Kolb-Archive.digest.vol-aw
August 31, 1998 - September 13, 1998
Thanks, Jerry:
Will check out the strut material next...
Dennis is already moving to help with the problem with the fittings...
Bill
-----Original Message-----
| From: | Jerry Bidle <jbidle(at)airmail.net> |
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Bewildered (again) in Brandon
>
>Bill,
>
>Jerry Bidle here. We build our FireFly #17. I don't seems to recall any
>problem on ours with the drag strut fittings. They and the tubing matched.
>
>I would reference the plans and verify what size tubing it says it should
>be. Sounds like to me they shipped you a part that may belong to a
>FireStar. You know what that means, call the factory and have them ship
>you out one or two of what you should have. Verify you have the correct
>tubing (diameter and wall thickness).
>
>Also check how many feet of the tubing you have for the wing struts. They
>sent us 1 long piece and 1 short piece. The longer lenght in only long
>enough to get 2 lenghts of the required lenght, not 3 so we had only enough
>material for only 3.
>
>Since our wings are closed up I can't get into measure the fittings but
>again refer to the tubing size on the plans. I suggested to Dennis they
>need more detail drawing for identification of the steel parts.
>
>Good luck,
>Jerry Bidle
>
>
>snip....
>
>>Building Firefly #76... The drag strut end fittings are too large in
>>diameter to slide into the drag strut tubes... Using my aerospace quality
>>precision (made in Hanoi, but passed off as Chinese) dial calipers, I
make
>>the inside diameters of the two 1 x .125 drag strut tubes to be .750
in....
>>The outside diameters of the two end fittings which are supposed to slide
>>lovingly into the tubes are approximately .800 and .925 respectively...
>>(yep, they are different...)
>>
>>I'll bet some of you are thinking, " that goon probably mixed up the
>>elevator horns with the drag strut fittings..." Naw, the goon checked
that
>>first...... both of the ones in the elevators are the same size and fit
>>snugly into their respective .875 x .035 tubes... and besides, the plans
>>don't mention anything about different specifications for the two sets of
>>parts...
>>
>>I tried to call the factory Saturday, but I was too late to catch anyone
>>there... So I thought I would throw this out to the collective wisdom of
the
>>Kolb mafia and see if one or more of you would take pity on me and give me
>>an idea of how to handle this....Has anyone else experienced this? If so,
>>how'd you deal with it? Dennis, you out there...? Meantime, I'll
just
>>open another warm beer and crawl off into the corner to gnaw on the
assembly
>>manual binding some more... I'm beginning to like it....
>>
>>thanks fer listenin'
>>
>>Bill Tuton
>>Brandon,FL
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Carroll " <ron.carroll(at)WORLDNET.ATT.NET> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax pistons |
Dennis & John J., I was wrong when I said the prop is a 66 X 23. Actually,
it is 66 X 28, which is a bit better. As for the cylinders, I am having
them checked right now. Hopefully they are not damaged. Tomorrow I will
order the new parts from CPS, if no one comes up with a sneaky way to get
them from a Ski-Doo dealer.
Dennis, you mentioned a 66 X 32. Would that work on a 377, or should I
stick with the 28" pitch? The best bet is to buy a ground adjustable prop.
I have hooked up a second tach, so when I get it back together it can check
one against the other.
Russell & Cav, the engine is LONG out of warrantee. It is the original
engine that came with the kit in 1985, but has never been run.
I thank you all for your concerns,
Ron Carroll
-----Original Message-----
From: DLSOUDER(at)aol.com <DLSOUDER(at)aol.com>
Date: Monday August 31 1998 1:47 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Rotax pistons
>
>writes:
>
><<
> Seized my engine during the break-in. I guess I failed to watch the temps
> close enough. Besides, it was over-revving, i.e., engine rated 35 hp @
> 6500 rpm, but full throttle showed 7400 rpm with the original Culver prop
> (66 X 23 ). I realize that I was careless in not shutting down the engine
> when this occurred, but I goofed. What should the static rpm be with
this
> engine/prop? Could it have been *cavitating* ?
>
>Do you mean to type 66 x 32?? A 66 x 23 would certainly overrev. A 66 x
32
>may or may not overrev depending upon how much it varied from the norm.
You
>also might want to check your tach - getting a backup reading from a light
>tack would be helpful. You static rpm should be between 6000 and 6400.
>
>You may need more than pistons, the cylinders can get oval when heated too
>much, this needs to be corrected.
>
> Dennis Souder
>Pres Kolb Aircraft
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Carroll " <ron.carroll(at)WORLDNET.ATT.NET> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax pistons |
John, you are right. I made a mistake when I said 66 X 23, it is actually
66 X 28, and appears to go to 7400. Maybe this prop (1985 vintage) doesn't
have the trick airfoil the newer props do. If my tach proves to be somewhat
accurate I'll ptrobably have to get an adjustable prop and tune it the way I
want it. You don't still have the Warp do you? If so, is it for sale?
Thanks,
Ron Carroll
original Firestar (one piston from 1st flight)
----Original Message-----
From: John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com>
Date: Monday August 31 1998 12:59 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Rotax pistons
>
>Ron,
> I used a 66 X 28 on my 377 after I took the Warp off. It came from
>Kolb and was the recommended prop for the 377. It wouldn't allow the
>engine to rev more than 6,000 static. The over-reving was probably your
>problem. 6,500 should be used as MAX static rpm.
>John Jung
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
I am in a heapa difficulty for a guy who knows it all (least my 8 yr old
thinks so).
I got this ASI ( a Delphi) fluid type at Oshkosh and mounted in my Firestar
and when I fly it, it posts only 30 Mph when my Hall (mounted outside away
from the nose on the left) reads 47. Stall occures on the Hall at 38 and at 22
on the Delphi. The Delphe has a pitot sticking out the front (8") and has no
static required. When we blow air from an air blower directly at the openings
of each input - Hall and Delphi -- both read the same!!!...I flared the pitot
and it still reads as low as before....what's goin on
here???........................GeoR38
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu> |
On Mon, 31 Aug 1998 GeoR38(at)aol.com wrote:
> on the Delphi. The Delphe has a pitot sticking out the front (8") and has no
> static required. When we blow air from an air blower directly at the openings
All ASI's require a static port. Maybe the Delphi one assumes that
a non-routed hole in it's case is good enf. Look for that hole.
If there isn't one, make one, and make it about as big in diameter as
the instrument itself ...if you get my drift. ;-) If you do find the
hole, route it to a place where there is lower aerodynamic pressure.
Finding the right place might be tough, but see my post earlier today;
it works great on my plane.
-Ben Ransom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | skip staub <skips(at)bhip.infi.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Chicken Little here - old and not bold. |
>GB, flying my FF on my 75th BD today.
Happy Birthday and congratulations!
Best regards,
Skip
1984 UltraStar
Ellenton,FL
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Spongie elevator cable (Dangerous) |
| From: | ul15rhb(at)JUNO.COM (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Ron, are you using the 3/32" cable? There is no measurable stretch to
it, not the kind that you are seeing.
Ralph Burlingame
Original FireStar 400+ hrs
writes:
>
>
>Woody, the control cable that came with my kit was galvanized. I
>screwed up a cable and I had to buy an 20' piece of stainlesssteel
cable to
>replace it with, and used the new cable for the down elevator control. I
too
>was curious about whether or not they had the same spongie feel so I
>swapped them, and I get the same feeling with either up or down.
>I have no play or give anywhere in the control system that could
>possibly account for the feeling, so I talked an aeronautical engineer
into
>giving his opinion. He thinks that the stretch is normal for the length
of
>the cable and the leverage of the elevator vs. the control horn.
>I guess I just tighten it up and live with it.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Ron Carroll
>Original Firestar (seized rear cylinder during engine break-in)
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net>
>To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>Date: Sunday August 30 1998 6:11 PM
>Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Spongie elevator cable (Dangerous)
>
>
>>
>>
>> I don't want to be a pest but could you tell me how the elevator
>feels
>>when you give it full down stick .Is it still spongy?
>>
>>
>>
>> Woody
>>
>> Some men are able to stumble over the truth but are able to pick
>>themselves up and keep walking as if nothing had happened.
>(Churchill)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | skip staub <skips(at)bhip.infi.net> |
edu>
>
>A new completion FS was damaged badly near here last week, in large
>part due to the unexpected behaviour of an R&D pipe.
>
>He was on a narrow strip (another mistake), and got fouled up when a
>change in yaw occurred due to the engine fading in tht 4000 rpm dead
>band, and then yawing back when it hit upper rpm. (This was on a high
>speed taxi test.)
I wouldn't put the blame on the R&D pipe. More likely the problem was
pilot error and lack of skill in trying to do high speed taxi/crow hop
tests. There was another recent message concerning crow hops that resulted
in an accident so ... in my opinion... don't go the crow hop route. All
airplanes handle much better in the air than they do on the ground.
High performance airplanes don't do crow hops so why should we in our
Kolbs? If you question your flying ability get some more dual before
soloing YOUR Kolb.
Skip
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | skip staub <skips(at)bhip.infi.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Bewildered (again) in Brandon |
>
>Bill,
>
>Can't help you with the building stuff, but it sounds like I should
>gather the troops and fly to Brandon. We could take you up in one of
>the two seaters to put you back into perspective.
Why not just fly a few miles south of Brandon to where there is a 5,000'
(fence to fence) sod field and where I keep my UltraStar? Wimauma Airpark
(FD-77) is a place where we all could meet ... and fly. :) (the old sod
field that Brandon used to have is now a housing development) :(
Skip
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax pistons |
| From: | ul15rhb(at)JUNO.COM (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Ron, what happened to the 66"x 28" prop that came with the kit? The
static rpm can be set to 6100 rpm. I have mine set to 6000 for a better
cruise.
Ralph
writes:
>
>
>Seized my engine during the break-in. I guess I failed to watch the
>temps
>close enough. Besides, it was over-revving, i.e., engine rated 35 hp
>@
>6500 rpm, but full throttle showed 7400 rpm with the original Culver
>prop
>(66 X 23 ). I realize that I was careless in not shutting down the
>engine
>when this occurred, but I goofed. What should the static rpm be with
>this
>engine/prop? Could it have been *cavitating* ?
>
>My question is in regard to a couple of posts from a while back about
>buying
>pistons at somewhere around half price from a Ski-Doo dealer, if you
>have
>the Ski-doo model numbers, etc. Can anyone refresh my memory on this?
>
>Ron Carroll
>Original Firestar
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Kolb flying formations |
| From: | ul15rhb(at)JUNO.COM (Ralph H Burlingame) |
John and Ben,
Flying with a GPS is too easy sometimes and I have to put it aside or
leave it home. Having it along, I have a tendency to look more at it than
the beautiful scenery under me. Another potential danger is plugging in
the wrong coordinates and getting to your destination, out of fuel, and
lost. Not a warm fuzzy feeling!
Ralph
writes:
>
>
>
>
>> and it all started by him getting lost. BTW, if somebody has a GPS,
>>that doesn't make them Charles Lindbergh. You might ask them if they
>>have the destination and waypoints keyed in, as well as ...uhhhhh
>>batteries?!! My experience is the GPS guys only have "their favorite"
>>destinations keyed in, and the Dead Reckoning guy has the specific
route >>mapped out to a T. BTW, DeadReckoning assisted by a GPS to hit
>>waypoints right on and exact edges of controlled airspaces is kinda
fun.
>>
>>
>> Ben Ransom
>>
>
>Ben and Gang:
>
>I agree wholeheartedly. Learn pilotage and DR before you get addicted
>to the GPS. Then when you start using the GPS, keep the sectional out
and
>follow along on it.
>On the way to OSH took off from Kankakee, Illinois, Frank Beagle's
>home base, and my GPS would not acquire satelites. So immediately to DR
>(dead reckoning) in an area that ain't DR friendly with a guy who has
become >lazy with his navigation and left it all up to the GPS for too
long. I found out >quick I couldn't fly direct to Joliet cause I didn't
have tghe heading and my mag >compass never has been much good except for
finding the rising and the >setting sun. I luckily had the Kankakee
River that would take me to the big 4 >lane highway which ran right
beside Joliet AP. A minute or two before I landed >at Joliet, the GPS
decided break was over and started working again. Greatest >thing going
for XCs, but can get me in trouble if depended on too much.
>ONe thing I noticed real quick, I didn't have that constant feeling of
>checking the ground speed, cross track error, etc. All I had was the
compass,
>ASI, and terrain features. Took a lot of hurry out of XC'ing. Hadn't
had that
>feeling for a while.
>
>Rambling again,
>
>john h
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Kolb flying formations |
| From: | ul15rhb(at)JUNO.COM (Ralph H Burlingame) |
John, yesterday five of us flew about 17 miles together as a group and it
was fun! I always say that ultralights sometimes are like magnets in the
air. I caught myself staring at something on the ground and when I looked
to the side I was within 100 feet of another Kolb. It's fun but you have
to watch each other.
Ralph Burlingame
Original FireStar 400+ hrs
>
>Group,
> Last evening I got a chance to fly with a couple of other Kolbs.
>One
>was an Ultrastar, the other an original Firestar, and mine is a
>Firestar
>II. We decided to fly to a small airport about 20 miles away. I hadn't
>been there for about 8 years, so I figured I would follow them. One of
>the others had never been there, and the third guy had been there this
>year. Also no radios. Off we went until without any real discussion of
>altitude, speed, or flying positions. The first problem we had was
>keeping in visual contact. Keeping the other two planes in sight
>didn't
>mean that they could see me, because of the high wing blind spot. Then
>the leader circled back, the other went into a climb and I lost sight
>of
>both. It took me 2 to 3 minutes to find them and even then they kept
>changing directions, circling around. I couldn't imagine what they
>were
>doing. Finally we all got going again in generally the right
>direction.
>After a while, they seemed to be going too far to the west, so I
>pulled
>out my GPS and took my own course to the airport. They kept me in
>sight
>and we all landed. We had a good laugh talking about the unorganized
>formation that we had just flown. What had happened is the leader was
>depending on his GPS and the batteries had gone dead. He was looking
>for
>someone else to take the lead, therefore all the circling. We
>discussed
>the problems with maintaining visable positions and had a much better
>flight back. Flying with other planes is fun, and flying with other
>Kolbs is even more fun. Oh, I should add, we cruised at 55 mph and
>1,500
>AGL.
>John Jung
>Firestar II N6163J
>SE Wisconsin
>John Jung
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Kolb flying formations |
| From: | mefine1(at)JUNO.COM (Mick Fine) |
>
> .... We had a good laugh talking about the unorganized
>formation that we had just flown.....
In our little UL club, if any 2 of us fly on the same day, it counts as a
"formation flight" :-)
-Mick Fine
Tulsa, Oklahoma
http://www.angelfire.com/ok/froghair
Green Country Ultralight Flyer's Organization (UFO)
http://www.angelfire.com/ok/gcufo
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | swidersk <swidersk(at)digital.net> |
| Subject: | Re: North Florida Fly In Oct.24, 98 |
Ray, I got some good news/bad news. Bad news is I was using a barrowed trailer
&
the owner "repossessed" it! I guess I'll be building a trialer before I fly
again. I still hope you stop by & check out my plane & motor. Good News: The
guy who owns the Twinstar is a friend of mine, Larry Flewelling, (352-495-8021).
I'd be happy to introduce you. He's planning on being at the flyin. I'm sure
he'd be thrilled to give you a ride. I'll probably be out of town that weekend.
Ray L Baker wrote:
>
> Kolbers, FYI
> 4th Annual Fall Air Festival 9 AM 10/24/98
> Flying 10 Airport (OJ8), Jonesville, FL (Crow hop west of Gainesville)
> Sponsored by Kitty Hawk Aviation and EAA chapter #98
> Free airplane rides for kids under 12 yrs. R/C model airplane demo.
> Williston Skydivers. FSS pilot seminars
> Food and beverages available.
>
> Newberry Road (FL 26) SW from Gainesville to flashing yellow light at
> County Road 241 (NW 170th St) south approx 2.5 miles to SW 42nd Ave (lime
> rock road to left) follow back to airport.
>
> Noticed there is a Twinstar based at Flying 10.
> L. Ray Baker
> Lake Butler, FL
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Gross <rpgross(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Sea Foam Source |
Hi Chris,
My engine is nearing the 50 hour mark and I have been searching for
some Sea Foam. No luck around south Florida. Care you spare 4 ounces?
Bob Gross
---"Wayland, William C." wrote:
>
>
> After much searching for a local source of this stuff I happened to
be in
> San Diego last week and called all three of the Car Quest / Southern
Auto
> Supply stores. Got two "never heard of it" and one "got plenty".
Hit was
> the store at 7832 Armour St. San Diego, CA 92111 (619) 277-4896 at
$2.99
> per pint can. Bought 6 cans and plan to give some to friends with
ULs.
>
> Chris Wayland, FireFly s/n 008
>
>
>
>
==
Captain Robert P. Gross
American Airlines MIA
561-744-8055
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Gross <rpgross(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax pistons |
Sorry to hear about you problem. Your prop should be a 66 X 28 with
the Rotax 377. I dumped mine early on and got an IVOprop, both for
adjustment and for survival. The wood props shatter if a bolt or
baseball cap goes through them, The composite props due much much
better.
You should see 6200-6300 static RPM. This will give you about 6700 RPM
at WOT in level flight at about 63 MPH.
Good luck!
Bob
---Ron Carroll wrote:
>
>
> Seized my engine during the break-in. I guess I failed to watch the
temps
> close enough. Besides, it was over-revving, i.e., engine rated 35
hp @
> 6500 rpm, but full throttle showed 7400 rpm with the original Culver
prop
> (66 X 23 ). I realize that I was careless in not shutting down the
engine
> when this occurred, but I goofed. What should the static rpm be
with this
> engine/prop? Could it have been *cavitating* ?
>
> My question is in regard to a couple of posts from a while back
about buying
> pistons at somewhere around half price from a Ski-Doo dealer, if you
have
> the Ski-doo model numbers, etc. Can anyone refresh my memory on this?
>
> Ron Carroll
> Original Firestar
>
>
>
>
>
>
==
Captain Robert P. Gross
American Airlines MIA
561-744-8055
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax pistons |
Ron if you are insistent about using a Warp Drive instead of a good prop like
a 3 blade IVO I have one in the basement that I might as well sell.
Dick C
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Mojave, Ca. Kolb builer/pilot |
Hi Erich: I flew with Mike about 1 1/2 yrs. ago for 2 hours. His plane
is a Twinstar. Configuration is slightly different, and it has a short
windshield. ( Just right for the wind over it to hit a 6 footer right in
the running lights.) It's quite underpowered with a 503, but flies fine
and will certainly give a good idea of what to expect in a MK III - far
better than a Cessna or Piper. Mike is a real nice guy, very capable, and
gives a very good value for the money. Also, he flies from El Mirage dry
lake near Victorville and it provides a " landing strip" about 6 or 8 miles
long and 2 or 3 miles wide. Perfectly flat, smooth and hard. A definite
"experience", and well worth the trip. Picture 85 mph on cruise control in
my Saab, with my hands in my lap, kicked back, and not a bump, jolt or
vibration. Neat !!! Big Lar.
----------
> From: Erich Weaver 805-683-0200 <sbaew(at)dames.com>
> To: kolb-list
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Mojave, Ca. Kolb builer/pilot
> Date: Monday, August 31, 1998 8:59 AM
>
>
> Thanks for the tip regarding Mike Michalsky, but Ive contacted him and he
> indicated he does not own a Mk III - he has another Kolb model. I guess
> he might coceivably be the Kolb builder that the original e-mail was
> asking about though.
>
> Any other southern California Mk III owners out there???
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Allan Blackburn <traderawb(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax pistons |
Frcole(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
> Ron if you are insistent about using a Warp Drive instead of a good prop like
> a 3 blade IVO
Well now, I sure do like my Warp Drive Prop. Have heard it both ways on
the IVO, so can't say anything either way about them. Warp has lasted
over four years now.
--
traderawb(at)home.com/\s /\s /\s Commodity Speculator /\s /
/\ /\s / \ / \ / \ /\/\s /\s / \ /
/ \ / \ / \/ \ / \ /\ / \ / \ / \ /
/ \/ \ / b \/b \/ \/b \/b \/b \/b
/b b \/b allan_w_blackburn(at)bigfoot.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Kolb flying formations |
Yah, and buy GOOD batteries. I recently "borrowed" 3 el cheapo Grainger
batteries from work, and put them in my trusty Magellan, which will
normally go about 2 - 3 hours on good alkalines. I have a little 4 ah
motorcycle battery in a fanny pack, complete with female lighter adapter on
a coil cord that will run the GPS for a couple of days. Of course, being
real bright and intelligent, I'd forgotten to charge it up, and got to use
my freebie back-ups. For all of 15 or 20 minutes. Big
Lar.
----------
> From: John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com>
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Kolb-List: Kolb flying formations
> Date: Monday, August 31, 1998 7:21 AM
>
>
> Group,
> Last evening I got a chance to fly with a couple of other Kolbs. One
GPS and took my own course to the airport. They kept me in sight
>
depending on his GPS and the batteries had gone dead. He was looking for
> someone else to take the lead, therefore all the circling. We discussed
> the problems with maintaining visable positions and had a much better
> flight back. Flying with other planes is fun, and flying with other
> Kolbs is even more fun. Oh, I should add, we cruised at 55 mph and 1,500
> AGL.
> John Jung
> Firestar II N6163J
> SE Wisconsin
> John Jung
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Beauford Tuton" <beaufordw(at)WORLDNET.ATT.NET> |
| Subject: | Re: Bewildered (again) in Brandon |
Hi Skip:
I was wondering where I would end up flying this thing from ... It's too
far to the farm in Georgia... I take it from your note that the good folks
who run the Wimauma Airpark don't mind UL operations???
Would enjoy meeting you, talking over the Kolb stuff and your experience at
Wimauma... Also would like to take a look at your airplane...
best regards,
Bill Tuton
(813) 662-2210
-----Original Message-----
From: skip staub <skips(at)bhip.infi.net>
Date: Monday, August 31, 1998 9:40 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Bewildered (again) in Brandon
>
>>
>>Bill,
>>
>>Can't help you with the building stuff, but it sounds like I should
>>gather the troops and fly to Brandon. We could take you up in one of
>>the two seaters to put you back into perspective.
>
>Why not just fly a few miles south of Brandon to where there is a 5,000'
>(fence to fence) sod field and where I keep my UltraStar? Wimauma Airpark
>(FD-77) is a place where we all could meet ... and fly. :) (the old sod
>field that Brandon used to have is now a housing development) :(
>
>Skip
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jason Omelchuck <jason(at)acuityinc.com> |
| Subject: | Covering the Wings MKIII |
The bow is from the leading to the trailing edges, so when you site down
the ribs they curve towards the root. I have found that once the fabric
is shrunk to the initial setting, it doesn't move much. It does get a
lot tighter but it is not able to stretch the already shrunk fabric. I
did not make a point of putting it on tight, nor did I make a point of
putting it on loose. I just glued it on as it lay on the wing. I have
received one response that this is normal so if no one is going to raise
the red flag I'm going to go with it.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: wood [SMTP:richard.wood(at)usa.net]
> Sent: Monday, August 31, 1998 4:13 PM
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Covering the Wings MKIII
>
>
>
> >
> >I am covering the wings on my MKIII and at 250 degrees the ribs took
> on
> >a noticeable bow. I stopped at that heat but am wondering if having
> a
> >curve in the ribs is OK. Any comments?
> >
> >
>
> Do you mean the ribs curve from tip to root? You may be able to
> bring it
> back by ironing the concave side of the bend to shrink this side and
> even
> things up.
> Did you try to tighten the fabric by hand as you put it on? It
> should be
> somewhat loose so you can shrink it to the max allowed by the fabric
> to "set"it.
>
>
>
> Woody
>
> Some men are able to stumble over the truth but are able to pick
> themselves up and keep walking as if nothing had happened.
> (Churchill)
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Cook" <foxcook(at)semo.net> |
| Subject: | connect foxcook(at)semo.net |
connect foxcook(at)semo.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jon P. Croke" <joncroke(at)CompuServe.COM> |
| Subject: | Re: FIRST FLIGHT News!! |
Topher,
Thanks for the reply.
Keep building......... I think of the many times I stopped and got diverted
by other interests while building.... and as I look back, I shoulda kept
going because its soo fun to fly this!
Thats a great suggestion to watch the back stick pressure while
turning.....
Jon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Geoff Thistlethwaite" <geoffthis(at)WORLDNET.ATT.NET> |
| Subject: | Balance Masters? |
Hello Kolbers
Anyone on the list have experience with prop/engine balancers? F/S2 w/503
dc/oil injection
Finished my covering through silver, hope to paint when things settle down
'round here; gotta run back to the hospital for the arrival of my 1st and
only son!
later
Geoff Thistlethwaite
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Covering the Wings MKIII |
.com>
I am looking forward to covering my wings shortly. I took the covering
seminar at Oshkosh this year. From what I learned I would not be satisfied
with bent ribs. I don't know of a solution to recover from the problem
other than starting again. I learned that the fabric should be shrunk
symmetrically from each end of the wing to preclude distorting the wing.
If you started at one end of the wing and worked to the other end, that
could have caused the bending. Keep us posted on your issue. Phone the
Kolb factory and Poly Fiber and get their perspectives.
Good luck
Ron
>
>The bow is from the leading to the trailing edges, so when you site down
>the ribs they curve towards the root. I have found that once the fabric
>is shrunk to the initial setting, it doesn't move much. It does get a
>lot tighter but it is not able to stretch the already shrunk fabric. I
>did not make a point of putting it on tight, nor did I make a point of
>putting it on loose. I just glued it on as it lay on the wing. I have
>received one response that this is normal so if no one is going to raise
>the red flag I'm going to go with it.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: wood [SMTP:richard.wood(at)usa.net]
>> Sent: Monday, August 31, 1998 4:13 PM
>> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Covering the Wings MKIII
>>
>>
>>
>> >
>> >I am covering the wings on my MKIII and at 250 degrees the ribs took
>> on
>> >a noticeable bow. I stopped at that heat but am wondering if having
>> a
>> >curve in the ribs is OK. Any comments?
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Do you mean the ribs curve from tip to root? You may be able to
>> bring it
>> back by ironing the concave side of the bend to shrink this side and
>> even
>> things up.
>> Did you try to tighten the fabric by hand as you put it on? It
>> should be
>> somewhat loose so you can shrink it to the max allowed by the fabric
>> to "set"it.
>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Covering the Wings MKIII |
On Tue, 1 Sep 1998, Jason Omelchuck wrote:
> The bow is from the leading to the trailing edges, so when you site down
> the ribs they curve towards the root. I have found that once the fabric
> is shrunk to the initial setting, it doesn't move much. It does get a
> lot tighter but it is not able to stretch the already shrunk fabric. I
> did not make a point of putting it on tight, nor did I make a point of
> putting it on loose. I just glued it on as it lay on the wing. I have
> received one response that this is normal so if no one is going to raise
> the red flag I'm going to go with it.
I would defer to Dennis or others on 'if this is okay'. I wouldn't think
it normal though, i.e. the normal goal in covering is to have everything
shrink the right amount for tight enf fabric and straight enf structure.
This accomplished by shrinking a little bit at a time and watching closely.
My guess is that a little curve on the ribs toward wing root or tip is
okay. I say this because, after final shrinking, the fabric is riveted
to the ribs, and therefore the fabric helps a keep the ribs in column.
In essence, Stits fabric on our wings is not just a covering, it's
structural too. I would be slightly more concerned about curve on the
upper ribs than the lower, as typical flight loads would presumably add
compressive loads to the upper ribs (and tensil loads to the bottom ribs).
The other possible down side is that, stopping at 250 degrees to avoid
further bending, the fabric is not as tight as you might want. I just
dunno.
Maybe you should measure how much curve (amount displaced from straight)
to help quantify when you ask Dennis.
-Ben 'Pseudo Engineer' Ransom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jason Omelchuck <jason(at)acuityinc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Covering the Wings MKIII |
OK I have now heard that it's OK and it's not OK. Dan at Kolb told me
that the main purpose of the fabric rivets is to hold the ribs in column
and if they are bent a little its no big deal. Its pretty easy to see
if the ribs are bent because the line of rivets is easy to see even
through the fabric (except for Mr. Pike who stitched his). I am going
to ask as you are out and around your plane to site down the ribs and
see if they bow any. My plane will never be a show plane and I have no
illusions of that, but I do not want to spend the rest of my flying life
worrying about if some of these things are going to make the wings fall
off. I know with that last statement I will get those of you who say
"if it worries you just redo it" this is great if you have lots of time
and money, neither of which I have (been working on the plane for 4
years now). I know ultimately it is my decision as to weather it is
safe or not, but I sure would like some input on what others are flying
with.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ron Hoyt [SMTP:RONALD.R.HOYT@gd-is.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 1998 11:24 AM
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Covering the Wings MKIII
>
>
> I am looking forward to covering my wings shortly. I took the
> covering
> seminar at Oshkosh this year. From what I learned I would not be
> satisfied
> with bent ribs. I don't know of a solution to recover from the
> problem
> other than starting again. I learned that the fabric should be shrunk
> symmetrically from each end of the wing to preclude distorting the
> wing.
> If you started at one end of the wing and worked to the other end,
> that
> could have caused the bending. Keep us posted on your issue. Phone
> the
> Kolb factory and Poly Fiber and get their perspectives.
>
> Good luck
>
> Ron
>
>
>
>
> >
> >The bow is from the leading to the trailing edges, so when you site
> down
> >the ribs they curve towards the root. I have found that once the
> fabric
> >is shrunk to the initial setting, it doesn't move much. It does get
> a
> >lot tighter but it is not able to stretch the already shrunk fabric.
> I
> >did not make a point of putting it on tight, nor did I make a point
> of
> >putting it on loose. I just glued it on as it lay on the wing. I
> have
> >received one response that this is normal so if no one is going to
> raise
> >the red flag I'm going to go with it.
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: wood [SMTP:richard.wood(at)usa.net]
> >> Sent: Monday, August 31, 1998 4:13 PM
> >> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> >> Subject: Re: Covering the Wings MKIII
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> >
> >> >I am covering the wings on my MKIII and at 250 degrees the ribs
> took
> >> on
> >> >a noticeable bow. I stopped at that heat but am wondering if
> having
> >> a
> >> >curve in the ribs is OK. Any comments?
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >> Do you mean the ribs curve from tip to root? You may be able to
> >> bring it
> >> back by ironing the concave side of the bend to shrink this side
> and
> >> even
> >> things up.
> >> Did you try to tighten the fabric by hand as you put it on? It
> >> should be
> >> somewhat loose so you can shrink it to the max allowed by the
> fabric
> >> to "set"it.
> >>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jason Omelchuck <jason(at)acuityinc.com> |
| Subject: | Covering the Wings MKIII |
Sorry about all the verbage on this bowed rib thing, but when I talked
to Bob at Kolb he said I should be able to take the wing up to 350
degrees and mine is only at 250. The procedure I used is to shrink to
225 and then install reinforce tape and rivets and then go to higher
heat settings. the reason I stopped is that the root (steel) rib
started to take on a noticeable bow at 250 degrees. When I think about
it this is probably the same bow that has been put into the other ribs,
I would be willing to bet that the bow in the ribs gets worse the
closer to the root rib and better towards the tip. The bottom line is
if the ribs are riveted to the fabric and the root rib bows it is going
to pull all of the others out of line also and get progressively worse
towards the root rib. Was there something wrong with my procedure? Did
all of you shrink to 350 degrees on the wing without the root rib
bending. The nearest I can tell is there is nothing to keep the steel
rib from bending in the plans.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ben Ransom [SMTP:ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 1998 12:24 PM
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: FW: Kolb-List: Covering the Wings MKIII
>
>
>
> On Tue, 1 Sep 1998, Jason Omelchuck wrote:
> > The bow is from the leading to the trailing edges, so when you site
> down
> > the ribs they curve towards the root. I have found that once the
> fabric
> > is shrunk to the initial setting, it doesn't move much. It does get
> a
> > lot tighter but it is not able to stretch the already shrunk fabric.
> I
> > did not make a point of putting it on tight, nor did I make a point
> of
> > putting it on loose. I just glued it on as it lay on the wing. I
> have
> > received one response that this is normal so if no one is going to
> raise
> > the red flag I'm going to go with it.
>
> I would defer to Dennis or others on 'if this is okay'. I wouldn't
> think
> it normal though, i.e. the normal goal in covering is to have
> everything
> shrink the right amount for tight enf fabric and straight enf
> structure.
> This accomplished by shrinking a little bit at a time and watching
> closely.
>
> My guess is that a little curve on the ribs toward wing root or tip is
> okay. I say this because, after final shrinking, the fabric is
> riveted
> to the ribs, and therefore the fabric helps a keep the ribs in column.
> In essence, Stits fabric on our wings is not just a covering, it's
> structural too. I would be slightly more concerned about curve on the
> upper ribs than the lower, as typical flight loads would presumably
> add
> compressive loads to the upper ribs (and tensil loads to the bottom
> ribs).
> The other possible down side is that, stopping at 250 degrees to avoid
> further bending, the fabric is not as tight as you might want. I just
> dunno.
>
> Maybe you should measure how much curve (amount displaced from
> straight)
> to help quantify when you ask Dennis.
>
> -Ben 'Pseudo Engineer' Ransom
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax pistons |
My warp drive is a good prop but on a FS2 it is close to the wing trailing
edge and produced noise and harmonics plus the plane shook a lot at low RPM.
One flight in a 3 bladed IVO firestar had me buying. The back to back
comparison and the smoothness and easy pitch adjustment sold me. I have also
had a fiberglass gap cover/engine cover pass thru the IVO with zero damage to
the prop and only a few seconds of terror.
Dick C
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ul15rhb(at)JUNO.COM (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Ron, I have an ivo prop now that I set the top rpms. That wood prop of
mine shattered in flight when the 8mm bolt from the muffler bracket went
through it. It could have been disastrous, but I shut it down quickly and
glided back. I was over the frozen lake at the time and could have landed
anywhere, but I didn't want to push the plane across that lake. I was
able to glide to the other side where my trailer was parked. It happened
at 1000 feet and it shook the airframe for about 5 seconds. If I had
been flying with the ivo, I don't think it would have shattered. Another
very good reason to have a composite prop on a pusher plane! The bolt
came out because the engine rebuilder put in a shorter head stud and I
couldn't see it underneath the engine shroud. The bolt didn't have enough
thread into the stud. Now all the muffler bracket bolts have drilled
heads now so I can safety wire them. This wouldn't have happened if I had
them in place the first time. I've been doing my own top-end overhauls
since the day of this incident, Feb. 1, 1993. No problems since.
