Kolb-Archive.digest.vol-az
October 02, 1998 - October 15, 1998
GET A SIGTRONICS INTERCOM TO INTERFACE WITH THE RADIO,MINE WORKS
FINE.FLIGHTCOM INTERCOMS DO NOT WORK WITH DELCOM RADIOS.I USE SIGTRONICS
HEADSETS ALSO.THE S-20 AND THE S-45 ARE THE BEST FOR HIGH NOISE ENVIRONMENT.
BENNY WHITEHEAD
behead(at)linknet.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Carroll " <ron.carroll(at)WORLDNET.ATT.NET> |
| Subject: | Re: Delcom 960 and Headsets |
Yes, and it works perfectly 'out of the box' with any of three different
brands of headset.
Ron Carroll
Original Firestar
-----Original Message-----
From: Jon P. Croke <joncroke(at)CompuServe.COM>
Date: Friday October 02 1998 10:29 AM
Subject: Kolb-List: Delcom 960 and Headsets
>
>Hi,
>
>Checked the archives and couldnt find what I needed, so here goes:
>
>I bought the Delcom 960 handheld radio and figured Id use it with my
>Flightcom GA headset. I purchased the patchcord that is supposed to
>connect these two.... well receive works great!...... but when I transmit I
>have to YELL just to get the faintest audio into this thing..... I tried a
>second patch cord, same result. (The headset is fine, I use it for Cessna
>training) Im guessing there is an impedance mismatch between the mike and
>Delcom circuitry..
>
>Is anyone out there using the Delcom with a 'standard' headset with good
>results?? How do you do it??
>
>Thanks
>
>Jon
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jhann Gestur Jhannsson <johann.g(at)centrum.is> |
Hi List members.
I have been flying my Firestar II this summer, mostly from a gras field.
It may not be the best grass field but it is good enough for the wheels
on the Firestar, I thought, but after only 10-12 hours earlier this
summer I had the wheel bearing brake in the right wheel. I did post this
problem of mine on the list.
I orderd new bearings from Kolb, but now after only 10 more hours, there
is a lot of play in the wheels. I am afraid to tighten it too much,
because it may cause another bearing to brake.(note: I did not thighten
too much last time, just right tension to get out the free play)
Should I make a spacer inside the rim, between two bearings, and then
thighten the nut, or should I just order new type of wheel system, such
as MATCO 6" with Hydraulic brake system, or HEGAR wheels.
I am not ready to fly my great plane when something like this is
bothering me.
I would like to hear from you list members, who have changed the wheel
from the original, what you installed, and how you like the change.
Sorry Dennis, for critizising your great plane, but this part is the
only thing I have been having problems with, on my Firestar II.
Thank you in advance,
Johann G.
ICELAND.
________________________________________________________________________________
Hi guys,
It doesn't look like I'll be flying this weekend due
to weather so maybe during the week.? I will try to share with you my 2SI
experiences and you be the judge. I bought the engine, mounted it ,broke it in
but my egts were a little too high.(1250-1290) I recieved a letter saying that
I would have to send it back for new wrist pin brgs. Did that. Took a month.
They sent it back without the carb,another month to get it back. Ran the
engine,instructor flew it twice around the pattern, landed but no spark after
that . Talked to2SI they sent a new engine,installed it and the EGT (1300+)
not good. Re-jetted and re-pitched and played around and got it to1250 max-
should be okay. The 2SI people were nice and helpful but i think they could
ship a more refined product.Now,if you want tech assistance you have to call
Jack Mccornack's outfit in Florida (Jack looks like Santa Clause ) He called
back after a few days and said he would call back in 30 min. but never did.I
am trying to remain optimistic but my patience is waning.......
John(wai
ting for weather) Bruzan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "john hauck" <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
be okay. The 2SI people were nice and helpful but i think they could
>ship a more refined product.Now,if you want tech assistance you have to
call
>Jack Mccornack's outfit in Florida (Jack looks like Santa Clause ) He
called
>back after a few days and said he would call back in 30 min. but never
did.I
>am trying to remain optimistic but my patience is waning.......
>
>
>
John(wai
>ting for weather) Bruzan
>
John:
That sounds pretty tuff trying to work out your engine problems w/2si. You
have far greater patience than I do. I would have hand carried that engine
and the one before it back to them for a prompt refund. Don't know that I
would want to experiment with an unreliable engine on a new aircraft first
time flight. Sounds like you are asking for problems.
However, I am only thinking outloud and do not know the full story. I did
lose my last airplane during initial testing to an engine related problem.
Not only did I lose an airplane that had a lot of potential for a show
plane, but I came close to getting seriously killed.
Take your time and be sure evrything is right before you take that first
plunge.
Just a friend from the Kolb List,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "john hauck" <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | TDY Til 1 Nov 98 |
Hi Gang:
I will be off the list until 1 Nov 98, or there abouts.
Don't talk about me when I am gone, now, ya here. I'll miss you guys.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)telepath.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 100 LL and Rotax 2/Strokes |
> << The stuff they put in can be any of
> several
> types of alcohol including methanol or it can be other chemicals >>
>
>
> Interesting. My understanding is that there are only two oxygenating
> agents. Alcohol and MTBE (methyl tertiary butyl ether) I was under the
> impression that MTBE is not a problem. What do you know that I don't?
There are others.
methanol
ethanol
iso propyl alcohol
ethyl tertiary butyl ether
tertiary amyl methyl ether
Most oxygenates used in gasolines are either alcohols ( Cx-O-H )
or ethers (Cx-O-Cy), and contain 1 to 6 carbons. Alcohols have
been used in gasolines since the 1930s, and MTBE was first used
in commercial gasolines in Italy in 1973, and was first used in the
US by ARCO in 1979. The relative advantages of aromatics and
oxygenates as environmentally-friendly and low toxicity octane-
enhancers are still being researched.
Both alkyl leads and oxygenates are effective at suppressing
knock, the primary reason for their addition. MTBE works by
retarding the progress of the low temperature or cool-flame
reactions, consuming radical species, particularly OH radicals and
producing isobutene. The isobutene in turn consumes additional
OH radicals and produces unreactive radicals such as allyl and
methyl allyl, as well as stable species such as allene, which resist
further oxidation
Concerning methanol, most horror stories of corrosion etc, are
derived from the use of anhydrous methanol. Corrosion of light
metals (aluminum, magnesium) was the main problem however the
addition of either 0.5% water to pure methanol, or corrosion
inhibitors to methanol-gasoline blends will prevent this.
Also, oxygenated fuels may swell or shrink some early elastomers
(seal, o-ring, etc). Most modern elastomers are immune.
J. Baker
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)telepath.com> |
| Subject: | Re: oxygenated fuels |
> Do we have any "experts" on the list in this area, or
> has anyone found a source for good information?
> John Jung
Read all about it...become your own expert.....
http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/hypertext/faq/usenet/autos/gasoline-
faq/
J. Baker
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Allan Blackburn <traderawb(at)home.com> |
Another way to look at this is that imitation is the highest from of
flattery
EZ
Had F___ built just one for his own use, I agree, but to start selling
them as his own design..No way.
--
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
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Wheel problem |
Hi Johann- I have an early FS2 about 5 years old now. The original wheels
with my kit were 6 inch wheelbarrow wheels that I could not adapt brakes to
successfully. The drum was always eccentric and grabbed. I bought 8 inch
aluminum ASUZA wheels and brakes from Wicks Aircraft and have 150 hours
without problems operating off a rough grass field. Of course I have bent the
gear legs but have had zero no wheel problems The tire is a 12 inch 2 ply
wheelbarrow unit and the setup is pretty light. A club member with a KXP had
his bearings fail on a X country but he has in excess of 400 hours.
Dick C
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Carroll " <ron.carroll(at)WORLDNET.ATT.NET> |
Is there a copyright or patent violation involved? If not, what's the beef?
Ron
-----Original Message-----
From: Allan Blackburn <traderawb(at)home.com>
Date: Friday October 02 1998 6:33 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: F______
>
>
>Another way to look at this is that imitation is the highest from of
>flattery
>
>EZ
>
>Had F___ built just one for his own use, I agree, but to start selling
>them as his own design..No way.
>
>
>--
>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
>
>x-mozilla-cpt: ;0
>x-mozilla-html: TRUE
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Carroll " <ron.carroll(at)WORLDNET.ATT.NET> |
| Subject: | Re: oxygenated fuels |
Jim, it looks like the URL is not identified properly. However, even with
it properly input I can't get through.
Ron
>Read all about it...become your own expert.....
>
>http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/hypertext/faq/usenet/autos/gasoline-
>faq/
Shouldn't it be:
http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/hypertext/faq or /usenet/autos/gasoline-faq/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net> |
>
>Is there a copyright or patent violation involved? If not, what's the beef?
>
>Ron
You just don't get it do you.
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: Wheel problem |
| From: | bobdoebler(at)juno.com (Robert L Doebler) |
writes:
>
>
Johann, I installed Hegar wheels and brakes ON MY F/S II and have never
had a problem. I did this to get away from problems with my mechanical
brakes. The mech. brakes WERE NOT FROM KOLB, so I can't comment on
theirs. However, the Hegar setup ain't cheap And boy do the Hegar
Hydraulic brakes work! They put a new meaning on a 3-point stop.
I suspect one of the reasons why bearings are going out, is due to the
changing toe in/out of the wheel under changing weight as we are landing.
This puts a high side -ways load on the bearing plus, if the wheel
flexes, this also puts undo loads on the bearings. ( IMHO), I guess
that's the disclaimer we're supposed to use. Anyway, everythings a
trade-off. I put down my $500 and my problems went away. OK, some of my
problems went away!
Bob D
>Hi List members.
>
>I have been flying my Firestar II this summer, mostly from a gras
>field.
>It may not be the best grass field but it is good enough for the
>wheels
>on the Firestar, I thought, but after only 10-12 hours earlier this
>summer I had the wheel bearing brake in the right wheel. I did post
>this
>problem of mine on the list.
>
>I orderd new bearings from Kolb, but now after only 10 more hours,
>there
>is a lot of play in the wheels. I am afraid to tighten it too much,
>because it may cause another bearing to brake.(note: I did not
>thighten
>too much last time, just right tension to get out the free play)
>Should I make a spacer inside the rim, between two bearings, and then
>thighten the nut, or should I just order new type of wheel system,
>such
>as MATCO 6" with Hydraulic brake system, or HEGAR wheels.
>I am not ready to fly my great plane when something like this is
>bothering me.
>I would like to hear from you list members, who have changed the wheel
>from the original, what you installed, and how you like the change.
>
>Sorry Dennis, for critizising your great plane, but this part is the
>only thing I have been having problems with, on my Firestar II.
>
>Thank you in advance,
>
>Johann G.
>ICELAND.
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
Hi Group: Has anyone actually weighed a 912 all up, ready to go ??
I've seen various quotations from l35 - 185 lbs. If you have the engine
equipped with starter, alternator, intake + exhaust, radiator, oil cooler,
fluids, hoses etc., what is the true life weight of the thing ?? Got into
a fairly spirited discussion recently. I figured around 175 lbs. and
darned near got shot by a true believer, who claimed 145 lbs. Wasn't sure
enough to get real spirited so eased off a bit, but I sure would like to
know for sure. Big Lar.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 100 LL and Rotax 2/Strokes |
| From: | bobdoebler(at)juno.com (Robert L Doebler) |
writes:
>
>> << The stuff they put in can be any of
>> several
>> types of alcohol including methanol or it can be other chemicals >>
>>
>>
>> Interesting. My understanding is that there are only two
>oxygenating
>> agents. Alcohol and MTBE (methyl tertiary butyl ether) I was under
>the
>> impression that MTBE is not a problem. What do you know that I
>don't?
>
>There are others.
>
>methanol
>ethanol
>iso propyl alcohol
>ethyl tertiary butyl ether
>tertiary amyl methyl ether
>
>Most oxygenates used in gasolines are either alcohols ( Cx-O-H )
>or ethers (Cx-O-Cy), and contain 1 to 6 carbons. Alcohols have
>been used in gasolines since the 1930s, and MTBE was first used
>in commercial gasolines in Italy in 1973, and was first used in the
>US by ARCO in 1979. The relative advantages of aromatics and
>oxygenates as environmentally-friendly and low toxicity octane-
>enhancers are still being researched.
>
>Both alkyl leads and oxygenates are effective at suppressing
>knock, the primary reason for their addition. MTBE works by
>retarding the progress of the low temperature or cool-flame
>reactions, consuming radical species, particularly OH radicals and
>producing isobutene. The isobutene in turn consumes additional
>OH radicals and produces unreactive radicals such as allyl and
>methyl allyl, as well as stable species such as allene, which resist
>further oxidation
>
>Concerning methanol, most horror stories of corrosion etc, are
>derived from the use of anhydrous methanol. Corrosion of light
>metals (aluminum, magnesium) was the main problem however the
>addition of either 0.5% water to pure methanol, or corrosion
>inhibitors to methanol-gasoline blends will prevent this.
>
>Also, oxygenated fuels may swell or shrink some early elastomers
>(seal, o-ring, etc). Most modern elastomers are immune.
>J. Baker
>Hey Jim, I couldn't have said it better! Of course I have no idea what
you said, let alone how to pronounce some of them big words. Just glad
someone is looking out for us little guys who just ask for $5 of
super-dooper gas, hold the water, and go fly!
little ole dumb Bob D
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wheel problem |
Johann,
Check the archives for information on wheel bearings at:
http://www.matronics.com/searching/search.html
A lot has been written in the last year. I replaced mine after about 40
hours.
John Jung
Firestar II N6163J 72 hrs
SE Wisconsin
>
>Johann Gestur Johannsson wrote:
snip...
> I orderd new bearings from Kolb, but now after only 10 more hours, there
> is a lot of play in the wheels.
snip...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike <just_in(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Kolb-List Digest: 10/01/98 |
please unsubscribe me: just_in(at)bellsouth.net
thank you
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Darren L Smalec" <smald(at)shianet.org> |
John: Read your post about 2SI, My 460 F-40 had about 35 hrs, and the front
cyl. wristpin brg. came apart. It stayed running, but not enough to keep me
up. forced landing, no problem. (Another grey hair!) Called 2SI, they said
it`s past warranty by 2 mo.. Shipped it back anyhow, they repaired it N/C,
replaced both cyl/pistons , took about 2-3 weeks. My engine wasn`t within
the recall serial #`s (earlier S/N). Maybe sender/ gauge diffrence, but I
would be cautious with your EGT running that high. anything near 1200 and I
get nervous. Watch your EGT closely when you reduce throttle, that`s when
mine peaks. I check my plugs after each day of flying.
Good Luck, Always keep those landing spots in range!
Darren Smalec- FS1
Central MI
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Darren L Smalec" <smald(at)shianet.org> |
John: I` ve had similar problems with the stock wheels. I tried using
unflanged bearings inside,(4 per wheel) with a spacer to hold them in
place, and that worked untill the steel stretched, and the bearings were
slopping in the wheel. I finally bought the asusa 6" aluminum wheels with
the tapered ROLLER bearings. No problems yet, 75 hrs later. Don`t really
like the asusa drum brakes, but are better than none, and cheap.
Darren Smalec FS1
Central Michigan
PS Hope I posted this correctly, I`m now on the digest mode & liking it !
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame) |
John and Darren,
Thanks for your posts about your 2si engines. Flying with those engines
makes you guys the real test pilots! Personally, this would take all the
fun out my flying experience if I had to constantly worry about the
engine and whether it will continue running. Eleven years ago, I went
through this with my 377 Rotax. Those engines were not proven then. Now
it's a completely different story knowing that my Rotax will get me there
and back again. Oh yes, I still keep those emergency fields in sight, as
"all" pilots should, but the experience is so much more enjoyable with
some reliability built into it. So far (knock on wood), the Rotax engines
have served me and my friends well, and at this point I wouldn't even
consider anything else. The same may be true for the 2si engines someday,
but only time will tell. In the meantime, you guys will be running the
experiment just as I did eleven years ago.
Ralph Burlingame
Original FireStar 400+ hrs
writes:
>
>John: Read your post about 2SI, My 460 F-40 had about 35 hrs, and the
>front cyl. wristpin brg. came apart. It stayed running, but not enough
to
>keep me up. forced landing, no problem. (Another grey hair!) Called 2SI,
they
>said it`s past warranty by 2 mo.. Shipped it back anyhow, they repaired
it
>N/C, replaced both cyl/pistons , took about 2-3 weeks. My engine wasn`t
>within the recall serial #`s (earlier S/N). Maybe sender/ gauge
diffrence,
>but I would be cautious with your EGT running that high. anything near
1200
>and I get nervous. Watch your EGT closely when you reduce throttle,
that`s
>when mine peaks. I check my plugs after each day of flying.
>Good Luck, Always keep those landing spots in range!
>Darren Smalec- FS1
>Central MI
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "jim hanson" <hansonjd(at)hotmail.com> |
I subscribed to KOLB because I had been interested in building a KOLB
aircraft. However, my interests have changed and I am more interested
in the "flimsier" types of ultralights. I will ask this one question
and then will offer no more non-KOLB material.
Does anyone know of other strut braced ultralights, similar to the
Weedhopper, if they are still in business and where I could find them.
You may e-mail me if you want to keep the KOLB page free of this
dribble.
Thanks in advance for any information.... Jim
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | skip staub <skips(at)bhip.infi.net> |
>>Is there a copyright or patent violation involved? If not, what's the beef?
It seems that I remember (reading) where the Wright brothers had much the
same problem with Glen Curtiss. I guess some things just never change. :)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rick106(at)juno.com |
| Subject: | Re: Kola-List: Del com 960 and Headsets |
Jon
I started out with the FLIGHT COM it did do a good job but when I flew
with a passenger
I would have to shout into the mike ,,,,So it's now on the shelf in my
shop.
Did some homework on intercoms and what my needs were now I have
COMPROMISE DUAL COM and I am very pleased with it .
Rick Liberate
writes:
>
>
>
>>
>>Hi,
>>
>>Checked the archives and couldnt find what I needed, so here goes:
>>
>>I bought the Delcom 960 handheld radio and figured Id use it with my
>>Flightcom GA headset. I purchased the patchcord that is supposed to
>>connect these two.... well receive works great!...... but when I
>transmit I
>>have to YELL just to get the faintest audio into this thing..... I
>tried a
>>second patch cord, same result. (The headset is fine, I use it for
>Cessna
>>training) Im guessing there is an impedance mismatch between the
>mike and
>>Delcom circuitry..
>>
>>Is anyone out there using the Delcom with a 'standard' headset with
>good
>>results?? How do you do it??
>>
>>Thanks
>>
>>Jon
>>
>>
>>
>>JON,
>GET A SIGTRONICS INTERCOM TO INTERFACE WITH THE RADIO,MINE WORKS
>FINE.FLIGHTCOM INTERCOMS DO NOT WORK WITH DELCOM RADIOS.I USE
>SIGTRONICS
>HEADSETS ALSO.THE S-20 AND THE S-45 ARE THE BEST FOR HIGH NOISE
>ENVIRONMENT.
>BENNY WHITEHEAD
>behead(at)linknet.net
>
>
>
>
>
ing your great plane, but this part is the
>only thing I have been having problems with, on my Firestar II.
>
>Thank you in advance,
>
>Johann G.
>ICELAND.
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net> |
flying.
>Good Luck, Always keep those landing spots in range!
>Darren Smalec- FS1
>Central MI
I hope you have installed threaded inserts into the spark plug holes.
Checking your plugs that often will tend to wear the threads down in the
aluminum head and may cause a problem later on. Do you think it is really
important to check them after every flight?
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: | dralle(at)matronics.com (Matt Dralle 925-606-1001) |
| Subject: | List Operation Survey... |
Kolb Listers,
We are finishing up week-one of the 'Kolb-List Operation Survey' with just
over a week to go. As of today, only about 15% of the Kolb-List members
have voted for their preferred list operation method. While I won't divulge
the current status of the survey, suffice to say that is it a *very* close
race. Your vote *will* make a difference.
If you havn't yet voted for your preferred method of operation for the
Kolb-List, please use your web browser to surf over to the Survey web page
and cast your vote. The Survey URL is:
http://www.matronics.com/kolb-list/survey.html
For a complete description of each of the "candidates", please review the
following URL where a detailed description is given on each method:
http://www.matronics.com/kolb-list/surveydefs.html
If have already cast your vote, thank you! If you haven't yet cast your
vote, please do so today. Let's get the voter turnout to as close to
100% as possible!
Thank you for your support,
Matt Dralle
Kolb-List Administrator
--
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: | "Ed Kiger" <edkiger(at)mwaz.com> |
Is anyone going to Copperstate?
Ed Kiger
edkiger(at)mwaz.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "dboll" <dboll(at)ndak.net> |
Hi Ed
I will be at Cooperstate Fri 2;00 at the propeller fourm , I think it is tent 2
but check the bulliten board. I 'm 50 years old ,kolb tee shirt, North Dakota
seed grower cap, big grin.Leaving Sun so will not be by the computer for messasges.
Don
----------
>
>
> Is anyone going to Copperstate?
>
> Ed Kiger
> edkiger(at)mwaz.com
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | WGrooms511(at)aol.com |
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
Gentlemen;
After reading the latest controversy about posting engine questions on this
list, I would like to risk the groups rath, and ask one about my rotax 618. I
have no other source,
and have a great deal of respect for the collective wisdome of the group, so here
goes.
My 618 has 94 hours on it, and at the advice of one of our group, I recently
invested in a water pressure guage.
For about fifteen hours it registered as I thought it should. It
would read about eight pounds at operating temperature.
Suddenly, and for the last ten hours it will not read any pressure at all, regardless
of how hot the water gets.
I have checked the guage, and it is operative. I can remove the radiator cap at
any time with no water loss.
I have also noticed a small loss of water each flight. Probably only two or three
ounces, but a loss just the same. I have heard that the 618 had problems with
the seal around the water pump. Is this my problem?
Where is the water going, and what damage can it cause?
Thanks for your responses.
W. Grooms
(__) ,---------. NOTE: The preceding message was sent via Jaek and
(oo) | :\/: _ _ \ Jon's WWW mail cow gateway. That is to say, the
/-------\/_/ : :: :: : ) person who sent this message could in fact be an
/ | MAIL|| \_ ' '`-'`-'/ anonymous prankster. Even though this message was
^^ ^^ could have been generated by anyone in the world.
Please keep this in mind. Thank you! --Jaek (smit2204) and -Jon- (stei0302)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)telepath.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wheel problem |
The problem is the ASF-0 flanged bearings are low speed, limited
load types. If you wanted to change out to a standard thrust
bearing (tapered roller) you couldn't because the OD requires
35mm and the ID 19mm. The only ID that will fit is a standard inch
bearing at 19.050mm but you can't get an OD that is less than
45.237mm. Same for OD. You'd have to go to a 15.875mm axle
(5/8") to get a match.
If you doubt the above, check out....
http://www.freewaycorp.com/bearings.htm
This is where your bearings come from..........
> A lot has been written in the last year. I replaced mine after
about 40
> hours.
> John Jung
> Firestar II N6163J 72 hrs
> SE Wisconsin
> >
> >Johann Gestur Johannsson wrote:
> snip...
> > I orderd new bearings from Kolb, but now after only 10 more hours, there
> > is a lot of play in the wheels.
> snip...
>
>
>
>
J. Baker
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bobdoebler(at)juno.com (Robert L Doebler) |
Yes Jim please post your artical on gas, I'm sure everyone would be
interested. Ps, If you've posted it before , you can send it to me.
Thanks Bob D
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wheel problem |
Hi Rick: I've got the Matco wheels + brakes too, and I'm not sure which
fitting you mean. I'm real interested in doing this right the 1st time -
don't need broken parts on airplanes. BTW, when I assembled mine, I was
told that the supplied plastic tubing wouldn't hold up + would eventually
leak. With that in mind I got new fittings, and installed steel brake
lines. Now that I think of it ( I assembled these over a year ago ), seems
like I did have a problem finding fittings that would screw into the wheel
cylinders. Also, when I flew in the Mk II with Matco brakes, had to almost
stand on the pedals to get any braking action at all, and then it wasn't
much. Has this been a problem for you ?? Big Lar.
----------
> From: rick106(at)juno.com
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Cc: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Wheel problem
> Date: Saturday, October 03, 1998 12:56 PM
>
>
> JOHANN
>
> I went with MATCO Hyd. type they work fine but if you get this type
> Matco uses a tapered hydraulic fitting on the wheel that if you don't
> know this you will get the system breaks wheel's hyd. tubing everything
> you need ......... except the tapered fittings they are EXTRA
>
> Rick Libersat
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
Yup, on Saturday. It would be interesting to get together there. Where
are you coming from ?? Anyone else ?? Where should we meet ?? When ??
Big Lar.
----------
> From: Ed Kiger <edkiger(at)mwaz.com>
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Kolb-List: Copperstate
> Date: Saturday, October 03, 1998 2:37 PM
>
>
> Is anyone going to Copperstate?
>
> Ed Kiger
> edkiger(at)mwaz.com
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "dboll" <dboll(at)ndak.net> |
HI LIST MEMBERS
I"m comming from North Dakota and will be at cooperstate most days but will be
ther Fri at the propeller fourm in tent 1 at 2;00 will have a kolb tee-shirt
on
Don from Dakota
ps leaving tomorrow early so this is my last post.
----------
>
>
> Yup, on Saturday. It would be interesting to get together there. Where
> are you coming from ?? Anyone else ?? Where should we meet ?? When ??
> Big Lar.
>
> ----------
> > From: Ed Kiger <edkiger(at)mwaz.com>
> > To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: Kolb-List: Copperstate
> > Date: Saturday, October 03, 1998 2:37 PM
> >
> >
> > Is anyone going to Copperstate?
> >
> > Ed Kiger
> > edkiger(at)mwaz.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Wheel problem |
In a message dated 10/3/98 10:05:06 PM Central Daylight Time,
larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net writes:
<<
Hi Rick: I've got the Matco wheels + brakes too, and I'm not sure which
fitting you mean. I'm real interested in doing this right the 1st time -
don't need broken parts on airplanes. BTW, when I assembled mine, I was
told that the supplied plastic tubing wouldn't hold up + would eventually
leak. With that in mind I got new fittings, and installed steel brake
lines. Now that I think of it ( I assembled these over a year ago ), seems
like I did have a problem finding fittings that would screw into the wheel
cylinders. Also, when I flew in the Mk II with Matco brakes, had to almost
stand on the pedals to get any braking action at all, and then it wasn't
much. Has this been a problem for you ?? Big Lar.
---------- >>
Hi Y'all:
I've got the MATCO wheels and hyd brakes on my Firestar. The brakes work "ok".
Really have to stand on them. This may be due to my installation not having
much mechanical advantage. I tried one of the single lever master cyclinders
mounted on the control stick but it didn't work at all. Often wondered if
mechanical brakes would have worked just as well. I've never had any trouble
with the plastic hose. Hard to find those fittings, though. MATCO has a new
style wheel cyclinder that seems to work well. John Hauck has them on his
MKIII. You might check back with him when he gets back from vacation. What am
I talking about: John's always on vacation!
Bill Griffin
P.S.: I know one guy who had Heagar brakes (not on a Kolb) and they seemed as
good or better than the MATCOs.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rick106(at)juno.com |
| Subject: | Re: Kola-List: Del com 960 and Headsets |
Jon
The word that I was trying to use is COMTRONICS ENGINEERING
and not compromise
Rick Libersat
>
>Jon
>I started out with the FLIGHT COM it did do a good job but when I
>flew with a passenger
>I would have to shout into the mike ,,,,So it's now on the shelf in my
>shop.
>Did some homework on intercoms and what my needs were now I have
>COMPROMISE DUAL COM and I am very pleased with it .
>
>Rick Liberate
> writes:
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>Hi,
>>>
>>>Checked the archives and couldnt find what I needed, so here goes:
>>>
>>>I bought the Delcom 960 handheld radio and figured Id use it with my
>>>Flightcom GA headset. I purchased the patchcord that is supposed to
>>>connect these two.... well receive works great!...... but when I
>>transmit I
>>>have to YELL just to get the faintest audio into this thing..... I
>>tried a
>>>second patch cord, same result. (The headset is fine, I use it for
>>Cessna
>>>training) Im guessing there is an impedance mismatch between the
>>mike and
>>>Delcom circuitry..
>>>
>>>Is anyone out there using the Delcom with a 'standard' headset with
>>good
>>>results?? How do you do it??
>>>
>>>Thanks
>>>
>>>Jon
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>JON,
>>GET A SIGTRONICS INTERCOM TO INTERFACE WITH THE RADIO,MINE WORKS
>>FINE.FLIGHTCOM INTERCOMS DO NOT WORK WITH DELCOM RADIOS.I USE
>>SIGTRONICS
>>HEADSETS ALSO.THE S-20 AND THE S-45 ARE THE BEST FOR HIGH NOISE
>>ENVIRONMENT.
>>BENNY WHITEHEAD
>>behead(at)linknet.net
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
tco uses a tapered hydraulic fitting on the wheel that if you
>don't
>> know this you will get the system breaks wheel's hyd. tubing
>everything
>> you need ......... except the tapered fittings they are EXTRA
>>
>> Rick Libersat
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)telepath.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wheel problem |
> I can hold the M-3 in one spot ,and even get the tail up but I am on the
> pedals so hard that it feels like the plastic line is going to pop
You'd have to have a lot of strength to burst the tube I use...and, I
suspect, any other nylon or suitable polyethelene plastic brake
line. Nylo-Seal line has a burst pressure of 2500psi. The typical
UL brake actuator piston is about 1 to 1.3 sq inches area so the
burst pressure will be darned difficult to reach. Might happen after
the tube ages a few years or it pops off an improperly installed
fitting but I wouldn't worry about it unless the tubing being used is
just totally inappropriate for low pressure hydraulic use.
J. Baker
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eugene Zimmerman <tehz(at)redrose.net> |
| Subject: | Re: F______(copies and imitations) |
>
>
>Another way to look at this is that imitation is the highest from of
>flattery
>
>EZ
>
>Had F___ built just one for his own use, I agree, but to start selling
>them as his own design..No way.
Allen,
You are right, there a is difference. I understand Dennis's outrage. I was
merely trying to point out that with products of distinction, such as Kolb
has, imitations and rip offs are not surprising, as "reprehensible" as they
may be. My comment about flattery was intended merely to help Dennis get
his blood pressure back to normal. I doubt very much that F------- will
really ever be much competition for Kolb as long as Kolb continues to offer
products of excellence, and customer satisfaction that they have been known
for. There may be copies and imitations of Kolb airplanes, but never of the
Kolb Company.
EZ
PS An airplane of a deceased company is an orphan.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | William Weber <bweber2(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Powder Coat at Home! |
The October issue of Motorcycle Consumer News has an article some of you
may find interesting. It is an evaluation of the Eastwood HotCoat
powdercoating system. The review indicates the system works well
although it recommends an electric oven for baking the parts after
spraying. Price is about $150 and comes with one 8 oz can of gloss black
powder. Additonal powder is $10 per 8 oz. The biggest drawback, of
course, is that the size of items you can coat is limited by the size of
your oven. They recommend you not use an oven also used for food because
of fumes from the chemicals. Check it out at:
http://www.eastwoodco.com/
--
***********************************************
* Bill Weber * Keep *
* Voiceboard Corp * the shiny *
* Simi Valley, CA * side up *
***********************************************
________________________________________________________________________________
Hi kolbers,
Way too windy to fly this weekend,maybe
later in the week.Iguess the reason I bought the 2SI was because it is
American made,less expensive ? and Iwould really like to see rotax get some
competition. I want this thing to work! Ilike their new 45hp liquid cooled
unit but Isure would'nt buy anything else until i see how this one pans out.
Thanks for the shim on the jet needle tip- it's good to hear of a succesful
2SI installation.
Thanks guys,
John
(done lurking,out of the Kolb closet) Bruzan
________________________________________________________________________________
A club member whose Firefly I had the pleasure of first flighting dropped one
of his wings off at my house yesterday to see if I can repair it. He was
doing touch and go's on our grass strip and dug a wheel into a soft spot or a
gopher hole and finished upside down. He was alone and had to remove the
engine to be able to right the aircraft. Damage was basically the nose cone,
prop and the left wing trashed to the outbd rib. Vertical was OK. Unless you
fly from the hard stuff those Firefly original wheels have to go.
Dick C
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | lwfuller(at)juno.com |
| Subject: | Re: Wheel problem |
Hi Big Lar
re your e-mail on the matco brakes-- I installed mine just the way the
instructions said. They work great and no leaks, plastic tubes and all
on my Mark III.
Larry Fuller N7935G
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wheel problem |
Thank you Larry, I needed that. I enjoyed meeting you at Castle AFB.
There'll be a trip to Camarillo not too far in the future - after
Copperstate + AOPA of course. Big Lar.
----------
> From: lwfuller(at)juno.com
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Wheel problem
> Date: Sunday, October 04, 1998 9:14 PM
>
>
> Hi Big Lar
> re your e-mail on the matco brakes-- I installed mine just the way the
> instructions said. They work great and no leaks, plastic tubes and all
> on my Mark III.
> Larry Fuller N7935G
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rutledge Fuller" <rut007(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Rebel without a clue! |
Dear Group:
As you may recall a few weeks past, I witnessed a pilot burn to death in
his homebuilt Glasaire on it's madien voyage. Well, for some reason, I
just happened to witness two more acts of stupidity which lead to the
destruction of one aircraft and a near miss on another.
On Thursday afternoon at Quincy, Fl. a newly built Murphy Rebel taxied
to the ramp. The pilot behind the yoke had a whooping 9 hrs total time
in any aircraft, and this one was a tailwheel. (I could end the story
here) The pilot previously attempted to high speed taxi, but was unable
to maintain proper control according to the FBO, but the pilot pointed
out that he was sure that he could fly it. On with the story--- The
Rebel backtaxied 32. I was entering a right downwind, making radio
calls the entire time. The Rebel had no radio. As a called base for
32, the Rebel taxied into position (he was pointed straight down the
runway) I now could not what this joker was doing, I slowed waiting for
him to accellerate, but he remained fixed. Being an agile aircraft, I
landed beside him, and taxied to the ramp to watch him. At the time
there were 7 other aircraft in the immediate vicinity, 3 w/o radios. The
Rebel w/o preforming any clearing turns now firewalls the throttle and
departs 32. The aircraft disappeared for about 15 minutes and reemerged
on a right base for 14 in very slow flight. The Rebels wings were
rolling left and right as an impending stall was developing. Ohh, did
you notice that he entered a base turn for 14? The active was still 32
with several aircraft in the vicinity/pattern. The Rebel just made it
to the threshold when he stalled and wiped out the landing gear. It
slid on the soft field for several hundred feet, chewing up the wooden
prop, then digging in a wingtip spinning the Rebel 180 degrees. I stood
at the ramp in disgust, and waited for the flames to emerge, that was
what I was used to. Well, fortunately there was no fire and the pilot
survived.