Ralph Burlingame
Original FireStar 400+ hrs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher John Armstrong" <Tophera(at)centuryinter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Covering the Wings MKIII |
HI Jason
did you remember to install the diagonal braces that suport the forward end
of the inboard rib, which is aluminum at the front of the steal on my FSII
anywhy? if not then that is almost surely the problem and i think you would
need to fix it. I find it hard to believe that the steal portion of the
inboard rib could be bent by three guys standing on it let alone the fabric.
if the inboard rib is bent but almost all of the bend is up front where
there is aluminum, on a FSII at least, I would bet that your diagonal braces
are not installed or not holding correctly.
Topher
-----Original Message-----
From: Jason Omelchuck <jason(at)acuityinc.com>
Date: Tuesday, September 01, 1998 4:56 PM
Subject: FW: FW: Kolb-List: Covering the Wings MKIII
>
>Sorry about all the verbage on this bowed rib thing, but when I talked
>to Bob at Kolb he said I should be able to take the wing up to 350
>degrees and mine is only at 250. The procedure I used is to shrink to
>225 and then install reinforce tape and rivets and then go to higher
>heat settings. the reason I stopped is that the root (steel) rib
>started to take on a noticeable bow at 250 degrees. When I think about
>it this is probably the same bow that has been put into the other ribs,
>I would be willing to bet that the bow in the ribs gets worse the
>closer to the root rib and better towards the tip. The bottom line is
>if the ribs are riveted to the fabric and the root rib bows it is going
>to pull all of the others out of line also and get progressively worse
>towards the root rib. Was there something wrong with my procedure? Did
>all of you shrink to 350 degrees on the wing without the root rib
>bending. The nearest I can tell is there is nothing to keep the steel
>rib from bending in the plans.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ben Ransom [SMTP:ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu]
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 1998 12:24 PM
>> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: FW: Kolb-List: Covering the Wings MKIII
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 1 Sep 1998, Jason Omelchuck wrote:
>> > The bow is from the leading to the trailing edges, so when you site
>> down
>> > the ribs they curve towards the root. I have found that once the
>> fabric
>> > is shrunk to the initial setting, it doesn't move much. It does get
>> a
>> > lot tighter but it is not able to stretch the already shrunk fabric.
>> I
>> > did not make a point of putting it on tight, nor did I make a point
>> of
>> > putting it on loose. I just glued it on as it lay on the wing. I
>> have
>> > received one response that this is normal so if no one is going to
>> raise
>> > the red flag I'm going to go with it.
>>
>> I would defer to Dennis or others on 'if this is okay'. I wouldn't
>> think
>> it normal though, i.e. the normal goal in covering is to have
>> everything
>> shrink the right amount for tight enf fabric and straight enf
>> structure.
>> This accomplished by shrinking a little bit at a time and watching
>> closely.
>>
>> My guess is that a little curve on the ribs toward wing root or tip is
>> okay. I say this because, after final shrinking, the fabric is
>> riveted
>> to the ribs, and therefore the fabric helps a keep the ribs in column.
>> In essence, Stits fabric on our wings is not just a covering, it's
>> structural too. I would be slightly more concerned about curve on the
>> upper ribs than the lower, as typical flight loads would presumably
>> add
>> compressive loads to the upper ribs (and tensil loads to the bottom
>> ribs).
>> The other possible down side is that, stopping at 250 degrees to avoid
>> further bending, the fabric is not as tight as you might want. I just
>> dunno.
>>
>> Maybe you should measure how much curve (amount displaced from
>> straight)
>> to help quantify when you ask Dennis.
>>
>> -Ben 'Pseudo Engineer' Ransom
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Carroll " <ron.carroll(at)WORLDNET.ATT.NET> |
| Subject: | Re: wooden props |
Ralph, this sounds like another good reason to look into a composite prop,
thanks.
Ron
-----Original Message-----
From: Ralph H Burlingame <ul15rhb(at)JUNO.COM>
Date: Tuesday September 01 1998 3:11 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: wooden props
>
>Ron, I have an ivo prop now that I set the top rpms. That wood prop of
>mine shattered in flight when the 8mm bolt from the muffler bracket went
>through it. It could have been disastrous, but I shut it down quickly and
>glided back. I was over the frozen lake at the time and could have landed
>anywhere, but I didn't want to push the plane across that lake. I was
>able to glide to the other side where my trailer was parked. It happened
>at 1000 feet and it shook the airframe for about 5 seconds. If I had
>been flying with the ivo, I don't think it would have shattered. Another
>very good reason to have a composite prop on a pusher plane! The bolt
>came out because the engine rebuilder put in a shorter head stud and I
>couldn't see it underneath the engine shroud. The bolt didn't have enough
>thread into the stud. Now all the muffler bracket bolts have drilled
>heads now so I can safety wire them. This wouldn't have happened if I had
>them in place the first time. I've been doing my own top-end overhauls
>since the day of this incident, Feb. 1, 1993. No problems since.
>
>Ralph Burlingame
>Original FireStar 400+ hrs
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Russell Duffy" <rv8(at)mindspring.com> |
"Bruce Daughtry"
| Subject: | the deed is done |
Well, I really went and did it. Today I removed the 503 engine from my
SlingShot, drained the fuel, removed the GPS and radio, folded the wings, and
pushed it back into the corner of the hanger.
All the SlingShot needs now is either a new owner, or a bigger engine (2-strokes
need not apply).
Russell Duffy
Navarre, FL
RV-8, 80587 (tanks)
Kolb SlingShot (for sale-without engine)
rv8(at)mindspring.com
http://www.mindspring.com/~rv8
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Covering the Wings MKIII |
>
Jason, if I hear you correctly, the ribs are bowed behind the spar,
the root rib has bent, and several other ribs are also curved, getting
progressively better toward the tip. From your post I assume it is the same
top and bottom.
If I understand your problem correctly, and wanted to fix it without
recovering it completely, here is what I would do.
If the last rib toward the tip is straight enough, I would leave it
alone. As I progressed inward toward the root, I would decide where the
problem became necessary to fix. At that rib, I would remove the rivits and
tape from there inboard to the root rib on all the ribs in between. I would
rub MEK on the root rib and get the fabric to loosen JUST A BIT, until the
root rib straightened. If you cut your fabric so there is very little
overlap, this may not be an option.
Now I would get the various ribs straight. They will probably be
glued to the fabric, rub MEK on them, loosen them from the fabric, and push
them into line, using a tool through the former rivit holes in the fabric.
Make sure the fabric is properly attached to the root rib, and
shrink the fabric until it is as tight as you want. Retape, and rerivit.
(Now you know another reason why I ribstitch...)
It is possible that the rivit holes in the fabric from the first
time around will only be slightly off to one side, and the standard tape
will cover them. If not, buy some 2" wide tape from one of the supply
houses, and that will cover the little holes. Once the tape has covered the
holes, your fabric is sufficiently strong.
If I did not understand the problem correctly, disregard this
solution...
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
Technical Counselor, EAA 442
>Sorry about all the verbage on this bowed rib thing, but when I talked
>to Bob at Kolb he said I should be able to take the wing up to 350
>degrees and mine is only at 250. The procedure I used is to shrink to
>225 and then install reinforce tape and rivets and then go to higher
>heat settings. the reason I stopped is that the root (steel) rib
>started to take on a noticeable bow at 250 degrees. When I think about
>it this is probably the same bow that has been put into the other ribs,
>I would be willing to bet that the bow in the ribs gets worse the
>closer to the root rib and better towards the tip. The bottom line is
>if the ribs are riveted to the fabric and the root rib bows it is going
>to pull all of the others out of line also and get progressively worse
>towards the root rib. Was there something wrong with my procedure? Did
>all of you shrink to 350 degrees on the wing without the root rib
>bending. The nearest I can tell is there is nothing to keep the steel
>rib from bending in the plans.
>
>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: the deed is done |
| From: | mefine1(at)JUNO.COM (Mick Fine) |
writes:
>
>Well, I really went and did it. Today I removed the 503 engine from
>my
>SlingShot, drained the fuel, removed the GPS and radio, folded the
>wings, and
>pushed it back into the corner of the hanger....
Dang Rusty!
Hate to hear this. For what it's worth, I hope your RV will be all you
expect!
-Mick Fine
Tulsa, Oklahoma
http://www.angelfire.com/ok/froghair
Green Country Ultralight Flyer's Organization (UFO)
http://www.angelfire.com/ok/gcufo
OK everybody - 5 bucks says the SS is back in the air before Halloween! -
any takers?
:-)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Covering the Wings MKIII |
| From: | mefine1(at)JUNO.COM (Mick Fine) |
writes:
>
> ... If I understand your problem correctly, and wanted to fix it
>without
>recovering it completely, here is what I would do....
Richard,
Since you're a tech counselor, what's your opinion of the problem? Jason
said he wasn't too concerned about 'cosmetics,' do you think there is
much of a structural concern?
-Just curious..
-Mick Fine
Tulsa, Oklahoma
http://www.angelfire.com/ok/froghair
Green Country Ultralight Flyer's Organization (UFO)
http://www.angelfire.com/ok/gcufo
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net> |
There has been a recent influx of questions concerning props and pitches.
I was given this site a couple of weeks ago and find it quite good at
determining the best prop for your aircraft. Try it.
Woody
Some men are able to stumble over the truth but are able to pick
themselves up and keep walking as if nothing had happened. (Churchill)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Covering the Wings MKIII |
I have no
>illusions of that, but I do not want to spend the rest of my flying life
>worrying about if some of these things are going to make the wings fall
>off. I know with that last statement I will get those of you who say
>"if it worries you just redo it" this is great if you have lots of time
>and money, neither of which I have (been working on the plane for 4
>years now). I know ultimately it is my decision as to weather it is
>safe or not, but I sure would like some input on what others are flying
>with.
Don't worry about it. The fabric will act as a giant gusset to keep
everything together. On high drag craft like ours I wouldn't even worry
about the adverse efects on the aerodynamics. It just won't be pretty and
every 2 bit amateur aeronautical engineer who has never built a plane will
tell you how you should have done it. This is a tube and rag, slow speed,
high drag aircraft so we can be forgiven a lot in accuracy.
Did you see the cartoon in Kit planes last month where the guy wants to be
a perfectionist and his wife lets him know it will be a hundred years before
he is done. Don't get caught in that trap. But always keep it in mind it is
your butt in the seat so do your best but don't cripple your self trying to
get everything perfect.
Dick (the country hick ) Wood
P.S. is it recommended to glue and rivit the ribs before final shrinking?
Woody
Some men are able to stumble over the truth but are able to pick
themselves up and keep walking as if nothing had happened. (Churchill)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Covering the Wings MKIII |
Jason,
I just covered the wings on my MKlll. I could only go up to 275 degrees. The
whole job came out real nice. Another builder here in Miami could only go up
to 275 also. Did you calibrate your iron ?....If so re-check it against
another iron....I had that problem. My first iron's thermostat would go up and
down. I had to throw it away. When I got a new iron, all my problems were
solved.
Good luck,
Rich Bragassa
Miami, Fl.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Thomas S. Wormsley" <tomsw(at)mail.atl.bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Covering the Wings MKIII |
Hello group,
I'm just about done aligning the wings on my FS II and hope to be ready
to
cover my wings in a week or so. From reading past messages and the Kolb
manual rib bowing has become my biggest concern. I remember reading a
message about a month ago about using safety wire for a stringer. Does
anybody have any suggestions or comments on this idea?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
Can't help myself, here goes another .02 and a bit. I went through the A/C
Spruce / Poly Fiber ( Stits ) seminar in Chino, CA. in Nov. ' 96. They had
us cover the wing by glueing only on the perimeter, then shrink in stages
at each temp. starting at 250' , and doing a piece at a time - kind of like
torquing head bolts on an engine. Back + forth, over + over, increasing
heat an increment at a time. Then after all shrinking was completed, the
ribs were glued, taped and rivetted. That lets the fabric slide and move
over the ribs to get tension without warpage, as Ben Ransom stated, and
binds it into a structural component. As someone else stated, temperature
of the iron is critical. Calibrate it carefully before-hand. Big Lar.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Covering the Wings MKIII |
>
>writes:
>>
>> ... If I understand your problem correctly, and wanted to fix it
>>without
>>recovering it completely, here is what I would do....
>
>Richard,
>
>Since you're a tech counselor, what's your opinion of the problem? Jason
>said he wasn't too concerned about 'cosmetics,' do you think there is
>much of a structural concern?
>
>-Just curious..
>
>
>-Mick Fine
>Tulsa, Oklahoma
Without seeing it, I would rather not have an opinion. But straight
ribs are ALWAYS better.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Covering the Wings MKIII |
While we are talking about fabric and shrinking; something to consider is
that our flutterbugs are not as structurally massive as some homebuilts.
Sometimes in addition to shrinking the fabric "by the book", you also need
to know when to stop. No matter whether you have gone through all the
required temperatures or not, sometimes it feels plenty tight, and the
structure is just barely starting to get little curves and bows, so quit. It
is entirely possible to overwhelm the struture.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
>Jason,
>
>I just covered the wings on my MKlll. I could only go up to 275 degrees. The
>whole job came out real nice. Another builder here in Miami could only go up
>to 275 also. Did you calibrate your iron ?....If so re-check it against
>another iron....I had that problem. My first iron's thermostat would go up and
>down. I had to throw it away. When I got a new iron, all my problems were
>solved.
>
>Good luck,
>
>Rich Bragassa
>Miami, Fl.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Covering the Wings MKIII |
Jason,
Bowed ribs wouldn't worry me. So, don't worry, be happy! Just don't
point them out to people that see your plane, and almost no one will
notice. As far as being a structural problem, I would fly it and never
think about it.
John Jung
Firestar II N6163J
SE Wisconsin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Covering the Wings MKIII |
Christopher John Armstrong wrote:
snip...
>I find it hard to believe that the steal portion of the
> inboard rib could be bent by three guys standing on it let alone the fabric.
>
Topher,
I know what you mean, but I saw it on mine. The fabric can bend the
steel. It also pulls the wingtips up or down depending on what side is
being shrunk.
John Jung
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Cook" <foxcook(at)semo.net> |
| Subject: | twinstar for sale. |
I have a finished twinstar in my garage for sale. I say finished, I
await a choke cable and wire extensions for the EGT and CHT.
The 503 engine is new and never run. This is a 1986 Twin
Star with a wide cowling. The workmanship is excellent. Fabric
is yellow and metal and cowling is metalic green. Has full
instruments. Buyer can license as Expermental or Ultralight
trainer. Reason for selling, I've bought a sail boat and won't
be around to fly for a few years. A completed ready to fly
TwinStar, excellant workmanship, pretty, everything new
and $10,000.oo will buy it. Southeast Missouri at
foxcook(at)semo.net or 573-222-3679.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Cook" <foxcook(at)semo.net> |
| Subject: | twinstar for sale |
I have a finished twinstar in my garage for sale. I say finished, I
await a choke cable and wire extensions for the EGT and CHT.
The 503 engine is new and never run. This is a 1986 Twin
Star with a wide cowling. The workmanship is excellent. Fabric
is yellow and metal and cowling is metalic green. Has full
instruments. Buyer can license as Expermental or Ultralight
trainer. Reason for selling, I've bought a sail boat and won't
be around to fly for a few years. A completed ready to fly
TwinStar, excellant workmanship, pretty, everything new
and $10,000.oo will buy it. Southeast Missouri at
foxcook(at)semo.net or 573-222-3679.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Covering the Wings MKIII |
Hi Jason: Have you calibrated your iron? 250 degrees shouldn't be any
problem. 350 degrees will bend things if you're not careful.
Good Luck
Bill Griffin
p.s. How's your soob project going?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu> |
| Subject: | Re:Covering the Wings MKIII |
Jason,
That post from Richard about using MEK to shuffle ribs around underneath.
Great idea ...wish I had thought of it. Guess that's why Richard is
a Tech Counselor.
Someone said start at 250. I think that is too high even tho that
number may have come from a Stits seminar. Nothing wrong with starting
at 180-200 just to see how things will go. Shrinking is a *very* small
percentage of total time and effort, so don't rush and risk all the
other work. All newbies ...don't freak about this, it is not hard,
just go slow.
I'd assume its normal for everybody to buy the little $10 temperature
calibrating tool (A/C Spruce or others). I can't imagine covering
without one. With that I inked little colored markings on my iron for
each temperature interval, and rechecked them periodically. (I recall
visions of my wing going up in smoke due to possible crappy thermostat.)
Ben Ransom
http://mae.ucdavis.edu/~ransom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jason Omelchuck <jason(at)acuityinc.com> |
| Subject: | FW: Covering the Wings MKIII |
You are correct in that Richards advice seems right on. In retrospect I
agree with you in that my iron, which I had calibrated and had worked
great for all my control surfaces seems to have gone out of wack for my
wings. My lesson for those of you who have not yet covered. Do a
reality check on you iron temps in-between each surface covered. When
the root rib starts to take on ANY bow at all, stop shrinking. Thanks
everyone for your input and support!
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ben Ransom [SMTP:ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 1998 8:53 AM
> To: Jason Omelchuck
> Subject: Re:Covering the Wings MKIII
>
> Jason,
> That post from Richard about using MEK to shuffle ribs around
> underneath.
> Great idea ...wish I had thought of it. Guess that's why Richard is
> a Tech Counselor.
>
> Someone said start at 250. I think that is too high even tho that
> number may have come from a Stits seminar. Nothing wrong with
> starting
> at 180-200 just to see how things will go. Shrinking is a *very*
> small
> percentage of total time and effort, so don't rush and risk all the
> other work. All newbies ...don't freak about this, it is not hard,
> just go slow.
>
> I'd assume its normal for everybody to buy the little $10 temperature
> calibrating tool (A/C Spruce or others). I can't imagine covering
> without one. With that I inked little colored markings on my iron for
> each temperature interval, and rechecked them periodically. (I recall
> visions of my wing going up in smoke due to possible crappy
> thermostat.)
>
> Ben Ransom
> http://mae.ucdavis.edu/~ransom
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Gerken <gerken(at)us.ibm.com> |
| Subject: | Re: proper props |
Woody, what is the Internet address for that Prop selection page, I don't see
it in you append. Thanks!
Jim Gerken
owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com on 09/01/98 09:27:50 PM
Please respond to kolb-list(at)matronics.com
cc:
Subject: Kolb-List: proper props
There has been a recent influx of questions concerning props and pitches.
I was given this site a couple of weeks ago and find it quite good at
determining the best prop for your aircraft. Try it.
Woody
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Russell Duffy" <rv8(at)mindspring.com> |
Hi guys,
I find myself thinking about 4-stroke engine options for the SS. This is
probably more of a mental exercise than anything, but I want to explore all the
possibilities. The options I know of are:
VW- Certainly the most proven option, but I would like to hear more details from
the people who are running these.
Rotax 912- too expensive, but proven and reliable. How much is a used one?
HKS- too expensive and not enough power.
Jabiru- An excellent option except for the price ($9k).
Subaru- An interesting choice. I've seen plenty of these on gyro's, and I think
it might be the best overall choice for power, cost, and reliability.
Mazda- As everyone knows, I love rotary engines, but haven't found a good
configuration for the SS. Rotaries tend to be far too heavy and powerful in the
2-rotor configuration. There has been some recent work in single rotor engines,
but the price may be prohibitive.
Any others????
BTW- we seem to be growing a bit of a hurricane now. Top winds are up to 90
mph, and the storm is stationary. It'll probably pass just East of us sometime
tonight, which is good because the west side is pretty weak. Currently, it's
raining and we have winds of 35 gusting to 40 mph. My house is about 3 miles
from the Gulf with a large bay about 1 mile North. Should be no problems unless
the storm gets a good bit stronger.
Rusty
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "J.E. Llopis" <pepell(at)lobocom.es> |
Another option is the SVS 1400. A very interesting 2 cyl, four stroke , 1.4
liters (84.43 cu.in)
80 hp , 130 Nm torque.
Maybe a little more heavy then ROTAX engine, but air cooled, no water and
radiator.
Jose Enrique Llopis
----------
> De: Russell Duffy
> A: Kolb list
> Asunto: Kolb-List: Engine options?
> Fecha: mircoles 2 de septiembre de 1998 20:30
>
>
> Hi guys,
>
> I find myself thinking about 4-stroke engine options for the SS. This is
> probably more of a mental exercise than anything, but I want to explore
all the
> possibilities. The options I know of are:
>
> VW- Certainly the most proven option, but I would like to hear more
details from
> the people who are running these.
>
> Rotax 912- too expensive, but proven and reliable. How much is a used
one?
>
> HKS- too expensive and not enough power.
>
> Jabiru- An excellent option except for the price ($9k).
>
> Subaru- An interesting choice. I've seen plenty of these on gyro's, and
I think
> it might be the best overall choice for power, cost, and reliability.
>
> Mazda- As everyone knows, I love rotary engines, but haven't found a good
> configuration for the SS. Rotaries tend to be far too heavy and powerful
in the
> 2-rotor configuration. There has been some recent work in single rotor
engines,
> but the price may be prohibitive.
>
> Any others????
>
> BTW- we seem to be growing a bit of a hurricane now. Top winds are up to
90
> mph, and the storm is stationary. It'll probably pass just East of us
sometime
> tonight, which is good because the west side is pretty weak. Currently,
it's
> raining and we have winds of 35 gusting to 40 mph. My house is about 3
miles
> from the Gulf with a large bay about 1 mile North. Should be no problems
unless
> the storm gets a good bit stronger.
>
> Rusty
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank_R_Reynen(at)notes.seagate.com |
| Subject: | Re: Engine options? |
Hi Rusty,
This website has a few more options for you to look at
http://www.isd.net/eulmer/engines.html
Frank Reynen MKIII@466 hrs
http://www.webcom.com/reynen
Hi guys,
I find myself thinking about 4-stroke engine options for the SS. This is
probably more of a mental exercise than anything, but I want to explore all
the
possibilities. The options I know of are:
VW- Certainly the most proven option, but I would like to hear more details
from
the people who are running these.
Rotax 912- too expensive, but proven and reliable. How much is a used one?
HKS- too expensive and not enough power.
Jabiru- An excellent option except for the price ($9k).
Subaru- An interesting choice. I've seen plenty of these on gyro's, and I
think
it might be the best overall choice for power, cost, and reliability.
Mazda- As everyone knows, I love rotary engines, but haven't found a good
configuration for the SS. Rotaries tend to be far too heavy and powerful
in the
2-rotor configuration. There has been some recent work in single rotor
engines,
but the price may be prohibitive.
Any others????
BTW- we seem to be growing a bit of a hurricane now. Top winds are up to
90
mph, and the storm is stationary. It'll probably pass just East of us
sometime
tonight, which is good because the west side is pretty weak. Currently,
it's
raining and we have winds of 35 gusting to 40 mph. My house is about 3
miles
from the Gulf with a large bay about 1 mile North. Should be no problems
unless
the storm gets a good bit stronger.
Rusty
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "J.E. Llopis" <pepell(at)lobocom.es> |
Another two options are :
* MidWest GAE 100 R (yes, i'm enloved but wankel engines too, that engine
is the Norton Rotary ) . 600 cc, 100 Hp and 55 Kg.
* JPX a certified 2325 cc engine, four cyl. ,80 hp, air cooled and direct
drive.
* Some people are working in BMW two cyl, engine conversions (??)
Jose Enrique Llopis
----------
> De: Russell Duffy
> A: Kolb list
> Asunto: Kolb-List: Engine options?
> Fecha: mircoles 2 de septiembre de 1998 20:30
>
>
> Hi guys,
>
> I find myself thinking about 4-stroke engine options for the SS. This is
> probably more of a mental exercise than anything, but I want to explore
all the
> possibilities. The options I know of are:
>
> VW- Certainly the most proven option, but I would like to hear more
details from
> the people who are running these.
>
> Rotax 912- too expensive, but proven and reliable. How much is a used
one?
>
> HKS- too expensive and not enough power.
>
> Jabiru- An excellent option except for the price ($9k).
>
> Subaru- An interesting choice. I've seen plenty of these on gyro's, and
I think
> it might be the best overall choice for power, cost, and reliability.
>
> Mazda- As everyone knows, I love rotary engines, but haven't found a good
> configuration for the SS. Rotaries tend to be far too heavy and powerful
in the
> 2-rotor configuration. There has been some recent work in single rotor
engines,
> but the price may be prohibitive.
>
> Any others????
>
> BTW- we seem to be growing a bit of a hurricane now. Top winds are up to
90
> mph, and the storm is stationary. It'll probably pass just East of us
sometime
> tonight, which is good because the west side is pretty weak. Currently,
it's
> raining and we have winds of 35 gusting to 40 mph. My house is about 3
miles
> from the Gulf with a large bay about 1 mile North. Should be no problems
unless
> the storm gets a good bit stronger.
>
> Rusty
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "J.E. Llopis" <pepell(at)lobocom.es> |
And another option is the Motavia Ultratec, a beautiful british engine ,
based on Ford parts (good car, i have a Mondeo .... Contour in the US?) .
That engine has two cyl, 82 hp, gear reduction, and looks very well.
Jose Enrique Llopis
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Gerken <gerken(at)us.ibm.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rusty's Engine options? |
Rusty, Lately I've read your notes with sympathy for your predicament with the
R&D pipes, and your frustration with the performance of you SS. I am very
sorry you've had trouble and I wish you hadn't even been tempted to try that
R&D pipe at all. If you happend to pay for it with a major credit card like
Visa, send that pipe back right now and call Visa and tell them the story and
get your money back. They have done this for me before in a product quality
dispute. I assume Visa pulled the money from R&D, whatever, I didn't care once
I had mine back. Anyway, good luck on that.
Your questions on the 4-strokes available;
What are we after (hypothetically) from the engine this time, over what you
know you had with the (Stock) 503? I see your last few notes saying things
like ""anything but 2-stroke"" or something like that. Is there something I
missed concerning your experience with the 503? You did not seize it with that
"REV & DESTROY" pipe on there, did you?
Back to the issue, are you after faster cruise, or more climb, or both, or
??? Assume that no matter what engine choice you would (hypothetically) make
for the SS, it would weigh more than the 503. Stall will go up. Drag will
remain the same, cruise and top speeds won't be much higher unless you
sacrafice climb with a high pitch, or go adjustable in-flight, in my opinion.
I have a good friend that flies a Titan. I would guess that the Titan is
most like the SS, of all the Kolbs, although the SS cannot be as clean. Drag
is your biggest problem, not horsepower. This Titan really flies nice (with a
503 and in-flight adjustable IVO 3-blade), and it looks like a jet when going
over. It is smooth, fast, efficient. And it has its own unique sound when the
prop is high-pitched for cruise. Once he gets it up to speed, the climb rate
is higher than my Mkiii with 582 and the speed he climbs at is about 1.5 times
that of my best rate of climb speed. Best of all, he can go about 125 top
speed and cruise at 100, for super long ranges, he flies to fly-ins all over
the place.
This is not meant to be an ad for Titan. I like the Kolbs better for the
flying I do. But there are some things to learn from the competition:
~Drag sucks.
~Adjustable props cost too much and are complicated and probably not a good
idea on a 2-stroke because of the
load-dependant EGT problems unless the operator is a 2-stroke lover to
begin with, BUT they open possibilities.
~Lower power can still give a great ride if you get that damm drag down
first.
I wish you lived closer Rusty, we'd pull my 582 off and plop it onto your SS,
hypothetically it would be a fun experiement.
Ship me your SS and I'll let you know how it works out.
Jim Gerken
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jason Omelchuck <jason(at)acuityinc.com> |
I have been taking a look at the SVS 1400 engine and it is a strong
option for my MKIII it has a list price of $7250 and includes exhaust,
instruments, oil cooler, oil tank it weighs 163lbs including the oil
cooler but not the tank. They have a pretty good web site at
http://www.teleport.com/~zlinak/engine/engine.htm it also looks like it
would be great for a bed mount. Being an air cooled engine also appeals
to me for simplicity of installation. I have done quite a bit of engine
searching because I do not want a 2 stroke engine on my MKIII but I
cannot afford $10,000 for the typical ready to go 4 stroke. There are a
couple of us on the list who are exploring the Subaru route. The bottom
line with VW's and Subaru's is your installed weight is going to be
around 200lbs which is about 40lbs heavier than paying $10,000. I
would love to hear from someone with a Jabariu, at a claimed weight of
125lbs a person could have a plane that weighs less than a 2 stroke
powered plane. The only disadvantage it the rated HP is around 3300 RPM
or higher which is not the best for our slow STOL planes. I will leave
you with a web page address that I have found very useful
http://sportflyer.com/engines.htm good luck in your search for the
perfect engine, and let us know what you find.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: J.E. Llopis [SMTP:pepell(at)lobocom.es]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 1998 11:48 AM
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Engine options?
>
>
> Another option is the SVS 1400. A very interesting 2 cyl, four stroke
> , 1.4
> liters (84.43 cu.in)
> 80 hp , 130 Nm torque.
>
> Maybe a little more heavy then ROTAX engine, but air cooled, no water
> and
> radiator.
>
> Jose Enrique Llopis
>
>
> ----------
> > De: Russell Duffy
> > A: Kolb list
> > Asunto: Kolb-List: Engine options?
> > Fecha: mircoles 2 de septiembre de 1998 20:30
> >
>
> >
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > I find myself thinking about 4-stroke engine options for the SS.
> This is
> > probably more of a mental exercise than anything, but I want to
> explore
> all the
> > possibilities. The options I know of are:
> >
> > VW- Certainly the most proven option, but I would like to hear more
> details from
> > the people who are running these.
> >
> > Rotax 912- too expensive, but proven and reliable. How much is a
> used
> one?
> >
> > HKS- too expensive and not enough power.
> >
> > Jabiru- An excellent option except for the price ($9k).
> >
> > Subaru- An interesting choice. I've seen plenty of these on gyro's,
> and
> I think
> > it might be the best overall choice for power, cost, and
> reliability.
> >
> > Mazda- As everyone knows, I love rotary engines, but haven't found a
> good
> > configuration for the SS. Rotaries tend to be far too heavy and
> powerful
> in the
> > 2-rotor configuration. There has been some recent work in single
> rotor
> engines,
> > but the price may be prohibitive.
> >
> > Any others????
> >
> > BTW- we seem to be growing a bit of a hurricane now. Top winds are
> up to
> 90
> > mph, and the storm is stationary. It'll probably pass just East of
> us
> sometime
> > tonight, which is good because the west side is pretty weak.
> Currently,
> it's
> > raining and we have winds of 35 gusting to 40 mph. My house is
> about 3
> miles
> > from the Gulf with a large bay about 1 mile North. Should be no
> problems
> unless
> > the storm gets a good bit stronger.
> >
> > Rusty
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu> |
| Subject: | Warp prop for sale |
I'd like to try a PowerFin prop, but I'll only do it if I get good money
for my Warp first. So, if anybody is interested I'll sell my Warp for say
$400 plus shipping.
It has 150 hours on it, no knicks, perfect condition. I bought it
new 3.5 years ago.
It is 66" two blade, tapered (high aspect) plan-form, with Warp's
machined aluminum hub, and adjustment protractor. Bolt pattern for
standard Rotax hub. I just checked with Warp and their price on
this new is currently $537.
I've been perfectly happy with it, just am curious to play with another
option. I've thought about trying wood just for comparison, but Ralph's
shattered wood story dampened my interest in that.
Ben Ransom
http://mae.ucdavis.edu/~ransom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | swidersk <swidersk(at)digital.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Engine options? |
Rusty,
The 3 cyl Goe Metro is the lightest auto coversion that I know of. It has
slightly less top end hp than a 582 but a lot more torque at cruise. Raven offers
a
light & heavy duty redrive. GM Canada has a turbo version which is around 80hp.
Some claim to have successfully turbocharged a 1/2 VW engine which would put
out
about 50hp, but I've never seen a naturally aspirated 1/2VW that didn't have trouble
getting rid of its heat so how can they pull another 50% more power?
Russell Duffy wrote:
>
> Hi guys,
>
> I find myself thinking about 4-stroke engine options for the SS. This is
> probably more of a mental exercise than anything, but I want to explore all the
> possibilities. The options I know of are:
>
> VW- Certainly the most proven option, but I would like to hear more details from
> the people who are running these.
>
> Rotax 912- too expensive, but proven and reliable. How much is a used one?
>
> HKS- too expensive and not enough power.
>
> Jabiru- An excellent option except for the price ($9k).
>
> Subaru- An interesting choice. I've seen plenty of these on gyro's, and I think
> it might be the best overall choice for power, cost, and reliability.
>
> Mazda- As everyone knows, I love rotary engines, but haven't found a good
> configuration for the SS. Rotaries tend to be far too heavy and powerful in
the
> 2-rotor configuration. There has been some recent work in single rotor engines,
> but the price may be prohibitive.
>
> Any others????
>
> BTW- we seem to be growing a bit of a hurricane now. Top winds are up to 90
> mph, and the storm is stationary. It'll probably pass just East of us sometime
> tonight, which is good because the west side is pretty weak. Currently, it's
> raining and we have winds of 35 gusting to 40 mph. My house is about 3 miles
> from the Gulf with a large bay about 1 mile North. Should be no problems unless
> the storm gets a good bit stronger.
>
> Rusty
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Engine options (Ultratec) |
| From: | rbaker2(at)JUNO.COM (Ray L Baker) |
Jose,
This Ultratec by Motavia has caught my attention too. I am hoping that
there will be some field reports on it by the time I have to make the
decision.(next spring if I'm lucky).
It appears to have a lot going for it. Designed for aircraft as opposed
to snow mobile, overhead cam, fuel injected, 2 yr warranty and readily
available parts at automotive prices and the price is competitive. The
specs are great. Now if it will just fly!
Check it out at http://slopilot.com
L. Ray Baker
writes:
>
>And another option is the Motavia Ultratec, a beautiful british engine
>,
>based on Ford parts (good car, i have a Mondeo .... Contour in the
>US?) .
>That engine has two cyl, 82 hp, gear reduction, and looks very well.