The FBO believes that the incident was caused by a loose nut at the
yoke! : ) Slightly used Rebel for sale.
NEXT!, Saturday afternoon at the FBO, the radio blared with some
garbled crap that noone could understand. It sounded foreign. I decided
to take a look outside to see what was going on. It was a Cessna on
final for 14, which this time was the active, but I think that this guy
just guessed and got lucky on which runway was active. He was 1/2 a
mile out on final and way way high. I even got the FBO opperator out of
his chair to watch this guy--I had that feeling. The cessna with full
flaps kept coming. He was still about 2 hundred feet high with half the
runway behind him. I waited to hear the engine rpm increase--nothing.
He continued to attemp to land. He finally touched down after the
runway, yes---I said after the runway. He immediately started sliding
heading toward the highway. He ran through a deep ditch (prop strike)
and finally came to a stop on the ashphalt road. He then taxied back
through the ditch (prop strike again) and headed toward the hard surface
runway where he ran over the runway lights and white painted tires.
After he ran over everything that was possible, he taxied to the ramp.
I was in disbelief when I saw an entire family in the cessna. The guy's
wife and two very young children (2 or 3 yrs old). I wanted to kick
that guy's ASS, and still do. The man claimed that he was from Mexico,
and flew from Miami headed to Texas. The FBO sold him fuel even though
they did not want to, and sent him on his way. He started up the motor
and taxied to the middle of the soft field and stayed there for 20
minutes. Several aircraft that use the softfield were in the pattern. I
then heard the foreign man on the radio asking if he was clear to
takeoff. Quincy is an uncontrolled airport. Long story still kind of
long, he finally departed and was never heard from again.
Get training, Get educated, Fly smart, or Get the Hell out of my
Airspace!
Rutledge (Ass Kickin' Mad) Fuller
Tallahassee, Fl.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Todd Thompson <TTHOMPS(at)dictaphone.com> |
I'd replace the cap and see what happens IF you can't find evidence of any other
leak source.
>>> 10/03 6:59 PM >>>
Gentlemen;
After reading the latest controversy about posting engine questions on this
list, I would like to risk the groups rath, and ask one about my rotax 618. I
have no other source,
and have a great deal of respect for the collective wisdome of the group, so here
goes.
My 618 has 94 hours on it, and at the advice of one of our group, I recently
invested in a water pressure guage.
For about fifteen hours it registered as I thought it should. It
would read about eight pounds at operating temperature.
Suddenly, and for the last ten hours it will not read any pressure at all, regardless
of how hot the water gets.
I have checked the guage, and it is operative. I can remove the radiator cap at
any time with no water loss.
I have also noticed a small loss of water each flight. Probably only two or three
ounces, but a loss just the same. I have heard that the 618 had problems with
the seal around the water pump. Is this my problem?
Where is the water going, and what damage can it cause?
Thanks for your responses.
W. Grooms
(__) ,---------. NOTE: The preceding message was sent via Jaek and
(oo) | :\/: _ _ \ Jon's WWW mail cow gateway. That is to say, the
/-------\/_/ : :: :: : ) person who sent this message could in fact be an
/ | MAIL|| \_ ' '`-'`-'/ anonymous prankster. Even though this message was
^^ ^^ could have been generated by anyone in the world.
Please keep this in mind. Thank you! --Jaek (smit2204) and -Jon- (stei0302)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Todd Thompson <TTHOMPS(at)dictaphone.com> |
Never knew how tough a beakin process could be. I need some help, please. I can't
figure this one out.
At idle the engine runs great and carbs are even, based on a hydro tube attached
to the vaccum nipple on each carb. Cable adjustments at the carb tops are even
and visual inspection shows the carbs to be even and resting on the idle stopped
screws. - not on the cables. At 4500 RPM's my exhaust gases are running
1050 and 1150 respectively and at 6200 - 6300 thet're even BUT only for a few
seconds and then they climb to 1200 and I have to shut down the motor. CHT
low 200's and water temps at 160 - 165 remain high but Nominal. ( At high RPM
the water temps will approach 170 so we spray water on the radiators. to keep
in check.)
My question is why the big difference in cylinder temps at midrange and why can't
I get through the break in according to the manual. The more run time I get
things seems to be getting better but I can't follow the manual to the letter.
I'm scared to death of trashing this $5K engine before I get my first flight
on it.
My last question is about the tail: The tail gets the tar beat out of it during
the breakin process. Should I be worried about this? I've got the back tied
down, of course - actually a three point tie down counting the main wheels.
Should I have the tail raised to effect a level flight configuration?
Any suggestions would be apprciated.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cavuontop(at)aol.com |
In a message dated 10/5/98 7:49:24 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
TTHOMPS(at)dictaphone.com writes:
<< Never knew how tough a beakin process could be. I need some help, please.
I can't figure this one out. >>
Todd:
I had a tough time breaking in my 582. I did it durring the summer.
The high outside temps and the lack of air flowing over the radiator brought
the temps up to 180 in 7-8 minutes. So I just went along episodically. Doing
it a few minutes at a time and them letting things cool off. Remember that
these engines come from the factory very tight. There is alot of friction and
resultant heat as things wear in. I have about three hours of running time on
mine now and the temps have stabilized. There seems to be some debate about
whether the breakin must be done all at once. I was simply unable to do it
straight through without overheating the engine. I've heard some folks say
that if you don't you have to start all over again from the beginning. I
skoke with the Folks at Lockwood, an authorized service place, and they said
it was unneccessary to start again.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu> |
On Fri, 2 Oct 1998, Ron Carroll wrote:
> Is there a copyright or patent violation involved? If not, what's the beef?
>
> Ron
E T H I C S
Ron,
Maybe you've never been robbed of anything that you worked hard for.
Besides the main point above, patent rights are worth no more than what
you can afford to spend defending them in court. This of course,
after the costs of patent searches and application to get one in
the first place. Get into litigating all this little stuff, then
also the big stuff, and you have a $175,000 Cessna 172. Still, the
main answer is ETHICS.
Sorry for dragging on with yet another post on this. I felt it necessary.
-Ben Ransom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank_R_Reynen(at)notes.seagate.com |
Dennis Souder @Kolb actually weighted a complete 912 package several months
ago and it came to about 163# on his scale.
Frank Reynen
Hi Group: Has anyone actually weighed a 912 all up, ready to go ??
I've seen various quotations from l35 - 185 lbs. If you have the engine
equipped with starter, alternator, intake + exhaust, radiator, oil cooler,
fluids, hoses etc., what is the true life weight of the thing ?? Got into
a fairly spirited discussion recently. I figured around 175 lbs. and
darned near got shot by a true believer, who claimed 145 lbs. Wasn't sure
enough to get real spirited so eased off a bit, but I sure would like to
know for sure. Big Lar.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dennis Souder <flykolb(at)epix.net> |
>
>Dennis Souder @Kolb actually weighted a complete 912 package several months
>ago and it came to about 163# on his scale.
>
>Frank Reynen
>
>
>
>
>
>Hi Group: Has anyone actually weighed a 912 all up, ready to go ??
>I've seen various quotations from l35 - 185 lbs. If you have the engine
>equipped with starter, alternator, intake + exhaust, radiator, oil cooler,
>fluids, hoses etc., what is the true life weight of the thing ?? Got into
>a fairly spirited discussion recently. I figured around 175 lbs. and
>darned near got shot by a true believer, who claimed 145 lbs. Wasn't sure
>enough to get real spirited so eased off a bit, but I sure would like to
>know for sure. Big Lar.
>
>Correct; 163 lbs is the weight of the 912 engine and all accessories with
fluids - the 912 was taken from our SlingShot and I weighed it complete with
motor mount which was 167 lb. I figured the motor mount weight about 4 lbs,
hence the 163 figure. The scales I used typically underreport the weight by
a ccouple pounds, so it is at least that much and possibly a bit more. The
bare engine weighs a bit under 130 lbs., but those accessories do pile on
the weight. This did not include the propeller.
Dennis
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank_R_Reynen(at)notes.seagate.com |
Never knew how tough a beakin process could be. I need some help, please.
I can't figure this one out.
At idle the engine runs great and carbs are even, based on a hydro tube
attached to the vaccum nipple on each carb. Cable adjustments at the carb
tops are even and visual inspection shows the carbs to be even and resting
on the idle stopped screws. - not on the cables. At 4500 RPM's my exhaust
gases are running 1050 and 1150 respectively
Try switching EGT probes to account for measurement differences.
and at 6200 - 6300 thet're even BUT only for a few seconds and then they
climb to 1200 and I have to shut down the motor. CHT low 200's and water
temps at 160 - 165 remain high but Nominal.
Your CHT's are normal.
( At high RPM the water temps will approach 170 so we spray water on the
radiators. to keep in check.)
My question is why the big difference in cylinder temps at midrange and why
can't I get through the break in according to the manual. The more run
time I get things seems to be getting better but I can't follow the manual
to the letter. I'm scared to death of trashing this $5K engine before I
get my first flight on it.
Repitch your prop for lower max.RPM say 6000 to give engine more load which
keeps EGT down.If not an adjustable prop than increase jetsize in Carbs.
Frank Reynen MKIII@479hrs
My last question is about the tail: The tail gets the tar beat out of it
during the breakin process. Should I be worried about this? I've got the
back tied down, of course - actually a three point tie down counting the
main wheels. Should I have the tail raised to effect a level flight
configuration?
Any suggestions would be apprciated.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Ransom <mlransom(at)ucdavis.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: F______, Wright/Curtis |
>It seems that I remember (reading) where the Wright brothers had much the
>same problem with Glen Curtiss. I guess some things just never change. :)
>It seems that I remember (reading) where the Wright brothers had much the
>same problem with Glen Curtiss. I guess some things just never change. :)
Wilbur spent a tremendous amount of time pursuing patent infringment cases
against Curtis, and I got the impression that it was rather depressing work
and it took *many* years to resolve. It was over the Curtis use of
ailerons, which the Wright Bros. said was too much like the wing-warping
they had a patent on. The Wrights eventually won actually, tho the
ailerons were of course superior for faster airplanes. From our
perspective now, the ailerons seem vastly different from wing warping, but
the idea of roll control was of course central to the Wright's success
(that plus many other fabulously ingenious ideas).
Dennis (and Homer), I have spend many hours in "doodle mode" trying to
figure out mods that would improve various little things on the Ultrastar.
I must say that I'm always impressed with just how hard it is to improve on
what you've done, even at the conceptual stage, while still keeping within
the same weight/strength parameters.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Stan Glumac <snap(at)sgi.net> |
please un -subscribe kolb list thank you snap(at)sgi.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Todd Thompson <TTHOMPS(at)dictaphone.com> |
>>> 10/05 1:36 PM >>>
Never knew how tough a beakin process could be. I need some help, please.
I can't figure this one out.
At idle the engine runs great and carbs are even, based on a hydro tube
attached to the vaccum nipple on each carb. Cable adjustments at the carb
tops are even and visual inspection shows the carbs to be even and resting
on the idle stopped screws. - not on the cables. At 4500 RPM's my exhaust
gases are running 1050 and 1150 respectively
Try switching EGT probes to account for measurement differences.
and at 6200 - 6300 thet're even BUT only for a few seconds and then they
climb to 1200 and I have to shut down the motor. CHT low 200's and water
temps at 160 - 165 remain high but Nominal.
Your CHT's are normal.
( At high RPM the water temps will approach 170 so we spray water on the
radiators. to keep in check.)
My question is why the big difference in cylinder temps at midrange and why
can't I get through the break in according to the manual. The more run
time I get things seems to be getting better but I can't follow the manual
to the letter. I'm scared to death of trashing this $5K engine before I
get my first flight on it.
Repitch your prop for lower max.RPM say 6000 to give engine more load which
keeps EGT down.If not an adjustable prop than increase jetsize in Carbs.
Frank Reynen MKIII@479hrs
My last question is about the tail: The tail gets the tar beat out of it
during the breakin process. Should I be worried about this? I've got the
back tied down, of course - actually a three point tie down counting the
main wheels. Should I have the tail raised to effect a level flight
configuration?
Any suggestions would be apprciated.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | penny(at)rtp.ericsson.se |
I've been very busy the last 3 months and have my Kolb mail go directly to a
separate folder. I took time today to check on Rusty's progress on the RV
and his web page is gone. So I looked in the Kolb folder for maybe a
message that he had changed addresses and noticed that the last message I
received was 8/25/98. What's up!?!?
I found a mail that indicated that there was a site that listed unsubscribed
persons. Sure enough, there I was, "User unknown". Obviously that's no
true! Does it take a single bounce to be deleted?!? Or is there a problem I
need the inform the IS dept about!
BTW, Rusty if you do now have an updated address, let me know.
Howard G. (YES this is a valid e-mail address!) Penny
RTP, NC
penny(at)rtp.ericsson.se
/* ------------------------- */
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu> |
Howard,
Rusty's page has moved to http://www.mindspring.com/~rv8/
How's your SS going?
-Ben Ransom
On Mon, 5 Oct 1998 penny(at)rtp.ericsson.se wrote:
>
> separate folder. I took time today to check on Rusty's progress on the RV
> and his web page is gone. So I looked in the Kolb folder for maybe a
> message that he had changed addresses and noticed that the last message I
> received was 8/25/98. What's up!?!?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "CHRISTOPHER DAVIS" <cdavis2(at)capecod.net> |
Dennis I have been trying to find spec on firestar KXPwith a single carb 503
,gross weight , g -loading parameters etc. It seems they are hard to come
by I dont mind chasing them down but have exausted id3eas on where to look
any help would be greatly appreciated thanks . CHRIS ,who BTW HAS 4 new
KOLB hats 4 new KOLB t-shirts and2 new KOLB video tapes THANK YOU VERY MUCH
-----Original Message-----
From: Dennis Souder <flykolb(at)epix.net>
Date: Monday, October 05, 1998 2:36 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Engines
>
>>
>>Dennis Souder @Kolb actually weighted a complete 912 package several
months
>>ago and it came to about 163# on his scale.
>>
>>Frank Reynen
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Hi Group: Has anyone actually weighed a 912 all up, ready to go ??
>>I've seen various quotations from l35 - 185 lbs. If you have the engine
>>equipped with starter, alternator, intake + exhaust, radiator, oil cooler,
>>fluids, hoses etc., what is the true life weight of the thing ?? Got into
>>a fairly spirited discussion recently. I figured around 175 lbs. and
>>darned near got shot by a true believer, who claimed 145 lbs. Wasn't sure
>>enough to get real spirited so eased off a bit, but I sure would like to
>>know for sure. Big Lar.
>>
>>Correct; 163 lbs is the weight of the 912 engine and all accessories with
>fluids - the 912 was taken from our SlingShot and I weighed it complete
with
>motor mount which was 167 lb. I figured the motor mount weight about 4
lbs,
>hence the 163 figure. The scales I used typically underreport the weight
by
>a ccouple pounds, so it is at least that much and possibly a bit more. The
>bare engine weighs a bit under 130 lbs., but those accessories do pile on
>the weight. This did not include the propeller.
>
>Dennis
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry Bidle <jbidle(at)airmail.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Firefly wheels & CG |
As a FireFly owner I agree that I believe you should opt for the larger
diameter FireStar wheels (little heavier) if your going to operate from
rougher fields.
I noticed watching the FireFly at Oshkosh that the gear legs work pretty
hard with the smaller wheels.
The jury is still out but I am interested in comments on this. Our FireFly
is a little nose heavy due to the instrument panel. Were in the CG range
but if will go on it nose pretty easy. I done it once, and my partner just
recently. (Glad we didn't fix the cone right away!.)
My partners tall, but I need an extra cushion to reach the rudder and brake
pedals. This moves the belly button (CG) forward, which makes it more
prone to go on its nose. Myself, I feel the gear needs to be moved
slightly forward must like they did later on the early FireStar KX or what
ever it was called back them.
Anybody else with some experience in the FireFly got an opinion about this.
Jerry Bidle
, you should ask for the FireStar (heavier) wheels. If you what those gear
legs work smaller wheels you woul
>
>A club member whose Firefly I had the pleasure of first flighting dropped one
>of his wings off at my house yesterday to see if I can repair it. He was
>doing touch and go's on our grass strip and dug a wheel into a soft spot or a
>gopher hole and finished upside down. He was alone and had to remove the
>engine to be able to right the aircraft. Damage was basically the nose cone,
>prop and the left wing trashed to the outbd rib. Vertical was OK. Unless
you
>fly from the hard stuff those Firefly original wheels have to go.
>Dick C
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry Bidle <jbidle(at)airmail.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Hold your horses!!! |
How do your fuel burns compare. Your RPM are different and by past post he
might be seeing less fuel burn since you may be lugging the engine. What
are you 447 operators seeing out there for fuel burn.