>
>Jose Enrique Llopis
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Kolb flying formations |
<< In our little UL club, if any 2 of us fly on the same day, it counts as a
"formation flight" :-)
-Mick Fine
Tulsa, Oklahoma >>
For the sailors, just like 2 sailboats on the same lake constitutes a
RACE!!....GeoR38
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net> |
| Subject: | Re: proper props |
>
> There has been a recent influx of questions concerning props and pitches.
>I was given this site a couple of weeks ago and find it quite good at
>determining the best prop for your aircraft. Try it.
>
>
A thousand pardons I must have forgot to paste in the url. Try this
http://beadec1.ea.bs.dlr.de/Airfoils/propdes.htm
This was for model builders but the calculations work the same way, lots
of good design info on all aspects of aerodynamics.
Woody
Some men are able to stumble over the truth but are able to pick
themselves up and keep walking as if nothing had happened. (Churchill)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Covering the Wings MKIII |
<< Did you see the cartoon in Kit planes last month where the guy wants to be
a perfectionist and his wife lets him know it will be a hundred years before
he is done. Don't get caught in that trap. But always keep it in mind it is
your butt in the seat so do your best but don't cripple your self trying to
get everything perfect.
Dick (the country hick ) Wood
>>
Good for you country hick.....I agree 100%..........I never even measured
anything on mine and my Firestar flies like a
champ....er.....airplane................GeoR38
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeff Wilde" <jeffwilde(at)mpinet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Engine options? |
Raven Manufactures a redrive for a Goe Metro/Suzuki conversion. They can
also supply an engine. I've sent for their literature but haven't received
it yet so I am not an expert. They caught my attention on the net and look
interesting. I'll enclose thier web site.
I appreciate all the pointers on covering. I've been pouring over the Stits
manual and Stits tape. Has anyone had experience applying the polytone over
epoxy enamel. The lit says it will work but may need to be reapplied every
few years. Any comments? Also, what do you Kolbists(new word?) use to blunt
the protrusions from the small tubes on the control surfaces. Some kind of
tape. Do the fabric rivits weaken the ribs in any way. What about rib
stitching, any advantages? Can I use good old laquer thinner to clean my
aluminum tubes or should I buy the Stits stuff? Well, that aught to generate
about 50 responses. Love you guys. Building a Mark III. Jeff in Oviedo.
-----Original Message-----
From: Russell Duffy <rv8(at)mindspring.com>
Date: Wednesday, September 02, 1998 8:45 AM
Subject: Kolb-List: Engine options?
>
>Hi guys,
>
>I find myself thinking about 4-stroke engine options for the SS. This is
>probably more of a mental exercise than anything, but I want to explore all
the
>possibilities. The options I know of are:
>
>VW- Certainly the most proven option, but I would like to hear more details
from
>the people who are running these.
>
>Rotax 912- too expensive, but proven and reliable. How much is a used one?
>
>HKS- too expensive and not enough power.
>
>Jabiru- An excellent option except for the price ($9k).
>
>Subaru- An interesting choice. I've seen plenty of these on gyro's, and I
think
>it might be the best overall choice for power, cost, and reliability.
>
>Mazda- As everyone knows, I love rotary engines, but haven't found a good
>configuration for the SS. Rotaries tend to be far too heavy and powerful
in the
>2-rotor configuration. There has been some recent work in single rotor
engines,
>but the price may be prohibitive.
>
>Any others????
>
>BTW- we seem to be growing a bit of a hurricane now. Top winds are up to
90
>mph, and the storm is stationary. It'll probably pass just East of us
sometime
>tonight, which is good because the west side is pretty weak. Currently,
it's
>raining and we have winds of 35 gusting to 40 mph. My house is about 3
miles
>from the Gulf with a large bay about 1 mile North. Should be no problems
unless
>the storm gets a good bit stronger.
>
>Rusty
>
>
>
>
>
>
name="Raven Geo Met engines.url"
filename="Raven Geo Met engines.url"
[InternetShortcut]
URL=http://www.raven-rotor.com/html/ultralight.html
Modified=00A5594A54D5BD012F
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "J.E. Llopis" <pepell(at)lobocom.es> |
I've received that mail from SVS 1400 vendor, to my request for information
:
> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: Milan Stavenik Jr. of Czechmates LLC [SMTP:zlinak(at)teleport.com]
> Enviado el: mircoles 2 de septiembre de 1998 17:44
> Para: JLB5157(at)red.cam.es
> Asunto: Re: Questions ...
>
> I have another customer that is building the Mark III and just
> purchased my engine. The performance is basically same (25% more
> torque with my engine and less fuel burn). Weight is basically same
> too if you include the water in 912. There is no mount ready so that
> would be the only extra work for you. Hope in the fall to have this
> one flying. If enough people were calling Kolb they would have to
> make an engine mount for the SVS-1400. You are in Spain ?
> Milan Stavenik
>
> "Czechmates LLC"
> P.O.Box 82752 Portland, OR 97282-0752
> tel: 503-704-6010, 233-6848, fax 503-234-5750
> http://www.teleport.com/~zlinak
>
MR Jason Omelchuck says:
" The only disadvantage it the rated HP is around 3300 RPM
or higher which is not the best for our slow STOL planes"
That is not true, because that engine has a propeller reduction drive . Is
a simple problem of right calculate the ratio of that drive. And that
engine has a lot of more torque, very good for big propellers to obtain a
high climb speed, perhaps due to the higher displacement.
Jose Enrique Llopis
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jason Omelchuck <jason(at)acuityinc.com> |
I believe if you reread my post you will see that the comment about the
3300 RPM and no reduction was about the Jabariu, which has no reduction
and does spin that fast.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: J.E. Llopis [SMTP:pepell(at)lobocom.es]
> Sent: Thursday, September 03, 1998 7:46 AM
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Engine options?
>
>
> I've received that mail from SVS 1400 vendor, to my request for
> information
> :
>
> > -----Mensaje original-----
> > De: Milan Stavenik Jr. of Czechmates LLC [SMTP:zlinak(at)teleport.com]
> > Enviado el: mircoles 2 de septiembre de 1998 17:44
> > Para: JLB5157(at)red.cam.es
> > Asunto: Re: Questions ...
> >
> > I have another customer that is building the Mark III and just
> > purchased my engine. The performance is basically same (25% more
> > torque with my engine and less fuel burn). Weight is basically same
> > too if you include the water in 912. There is no mount ready so
> that
> > would be the only extra work for you. Hope in the fall to have this
> > one flying. If enough people were calling Kolb they would have to
> > make an engine mount for the SVS-1400. You are in Spain ?
> > Milan Stavenik
> >
> > "Czechmates LLC"
> > P.O.Box 82752 Portland, OR 97282-0752
> > tel: 503-704-6010, 233-6848, fax 503-234-5750
> > http://www.teleport.com/~zlinak
> >
>
> MR Jason Omelchuck says:
> " The only disadvantage it the rated HP is around 3300 RPM
> or higher which is not the best for our slow STOL planes"
>
> That is not true, because that engine has a propeller reduction drive
> . Is
> a simple problem of right calculate the ratio of that drive. And that
> engine has a lot of more torque, very good for big propellers to
> obtain a
> high climb speed, perhaps due to the higher displacement.
>
> Jose Enrique Llopis
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: more covering questions |
On Thu, 3 Sep 1998, Jeff Wilde wrote:
> manual and Stits tape. Has anyone had experience applying the polytone over
> epoxy enamel.
Rough sand the epoxy surface or apply polytone whle epoxy still tacky.
Without one of these methods, polytone will not stick at all.
> the protrusions from the small tubes on the control surfaces. Some kind of
yes, tape white cotton (l1st aid) tape or polytac on a small scrap of Stits
> tape. Do the fabric rivits weaken the ribs in any way. What about rib
yes, rivet holes always weaken things. Rib stitching would avoid this.
Kolbs have proven plenty strong enf with fabric riveted.
> stitching, any advantages? Can I use good old laquer thinner to clean my
> aluminum tubes or should I buy the Stits stuff? Well, that aught to generate
Use MEK. It eats anything, no residue, and you'll need it anyway when you
get to covering.
-Ben Ransom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jason Omelchuck <jason(at)acuityinc.com> |
As far as blunting the small tubes, I worked them over pretty good with
a file before install. On the leading edge I wrapped the lower surface
all the way around to the top to cover the leading edges of the tubes
and then when you wrap the top piece over it goes all the way around to
cover the bottom tubes. This means that the leading edges have 2 layers
of cloth over the protruding tubes. On the trailing edge I used the
bent rib method so there were no protrusions. You can cover the
protrusions with antichaif tape or run a finishing tape along the whole
trailing edge, I think either would work. Some people have said you can
use cotton althetic tape for antichafe tape, I can neither confirm nor
deny that this works.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeff Wilde [SMTP:jeffwilde(at)mpinet.net]
> Sent: Thursday, September 03, 1998 8:16 AM
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Engine options?
>
>
>
>
> Raven Manufactures a redrive for a Goe Metro/Suzuki conversion. They
> can
> also supply an engine. I've sent for their literature but haven't
> received
> it yet so I am not an expert. They caught my attention on the net and
> look
> interesting. I'll enclose thier web site.
> I appreciate all the pointers on covering. I've been pouring over the
> Stits
> manual and Stits tape. Has anyone had experience applying the polytone
> over
> epoxy enamel. The lit says it will work but may need to be reapplied
> every
> few years. Any comments? Also, what do you Kolbists(new word?) use to
> blunt
> the protrusions from the small tubes on the control surfaces. Some
> kind of
> tape. Do the fabric rivits weaken the ribs in any way. What about rib
> stitching, any advantages? Can I use good old laquer thinner to clean
> my
> aluminum tubes or should I buy the Stits stuff? Well, that aught to
> generate
> about 50 responses. Love you guys. Building a Mark III. Jeff in
> Oviedo.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Russell Duffy <rv8(at)mindspring.com>
> To: Kolb list
> Date: Wednesday, September 02, 1998 8:45 AM
> Subject: Kolb-List: Engine options?
>
>
> >
> >Hi guys,
> >
> >I find myself thinking about 4-stroke engine options for the SS.
> This is
> >probably more of a mental exercise than anything, but I want to
> explore all
> the
> >possibilities. The options I know of are:
> >
> >VW- Certainly the most proven option, but I would like to hear more
> details
> from
> >the people who are running these.
> >
> >Rotax 912- too expensive, but proven and reliable. How much is a
> used one?
> >
> >HKS- too expensive and not enough power.
> >
> >Jabiru- An excellent option except for the price ($9k).
> >
> >Subaru- An interesting choice. I've seen plenty of these on gyro's,
> and I
> think
> >it might be the best overall choice for power, cost, and reliability.
> >
> >Mazda- As everyone knows, I love rotary engines, but haven't found a
> good
> >configuration for the SS. Rotaries tend to be far too heavy and
> powerful
> in the
> >2-rotor configuration. There has been some recent work in single
> rotor
> engines,
> >but the price may be prohibitive.
> >
> >Any others????
> >
> >BTW- we seem to be growing a bit of a hurricane now. Top winds are
> up to
> 90
> >mph, and the storm is stationary. It'll probably pass just East of
> us
> sometime
> >tonight, which is good because the west side is pretty weak.
> Currently,
> it's
> >raining and we have winds of 35 gusting to 40 mph. My house is about
> 3
> miles
> >from the Gulf with a large bay about 1 mile North. Should be no
> problems
> unless
> >the storm gets a good bit stronger.
> >
> >Rusty
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> name="Raven Geo Met engines.url"
> filename="Raven Geo Met engines.url"
>
> [InternetShortcut]
> URL=http://www.raven-rotor.com/html/ultralight.html
> Modified=00A5594A54D5BD012F
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Engine options? |
a
Do the fabric rivits weaken the ribs in any way. What about rib stitching,
any advantages?
One of our locals stalled in a Twinstar from about 12 feet up and
cart wheeled it. Walked away, but a total. The ribs all broke through the
holes drilled for the rivits, but they would have broken anyway.
However; anytime you drill a 1/8" hole through a tube that is 5/16"
OD, you have removed roughly 2/5 of the tubes circumference, which is
obviously not going to leave it as strong as it was. But since all the Kolbs
out there with rivited rib holes are doing fine, it must not be a big deal.
I rib stitched mine. Get a helper for the back side, I have found
that if you mention at the EAA meeting just before you are ready to do it,
all you need to do is say; "I am getting ready to rib stitch my wing,
anybody want to help?" and you will have several volunteers. People like to
learn new things, in this case, it is learning an old thing again.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank_R_Reynen(at)notes.seagate.com |
| Subject: | Re: Engine options (Ultratec) |
(Document link not converted)
rbaker2(at)JUNO.COM (Ray L Baker) on 09/02/98 06:02:17 PM
Please respond to kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Engine options (Ultratec)
Jose,
This Ultratec by Motavia has caught my attention too. I am hoping that
there will be some field reports on it by the time I have to make the
decision.(next spring if I'm lucky).
It appears to have a lot going for it. Designed for aircraft as opposed
to snow mobile, overhead cam, fuel injected, 2 yr warranty and readily
available parts at automotive prices and the price is competitive. The
specs are great. Now if it will just fly!
Check it out at http://slopilot.com
L. Ray Baker
writes:
>
>And another option is the Motavia Ultratec, a beautiful british engine
>,
>based on Ford parts (good car, i have a Mondeo .... Contour in the
>US?) .
>That engine has two cyl, 82 hp, gear reduction, and looks very well.
>
>Jose Enrique Llopis
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank_R_Reynen(at)notes.seagate.com |
| Subject: | Re: Engine options (Ultratec) |
I checked up on this engine more than a year ago and found the specs highly
overrated and the Manuf. not very responsive.See below the archived message
I posted on this list in May-97.
BTW, the engine is still not on the market(see article in ULflying mag this
month)
It will never fly on my MKIII !!
While reading the May '97 issue of UL-flying I became very interested
in the article about this new 4-stroke Ultratec-60 or 80hp engine build
by Motavia Lmtd.
I wanted this engine to eventually replace the Rotax 582 currently on
my MARK-III (on LOTUS floats) which can use the 80 hp performance (even
with the modest increase in weight--15 lbs heavier), in addition to
4-stroke reliability and fuel injection at much lower cost compared to
a Rotax 912.
I requested and received the published performance specs on the
Ultratec-80HP engine.
The spec.sheet claimes an 80 HP performance at 6500 rpm.
Checking this with the std hpX5250=torqueXrpm formula, to produce 80 hp
at 6500rpm requires 64.4 ftlbs of torque (at 6500 rpm). Their data
specifies a max. torque of 58 ftlbs at 5500 rpm and declining with
increasing rpm (as shown on torque curve). Even using Ultratec's value
of 58 ftlbs torque flat out to 6500 rpm, it would only produce 72 hp.
Doublechecking the numbers with the Ultratec80 data given in the metric
system gave similar results. (60 KW @6500 rpm; Max torque 80 Nm @5500
rpm claimed) produces only 54.4 KW @ 6500rpm with flat torque
performance.
So no typo's or translation errors there.
The 80 hp Rotax 912 torque curve (CPS catalog) shows 75 ftlbs at 5500
rpm so it is likely that the Rotax claim of producing 80 hp (requiring
70 ftlbs torque) at 6000 rpm value is correct.
If Motavia's numbers are correct, the Ultratec-80 engine is only a
modest 70 hp by comparison.
I contacted the US dealer and the British manufacturer by E-mail with
the same concerns several weeks ago but except for a reply from the US
dealer to be patient, "they were busy building engines", I have not
heard anything from them.
So my question to you horsepower gurus is: Where could these 10 missing
Ultratec horses be hiding?
The Ultratec80 engine (complete with all accessories) is priced at
$7395 (less $500 if you order immediately), compared to around $9000
for a Rotax 912.
One other point regarding the spec. sheet: Fuel usage was stated as an
unspecified 6L/hr (1.6 Gall/hr), and when I requested clarification,
received the answer that this is at 50% powersetting. This
powersetting I use only during flair-out and landing my floatplane. Is
there anybody that can maintain airspeed and altitude at that setting
(unless over-powered!)?
Frank Reynen (BSME) Mark-III @380 hrs (:-(
Frank Reynen MKIII@466hrs
http://www.webcom.com/reynen
Jose,
This Ultratec by Motavia has caught my attention too. I am hoping that
there will be some field reports on it by the time I have to make the
decision.(next spring if I'm lucky).
It appears to have a lot going for it. Designed for aircraft as opposed
to snow mobile, overhead cam, fuel injected, 2 yr warranty and readily
available parts at automotive prices and the price is competitive. The
specs are great. Now if it will just fly!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerryb(at)jmd.ods.com |
| Subject: | Re[2]: KOLB: Source of seafoam treatment - NAPA |
If your still in search of Seafoam for the ring and cylinder
decarbonizing treatment, check out a NAPA auto parts store. NAPA
carry's it according to the manufacturer. We indeed found they had
it. Also as a good comments about it.
Jerry Bidle
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: KOLB: seafoam treatment again
Date: 7/12/98 7:40 PM
Ron and others,
I was wondering how you were coming along. It looks like you will be in
the air soon. Take your time and do a good job. I saw your message and
ran out to the car and got a can. I'll be darned, the address is right
here in Hopkins MN.
I have the can of Seafoam in front of me and I can see that I'm gonna
become known as Mr. Seafoam.
Yes Mick, I did wash out my keyboard with Seafoam and I noticed it
performs much better. Hmmmm, the label doesn't say anything about
keyboards ....... ....... &%^$#@(*&^%$##@ ....... duh, what's happening
.......??????
>From phone book:
Sea Foam Sales Co.
10401 E. Bren Road
Minnetonka, MN 55343
(612) 938-4811
Address on can:
Sea Foam Sales Co.
P.O. Box 5178
Hopkins, MN 55343-1178
Part # SF-16
It's a 16oz round can with a red and black label. It says:
"A 100% pure petroleum product for use in all gasoline and diesel type
engines both 2 and 4 cycle. Oxygen sensor safe.
Cleans dirty engine parts internally by removing harmful gums, varnish
and carbon buildup. Removes moisture from oil crankcases and fuel tanks.
Works and performs instantly.
Stabilizes and conditions fuels from becoming stale. Excellent for engine
storage."
The side of the can shows all types of engines from cars and trucks to
snowmobiles and chainsaws. It says that it can be added to the fuel tank,
oil, injected into the carb, or into the sparkplug hole. It's been
around since 1942.
I paid $4.69 for the can, but I see it on sale for $2.69. It's worth
every penny since I've seen what it does. I use a synthetic oil now in my
engine and I have not had a problem except that it fouled a plug the
first time I used it. This last time it didn't. I suggest using some old
plugs, then put in the new ones once the carbon has been blown out.
Ralph (Seafoam addict) Burlingame
Original FireStar 400 hrs
writes:
>Ralph, I was just sitting here telling a friend from Nevada about your
>Seafoam. Neither of us has ever heard of it, but we are both very
>interested in trying it. I have previously looked for it in auto supply
>store, but no dice. I wonder if you might send me some info off the
>label so that I can write the company for info on either a local
distributor
>or possibly buy it over the phone.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Ron Carroll
>Original Firestar (4-coats of paint on it so far ( 2-Poly Brush,
>2-PolySpray, Tomorrow we start the Poly Tone)
-
To unsubscribe send email to: majordomo(at)intrig.com
Include in the body: unsubscribe kolb yourname@yourdomain
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "J.E. Llopis" <pepell(at)lobocom.es> |
Sorry Jason. Yes, you are right.
The comments from Mr. Frank Reynen on the Motavia Ultratec are very
interesting., I think , the SVS engine is a more interesting option.
Perhaps the 912 is a too complex engine. (both liquid and air cooling, four
cyl, etc ).
Jose Enrique Llopis
(Perhaps an MK III builder .....)
----------
> De: Jason Omelchuck
> A: 'Kolb builders'
> Asunto: FW: Kolb-List: Engine options?
> Fecha: jueves 3 de septiembre de 1998 17:39
>
>
> I believe if you reread my post you will see that the comment about the
> 3300 RPM and no reduction was about the Jabariu, which has no reduction
> and does spin that fast.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: J.E. Llopis [SMTP:pepell(at)lobocom.es]
> > Sent: Thursday, September 03, 1998 7:46 AM
> > To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Engine options?
> >
> >
> > I've received that mail from SVS 1400 vendor, to my request for
> > information
> > :
> >
> > > -----Mensaje original-----
> > > De: Milan Stavenik Jr. of Czechmates LLC [SMTP:zlinak(at)teleport.com]
> > > Enviado el: mircoles 2 de septiembre de 1998 17:44
> > > Para: JLB5157(at)red.cam.es
> > > Asunto: Re: Questions ...
> > >
> > > I have another customer that is building the Mark III and just
> > > purchased my engine. The performance is basically same (25% more
> > > torque with my engine and less fuel burn). Weight is basically same
> > > too if you include the water in 912. There is no mount ready so
> > that
> > > would be the only extra work for you. Hope in the fall to have this
> > > one flying. If enough people were calling Kolb they would have to
> > > make an engine mount for the SVS-1400. You are in Spain ?
> > > Milan Stavenik
> > >
> > > "Czechmates LLC"
> > > P.O.Box 82752 Portland, OR 97282-0752
> > > tel: 503-704-6010, 233-6848, fax 503-234-5750
> > > http://www.teleport.com/~zlinak
> > >
> >
> > MR Jason Omelchuck says:
> > " The only disadvantage it the rated HP is around 3300 RPM
> > or higher which is not the best for our slow STOL planes"
> >
> > That is not true, because that engine has a propeller reduction drive
> > . Is
> > a simple problem of right calculate the ratio of that drive. And that
> > engine has a lot of more torque, very good for big propellers to
> > obtain a
> > high climb speed, perhaps due to the higher displacement.
> >
> > Jose Enrique Llopis
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jason Omelchuck <jason(at)acuityinc.com> |
The comments from Mr. Frank Reynen on the Motavia Ultratec are very
interesting., I think , the SVS engine is a more interesting option.
Perhaps the 912 is a too complex engine. (both liquid and air cooling,
four
cyl, etc ).
Jose Enrique Llopis
(Perhaps an MK III builder .....)
I agree The SVS engine looks like a great alternative and a very mature
design. I think it is certified in Europe under JAR and list price is
"only" $7300 including instruments and exhaust. Again, I would
encourage any of you who are interested in a 4 stroke alternative to
check out their website at
http://www.teleport.com/~zlinak/engine/engine.htm and if anyone has any
experience with the company or engine please report back to the group.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Guy Tetreault <samten(at)CAM.ORG> |
Hi All,
About a year ago I was just getting acquainted with ULs in
general and my interest was then focused on various rotorcrafts. On
one of the lists there was a very clear concern expressed by some of the
participants on the subject of using a lead pencil to write on aluminum
tubing or sheeting. The concern refered to a form of corrosion that
starts at a microscopic level at the point of the marking and eventually
develops into micro-cracks important enough to significantly weaken an
otherwise safe looking piece of structural material !
Any comments on this, I was reading an assembly manual from
an older UL manufacturer recently and they were suggesting marking the
parts with just this type of pencil! A bit unsettling.
Guy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Guy Tetreault <samten(at)CAM.ORG> |
Hi again,
When the subject of engines comes up I have quite a hard time not
putting in my three (I live in Canada!) cents. I just read Mark Bierle's
comments on the David V-twin, seems he tried it on one of his planes. A
recent Experimenter magazine refers to a Yamaha Virago engine powering a
light plane. There's a gentleman near here running a BMW motorcycle
engine on his trike, he designed his own redrive and he just loves it.
If you show the HP and torque figures for the SVS-1400 to a motorcycle
mechanic, he'll tell you that they're from a mildly modified Harley, an
engine I know well having put 50,000 mi on one recently without even a
burp from it.
There's a lot to be said about motorcycle or small car 4 strokes but
one has to be more than just a little bit mechanicaly inclined and be
ready for some trial and error but I'm sure it's worth it. I have no
trouble imagining myself flying a BMW, ST1100 or american big twin
powered Mark III, sipping gas and barely making a sound, reliably. I can
see it now, the All American H-D powered Mark III sounding just like an
old radial engine WOW!
Geeez I'm all worked up now, anyway the fruit on one's effort would be
an original, fuel efficient and reliable aircraft, all this for less
money than a 912. Guess I'll have to go down in the shop and pull that
engine out of the bike!
Guy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bob n <ronoy(at)shentel.net> |
NO NO NO don't do it. As an old FAA mech I'm here to tell you NO. Use a
soft fine line ink writing pen. I'm not a big maker of ULs, but have
made many, many repair sheets for all kinds GAs. Don't do it. Grey Baron
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Engine options? |
In a message dated 9/2/98 1:01:42 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
jason(at)acuityinc.com writes:
<< . I
would love to hear from someone with a Jabariu, at a claimed weight of
125lbs a person could have a plane that weighs less than a 2 stroke
powered plane. The only disadvantage it the rated HP is around 3300 RPM
or higher which is not the best for our slow STOL planes. I will leave
yo >>
I'm flying a Jabiru 2200 on my Titan II. First flight was June 4th and to
date I have 61 hours on it. No problems and no complaints! Performance of
the Titan is equal to a similarly equiped 912 powered plane. Fuel burn
through 56 hours is 2.65 gph. I have a wood prop - 58x44 and straight & level
WOT gives me 3010 rpm and 130 mph. Climb @ 65 mph settles in at 1150 fpm for
a two thousand foot climb. I oftem cruise at 95 - 100 mph with other Titans
at 2350rpm. The engine is smooth and quiet. Prop noise gets a bit loud over
2800 rpm.
The weight of the installed components of the Jabiru including exhaust is 122
lbs on my plane. (We put the wholeengine, carb, exhaust, etc on the chapters
certified aircraft scale and weighed it).
Jabiru has now produced a pusher exhaust standard in stainless steel.
I guess you could say I really like this engine. Having flown my Kolb Mk III
582 for 130 hours and based on that experience, I bet it would perform great
on that plane as well.
Pete Krotje
Wisconsin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)telepath.com> |
> the subject of using a lead pencil to write on aluminum
> tubing or sheeting. The concern refered to a form of corrosion that
> starts at a microscopic level at the point of the marking and eventually
> develops into micro-cracks important enough to significantly weaken an
> otherwise safe looking piece of structural material !
Check out this site. Aluminum and graphite are about as far apart
on the galvanic corrosion potential chart as you can get. In the
presence of moisture (vapor counts, too) there will be a galvanic
reaction with the aluminum losing the battle (Anodic).
http://www.cybcon.com/~thelen/1galv.html
J. Baker
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | skeeve(at)excellentproducts.com (dave) |
| Subject: | Re: powerplant options |
The idea of a mk-111 that sounds like a Harley is cool! Just like a radial,
the sound is very distinctive and beautiful!
Also, has everyone seen the info on the Raven Redrive units, especially the
newest one that is for a pusher?
The engine to go with this is one of several sizes of Geo Metro engines.
That is most likely what I will use on my MK-III. The engine is made by
Suzuki and is known for light weight and very good reliability. They sent me
a notice a short while ago, that they have just finished designing a pusher
configuration just for Mk-III size and style aircraft. I see that they have
a new turbo charged unit available as well.
I haven't purchased anything from them yet, but I have talked to them for
quite a while and they do sound especially knowledgable and friendly. (I am
in no way related to them)
If anyone wants, I will get further info and post it here.
Or, better yet:
http://www.raven-rotor.com/
Blue skies, All!
dave
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rutledge Fuller" <rut007(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Bewildered (again) in Brandon |
"
Hi Skip:
I was wondering where I would end up flying this thing from ... It's
too
far to the farm in Georgia... I take it from your note that the good
folks
who run the Wimauma Airpark don't mind UL operations???
Would enjoy meeting you, talking over the Kolb stuff and your experience
at
Wimauma... Also would like to take a look at your airplane...
best regards,
Bill Tuton
(813) 662-2210"
Bill, I copied your phone number down for when the weather clears.
Where is the nearest ultralight friendly airport/field to your home? Do
you have coordinates? I will be at the Jonesville fly-in at the Flying
Ten airport. Why don't you stop in. I'm sure that you could get some
flying time there.
Rutledge Fuller
Tallahassee, Fl.
Haven't flown in three days
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Randy & Joni Tolvstad" <tolvstad(at)nvc.net> |
| Subject: | What is the best prop? |
I was wondering if anyone had any suggestions as to what type of prop I
should use or my Ultrastar. I am currently using a ultra prop by
Competition Aircraft with a 16 degree wedge. It seems to work very well
with the exception that the grass seems to constantly be chewing up my prop.
Someone suggested to me to take and put metal taped on the leading edge of
the prop. Is this a safe thing to do ?
The gentleman I bought the plane from suggested that I go to a 17 degree
wedge. He said that would increase might air speed and still not over work
the engine. I am currently running a 440, Kawasaki engine. My cylinder
head temperature runs in the 250 degree range. My exhaust temperature runs
in the 1150 degree range .
Being brand new to the sport of ultralights I would appreciate any
suggestions any of you may have .
Randy Tolvstad
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: What is the best prop? |
Randy,
Do you have two or three blades on your prop and what is your max
static rmp? With this information, it should be possible to make
suggestions.
John Jung
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MitchMnD(at)aol.com |
With Earl out of here two of us from the Tallahassee Kolb bunch took to the
air Fri AM. It was so clear we could see the state capitol from over Quincy
airport (~20 Miles) and it was dead calm. We flew to yet another grass strip
about 10 miles East and got down low for a good look. It was big enough for a
GA aircraft and looked huge to us. The local word is that the owner is wary
of liability problems and is not anxious for visitors. There was no one
around so we passed it for now. I suspect that he will not invite us to land
but if we just drop in he shouldn't mind. Did several idle-power down
landings some touch and goes and just generally enjoyed the morning. All of
you still building take heart .. It is worth every minute of it !!!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Russell Duffy" <rv8(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rusty's Engine options? |
Hello all,
Thanks to everyone for the interesting engine info. There are a few more good
choices than I realized. If I had a bit of extra money laying around, I think
I
would get a Jabiru. It could be used for the SS, then later for some of the
other projects I've been interested in (Sonerai, KR-1, Corby Starlet). Like I
said before though, this is primarily a mental excersise for me, but just today
I passed along some of the engine info to a SS builder that isn't part of the
computer generation.
>R&D pipe at all. If you happend to pay for it with a major credit card like
>Visa, send that pipe back right now and call Visa and tell them the story and
>get your money back. They have done this for me before in a product quality
I'll have to check into this.
>like ""anything but 2-stroke"" or something like that. Is there something I
>missed concerning your experience with the 503? You did not seize it with that
>"REV & DESTROY" pipe on there, did you?
You didn't miss anything, but I have a feeling I was in the danger zone when I
took the plane around the pattern using the R&D pipe. Those plugs sure were
white. As for 2-strokes in general, I've just never been comfortable with them
in airplanes, and the whole R&D pipe experience demonstrated just how finicky
they can be.
> Back to the issue, are you after faster cruise, or more climb, or both, or
I think I'm trying to make the SS something it's not. Prior for finishing the
SS, I had no experience with very light aircraft. After years of hearing people
speak so passionately about low-and-slow flying, I thought it would be the
perfect. Unfortunately, I haven't found that to be true for me. First, going
slow isn't in my personality. Second, the only place to safely fly low around
here is along the beach, and to do that I have to cross the bay which puts me
out of gliding distance of land for a few minutes. Though, these flights were
the most fun I had with the SS, there's a limit to how many times you can make
the same flight. Everything else around here is paper company land (tall pointy
pine trees), so flying below a few thousand feet in a 2-stroke powered plane
isn't something I'm comfortable with.
The best solution to me current Dilemma is to sell the SS and continue with the
RV-8. This is no reflection on the SS, or Kolb because the plane flies great.
It just didn't turn out to be what I wanted to fly.
Rusty
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | swidersk <swidersk(at)digital.net> |
| Subject: | Re: What is the best prop? |
Randy,
some years ago, a UL club in Colorado tested all the leading props (ground
adjustable) on the same day on the same engine. Precesion Propellor came out on
top & the UltraProp was on the bottom. (Though it was rated as the toughest in
an
abrasive environment like float planes & lawn mowers.) It has no built in helix
or twist (easier & cheaper to make) & will never compete for efficiency in the
thrust arena. I had a UltraStar for 8 years & am familiar with your problem.
Metal tape can be safely used as a temperary fix. NAPA's autobody section sells
stainless steel tape that is the toughest I know of. On your 50" circle, you can
gain 12% thrust by inlaying aluminum p-tips. I ended up raising my landing gear
12" & adapting a Roatax B drive onto my trusty Cuyuna & got a 60" circle. With
my
Precision prop I was getting 290lbs of static thrust (That was including a 10%
increase over stock with the inlaid p-tips) My buddy's stock single carb rotax
TwinStar was getting 275lbs with its 66" prop. With even less pitch, I actually
could pull 310lbs thrust though it would quit flying when it hit 40mph, but it
sure git there quick! On changing your pitch, I'd say you have perfect numbers
for longevity & don't mess with it, unless you are prepared for a very long &
expensive learning experience that will yield you a bit more thrust. You have
a
wonderful plane. If you would ask my opinion, Ii would say just enjoy it as it
is
& have a bunch of fun for a while. I'd be happy to share some things I've learned
with it if you want to give me a call, 352-622-4064.
Richard Swiderski
Randy & Joni Tolvstad wrote:
>
> I was wondering if anyone had any suggestions as to what type of prop I
> should use or my Ultrastar. I am currently using a ultra prop by
> Competition Aircraft with a 16 degree wedge. It seems to work very well
> with the exception that the grass seems to constantly be chewing up my prop.
> Someone suggested to me to take and put metal taped on the leading edge of
> the prop. Is this a safe thing to do ?
>
> The gentleman I bought the plane from suggested that I go to a 17 degree
> wedge. He said that would increase might air speed and still not over work
> the engine. I am currently running a 440, Kawasaki engine. My cylinder
> head temperature runs in the 250 degree range. My exhaust temperature runs
> in the 1150 degree range .
>
> Being brand new to the sport of ultralights I would appreciate any
> suggestions any of you may have .
>
> Randy Tolvstad
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net> |
| Subject: | Re: What is the best prop? |
>
>
>I was wondering if anyone had any suggestions as to what type of prop I
>should use or my Ultrastar. I am currently using a ultra prop by
>Competition Aircraft with a 16 degree wedge. It seems to work very well
>with the exception that the grass seems to constantly be chewing up my prop.
>Someone suggested to me to take and put metal taped on the leading edge of
>the prop. Is this a safe thing to do ?
>
>The gentleman I bought the plane from suggested that I go to a 17 degree
>wedge. He said that would increase might air speed and still not over work
>the engine. I am currently running a 440, Kawasaki engine. My cylinder
>head temperature runs in the 250 degree range. My exhaust temperature runs
>in the 1150 degree range .
>
The tape idea is good. Go to a good auto parts store and buy some
stainless steel tape. Be sure to clean off your leading edges better than
you ever have before. Cut 2 poeces identical in length and put them on the
same distance from the prop tip. Rub them down real good to make sure the
adhesive sticks.
You missed an important bit of information. We need the max RPM. 6300 Rpm
is a good rule of thumb. If you have less decrease pitch if more increase
pitch. Head temp seems a bit cool. Try raising the needle circlip a notch.
Woody
Some men are able to stumble over the truth but are able to pick
themselves up and keep walking as if nothing had happened. (Churchill)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Prop advice needed |
Hi, List. Am ready to order engine [503DCDI w/GPL elec. start & "C" Box. I
weigh 265 lbs., am not looking for max top speed but want good take-off power.
Have read lots of arguements on Ivo vs. Warp. A friend who flies a FS I
recommended the Warp 3 blade w/ taper tips, said the ground acceleration was
noticeably greater. Sounds good to me....
In the Kolb newsletter dated 7-1-95, they say '"We have fallen in love with
the Ivo prop for the FS II, we are currently running a 3 blade Ivo with the
quick adjust hub and the 2 1/2" spacer". Seems prop noise is greatly
reduced...but it flexes too much....but it is lighter & cheaper.
Dennis S., if you are out there, do you still recommend the Ivo over the Warp,
& if so, which diameter , pitch, & gear ratio?
Any input will be appreciated as I would like to order soon.
Howard Shackleford
FS I
Lexington, SC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RHolt61518(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Engine options? |
I do not want anymore updates? Thankyou.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | john hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: What is the best prop? |
wood wrote:
>
> >
> >
> ead temperature runs in the 250 degree range. My exhaust temperature runs
> >in the 1150 degree range .
> >
>
>
> pitch. Head temp seems a bit cool. Try raising the needle circlip a notch.
>
> Woody
>
>
>
Hi Gang:
I have to disagree with Woody on one point. If the Kawasaki EGT limit is similar
to the Rotax, then I think I would leave the needle alone. However, This
gentleman hasn't stated enough info to be giving him a lot of advice. If these
temps are WOT changing fuel needle position will not effect EGT. If they are
cruise power at midrange to 75 per cent power, based on EGT limit on the Kawa,
I
think I would leave it right where it is at.
Reference the Competition Prop, I remember Bert Howland telling me that the
straight blades without twist defeat themselves quite early in the speed range.
He said it was like running into a wall. If it was pitched to climb, it would
probably fly 40 to 45 mph no matter how much power you twisted it with.
Erroding prop leading edges was a problem with my Ultrastar also. I had to keep
my strip mowed low, and the main gear would help by throwing stones and debris
into the prop. The best prop I flew with on the Ultrastar was a Jim Culver 50X30
with polyurethane leading edge. With a 35 hp Cuyuna it was perfect, except in
tall grass and weeds.
If you are flying a newly purchased used aircraft, I think I would leave
adjustments alone until I found out a little about how the aircraft performs.
Most likely the guy who sold you the acft had it flying ok, for now any how.
john h
PS: 250F cyl head sounds pretty good to me, but I don't know if it is 50% pwr
or
100% pwr, how long it has run at this setting, or what. Kinda hard to tell
somebody how to set up an eng w/o all the proper info. Kawa engs have super
reputation, very few problems, a real grind 'em out power plant without
complaints, for the most part.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry Bidle <jbidle(at)airmail.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Sea Foam Source |
Chris,
Visit your local NAPA auto parts store, they will have it.
Jerry Bidle
>
>
>Hi Chris,
>My engine is nearing the 50 hour mark and I have been searching for
>some Sea Foam. No luck around south Florida. Care you spare 4 ounces?
>
>Bob Gross
>
>
>
>
>
>---"Wayland, William C." wrote:
>>
>
>>
>> After much searching for a local source of this stuff I happened to
>be in
>> San Diego last week and called all three of the Car Quest / Southern
>Auto
>> Supply stores. Got two "never heard of it" and one "got plenty".
>Hit was
>> the store at 7832 Armour St. San Diego, CA 92111 (619) 277-4896 at
>$2.99
>> per pint can. Bought 6 cans and plan to give some to friends with
>ULs.
>>
>> Chris Wayland, FireFly s/n 008
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>==
>Captain Robert P. Gross
>American Airlines MIA
>561-744-8055
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "J.E. Llopis" <pepell(at)lobocom.es> |
Harley engines are beautiful and the sound is a dream .... but they are
too heavy.
BMW conversions may be lighter, and the quality is very high.
Perhaps i go to Czech republic in some months , and i can see the SVS
engine . That
engine is build in the Czech republic, by people coming from Zlin
Jose Enrique Llopis
----------
> De: Guy Tetreault
> A: Kolb mailing list
> Asunto: Kolb-List: Engine options
> Fecha: viernes 4 de septiembre de 1998 13:45
>
>
> Hi again,
> When the subject of engines comes up I have quite a hard time not
> putting in my three (I live in Canada!) cents. I just read Mark Bierle's
> comments on the David V-twin, seems he tried it on one of his planes. A
> recent Experimenter magazine refers to a Yamaha Virago engine powering a
> light plane. There's a gentleman near here running a BMW motorcycle
> engine on his trike, he designed his own redrive and he just loves it.
> If you show the HP and torque figures for the SVS-1400 to a motorcycle
> mechanic, he'll tell you that they're from a mildly modified Harley, an
> engine I know well having put 50,000 mi on one recently without even a
> burp from it.
> There's a lot to be said about motorcycle or small car 4 strokes but
> one has to be more than just a little bit mechanicaly inclined and be
> ready for some trial and error but I'm sure it's worth it. I have no
> trouble imagining myself flying a BMW, ST1100 or american big twin
> powered Mark III, sipping gas and barely making a sound, reliably. I can
> see it now, the All American H-D powered Mark III sounding just like an
> old radial engine WOW!
> Geeez I'm all worked up now, anyway the fruit on one's effort would be
> an original, fuel efficient and reliable aircraft, all this for less
> money than a 912. Guess I'll have to go down in the shop and pull that
> engine out of the bike!
> Guy
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "J.E. Llopis" <pepell(at)lobocom.es> |
Harley engines are beautiful and the sound is a dream .... but they are
too heavy.
BMW conversions may be lighter, and the quality is very high.
Perhaps i go to Praga in some months , and i can see the SVS engine . That
engine is build in the Czech republic, for people coming from Zlin
Jose Enrique Llopis
----------
> De: Guy Tetreault
> A: Kolb mailing list
> Asunto: Kolb-List: Engine options
> Fecha: viernes 4 de septiembre de 1998 13:45
>
>
> Hi again,
> When the subject of engines comes up I have quite a hard time not
> putting in my three (I live in Canada!) cents. I just read Mark Bierle's
> comments on the David V-twin, seems he tried it on one of his planes. A
> recent Experimenter magazine refers to a Yamaha Virago engine powering a
> light plane. There's a gentleman near here running a BMW motorcycle
> engine on his trike, he designed his own redrive and he just loves it.
> If you show the HP and torque figures for the SVS-1400 to a motorcycle
> mechanic, he'll tell you that they're from a mildly modified Harley, an
> engine I know well having put 50,000 mi on one recently without even a
> burp from it.
> There's a lot to be said about motorcycle or small car 4 strokes but
> one has to be more than just a little bit mechanicaly inclined and be
> ready for some trial and error but I'm sure it's worth it. I have no
> trouble imagining myself flying a BMW, ST1100 or american big twin
> powered Mark III, sipping gas and barely making a sound, reliably. I can
> see it now, the All American H-D powered Mark III sounding just like an
> old radial engine WOW!
> Geeez I'm all worked up now, anyway the fruit on one's effort would be
> an original, fuel efficient and reliable aircraft, all this for less
> money than a 912. Guess I'll have to go down in the shop and pull that
> engine out of the bike!
> Guy
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bob n <ronoy(at)shentel.net> |
AD 98-15-16 Bombadier-Rotax 912F series enginesrequires installation
of improved fuel pump and fuel supply tube.
Of course this is required of AIRCRAFT engines, N-numbered, not ULs, but
maybe should be investigated. This came from FAA Aviation Maintenance
Alerts, AC 43-16A, 9/98, #242
Grey Baron
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com> |
Just got back from the annual Duffield Days fly in. Duffield is a
wide spot in the road about 30 miles north of Kingsport, Tn., and every year
they have this local festival called Duffield Days. Every volunteer fire
department, 4-H club, church youth group, hot rod club, school, you name it,
shows up for a parade. If you show up, you can be in the parade. And they
lay out a 1000' grass strip in the industrial park, put up shade tents, and
porta cans for the flutterbug fliers. We fly around and around the parade
route while the parade is going on, and everyone loves it.
It is in the Appalachians, and there are a lot of old timers that
come out of the hills to look at the little airplanes, and they are very
humble and friendly.
The parade was about a mile long this year, and I left just as it
was finishing, and the lumberjack competition and tractor pulls were getting
ready to start.
Unfortunately, I messed up and forget to buy a big ol' chocolate
cake at one of the church bazzar tents to bring home, but aside from that,
it was a great fly in. We had 10 u/l's, 2 trikes, a powered parachute, and a
gyro. Now I gotta go to work, but it was a good way to start the day!
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cpeterhu(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Engine options |
I wonder why nobody mentions a Honda, water-cooled, shaft drive motorcycle
engine?
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Prop advice needed |
I would also recommend the single carb. Its easier to tune and cheaper when
you try out different jets etc.,
Dick C
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net> |
| Subject: | Re: What is the best prop? |
>
>
>
>wood wrote:
>>
>>
>> pitch. Head temp seems a bit cool. Try raising the needle circlip a notch.
>>
>> Woody
>>
>>
>>
>
>Hi Gang:
>
>I have to disagree with Woody on one point. If the Kawasaki EGT limit is
similar
>to the Rotax, then I think I would leave the needle alone. However, This
>gentleman hasn't stated enough info to be giving him a lot of advice.
Agreed, It is hard giving advice over the phone so to speak. Check your
sparkplugs and they should tell you what is happening inside the engine. If
they are black lean the carb a bit. If white richen it a bit. If any shade
of tan don't mess with it. Only YOUR engine knows for sure. A factory manual
(if you can find one) might give you a proper cht reading.
Woody
Some men are able to stumble over the truth but are able to pick
themselves up and keep walking as if nothing had happened. (Churchill)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rick106(at)JUNO.COM |
| Subject: | Re: Beauford Tuton |
LARRY
You must be on Dennis LIST I can remember when I was in the same shape
, could not find the part , or I just forgot where I layed it down
,anyway no where to be found.Give DENNIS a call and in about 4 / 5 days
that part was in my shop
this is one of the things that makes KOLB the co. it is . Plus they
ALWAYS
were able to answer any questions and boy did I have some dumb ones.
Swaging the end just a tad may be a good idea ,but if the right parts
are their that may be the thing to do.
Rick Libersat
writes:
>
>
> Hey, Bewildered - - - - - This is probably academic at this point,
>since
>it sounds like Dennis is working it out for you. ( Wish he'd send me
>that
>motor mount, tho' ) Just for interest value, though, rather than
>taking
>off metal - and thereby weakening an extremely critical part - what
>about
>swaging the end slightly, to open it up enough to accept the fitting
>??
>Thoughts, anyone ?? Big Lar.
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rick106(at)JUNO.COM |
| Subject: | Re: Beauford Tuton |
LARRY
You must be on Dennis LIST I can remember when I was in the same shape
, could not find the part , or I just forgot where I layed it down
,anyway no where to be found.Give DENNIS a call and in about 4 / 5 days
that part was in my shop
this is one of the things that makes KOLB the co. it is . Plus they
ALWAYS
were able to answer any questions and boy did I have some dumb ones.
Swaging the end just a tad may be a good idea ,but if the right parts
are their that may be the thing to do.
Rick Libersat
writes:
>
>
> Hey, Bewildered - - - - - This is probably academic at this point,
>since
>it sounds like Dennis is working it out for you. ( Wish he'd send me
>that
>motor mount, tho' ) Just for interest value, though, rather than
>taking
>off metal - and thereby weakening an extremely critical part - what
>about
>swaging the end slightly, to open it up enough to accept the fitting
>??
>Thoughts, anyone ?? Big Lar.
>
>
>
>
>
>the
>plane on its back after catching a wheel in some high grass. The
>controls
>were very unresponsive at the slow speeds and you can imagine the
>feeling
>in my gut after performing this manuever.... wrecked the plane and
>never
>got to fly it! Never again. After replacing the nose and a gear
>leg.....
>I headed to KOLB central and spent a few hours with Dan, the flight
>instructor. No problem at all 'mastering' basic maneuvers in the Mark
>III.
> Very valuable to have this experience... so as not to mix it up with
>the
>feel of my limited experience in a C-172 (dont have my license, but
>have
>reached the solo stage).
>
>So today was the day... I was still really scared to take off.... all
>psychological Im sure... but I powered up and pulled the stick.....
>would
>this thing fly??? Didnt you wonder this when you took your completed
>plane
>up for the first time??? Maybe I had put the wings on backwards!!! Or
>worse
>the prop... There were a million reasons not to trust this..... Maybe
>it
>would just flip over for no reason and end up on its back again..... I
>was
>scared.... But...... No surprises.... It went up.....and up.. It was
>soooo thrilling to fly for the first time in this plane..... Now...
>could I
>land???
>
>Once again, I was pleasantly surprised.... maybe beginners luck...
>but it
>came down soo smoothly.. a little bounce but so uneventful... and I
>parked
>it for the day because it was time for a new pair of pants.... just
>kidding.
>
>So the moral of my story is this for those of you who will someday fly
>you
>Kolb for the first time.... NO crowhops...I think you're asking for
>trouble
>and Ill show you what can happen (or just order a second nose cone
>and
>some gear legs in advance-- they now come specially packaged as the
>'Crow
>Hop experimenters Kit' from you nearest Kolb dealer ; -) ) Get some
>time
>with a Mark III or the like.. (taking a lesson from Dan at Kolb was
>fun and
>rewarding... a very nice no nonsense guy) and... ENJOY!! Now these
>words
>of wisdom have previously been posted in this list... Im just
>repeating
>them with my endorsement.
>
>Great thanks to the many contributors to this forum that kept my
>interest
>up for over 2 YEARS of building... thats a long time and a lots of
>messages..... lots of great advice and insights into the many aspects
>invovled with building/flying. That first flight is a big 'hump' to
>cross... Hey Dennis: your plane really flies...... I guess thats not
>news.... I mean it flies even with ME at the controls... I wasnt sure
>of
>that til today.
>
>One technical note/question... What seemed odd was that in my turns it
>seemed that I was being pulled out of my seat... too much rudder?? my
>little slip/skid indicator basically did not move so it was hard too
>tell
>if that was it.... but it was strange to feel that 'pull' that
>strong....
>
>Thanks to all
>
>Jon (near Greenbay, WI)
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bobdoebler(at)JUNO.COM (Robert L Doebler) |
Is this site up? Haven't got anything in some time.
Thanks
Bob D.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rick106(at)JUNO.COM |
| Subject: | Re: Engine options (Ultratec) |
Frank
Good work and very interesting numbers
Rick Libersat
writes:
>
>I checked up on this engine more than a year ago and found the specs
>highly
>overrated and the Manuf. not very responsive.See below the archived
>message
>I posted on this list in May-97.
>BTW, the engine is still not on the market(see article in ULflying mag
>this
>month)
>It will never fly on my MKIII !!
>
>While reading the May '97 issue of UL-flying I became very interested
>in the article about this new 4-stroke Ultratec-60 or 80hp engine
>build
>by Motavia Lmtd.
>
>I wanted this engine to eventually replace the Rotax 582 currently on
>my MARK-III (on LOTUS floats) which can use the 80 hp performance
>(even
>with the modest increase in weight--15 lbs heavier), in addition to
>4-stroke reliability and fuel injection at much lower cost compared to
>a Rotax 912.
>
>I requested and received the published performance specs on the
>Ultratec-80HP engine.
>
>The spec.sheet claimes an 80 HP performance at 6500 rpm.
>
>Checking this with the std hpX5250=torqueXrpm formula, to produce 80
>hp
>at 6500rpm requires 64.4 ftlbs of torque (at 6500 rpm). Their data
>specifies a max. torque of 58 ftlbs at 5500 rpm and declining with
>increasing rpm (as shown on torque curve). Even using Ultratec's
>value
>of 58 ftlbs torque flat out to 6500 rpm, it would only produce 72 hp.
>
>Doublechecking the numbers with the Ultratec80 data given in the
>metric
>system gave similar results. (60 KW @6500 rpm; Max torque 80 Nm @5500
>rpm claimed) produces only 54.4 KW @ 6500rpm with flat torque
>performance.
>
>So no typo's or translation errors there.
>
>The 80 hp Rotax 912 torque curve (CPS catalog) shows 75 ftlbs at 5500
>rpm so it is likely that the Rotax claim of producing 80 hp (requiring
>70 ftlbs torque) at 6000 rpm value is correct.
>
>If Motavia's numbers are correct, the Ultratec-80 engine is only a
>modest 70 hp by comparison.
>
>I contacted the US dealer and the British manufacturer by E-mail with
>the same concerns several weeks ago but except for a reply from the US
>dealer to be patient, "they were busy building engines", I have not
>heard anything from them.
>
>So my question to you horsepower gurus is: Where could these 10
>missing
>Ultratec horses be hiding?
>
>The Ultratec80 engine (complete with all accessories) is priced at
>$7395 (less $500 if you order immediately), compared to around $9000
>for a Rotax 912.
>
>One other point regarding the spec. sheet: Fuel usage was stated as an
>unspecified 6L/hr (1.6 Gall/hr), and when I requested clarification,
>received the answer that this is at 50% powersetting. This
>powersetting I use only during flair-out and landing my floatplane.
>Is
>there anybody that can maintain airspeed and altitude at that setting
>(unless over-powered!)?
>
>Frank Reynen (BSME) Mark-III @380 hrs (:-(
>
>
>Frank Reynen MKIII@466hrs
>http://www.webcom.com/reynen
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Jose,
>This Ultratec by Motavia has caught my attention too. I am hoping
>that
>there will be some field reports on it by the time I have to make the
>decision.(next spring if I'm lucky).
>It appears to have a lot going for it. Designed for aircraft as
>opposed
>to snow mobile, overhead cam, fuel injected, 2 yr warranty and readily
>available parts at automotive prices and the price is competitive. The
>specs are great. Now if it will just fly!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | john hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
Robert L Doebler wrote:
>
> Is this site up? Haven't got anything in some time.
>
Me either Bob. I guess everyone is watching base ball, football, or out flying.
Too hot in Central Alabama to mess with the airplane.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | skip staub <skips(at)bhip.infi.net> |
Hi Bob,
>Is this site up? Haven't got anything in some time.
Yep! :)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
Yeah, we've gone from 50 + per day to 6 or 8 messages. Wonder where
everybody is. Too durned hot here in P.S. too, John. More time to play on
the computer. You haven't lived till you've pre-flighted a
Cessna 172 on a 115' day. Soaked like a garden hose hit you. Guess that
Alabama humidity will do it to ya too. Big Lar.
----------
> From: Robert L Doebler <bobdoebler(at)JUNO.COM>
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Kolb-List: ??
> Date: Monday, September 07, 1998 7:50 PM
>
>
> Is this site up? Haven't got anything in some time.
>
> Thanks
>
> Bob D.
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
Hi Group: I tried the engine information address that Frank Reynen
provided. Really excellent, it's now on my favorites list. Thanks Frank.
Don't give up hope, I've got the photos in being reprinted, and will
eventually get them on their way. Still think that was a great ride you
took me on. Thanks again. Big Lar.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rutledge Fuller" <rut007(at)hotmail.com> |
kolb-list(at)matronics.com
| Subject: | Tragedy and Death from 1,000 ft |
On Saturday September 5, 1998 I headed out for a x-country to Sandy
Creek, Fl. Sandy Creek is located on the New Orleans sectional East of
Panama City and West of Wewahitchca. This morning I was supposed to
meet Richard and do a candy drop over a radio controled air show. I
arrived in Sandy Creek in a short 1hr and 15min. The air was smooth,
and I had a tailwind that allowed a 73 mph ground speed. When I arrived
Richard was ready to go flying prior to the candy drop at 12pm. We
departed and over flew the RC fly-in then headed out over Mexico Beech.
After flying over an hour we decided to head back to Sandy Creek to
prepare for the candy drop. Richard called out a flight of two entering
a left downwind for 090. Strangely, another transmission cautioned us
that a Glasair was about to attempt a high speed taxi test on the 2,500
grass strip (there is no asphalt) Richard said that we would refrain
from leading and would be waiting over the sod farm until clear. The
Glasair began to accelerate down the runway and a ground man said over
the radio, "Lookin' Good". The Glasair then lifted off of the ground,
but failed to climb. The aircraft then circled arround passing over the
sod farm (One very large grass airfield 3milesX3miles) and made one
trasmission,"Iv'e got a problem, Ive' got a problem". We replyed that
he was clear and kept a close eye on his whereabouts. He flew straight
toward the runway at an angle, which made him overshot a little. He
banked his plane hard to the right and slammed into the ground at the
threshhold of 270. The aircraft crashed right in front of his own house
with 2,500 ft more runway to go. Richard, over the radio, said "He hit
hard". Just as he said that, the entire airplane expolded into flames
burning the pilot alive within seconds. I was astonished, I had only
see this kind of thing on TV. I had to keep repeating to myself, "Fly
the plane", "Fly your plane". Richards voice broke the silence over the
radio as I saw several vehicles speeding toward the crash, "Let's
land!". It was difficult from fixating on the reckage while on final as
the flames were burning out of control. We landed 090 and taxied to the
hanger. Emergency vehicles began to pour into the flight park, and we
stayed clear. An hour later we got special permission to depart the
airport. I wanted to get home and Richard was bound and determined to
do that candy drop. An hour and a half later, Quincy was off my right
wing. I was glad to be home. I parked the plane and headed for the
house. Enough flying for one day.
In situations like this, we must reflect on the accident and learn for
others mistakes. I feel that I was ment to witness this act, and it
sure sobered me up. Any thoughts?
Rutledge Fuller
Tallahassee, Fl.
Original Firestar 42 hrs. in four weeks
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rutledge Fuller" <rut007(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Sea Foam Source |
I got mine at Car Quest. Now tell me, how are you using it exactly?
How much in the sparkle plug holes? Do you do one cylinder at a time at
top dead center? Please advise.
Thanks,
Rutledge Fuller
Tally, Fl.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Prop advice needed |
HShack(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
> Hi, List. Am ready to order engine [503DCDI w/GPL elec. start & "C" Box. I
> weigh 265 lbs., am not looking for max top speed but want good take-off power.
>
I had a two blade Warp on my FSII for about 15 minutes of flying.
Then I put the three blade IVO back on. I love the IVO also, on the FSII
because of the spacer and the three blades. It is smooth and quiet. And
it has the quick adjust.
John Jung
Firestar II 60 hrs
SE Wisconsin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Russell Duffy" <rv8(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | 503 for sale (really this time) |
Hi guys,
Unfortunately, I didn't keep the messages from people who wanted my 503 the last
time I was planning to sell it, so here goes again.
503 DCDI - 44 hours, new about 2-97
2-blade, 66" IVO quick adjust prop
mount plate is ready to bolt onto a Kolb
All this for the low, low price of $2000 + shipping.
Let me know if interested,
Thanks,
Rusty
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Scott Bentley <Scott.Bentley(at)Bentley.COM> |
"'Joe Harab'"
Frank Conforti
"'Bob Christ'"
| Subject: | Pictures of Schreveport '98 Labor Day Flying |
Doug Lack and I flew into "Sheveport North", a grass strip south west of
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania on Saturday morning 9/5.
While the advertisements said "General Aviation" fly-in, it was mostly
ultralights and experiementals where we got there.
See http://scott.bentley.com/shvpt90598/ for all the pictures.
http://scott.bentley.com/shvpt90598/pic00001.jpg is a picture of my Mark III
and the entire flight line.
http://scott.bentley.com/shvpt90598/pic00002.jpg is one of the other Kolbs
(there were several Kolbs and Rans.)
http://scott.bentley.com/shvpt90598/pic00003.jpg was recently completed (I
think the gentleman told me his name was "Bixby" or something like that.)
http://scott.bentley.com/shvpt90598/pic00005.jpg is a picture of Doug and a
Fisher 404
http://scott.bentley.com/shvpt90598/pic00007.jpg is something we dubbed a
"flying wing" since it appears to have no tail.
http://scott.bentley.com/shvpt90598/pic00008.jpg is one of the Rans.
http://scott.bentley.com/shvpt90598/pic00009.jpg is a Cessna 195
http://scott.bentley.com/shvpt90598/pic00011.jpg is a Titan Tornado
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | john hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Tragedy and Death from 1,000 ft |
Rutledge Fuller wrote:
>
>
> In situations like this, we must reflect on the accident and learn for
> others mistakes. I feel that I was ment to witness this act, and it
> sure sobered me up. Any thoughts?
>
> Rutledge Fuller
> Tallahassee, Fl.
> Original Firestar 42 hrs. in four weeks
Good Morning Gang:
Welcome to the real world of aviation. We are all supceptible to crashing. If
and when we get to the point of thinking that we are immune to it because we are
good, then we are in for a rude awakening. I know of noone that is immune to
gravity. We are lucky, in one respect, with the type flying we do, and/or are
capable of doing: low and slow. In most situations we have a far greater
advantage of survival in a crash than our much quicker friends. Live, learn, fly,
and enjoy our sport.
I know how you feel Rut. I have witnessed deadly helicopter crashes in RVN, but
they didn't bother me near as much as a fatal crash I witnessed at Sun and Fun
several years ago. A gentleman took off in front of me in a new aircraft called
a
Tundra. I was right behind him in the Factory MK III w/smiling female passenger.
On downwind the aircraft turned left in about a 30 degree bank, descended to the
ground, impacted a pile of pallets stacked in front of a semi-trailer. I was
helpless. All I could do was watch in horror.
Hang in there.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Gross weight, FSII |
Group,
This weekend I tested my Firestar II at it's gross weight. I might
even have had a few gallons extra in the tank. The temperature and
humidity were both about 90. The runway was grass and 2,800 feet long. I
have a single carb 503 with a 3 blade, 62" IVO. Winds were light and
variable. By the end of the runway I had 300' AGL and was climbing at
550 fpm, which is what I averaged to 1,500 ft. Once at altitude, I
needed a few hundred more rpm to hold the same speed as solo, and I
needed slight back pressure on the stick. (5,700 rpm at 65 mph)
Otherwise the plane felt the same and didn't seem to have any problem.
On landing the rollout was longer but the plane had the same feel. I
was happy with the performance of the plane. I have the second carb, and
I had figured that if I didn't think the 503 had enough power with one
carb, I could always add the second one. Now it looks like I will
sticking with one carb.
John Jung
Firestar II N6163J 60 hrs
SE Wisconsin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu> |
| Subject: | U-joint wear and roll trim |
Hi everybody,
My last few flights I've had to hold some left aileron, and I kept
asking myself ...Ben? This is new right, I mean, this thing flew straight
before, right?
Ten months back I took the slop out of the right side wing U joint, but
didn't do the left at that time, as it was not too bad. By now I had
about 1/8" up/down slop in my left wing U-joint. Before flying this
weekend, I customized the washer, reducing it to 0 slop. My plane flies
straight again. :-)
Here's what I don't get: I would thing that slop in the left wing U-joint
(rear wing root attachment) would mean a lower wing incidence angle in
flight on the left wing than the right, and therefore a tendency for
left roll. But I had just the opposite, i.e. my right wing was heavy
until I removed slop from left wing U joint.
This brings up another thought... if your plane flies with one wing
heavy, making you want an aileron trim tab, I betcha you could fix the
alignment problem by changing to a custom made U joint. This would be
only a single small part, with a hole drilled slightly off-set. Don't
know if some with mis-aligned wings have gone this path or not.
-Ben Ransom
PS: I'm curious if others have experienced much wear at the U-joint.
I thought most of mine had just been the paint wearing at the metal-metal
surface contact, but I think there is metal wear there as well. If both
sides are worn the same you wouldn't notice any roll trim change, but
the slop should be removed anyway.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Gross <rpgross(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Sea Foam Source |
Hey Rutledge,
Since you have been flying so much I was wondering what kind of
performance your getting. We have the same A/C and engine package.
what kind of cruise speed and fuel consumption do you get?
Bob
---Rutledge Fuller wrote:
>
>
>
> I got mine at Car Quest. Now tell me, how are you using it exactly?
> How much in the sparkle plug holes? Do you do one cylinder at a
time at
> top dead center? Please advise.
>
> Thanks,
> Rutledge Fuller
> Tally, Fl.
>
>
>
>
>
==
Captain Robert P. Gross
American Airlines MIA
561-744-8055
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Sea Foam Source |
| From: | ul15rhb(at)JUNO.COM (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Rut,
I just read your incredible story. Wow, I have to take a deep breath. I
heard an F-16 pilot say one time, "I'd rather go in a big fireball than
get hit by a truck". Flying is the greatest thing I've ever accomplished
bar none. I've already lost a good friend that I flew with for eight
years in a tragic ultralight accident. It took the wind out of my sails
for awhile until I realized that he would not want to see me grounded
because of his death.
Now for a little humor, then I'll give you the Seafoam Procedure.
A man is flying in a hot air balloon and realizes he is lost. He reduces
height and spots a man down below. He lowers the balloon further and
shouts,
"Excuse me, can you tell me where I am?"
The man below says, "Yes, you're in a hot air balloon, hovering 30 feet
above this field."
"You must work in Information Technology," says the balloonist.
"I do," replies the man. "How did you know?"
"Well," says the balloonist, "everything you have told me is technically
correct, but it's no use to anyone."
The man below says, "You must be in upper management in some business."
"I am," replies the balloonist, "but how did you know?"
"Well," says the man, "you don't know where you are, or where you're
going,
but you expect me to be able to help. You're in the same position you
were
before we met, but now it's my fault."
Seafoam procedure:
1) Take out one spark plug and bring that piston to TDC.
2) Add 2-4 capfuls in that cylinder.
3) Raise the tail of the plane (for a few sec) to get the seafoam
running forward
4) Let it sit for a few days (a week if possible)
5) Put a used plug in the treated cylinder.
6) Start it up and run at about 4000 rpm once it's warmed up.
7) When it quits blowing white smoke out the exhaust, it's ready.
8) Put a new plug in the treated cylinder.
9) Repeat steps 1-8 for the other cylinder.
Please Note: The seafoam may foul the plugs. Use some old plugs during
the treatment then put in new ones after the treatment. I have tested it
for the above method. The instructions say that you can add it to your
gas tank, but I would NOT do it because you do not know what it will eat
up. Keep it in the cylinders only.
Ralph Burlingame
Original FireStar 400+ hrs
writes:
>
>
>
>I got mine at Car Quest. Now tell me, how are you using it exactly?
>How much in the sparkle plug holes? Do you do one cylinder at a time
>at
>top dead center? Please advise.
>
>Thanks,
>Rutledge Fuller
>Tally, Fl.
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Beauford Tuton" <beaufordw(at)WORLDNET.ATT.NET> |
Dennis:
The smaller drag strut fittings arrived today... they fit well.
Thank you for the prompt return. I mailed the other two fittings back to
Mike a few days ago...
Bill Tuton
FF#76
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ul15rhb(at)JUNO.COM (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Guys,
I acquired and installed a low time Rotax 447 engine to replace my 450 hr
reliable 377 this past weekend. I used the 377 muffler and EGT probe for
the 447. The EGT on an average summer day in MN was around 1100 deg on
the 377 at 5500 rpm. After a short hop with the new engine, the EGT was
1300 in cruise at 5000 rpm. I'm using the same type gas and oil that I
used on the 377. The 377 muffler has a single joint and the 447 has two
joints. Both mufflers appear to have identical dimensions. The 447 has
the factory settings, jets as did the 377. The 447 did have normal EGT
readings with its muffler. I used the 377 muffler because I needed to
paint the other one. Any ideas?
Ralph (377 now 447) Burlingame
Original FireStar 400+ hrs
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: U-joint wear and roll trim |
| From: | ul15rhb(at)JUNO.COM (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Ben,
This is true for all Kolbs as far as I know. My plane has also developed
a slight right-heavy wing and having to hold a little left stick. I have
been planning to take the "slop" out of the right wing universal joint
giving it less upward movement thereby more incidence and correcting the
right-heaviness. I haven't got around to it. I know Kolb Aircraft will
drill an offset U-joint (for a fee) to straighten out a roll tendency. A
friend of mine had a huge built-in roll that was corrected this way.
This, in my humble opinion, is better than adding aileron trim tabs,
rudder offset or tabs. Think of it this way: a "down-aileron" lifts a
wing, so bringing the trailing edge of the wing down by taking out the
"slop" will also lift that wing. I don't quite understand, in your
situation, how the opposite seemed to work.
Ralph Burlingame
Original FireStar 400+ hrs
writes:
>
>
>Hi everybody,
>
>My last few flights I've had to hold some left aileron, and I kept
>asking myself ...Ben? This is new right, I mean, this thing flew
>straight
>before, right?
>
>Ten months back I took the slop out of the right side wing U joint,
>but didn't do the left at that time, as it was not too bad. By now I
had
>about 1/8" up/down slop in my left wing U-joint. Before flying this
>weekend, I customized the washer, reducing it to 0 slop. My plane
>flies straight again. :-)
>
>Here's what I don't get: I would thing that slop in the left wing
>U-joint (rear wing root attachment) would mean a lower wing incidence
angle in
>flight on the left wing than the right, and therefore a tendency for
>left roll. But I had just the opposite, i.e. my right wing was heavy
>until I removed slop from left wing U joint.
>
>This brings up another thought... if your plane flies with one wing
>heavy, making you want an aileron trim tab, I betcha you could fix the
>alignment problem by changing to a custom made U joint. This would be
>only a single small part, with a hole drilled slightly off-set. Don't
>
>know if some with mis-aligned wings have gone this path or not.
>
>-Ben Ransom
>
>PS: I'm curious if others have experienced much wear at the U-joint.