Jerry
>
>I'm finding that I get about the same fuel consumption on the 447 as I
>did with the 377. For the cruise that I fly, about 58 mph, the 447 will
>push it at
>5100 rpm and the 377 would do it at 5800 rpm. The burn is about 2.7
>gal/hr.
>The 700 rpm drop on the 447 gives me the savings. BTW, I pitched the IVO
>prop so I could climb out at 6100 rpm on both engines. I can now cruise
>faster, at the same rpm, than my buddy's Original 447 FireStar equipped
>with a 447, with less pitch in his IVO.
>
>Ralph Burlingame
>Original FireStar 400+ hrs
>
>
>
>On Tue, 29 Sep 1998 16:01:37 Eugene Zimmerman writes:
>>
>>>
>>>Wow, Ive started a storm and it is time to clarify some points. I
>>>wrote asking for advice about my 377's seemingly high fuel consuption
>>>and this has turned into a dicussion of pilotage???..
>>>
>>>Anyway... The airspeeds I quoted were CAS (corrected)and yes they
>>were
>>>backed up by an on-knee GPS. I had cranked in more prop pitch trying
>>>to get better specific fuel consumption for x-c flying. This resulted
>>>in 6100 RPM at WOT during climb. While cruising at 48 MPH I got 3.2
>>>GPH. Too high.
>>>
>>>I researched the list archives and found some discussion of
>>>under-revving this little 2-stroke causing high fuel consumption. I
>>>don't know if this really happens but soon I will.
>>>
>>>I just re-pitched the 66" 2 bladed IVO again and put the windshield
>>>back on. Now it revs at 6600 RPM in climb, gives 55 mph CAS at 5800
>>>RPM and hopefully a lot less fuel flow.
>>>
>>>Experienced 377 operators comments are welcome. I have the stock lea
>>>level jetting installed, and hope to get the fuel consumtion down to
>>>2.5 GPH so I can get more than 60 miles on a tank (with reserves).
>>>
>>>Cheers... Bob Gross
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>---Rutledge Fuller wrote:
>>>>
>>
>>Yep, you're right.
>>I happen to be able to change my prop pitch on the fly and soon
>>discovered
>>that the little 377 will just love to scream along at 5800 or more,
>>very
>>efficiently. Increasing pitch and lowering rpm to 4000 to 4500 will
>>cause
>>fuel consumption to go up for the same given cruise speed.
>>
>>EZ
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Lanny Fetterman <donaho(at)csrlink.net> |
Wheel bearing failure , been there done that. I wore one set out just
doing taxi tests.(I also know how to install them correctly as several
people said in the archives.) I found out that the cause was heat from my
dragging drum brakes.
Seems that if I adjusted them so they had any holding power at all, they
would drag when released.
My solution was to drill new holes in the heal break levers about one inch
inboard of the orgional holes. This gave me more throw at the break
actuation lever, I could now have full holding power and also full release.
The trade off is, the break cables are closer to your heels when you fly
but that was worth it to me to make these brakes work.
I flew last Tuesday and what a differance it makes in controlling the
airplane on the ground, when the brakes release instead of dragging, I did
not need near as much foot work on my take off or landing roll.
I am sure there are other reasons for wheel bearing failures as mentioned
in the archives. Zero to 60 mph. (never even considered that) IMHO if your
drum brakes drag you will not get much time out the bearings.
Lanny Fetterman
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Johann G." <johann.g(at)centrum.is> |
Hi list members.
I have a problem with a Rotax engine, and do not know who to ask but you
experts on the list.
I noticed on a Rotax 503 engine that I have, that there are black
streaks on the pistons side, seen from the exhaust side, did not look at
the intake side yet.
According to the CPS catalog (Proper care & ....... Part 27) these
streaks can be made by either cold seizure or over-rev- no-load rpm
situation.
My ignorant question is this. Does this piston need to be replaced or
can it be carbon cleaned or sanded down where the steaks are and still
be as good as new, or has the aluminum in the piston expanded and
deformed by the overheating?
The reason for my question is that this engine stopped on me at 500
feet, and I am trying to find out the cause for the problem.
Thanks,
Johann G. (Firestar II, 24 hours)
Iceland.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
Thank you Frank. It was good to see you and Chris again at Castle.
Big Lar.
----------
> From: Frank_R_Reynen(at)notes.seagate.com
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Engines
> Date: Monday, October 05, 1998 9:29 AM
>
>
> Dennis Souder @Kolb actually weighted a complete 912 package several
months
> ago and it came to about 163# on his scale.
>
> Frank Reynen
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rick106(at)juno.com |
Tod
I have a M/3 with a 582 with 60hr. or so when I was in the break in
stage I had a cold seizer the reason was that I had the white cup that is
in the carb. in the wrong place check your book? to cool the egt put in
one or two more deg. of pitch in your prop
I have 165 jets and the needle is on the third grove from the top of the
needle this should cool the egt down I know that it sounds strange the
more pitch the lower the temp. looks like it should be the other way
around but it is not as far as the water temp. it sounds like you are
ok. it is high cause you do not have the air going through the radiator,
if the egt temp is still high go to a 170 jet . keep in touch
Rick Libersat
writes:
>
>
>Never knew how tough a beakin process could be. I need some help,
>please. I can't figure this one out.
>
>At idle the engine runs great and carbs are even, based on a hydro
>tube attached to the vaccum nipple on each carb. Cable adjustments at
>the carb tops are even and visual inspection shows the carbs to be
>even and resting on the idle stopped screws. - not on the cables. At
>4500 RPM's my exhaust gases are running 1050 and 1150 respectively and
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rick106(at)juno.com |
| Subject: | Re: Rebel without a clue! |
Rut
If you see this guy again tell him that TEXAS is off limits to guy's like
him.
Rick Libersat
writes:
>
>
>Dear Group:
>
>As you may recall a few weeks past, I witnessed a pilot burn to death
>in
>his homebuilt Glasaire on it's madien voyage. Well, for some reason,
>I
>just happened to witness two more acts of stupidity which lead to the
>destruction of one aircraft and a near miss on another.
>
>On Thursday afternoon at Quincy, Fl. a newly built Murphy Rebel
>taxied
>to the ramp. The pilot behind the yoke had a whooping 9 hrs total
>time
>in any aircraft, and this one was a tailwheel. (I could end the story
>here) The pilot previously attempted to high speed taxi, but was
>unable
>to maintain proper control according to the FBO, but the pilot pointed
>
>out that he was sure that he could fly it. On with the story--- The
>Rebel backtaxied 32. I was entering a right downwind, making radio
>calls the entire time. The Rebel had no radio. As a called base for
>32, the Rebel taxied into position (he was pointed straight down the
>runway) I now could not what this joker was doing, I slowed waiting
>for
>him to accellerate, but he remained fixed. Being an agile aircraft, I
>
>landed beside him, and taxied to the ramp to watch him. At the time
>there were 7 other aircraft in the immediate vicinity, 3 w/o radios.
>The
>Rebel w/o preforming any clearing turns now firewalls the throttle and
>
>departs 32. The aircraft disappeared for about 15 minutes and
>reemerged
>on a right base for 14 in very slow flight. The Rebels wings were
>rolling left and right as an impending stall was developing. Ohh, did
>
>you notice that he entered a base turn for 14? The active was still
>32
>with several aircraft in the vicinity/pattern. The Rebel just made it
>
>to the threshold when he stalled and wiped out the landing gear. It
>slid on the soft field for several hundred feet, chewing up the wooden
>
>prop, then digging in a wingtip spinning the Rebel 180 degrees. I
>stood
>at the ramp in disgust, and waited for the flames to emerge, that was
>what I was used to. Well, fortunately there was no fire and the pilot
>
>survived.
>
>The FBO believes that the incident was caused by a loose nut at the
>yoke! : ) Slightly used Rebel for sale.
>
>
>NEXT!, Saturday afternoon at the FBO, the radio blared with some
>garbled crap that noone could understand. It sounded foreign. I
>decided
>to take a look outside to see what was going on. It was a Cessna on
>final for 14, which this time was the active, but I think that this
>guy
>just guessed and got lucky on which runway was active. He was 1/2 a
>mile out on final and way way high. I even got the FBO opperator out
>of
>his chair to watch this guy--I had that feeling. The cessna with full
>
>flaps kept coming. He was still about 2 hundred feet high with half
>the
>runway behind him. I waited to hear the engine rpm increase--nothing.
>
>He continued to attemp to land. He finally touched down after the
>runway, yes---I said after the runway. He immediately started sliding
>
>heading toward the highway. He ran through a deep ditch (prop strike)
>
>and finally came to a stop on the ashphalt road. He then taxied back
>through the ditch (prop strike again) and headed toward the hard
>surface
>runway where he ran over the runway lights and white painted tires.
>After he ran over everything that was possible, he taxied to the ramp.
>
>I was in disbelief when I saw an entire family in the cessna. The
>guy's
>wife and two very young children (2 or 3 yrs old). I wanted to kick
>that guy's ASS, and still do. The man claimed that he was from
>Mexico,
>and flew from Miami headed to Texas. The FBO sold him fuel even
>though
>they did not want to, and sent him on his way. He started up the
>motor
>and taxied to the middle of the soft field and stayed there for 20
>minutes. Several aircraft that use the softfield were in the pattern.
>I
>then heard the foreign man on the radio asking if he was clear to
>takeoff. Quincy is an uncontrolled airport. Long story still kind of
>
>long, he finally departed and was never heard from again.
>
>Get training, Get educated, Fly smart, or Get the Hell out of my
>Airspace!
>
>Rutledge (Ass Kickin' Mad) Fuller
>Tallahassee, Fl.
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Cold seizure |
Johann,
When the engine quit, had you just taken off and climbed to 500 feet
under full power? If so, what was the cylinder head temperature before
take off? If it wasn't at least 200 degrees, then cold seizure is
likely. In either case, if your pistons are marked, the cylinders should
come off for a close inspection of pistons and cylinders. It is
explained in the CPS catalog. My 503 had been seized at 18 hrs (before I
bought it). I had no damage to the cylinder, except some aluminum
deposited on it, and I was able to save the piston and rings with very
careful cleaning. It now has 72 more hours with no problems. So it may
be possible to save yours. Most people would replace the pistons and
rings with new because they would not have confidence in their own work.
And if the cylinders are damaged, they will need honing at least. Good
luck.
John Jung
Firestar II 503
SE Wisconsin
>
>G. wrote:
>
snip...
> My ignorant question is this. Does this piston need to be replaced or
> can it be carbon cleaned or sanded down where the steaks are and still
> be as good as new, or has the aluminum in the piston expanded and
> deformed by the overheating?
snip....
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rutledge Fuller" <rut007(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: wheel bearings |
You might be on to something. I have the flanged bearings with the disc
brakes. Have 55.5 hrs. Many,many landings including hard surface too.
One thing that I do during preflight is check the wheels by spinning
them. I also grease the heck out of them.
Rutledge Fuller
>Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 21:35:27 -0400
>To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>From: Lanny Fetterman <donaho(at)csrlink.net>
>Subject: Kolb-List: wheel bearings
>Reply-To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>
>
> Wheel bearing failure , been there done that. I wore one set out just
>doing taxi tests.(I also know how to install them correctly as several
>people said in the archives.) I found out that the cause was heat from
my
>dragging drum brakes.
> Seems that if I adjusted them so they had any holding power at all,
they
>would drag when released.
> My solution was to drill new holes in the heal break levers about one
inch
>inboard of the orgional holes. This gave me more throw at the break
>actuation lever, I could now have full holding power and also full
release.
>The trade off is, the break cables are closer to your heels when you
fly
>but that was worth it to me to make these brakes work.
> I flew last Tuesday and what a differance it makes in controlling the
>airplane on the ground, when the brakes release instead of dragging, I
did
>not need near as much foot work on my take off or landing roll.
> I am sure there are other reasons for wheel bearing failures as
mentioned
>in the archives. Zero to 60 mph. (never even considered that) IMHO if
your
>drum brakes drag you will not get much time out the bearings.
> Lanny Fetterman
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rutledge Fuller" <rut007(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rebel without a clue! |
I looked up the N-number yesterday on the net, and called the owner who
seemed somewhat concerned. Come to find out this guy just got his
license, and the guy on the phone was his instructor. Moral of the
story which is "Kolb" related is that we must fly safely and continue to
educate ourselves. If all ultralight pilots acted this way,
ultralighting would be outlawed. Once again, I can tell you another one
that happened two weeks ago. At Quincy once again, a trike showed up at
the field. The pilot was not a pilot and did not have any training. He
was bound and determined to be a pilot though, but did not want to take
the time to get proper training. I did not witness this one, but did
see all the damage. It just so happened that this trike pilot of zero
hours decided he would start the engine and taxi around. Upon starting
the motor (440 Kaw) it was stuck on full throttle. The Trike taxied
itself at high speed into a Piper Super Cruiser bending the prop,
aileron, and motor cowling. An estimated $3,000 in damage was
estimated. Actions like this at a field could cause the airport board
to consider limiting ultralight activity. We are lucky at Quincy though
because we do have many experienced and safe acting ultralighters and
the FBO knows it. (5 of which are Kolbs)
Safe flyin'
Remember that Safety is a value, not a priority.
Think about it
Rutledge Fuller
Tallahassee, Fl.
>Rut
>
>If you see this guy again tell him that TEXAS is off limits to guy's
like
>him.
>Rick Libersat
>
>
>
>
>writes:
>>
>>
>>Dear Group:
>>
>>As you may recall a few weeks past, I witnessed a pilot burn to death
>>in
>>his homebuilt Glasaire on it's madien voyage. Well, for some reason,
>>I
>>just happened to witness two more acts of stupidity which lead to the
>>destruction of one aircraft and a near miss on another.
>>
>>On Thursday afternoon at Quincy, Fl. a newly built Murphy Rebel
>>taxied
>>to the ramp. The pilot behind the yoke had a whooping 9 hrs total
>>time
>>in any aircraft, and this one was a tailwheel. (I could end the story
>>here) The pilot previously attempted to high speed taxi, but was
>>unable
>>to maintain proper control according to the FBO, but the pilot pointed
>>
>>out that he was sure that he could fly it. On with the story--- The
>>Rebel backtaxied 32. I was entering a right downwind, making radio
>>calls the entire time. The Rebel had no radio. As a called base for
>>32, the Rebel taxied into position (he was pointed straight down the
>>runway) I now could not what this joker was doing, I slowed waiting
>>for
>>him to accellerate, but he remained fixed. Being an agile aircraft, I
>>
>>landed beside him, and taxied to the ramp to watch him. At the time
>>there were 7 other aircraft in the immediate vicinity, 3 w/o radios.
>>The
>>Rebel w/o preforming any clearing turns now firewalls the throttle and
>>
>>departs 32. The aircraft disappeared for about 15 minutes and
>>reemerged
>>on a right base for 14 in very slow flight. The Rebels wings were
>>rolling left and right as an impending stall was developing. Ohh, did
>>
>>you notice that he entered a base turn for 14? The active was still
>>32
>>with several aircraft in the vicinity/pattern. The Rebel just made it
>>
>>to the threshold when he stalled and wiped out the landing gear. It
>>slid on the soft field for several hundred feet, chewing up the wooden
>>
>>prop, then digging in a wingtip spinning the Rebel 180 degrees. I
>>stood
>>at the ramp in disgust, and waited for the flames to emerge, that was
>>what I was used to. Well, fortunately there was no fire and the pilot
>>
>>survived.
>>
>>The FBO believes that the incident was caused by a loose nut at the
>>yoke! : ) Slightly used Rebel for sale.
>>
>>
>>NEXT!, Saturday afternoon at the FBO, the radio blared with some
>>garbled crap that noone could understand. It sounded foreign. I
>>decided
>>to take a look outside to see what was going on. It was a Cessna on
>>final for 14, which this time was the active, but I think that this
>>guy
>>just guessed and got lucky on which runway was active. He was 1/2 a
>>mile out on final and way way high. I even got the FBO opperator out
>>of
>>his chair to watch this guy--I had that feeling. The cessna with full
>>
>>flaps kept coming. He was still about 2 hundred feet high with half
>>the
>>runway behind him. I waited to hear the engine rpm increase--nothing.
>>
>>He continued to attemp to land. He finally touched down after the
>>runway, yes---I said after the runway. He immediately started sliding
>>
>>heading toward the highway. He ran through a deep ditch (prop strike)
>>
>>and finally came to a stop on the ashphalt road. He then taxied back
>>through the ditch (prop strike again) and headed toward the hard
>>surface
>>runway where he ran over the runway lights and white painted tires.
>>After he ran over everything that was possible, he taxied to the ramp.
>>
>>I was in disbelief when I saw an entire family in the cessna. The
>>guy's
>>wife and two very young children (2 or 3 yrs old). I wanted to kick
>>that guy's ASS, and still do. The man claimed that he was from
>>Mexico,
>>and flew from Miami headed to Texas. The FBO sold him fuel even
>>though
>>they did not want to, and sent him on his way. He started up the
>>motor
>>and taxied to the middle of the soft field and stayed there for 20
>>minutes. Several aircraft that use the softfield were in the pattern.
>>I
>>then heard the foreign man on the radio asking if he was clear to
>>takeoff. Quincy is an uncontrolled airport. Long story still kind of
>>
>>long, he finally departed and was never heard from again.