>I thought most of mine had just been the paint wearing at the
>metal-metal
>surface contact, but I think there is metal wear there as well. If
>both
>sides are worn the same you wouldn't notice any roll trim change, but
>the slop should be removed anyway.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu> |
> Guys,
> I acquired and installed a low time Rotax 447 engine to replace my 450 hr
> reliable 377 this past weekend. I used the 377 muffler and EGT probe for
> the 447. The EGT on an average summer day in MN was around 1100 deg on
> the 377 at 5500 rpm. After a short hop with the new engine, the EGT was
> 1300 in cruise at 5000 rpm. I'm using the same type gas and oil that I
> used on the 377. The 377 muffler has a single joint and the 447 has two
> joints. Both mufflers appear to have identical dimensions. The 447 has
> the factory settings, jets as did the 377. The 447 did have normal EGT
> readings with its muffler. I used the 377 muffler because I needed to
> paint the other one. Any ideas?
>
Is this set up with a single probe at the Y union of the two exhausts?
I made myself somewhat an expert on this, and the difference made by
converting to two probes at the Rotax specified 100mm distance.
I changed to two probes into a switch (SPDT) that feeds the single
EGT gauge. I'm very happy with it.
If your EGT probe is at the Y, 1300 isn't abnormal. I used to hit
1300 on max power all the time. After changing to 2 probes at 100mm
I see that even the previous 1300 was with the engine jetted slightly
on the rich side. (Yes I was dbl checking against plug color, but erring
on the side of rich because of the big scary number --1300). It is
really nice having the probes at 100mm, allowing you useful numbers
to compare to spec.
I don't know if the 377 muffler is different enf from the 447 to make
a difference in EGT.
-Ben Ransom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tyre <tyre(at)surfsouth.com> |
[un]subscribe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Russell Duffy" <rv8(at)mindspring.com> |
Thanks to everyone that responded to my 503 sale. I'll be shipping it to the
new owner tomorrow. Now about that SlingShot....... :-)
Russell Duffy
Navarre, FL
RV-8, 80587 (tanks)
Kolb SlingShot (for sale-without engine)
rv8(at)mindspring.com
http://www.mindspring.com/~rv8
s if the one on the right were up just a tad ,or the
left flap down this would cause the same thing their is no slop in the
u- joints all check out ok
do you think that I should start with re-adjusting the flaps then take
her up or do you think the ailerons should be first ?
Rick Libersat
writes:
>Ben, This is true for all Kolbs as far as I know. My plane has also
>developed a slight right-heavy wing and having to hold a little left
>stick. I have been planning to take the "slop" out of the right wing
>universal joint giving it less upward movement thereby more incidence
>and correcting the right-heaviness. I haven't got around to it. I know
>Kolb Aircraft will drill an offset U-joint (for a fee) to straighten
>out a roll tendency. A friend of mine had a huge built-in roll that
>was corrected this way. This, in my humble opinion, is better than
>adding aileron trim tabs, rudder offset or tabs. Think of it this way:
>a "down-aileron" lifts a wing, so bringing the trailing edge of the
>wing down by taking out the
>"slop" will also lift that wing. I don't quite understand, in your
>situation, how the opposite seemed to work.
>
>Ralph Burlingame
>Original FireStar 400+ hrs
>
>
> writes:
>>
>>
>>Hi everybody,
>>
>>My last few flights I've had to hold some left aileron, and I kept
>>asking myself ...Ben? This is new right, I mean, this thing flew
>>straight
>>before, right?
>> >Ten months back I took the slop out of the right side wing U joint,
>
>>but didn't do the left at that time, as it was not too bad. By now I
>had
>>about 1/8" up/down slop in my left wing U-joint. Before flying this
>>weekend, I customized the washer, reducing it to 0 slop. My plane
>>flies straight again. :-)
>> >Here's what I don't get: I would thing that slop in the left wing
>>U-joint (rear wing root attachment) would mean a lower wing incidence
>angle in
>>flight on the left wing than the right, and therefore a tendency for
>>left roll. But I had just the opposite, i.e. my right wing was heavy
>>until I removed slop from left wing U joint.
>>
>>This brings up another thought... if your plane flies with one wing
>>heavy, making you want an aileron trim tab, I betcha you could fix
>the
>>alignment problem by changing to a custom made U joint. This would
>be
>>only a single small part, with a hole drilled slightly off-set.
>Don't
>>
>>know if some with mis-aligned wings have gone this path or not.
>>
>>-Ben Ransom
>>
>>PS: I'm curious if others have experienced much wear at the U-joint.
>>I thought most of mine had just been the paint wearing at the
>>metal-metal
>>surface contact, but I think there is metal wear there as well. If
>>both
>>sides are worn the same you wouldn't notice any roll trim change, but
>>the slop should be removed anyway.
>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tom Wormsley <tomsw(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Propeller Balance |
Hello group,
I'm in the process of balancing a 2 bladed wood prop. The horizontal
balance is fine, but the vertical is out. About 5 pennies placed
between two bolts on the light side balances it. I'm curious as to what
others have used to balance thier props and where they have added the
weight. Is it acceptable to add the weight to the hub plate? Any info
would be a great help.
Tom W.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rutledge Fuller" <rut007(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Sea Foam Source |
"Hey Rutledge,
Since you have been flying so much I was wondering what kind of
performance your getting. We have the same A/C and engine package.
what kind of cruise speed and fuel consumption do you get?
Bob"
Boy, you guys are going to have a time with this. I CRUISE AT "6200 "
RPM's. Indicated airspeed 65-70mph. Groundspeed in calm air is about
63mph in calm air. CHT's run 340 and EGT's 1124. I am running the
standard Ritz/Tennessee wood prop. The craft is kind of dragy (I think
that is a new word) with huge 8x6 monster mudder tires, and weight of 10
gal of fuel. I am using the round lift struts as well. Fuel consumption
at that rpm is 2.75 gph. with stock jeting. The 377 loves to run at
high rpm's. Anything under 5500 rpm is useless unless you are
decending.
Rutledge Fuller
Tallahassee, Fl.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rutledge Fuller" <rut007(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Sea Foam Source |
Thanks Ralph. I enjoyed the joke too. One thought is that unless the
liquid evaporates in the cylinder, or seeps completely to the crakcase,
starting the engine could dramitically increase the compression ratio.
I did all of the listed steps below, but only for a 12 hour period.
When I pulled slowly on the starter rope I could feel the additional
compression. I took out the sparkplug and proped the engine a few times
to move the sea-foam out of the cylinder to bring the compression back
to normal. I have another batch of sea-foam in now and will let it sit
for a week. Are you able to notice less carbon visually on the crown of
the piston after application?
Thanks.
Rutledge
Ralph Wrote:
1) Take out one spark plug and bring that piston to TDC.
2) Add 2-4 capfuls in that cylinder.
3) Raise the tail of the plane (for a few sec) to get the seafoam
running forward
4) Let it sit for a few days (a week if possible)
5) Put a used plug in the treated cylinder.
6) Start it up and run at about 4000 rpm once it's warmed up.
7) When it quits blowing white smoke out the exhaust, it's ready.
8) Put a new plug in the treated cylinder.
9) Repeat steps 1-8 for the other cylinder.
Please Note: The seafoam may foul the plugs. Use some old plugs during
the treatment then put in new ones after the treatment. I have tested it
for the above method. The instructions say that you can add it to your
gas tank, but I would NOT do it because you do not know what it will eat
up. Keep it in the cylinders only.
Ralph Burlingame
Original FireStar 400+ hrs
writes:
>
>
>
>I got mine at Car Quest. Now tell me, how are you using it exactly?
>How much in the sparkle plug holes? Do you do one cylinder at a time
>at
>top dead center? Please advise.
>
>Thanks,
>Rutledge Fuller
>Tally, Fl.
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rutledge Fuller" <rut007(at)hotmail.com> |
Please give us the details on performance improvements when you get it
sorted out.
Rutledge Fuller
Ralph worte:
Guys,
I acquired and installed a low time Rotax 447 engine to replace my 450
hr
reliable 377 this past weekend.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RHolt61518(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Sea Foam Source |
Please take me off your list. I do not want anymore updates!
Thank you r. h.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
Ralph,
I would check for an intake leak. Could be seals or the pulse line.
I wouldn't fly it again, with that engine, until the temperature problem
was resolved.
John Jung
Firestar II N6163J 60 hrs
SE Wisconsin
>
>Ralph H Burlingame wrote:
>
>
> Guys,
> I acquired and installed a low time Rotax 447 engine to replace my 450 hr
> reliable 377 this past weekend. I used the 377 muffler and EGT probe for
> the 447. The EGT on an average summer day in MN was around 1100 deg on
> the 377 at 5500 rpm. After a short hop with the new engine, the EGT was
> 1300 in cruise at 5000 rpm. I'm using the same type gas and oil that I
> used on the 377. The 377 muffler has a single joint and the 447 has two
> joints. Both mufflers appear to have identical dimensions. The 447 has
> the factory settings, jets as did the 377. The 447 did have normal EGT
> readings with its muffler. I used the 377 muffler because I needed to
> paint the other one. Any ideas?
>
> Ralph (377 now 447) Burlingame
> Original FireStar 400+ hrs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com> |
>
>Guys,
>I acquired and installed a low time Rotax 447 engine to replace my 450 hr
>reliable 377 this past weekend. I used the 377 muffler and EGT probe for
>the 447. The EGT on an average summer day in MN was around 1100 deg on
>the 377 at 5500 rpm. After a short hop with the new engine, the EGT was
>1300 in cruise at 5000 rpm.
According to the diagram in the CPS book, the 377, 447, and 503 all
use the same size muffler.
Are you using the same prop for the 447 that you used for the 377?
Assuming that jetting is correct:
If the engine is underpropped, (insufficient load) the EGT's will go
up, CHT may be normal or even low.
If the engine is overpropped, (too much load) EGT's will go down,
but CHT's may be normal to high.
If the prop load is wrong, it is hard to correct temps with jetting.
What do the plugs look like? Plug readings calibrate EGT's.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
the tip on one side, and then carefully brush the Hobbypoxy over
(and through) it. Do the same thing on the other side and let it harden
overnight.
Sand it down around the edges so that when you do the back side, the
edges will come together right. Do the back side, and after it hardens, sand
the whole thing down with 120 grit paper. You want to get the Hobbypoxy real
smooth. Be careful not to cut into the fiberglass. You will need to use a
sanding block, because the Hobbypoxy will have waves, high and low spots.
If you need a second coat of Hobbypoxy, be sure the first is sanded
good.
When you get done, balance it again, using Hobbypoxy resin on the
tip of the light blade. To get a glossy finish, wet sand it with 400, 600
paper and compound it. I did the prop on the Hummer that way, it lasted 13
years, and just got minor dings from 1 hose clamp and two 2" nylon saddles
when a coil mount broke.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu> |
On Wed, 9 Sep 1998, John Jung wrote:
>
> Ralph,
> I would check for an intake leak. Could be seals or the pulse line.
> I wouldn't fly it again, with that engine, until the temperature problem
> was resolved.
Exhaust side leaks are just as likely, perhaps even more likely as a
cause of high EGT and lean mixture problems. I had this problem on my
447 20 hours after a top end cleaning in which I had just replaced all
top end gaskets. I now use gasket sealer on the exh manifold gaskets.
As well, when I really got down to a nitty gritty close look for the
cause of the leak I found the exh port facing, where the manifold bolts
on, was not exactly flat. I filed away a dip in this so-called milled
flat surface.
Ben Ransom
http://mae.ucdavis.edu/~ransom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DLSOUDER(at)aol.com |
<<
I acquired and installed a low time Rotax 447 engine to replace my 450 hr
reliable 377 this past weekend. I used the 377 muffler and EGT probe for
the 447. The EGT on an average summer day in MN was around 1100 deg on
the 377 at 5500 rpm. After a short hop with the new engine, the EGT was
1300 in cruise at 5000 rpm. I'm using the same type gas and oil that I
used on the 377. The 377 muffler has a single joint and the 447 has two
joints. Both mufflers appear to have identical dimensions. The 447 has
the factory settings, jets as did the 377. The 447 did have normal EGT
readings with its muffler. I used the 377 muffler because I needed to
paint the other one. Any ideas? >>
As far as I know the exhaust systems are the same so that should not be a
factor. As I recall we even used the same propeller on the 447 as we had for
the 377 and it turned it only about 150 rpms more; so the EGT would expected
to be a bit higher because the prop is not working the engine as hard as the
377 - not sure if it would account for the 200 deg. difference though.
Looking for air leaks as others have suggested might be worthwhile.
Dennis
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Joeljon2(at)aol.com |
Just finished my Firefly and am "breaking in" the 447. The weight and balance
figures seem to be within limits (I had to ad 10 lbs. in the nose because I
weigh only 130 sopping wet), but the tail boom still seems AUFULLY
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Joeljon2(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Firefly continued |
Oops, pressed the wrong button.
Continuing: The tail booms seems AUFULLY heavy, like "what raises it
off the ground?"
Have had no problem with initial flight of two other homebuilts, but
this little job scares me for some reason. Soloed in a Porterfield
(taildgragger) 58 years ago & have flown various others (all single engine)
since then, of course. Should I just get in and open the throttle, or what?
joeljon2(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rutledge Fuller" <rut007(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Firefly continued |
" Should I just get in and open the throttle, or what?
joeljon2(at)aol.com"
I suggest if you are scared of the machine, not to fly it. I would taxi
it around and take it one step at a time. If you are not familiar with
ultralights-get two place training before anything else. When I first
got my bird, I taxied for about two hours working on ground control and
would conduct high speed taxi tests with the tail in the air. I did
this at an indicated airspeed of 40 mph just before it would lift off.
When I felt that I was ready, I simply flew it around the pattern and
did several go arounds after setting up for a good landing. Once
comfortable with that, I brought it around for a prefect landing that
has not been matched by myself again to this date. I did also have my
flight instructor on the ground with a radio to add moral support and
received several hours of two place and GA training. I would suggest
having someone who is familiar with Kolbs test fly it and describe in
detail how that particular aircraft flies. I am not a big fan of Crow
Hops unless you really have a large strip to work from.
Good luck, Use your head, and fly safe, at a pace that you are
confortable with.
Rutledge Fuller
Tallahassee, Fl.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DLSOUDER(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Firefly continued |
<< Oops, pressed the wrong button.
Continuing: The tail booms seems AUFULLY heavy, like "what raises it
off the ground?" >>
Your sitting in the seat is what raises it off the ground - sort of like a
seesaw: if your friend jumps off the opposite end, your end gets awfully heavy
awfully quickly. Have someone your weight sit in the seat and then see how
heavy the tail it.
Above and beyond all that, the force you feel picking the tail up on the
ground is not really relevant for W & B because when it is flying, it is
hanging from the wings - not supported by the wheels.
Call our flight instructor Dan at (610) 948-4136 and talk to him about flying
- he will have some good input for you.
Dennis Souder
Pres Kolb Aircraft
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: My newFirefly |
Joel,
This question comes up regularly on the list. To sumarize: 1) Don't
crow-hop. 2) On final, don't reduce the throttle more than 500 rpm below
slow cruise, until you are within 5 feet of the ground. 3) Get familiar
with the different view from of a Kolb. Some people sit in them with the
tail up but the best way is to get a ride or training in a Mark III. 4)
Do all the other preparation as for any first flight.
John Jung
>
>Joeljon2(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> Just finished my Firefly and am "breaking in" the 447.
snip...
> Have had no problem with initial flight of two other homebuilts, but
> this little job scares me for some reason. Soloed in a Porterfield
> (taildgragger) 58 years ago & have flown various others (all single engine)
> since then, of course. Should I just get in and open the throttle, or what?
> joeljon2(at)aol.com
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rutledge Fuller" <rut007(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Slow activity??? |
Boy, the group has been pretty quiet lately. Whats going on?
I was bored and even tried the archive search engine. It's awsome. I
punched in "Sea-foam" and got back a ton of stuff. I found out that
Ralph secretly owns stock in the company.
That's all for now.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charles Henry <chhenry(at)plains.nodak.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Firefly continued |
> " Should I just get in and open the throttle, or what?
> joeljon2(at)aol.com"
If you have not flown an ultralight before the main differences are
things happen quickly,
(1) you are flying before you expect it. (4-5 seconds from power up)
(2) it slows down very quickly with the power off.
(3) you either need to carry power when landing to give a little
more reaction time on flare out, or do not flare out until you are about 4-5
feet above the ground. Some say this feels like diving at the ground if they
are used to GA aircraft.
All the people that I know that came to grief when transitioning from GA
aircraft to ULs stalled on flare out at about 20 feet above the ground when
the speed bled off faster than expected.
Good Luck and enjoy the fun flying and great climbing Kolb.
Charles Henry
Firestar I
447 @ 136 hrs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Firefly continued |
On Wed, 9 Sep 1998, Rutledge Fuller wrote:
> I suggest if you are scared of the machine, not to fly it. I would taxi
Great advice. When I first flew mine, I wasn't afraid of it at all, but
was pretty nervous about trailering my baby down the freeway for first time.
> it around and take it one step at a time. If you are not familiar with
One step at a time, also among the best advice IMO.
> would conduct high speed taxi tests with the tail in the air. I did
> this at an indicated airspeed of 40 mph just before it would lift off.
I used to call this crowhopping, or at least the precursor to crowhopping.
I have several arrows in my backside for advocating C.H., so will no
longer even mention it or spell the words. But I continue to believe this
high speed taxi in no wind where it is wanting badly to depart terra firma
is an invaluable exercise. Do it till you are getting sick of it. Don't
forget that the throttle is one of the main controls. You really get to
know the feel and how much input is required for your plane. I still do
it often cuz it is also fun. Main thing ...don't proceed to next step
with anything until you are comfortable with previous step.
-my 2bits
Ben Ransom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Carroll " <ron.carroll(at)WORLDNET.ATT.NET> |
| Subject: | Re: Firefly continued |
I know how you must feel at this time because I feel the same. I'm not
exactly sure why. Maybe because I built it? I've trusted my life to a lot
of ULs in the past, made by builders I don't even know, so why should I have
reservations about something I built. Everything is not perfect, but I know
there is nothing structurally compromised.
I've read a lot of our members opinions regarding the first flight, and I
think I'll do a couple high speed taxis, a couple crow-hops, then take a
break to go over the plane well, looking for anything that may have worked
loose. Then I will take it up to an altitude that will give me plenty of
time in the event of a problem and get the feel for the plane.
For what its worth,
Ron Carroll
Original Firestar (almost ready for flight)
-----Original Message-----
From: Joeljon2(at)aol.com <Joeljon2(at)aol.com>
Date: Wednesday September 09 1998 9:26 AM
Subject: Kolb-List: Firefly continued
>
>Oops, pressed the wrong button.
> Continuing: The tail booms seems AUFULLY heavy, like "what raises it
>off the ground?"
> Have had no problem with initial flight of two other homebuilts, but
>this little job scares me for some reason. Soloed in a Porterfield
>(taildgragger) 58 years ago & have flown various others (all single engine)
>since then, of course. Should I just get in and open the throttle, or
what?
> joeljon2(at)aol.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bob n <ronoy(at)shentel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Firefly continued |
Well, Joel, the tail IS kinda heavy as I can tell you after moving mune
around to jockey into crowded hangar. Moving air raises it! Yes, it's a
bit sporty. On TO it really goes! Flying is abt normal considering a bit
of noise and wind. On landinding you gotta be a careful, especually if
you've only had PPL time. make approach at 40+ and don't level off 'til
you can see the the numbers on the back of the cockroaches. You will be
sitting VERY low, so so don't cut the power and FLOP in. Fly it down to
the ground, like a wheel landing in the Porterfield.
Grey Baron FF70, flying since '41
usting the flaps then take
>her up or do you think the ailerons should be first ?
>
>Rick Libersat
>
>
>
Remember folks,
Hands off flying in a kolb, is affected by power setting. If it flys hands
off with engine on idle it will not likely at full throttle.
Eugene
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ul15rhb(at)JUNO.COM (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Richard,
I am using the same prop and have set it for 6100 rpm static. I only have
20 minutes flight time on the 447. The plugs are still clean and like
new. There is something here that I mentioned to Ben Ransom about the EGT
was normally high in the 377 for 10 years because I have a single probe
in the "Y" of the muffler (slap my hands). I installed this in 1986 when
there was not enough info on probe placement. Well, last year when I
started using Seafoam, the EGT went down from 1250 to 1100 deg. in
cruise. Don't ask me why and it has stayed that way until I switched to
the 447. Now you are saying, "well just add some Seafoam and see what
happens". I will do that next time I fly. The high EGT may be a "normal"
reading for the probe placement as was the 377 for many years. I may have
answered my own question. Sometimes I do that.
Ralph (377 now 447) Burlingame
Original FireStar 400+ hrs
writes:
>
>Burlingame)
>>
>>Guys,
>>I acquired and installed a low time Rotax 447 engine to replace my
>450 hr reliable 377 this past weekend. I used the 377 muffler and EGT
probe
>forthe 447. The EGT on an average summer day in MN was around 1100 deg
>on the 377 at 5500 rpm. After a short hop with the new engine, the EGT
>was 1300 in cruise at 5000 rpm.
>
>According to the diagram in the CPS book, the 377, 447, and
>503 all use the same size muffler.
>Are you using the same prop for the 447 that you used for the
>377? Assuming that jetting is correct:
>If the engine is underpropped, (insufficient load) the EGT's
>will go up, CHT may be normal or even low.
> If the engine is overpropped, (too much load) EGT's will go
>down, but CHT's may be normal to high.
>If the prop load is wrong, it is hard to correct temps with
>jetting.
>What do the plugs look like? Plug readings calibrate EGT's.
>
> Richard Pike
> MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Sea Foam Source |
| From: | ul15rhb(at)JUNO.COM (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Rut,
One of the first things I noticed too was the increased compression. You
may not notice much less carbon on the piston domes due to the fact that
it will run off and collect in the rings where you want it. You may want
to add about 4 capfuls to the TDC piston and then lift the tail of the
plane to get the Seafoam to run to the front of the cylinder. Being the
plane sits of its tail most of the time, the Seafoam will collect in the
rear of each cylinder.
Ralph
writes:
>
>
>Thanks Ralph. I enjoyed the joke too. One thought is that unless the
>
>liquid evaporates in the cylinder, or seeps completely to the
>crakcase,
>starting the engine could dramitically increase the compression ratio.
>
>I did all of the listed steps below, but only for a 12 hour period.
>When I pulled slowly on the starter rope I could feel the additional
>compression. I took out the sparkplug and proped the engine a few
>times
>to move the sea-foam out of the cylinder to bring the compression back
>
>to normal. I have another batch of sea-foam in now and will let it
>sit
>for a week. Are you able to notice less carbon visually on the crown
>of
>the piston after application?
>
>Thanks.
>Rutledge
>
>Ralph Wrote:
>
>1) Take out one spark plug and bring that piston to TDC.
>2) Add 2-4 capfuls in that cylinder.
>3) Raise the tail of the plane (for a few sec) to get the seafoam
>running forward
>4) Let it sit for a few days (a week if possible)
>5) Put a used plug in the treated cylinder.
>6) Start it up and run at about 4000 rpm once it's warmed up.
>7) When it quits blowing white smoke out the exhaust, it's ready.
>8) Put a new plug in the treated cylinder.
>9) Repeat steps 1-8 for the other cylinder.
>
>Please Note: The seafoam may foul the plugs. Use some old plugs during
>the treatment then put in new ones after the treatment. I have tested
>it
>for the above method. The instructions say that you can add it to your
>gas tank, but I would NOT do it because you do not know what it will
>eat
>up. Keep it in the cylinders only.
>
>Ralph Burlingame
>Original FireStar 400+ hrs
>
>
>writes:
>>
>>
>>
>>I got mine at Car Quest. Now tell me, how are you using it exactly?
>
>>How much in the sparkle plug holes? Do you do one cylinder at a time
>
>>at
>>top dead center? Please advise.
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Rutledge Fuller
>>Tally, Fl.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Firefly continued |
| From: | mefine1(at)JUNO.COM (Mick Fine) |
>
>... On landinding you gotta be a careful, ....
Ooow, I think it's that extra 'ding' that Joel's trying to avoid! ;-)
Actually, I know Joel and got to see his FF a couple weeks ago. The plane
looks fine to me. The boom does seem heavier than my Flyer's but I
wouldn't let that concern me (unless the calculated W&B is outside the
'good range'). Like Dennis (and Richard H.) said, what weight the
tailwheel carries on the ground pretty much has nothing to do with what
the wings carry in the air.
We could have done Dennis' experiment too, if you had only asked me to
sit in it (Hint-Hint!!).
-Mick Fine
Tulsa, Oklahoma
http://www.angelfire.com/ok/froghair
Green Country Ultralight Flyer's Organization (UFO)
http://www.angelfire.com/ok/gcufo
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Slow activity??? |
| From: | ul15rhb(at)JUNO.COM (Ralph H Burlingame) |
My mom always said, "Find a way to make money doing what you like
to do best". I should take her advice!
Ralph
writes:
>
>
>Boy, the group has been pretty quiet lately. Whats going on?
>I was bored and even tried the archive search engine. It's awsome. I
>punched in "Sea-foam" and got back a ton of stuff. I found out that
>Ralph secretly owns stock in the company.
>
>That's all for now.
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry Bidle <jbidle(at)airmail.net> |
Russ,
Not to rain on your party but how would one buy your SS and then install a
engine. It would take a A&E or your self to install it and sign it off.
Jerry Bidle
>
>Thanks to everyone that responded to my 503 sale. I'll be shipping it to the
>new owner tomorrow. Now about that SlingShot....... :-)
>
>Russell Duffy
>Navarre, FL
>RV-8, 80587 (tanks)
>Kolb SlingShot (for sale-without engine)
>rv8(at)mindspring.com
>http://www.mindspring.com/~rv8
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Firefly continued |
| From: | ul15rhb(at)JUNO.COM (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Ron and Joel,
Sounds like a good plan except, as others have said, during the crowhop
or high speed taxi tests, the little plane has so much lift that it will
be in the air before you know it. Then you become committed to flying it.
If this happens, here's what to do: 1) stay up there at a safe altitude
and get familiar with the plane. Don't try to come down just yet and fill
the tank before starting out. 2) After at least a half hour of getting to
know each other, make several simulated approaches (at least 10) and come
down close to the ground without landing.
3) On the 11th pass, bring the throttle down to 4000 rpm and hold it. Let
the plane lose altitude and set up your approach at 40 mph. If, for any
reason, things do not look right, then simply give it throttle and go
around again. When the plane comes within 5 feet of the ground, close the
throttle and hold the stick neutral. The plane will essentialy land
itself. If you try to flare, you may not get the timing right and could
bend the gear legs. Only do this under calm conditions. This is what I
did and it works. I hope this helps.
Ralph Burlingame
Original FireStar 400+ hrs
writes:
>
>
>I know how you must feel at this time because I feel the same. I'm
>not
>exactly sure why. Maybe because I built it? I've trusted my life to
>a lot
>of ULs in the past, made by builders I don't even know, so why should
>I have
>reservations about something I built. Everything is not perfect, but
>I know
>there is nothing structurally compromised.
>
>I've read a lot of our members opinions regarding the first flight,
>and I
>think I'll do a couple high speed taxis, a couple crow-hops, then take
>a
>break to go over the plane well, looking for anything that may have
>worked
>loose. Then I will take it up to an altitude that will give me plenty
>of
>time in the event of a problem and get the feel for the plane.
>
>For what its worth,
>
>Ron Carroll
>Original Firestar (almost ready for flight)
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Joeljon2(at)aol.com <Joeljon2(at)aol.com>
>To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>Date: Wednesday September 09 1998 9:26 AM
>Subject: Kolb-List: Firefly continued
>
>
>>
>>Oops, pressed the wrong button.
>> Continuing: The tail booms seems AUFULLY heavy, like "what
>raises it
>>off the ground?"
>> Have had no problem with initial flight of two other
>homebuilts, but
>>this little job scares me for some reason. Soloed in a Porterfield
>>(taildgragger) 58 years ago & have flown various others (all single
>engine)
>>since then, of course. Should I just get in and open the throttle,
>or
>what?
>> joeljon2(at)aol.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bob n <ronoy(at)shentel.net> |
Just saw a good TV show called EXTREME AVIATION on TLCThe Learning
Channel. Had some Oshkosh and abt 10 min on ULs! It's on again locally
at midnite DC area, but try your local TV sked, or watch for re-runs.
Grey Baron
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mefine1(at)JUNO.COM (Mick Fine) |
writes:
>... Well, last year when I started using Seafoam, the EGT went
>down from 1250 to 1100 deg. in cruise....
Ralph,
I'm kinda having a hard time reasoning this one out. Unless I
misunderstood, Seafoam claims to be sort of "de-carbon in a can", right?
In the interest of science (as the Car-Talk guys say), has anyone else
noticed a similar change in EGT after an old fashioned (elbow grease)
de-carbon? I never have but then I may not be as observant as I should.
-Mick Fine
Tulsa, Oklahoma
http://www.angelfire.com/ok/froghair
Green Country Ultralight Flyer's Organization (UFO)
http://www.angelfire.com/ok/gcufo
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Firefly continued |
Are you one of the Henry's who took a Scuba diving class in Van Nuys, CA in
about 1969 or 70 ?? What a bunch. I was their instructor, and we all had
a ball. Seems to me the eldest had a farm or ranch in Baja Calif.
Big Lar.
----------
> From: Charles Henry <chhenry(at)plains.nodak.edu>
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firefly continued
> Date: Wednesday, September 09, 1998 1:24 PM
>
>
>
> Good Luck and enjoy the fun flying and great climbing Kolb.
> Charles Henry
> Firestar I
> 447 @ 136 hrs
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
Hi Group: A while back, when the conversation got heavy on Seafoam, I
got interested, even tho' I don't run a 2 stroke, since some of the guys at
the Club do. Being real bright and intelligent, I didn't save any of the
comments at the time, but went ahead and talked about this wonder treatment
at the next meeting. Ran into extreme skepticism. To put it mildly.
Well, that's fine, this time I have saved some comments, but one guy at the
club put a stumper on me. He said something to the effect of there being
as much carbon UNDER the piston as on top of it ! ! ! How can this be ??
Also he wanted to know how the "stuff" would get the carbon off the head,
if it's sitting down on the piston ?? Next meeting is Sat. noon, and I'd
like to have some ammunition to take with me.
Talked about the para-gliding a week or so ago. This Fri. noon will be a
hang-gliding lesson for a comparison. Looking forward with great
anticipation. What a tremendous experience. Big Lar.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ul15rhb(at)JUNO.COM (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Mick,
I too have no real explanations and only report what I observed. The EGT
was always high on my 377 and I accepted it to be the probe distance and
not the engine. Then, like I say, they went down to "normal" readings
around 1100 deg after using Seafoam. If there were any "leaks" in the
engine, is it possible Seafoam plugged it up? I'm throwing out wild
guesses now. I don't know if anyone else has reported this or not, but I
will sure let you know what happens when I use it on the 447. I have not
changed anything yet on the 447 except to add some Seafoam to the rear
cylinder. That's it. The next available time that I can take it out will
be this coming Saturday. Stay tuned, I may have to get some eyewitnesses
to testify for this one.
Ralph (don't really have any Seafoam stock) Burlingame
Original FireStar 400+ hrs
>writes:
>
>>... Well, last year when I started using Seafoam, the EGT went
>>down from 1250 to 1100 deg. in cruise....
>
>Ralph,
>I'm kinda having a hard time reasoning this one out. Unless I
>misunderstood, Seafoam claims to be sort of "de-carbon in a can",
>right? In the interest of science (as the Car-Talk guys say), has
>anyone else noticed a similar change in EGT after an old fashioned
(elbow >grease) de-carbon? I never have but then I may not be as
observant as I
>should.
>
>
>-Mick Fine
>Tulsa, Oklahoma
>http://www.angelfire.com/ok/froghair
>Green Country Ultralight Flyer's Organization (UFO)
>http://www.angelfire.com/ok/gcufo
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Russell Duffy" <rv8(at)mindspring.com> |
>Not to rain on your party but how would one buy your SS and then install a
>engine. It would take a A&E or your self to install it and sign it off.
>
>Jerry Bidle
It's worse than that. You must have missed the part about selling the plane
without registration. How can anyone register it? Legally, it would be really
tough, but since when do we worry about a little thing like legality. I suspect
there are a number of SlingShots flying as illegal UL's. Heck, I've seen people
post FireStar weights that topped my empty weight of 396. If someone wanted to
register my SS as if they built it, I'm sure they could, but that's between them
and the FAA. I'll provide all the photos they'd ever need, along with a
builders log.
If no one buys it, it'll just stay in the corner of the hanger and collect dust.
Maybe one day, I'll get interested again, and build that single rotor Mazda I've
always wanted.
Rusty (just air conditioned my garage- Aaaaaaaah) Duffy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ul15rhb(at)JUNO.COM (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Larry,
I've seen the carbon underneath a pistons' dome and there is quite a bit
of buildup. Other than the weight increase, I don't think any of this
buildup in a 2-cycle Rotax piston has any bearing on what's happening on
the outside.
Just my 2 cents.
Ralph
writes:
>
>
>Hi Group: A while back, when the conversation got heavy on
>Seafoam, I got interested, even tho' I don't run a 2 stroke, since some
of the
>guys at the Club do. Being real bright and intelligent, I didn't save
any of
>the comments at the time, but went ahead and talked about this wonder
>treatment at the next meeting. Ran into extreme skepticism. To put it
mildly.
>Well, that's fine, this time I have saved some comments, but one guy
>at the club put a stumper on me. He said something to the effect of
there
>being as much carbon UNDER the piston as on top of it ! ! ! How can
this be
>?? Also he wanted to know how the "stuff" would get the carbon off the
>head, if it's sitting down on the piston ?? Next meeting is Sat. noon,
and
>I'd like to have some ammunition to take with me.
>
>Talked about the para-gliding a week or so ago. This Fri. noon will
>be a hang-gliding lesson for a comparison. Looking forward with great
>anticipation. What a tremendous experience. Big Lar.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Carroll " <ron.carroll(at)WORLDNET.ATT.NET> |
| Subject: | Re: Firefly continued |
Thanks for the good advise, Ralph (my guru) Burlingame. I'll sure be glad
when my engine comes back and I can get over the first big hump. After that
it will be clear sailing.
Ron
-----Original Message-----
From: Ralph H Burlingame <ul15rhb(at)JUNO.COM>
Date: Wednesday September 09 1998 7:06 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firefly continued
>
>Ron and Joel,
>Sounds like a good plan except, as others have said, during the crowhop
>or high speed taxi tests, the little plane has so much lift that it will
>be in the air before you know it. Then you become committed to flying it.
>If this happens, here's what to do: 1) stay up there at a safe altitude
>and get familiar with the plane. Don't try to come down just yet and fill
>the tank before starting out. 2) After at least a half hour of getting to
>know each other, make several simulated approaches (at least 10) and come
>down close to the ground without landing.
>3) On the 11th pass, bring the throttle down to 4000 rpm and hold it. Let
>the plane lose altitude and set up your approach at 40 mph. If, for any
>reason, things do not look right, then simply give it throttle and go
>around again. When the plane comes within 5 feet of the ground, close the
>throttle and hold the stick neutral. The plane will essentialy land
>itself. If you try to flare, you may not get the timing right and could
>bend the gear legs. Only do this under calm conditions. This is what I
>did and it works. I hope this helps.
>
>Ralph Burlingame
>Original FireStar 400+ hrs
>
>
>
> writes:
>>
>>
>>I know how you must feel at this time because I feel the same. I'm
>>not
>>exactly sure why. Maybe because I built it? I've trusted my life to
>>a lot
>>of ULs in the past, made by builders I don't even know, so why should
>>I have
>>reservations about something I built. Everything is not perfect, but
>>I know
>>there is nothing structurally compromised.
>>
>>I've read a lot of our members opinions regarding the first flight,
>>and I
>>think I'll do a couple high speed taxis, a couple crow-hops, then take
>>a
>>break to go over the plane well, looking for anything that may have
>>worked
>>loose. Then I will take it up to an altitude that will give me plenty
>>of
>>time in the event of a problem and get the feel for the plane.
>>
>>For what its worth,
>>
>>Ron Carroll
>>Original Firestar (almost ready for flight)
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Joeljon2(at)aol.com <Joeljon2(at)aol.com>
>>To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>>Date: Wednesday September 09 1998 9:26 AM
>>Subject: Kolb-List: Firefly continued
>>
>>
>>>
>>>Oops, pressed the wrong button.
>>> Continuing: The tail booms seems AUFULLY heavy, like "what
>>raises it
>>>off the ground?"
>>> Have had no problem with initial flight of two other
>>homebuilts, but
>>>this little job scares me for some reason. Soloed in a Porterfield
>>>(taildgragger) 58 years ago & have flown various others (all single
>>engine)
>>>since then, of course. Should I just get in and open the throttle,
>>or
>>what?
>>> joeljon2(at)aol.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Russell Duffy" <rv8(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | More R&D rambling |
Hi all,
I called R&D today and told them that I wanted to send their POS pipe back.
Their official stance is that they won't refund my money. He then went on to
tell me how the 503 pipes seem to be having more problems than the others, and
that they plan to test some modifications to the pipe to see if that helps. If
it works better, they plan to offer free (you pay the shipping) modifications to
anyone that bought one previously. I told him I wouldn't fly behind one of
their pipes again, and as far as I was concerned, it just didn't work as
advertised. The conversation ended when he abruptly said "the other phone's
ringing, gotta go"... click.
Stay away from R&D. Visa is sending me a dispute form to fill out :-)
Rusty (scheduled for intro aerobatic training in October) Duffy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Randy & Joni Tolvstad" <tolvstad(at)nvc.net> |
| Subject: | Re: What is the best prop? |
Richard
Thank you very much for all the information. It sounds like you have a lot
of experience in this area. I plan on getting some metal tape and putting
it on the prop as you have suggested. I was shocked to hear that my prop is
a lower end prop. Can you tell me how to go about measuring thrust? At this
stage in my Flying career I am more interested in safety and reliability
than in performance.
I am also interested in the inlaid p-tips that you talked about. I have not
heard of them. Can you explain or tell me where I can learn more about
them?
The maximum rpm for my motor is suggested at 6200 rpm. I will have to pull
my plugs and check them as Woody has suggested. Will it damage my engine if
it is running to cool?
I am currently running only a two blade prop. I cannot run a 3 bleed prop
because I fold my plane and put it in a trailer to store it.
I agree with your opinion on the plane. I may be a little prejudice because
it is my first plane but I feel it is very easy to fly and am having a lot
of fun with it. One other question I was wondering about, Is what is the
optimum flying speed for this plane? I have been reading about flying in
rough conditions and they talked about flying your plane at the optimum
speed. Thanks again for all the great advice!
Randy Tolvstad
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rick106(at)JUNO.COM |
Hi All
I would like to know if ,some of the group has changed their tail
wheel,an it so what did you go to ?
the tail wheel on my M III is the little skinny one ,when it is on soft
sod it sinks in the ground .I did change it out with a shopping cart
wheel that worked fine for about six hr. then last sunday all the rubber
came off like an 18wheeler on the interstate.
I would like to go to a wider tail wheel ,but still keep the tail boom
low or where it is now
Rick Libersat
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rick106(at)JUNO.COM |
| Subject: | Re: More R&D rambling |
Russell
Sorry to hear that you are having that kind of trouble with R&D I will
take a copy of your posting to my next EAA meeting .Their are some
members that are wanting this pipe, I am sure they will change their
minds after reading this post
Rick Libersat
writes:
>
>Hi all,
>
>I called R&D today and told them that I wanted to send their POS pipe
>back.
>Their official stance is that they won't refund my money. He then
>went on to
>tell me how the 503 pipes seem to be having more problems than the
>others, and
>that they plan to test some modifications to the pipe to see if that
>helps. If
>it works better, they plan to offer free (you pay the shipping)
>modifications to
>anyone that bought one previously. I told him I wouldn't fly behind
>one of
>their pipes again, and as far as I was concerned, it just didn't work
>as
>advertised. The conversation ended when he abruptly said "the other
>phone's
>ringing, gotta go"... click.
>
>Stay away from R&D. Visa is sending me a dispute form to fill out :-)
>
>Rusty (scheduled for intro aerobatic training in October) Duffy
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rick106(at)JUNO.COM |
| Subject: | Re: More R&D rambling |
Russell
Sorry to hear that you are having that kind of trouble with R&D I will
take a copy of your posting to my next EAA meeting .Their are some
members that are wanting this pipe, I am sure they will change their
minds after reading this post
Rick Libersat
writes:
>
>Hi all,
>
>I called R&D today and told them that I wanted to send their POS pipe
>back.
>Their official stance is that they won't refund my money. He then
>went on to
>tell me how the 503 pipes seem to be having more problems than the
>others, and
>that they plan to test some modifications to the pipe to see if that
>helps. If
>it works better, they plan to offer free (you pay the shipping)
>modifications to
>anyone that bought one previously. I told him I wouldn't fly behind
>one of
>their pipes again, and as far as I was concerned, it just didn't work
>as
>advertised. The conversation ended when he abruptly said "the other
>phone's
>ringing, gotta go"... click.
>
>Stay away from R&D. Visa is sending me a dispute form to fill out :-)
>
>Rusty (scheduled for intro aerobatic training in October) Duffy
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu> |
On Wed, 9 Sep 1998, Mick Fine wrote:
> In the interest of science (as the Car-Talk guys say), has anyone else
> noticed a similar change in EGT after an old fashioned (elbow grease)
> de-carbon? I never have but then I may not be as observant as I should.
I operated my 447 SC with a single probe at the Y for its 140 hours.
I decarboned twice in that time using Elbow Grease instead of Sea Foam
and noticed no change in EGT.
Ralph's engine hitting 1300 with a single probe at the Y is normal. I'd
guess his 377 had leaks plugged by the Sea Foam treatment. Man that stuff
does it all ...I think I'll take a swig myself! :)
I think I mentioned to Ralph but not to the list that I *really* like
the 2 EGTs at 100mm better than 1 at the Y. Both of mine go into a
switch for my single EGT gauge. Works great. Only one EGT is not
adequate info to know what your engine is up to.
-Ben
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Firefly continued |
> 3) On the 11th pass, bring the throttle down to 4000 rpm and hold it. Let
> the plane lose altitude and set up your approach at 40 mph. If, for any
This "first flight" method discussion might be getting a little old, but
I feel compelled to say that I think 40mph is just a tad slow for approach.
Maybe 40 is okay if you keep 4000rpm, but keep in mind that Firestars stall
in the low to mid 30s (at idle), and a new plane probably won't have a
closely calibrated ASI. I'd say closer to 50 would be better for first
time approaches. Let it slow and settle after crossing the numbers.
Hope too many cooks here doesn't spoil the broth.
-Ben Ransom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | William V Rayfield <rayfiwv(at)mail.auburn.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: More R&D rambling |
Is "POS" a technical term?
One point: I thought one of R&D's selling points was that if the customer
wasn't satisfied they'd give a refund. Apparently Rusty, you are satisfied
and just don't know it...funny how that works....
Bill Rayfield
"I'm not smart, but I sure am slow!"
Mechanical Engineering Student
Auburn University
"War Eagle"
On Wed, 9 Sep 1998, Russell Duffy wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I called R&D today and told them that I wanted to send their POS pipe back.
> Their official stance is that they won't refund my money. He then went on to
> tell me how the 503 pipes seem to be having more problems than the others, and
> that they plan to test some modifications to the pipe to see if that helps.
If
> it works better, they plan to offer free (you pay the shipping) modifications
to
> anyone that bought one previously. I told him I wouldn't fly behind one of
> their pipes again, and as far as I was concerned, it just didn't work as
> advertised. The conversation ended when he abruptly said "the other phone's
> ringing, gotta go"... click.
>
> Stay away from R&D. Visa is sending me a dispute form to fill out :-)
>
> Rusty (scheduled for intro aerobatic training in October) Duffy
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com> |
>
> He said something to the effect of there being
>as much carbon UNDER the piston as on top of it ! ! ! How can this be ??
>Also he wanted to know how the "stuff" would get the carbon off the head,
>if it's sitting down on the piston ?? Next meeting is Sat. noon, and I'd
>like to have some ammunition to take with me.
>
Depending on the type of oil you use, if the top of the piston gets
hot enough, the oil on the inderside of the piston dome will form a layer of
carbon.
Don't know if this answers part two of the question, but years ago I
put a smoke system on the Hummer's Rotax 277. Injected Corvis oil into the
exhaust manifold several inches down from the exhaust port. Smoked like
crazy, but also had the interesting side effect of cleaning all the carbon
off the exhaust port, head, piston top and rings.
Corvis oil is the oil used to treat wooden pallets, and is used by
airshow performers for smoke. I got some leftovers the Red Baron Squadron
didn't use when they passed through here.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com> |
| Subject: | Re: What is the best prop? |
>
>
>
>
>The maximum rpm for my motor is suggested at 6200 rpm. I will have to pull
>my plugs and check them as Woody has suggested. Will it damage my engine if
>it is running to cool?
Only if it loads up and quits, depositing you into the trees.
>
>I am currently running only a two blade prop. I cannot run a 3 bleed prop
>because I fold my plane and put it in a trailer to store it.
>
> 3 blades run smoother. 2 blades can give you a broader speed range,
but at the speeds we fly, who cares?
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com> |
>
>Hi All
>
>I would like to know if ,some of the group has changed their tail
>wheel,an it so what did you go to ?
>the tail wheel on my M III is the little skinny one ,when it is on soft
>sod it sinks in the ground .
Sorrell (Hyperlight, Hyperbipe, etc.) make a tail wheel assembly
that will bolt right up to the Kolb MKIII bracket. I love mine. It is twice
as wide, and sits a little lower.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Firefly continued |
Ben Ransom wrote:
snip..
>I feel compelled to say that I think 40 mph is just a tad slow for approach.
>Maybe 40 is okay if you keep 4000rpm, but keep in mind that Firestars stall
>in the low to mid 30s (at idle), and a new plane probably won't have a
>closely calibrated ASI. I'd say closer to 50 would be better for first
>time approaches. Let it slow and settle after crossing the numbers.
>
Ben makes a very good point. I had the same thoughts. Sorry for writing a "me
too", but I think this is important. I approach a 500 foot runway at 50 (stall
at
38). But when the runway is long, I have no problem with a 65 to 75 mph approach.
The speed dissipates fast, once I stop descending.
John Jung
Firestar II N6163J 60 hrs
SE Wisconsin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Waligroski, Greg" <gwaligro(at)ball.com> |
Does the switch affect the EGT readings? I thought I read somewhere that
the low voltages(?) of the probes made them sensitive to small resistance
changes that may be present in a switched circuit. Are you using a
"special" switch?
-Gregg
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ben Ransom [SMTP:ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu]
> Sent: Thursday, September 10, 1998 12:14 AM
> To: Kolb
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: 447 egt
>
>
>
> I think I mentioned to Ralph but not to the list that I *really* like
> the 2 EGTs at 100mm better than 1 at the Y. Both of mine go into a
> switch for my single EGT gauge. Works great. Only one EGT is not
> adequate info to know what your engine is up to.
>
> -Ben
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Carroll " <ron.carroll(at)WORLDNET.ATT.NET> |
| Subject: | Re: Seizure during breakin |
Thanks for the information, Bill.
I decided to call an authorized Rotax service center and told the guy what
had happened. He ask "Why do you think it seized?". I replied that it was
probably due to over-revving to 7400. He said "You can run a 377 at 8 or 9
grand all day and never hurt it. I'll assure you that it wasn't caused by
over-revving. Now then, what do you think is the cause?" I suggested the
carb, because I was told to raise the needle a notch during the 1st
10-hours, but I didn't. He said the needle has no effect at full throttle,
where it seized. Besides, only one piston seized, if it was a carb problem
they would both have seized. He finally came up with what the probable
cause was: A defective seal on the PTO end of the crankshaft. After the
engine sat without running for 13-years the seals more than likely have
dried out (shrunk, and any lubrication has long since 'disappeared').
Unless I have a pocket full of money to continue buying pistons forever he
said I should replace both seals before any further running. Therefore it
is now in the shop having new seals installed.
I suppose the bottom line to this whole escapade is that I should have
purchased a new kit in the first place. It would have included a fresh
engine with more power, latest design features, and probably less weight.
So, my word to the newbies is to look into a factory new plane when buying.
Weigh the discount price against the discount features and condition. The
dollar saved is not necessarily going to stay in the bank.
Thanks again,
Ron Carroll
Original Firestar #015
-----Original Message-----
From: WVarnes(at)aol.com <WVarnes(at)aol.com>
Date: Wednesday September 09 1998 8:53 PM
Subject: Seizure during breakin
>Hi Ron,
>
>Kinda late responding to your post about seizing your engine during
breakin.
>Gee, what a bummer. That is a real pain in the wallet.
>
>The 66 X 28 prop is the correct one for the 377. It's hard to believe that
>the 377 could spin that prop up to 7400 RPM static, so maybe the first
thing
>to check is the prop. Is it actually 66 X 28, or could it be a smaller
pitch,
>but marked incorrectly?
>
>If the prop is OK, then maybe there is a different problem, like getting an
>air leak at full throttle allowing it to run lean. A lean mixture will
give
>more RPM and more horsepower up to a point, then things begin to get hot
and
>it's meltdown time. If you have an experienced person look at the piston
and
>cylinder, they can probably tell what kind of a seizure it is (ie:
overheating
>due to excessive RPM; overheating due to lean mixture; lack of lubrication;
>etc.). Also, you probably already did, but be sure to check the carb. jets
to
>be sure the proper ones are installed and that the needle is in the correct
>position. That's all I can think of.
>
>Here's my story about props. I purchased my Orig. FS kit in Jun 89. For
some
>reason I received a 66 X 32 prop., the same as used on the 447. I wasn't
>aware that I had the wrong prop for quite some time. Of course, I had an
>opposite situation from yours, whereas I couldn't even reach 6000 RPM
static.
>The problem I had was very low EGT's, like 800 to 900 degrees, and lots of
>carbon every 50 hours. One day Kolb had a sale on used props. and I bought
a
>66 X 30, a compromise between the one I had and the one I should have had.
I
>can now turn about 6100 RPM static and on climb out at 40 MPH. I weigh
about
>135 lbs., so the compromised prop. works good for me. Now my EGT's are up
in
>the 1050-1100 range and hopefully my next teardown won't reveal so much
>carbon.
>
>I went flying on Sunday so checked my elevator for spongy cables. Yes,
there
>is some give. But only about two inches with considerable force. I tied
the
>stick back tight, then went to the elevator and pressed down. My cables
are
>snug, not drum tight. The cables do sag somewhat between the elevator
control
>mechanisim and the pulleys at the forward end of the boom tube. I think in
my
>case, I am simply feeling the cables rise up to a tighter condition when I
>press down on the elevator, thus some slight give.
>
>Glad to hear that you are real close to flying. You're going to love that
>Kolb!
>
>Bill Varnes
>Original FireStar 377 (280 hours)
>Audubon NJ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DLSOUDER(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: BRS parachute mounting info |
<< A friend without access to the internet is a builder and flyer of the
Firestar II. He is interested in adding a BRS chute to his aircraft.
1. Which model is best for him given the following restrictions?
750 lb. Cannister
2. How would it mount? He is restricted to a maximum of 15" above the
aircraft as the Kolb is trailered, with the wings folded, to the flying site.
Also, as the wings are unfolded and folded each time he flies he is concerned
with how the chute would mount in the wing gap and still leave access for the
pin installation and removal each time the wings are unfolded and folded.
It clamps to the 1-3/4" dia tube on top of cage - an easy installation.
Height is slightly more than to top of oil tank if he has the oil injected 503
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Carroll " <ron.carroll(at)WORLDNET.ATT.NET> |
Richard, not being familiar with the M-III, do you think the tailwheel would
'bolt up' to a Firestar without a major revamp?
Ron
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
Date: Thursday September 10 1998 5:44 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: tail wheel
>
>>
>>Hi All
>>
>>I would like to know if ,some of the group has changed their tail
>>wheel,an it so what did you go to ?
>>the tail wheel on my M III is the little skinny one ,when it is on soft
>>sod it sinks in the ground .
>
> Sorrell (Hyperlight, Hyperbipe, etc.) make a tail wheel assembly
>that will bolt right up to the Kolb MKIII bracket. I love mine. It is twice
>as wide, and sits a little lower.
> Richard Pike
> MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Russell Duffy" <rv8(at)mindspring.com> |
>I would like to know if ,some of the group has changed their tail
>wheel,an it so what did you go to ?
>the tail wheel on my M III is the little skinny one ,when it is on soft
>sod it sinks in the ground .I did change it out with a shopping cart
Check the archives (Matt pays me to say that ). I installed one of the
Aircraft Spruce "homebuilder special" wheels on the SlingShot, and I think I
gave all the details which I don't remember now. The wheel is full swivel, but
it's also a couple pounds heavier, and required some modification to fit the
tailwheel spring (bar, thingy- another technical term for William), and was
expensive. I can post some pictures somewhere if your interested.
Rusty (I can't take any more R&D satisfaction) Duffy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu> |
>
> Does the switch affect the EGT readings? I thought I read somewhere that
> the low voltages(?) of the probes made them sensitive to small resistance
> changes that may be present in a switched circuit. Are you using a
> "special" switch?
Absolutely nothin special. In fact it came from RadioShack, so you know I
was desperate. A new switch has essentially no measurable resistance (in
closed position), probably less than say 5 feet of wire. With soldered
connections, appropriate wire gauge and length, and stranded wire, this
is not an issue.
-Ben Ransom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu> |
> Depending on the type of oil you use, if the top of the piston gets
> hot enough, the oil on the inderside of the piston dome will form a layer of
> carbon.
Also, lots of this can just be fuel tarnish. (underside goo is
harmless, it's the crud in the ring grooves that will nail the engine.)
> Don't know if this answers part two of the question, but years ago I
> put a smoke system on the Hummer's Rotax 277. Injected Corvis oil into the
> exhaust manifold several inches down from the exhaust port. Smoked like
Ok, now we're talkin! Next $64 question, what did you use as an injector?
And, shouldn't we by now be getting a Seafoam discount for using it as
the be-all/end-all subject header for the last 3 weeks? :-)
-Ben Ransom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Seizure during breakin |
Ron,
You are correct about the potemtial problems with engine that had been stored.
But buying an older kit still can be a good deal if you didn't pay too much. You
won't be dissapointed by the 377's performance of the performance of an original
Firestar. A friend that tried to buy my original Firestar, found one in his price
range, and now we fly together. He has a 377 and climbs out as fast and cruises
as
fast as my 503 Firestar II, and he spent half the money that I did.
John Jung
Firestar II N6163J 60 hrs
SE Wisconsin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | William Weber <bweber2(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Sea Foam Source |
> Keep it in the cylinders only.
So how do I use it with an inverted engine?
--
***********************************************
* Bill Weber * Keep *
* Voiceboard Corp * the shiny *
* Simi Valley, CA * side up *
***********************************************
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
Greg,
I have a switch in my Kolb built instrument panel. In testing it, I could
detect no difference with or without it, or on either side of the switch. It
switches both EGT and CHT. If there is some error, it is small compared to the
difference in EGT probes.
John Jung
Waligroski, Greg wrote:
>
> Does the switch affect the EGT readings? I thought I read somewhere that
> the low voltages(?) of the probes made them sensitive to small resistance
> changes that may be present in a switched circuit. Are you using a
> "special" switch?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DLSOUDER(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | 4 Cylinder FireStar |
Recived a call from the FAA about a FireStar crash, pilot was doing high speed
taxi testing and he wound up in a tree. FAA wanted to know if it was an UL or
experimental. Our records showed that he purchased the kit, but no engine.
We said we really didn't know because we don't know what engine he may have
used. The FAA investigator said he didn't know either, but he did know that
it had 4 cylinders!
In case you don't know - you shouldn't do that! Please don't do that! A
FireStar does not need more than 2 cylinders - 4 is way too many cylinders.
Please count your cylinders before installing ... remember 4 is too many.
Dennis (another sleepless night) Souder
Pres Kolb Aircraft
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Firefly continued |
| From: | bobdoebler(at)JUNO.COM (Robert L Doebler) |
writes:
>
>
>>
>This "first flight" method discussion might be getting a little old,
>but
>I feel compelled to say that I think 40mph is just a tad slow for
>approach.
>Maybe 40 is okay if you keep 4000rpm, but keep in mind that Firestars
>stall
>in the low to mid 30s (at idle), and a new plane probably won't have a
>closely calibrated ASI. I'd say closer to 50 would be better for
>first
>time approaches. Let it slow and settle after crossing the numbers.
>
>Hope too many cooks here doesn't spoil the broth.
>-Ben Ransom
>
>I too agree with you Ben. I like to keep about 50mp. When you turn
final, your stall speed increases. At 40mph, your stall speed might just
reach up and bite you! If you think you are going to fast over the
numbers-drag your feet, or throw out your anchor! Just kidding
Bob Doebler
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rutledge Fuller" <rut007(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Firefly continued |
I fly close to Vne on approach most of the time because I stay high and
tight to the field. This forces me to make steep turns on base and
final. I then bleed back to 50, until in ground effect. Remember that
turns will increase your stall speed. I am not going to take any
chances. Altitude, speed, and a nice field 45 degrees off my wing will
help increase my likelyhodd of a safe and uneventiful landing.
Rut Fuller
Tallahassee
----Original Message Follows----
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1998 23:27:46 -0700 (PDT)
From: Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firefly continued
> 3) On the 11th pass, bring the throttle down to 4000 rpm and hold it.
Let
> the plane lose altitude and set up your approach at 40 mph. If, for
any
This "first flight" method discussion might be getting a little old, but
I feel compelled to say that I think 40mph is just a tad slow for
approach.
Maybe 40 is okay if you keep 4000rpm, but keep in mind that Firestars
stall
in the low to mid 30s (at idle), and a new plane probably won't have a
closely calibrated ASI. I'd say closer to 50 would be better for first
time approaches. Let it slow and settle after crossing the numbers.
Hope too many cooks here doesn't spoil the broth.
-Ben Ransom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rutledge Fuller" <rut007(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Seizure during breakin |
""I decided to call an authorized Rotax service center and told the guy
what
had happened. ""
Who did you call? I liked his answers. I think that anyone could have
easily pointed out rpm as the problem and said to put in new piston/etc.
This guy looked deeper.
Rutledge Fuller
Tallyville
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rutledge Fuller" <rut007(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Seizure during breakin |
I agree. I bought my Original as a used kit with the engine stored for
10 years. Have over 40 hours on it with no problems. The engine was
stored in airconditioned conditions. I also have been told by several
Kolb owners who have owned both the Orig and current Firestar and
Fireflys they prefer the Original hands down.
That guy from Tallahassee again.
""Ron,
You are correct about the potemtial problems with engine that had
been stored.
But buying an older kit still can be a good deal if you didn't pay too
much. You
won't be dissapointed by the 377's performance of the performance of an
original
Firestar. A friend that tried to buy my original Firestar, found one in
his price
range, and now we fly together. He has a 377 and climbs out as fast and
cruises as
fast as my 503 Firestar II, and he spent half the money that I did.
John Jung
Firestar II N6163J 60 hrs
SE Wisconsin""
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank_R_Reynen(at)notes.seagate.com |
| Subject: | Re: 4 Cylinder FireStar |
Dennis,
You made my day with this one! Thanks so much.
Frank(wanting 4 cylinders also)Reynen MKIII@471 hrs
http://www.webcom.com/reynen
Recived a call from the FAA about a FireStar crash, pilot was doing high
speed
taxi testing and he wound up in a tree. FAA wanted to know if it was an UL
or
experimental. Our records showed that he purchased the kit, but no engine.
We said we really didn't know because we don't know what engine he may have
used. The FAA investigator said he didn't know either, but he did know
that
it had 4 cylinders!
In case you don't know - you shouldn't do that! Please don't do that! A
FireStar does not need more than 2 cylinders - 4 is way too many cylinders.
Please count your cylinders before installing ... remember 4 is too many.
Dennis (another sleepless night) Souder
Pres Kolb Aircraft
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Sea Foam Source |
William Weber wrote:
> So how do I use it with an inverted engine?
Bill,
Just let an inexperienced pilot practice crow-hops in your plane on a narrow
runway. Then put the Sea Foam in before you turn the plane right-side up.
John Jung
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Carroll " <ron.carroll(at)WORLDNET.ATT.NET> |
| Subject: | Re: Seizure during breakin |
Rut, I believe the guy is a little out of your area, but here he is:
Brian Carpenter
Owner, Rainbow Aviation Services
FBO Corning Airport, Corning CA (0O4)
BFI, CFI, CFII, A&P, IA
Rotax dealer
Quicksilver dealer
And the list goes on...
530-624-0644
fastglass1(at)aol.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Rutledge Fuller <rut007(at)hotmail.com>
Date: Thursday September 10 1998 9:55 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Seizure during breakin
>
>
>
>
>""I decided to call an authorized Rotax service center and told the guy
>what
>had happened. ""
>
>Who did you call? I liked his answers. I think that anyone could have
>easily pointed out rpm as the problem and said to put in new piston/etc.
>This guy looked deeper.
>
>Rutledge Fuller
>Tallyville
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Iles <garyiles(at)mnsi.net> |
Hello Kolber's. I'am new to the list,a friend of mine by the name of
Woody suggested that I get on the list for some interesting stuff about
ULs. I don't fly a Kolb, but Woody does and I've been up with him many
times.I fly a Rans S12, 582, 66"warp prop.Does anybody have experience
with Hirth engines with several hundred hours,I'd like to know if these
engines go the advertised 1000 hrs.TBO.Also I'd like to here about
anybody experimenting with 4cly engines.I've heard some talk about a
fellow with a vw engine,would like to here more about this combination,I
believe it's on a Mk111. climb,cruise,takeoff distance etc.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayland, William C." <wcw2573(at)eagle.sbeach.navy.mil> |
John Jung you are not nice !! I gave a friend of mine some Sea Foam and he
has a Hirth engine with plugs down on a Twin Beaver. My advice to him was
to fabricate and try out a fitting that will replace the spark plug. It
should have a long clear plastic tube coming out and fixed up beside the
engine at an elevation higher than the rings of the piston at TDC. Mark
the tube at a point just higher than the level of the rings. Then keep
filling the tube up to that level over a period of time (I have no idea how
long it might take) until the fluid level stops falling below the mark.
Your time to fill would be governed by how slowly the air in the cylinder is
pushed out past the rings by the slight "head" (pressure) developed by the
fluid. WILL THIS WORK ? I REALY DON'T KNOW. So if someone gives it a
concerted try please give us all a report.
Chris Wayland.
> ----------
> From: John Jung[SMTP:jrjung(at)execpc.com]
> Sent: Thursday, September 10, 1998 9:29 AM
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Sea Foam Source
>
>
> William Weber wrote:
>
> > So how do I use it with an inverted engine?
>
> Bill,
> Just let an inexperienced pilot practice crow-hops in your plane on a
> narrow
> runway. Then put the Sea Foam in before you turn the plane right-side up.
> John Jung
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net> |
| Subject: | Re: What is the best prop? |
>
>The maximum rpm for my motor is suggested at 6200 rpm. I will have to pull
>my plugs and check them as Woody has suggested. Will it damage my engine if
>it is running to cool?
>
Running cool won't really hurt but you could have a higher carbon build
up. I used to run my Zenoah and 277 Rotax at 400* on climbout and 350*
cruise without a problem. I think the book states max 425* and only for a
very short period. The warmer you are able to run the engine the more power
you are able to extract from the gas. Keep an eye on the plugs untill you
know your engine.
Woody
Some men are able to stumble over the truth but are able to pick
themselves up and keep walking as if nothing had happened. (Churchill)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com> |
>>> Don't know if this answers part two of the question, but years ago
I
>> put a smoke system on the Hummer's Rotax 277. Injected Corvis oil into the
>> exhaust manifold several inches down from the exhaust port. Smoked like
>
>Ok, now we're talkin! Next $64 question, what did you use as an injector?
>
About 6" of steel brake line off a car. It is 3/16" OD, slid it through a
AN-3 washer, and brazed the washer on. Drilled a 3/16" hole through a hose
clamp and clamped it on to the exhaust pipe about 8-10" from the engine, I
don't recall exactly. Drilled a 3/16" hole in the exhaust pipe, the tubing
stuck through about 1/2".
through the cap down to the bottom. Had a T fitting inline to pressurize it,
one side of the T had a valve stem brazed on. Ran some plain plastic tubing
through an off/on valve in the panel back to the engine. Pressurize the
bottle to about 75 psi, and it will blow oil into the header like mad.
Only problem was sometimes getting air leaks at the cap where the
tubing fit through.
There was one supervisor at work at the tower that was kind of a
ninny, and hated calls from civilians about airplanes "going down": crashes
that really weren't.
So when he was working, I would fly high above over places like ball
fields, race tracks, subdivisions, anywhere that there were a lot of people,
start it smoking, and spiral down behind a ridge, then fly off, discreetly
departing the area.
Rang his phone off the hook, and he hated fielding all those calls,
but was too much of a "company man" to tell them it was a crazy air traffic
controller setting them up...
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com> |
>
>Richard, not being familiar with the M-III, do you think the tailwheel would
>'bolt up' to a Firestar without a major revamp?
The MKIII has a tailwheel bracket that fits the end of a round rod.
It is a round tube with two thick flat straps welded to it which extend back
slightly and then are bent at an angle to position the tailwheel at the
correct trailing angle.
The Sorrell Hyperlight tailwheel has a yoke that is 1 1/4" high, and
easily fits within the two flat straps, needing one flat washer for a shim.
The steering arm that came on the tailwheel casting was too thin,
too flexible, and was easily replaced with a new one that I cut out of .060
4130 steel.
I don't know what Sorrell gets for that unit, because I bought a
wrecked Hyperlight to sell the parts off, and kept the tailwheel assy.
If your tailwheel bracket at the end of your tail spring has at
least a 1/14" gap between the top and bottom tang, you should be able to
make it fit.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net> |
| Subject: | Re: new subsriber |
>
>Hello Kolber's. I'am new to the list,a friend of mine by the name of
>Woody suggested that I get on the list for some interesting stuff about
>ULs. I don't fly a Kolb
About time you quit lurking and came out and be identified. This is the
guy that inspired the "cranky" debate last month.
Woody
Some men are able to stumble over the truth but are able to pick
themselves up and keep walking as if nothing had happened. (Churchill)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mjc <mjc(at)etri.re.kr> |
That rule is only for the U.S.A.
Other countries have different rules-such as in Canada or in Europe.
In my country(Korea), a u/l can be purchased as ready to fly.
Weight limits are 330 lb for single-seat and 496 lb for two-seats.
MJ Chu
Russell Duffy wrote:
>
> >Not to rain on your party but how would one buy your SS and then install a
> >engine. It would take a A&E or your self to install it and sign it off.
> >
> >Jerry Bidle
>
> It's worse than that. You must have missed the part about selling the plane
> without registration. How can anyone register it? Legally, it would be really
> tough, but since when do we worry about a little thing like legality. I suspect
> there are a number of SlingShots flying as illegal UL's. Heck, I've seen people
> post FireStar weights that topped my empty weight of 396. If someone wanted
to
> register my SS as if they built it, I'm sure they could, but that's between them
> and the FAA. I'll provide all the photos they'd ever need, along with a
> builders log.
>
> If no one buys it, it'll just stay in the corner of the hanger and collect dust.
> Maybe one day, I'll get interested again, and build that single rotor Mazda I've
> always wanted.
>
> Rusty (just air conditioned my garage- Aaaaaaaah) Duffy
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eugene Zimmerman <tehz(at)redrose.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Sea Foam Source |
<19980909.193442.7983.0.ul15rhb(at)juno.com>
>
>> Keep it in the cylinders only.
>
>So how do I use it with an inverted engine?
>
>
Turn the whole plane upside down.
Did I get the right answer for your quiz?
EZ :)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eugene Zimmerman <tehz(at)redrose.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 4 Cylinder FireStar |
>
>Recived a call from the FAA about a FireStar crash, pilot was doing high
speed
>taxi testing and he wound up in a tree. FAA wanted to know if it was an
UL or
>experimental. Our records showed that he purchased the kit, but no engine.
>We said we really didn't know because we don't know what engine he may have
>used. The FAA investigator said he didn't know either, but he did know that
>it had 4 cylinders!
>
>In case you don't know - you shouldn't do that! Please don't do that! A
>FireStar does not need more than 2 cylinders - 4 is way too many cylinders.