>>
>>Get training, Get educated, Fly smart, or Get the Hell out of my
>>Airspace!
>>
>>Rutledge (Ass Kickin' Mad) Fuller
>>Tallahassee, Fl.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MitchMnD(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Firefly wheels & CG |
Hello Jerry, Because my FireFly is within the Part 103 weight limit and I
only weigh ~153 pounds my CG is near the aft limit when my fuel tank is full.
I have to use a 3" thick cushion (life preserver) to reach the peddles and to
move the CG fwd. I think we are on opposite ends of the allowable limits for
our "one size fits almost all" flying machines. You may want to consider a
small weight added to the aft end of the tail tube. A little weight out there
can make a big difference in CG. Also be extra cautious when flying with a
light fuel load.
One strange thing resulting from my Wt/Bal situation is that I can't do a
straight forward low power stall. The plane refuses to drop her nose and just
continues to mush forward. I suspect she would spin if I let her fall off to
either side but I always come out of it by moving the stick forward. "Don't
try this at home."
A recent encounter with a Steerman taxi-ing out from behind a hangar onto the
same taxi strip I was on convinced me that brakes are mandatory at my home
base. I have a set of 4" wheels and a set of "5 (KX) wheels. I am
temporarily using the 5" wheels because they have brakes. I am working on
designing, building and testing etc. a brake system for the 4" wheels. The
diameter of the 5" tires are only 1" larger so I don"t think they will be much
better in a bean field or gopher hole landings. They are also about 7 Lbs
heavier with brakes.
Plane Duane in Tallahassee
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert E. Kearbey, D.D.S." <kearbey(at)cncnet.com> |
----------
> From: rick106(at)juno.com
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: 582 Breakin
> Date: Monday, October 5, 1998 9:15 PM
>
>
> Tod
>
> I have a M/3 with a 582 with 60hr. or so when I was in the break in
> stage I had a cold seizer the reason was that I had the white cup that is
> in the carb. in the wrong place check your book? to cool the egt put in
> one or two more deg. of pitch in your prop
> I have 165 jets and the needle is on the third grove from the top of the
> needle this should cool the egt down I know that it sounds strange the
> more pitch the lower the temp. looks like it should be the other way
> around but it is not as far as the water temp. it sounds like you are
> ok. it is high cause you do not have the air going through the radiator,
> if the egt temp is still high go to a 170 jet . keep in touch
>
> Rick Libersat
>
> writes:
> >
> >
> >Never knew how tough a beakin process could be. I need some help,
> >please. I can't figure this one out.
> >
> >At idle the engine runs great and carbs are even, based on a hydro
> >tube attached to the vaccum nipple on each carb. Cable adjustments at
> >the carb tops are even and visual inspection shows the carbs to be
> >even and resting on the idle stopped screws. - not on the cables. At
> >4500 RPM's my exhaust gases are running 1050 and 1150 respectively and
> >at 6200 - 6300 thet're even BUT only for a few seconds and then they
> >climb to 1200 and I have to shut down the motor. CHT low 200's and
> >water temps at 160 - 165 remain high but Nominal. ( At high RPM the
> >water temps will approach 170 so we spray water on the radiators. to
> >keep in check.)
> >
> >My question is why the big difference in cylinder temps at midrange
> >and why can't I get through the break in according to the manual. The
> >more run time I get things seems to be getting better but I can't
> >follow the manual to the letter. I'm scared to death of trashing this
> >$5K engine before I get my first flight on it.
> >
> >My last question is about the tail: The tail gets the tar beat out of
> >it during the breakin process. Should I be worried about this? I've
> >got the back tied down, of course - actually a three point tie down
> >counting the main wheels. Should I have the tail raised to effect a
> >level flight configuration?
> >
> >
> >
> >Any suggestions would be apprciated.
> > Rick,
I had the same problems when we broke in our 582. We just did the
break-in
slowly in stages. Actually did never quite finish the break-in on the
ground. I just
took it up and flew it. Had no problems because of the extra airflow. I
think one
needs to realize that on water craft ( jet skiis,etc.) they don't even have
a cht or
egt. They just run it at different power settings for a while. As far as
the tail
vibration goes, we had that problem also. That was one of reasons I quit
the
on the ground break-in. Just didn't like to see that. We know have almost
100 hours on it and it runs great. I also have had to use the third notch
of jet
needle during the summer to get things to run smooth. Seems during the
winter
I go back to the number two groove. Hope this is helpful.
Bob Kearbey
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Todd Thompson <TTHOMPS(at)dictaphone.com> |
Rick, thanks for the reply. I spoke to Green Sky on advise of Dan at Kolb. Turns
out one of my problems is that I inadvertently place the jet needle on top
of the white cup in the carb - in one carb not both so that cyl. was running cool.
This weekend I'll run the engine again and see what happens.
I can't adjust my pitch since I have a two blade Prince P-tip prop. With hindsight
I wish somebody had advised me against this decision. Having an adjustable
prop is really the way to go. Nevertheless, I think the pitch is pretty
close to where it should be since my rpms are up in the 6200 range on the ground.
Thanks for the jetting info, I'll keep it in mind. Jetting makes sense to me but
I must admit that the increase/decrease pitching of a prop always seems backwards
to me. New knowledge. Thanks. It makes better sense to me now.
Getting a Rotax engine to run right seems to be analogous to filling a bathroom
tub at a specific temperature with the drain open to some degree. You have to
balance the hot and cold water for temperature and the rate of flow has to equal
the drain so the tub won't over flow and trash your house. Right now I keep
filling the tub to the brink and the temps aren't correct!! Patience is a
virtue.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bob n <ronoy(at)shentel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Firefly wheels & CG |
I have FF#70 with the big wheels, and I operate mostly off a hard rnwy.
I looked at those toy wheels and said Noalso have heel brakes that
can't go on the "casters." Grey Baron.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry Bidle <jbidle(at)airmail.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Firefly wheels & CG |
First thing is everyone take this with a grain of salt.
If I recall right our FireFly comes out where minimum pilot weight with
zero fuel was around 150# and you would be at aft CG. Forward we can haul
the average UL pilot, 150# plus 50-100 of spuds in his lap, no problem. CG
relative to center of lift doesn't appear to be a problem, but the balance
point on the gear is my concern. Understand were nose heavy compared to
most. The present gear position seems to make it pretty easy to go on its
nose. Have to watch power, 3800-4000 RPM will push it over.
(Note my partner suggest I put a cushion behind me to reach the pedals,
that moved belly button CG forward. He also removed some weight from the
aft baggage area. Well on that flight it went over on the nose real easy.
Many thanks to whom ever invented 100 MPH tape) Threw the cushion at my
partner. Kind of reminds me of model airplanes, you pick up your pieces
and take them home. Can't have to much weight on the tail, you need to be
able to lift it at low speed on take off roll. This is where I am coming
from in that I would like to extend the gear forward just a little, not
much. Then I think it would be perfect. Again our case may be unique
since were a little heavy in the nose due to instrumentation. I want to
rerun the weight and balance to see where it comes in now since my partner
added the full enclosure. We have talked about strapping a divers weight
to the tail boom to see what it would do, I would like to get a full swivel
tail wheel. That would probably be just about the right amount. (more
weigh?) We can tell the weight impacts take off roll and stall speed.
Still climbs well. Means your fly the approach much faster. Like Dennis
says, build them light.
>
>Hello Jerry, Because my FireFly is within the Part 103 weight limit and I
>only weigh ~153 pounds my CG is near the aft limit when my fuel tank is full.
>I have to use a 3" thick cushion (life preserver) to reach the peddles and to
>move the CG fwd. I think we are on opposite ends of the allowable limits for
>our "one size fits almost all" flying machines. You may want to consider a
>small weight added to the aft end of the tail tube. A little weight out
there
>can make a big difference in CG. Also be extra cautious when flying with a
>light fuel load.
>
>One strange thing resulting from my Wt/Bal situation is that I can't do a
>straight forward low power stall. The plane refuses to drop her nose and
just
>continues to mush forward. I suspect she would spin if I let her fall off to
>either side but I always come out of it by moving the stick forward. "Don't
>try this at home."
>
>A recent encounter with a Steerman taxi-ing out from behind a hangar onto the
>same taxi strip I was on convinced me that brakes are mandatory at my home
>base. I have a set of 4" wheels and a set of "5 (KX) wheels. I am
>temporarily using the 5" wheels because they have brakes. I am working on
>designing, building and testing etc. a brake system for the 4" wheels. The
>diameter of the 5" tires are only 1" larger so I don"t think they will be
much
>better in a bean field or gopher hole landings. They are also about 7 Lbs
>heavier with brakes.
>
>Plane Duane in Tallahassee
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank_R_Reynen(at)notes.seagate.com |
Do you use an overflow bottle? from your question it sounds like you do not
have this.
Do you fill the radiator back up every time again? I would suspect the
radiator cap leaking first and an overflow could tell the difference
between this and a pumpseal failure. A pumpseal failure dumps the water
into the R/V gearshaft oil cavity (This is VERY serious requiring immediate
attention!) but you would notice a higher oil level in the little tank
after flying but since you do not mention this, I think you are loosing
coolant somewhere else. Check all hose connections. The ethylene Glycol
leaves an oily stain at the leak site.The loss of coolant keeps the
waterpressure from building up and registering on the gauge.
Frank Reynen MKIII@479hrs
Gentlemen;
After reading the latest controversy about posting engine questions on
this list, I would like to risk the groups rath, and ask one about my rotax
618. I have no other source,
and have a great deal of respect for the collective wisdome of the group,
so here goes.
My 618 has 94 hours on it, and at the advice of one of our group, I
recently invested in a water pressure guage.
For about fifteen hours it registered as I thought it should. It
would read about eight pounds at operating temperature.
Suddenly, and for the last ten hours it will not read any pressure at all,
regardless of how hot the water gets.
I have checked the guage, and it is operative. I can remove the radiator
cap at any time with no water loss.
I have also noticed a small loss of water each flight. Probably only two or
three ounces, but a loss just the same. I have heard that the 618 had
problems with the seal around the water pump. Is this my problem?
Where is the water going, and what damage can it cause?
Thanks for your responses.
W. Grooms
(__) ,---------. NOTE: The preceding message was sent via Jaek
and
(oo) | :\/: _ _ \ Jon's WWW mail cow gateway. That is to say,
the
/-------\/_/ : :: :: : ) person who sent this message could in fact be
an
/ | MAIL|| \_ ' '`-'`-'/ anonymous prankster. Even though this message
was
it
^^ ^^ could have been generated by anyone in the world.
Please keep this in mind. Thank you! --Jaek (smit2204) and -Jon-
(stei0302)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Geoff Thistlethwaite" <geoffthis(at)WORLDNET.ATT.NET> |
| Subject: | Re: oxygenated fuels |
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: oxygenated fuels
>
>>Read all about it...become your own expert.....
>
>http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/hypertext/faq/usenet/autos/gasoline-
>J. Baker
I buy all my fuel at the local airport, as they sell "auto fuel for
aviation". By law it CANNOT have any oxygenating parts pure gasoline only.
Geoff Thistlethwaite
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Geoff Thistlethwaite" <geoffthis(at)WORLDNET.ATT.NET> |
,installed it and the EGT (1300+)
>not good. Re-jetted and re-pitched and played around and got it to1250 max-
>should be okay. but my patience is waning.......
>
>
>
John(waiting for weather) Bruzan
John,
I would definitely check your egt gages, & probes for accuracy, and keep a
constant watch on the color of your spark plugs.
Geoff Thistlethwaite
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Firefly wheels & CG |
Mitch,
What is low power? Try it at idle and I bet it will break so fast that it will
suprize you.
John Jung
MitchMnD(at)aol.com wrote:
snip...
> One strange thing resulting from my Wt/Bal situation is that I can't do a
> straight forward low power stall. The plane refuses to drop her nose and just
> continues to mush forward.
snip...
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Cold seizure |
Black or brown patches of carbon are acceptable on the piston side but deep
scratches or gouges are not.
Dick C
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "A. J. Vann" <redhill(at)rose.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Thomasville Ga. Fly-In |
Rutledge of Tallahassee,
don't know if this is the correct way to reply to you, but I hope to
meet you in Thomasville this weekend. I want to fly in a two place
kolb, if someone brings one. Want to invest in one, but already bought
your Quincy Champ instead; but may get a Kolb later, after I become
"tail efficient". Will you be there Sat. AM? Got to dove hunt that PM,
but will be there both Sat. AM and Sun AM.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Firefly wheels & CG |
Jerry,
As long as you are within the CG, don't change a thing. Just learn the plane.
For one thing, you never have to let the tail come up on takeoff roll. Fly off
three wheels. You will have less problem with tipping forward and it's easier
to
maintain direstion too. Same for landing, don't let the mains touch until the tail
is low. If you hold the mains off as you slow down, the tail will lower. With my
original Firestar it was possible to touch the tail first. Just like takeoff, you
will be less likely to tip forward and have more directional control. If you were
to move the gear farther forward, you would have a plane that would have more
resistance to tipping forward, but be more likely to ground loop.
John Jung
Firestar II
SE Wisconsin
Jerry Bidle wrote:
snip...
> Can't have to much weight on the tail, you need to be
> able to lift it at low speed on take off roll. This is where I am coming
> from in that I would like to extend the gear forward just a little, not
> much. Then I think it would be perfect.
snip....
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry & Karen Cottrel" <lcottrel(at)kfalls.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Firefly wheels & CG |
the balance
> point on the gear is my concern. Understand were nose heavy compared to
> most. The present gear position seems to make it pretty easy to go on
its
> nose. Have to watch power, 3800-4000 RPM will push it over.
>
This may be a rather silly question, but you guys are keeping the stick
pulled back into your belly as far as you can until you get close to flying
speed, Aren't you?
Larry
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hansen, Mark" <MHansen(at)ConusNews.com> |
This is for people who like cold weather flying.
The Max Heater
Designed & operational for water cooled engines
in closed cockpit experimental & ultralight planes.
specs.
12 volt
3.5 amps
under 4 lbs of weight
fan motor
easy installation
one is also available for a 503 fan cooled engine.
I'm not sure but it may work on a 447 or a 377 as well
Phone (507) 367-4559
ask for Dick
Address
The Max Heater
12 Blakely Court NW
Oronoco, MN 55960
I hope I didn't over step my bounds on this.
I don't know the price, I didn't ask. (I have an
open cockpit twinstar) I just thought some of
you might like to inquire about it.
Mark Hansen
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rutledge Fuller" <rut007(at)hotmail.com> |
While flying around Quincy yesterday, my 377 Rotax quit running. I had
to land. My engine quit probably 7 or 8 times while in the pattern (3
or 4 on downwind), and I made uneventful landings on the grass strip
each time. My EGT's (1112) and CHT's (333) looked normal. My fuel
tank was full and mixed 50 to 1. My preflight showed no signs of any
problems either. Maybe it was due to me cutting off the ignition switch
: ) Had you going didn't I. I found the engine out experience to be
fun and educational. I will probably fly the pattern a little higher
from now on in case of a real failure. I was able to make the runway
shutting down on mid-downwind at 600 feet AGL. If you try this at home
please do several dry runs at idle prior to hitting the switch. You
will need to factor the wind too.
Rutledge Fuller
Tallahassee, Fl.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net> |
>I can't adjust my pitch since I have a two blade Prince P-tip prop. With
hindsight I wish somebody had advised me against this decision. Having an
adjustable prop is really the way to go. Nevertheless, I think the pitch
is pretty close to where it should be since my rpms are up in the 6200 range
on the ground.
All things considered if you are getting 6200 with a fixed pitch prop you
are at the correct pitch and you don't need an adjustable prop. Most people
once they set their adjustable pitch prop leave it. I have always found 6200
as a good rule of thumb for setting the prop. The fixed pitch wood prop will
give you better performance and probably a smoother flight. I wish I had a
wood prop. One other advantage to the composite prop is that they hold up
better to water erosion and small prop strikes.
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: | Cliff and Carolyn Stripling <striplic(at)dfw.net> |
| Subject: | Re: CG and other stuff... |
>This may be a rather silly question, but you guys are keeping the stick
>pulled back into your belly as far as you can until you get close to flying
>speed, Aren't you?
Larry and all,
I usually pick up the tail on roll pretty quickly. My MK3 CG is toward the
rear therefore I don't have the tendency to nose over on initial roll and
power up. I never firewall it from a dead stop though. In soft field
conditions, I keep the tail a little lower trying not to dig the tailwheel
into the turf. But in any event, I don't recall ever holding the stick back
that far.
Keeping the stick too far back when taking off with a passenger puts my Kolb
into a situation where it just wants to fly down the runway at a high angle
of attack not wanting to gain speed or climb out of ground effect. I level
it off and gain a little more speed then up we go. I found letting another
5 mph build up before lifting off makes all the difference.
As everyone knows, the Kolb will climb like no other plane of its type.
Here is an observation and question for us to consider. Is it best to climb
at the best "rate" of climb or the best "angle" of climb? In a Kolb the
best angle of climb is really steep. Those that say "angle" say altitude is
your best friend and you can pick a better landing spot in the case of an
engine out. The other guys say, well, that may be true, but what about an
engine out and the plane darn near loses it's flying speed before the pilot
can react and lower the nose... meaning "departure stall". I read somewhere
that the response time to an engine out is around 3 seconds. By that time a
Kolb (or any other very light plane or UL) will be in big trouble.