>Please count your cylinders before installing ... remember 4 is too many.
>
>Dennis (another sleepless night) Souder
>Pres Kolb Aircraft
I highly suspect it merely had four spark plugs and not four cylinders. :)
EZ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry Bidle <jbidle(at)airmail.net> |
I hate this new system, replying directly to the originator is a major
effort. So be it, everyone gets messages now. I tired and ready to go home.
Did you apply for and get your repair mans certificate. If you haven't you
should just in case you want to put another engine on that old duck. It
would make it a lot easier.
Jerry Bidle
>
>>Not to rain on your party but how would one buy your SS and then install a
>>engine. It would take a A&E or your self to install it and sign it off.
>>
>>Jerry Bidle
>
>
>It's worse than that. You must have missed the part about selling the plane
>without registration. How can anyone register it? Legally, it would be
really
>tough, but since when do we worry about a little thing like legality. I
suspect
>there are a number of SlingShots flying as illegal UL's. Heck, I've seen
people
>post FireStar weights that topped my empty weight of 396. If someone
wanted to
>register my SS as if they built it, I'm sure they could, but that's
between them
>and the FAA. I'll provide all the photos they'd ever need, along with a
>builders log.
>
>If no one buys it, it'll just stay in the corner of the hanger and collect
dust.
>Maybe one day, I'll get interested again, and build that single rotor
Mazda I've
>always wanted.
>
>Rusty (just air conditioned my garage- Aaaaaaaah) Duffy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Henry Wortman <hwortman(at)datasys.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Sea Foam Source |
>
> So how do I use it with an inverted engine?
>
>
William:
On my inverted 503, I removed the exhaust system and injected (as I
remember) about 13 cc of seafoam directly into the top of each cylinder.
Then by turning the prop it effectively produced a hydraulic lock. By
holding pressure on the prop the seafoam was forced around and by the
rings. You have the added advantage that you can examine the rings,
piston and head. I used a dental mirror to get a good look inside. I
agree with Ralph, works great.
No stock either: Henry Maybe we should call this stuff "engine
overhaul" !!!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ul15rhb(at)JUNO.COM (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Ben and others,
I should qualify the 447 EGT readings that I compared to the 377. Last
Saturday morning was 50 deg outside which raises the EGT reading by 20
deg (the instrument is calibrated at the factory at 70 deg). This may not
sound like much, but this means the actual EGT temp would be 1280 deg and
this is what it should read if the surface temp was 70 deg. The 447 was
"pickled" in 2-cycle oil and this "may" account for higher EGT's. I have
added some Seafoam already and plan to slosh some more in the cylinders
prior to a static runup at full power. I will use the same IVO prop
quick-adjust pitch that I have now and the same EGT instrument for this
test. This may indicate whether Seafoam has any effect on the EGT. I will
let you know what happens.
Ralph Burlingame
Original FireStar 400+ hrs
writes:
>
>I operated my 447 SC with a single probe at the Y for its 140 hours.
>I decarboned twice in that time using Elbow Grease instead of Sea Foam
>and noticed no change in EGT.
>
>Ralph's engine hitting 1300 with a single probe at the Y is normal.
>I'd guess his 377 had leaks plugged by the Sea Foam treatment. Man that
>stuff does it all ...I think I'll take a swig myself! :)
>
>I think I mentioned to Ralph but not to the list that I *really* like
>the 2 EGTs at 100mm better than 1 at the Y. Both of mine go into a
>switch for my single EGT gauge. Works great. Only one EGT is not
>adequate info to know what your engine is up to.
>
>-Ben
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry Bidle <jbidle(at)airmail.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 4 Cylinder FireStar |
Crash, bang, bang, ouch, more bangs. Whew! There got those two extra
cylinders off as Kolb recommended. This thing should fly just as fine
according to Dennis. Glad I checked email before the first flight.
I hope Jabiru's stands behind their product warranty better than R&D's when
running with only two jugs.
(Hey it's late, I been here too long today.... .. .)
Jerry Bidle
(FireFly)
>
>Recived a call from the FAA about a FireStar crash, pilot was doing high
speed
>taxi testing and he wound up in a tree. FAA wanted to know if it was an
UL or
>experimental. Our records showed that he purchased the kit, but no engine.
>We said we really didn't know because we don't know what engine he may have
>used. The FAA investigator said he didn't know either, but he did know that
>it had 4 cylinders!
>
>In case you don't know - you shouldn't do that! Please don't do that! A
>FireStar does not need more than 2 cylinders - 4 is way too many cylinders.
>Please count your cylinders before installing ... remember 4 is too many.
>
>Dennis (another sleepless night) Souder
>Pres Kolb Aircraft
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
I test flew a Firefly this evening. My very first action trying to taxi from
the concrete hanger floor to the grass put me on its nose as those little
biddy plastic wheels could not climb over the hump. Great start! Taxi was
wobbly as the gear seemingly flexed a lot and felt like it was further aft
than my FS2. By the way I am 6ft 2 in and could not wear a helmet as it
jammed me into the underside of the wing gap seal. Even without it I had to
recline a little more than I am used to. On the runway the acceleration from
the 447 was fantastic and felt greater than my own ship. In the air it
climbed great, was light on all controls especially the rudder. It flew much
nicer than my FS2. Biggest problem was having just a waist strap had me
gripping the tubing and banking very shallowly. No real stall just bob up and
down and an easy landing at 50 to 55 indicated. Absolutely a great flying
plane, it just needs big wheels and shoulder harness. I want one,
Dick C
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry Bidle <jbidle(at)airmail.net> |
| Subject: | Re: new subsriber |
Welcome to the group.
One of the interesting 4-stokes is Larry Israllel (sp) formerly of Team
Aircraft. Their working on the side developing an engine based upon old
French made engine. While working from a limited budget, I like what I
heard and seen. If you look for HP, then the Jabiru is the way to go. No
pumping oil and cooling lines, a very clean neat (fast) installation.
People I talked to with them seem to be very happy.
Jerry
>
>Hello Kolber's. I'am new to the list,a friend of mine by the name of
>Woody suggested that I get on the list for some interesting stuff about
>ULs. I don't fly a Kolb, but Woody does and I've been up with him many
>times.I fly a Rans S12, 582, 66"warp prop.Does anybody have experience
>with Hirth engines with several hundred hours,I'd like to know if these
>engines go the advertised 1000 hrs.TBO.Also I'd like to here about
>anybody experimenting with 4cly engines.I've heard some talk about a
>fellow with a vw engine,would like to here more about this combination,I
>believe it's on a Mk111. climb,cruise,takeoff distance etc.
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry Bidle <jbidle(at)airmail.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 4 Cylinder FireStar |
>>Recived a call from the FAA about a FireStar crash, pilot was doing high
>speed taxi testing and he wound up in a tree. FAA wanted to know if it
was an
>UL or experimental. Our records showed that he purchased the kit, but no
engine.
>>We said we really didn't know because we don't know what engine he may have
>>used. The FAA investigator said he didn't know either, but he did know that
>>it had 4 cylinders!
>>
>>In case you don't know - you shouldn't do that! Please don't do that! A
>>FireStar does not need more than 2 cylinders - 4 is way too many cylinders.
>>Please count your cylinders before installing ... remember 4 is too many.
>>
>>Dennis (another sleepless night) Souder
>>Pres Kolb Aircraft
>
>I highly suspect it merely had four spark plugs and not four cylinders. :)
>EZ
>
*** Gee, Dennis this is a good stock answer. Maybe you should even call
them back.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)telepath.com> |
> > He said something to the effect of there being
> >as much carbon UNDER the piston as on top of it ! ! ! How can this be ??
> Depending on the type of oil you use, if the top of the piston gets
> hot enough, the oil on the inderside of the piston dome will form a layer of
> carbon.
Thought about responding to this one and then decided not to...but
finally got my goat......
Seems to me that one of two, possibly three things would get a lot
of carbon deposition under the dome, all of them bad.
1. Lack of heat transfer from piston to cyl walls caused by big
clearances, stuck rings, or (less likely) lack of wrist pin lubrication.
Excessive load would do it as well. Pistons should only run about
450F according to instrumented tests. You'd need approx 800F to
begin good oils fractionization.
2. Excessively tight clearances....the almost-seize-but-never-quite-
getting-there scenario. Less likely since the amount of time spent
in that regime would be abysmally low before a seizure occured or
the clearances loosened up.
3. Running lean but not to the point of seizure....almost the same
as 2.
4. (OK, maybe four...) Oil type.....really unlikely given the quality
of oils available.
J. Baker
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)telepath.com> |
> >I would like to know if ,some of the group has changed their tail
> >wheel,an it so what did you go to ?
> >the tail wheel on my M III is the little skinny one ,when it is on soft
> >sod it sinks in the ground .
>
> Sorrell (Hyperlight, Hyperbipe, etc.) make a tail wheel assembly
> that will bolt right up to the Kolb MKIII bracket. I love mine. It is twice
> as wide, and sits a little lower.
> Richard Pike
Often thought that I'd like to try a snowmobile bogey wheel as a
replacement. No wider than the original but some come with ball
bearings and lots of choices in styles...plastic hub, metal hub,
colored plastic hubs......
Dennis Kirk Snowmobile catalog has a bunch.
J. Baker
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hansen, Mark" <MHansen(at)ConusNews.com> |
go to a hardware store & look, I found a 1"1/2 wide wheel that works
great.
Note: so far all I have done is taxi on this wheel with my twinstar.
speeds
up to 35 mph.
This is at about take off speed for a twinstar
Mark Hansen
> ----------
> From: Jim Baker[SMTP:jlbaker(at)telepath.com]
> Reply To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Thursday, September 10, 1998 5:08 PM
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: tail wheel
>
>
> > >I would like to know if ,some of the group has changed their tail
> > >wheel,an it so what did you go to ?
> > >the tail wheel on my M III is the little skinny one ,when it is on soft
> > >sod it sinks in the ground .
> >
> > Sorrell (Hyperlight, Hyperbipe, etc.) make a tail wheel assembly
> > that will bolt right up to the Kolb MKIII bracket. I love mine. It is
> twice
> > as wide, and sits a little lower.
> > Richard Pike
>
>
> Often thought that I'd like to try a snowmobile bogey wheel as a
> replacement. No wider than the original but some come with ball
> bearings and lots of choices in styles...plastic hub, metal hub,
> colored plastic hubs......
>
> Dennis Kirk Snowmobile catalog has a bunch.
>
>
>
>
> J. Baker
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | swidersk <swidersk(at)digital.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Firefly continued |
Right On Ben!
I'm sorry about the arrows in your back but the truth hurts sometimes. (Gee,
I
sure hate to stir things up!) I think you hit it on the head when you said if
you're afraid of it you're not ready for it. The most important factor for safety
is good judgement (assuming you have the discipline to carry it out). The second
most important factor is knowledge. You must understand what makes your plane
fly
& how it is controlled. If you possess this you will eliminate 90% of the fear.
The 3rd ingrediant is skill. Good judgement will tell you to get instruction
untill you acquire the knowledge & skill to be safe & comforatable. There are
cicumstances where this is not possible ( Eg., no instructors &/or $) but there
is
a sane alternative that demands extreme patience & discipline...Ben alluded to
it:
Take baby steps untill you are flying. You read & discuss untill you have it
engrained in your brain. You take a vow to never practice in winds over 5mph,
except for the first few weeks where your limit will be 0-2mph. You taxi back &
forth untill you are bored silly & can do it perfectly with out thinking. You now
have mastered one demension of flying- yaw control. Then you taxi just fast
enough to hold your tail up & do this untill you are bored silly & can do it in
your sleep. Now you have mastered 2 demensions of flight- yaw & pitch control.
If you are really committed to this process you will gut out the next step which
is very frustrating & sounds ridiculous, but it will allow you to master the 3rd
demension of flight- roll control & never leave the ground. While taxing with
your tail up, give full deflection of left airleron & increase power until your
right tire just comes off the ground & then cut the power. Do this untill you
can
hold the tire off the ground longer & longer untill indefinitely! Then do it with
the opposite aileron. It sounds crazy, & takes a long time, but you will have
become proficient at flying your craft in all 3 demensions without ever giving
an
opportunity to injure yourself. When this has become reflexive, you can now
increase the throttle untill you just break ground then cut it. Keep doing this
untill you can make your craft break ground & settle down again with out any pitch
input, untill you seared it into your brain that the throttle controls your lift
&
not your stick. Then your are ready to keep it **one** foot off the gound at 5mph
over stall for a few feet at a time untill you con fly the length of the runway
without skipping on the ground. Now you are ready to go 10mph over stall to 5ft
&
settle back down. You do this untill you gease it every time. Then you go to
10ft. & do the same, and then 20ft. Now you will be more skilled than 98% of your
flying buddies & you will know you are ready for your first flight to altitude.
Not only will you not be afraid, you will find it anticlimatic. This will take
months at least, because there will be days when just as you finish preflighting
the wind goes over the 5mph mark & you have to fold it back up & go home. This
is
what I did when I had no money, 2 toddlers who needed a father & a wife whose
heart I didn't want break by getting myself killed or injured. When I completed
my program I began my jouney of flying as a proficient pilot able to respond to
most every thing my craft could ask of me, including dead sticks. In my 6th hr
of
flying time I just entered the 1st leg of the pattern at Sun & Fun, at about 400ft
altitude when I backed off full throttle & experienced my 1st engine seizure.
Because I had already practiced this I was not gripped by fear. The wind was a
steady 15mph. After a 270 degree turn I greased it into the middle of the
runway...Then I started to shake! Homer, who saw the whole thing, later asked
me
how long I've been flying. He was surprised when I admitted to 6hrs., & made some
comment about me being an unusual pilot. I immediately & with all my heart told
him he deserves most of the credit for designing such an extraordinarily good
flying plane that really makes one look good. Later I realized the fruit of my
regimented beginners program. Judgment, Knowledge & Skill come at a price, one
way or another. If you're willing to pay the price, & you're blessed enough to
have a Kolb... you can be a thrilled & safe pilot having more fun than should be
legal!
Richard Swiderski.
Ben Ransom wrote:
>
> On Wed, 9 Sep 1998, Rutledge Fuller wrote:
> > I suggest if you are scared of the machine, not to fly it. I would taxi
> Great advice. When I first flew mine, I wasn't afraid of it at all, but
> was pretty nervous about trailering my baby down the freeway for first time.
>
> > it around and take it one step at a time. If you are not familiar with
> One step at a time, also among the best advice IMO.
>
> > would conduct high speed taxi tests with the tail in the air. I did
> > this at an indicated airspeed of 40 mph just before it would lift off.
> I used to call this crowhopping, or at least the precursor to crowhopping.
> I have several arrows in my backside for advocating C.H., so will no
> longer even mention it or spell the words. But I continue to believe this
> high speed taxi in no wind where it is wanting badly to depart terra firma
> is an invaluable exercise. Do it till you are getting sick of it. Don't
> forget that the throttle is one of the main controls. You really get to
> know the feel and how much input is required for your plane. I still do
> it often cuz it is also fun. Main thing ...don't proceed to next step
> with anything until you are comfortable with previous step.
>
> -my 2bits
> Ben Ransom
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: new subsriber |
Richard Neilsen in Michigan started flying a direct drive VW a few months
ago, and I think he said it seemed fairly comparable to a 912. Haven't
heard from him in quite a while, and I'm sure curious as to how things are
going for him. I'm in the slow process of building a 2110 cc VW with
redrive for my "in process " Mk III, but it's still a long way from
competion. I hope by Christmas. The machine shop should have the crank
ready by tomorrow, then to the balancing shop. Isn't it something how
estimates keep getting revised upward ?? My buddy with the Titan has
settled on the SVS 1400 engine for his Tornado. I hope I got that right.
It's the Czech built engine. He's downloaded a lot of info on it and it
looks real good. Welcome to the list. It's a great group.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | TONY ALLEN <ALLENT%HOLLIA1%sbevax(at)mr.sbe.saskatoon.sk.ca> |
| Subject: | Unable to unsubscribe. |
UA-content-id: E6ZXODWV79Y
A1-type: MAIL
Hop-count: 1
Sorry to post this on the list, but after following the
instructions for unsubscribing, I'm still getting kolb-list mail.
It may be because the instructions say to leave the "subject" line
blank, something my company's mail software won't allow.
Help!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Guy Tetreault <samten(at)CAM.ORG> |
| Subject: | 4 Cylinder Firestar |
Saw a real nice Firestar KXP the other day, with a neat engine
instalation. A 4 cylinder Koenig radial. Sounded great too, low reving
kind of sound. But this guy is still around though, must be someone else
that crashed.
Guy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dralle(at)matronics.com (Matt Dralle 925-606-1001) |
| Subject: | Re: Unable to unsubscribe. |
>--------------
>
> Sorry to post this on the list, but after following the
> instructions for unsubscribing, I'm still getting kolb-list mail.
> It may be because the instructions say to leave the "subject" line
> blank, something my company's mail software won't allow.
>
> Help!
>--------------
That's because you are really subscribed as:
allen.tony(at)sbevax.sbe.saskatoon.sk.ca
But your current email "From:" address is:
ALLENT%HOLLIA1%sbevax(at)mr.sbe.saskatoon.sk.ca
Unless you specifically unsubscribe the subscribed address, majordomo doesn't
find you in the list.
In a situation like this, send the "who" command to majordomo, find the
exact syntax of your subscription, then send a command similar to:
unsubscribe allen.tony(at)sbevax.sbe.saskatoon.sk.ca
I've unsubscribed you by hand this time, however.
Matt Dralle
List Admin.
--
Matt G. Dralle | Matronics | P.O. Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551
925-606-1001 Voice | 925-606-6281 FAX | dralle(at)matronics.com Email
http://www.matronics.com/ W.W.W. | Featuring Products For Aircraft
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rick106(at)JUNO.COM |
Russell
Please if it is not to much trouble I sure would like to see the pic.
Do you remember if the alum. rod on the tail will work with the assembly
that is on the KOLB.
Rick Libersat
writes:
>
>>I would like to know if ,some of the group has changed their tail
>>wheel,an it so what did you go to ?
>>the tail wheel on my M III is the little skinny one ,when it is on
>soft
>>sod it sinks in the ground .I did change it out with a shopping cart
>
>
>Check the archives (Matt pays me to say that ). I installed one of
>the
>Aircraft Spruce "homebuilder special" wheels on the SlingShot, and I
>think I
>gave all the details which I don't remember now. The wheel is full
>swivel, but
>it's also a couple pounds heavier, and required some modification to
>fit the
>tailwheel spring (bar, thingy- another technical term for William),
>and was
>expensive. I can post some pictures somewhere if your interested.
>
>Rusty (I can't take any more R&D satisfaction) Duffy
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rick106(at)JUNO.COM |
Jim
Richard Pike has put me on the trail of the Hyperlight,Hyperbipe I will
get their number and give them a call, but the snowmobile people I would
not have a clue on how to get in touch with them if you would please send
me their number.
Do you know if the new plane that KOLB has out what type of tail wheel
does it have, ?
thanks , guy's
Rick Libersat
writes:
>
>> >I would like to know if ,some of the group has changed their tail
>> >wheel,an it so what did you go to ?
>> >the tail wheel on my M III is the little skinny one ,when it is on
>soft
>> >sod it sinks in the ground .
>>
>> Sorrell (Hyperlight, Hyperbipe, etc.) make a tail wheel
>assembly
>> that will bolt right up to the Kolb MKIII bracket. I love mine. It
>is twice
>> as wide, and sits a little lower.
>> Richard Pike
>
>
>Often thought that I'd like to try a snowmobile bogey wheel as a
>replacement. No wider than the original but some come with ball
>bearings and lots of choices in styles...plastic hub, metal hub,
>colored plastic hubs......
>
>Dennis Kirk Snowmobile catalog has a bunch.
>
>
>
>
>J. Baker
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rick106(at)JUNO.COM |
thanks I will go down to my local hardware store and look didn't think
about that ,thanks
Rick Libersat
writes:
>
>
>go to a hardware store & look, I found a 1"1/2 wide wheel that works
>great.
>
>Note: so far all I have done is taxi on this wheel with my twinstar.
>speeds
>up to 35 mph.
>
>This is at about take off speed for a twinstar
>
>Mark Hansen
>
>> ----------
>> From: Jim Baker[SMTP:jlbaker(at)telepath.com]
>> Reply To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>> Sent: Thursday, September 10, 1998 5:08 PM
>> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: tail wheel
>>
>>
>> > >I would like to know if ,some of the group has changed their tail
>> > >wheel,an it so what did you go to ?
>> > >the tail wheel on my M III is the little skinny one ,when it is
>on soft
>> > >sod it sinks in the ground .
>> >
>> > Sorrell (Hyperlight, Hyperbipe, etc.) make a tail wheel
>assembly
>> > that will bolt right up to the Kolb MKIII bracket. I love mine. It
>is
>> twice
>> > as wide, and sits a little lower.
>> > Richard Pike
>>
>>
>> Often thought that I'd like to try a snowmobile bogey wheel as a
>> replacement. No wider than the original but some come with ball
>> bearings and lots of choices in styles...plastic hub, metal hub,
>> colored plastic hubs......
>>
>> Dennis Kirk Snowmobile catalog has a bunch.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> J. Baker
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hansen, Mark" <MHansen(at)ConusNews.com> |
I don't know if this is true or not. But I saw in a magazine (I don't
remember which one)
Suzuki snowmobile engines will work with the normal gear box for a rotax
engine.
If this is so, it would be alot cheaper to go with suzuki
note: I think Suzuki is used in articat
Mark Hansen
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dennis Souder <flykolb(at)epix.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 4 Cylinder Firestar |
>
>Saw a real nice Firestar KXP the other day, with a neat engine
>instalation. A 4 cylinder Koenig radial. Sounded great too, low reving
>kind of sound. But this guy is still around though, must be someone else
>that crashed.
>
>
Oh dear, thought I had a good rule for powering the FireStar - I guess 4
cylinders is not too many after all. Now its going to get complicated,
because we need to say how big the cylinders must me. Thanks for pointing
that out!
Dennis (sleeping good tonight) Souder
Pres Kolb Aircraft
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard neilsen" <NEILSENR(at)state.mi.us> |
| Subject: | new subsriber -Reply |
.I've heard some talk about a fellow with a vw engine,would like to here more about
this combination,I
believe it's on a Mk111. climb,cruise,takeoff distance etc.
OK I'm the one. I don't have enough experience to give you all you ask for as I had a landing problem and I'm kinda slow in getting things back together (other projects). As a general comment it seems to fly about like a 912 powered MKIII with two on board as apposed to the VW with just me. The take off roll is app 150ft and the cruse is app. 80MPH. I have a web site at http://pw2.netcom.com/~neilsenr/my_pages.html that has some of the details and Pics. While out of service I'm changing the exhaust system to a 4 into 1 and may add a muffler. The existing system is way too loud but it does sing a nice 4 stroke song.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Firefly continued |
Richard Swidersk wrote:
snip..
> Good judgement will tell you to get instruction
> untill you acquire the knowledge & skill to be safe & comforatable. There are
> cicumstances where this is not possible ( Eg., no instructors &/or $)
snip...
Group,
I'm sorry, but I have to object to defying "Good judgment" to go flying. In
my
opinion, anyone who can't afford "Good judgment", shouldn't fly.
John Jung
Firestar II N6163J 60 hrs
SE Wisconsin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bob n <ronoy(at)shentel.net> |
Dick CMy FF has the "big" wheels and is very good on anything rough.
Also the "over-the-shoulder" belt and harness. You ought to get both.
And you're correct, the FF is a pocket rocket. Grey Baron
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher John Armstrong" <Tophera(at)centuryinter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Firefly continued |
What is described here is the crow hop theory of learning to fly and it
works for some... but I have to say that the statement
It sounds crazy, & takes a long time, but you will have
>become proficient at flying your craft in all 3 demensions without ever
giving an
>opportunity to injure yourself.
is not the least true. You have drastically more chance to crunch up your
plane and yourself performing this acrobatic stunt then standard flying.
Get competent at flying, by flying up away from the ground where there is
nothing hard to smash into. the only thing that can get you into trouble up
high is stalling/spinning so go fast.
Topher
-----Original Message-----
From: swidersk <swidersk(at)digital.net>
Date: Thursday, September 10, 1998 11:22 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firefly continued
When this has become reflexive, you can now
>increase the throttle untill you just break ground then cut it. Keep doing
this
>untill you can make your craft break ground & settle down again with out
any pitch
>input, untill you seared it into your brain that the throttle controls your
lift &
>not your stick. Then your are ready to keep it **one** foot off the gound
at 5mph
>over stall for a few feet at a time untill you con fly the length of the
runway
>without skipping on the ground. Now you are ready to go 10mph over stall
to 5ft &
>settle back down. You do this untill you gease it every time. Then you go
to
>10ft. & do the same, and then 20ft. Now you will be more skilled than 98%
of your
>flying buddies & you will know you are ready for your first flight to
altitude.
>Not only will you not be afraid, you will find it anticlimatic. This will
take
>months at least, because there will be days when just as you finish
preflighting
>the wind goes over the 5mph mark & you have to fold it back up & go home.
This is
>what I did when I had no money, 2 toddlers who needed a father & a wife
whose
>heart I didn't want break by getting myself killed or injured. When I
completed
>my program I began my jouney of flying as a proficient pilot able to
respond to
>most every thing my craft could ask of me, including dead sticks. In my
6th hr of
>flying time I just entered the 1st leg of the pattern at Sun & Fun, at
about 400ft
>altitude when I backed off full throttle & experienced my 1st engine
seizure.
>Because I had already practiced this I was not gripped by fear. The wind
was a
>steady 15mph. After a 270 degree turn I greased it into the middle of the
>runway...Then I started to shake! Homer, who saw the whole thing, later
asked me
>how long I've been flying. He was surprised when I admitted to 6hrs., &
made some
>comment about me being an unusual pilot. I immediately & with all my heart
told
>him he deserves most of the credit for designing such an extraordinarily
good
>flying plane that really makes one look good. Later I realized the fruit
of my
>regimented beginners program. Judgment, Knowledge & Skill come at a price,
one
>way or another. If you're willing to pay the price, & you're blessed
enough to
>have a Kolb... you can be a thrilled & safe pilot having more fun than
should be
>legal!
>
> Richard Swiderski.
>
>Ben Ransom wrote:
>
>>
>> On Wed, 9 Sep 1998, Rutledge Fuller wrote:
>> > I suggest if you are scared of the machine, not to fly it. I would
taxi
>> Great advice. When I first flew mine, I wasn't afraid of it at all, but
>> was pretty nervous about trailering my baby down the freeway for first
time.
>>
>> > it around and take it one step at a time. If you are not familiar with
>> One step at a time, also among the best advice IMO.
>>
>> > would conduct high speed taxi tests with the tail in the air. I did
>> > this at an indicated airspeed of 40 mph just before it would lift off.
>> I used to call this crowhopping, or at least the precursor to
crowhopping.
>> I have several arrows in my backside for advocating C.H., so will no
>> longer even mention it or spell the words. But I continue to believe
this
>> high speed taxi in no wind where it is wanting badly to depart terra
firma
>> is an invaluable exercise. Do it till you are getting sick of it. Don't
>> forget that the throttle is one of the main controls. You really get to
>> know the feel and how much input is required for your plane. I still do
>> it often cuz it is also fun. Main thing ...don't proceed to next step
>> with anything until you are comfortable with previous step.
>>
>> -my 2bits
>> Ben Ransom
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jason Omelchuck <jason(at)acuityinc.com> |
Larry, Please keep us updated on your VW installation and your friends
SVS 1400 install. I am very interested in the SVS 1400 for my MKIII,
$7000 I may be able to convince my wife of spending, $9000 +, no way.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Larry Bourne [SMTP:larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net]
> Sent: Thursday, September 10, 1998 9:19 PM
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: new subsriber
>
>
>
> Richard Neilsen in Michigan started flying a direct drive VW a few
> months
> ago, and I think he said it seemed fairly comparable to a 912.
> Haven't
> heard from him in quite a while, and I'm sure curious as to how things
> are
> going for him. I'm in the slow process of building a 2110 cc VW with
> redrive for my "in process " Mk III, but it's still a long way from
> competion. I hope by Christmas. The machine shop should have the
> crank
> ready by tomorrow, then to the balancing shop. Isn't it something
> how
> estimates keep getting revised upward ?? My buddy with the Titan has
> settled on the SVS 1400 engine for his Tornado. I hope I got that
> right.
> It's the Czech built engine. He's downloaded a lot of info on it and
> it
> looks real good. Welcome to the list. It's a great group.
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Joeljon2(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Brealing in a 447 |
Just learned how to start my new 447. Book gives poop for a one-hour
schedule for break-in at various RPM's. Looks like especially on wide-open
segments you would encounter over-heating (don't want to risk seizure). Is
there a maximum outside air temerature beyond which the break-in should be
done? Should it ALL be done at the same time or can it be done in segments ?
What would happen if I did't go through all that stuff? The engine runs so
beautifully, i.e., what does the beak-in accomplish?
joeljon2(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu> |
A friend recently related to me a first flight FS2 scare that
he witnessed.
The pilot had completed USUA training in Quicksilvers, bought a completed
FS2, and was strongly advised to get good and comfy in Quicks before
flyng the FS2. He did some of this, not sure how much. He took off in
the FS2 from his small private strip, planning on figuring it out up
high, then making approaches and landings at Lodi where the runway is
amply big enf to allow some room for learning (aka error).
On approach to Lodi things were fine but he landed fast, perhaps from
typical advice to "just fly it down" to a wheel landing. Once on the
ground, but still kinda fast, a light puff picked up one wing, starting
him to skid up on one wheel, and the plane careened off the runway, and by
dumb luck right onto the diagonal crossing runway. That's the good news.
The bad news: this diagonal runway ends right after it crosses the main
runway, and he was really heading for a barbed wire fence 40 feet ahead.
He gunned the engine (gulp), and cleared the barbed fence by at least
3/4 inch(!). That's the good news. The bad news: next there were power
lines just 50 feet ahead. He pushed the nose back down, cleared the power
lines, and somehow managed not to cram it into the dirt underneath them.
I'm sure that's about the most exciting 90 feet of earth this guy has
ever traversed!
A totally seperate incident, which i mentioned recently, related to a first
flight on an R&D piped FS2, did serious damage to the plane because the
pilot progressed to high speed taxi testing before he should have, and as
well, at a field too narrow to allow for small error. This pilot is a
very experienced UL pilot, but was just unfamiliar with the FS and the
peakiness of an R&D piped engine. He too, was planning on just one high
speed taxi and then launching so-as to fly (and learn up high), and get
over to a bigger field to figure out approaches and landings.
Aside from a hair-raising story (or 2), this illustrates why I think it
is wise to become pretty comfy with high speed taxiing before doing
whatever next step you call it for first flying. In high speed taxiing,
you MUST remember the throttle will either make it fly or keep you
on the ground. Do it at a field big enf, and quiet enf that you can
do it in a calm, professional manner. We aren't supposed to be wrecking
these things ...that's just a reputation ULs started out with.
On the little thread about Experience and Judgement, you've probably
heard the jingle:
Good judgment comes from experience, and a lot of that comes from bad
judgment.
My list quota for the day, i'm sure.... :) -Ben Ransom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank_R_Reynen(at)notes.seagate.com |
Hi all,
I looked at the SVS-1400 specs and have the following conclusions:
76 HP(calculated from the published dyno sheet) not 80 HP as stated.
Belt drive reduction is cheaper, much less reliable and requires more HP
and will deliver less engine torque to the propellor shaft than a gearbox.
Fixed spark advance @18 degr coupled with only two cylinders will increase
idle RPM and low speed vibration .
As usual, even at these prices you get what you pay for.
Frank (want 4-cycle)ReynenMKIII@471 hrs
http://www.webcom.com/reynen
Please respond to kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Larry, Please keep us updated on your VW installation and your friends
SVS 1400 install. I am very interested in the SVS 1400 for my MKIII,
$7000 I may be able to convince my wife of spending, $9000 +, no way.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Geoff Thistlethwaite" <geoffthis(at)WORLDNET.ATT.NET> |
| Subject: | ?'s from Jeff in Oviedo |
1. Polytone over epoxy enamel? don't know
2. Blunt protrusions - I used cotton first aid tape and covered any
protusion that MIGHT wear on the fabric
3. fabric rivits shouldn't weaken the ribs
4. rib stitching - a LOT more work for not that much gain in strength.
5. laquer thinner ok, mek ok, acetone ok
Geoff Thistlethwaite
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Crawford II" <JCRAWFOR(at)us.oracle.com> |
--=_ORCL_23817461_0_0
Dick,
I am considering a Kolb and have leaned toward the Firestar line.
You mentioned that the Firefly you tested handles better than your
FirestarII. How so? Does it have better slow-speed characteristics,
including a more forgiving stall?
I have a PPSEL ticket so being stricly UL is not my biggest concern.
I also like the extra space in the FSII just in case I may want
to carry a passenger or use it for camping gear etc. But my primary goal
is a low-and-slow bird that can land on a dime yet last more than
100 hours. Thus, I am willing to give up the extra space if the Firefly
is superior in the other areas. Should I consider the Firefly?
Thanks,
John Crawford
--=_ORCL_23817461_0_0
Date: 10 Sep 98 19:07:58
From:Frcole(at)aol.com
To:Kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Subject:Kolb-List: Comparison
Reply-to:UNX09.US.ORACLE.COM:kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Return-Path:
Sender:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
I test flew a Firefly this evening. My very first action trying to taxi from
the concrete hanger floor to the grass put me on its nose as those little
biddy plastic wheels could not climb over the hump. Great start! Taxi was
wobbly as the gear seemingly flexed a lot and felt like it was further aft
than my FS2. By the way I am 6ft 2 in and could not wear a helmet as it
jammed me into the underside of the wing gap seal. Even without it I had to
recline a little more than I am used to. On the runway the acceleration from
the 447 was fantastic and felt greater than my own ship. In the air it
climbed great, was light on all controls especially the rudder. It flew much
nicer than my FS2. Biggest problem was having just a waist strap had me
gripping the tubing and banking very shallowly. No real stall just bob up
and
down and an easy landing at 50 to 55 indicated. Absolutely a great flying
plane, it just needs big wheels and shoulder harness. I want one,
Dick C
--=_ORCL_23817461_0_0--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net> |
>
>Hi all,
>I looked at the SVS-1400 specs and have the following conclusions:
>76 HP(calculated from the published dyno sheet) not 80 HP as stated.
>Belt drive reduction is cheaper, much less reliable and requires more HP
>and will deliver less engine torque to the propellor shaft than a gearbox.
>Fixed spark advance @18 degr coupled with only two cylinders will increase
>idle RPM and low speed vibration .
>As usual, even at these prices you get what you pay for.
>
>Frank (want 4-cycle)ReynenMKIII@471 hrs
Tell us more about how belts are unreliable and give less torque. In one
summer 3 of my friends had to rebuild their gearboxes. A couple more in the
following years. My belts are doing fine.
Unless the belts are slipping there should be as much torque either with
gears or belts. Belts are a bit harder to turn but not any amount worth
worrying about. Belts are easy to inspect, Gears are heavy and need oil and
good seals. Belts are lighter,quieter and smoother. There are advantages to
both systems.
Woody
Some men are able to stumble over the truth but are able to pick
themselves up and keep walking as if nothing had happened. (Churchill)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Brealing in a 447 |
| From: | ul15rhb(at)JUNO.COM (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Joel,
One thing we can all agree on in this group is that a Rotax break-in is
absolutely necessary. It's an hour long procedure and you need to follow
it to the letter. If you interrupt any segment of this procedure, then
you must start all over from the beginning. If you want reliability from
your engine then you want to do all you can to provide that assurance.
The break-in will slowly seat the rings for good performance. Even after
you put in new rings again, you will have to go through this procedure.
This is a part of ultralight flying and I would accept at full value what
you have to do to get into the air safely. The outside temperature should
probably under 80 degrees. Get a nylon auto tow rope, wrap it around the
tailwheel rod and the other end around the front tire of your car where
it meets the ground. This works fine.
Ralph Burlingame
Original FireStar 400+ hrs
>
>Just learned how to start my new 447. Book gives poop for a one-hour
>schedule for break-in at various RPM's. Looks like especially on
>wide-open segments you would encounter over-heating (don't want to risk
>seizure). Is there a maximum outside air temerature beyond which the
>break-in should be done? Should it ALL be done at the same time or can
it be >done in segments ? What would happen if I did't go through all
that stuff? The engine runs so beautifully, i.e., what does the beak-in
accomplish? >joeljon2(at)aol.com
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Thomas L. King" <kingdome(at)tcac.net> |
>
>Hi all,
>I looked at the SVS-1400 specs and have the following conclusions:
>76 HP(calculated from the published dyno sheet) not 80 HP as stated.
>Belt drive reduction is cheaper, much less reliable and requires more HP
>and will deliver less engine torque to the propellor shaft than a gearbox.
>Fixed spark advance @18 degr coupled with only two cylinders will increase
>idle RPM and low speed vibration .
>As usual, even at these prices you get what you pay for.
>
>Frank (want 4-cycle)ReynenMKIII@471 hrs
>http://www.webcom.com/reynen
Belt drive is cheaper. True.
Belt drive is much less reliable--Also true, if it is not properly installed
and maintained. Harley-Davidson motorcycles have made 100K miles on a
single belt when properly installed and maintained. They have also thrown
the belt in less than 5K miles when the pulleys were as much as 4
thousandths out of alignment.
Also, why do Harly's use belt drive? it is cheaper, just as reliable, and
transmits more power to the rubber.
As to the spark advance.........where do you get the info that the spark is
fixed at 18 degr btdc? What that info tells me is that the static spark is
set (with the engine off) at 18 degr btdc. When running, the centrifugal
(or computerized) advance takes over and adjusts the spark even further
btdc. I have not seen any engine manufactured in the last 40 years that did
not have some scheme to advance the spark after the engine was running.
As to smooth idle---- how much flying do you do at idle.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not in love with the SVS-1400, it's just that if
you are going to trash the engine, do it for the right reasons.
ENOUGH SOAPBOX already!!!
Tom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mefine1(at)JUNO.COM (Mick Fine) |
writes:
>
>...Pressurize the
>bottle to about 75 psi, and it will blow oil into the header like mad.
....
>
I changed the subject line of this thread, hope nobody minds.
A local guy with a 503 on (yes) a Weedhopper has a great smoker. He uses
a small (maybe half-gallon?) pump-up plastic sprayer like what you'd use
on your tomato plants. I believe he has the "injector" in the "can" of
the muffler and thus, has less internal pressure to overcome. Apparently,
the exhaust gas is still plenty hot as it really "lays a fog!" No problem
with loss of pressure either.
-Mick Fine
Tulsa, Oklahoma
http://www.angelfire.com/ok/froghair
Green Country Ultralight Flyer's Organization (UFO)
http://www.angelfire.com/ok/gcufo
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MitchMnD(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Mid Eastern Regional Fly In |
I am planning to be at the MERFI at Marion OH tomorrow AM. I will be pleased
to meet any Kolbers from that area at 1200 Hrs in front of the EAA display. I
have completed three of Kolb's planes but am always ready to swap ideas with
fellow builders. I'll be the guy with a white Kolb hat, 150 Lbs, close-
cropped white beard. See Ya There ! Duane Mitchell (Tallahassee FL).
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Starting out |
| From: | mefine1(at)JUNO.COM (Mick Fine) |
writes:
>
>.....it is wise to become pretty comfy with high speed
>taxiing before doing
>whatever next step you call it for first flying. ...
Ben stated it better than I've ever been able to. I'm going on vacation
for a week and don't have time to carry the flag FOR crowhopping during
this round but by all means, lets argue this one again and again and
again........ :-)
-Mick Fine
Tulsa, Oklahoma
http://www.angelfire.com/ok/froghair
Green Country Ultralight Flyer's Organization (UFO)
http://www.angelfire.com/ok/gcufo
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)telepath.com> |
> I don't know if this is true or not. But I saw in a magazine (I don't
> remember which one)
> Suzuki snowmobile engines will work with the normal gear box for a rotax
> engine.
>
> If this is so, it would be alot cheaper to go with suzuki
What sort of HP and torque curves accompany these engines?
Probably pretty spikey (is that a word?).
J. Baker
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)telepath.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Brealing in a 447 |
> One thing we can all agree on in this group is that a Rotax break-in is
> absolutely necessary. It's an hour long procedure and you need to follow
> it to the letter. If you interrupt any segment of this procedure, then
> you must start all over from the beginning.
This has always seemed to me to be advice from Rotax that made
no sense. And here's why. First a pointer to a Web page...
http://www.cessna.org/breakin.html
http://www.uneaqdesigns.com/civic/others/breakin.html
Sure these are about four stroke engines but what they say applies
to all mechanisms where a seal is to be created while compressing
a working fluid....air compressors, fluid pumps, etc
Engine break-in is a finite thing. Some take longer (for metallurgical
reasons), some less. With a four stroke you can tell when you're
just about there when oil consumption decreases to a small but
still measurable amount. If I ever ran across a four stroke engine
that didn't use some oil I'd be leery of accelerated ring and cylinder
wear. Anyway....just how do you know when a two-stroke is broken-
in unless it's on a dyno and you can see steady (and very small at
that) power increases? You have nothing other than the
temperature of the engine, assuming you can establish a "normal"
baseline to begin with. Can't use oil consumption as it's total loss.
So why all the emphasis on "starting over from scratch" when all
that is needed is load (cylinder pressure to force rings to cylinder
walls) and adequate cooling air or liquid. I've got a University of
Michigan Engineering Press book that details metal to metal wear-
in and it agrees closely with the above Cessna page......high
manifold pressure (that is, large throttle openings creating an
appropriate load) seat the rings. Whether it's done in 10 minute,
10 hour, or 10 day increments is of no consequence except in
relation to correct temperature management. That's what it takes
to seat the rings and no amount of backtracking on an arbitrary
schedule will seat them any faster or any slower (unless, of course
you baby the engine and don't apply appropriate load).
> If you want reliability from
> your engine then you want to do all you can to provide that assurance.
> The break-in will slowly seat the rings for good performance. Even after
> you put in new rings again, you will have to go through this procedure.
> This is a part of ultralight flying and I would accept at full value what
> you have to do to get into the air safely.
If using this schedule makes you feel better about the process, by
all means.....
Personally, I crank 'em up for about 5 minutes to verify correct
operation, no leaks, everything works and then go fly to apply the
loading (high MAP) while watching the temps closely.
J. Baker
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Good day, Bad day |
Hi Group: Well, some days you soar with the eagles, then get slapped
down to run with the turkeys. Guess that's to keep us humble or something.
I bought a forged, counterweighted 82 mm crankshaft for my engine, and it
came with 8 dowel pins pressed in, to index it to the VW flywheel. Aero
Kinetics provides a special drive plate for their re-drive that requires
four 3/8 - 24 holes to be drilled + tapped in the flywheel end. Being
bright and creative, I told the machine shop to pull 4 of the dowel pins,
leave the other 4, including the offset one for indexing, drill the drive
plate for those and drill and tap the others. That way, when I have it
balanced, it'll already be indexed, and we're off and running. Fine. You
Bet. Anyway, this morning I raced off to San Bernardino for the
great hang gliding lesson. Wonderful, but totally different from the
para-glider lesson 2 weeks ago. Absolutely great experience. So, hit the
freeway for home all pumped up and excited, and went to pick up Crank. The
man pulled 4 pins, drilled and tapped 4 holes. $l50.00 ! ! ! ! It was a
jolting end to a great day. Yes, I'm P.O.ed. A thought for VW
builders - I had originally decided to go to a 2180 cc engine. 82 mm
stroke, X 92 mm bore. Very popular. Maybe even go bigger. No more
weight, right ?? Well, 3 different dune buggy shops independently told me
not to do it. Apparently more stroke will cause extreme rod angles with
attendant problems. Large bore cylinders start with the 90.5 mm bore.
Bigger - i.e. the 92 - are bored out 90.5's and have correspondingly
thinner walls. Less stability, more leakage, poorer cooling, etc. A call
to SCAT confirmed this, so I took all their advice. You can see the
difference, and now I'm glad I listened. I know this
has been beat to death, but a friend of mine made a suggestion about the
tail-wheels, after having a chuckle at mine. Why not use a roller blade
wheel ?? Small, light, strong, ball bearing - - - -
Big Lar.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | john hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Good day, Bad day |
Larry Bourne wrote:
>
> I know this
> has been beat to death, but a friend of mine made a suggestion about the
> tail-wheels, after having a chuckle at mine. Why not use a roller blade
> wheel ?? Small, light, strong, ball bearing - - - -
> Big Lar.
>
>
Hey Big Lar:
Don't laugh. The 1998 OSH Grand Champion Lt Plane, built and flown to OSH from
Wetumpka, Alabama, by Dan Horton, uses a roller blade wheel. Worked fine until
he
had to do some high speed taxiing for some distance at an airport in Illinois.
The small diameter wheel got hot and melted the bearing out of the wheel. He
pulled the Early Bird Jenny off the taxiway so the Jumbo Jet could get around him,
went to the sports shop, got another wheel, came back put it on and flew on to
OSH.
john h
PS: Waiting for the sun to come up so can fly to Clanton, Al, for monthly flyin
breakfast. Flying is going to get good now, the air is cooling off and that makes
the plane fly better and the engine run better.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | William Weber <bweber2(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Sea Foam Source |
Henry Wortman wrote:
> >
> > So how do I use it with an inverted engine?
> >
> >
> William:
> On my inverted 503, I removed the exhaust system and injected (as I
> remember) about 13 cc of seafoam directly into the top of each cylinder.
> Then by turning the prop it effectively produced a hydraulic lock. By
> holding pressure on the prop the seafoam was forced around and by the
> rings. You have the added advantage that you can examine the rings,
> piston and head. I used a dental mirror to get a good look inside. I
> agree with Ralph, works great.
>
Best idea I've seen yet! Thanks.
--
***********************************************
* Bill Weber * Keep *
* Voiceboard Corp * the shiny *
* Simi Valley, CA * side up *
***********************************************
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <bransom(at)ucdavis.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Brealing in a 447 |
>
>Just learned how to start my new 447. Book gives poop for a one-hour
>schedule for break-in at various RPM's. Looks like especially on wide-open
>segments you would encounter over-heating (don't want to risk seizure). Is
>there a maximum outside air temerature beyond which the break-in should be
>done? Should it ALL be done at the same time or can it be done in segments ?
>What would happen if I did't go through all that stuff? The engine runs so
>beautifully, i.e., what does the beak-in accomplish?
>joeljon2(at)aol.com
Joel,
Why the heck *wouldn't* you do a break-in? Two stroke engines are known
for their exact requirements to avoid problems. I see absolutely no reason
to avoid this first hour of relationship. How do you *know* it runs so
beautifully? Are you one of those guys who got married after the first
date?! :-) Really, your Rotax will not always look so pretty the next
morning. Spend the hour so down the road you can at least feel you did
your part of the relationship. Just like with women, cut corners with
your dear airplane, and you will seriously regret it later.
BTW, on my beloved Rotax, after doing the break-in I taxied about 400 yards
down the taxi way where the engine simply quit on me. But, three years later
and we are still together ...sort of a love-hate thing, but we mostly treat
each other right and get along pretty well considering what we ask of each
other.
Good luck to you and yours.
-Ben
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "CHRISTOPHER DAVIS" <cdavis2(at)capecod.net> |
Hey guys after landing and finding my original kolb tail wheel gone i stole
my sons "worn out" in line skate wheels , almost 200hrs later I still have
4spares! Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: rick106(at)JUNO.COM <rick106(at)JUNO.COM>
Date: Friday, September 11, 1998 2:23 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: tail wheel
>
>thanks I will go down to my local hardware store and look didn't think
>about that ,thanks
>
>Rick Libersat
>
>writes:
>>
>>
>>go to a hardware store & look, I found a 1"1/2 wide wheel that works
>>great.
>>
>>Note: so far all I have done is taxi on this wheel with my twinstar.
>>speeds
>>up to 35 mph.
>>
>>This is at about take off speed for a twinstar
>>
>>Mark Hansen
>>
>>> ----------
>>> From: Jim Baker[SMTP:jlbaker(at)telepath.com]
>>> Reply To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>>> Sent: Thursday, September 10, 1998 5:08 PM
>>> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>>> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: tail wheel
>>>
>>>
>>> > >I would like to know if ,some of the group has changed their tail
>>> > >wheel,an it so what did you go to ?
>>> > >the tail wheel on my M III is the little skinny one ,when it is
>>on soft
>>> > >sod it sinks in the ground .
>>> >
>>> > Sorrell (Hyperlight, Hyperbipe, etc.) make a tail wheel
>>assembly
>>> > that will bolt right up to the Kolb MKIII bracket. I love mine. It
>>is
>>> twice
>>> > as wide, and sits a little lower.
>>> > Richard Pike
>>>
>>>
>>> Often thought that I'd like to try a snowmobile bogey wheel as a
>>> replacement. No wider than the original but some come with ball
>>> bearings and lots of choices in styles...plastic hub, metal hub,
>>> colored plastic hubs......
>>>
>>> Dennis Kirk Snowmobile catalog has a bunch.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> J. Baker
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Russell Duffy" <rv8(at)mindspring.com> |
(I'm sending this again just in case you didn't get it the first time. My
outgoing mail has been misbehaving recently. Sometimes, I think the proper turm
for my outbox is the bit-bucket :-) I didn't want you to think I was ignoring
your request.)
>Please if it is not to much trouble I sure would like to see the pic.
>Do you remember if the alum. rod on the tail will work with the assembly
>that is on the KOLB.
Rick,
The pictures are no problem, but I'm not sure how to get them to you. I see
you're using Juno, and I believe they don't allow attachments (?). Also, I
assume that since you're using Juno, you probably don't have access to the web.
So, if you do have web access, let me know, and I'll post the pictures on my
site for you. If not, leave me a snail-mail address and I'll send them to you
that way. All my pictures are in digital form, so they'll arrive on floppies or
a CD.
(From memory), the SS tailrod is 3/4" aluminum, and the hole in the wheel
assembly is 5/8". Fortunately, the tailwheel housing is very thick, so you
still have plenty of material left when you bore the hole out to 3/4".
Alternately, I suppose you could have the rod turned down to 5/8" but that would
be more of a compromise of strength I think.
Let me know how you want the pictures.
Rusty
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Christensen" <spectruminternational(at)email.msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: need a Mark III ride |
Hi Erich:
I have a MKIII located at Chino Airport. Right now, I'm repairing a bent
landing gear; should be back flying by mid October. I'm still flying off
the 40 hours, which will require several more weeks, so can't take anyone up
as yet. If you are patient, I'll be pleased to give you a demo. ride early
next year. Where do you live??
Ron Christensen
Placentia, (Orange County) CA
Phone: 714/996-1999
FAX: 714/996-1993
>Im a new pilot considering purchase of a Mark III for further training to
>BFI status. Like the Kolb because of easy breakdown and setup from
>trailer. Problem: Dont want to buy one without having actually flown in
>one. Is there anyone out there in my neck of the woods that I could hook
>up with to get a ride in one? Willing to pay a reasonable price for the
>service.
>
>Thanks for your consideration. Im located in southern california.
>
>Erich Weaver
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Leoniron(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Mid Eastern Regional Fly In |
Duane,
Hope you are having a great time in Ohio
I am in Atlanta helping with the grandchildren
Left Leon in Tall to take care of the Quincy Kolb air force
We are finally on the Kolb mailing list
Have a safe trip back
Lois
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ul15rhb(at)JUNO.COM (Ralph H Burlingame) |
I took my 447 powered Original FireStar for a 76 mile ride today. Before
starting out I wanted to check the EGT temps as I said I would. With all
things being the same when I read the 1280 EGT last weekend, I added
Seafoam to each cylinder and ran it up. The numbers came up like this:
6500 rpm, EGT 1250, outside temp 71 deg. This isn't much different than
before. I re-pitched the prop so the max rpm was 6000 during climbout
where the EGT read 1200. On the way to our destination, I cruised at 58
mph at 5100 rpm. The EGT varied between 1125 and 1175 deg. The 377 would
have to maintain 5700 rpm to cruise at this speed. Fuel consumption was
about the same as the 377 with the reduced throttle setting. The 447 on
an Original FireStar really gives some nice performance and I'm pleased
with it. Summarizing, I don't think the Seafoam had anything to do with
lowering the EGT temps, re-pitching the prop had everything to do with
it.
As it turned out, the field that we flew into had an RV fly-in today. We
were welcomed to a nice pork roast dinner and saw some real performers.
Nice surprise to very pleasant day here in Minnesota.
Ralph Burlingame
Original FireStar 400+ hrs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com> |
I have not seen any engine manufactured in the last 40 years that did
>not have some scheme to advance the spark after the engine was running.
>
You really do need to look inside the flywheel of the Rotax at those
little points things once in a while...they only retard with time and wear,
they don't advance. Trust me.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
?
>What would happen if I did't go through all that stuff? The engine runs so
>beautifully, i.e., what does the beak-in accomplish?
>joeljon2(at)aol.com
>
>
Don't know Rotax's specific rationale, but years ago I flew model
airplanes a lot, and the data that came with my Johnson Combat Special
explained that the metal needed to stress relieve itself from the
manufacturing process. It laid out a break-in procedure of running fast and
rich on a small prop to get it hot, but keep the load down, with cooling off
periods specified between runs. Supposedly this caused everything to align
and relax and fit better.
Whatever; I broke it in to the letter, and it ran flawless and strong.
Broke my Rotax 277 in by the book too, it also was still running
flawless with close to 600 hours when I sold it. 2nd set of rings, original
piston.
Don't do it in segments, it needs the heating/cooling cycles.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "dboll" <dboll(at)ndak.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Aluminum Fuel Tank |
> HI list members,
> > I will be going to the Phoenix area in Nov from North
> > Dakota for 4 mounths and I will be taking my Firestar with in a traile=
> r. I'm
> > looking for a good place to fly out of and keep my Kolb and trailer dur=
> ing my
> > stay. I am also building a Youngster V and will have the wing kit with
> me and
> > hope to get all four wings built this winter. Any contacts would be gre=
> at. I
> > will be at Cooperstate in Oct. so could look some of the up at that tim=
> e.
> > Thanks in advance
> >
> > don in
> > dakota
> >
> >
> >
> >
----------
>
>
> To the more experienced,
>
> I am seriously considering installing a larger aluminum tank (~20 gal) in my
> Mark III. I can weld aluminum and would like to do it myself. I need some
> help with the design (hope John Hauck is listening).
>
> This search engine stuff is great! This is an excerpt from an earlier John
> Hauck reply:
>
> "We built a 25 gal aluminum tank for my MK III. We needed that much fuel
> capacity to do my big trip with a 582 that I thought I was going to be
> using. However, it is nice to have a large fuel capacity. It allows me to
> make to X/C with one less problem, fuel.
>
> We needed cargo space for my gear so the tank went upstairs in the open
> area behind my head. This position also allowed me to have a sight gauge
> on the left bulk head that is easy to see while flying. Trying to peek
> through holes or over or between seats behind you can create difficult
> situations, like fuel starvation.
>
> My brother Jim welded up the tank from .052 5052 aluminum."
>
> I'd like to install my tank in a similar manner. I work in a chemical plant
> and really like the idea of a sight glass. We have been bitten by level
> instruments failing more than once.
>
> John if you are listening, how did you mount your tank in the upper part of
> the cage? I am assuming it must be on legs.
>
> Do you have a sump drain to check for condensate/contamination?
>
> Any special venting precautions?
>
> Any help with rough dimensions would also be appreciated. I haven't seen an
> uncovered cage and am not sure what space is available for sliding a tank
> through the cross braces. I had read where tubing on the cage had to be cut
> and riveted back with internal sleeve.
>
> I did talk to Dennis via E-mail about this. He said he would be glad to send
> some plans if he had them and I was more than welcome to come by the factory
> and see their design. It is just a little too far a walk. I did get my
> serial number today (M3-308).
>
> Any help from John or others would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
> John Bickham
> St. Francisville, LA
> Mark III Parts Owner
> M3-308
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Beauford Tuton" <beaufordw(at)WORLDNET.ATT.NET> |
Rutledge:
Sorry to be so slow with the response... Have been off the net for a few
days.
I would like to do the Jonesville thing, but cannot get away from here just
now because of work...
Hope you have a good time, and look forward to seeing you and looking at
your plane one of these days. Please do give a call if you get the chance.
I have a son working in Tallahassee and will probably get up there sooner or
later; will contact you to see if you are going to be available before I
start that way.
To answer your question, I believe the nearest UL friendly airport to be the
Wimauma Airpark, just south of Brandon, FL about 7 or 8 miles... I believe
it's on the sectional, but I don't have access to the coordinates... Skip
Staub, here on the List may know them...He may help us out. The closest
other airport to it would probably be Ellenton, X-32.
The FireFly is progressing, but slowly... I have an "old" buddy coming in
for a visit over this next weekend... He's an airplane builder with a lot of
savvy and experience... We're going to hang the wings on this monster and
get everything lined up... Think I'm going to add a tad more dihedral than
specified, based on the experiences I've read here in the list... (Gotta
measure those struts).. I figure an extra degree or so can't hurt anything
and may make it a little more stable... Am spoiled from having fooled with
some "hands-off" old airplanes... I don't want this thing to handle like a
helo...i.e. work me all the time just to keep the marble over near the
saucer... Am opposed to extra work as a matter of deeply held principle...
Further, am getting older, slower and increasingly incompetent...(not to
mention, incontinent) and plan to ensure I knowingly build nothing into this
contraption to further showcase the embarrassment invariably associated with
the accelerating onset of those unfortunate characteristics... Seems only
fair that a man oughta be able to quietly doze off and drool into the
slipstream for a few minutes here and there without paying for it bigtime at
the bottom end of a graveyard spiral... Right...? I mean, it's bad enough,
ya lose yer cigar when yer mouth sags open....Come to think of it, I wonder
if there is any reliable data on the effects of a sodden stogie going
through an IVO two blade...? All that research to date seems to have
focused rather selfishly on nuts, bolts and muffler parts... Mebbe we can
get a federal grant... after all, it's tobacco research, right...? They
bite on that one every day.... (pun...?)... bad... sorry...
Anyway, look forward to seeing you one of these days.... Thank you for the
note, Rut...
Best Regards,
Bill Tuton
still pounding on FF#76
-----Original Message-----
From: Rutledge Fuller <rut007(at)hotmail.com>
Date: Friday, September 04, 1998 9:19 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Bewildered (again) in Brandon
>
>
>"
>Hi Skip:
>I was wondering where I would end up flying this thing from ... It's
>too
>far to the farm in Georgia... I take it from your note that the good
>folks
>who run the Wimauma Airpark don't mind UL operations???
>Would enjoy meeting you, talking over the Kolb stuff and your experience
>at
>Wimauma... Also would like to take a look at your airplane...
>best regards,
>Bill Tuton
>(813) 662-2210"
>
>Bill, I copied your phone number down for when the weather clears.
>Where is the nearest ultralight friendly airport/field to your home? Do
>you have coordinates? I will be at the Jonesville fly-in at the Flying
>Ten airport. Why don't you stop in. I'm sure that you could get some
>flying time there.
>
>Rutledge Fuller
>Tallahassee, Fl.
>Haven't flown in three days
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Thomas L. King" <kingdome(at)tcac.net> |
Sat, 12 Sep 1998 22:25
You wrote:
> You really do need to look inside the flywheel of the Rotax at
those
>little points things once in a while...they only retard with time and wear,
>they don't advance. Trust me.
> Richard Pike
> MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
>
I don't know about the single point ignition Rotax, but the models with the
Ducati dual ignition DO have a spark advance. See The Proper Care & Feeding
of the Rotax Motor, Part 32 ,figure 8, by Mike Stratman. This allows
starting with less chance of kickback than would be the case if the ignition
were always set for optimum power. The smaller engines will be possible to
start (with a good healthy pull) with the ignition set for optimum power.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Arlyn Moen" <amoen(at)ndak.net> |
| Subject: | Kolb MK III For sale |
There is a kolb MK III For sale in Minot North Dakota.
It has stits cover (white), 503 rotax twin carb motor,brs chute,150 hrs
flying time.
He wants $14,000.00 for it or 12,500 without the chute or 10,000 without
chute or engine. He doesn't have internet access. His phone # is
701-839-4652.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "dboll" <dboll(at)ndak.net> |
test
----------
>
>
> To the more experienced,
>
> I am seriously considering installing a larger aluminum tank (~20 gal) in my
> Mark III. I can weld aluminum and would like to do it myself. I need some
> help with the design (hope John Hauck is listening).
>
> This search engine stuff is great! This is an excerpt from an earlier John
> Hauck reply:
>
> "We built a 25 gal aluminum tank for my MK III. We needed that much fuel
> capacity to do my big trip with a 582 that I thought I was going to be
> using. However, it is nice to have a large fuel capacity. It allows me to
> make to X/C with one less problem, fuel.
>
> We needed cargo space for my gear so the tank went upstairs in the open
> area behind my head. This position also allowed me to have a sight gauge
> on the left bulk head that is easy to see while flying. Trying to peek
> through holes or over or between seats behind you can create difficult
> situations, like fuel starvation.
>
> My brother Jim welded up the tank from .052 5052 aluminum."
>
> I'd like to install my tank in a similar manner. I work in a chemical plant
> and really like the idea of a sight glass. We have been bitten by level
> instruments failing more than once.
>
> John if you are listening, how did you mount your tank in the upper part of
> the cage? I am assuming it must be on legs.
>
> Do you have a sump drain to check for condensate/contamination?
>
> Any special venting precautions?
>
> Any help with rough dimensions would also be appreciated. I haven't seen an
> uncovered cage and am not sure what space is available for sliding a tank
> through the cross braces. I had read where tubing on the cage had to be cut
> and riveted back with internal sleeve.
>
> I did talk to Dennis via E-mail about this. He said he would be glad to send
> some plans if he had them and I was more than welcome to come by the factory
> and see their design. It is just a little too far a walk. I did get my
> serial number today (M3-308).
>
> Any help from John or others would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
> John Bickham
> St. Francisville, LA
> Mark III Parts Owner
> M3-308
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cpeterhu(at)aol.com |
Gee Bill you oughta be a writer. Are you? Pete
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | skip staub <skips(at)bhip.infi.net> |
>To answer your question, I believe the nearest UL friendly airport to be the
>Wimauma Airpark, just south of Brandon, FL about 7 or 8 miles... I believe
>it's on the sectional, but I don't have access to the coordinates... Skip
>Staub, here on the List may know them...He may help us out.
What do you mean by may help?? I'm more than happy to help! That
said, here's how I see things with respect to the privately owned Wimauma
Airpark (where I keep my Swift and UltraStar). Wimauma (FD-77) hasn't
given me any grief about the UltraStar. I don't think that there will be a
problem as long as the ultralights follow the established "rules of the
road" as set forth in the FARs. (the FBO flight instructor on the field
is reputed to not like ultralights) To date, what little ultralight traffic
that has flown into Wimauma, has had no problem. No auto gas, but 100LL is
presently $1.70/gal. Wimauma is situated just south of Brandon about 10
miles .
Ellenton Airport (X-32) is DEFINITELY NOT a choice. That airport is
private and is CLOSED to the public. I live close by and used to maintain
the field as well as operate out of there for several years. A recent
change of ownership has probably tightened the already tight restrictions
that the field has been operating under. In addition, Ellenton is a long
ways from Brandon as it is located just about 10 nm north of the
Sarasota/Bradenton International Airport (SRQ).
An alternate choice might be Airport Manatee (48X). It's an open to the
public, private sod field that has several ultralights/near
ultralights/parasails/etc. based there in addition to many GA aircraft.
Auto fuel and 100LL is available during normal working hours (except Sunday
when the pumps are closed). Airport Manatee is still convenient to Brandon
although it is about 10 miles further away than Wimauma.
I hope that we all have a chance to meet one of these days.
Regards,
Skip
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Randy & Joni Tolvstad" <tolvstad(at)nvc.net> |
Bill,
Enjoy reading your thoughts very much (still laughing about this one!! It
kinda hits home). Being new to all this UL stuff, I read this group to try
and educate myself a little. But I did stumble on something the other day
that might help you out with coordinates. If you go to most of your road
atlas or trip setup software ( I use Microsoft Automap) it will also tell
you the coordinates for any location you click on. It should work great for
your GPS (wish I had one).
Just a quick hello to Rutledge. I purchased a old BRS from him that I still
haven't got mounted on my plane (how do you spell procrastination?). Sorry
to here about the experience you witnessed with the Glasair. I agree that
there are things we are just ment to see and hopefully learn a little from.
Still had to be a very terrible experience. I do enjoy reading of your
flying experiences though.
Just curious as to how many hours you guys must have in UL flying? I have a
whopping 4 hours on my own. The weather up here must not cooperate as much
as down there. I do only fly in perfect calm weather so far. Seems that
when the wind goes down though, I only got one thing on my mind. I am worse
than a teenager on a hot date!
Keep the great letters coming and talk to you again
Randy Tolvstad
-----Original Message-----
From: Beauford Tuton <beaufordw(at)WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Date: Sunday, September 13, 1998 8:28 AM
Subject: Kolb-List: Kind Offer
>
>Rutledge:
>Sorry to be so slow with the response... Have been off the net for a few
>days.
>I would like to do the Jonesville thing, but cannot get away from here just
>now because of work...
>Hope you have a good time, and look forward to seeing you and looking at
>your plane one of these days. Please do give a call if you get the chance.
>I have a son working in Tallahassee and will probably get up there sooner
or
>later; will contact you to see if you are going to be available before I
>start that way.
>To answer your question, I believe the nearest UL friendly airport to be
the
>Wimauma Airpark, just south of Brandon, FL about 7 or 8 miles... I believe
>it's on the sectional, but I don't have access to the coordinates... Skip
>Staub, here on the List may know them...He may help us out. The closest
>other airport to it would probably be Ellenton, X-32.
>
>The FireFly is progressing, but slowly... I have an "old" buddy coming in
>for a visit over this next weekend... He's an airplane builder with a lot
of
>savvy and experience... We're going to hang the wings on this monster and
>get everything lined up... Think I'm going to add a tad more dihedral than
>specified, based on the experiences I've read here in the list... (Gotta
>measure those struts).. I figure an extra degree or so can't hurt anything
>and may make it a little more stable... Am spoiled from having fooled with
>some "hands-off" old airplanes... I don't want this thing to handle like a
>helo...i.e. work me all the time just to keep the marble over near the
>saucer... Am opposed to extra work as a matter of deeply held principle...
>Further, am getting older, slower and increasingly incompetent...(not to
>mention, incontinent) and plan to ensure I knowingly build nothing into
............
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Erich Weaver 805-683-0200 <sbaew(at)dames.com> |
| Subject: | Re: need a Mark III ride |
Autoforwarded: false
UA-content-id: 11C96AF72E00
Hop-count: 1
Ron: Thanks for the offer. It looks like Ive got a few lessons lined up
with a fellow out near Lancaster that has a Kolb modified to be very
similar to a Mark III. Ive also got a deposit down for a purchase of
one, so I cant wait very long. Ill keep your message though so I can
track you down if needed. Appreciate the help.......
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Kind Offer -Re Jonesville |
| From: | rbaker2(at)JUNO.COM (Ray L Baker) |
Bill (Beauford) Tuton
Sorry you are not going to make Jonesville next month. I was looking
forward to meeting someone almost as old and decrepit as I am and still
foolish enough to think that he can fly.
Rutledge,
I will be looking for you. I am still ground bound, flying the Ford
Ranger. Looking forward to seeing your flying machine.
Kolbers,
Anyone else out there planing to make the Jonesville fly in?
L. Ray Baker
Lake Butler, FL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Gross <rpgross(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | help 377 operators! |
Hi Rutledge,
Thanks for the info. I was asking cause mine is not doing so well. I
just hit the 50 hr mark. I flew a x-c to River Ranch FL over the Labor
day weekend. It was abt 90 miles away. I got....
45 mph at 5200 rpm
3.2 GPH (a problem??)
Top speed is 70 at 6700 RPM with a 66 inch 2 bladed IVO.
Climb is 6100 rpm at 650 FPM. cruise EGT seems low at 850 F but plug
color is perfect. No leaks found.
BTW I took my windshield off for the summer and have only 5 gals gas
with round wing struts.
Suggestions/comments anyone?
Thanks Bob...Jupiter Fl.
P.S. I have used Penzoil in the gas. Used seafoam last week. 50 hr
Inspection was perfect!!
==
August 31, 1998 - September 13, 1998
Kolb-Archive.digest.vol-aw