Something to think about when you are doing the steep "zoom" climb that is
soooooo... impressive.
This is what I think... When flying from a runway plenty (say 3K' or so)
long you will have ample altitude with best rate by the time you are half
way down to land with some possible options. ...with best angle you will
have the same and maybe more options... with more altitude of course. If
you are flying from a really short field (depending on your options to land
off the field), then altitude is "really" your friend and a steeper climb
might be better. I guess it depends on the circumstances.
I have practiced some lost power take offs (from 75 to 100 feet or so and
simulated first at altutude) and I really did lose flying speed almost
immediately. I had to react instantly to get the nose down to keep enough
flying speed to stay in the air and under control and to allow for landing
flair. Careful if you do those to have a nice warm engine and keep enough
power (not idle) to recover easily and not try it too close to the ground
and have plenty of runway in front of you. What am I saying?
Disclaimer-disclaimer!!!! Maybe you shouldn't do them at all. The last
thing I want to see is any plane with a face like a "bulldog".
That leads to the never ending discussion of whether to do engine out
landings simulated at low power... or for real - meaning - silence!
Whoooow-Boy! Not me! Not me! Not yet! Not enough experience! Pucker
time!!! When they say it is not "if" but "when"... right now, I can wait
until "when". The same could be said for the above.
Fly safe when trying to practice for emergencies so that the practice does
not actually become an emergency.
Later,
--
Cliff & Carolyn Stripling Him: Retired Pharmacist
(972)247-9821 Dallas Texas Her: Real Estate Broker - Texas
and Marble Falls Texas Both: 5th Wheel - RV - Travel
Kolb MKIII - N582CC (50.5 hrs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MitchMnD(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | FireFly Wt/Bal, Wheels |
Thanks to all for responses to my posting on this subject.
engine it has been ~3,500 RPM and this number is being reduced as reliability
and confidence increases. I'll bet one respondant was right when he said that
dropping to full idle ( 2,250 RPM ) will percipitate a full stall.
Nose heavy = nose stands: The only time I had this problem was when operating
in tall grass (~6 to 10") with my Fire Star. Stick back, take off power got
me up but taught me to consider how my wheels will roll on any field I plan to
use. I have since landed and taken off in my FireFly on similar grass areas
with no problems. Plowed ground, pea patches etc are fairly low on my list
for forced landing sites.
Three point/tail wheel landings: In my opinion three point, with flaps, stall
landings are mandatory for short fields and experienced pilots have usually
developed this highly desirable skill. Low time pilots should stick with
2.500' Ft or more runways that allow 40 MPH, main-gear-first landings at least
while getting used to a new bird. I try to balance the time spent joyriding
with time spent learning how to improve my flying skills. I want to be one of
those "experienced pilots" in case everything gets very quiet ( except for my
expletves) while I am flyng.
Duane Mitchell. Tallahassee, FL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: FireFly Wt/Bal, Wheels |
On Wed, 7 Oct 1998 MitchMnD(at)aol.com wrote:
> Thanks to all for responses to my posting on this subject.
I haven't been following this thread much, but your question makes
no sense. Stall has nothing to do with throttle setting. Stall is
a function of angle of attack. Not just in theory, i.e. I'm not just
being a picky obtuse aeronautical geek. Is there something else you
really meant to ask?
-Ben Ransom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
Rutledge,
While the experience is fresh in your mind, please answer this question: What
difference did you notice between the "idle" practice, and actual engine off? This
information could help many people to be better prepared.
John Jung
SE Wisconsin
Rutledge Fuller wrote:
snip...
>I found the engine out experience to be
>fun and educational. I will probably fly the pattern a little higher
>from now on in case of a real failure. I was able to make the runway
>shutting down on mid-downwind at 600 feet AGL. If you try this at home
>please do several dry runs at idle prior to hitting the switch.
snip...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Ransom <mlransom(at)ucdavis.edu> |
| Subject: | redrives, belt vs. gear |
Just a quick note pertaining to some discussion maybe a month ago. Here's
a URL for a web page that neatly tabulates some of the pros/cons of belt
drives. Some--I don't think it's the end-all, and they're promoting their
own system, which is gear drive. This is a place selling Subaru
conversions. The page is a graphic that might be a little slow.
http://www.eggenfellneraircraft.com/page7.html
p.s. Ben's been sniffing at some experimental kits and pointed me to this
site. Sounds like he's deciding he's going to stick with his ultralight.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Firefly wheels & CG |
>This may be a rather silly question, but you guys are keeping the stick
>pulled back into your belly as far as you can until you get close to flying
>speed, Aren't you?
>Larry
Heck no. I try to get weight off the tail wheel as soon as possible.When
I reach 35 I pull a bit more back stick and commit aviation.
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: | "Rutledge Fuller" <rut007(at)hotmail.com> |
My experience with my aircraft is as follows: Idle will bring it down
quicker than with engine off. In other words if I were to practice
simulated engine off an idle, I know that I could easily make it to the
landing sight without power. The plane handled IMHO better with the
engine off. It was very enjoyable. 3,500 RPM's is about the same speed
and altitude loss as engine off for me. I believe that this is an
invaluable test/exercise of the pilot. Notice I didn't say aircraft.
Hell, I might just start making every landing engine off. The only
reason for an engine is to gain altitude. I will let the group know
when I pull the switch 10 miles out. (Just Kiddin') If we as pilots
educate ourselves and train for an engine failure, I think we would
probably change the way that we currently fly. Just about every
ultralight that I fly with shoots a very wide pattern at low altitude.
I bet if they shut down they would be in the trees. They probably think
that they are flying safe, but I wonder. If as a pilot you are to
frightened to shut it down, then at least perform idle to 3,500 rpm
simulated engine out's. Remember that I shut down at 600ft AGL (Actual
Ground level) mid-downwind. I kept at least 50 mph on the speedo. In
turns (base to final) I speed up between 55-70mph depending on bank
angle and extra altitude I needed to loose. Touchdowns were a bit
clumsy at first, because I wanted to stick it. Once relaxed, I was able
to come in and actually flair and kiss the ground with the mains. On
one landing it freaked me out because I thought I was still flying--I
didn't feel the wheels touch. I bet that will never happen again. Good
luck and remember don't just go up and kill the engine.. Do several
idle attempts first. Setup to land midfield, and start turning it off
on final. Make sure that you are a little high the first time. Get
adjusted to that then work on engine off on base. This is important
because you will be turning the aircraft w/o an engine (Stay
Coordinated). The final step would be to work on shut down on the
downwind leg. Remember to pull back to idle for at least several
seconds to let the engine cool some before you kill it. If anyone else
with more experience or knowlege has anything to add or retract, please
do.
Rutledge Fuller
58.8 hrs engine on and .2 engine off
Tallahassee, Fl.
>Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 09:27:26 -0500
>From: John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com>
>To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Engine Out!
>Reply-To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>
>
>Rutledge,
> While the experience is fresh in your mind, please answer this
question: What
>difference did you notice between the "idle" practice, and actual
engine off? This
>information could help many people to be better prepared.
>John Jung
>SE Wisconsin
>
>Rutledge Fuller wrote:
>snip...
>>I found the engine out experience to be
>>fun and educational. I will probably fly the pattern a little higher
>>from now on in case of a real failure. I was able to make the runway
>>shutting down on mid-downwind at 600 feet AGL. If you try this at
home
>>please do several dry runs at idle prior to hitting the switch.
>snip...
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: CG and other stuff... |
Cliff,
About the best angle v.s. best rate, you brought up a good question and
analyzed it well. But of course, I have something to add. I use best rate all the
time, but most people watching me would think that I am using best angle. It is
still steep. Best rate on the Firestars that I have owned is about 8-10 mph over
stall. I think that best angle is 1 or 2 mph above stall. If I am right, best angle
is way to dangerous. Best rate wouldn't even give me 3 seconds to react to prevent
a stall. I might not stall in 3 seconds, but if I waited 3 seconds, it would be
too
late to prevent the stall. It takes time to lower the nose. Best rate on my
original Firestar was 42 mph and on my Firestar II, it's about 48 mph.
John Jung
Firestar II 72 hrs
SE Wisconsin
Cliff Stripling wrote:
snip...
> Here is an observation and question for us to consider. Is it best to climb
> at the best "rate" of climb or the best "angle" of climb?
snip...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick LeMarr <RLEMARR(at)promus.com> |
I have one in 582 Flightstar II. Good product. Will lower water temps
slightly. I fly all winter but have to 3/4 cover split radiators below ~40
degrees.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hansen, Mark [SMTP:MHansen(at)ConusNews.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 1998 11:34 PM
> To: 'kolb-list(at)matronics.com'
> Subject: Kolb-List: The Max Heater
>
>
> This is for people who like cold weather flying.
>
> The Max Heater
> Designed & operational for water cooled engines
> in closed cockpit experimental & ultralight planes.
>
>
> specs.
> 12 volt
> 3.5 amps
> under 4 lbs of weight
> fan motor
> easy installation
>
>
> one is also available for a 503 fan cooled engine.
> I'm not sure but it may work on a 447 or a 377 as well
>
>
> Phone (507) 367-4559
> ask for Dick
>
> Address
>
> The Max Heater
> 12 Blakely Court NW
> Oronoco, MN 55960
>
>
> I hope I didn't over step my bounds on this.
> I don't know the price, I didn't ask. (I have an
> open cockpit twinstar) I just thought some of
> you might like to inquire about it.
>
>
> Mark Hansen
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Power off/on stalls |
Ben and Group,
Duane was answering my question about throttle setting, which I asked to
determine if he was doing a power on stall or a real stall. Many people flying
Kolbs, only do full power or cruise power stalls (power on). In my experience,
a
Kolb wing will only do a partial stall under these conditions. I believe that the
wing stalls between the ailerons, dropping the nose slightly, and then the plane
starts to climb again. They think that Kolbs are "pussy cats" as far as stalls
are
concerned and often describe the stall as "mushy". That is why I asked about the
throttle setting. I suspected that Duane had a fair amount of rpms and was
experiencing only a "partial" stall.
To people who haven't done a power off or full idle stall in their Kolb, I
say
"You don't know your plane yet". A power off stall is nothing like the power on
stall. It can come on faster than you think possible and the nose WILL drop and
you
WILL lose altitude. The other thing which can be a suprise is how much nose down
it
takes to maintain airspeed with the engine off. So, if you haven't done a full
idle
or power off stall yet, reread this several times and mentally prepare yourself
in
case the engine quits before you learn your plane. Just don't be fooled by doing
only "partial" stalls.
John Jung
Firestar II
SE Wisconsin
Ben Ransom wrote:
>
> On Wed, 7 Oct 1998 MitchMnD(at)aol.com wrote:
> > Thanks to all for responses to my posting on this subject.
>
> I haven't been following this thread much, but your question makes
> no sense. Stall has nothing to do with throttle setting. Stall is
> a function of angle of attack. Not just in theory, i.e. I'm not just
> being a picky obtuse aeronautical geek. Is there something else you
> really meant to ask?
>
> -Ben Ransom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank_R_Reynen(at)notes.seagate.com |
| Subject: | Re: climb rates. |
I remember from my GA training that "best rate of climb" is to be used
for all normal departures for the exact same reasons as stated by John Jung
and "best angle of climb" for clearing obstacles such as a power line or
trees at the end of a short runway followed by the normal rate of climb
once you have cleared the obstacle.
Frank Reynen MKIII@479hrs
http://www.webcom.com/reynen
Cliff,
About the best angle v.s. best rate, you brought up a good question and
analyzed it well. But of course, I have something to add. I use best rate
all the
time, but most people watching me would think that I am using best angle.
It is
still steep. Best rate on the Firestars that I have owned is about 8-10 mph
over
stall. I think that best angle is 1 or 2 mph above stall. If I am right,
best angle
is way to dangerous. Best rate wouldn't even give me 3 seconds to react to
prevent
a stall. I might not stall in 3 seconds, but if I waited 3 seconds, it
would be too
late to prevent the stall. It takes time to lower the nose. Best rate on my
original Firestar was 42 mph and on my Firestar II, it's about 48 mph.
John Jung
Firestar II 72 hrs
SE Wisconsin
Cliff Stripling wrote:
snip...
> Here is an observation and question for us to consider. Is it best to
climb
> at the best "rate" of climb or the best "angle" of climb?
snip...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cliff and Carolyn Stripling <striplic(at)dfw.net> |
| Subject: | Re: other stuff... |
John and all,
>...I use best rate all the
>time, but most people watching me would think that I am using best angle. It is
>still steep
Ain't it the truth... nothing like a Kolb!
I think that best angle is 1 or 2 mph above stall. If I am right, best angle
>is way to dangerous.
I would put best angle at least 5 mph over stall (if not actual, for safety)
and you are right that 1 or 2 mph over would be very dangerous. For me, 15
mph over is what I "feel" is my best rate. Nothing scientific though.
Best rate wouldn't even give me 3 seconds to react to prevent
>a stall. I might not stall in 3 seconds, but if I waited 3 seconds, it
would be too late to prevent the stall. It takes time to lower the nose.
I agree. I have two big red marks on my ASI... my pattern speeds (all one
speed for me) and 5 mph over my stall speed. I try to carry an extra 15
mph (even an extra 5 mph or more on final with a strong headwind) or so over
stall in all my pattern speeds just to make it simple and easy for me to
remember (I fly the faster red mark) and only start to bleed it off when
over the fence. I never, never fly slower than the slower red mark unless I
am practicing stalls. I really think the thing that causes almost all light
plane accidents involving pilot error is flying too slow causing a
stall/spin. Something else that might too, is making drastic control
surface (like big up elevator plus a lot of cross controlled ailerons/rudder
for instance when overshooting a turn to final) inputs causing the wing (or
rather one wing) to exceed the stall angle of attack... even though flying
at a speed that is above the normal stall speed.
I came real close to stall speed on my second flight while I was looking at
every instrument it seems "except" the ASI. I had reached pattern altitude
on a climb out and was making a very shallow turn to cross wind. When I
looked at the ASI, I was 1 or 2 mph over stall. Cold sweat time! I had not
noticed any of the usual warnings (or maybe that early on I did not
recognize them) of flying that close to stall. I put the marks on my ASI
that very day and watch them like a hawk (quick glance is all it takes with
those big red marks) anytime I am down to 6 or 700 feet of the ground.
Later,
--
Cliff & Carolyn Stripling Him: Retired Pharmacist
(972)247-9821 Dallas Texas Her: Real Estate Broker - Texas
and Marble Falls Texas Both: 5th Wheel - RV - Travel
Kolb MKIII - N582CC (50.5 hrs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rick106(at)juno.com |
| Subject: | Re: other stuff... |
Cliff
If you have the weather channel look at it for a while they are flashing
this message on aircraft auction at this address but for some reason I
can't get it
tradedays-aviation.com
Rick Libersat
writes:
>
>
>John and all,
>
>>...I use best rate all the
>>time, but most people watching me would think that I am using best
>angle. It is
>>still steep
>
>Ain't it the truth... nothing like a Kolb!
>
>I think that best angle is 1 or 2 mph above stall. If I am right, best
>angle
>>is way to dangerous.
>
>I would put best angle at least 5 mph over stall (if not actual, for
>safety)
>and you are right that 1 or 2 mph over would be very dangerous. For
>me, 15
>mph over is what I "feel" is my best rate. Nothing scientific though.
>
>Best rate wouldn't even give me 3 seconds to react to prevent
>>a stall. I might not stall in 3 seconds, but if I waited 3 seconds,
>it
>would be too late to prevent the stall. It takes time to lower the
>nose.
>
>I agree. I have two big red marks on my ASI... my pattern speeds (all
>one
>speed for me) and 5 mph over my stall speed. I try to carry an extra
>15
>mph (even an extra 5 mph or more on final with a strong headwind) or
>so over
>stall in all my pattern speeds just to make it simple and easy for me
>to
>remember (I fly the faster red mark) and only start to bleed it off
>when
>over the fence. I never, never fly slower than the slower red mark
>unless I
>am practicing stalls. I really think the thing that causes almost all
>light
>plane accidents involving pilot error is flying too slow causing a
>stall/spin. Something else that might too, is making drastic control
>surface (like big up elevator plus a lot of cross controlled
>ailerons/rudder
>for instance when overshooting a turn to final) inputs causing the
>wing (or
>rather one wing) to exceed the stall angle of attack... even though
>flying
>at a speed that is above the normal stall speed.
>
>I came real close to stall speed on my second flight while I was
>looking at
>every instrument it seems "except" the ASI. I had reached pattern
>altitude
>on a climb out and was making a very shallow turn to cross wind. When
>I
>looked at the ASI, I was 1 or 2 mph over stall. Cold sweat time! I
>had not
>noticed any of the usual warnings (or maybe that early on I did not
>recognize them) of flying that close to stall. I put the marks on my
>ASI
>that very day and watch them like a hawk (quick glance is all it takes
>with
>those big red marks) anytime I am down to 6 or 700 feet of the ground.
>
>Later,
>
>
>--
>Cliff & Carolyn Stripling Him: Retired Pharmacist
>(972)247-9821 Dallas Texas Her: Real Estate Broker - Texas
>and Marble Falls Texas Both: 5th Wheel - RV - Travel
> Kolb MKIII - N582CC (50.5 hrs)
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame) |
John,
I know you directed this question to Rut, but I can answer it. I have a
fair
amount of intentional deadstick time and the first thing noticed is the
neutral aerodynamic point has shifted rearward. This will force more
forward stick. The actual glide and landing is better than engine idling
because of less drag. When the mains hit harder than you want them to,
the recovery is much better without power. The nose can be very high with
the tailwheel dragging the ground and the mains will still come down
softly. It's not the white-knuckle experience that you would think, if
you practice.
Do be careful practicing deadstick landings. If it's your first time,
switch it off when you know that you have the runway made and still have
plenty left. Do not do it on short strips (1000 feet or less). Another
thing to consider is thermal shock to the engine. I only do this during
the summer months because the colder air will cool the engine too
quickly. A friend cracked the front bearing when he shut it down in the
winter. This caused erratic timing and a high speed miss. It took quite
awhile to find this problem.
Ralph Burlingame
Original FireStar 400+ hrs
>
>Rutledge,
>While the experience is fresh in your mind, please answer this
>question: What difference did you notice between the "idle" practice,
and >actual engine off? This information could help many people to be
better >prepared.
>John Jung
>SE Wisconsin
>
>Rutledge Fuller wrote:
>snip...
>>I found the engine out experience to be
>>fun and educational. I will probably fly the pattern a little higher
>>from now on in case of a real failure. I was able to make the runway
>>shutting down on mid-downwind at 600 feet AGL. If you try this at
>home
>>please do several dry runs at idle prior to hitting the switch.
>snip...
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: CG and other stuff... |
Hi all
I've had to make two emergency landings in a Quicksilver, so far not in my
firestar. The last one was an engine out. Landing with the Engine out was not a
big
deal. The first time was from loss of a teleflex cable clamp that resulted in loss
of rudder control. This was the ONLY directional control on the Quick at the time.
That one was a really big deal, pucker deluxe. both time no damage while landing.
One point I'd like to make is the engine out happened on a cross country, 11 miles
after clearing 27 miles of forest. Looking back on this incident, I'll not make
the
flying over no place to land mistake again.
As for holding the tail wheel on the ground till take off. This may be all right
if
you have plenty of runway. I don't. I fly from 500 feet of mowed grass in my back
yard, and there isn't time to overcome the added drag of a wing at high angle and
a
tail wheel on the ground. Acceleration is much quicker if the tail is allowed to
come up fairly early. However you can't just firewall it and expect to control
a
kolb. At least not my Original Firestar. The prop thrust and torque are both to
strong for the control available at low ground speed. This is a problem that did
not exist when flying trike type AC.
One other comment about short field work. Never ever under any circumstances commit
to a landing. On a very short field your touch down point MUST be accurate or you
wont have enough time to stop without the brakes putting you on your nose. If it
aint right go around and around until it is right.
Adam Violett
See my Original Firestar at:
http://www.springhill-online.net/~violett/
P.S. this used to be John Jung's plane. Thanks John, It's a great plane!!
>
> When they say it is not "if" but "when"... right now, I can wait
> until "when".
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MitchMnD(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Power off/on stalls |
Thanks John Jung, I agree with your observations about "partial" stalls at
"low" throttle settings. During early flight testing of my FireStar, my Mark
lll and my FireFly I did reduce the throttle and increase the angle of attack
untill I got full stalls. It was the lack of forward speed in the low
throttle mush that facinated me. Every thing seemed to be in balance so it
just sat there in the sky.
I also agree that pilots should expeience the way their plane stalls so that
they can recognize the simptoms and handle the results. Incidentally all of
the Kolbs stalled about the same. The Mark lll testing was done with only the
pilot on board and I know it would be different with a passenger.
Ben, get back in bed !
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | chris sudlow <suds77(at)earthlink.net> |
Rutledge Fuller wrote:
>
> While flying around Quincy yesterday, my 377 Rotax quit running. I had
> to land. My engine quit probably 7 or 8 times while in the pattern (3
> or 4 on downwind), and I made uneventful landings on the grass strip
> each time. My EGT's (1112) and CHT's (333) looked normal. My fuel
> tank was full and mixed 50 to 1. My preflight showed no signs of any
> problems either. Maybe it was due to me cutting off the ignition switch
> : ) Had you going didn't I.
yup. all the way to the delete key.
> I found the engine out experience to be
> fun and educational. I will probably fly the pattern a little higher
> from now on in case of a real failure. I was able to make the runway
> shutting down on mid-downwind at 600 feet AGL. If you try this at home
> please do several dry runs at idle prior to hitting the switch. You
> will need to factor the wind too.
>
> Rutledge Fuller
> Tallahassee, Fl.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mick Fine" <froghair(at)mailexcite.com> |
| Subject: | Fw: Challenger Mailing List |
I'm forwarding this from "rec.aviation.ultralight" as a public service :-)
letsfly(at)win.net wrote in article <6v70sl$mo7$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
> I have just started a "un-official" email list for Challenger owners or
> anyone interested in them.
--snip--
> You can sign up at:
> http://www.win.net/letsfly/fly_challenger.htm
>
> Please pass this info to all the Challenger owners you know. I am not on
any
> other mailing list so this will be the extent of my attempt to notify
others
> about the new list.
>
> Charlie B.
--------- End Forwarded Message ---------
Free web-based email, Forever, From anywhere!
http://www.mailexcite.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: redrives, belt vs. gear |
Hi Mike: It was a pleasure meeting you at Castle. You've done a very nice
job on your Kolb. The web site you listed is a good one. For a slightly
different viewpoint, look in Sport Aviation, Mar. 1997 issue for an
excellent article on Geschwender's chain re-drive. The Aero-Kinetics is
very similar, but much lighter, lower and less expensive. Contact Magazine
# 44 has an exc. article comparing several chains, and a gear reduction for
reliability and power absorption. Surprised me. I mentioned some time ago
that I'd like info on hooking up a knock sensor. No comment from the
group, but when I searched Contact's archive, there it was - issue # 28.
Good magazine. Big Lar.
----------
> From: Mike Ransom <mlransom(at)ucdavis.edu>
> To: kolb(at)intrig.com
> Subject: Kolb-List: redrives, belt vs. gear
> Date: Wednesday, October 07, 1998 10:29 AM
>
>
> Just a quick note pertaining to some discussion maybe a month ago.
Here's
> a URL for a web page that neatly tabulates some of the pros/cons of belt
> drives. Some--I don't think it's the end-all, and they're promoting
their
> own system, which is gear drive. This is a place selling Subaru
> conversions. The page is a graphic that might be a little slow.
>
> http://www.eggenfellneraircraft.com/page7.html
>
> p.s. Ben's been sniffing at some experimental kits and pointed me to this
> site. Sounds like he's deciding he's going to stick with his ultralight.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: redrives, belt vs. gear |
Hi Mike: It was a pleasure meeting you at Castle. You've done a very nice
job on your Kolb. The web site you listed is a good one. For a slightly
different viewpoint, look in Sport Aviation, Mar. 1997 issue for an
excellent article on Geschwender's chain re-drive. The Aero-Kinetics is
very similar, but much lighter, lower and less expensive. Contact Magazine
# 44 has an exc. article comparing several chains, and a gear reduction for
reliability and power absorption. Surprised me. I mentioned some time ago
that I'd like info on hooking up a knock sensor. No comment from the
group, but when I searched Contact's archive, there it was - issue # 28.
Good magazine. Big Lar.
----------
> From: Mike Ransom <mlransom(at)ucdavis.edu>
> To: kolb(at)intrig.com
> Subject: Kolb-List: redrives, belt vs. gear
> Date: Wednesday, October 07, 1998 10:29 AM
>
>
> Just a quick note pertaining to some discussion maybe a month ago.
Here's
> a URL for a web page that neatly tabulates some of the pros/cons of belt
> drives. Some--I don't think it's the end-all, and they're promoting
their
> own system, which is gear drive. This is a place selling Subaru
> conversions. The page is a graphic that might be a little slow.
>
> http://www.eggenfellneraircraft.com/page7.html
>
> p.s. Ben's been sniffing at some experimental kits and pointed me to this
> site. Sounds like he's deciding he's going to stick with his ultralight.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
Sorry Mike - I missed you there. I should have said Ben.
Big Lar.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cliff and Carolyn Stripling <striplic(at)dfw.net> |
| Subject: | Re: other stuff... |
Rick,
>tradedays-aviation.com
No luck for me either. I had Carolyn check the weather channel on the TV
and did not see the ad. I will keep looking for it.
Later,
--
Cliff & Carolyn Stripling Him: Retired Pharmacist
(972)247-9821 Dallas Texas Her: Real Estate Broker - Texas
and Marble Falls Texas Both: 5th Wheel - RV - Travel
Kolb MKIII - N582CC (50.5 hrs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
That's interesting. I sent that message to Mike once. It self sent again
5 min. later. What causes that ?? Big Lar.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rebel without a clue! |
>
>Dear Group:
>
>As you may recall a few weeks past, I witnessed a pilot burn to death in
>his homebuilt Glasaire on it's madien voyage. Well, for some reason, I
>just happened to witness two more acts of stupidity which lead to the
>destruction of one aircraft and a near miss on another.
(To save space, I deleted all the stupid pilot tricks, rp)
>Get training, Get educated, Fly smart, or Get the Hell out of my
>Airspace!
>
>Rutledge (Ass Kickin' Mad) Fuller
>Tallahassee, Fl.
>
You had good reason to be mad. Gross incompetence coupled with
stupidity causes media events that hurt us all, even if they only kill a few.
Now the Air Traffic Controller in me comes out; call FSDO, call them
immediately, and ask for a specialist, and describe exactly what you saw. To
get the phone number, call your local FSS, and tell them you are observing a
grossly unsafe situation, and you want the phone # of the FSDO that handles
that area.
Don't call the control tower, unless it is to get FSDO's phone
number, it is not ATC's job to police incompetence, but they do report it.
You may be asked if you want to report a violation. That is up to
you. I seldom report violations, unless they are flagrant, and likely to
hurt someone. I think the last time I did that was back in the 80's, except
for some idiot in a Tri-Pacer who called us up and on initial contact told
us he was lost because he was flying around in the clouds and couldn't see
anything?! Duh! (If I reported every violation I saw, most every controller
and half the flying public would be out of the aviation field by next week...)
The only time I ever did one of these type reports, there was a guy
in a Skyhawk that took four tries to get it on an 8000' runway in light
wind, did a horrible scary job, and it was some old guy with his 3 grandkids
in the plane. After he bought some fuel, he loaded the kids back in and took
off with them. No violation, just waaayyy behind the airplane. Really
shakey. And I called FSDO and told them exactly that. My conscience wouldn't
permit anything less.
The old guy needed to get something like a Quicksilver MX, and fly
it from a cow pasture, away from everbody else, especially he didn't need to
be hauling children.
Let your conscience be your guide. Sometimes meddeling is OK.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)telepath.com> |
| Subject: | Re: other stuff... |
> Rick,
>
> >tradedays-aviation.com
>
> No luck for me either. I had Carolyn check the weather channel on the TV
> and did not see the ad. I will keep looking for it.
>
Gentle chiding......you guys really need to use your search
engines! Came up first hit.....here ya go.....
http://www.tradedays-aviation.org/
; )
J. Baker
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry Bidle <jbidle(at)airmail.net> |
What do you do if you end up short of the field. I fear some one will read
this and go out and try it then get themselves into trouble. Why bust up a
good airplane.
What would be of value is the noting the differences you see in sink rate
and how much the forward glide is impacted. Those do vary some without
power. Also when you kill the engine does the prop stop.
I come from a GA background and have to say I've never seen GA pilot
training do actual engine off practice landings. It doesn't give them an
out. Crow hopping is another followed by high speed taxi runs. I've seen
a number of airplanes busted this way.
Your observation you wrote up in a later message were very interesting
though.
>
>While flying around Quincy yesterday, my 377 Rotax quit running. I had
>to land. My engine quit probably 7 or 8 times while in the pattern (3
>or 4 on downwind), and I made uneventful landings on the grass strip
>each time. My EGT's (1112) and CHT's (333) looked normal. My fuel
>tank was full and mixed 50 to 1. My preflight showed no signs of any
>problems either. Maybe it was due to me cutting off the ignition switch
>: ) Had you going didn't I. I found the engine out experience to be
>fun and educational. I will probably fly the pattern a little higher
>from now on in case of a real failure. I was able to make the runway
>shutting down on mid-downwind at 600 feet AGL. If you try this at home
>please do several dry runs at idle prior to hitting the switch. You
>will need to factor the wind too.
>
>Rutledge Fuller
>Tallahassee, Fl.
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry Bidle <jbidle(at)airmail.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Firefly wheels & CG |
Were both tail wheel pilots. Had a Citabria for 7 years.
I don't have a problem with takeoff, just landing. Yes, for takeoff keep
the stick back until it builds up a little speed then to neutral. This all
happens real fast on take off with the 447. Wow!
Now if I could just land the thing. That's where I done the damage. One
down and on roll out, keep the stick in your belly. Problem is it seems to
be a little too sensitive wanting to nose over. Remember were a little
heavy in the nose due instruments. After touch down I don't know exactly
what happened. I don't think it hit the heel brakes but might still had a
little power on but it stared going over and there was no stopping it once
it started. Drug our toy back to the hangar for 100 MPH tape treatment on
the nose cone. End of flying for that day.
After my nose over we decided to check how sensitive it was as you
increased power. With my partner it was around 4000 RPM (no cushion), with
me and the cushion it was around 3800 RPM when it would lift the tail
standing still.
Maybe we can get Kolb to make us some longer gear legs (more weight), maybe
an inch. Wouldn't take much. I would like to try it but dread the thought
of another day changing gear legs ..... it took 3 hours to change just one.
Let's see, gear legs, nose cone, gear legs, nose cone. Easier and cheaper
to change the legs. Dennis, you got any of those new fancy lighter weight
chrome molly gear legs. We need a set an inch or so longer.
Jerry
>
> the balance
>> point on the gear is my concern. Understand were nose heavy compared to
>> most. The present gear position seems to make it pretty easy to go on
>its
>> nose. Have to watch power, 3800-4000 RPM will push it over.
>>
>This may be a rather silly question, but you guys are keeping the stick
>pulled back into your belly as far as you can until you get close to flying
>speed, Aren't you?
>Larry
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Erich Weaver 805-683-0200 <sbaew(at)dames.com> |
Autoforwarded: false
UA-content-id: 11CA3D6A3B00
Hop-count: 1
Hey guys - Im a newcomer, waiting for an engine to be mounted on a Mark
III that I recently purchased. I have flying on my brain, and am having
a hard time waiting. In my training and subsequent solo time though, I
did notice that I really tend to get fatigued from engine noise, aside
from the fact that I place high value on my hearing. I know there are
headphones with active noise redction systems. Does anybody out there
use them? How effective are they (i.e. - are they worth the price). I
also see ads in Ultralight Flying for "air intake silencers" - are these
anything thats going to help me? Any other systems to consider? Thanks
in advance for any input.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Geoff Thistlethwaite" <geoffthis(at)WORLDNET.ATT.NET> |
| Subject: | Re: noise reduction |
definitely wear ear plugs!
Even with a helmet/headphones
Geoff Thistlethwaite
-----Original Message-----
From: Erich Weaver 805-683-0200 <sbaew(at)dames.com>
Date: Wednesday, October 07, 1998 11:52 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: noise reduction
>
>Hey guys - Im a newcomer, waiting for an engine to be mounted on a Mark
>III that I recently purchased. I have flying on my brain, and am having
>a hard time waiting. In my training and subsequent solo time though, I
>did notice that I really tend to get fatigued from engine noise, aside
>from the fact that I place high value on my hearing. I know there are
>headphones with active noise redction systems. Does anybody out there
>use them? How effective are they (i.e. - are they worth the price). I
>also see ads in Ultralight Flying for "air intake silencers" - are these
>anything thats going to help me? Any other systems to consider? Thanks
>in advance for any input.
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rutledge Fuller" <rut007(at)hotmail.com> |
Jerry,
I fear that pilots will not strive to get the proper training. Also, I
will not end up short. Sometime GA guys just don't have a clue. The
day that I have an engine failure, I will be prepared -- Will you? You
mentioned that you fear that someone will read my post an go and get
themselves into trouble. If they get proper training they will not.
Let me explain something to you: Flying is like many things, full of
hazards. It is up to us as pilots to learn how to manage and deal with
the hazards that we are faced with. If we don't, and ignore the
hazards, we will end up hurt. Do you practice stalls, takeoff's, or
landings? It's not really any different. I would like to end with, if
an ultralight pilot can't fly engine off on at least a short final, they
probably shouldn't be flying.
This is my story and I'm stickin' to it
Jerry does bring up a good point, that you shouldn't jump in the plane
and kill the engine without knowing you are going to make the field.
Best yet would be to get dual instruction-engine out.
Rutledge Fuller
Tallahassee, Fl.
>Date: Wed, 7 Oct 98 23:29:24 -0500 (CDT)
>To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>From: Jerry Bidle <jbidle(at)airmail.net>
>Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Engine Out!
>Reply-To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>
>
>What do you do if you end up short of the field. I fear some one will
read
>this and go out and try it then get themselves into trouble. Why bust
up a
>good airplane.
>
>What would be of value is the noting the differences you see in sink
rate
>and how much the forward glide is impacted. Those do vary some without
>power. Also when you kill the engine does the prop stop.
>
>I come from a GA background and have to say I've never seen GA pilot
>training do actual engine off practice landings. It doesn't give them
an
>out. Crow hopping is another followed by high speed taxi runs. I've
seen
>a number of airplanes busted this way.
>
>Your observation you wrote up in a later message were very interesting
>though.
>
>
>>
>>While flying around Quincy yesterday, my 377 Rotax quit running. I
had
>>to land. My engine quit probably 7 or 8 times while in the pattern (3
>>or 4 on downwind), and I made uneventful landings on the grass strip
>>each time. My EGT's (1112) and CHT's (333) looked normal. My fuel
>>tank was full and mixed 50 to 1. My preflight showed no signs of any
>>problems either. Maybe it was due to me cutting off the ignition
switch
>>: ) Had you going didn't I. I found the engine out experience to be
>>fun and educational. I will probably fly the pattern a little higher
>>from now on in case of a real failure. I was able to make the runway
>>shutting down on mid-downwind at 600 feet AGL. If you try this at
home
>>please do several dry runs at idle prior to hitting the switch. You
>>will need to factor the wind too.
>>
>>Rutledge Fuller
>>Tallahassee, Fl.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rutledge Fuller" <rut007(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rebel without a clue! |
Thanks Richard,
We took care of it through a different means that was successful.
Rutledge
Richard wrote:
> You had good reason to be mad. Gross incompetence coupled with
>stupidity causes media events that hurt us all, even if they only kill
a few.
> Now the Air Traffic Controller in me comes out; call FSDO, call
them
>immediately, and ask for a specialist, and describe exactly what you
saw.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cpeterhu(at)aol.com |
In my Piper Cub days, I was trained to land with engine at idle on final. Of
course not engine off, but the idea was the same.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Darren L Smalec" <smald(at)shianet.org> |
| Subject: | Accelerated stalls |
Hi listers- Just wondering if anyone has any experience with accelerated
stalls, straight or turning, in a Firestar 1. I don`t plan on doing any,
but would like to know how easy it is to do, and what to expect if it does.
Thanks.
Curious Darren,
Central MI.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "barry youngblood" <barry(at)hcis.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Firefly wheels & CG |
-----Original Message-----
From: Jerry Bidle <jbidle(at)airmail.net>
Date: Wednesday, October 07, 1998 11:30 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firefly wheels & CG
>>heavy in the nose due instruments. After touch down I don't know exactly
>what happened. I don't think it hit the heel brakes but might still had a
Jerry, I had to respond to your mention of heel brakes. On my FSII my feet
used to set just about on the brakes and several landings which I hit a
little hard made my weight move forward. This caused my feet to actuate the
brakes causing two noseovers. Bent the stop tabs on heel levers to let them
move a little further from rudders and have had no problem with noseover
since. Now I must make an effort to use brakes.
Barry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry Bidle <jbidle(at)airmail.net> |
Rutledge,
When I practice stalls I do it at altitude, thus I control my risk. When I
shoot landings I'm in a normal mode of operation. In fact, one of the
steps I was taught in getting familiar with a strange airplane was to
practice a few at altitude so you get the feel of the plane and it's
attitude in the landing sequence.
But to say cut the engine seems to violate the rule of always leaving
yourself a way out. If you blow it, traffic cuts in front of you or any of
the other million things that can and will happen, you leave yourself no
way out. Why do they say don't fly over areas where you can't land. I
feel if people practice the procedure while the engine the running at idle
they'll be prepared, most just don't practice thus get theirs under real
conditions. It's little more bold than I care to be, which reminds me of
the old saying "there are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there
are not many old, bold pilots".
Like you, I stick to my story based upon experience. I have to believe
that the flight instruction industry has learned what works over the years.
The practice of shutting of the engine and dead sticking it in, crow
hopping, and high speed taxis are excellent ways to bust up a airplane and
maybe yourself along with it. These are all daring, macho type operations.
My final 2 cents,
Jerry
>
>
>Jerry,
>
>I fear that pilots will not strive to get the proper training. Also, I
>will not end up short. Sometime GA guys just don't have a clue. The
>day that I have an engine failure, I will be prepared -- Will you? You
>mentioned that you fear that someone will read my post an go and get
>themselves into trouble. If they get proper training they will not.
>Let me explain something to you: Flying is like many things, full of
>hazards. It is up to us as pilots to learn how to manage and deal with
>the hazards that we are faced with. If we don't, and ignore the
>hazards, we will end up hurt. Do you practice stalls, takeoff's, or
>landings? It's not really any different. I would like to end with, if
>an ultralight pilot can't fly engine off on at least a short final, they
>probably shouldn't be flying.
>
>This is my story and I'm stickin' to it
>
>Jerry does bring up a good point, that you shouldn't jump in the plane
>and kill the engine without knowing you are going to make the field.
>Best yet would be to get dual instruction-engine out.
>
>Rutledge Fuller
>Tallahassee, Fl.
>
>>Date: Wed, 7 Oct 98 23:29:24 -0500 (CDT)
>>To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>>From: Jerry Bidle <jbidle(at)airmail.net>
>>Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Engine Out!
>>Reply-To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>>
>>
>>What do you do if you end up short of the field. I fear some one will
>read
>>this and go out and try it then get themselves into trouble. Why bust
>up a
>>good airplane.
>>
>>What would be of value is the noting the differences you see in sink
>rate
>>and how much the forward glide is impacted. Those do vary some without
>>power. Also when you kill the engine does the prop stop.
>>
>>I come from a GA background and have to say I've never seen GA pilot
>>training do actual engine off practice landings. It doesn't give them
>an
>>out. Crow hopping is another followed by high speed taxi runs. I've
>seen
>>a number of airplanes busted this way.
>>
>>Your observation you wrote up in a later message were very interesting
>>though.
>>
>>
>
>>>
>>>While flying around Quincy yesterday, my 377 Rotax quit running. I
>had
>>>to land. My engine quit probably 7 or 8 times while in the pattern (3
>>>or 4 on downwind), and I made uneventful landings on the grass strip
>>>each time. My EGT's (1112) and CHT's (333) looked normal. My fuel
>>>tank was full and mixed 50 to 1. My preflight showed no signs of any
>>>problems either. Maybe it was due to me cutting off the ignition
>switch
>>>: ) Had you going didn't I. I found the engine out experience to be
>>>fun and educational. I will probably fly the pattern a little higher
>>>from now on in case of a real failure. I was able to make the runway
>>>shutting down on mid-downwind at 600 feet AGL. If you try this at
>home
>>>please do several dry runs at idle prior to hitting the switch. You
>>>will need to factor the wind too.
>>>
>>>Rutledge Fuller
>>>Tallahassee, Fl.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rutledge Fuller" <rut007(at)hotmail.com> |
If everyone had the same opinion, it would be a boring world wouldn't
it. I appreciate your comments and observations. I only hope that I am
not one of those bold pilots. I truely feel that my engine off landings
were as safe as with the engine on given the variables that I had to
deal with that day. I now know what to expect from my aircraft, and
know that I will not freak out when my engine fails. Remember that
Rotax guarantees our two-stroke engines to fail in-flight.
Good Flying,
Rutledge Fuller
>Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 10:57:40 -0500
>To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>From: Jerry Bidle <jbidle(at)airmail.net>
>Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Engine Out!
>Reply-To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>
>
>Rutledge,
>
>When I practice stalls I do it at altitude, thus I control my risk.
When I
>shoot landings I'm in a normal mode of operation. In fact, one of the
>steps I was taught in getting familiar with a strange airplane was to
>practice a few at altitude so you get the feel of the plane and it's
>attitude in the landing sequence.
>
>But to say cut the engine seems to violate the rule of always leaving
>yourself a way out. If you blow it, traffic cuts in front of you or
any of
>the other million things that can and will happen, you leave yourself
no
>way out. Why do they say don't fly over areas where you can't land. I
>feel if people practice the procedure while the engine the running at
idle
>they'll be prepared, most just don't practice thus get theirs under
real
>conditions. It's little more bold than I care to be, which reminds me
of
>the old saying "there are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but
there
>are not many old, bold pilots".
>
>Like you, I stick to my story based upon experience. I have to believe
>that the flight instruction industry has learned what works over the
years.
> The practice of shutting of the engine and dead sticking it in, crow
>hopping, and high speed taxis are excellent ways to bust up a airplane
and
>maybe yourself along with it. These are all daring, macho type
operations.
>
>My final 2 cents,
>Jerry
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Tail down takeoff's |
Group,
Let me describe the way I takeoff in a Firestar. Keeping the tail down will
only increase takeoff roll from 200 ft to 250 ft. I normally let the tail come
up,
but when I was new to the Firestar, it was easier to keep directional control with
it down. I didn't hold the stick back all the way, just enough to keep the tail
from coming up. Doing it that way, it isn't necessary to move the stick quickly
forward at liftoff and it doesn't dig the tail wheel into the ground. Even the
377
original Firestar would accelerate to best climb speed immediately after leaving
the ground with the tail down. And my 503 Firestar II takes off the same way only
it requires more pressure on the left rudder. Oh, and I do firewall it from the
start. I probably have 5,000 rpms going before I release the brakes. (only 500
feet of runway for me) But maybe "firewall" is not the best description. I warn
the engine to 200 degrees CHT, by running the engine at 4,000 rpms. Once I have
200 degrees, I go to full throttle from 4,000 rpm.
John Jung
Firestar II N6163J
SE Wisconsin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "A. J. Vann" <redhill(at)rose.net> |
> If everyone had the same opinion, it would be a boring world wouldn't
> it. I appreciate your comments and observations. I only hope that I am not
one of those bold pilots. Rutledge
I hope I'm not considered a bold pilot either; I also like to cut my
engine off on some landings. It gives me tremendous confidence. Like
you, I only cut the engine when I know I have the airstrip made. I
don't attempt to land at the numbers with the engine out, since I like
the margin of safety of using up some of the runway for this drill.
As a former pilot with a glider rating, every landing with the glider
was made with no engine and no go-arounds. In a glider, once you're on
final, that's it; you absolutely must land. Most GA pilots are scared
to death to hear their engine quit, even instuctors with thousands of
hours of experience; but a glider pilot has that extra confidence and
experience. I say continue your power-off drills, and continue to do so
wisely.
until you gain some confidence. I prefer to do engine off landings with
plenty of altitude and to use the forward slip to loose that extra
altitude on final, if necessary. I also prefer to make several idle
engine landings first, to test the current wind effect on my sink rate
and glide ratio. By next summer, I hope to be cutting my engine and
practicing some actual soaring with the ultralight. I'll report on this
next year.
Rutledge, I'll look for you on Fri. afternoon in T'ville. Champ is OK,
but only got 2 hrs in it. It weighs 700 lbs and has a 65 hp engine; not
as good performance as the UL. I have 50 hrs in the ultralight now and
love it.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu> |
On Thu, 8 Oct 1998, Rutledge Fuller wrote:
> If everyone had the same opinion, it would be a boring world wouldn't
> know that I will not freak out when my engine fails. Remember that
> Rotax guarantees our two-stroke engines to fail in-flight.
> Good Flying,
> Rutledge Fuller
Rut,
FWIW, i'm with you on this one. I don't agree with the opinion that
practicing full engine outs, fast taxi, and C___ H__ is categorically
macho and likely to bust plane&pilot. Just the opposite. And, I guess
if we all didn't want a variety of opinions we'd all unsubscribe, leaving
only those who are 100% right 100% of the time.
May we all die of old age.
-Ben Ransom
PS: I had an unexpected engine out once. No change of pants required
at all. When it happened I remember clearly my second thought was, 'geez,
glad i practiced all those engine off landings.' Hope I'm always so
lucky ....and, barring good luck, well enf practiced for whatever arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "CHRISTOPHER DAVIS" <cdavis2(at)capecod.net> |
A.J. and all,as a glider rated pilot and not a dare devil when my firestar
KXP got reeeeeeal quiet on down wind after some ill advised carb
adjustments, my first thoughts after pushing the nose down for best glide
were" doesn't this thing fly great with out alltha vibration an noise" I am
in the process of installing electric start so I will have "the poor mans
motor glider" cant wait to shut that 503 off. Still fighting with wiring
.CHRIS
-----Original Message-----
From: A. J. Vann <redhill(at)rose.net>
Date: Thursday, October 08, 1998 5:02 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Engine Out!
>
>> If everyone had the same opinion, it would be a boring world wouldn't
>> it. I appreciate your comments and observations. I only hope that I am
not one of those bold pilots. Rutledge
>
> I hope I'm not considered a bold pilot either; I also like to cut my
>engine off on some landings. It gives me tremendous confidence. Like
>you, I only cut the engine when I know I have the airstrip made. I
>don't attempt to land at the numbers with the engine out, since I like
>the margin of safety of using up some of the runway for this drill.
>
> As a former pilot with a glider rating, every landing with the glider
>was made with no engine and no go-arounds. In a glider, once you're on
>final, that's it; you absolutely must land. Most GA pilots are scared
>to death to hear their engine quit, even instuctors with thousands of
>hours of experience; but a glider pilot has that extra confidence and
>experience. I say continue your power-off drills, and continue to do so
>wisely.
>
> For those of you wishing to try this, first, do so with an instructor
>until you gain some confidence. I prefer to do engine off landings with
>plenty of altitude and to use the forward slip to loose that extra
>altitude on final, if necessary. I also prefer to make several idle
>engine landings first, to test the current wind effect on my sink rate
>and glide ratio. By next summer, I hope to be cutting my engine and
>practicing some actual soaring with the ultralight. I'll report on this
>next year.
>
> Rutledge, I'll look for you on Fri. afternoon in T'ville. Champ is OK,
>but only got 2 hrs in it. It weighs 700 lbs and has a 65 hp engine; not
>as good performance as the UL. I have 50 hrs in the ultralight now and
>love it.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Hi fellow Kolbers,
I have a question I would like to ask the group. It has occurred to me
that
there should be something that could be installed on the output side of the
regulator / rectifier to prevent high voltage, say over 15 volts, from getting
through to the battery and associated equipment. When the regulators we're
using for the purpose of charging aircraft batteries fail they either go open
(if you're lucky) or short through (if you're not). I know when, they short
through, as much as 100 volts can be passed to the battery, radios, gps, etc.
My question is would there be enough interest to warrant producing a device
that would prevent damage to expensive equipment should your regulator fail?
Thanks for any comments pro or con.
Dick Kuntzleman, Pres.
Kuntzleman Electronics,
Inc.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eugene Zimmerman <tehz(at)redrose.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Tail down takeoff's |
<19981007.184909.7823.4.ul15rhb(at)juno.com>
>
>Group,
> Let me describe the way I takeoff in a Firestar. Keeping the tail down
will
>only increase takeoff roll from 200 ft to 250 ft. I normally let the tail
come up,
>but when I was new to the Firestar, it was easier to keep directional
control with
>it down. I didn't hold the stick back all the way, just enough to keep
the tail
>from coming up. Doing it that way, it isn't necessary to move the stick
quickly
>forward at liftoff and it doesn't dig the tail wheel into the ground. Even
the 377
>original Firestar would accelerate to best climb speed immediately after
leaving
>the ground with the tail down. And my 503 Firestar II takes off the same
way only
>it requires more pressure on the left rudder. Oh, and I do firewall it
from the
>start. I probably have 5,000 rpms going before I release the brakes. (only
500
>feet of runway for me) But maybe "firewall" is not the best description.
I warn
>the engine to 200 degrees CHT, by running the engine at 4,000 rpms. Once I
have
>200 degrees, I go to full throttle from 4,000 rpm.
>John Jung
>Firestar II N6163J
>SE Wisconsin
>
>
>
Yeah, give'n my engine a good warning before every flight puts the fear of
failure
into it and keeps it running strong too. :)
Eugene Z
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rick106(at)juno.com |
| Subject: | Re: other stuff... |
JIM
Thanks I'll take the heat on this one , I only forgot to tell Cliff to
add org and omit the com from
tradedays-aviation.com " thanks" for keeping me straight
Rick Libersat
writes:
>
>> Rick,
>>
>> >tradedays-aviation.com
>>
>> No luck for me either. I had Carolyn check the weather channel on
>the TV
>> and did not see the ad. I will keep looking for it.
>>
>
>Gentle chiding......you guys really need to use your search
>engines! Came up first hit.....here ya go.....
>
>
>http://www.tradedays-aviation.org/
>
>; )
>J. Baker
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com> |
>
>Hi fellow Kolbers,
> I have a question I would like to ask the group. It has occurred to me
that
>there should be something that could be installed on the output side of the
>regulator / rectifier to prevent high voltage, say over 15 volts, from getting
>through to the battery and associated equipment. When the regulators we're
>using for the purpose of charging aircraft batteries fail they either go open
>(if you're lucky) or short through (if you're not). I know when, they short
>through, as much as 100 volts can be passed to the battery, radios, gps, etc.
>My question is would there be enough interest to warrant producing a device
>that would prevent damage to expensive equipment should your regulator fail?
>
> Thanks for any comments pro or con.
>
> Dick Kuntzleman, Pres.
> Kuntzleman Electronics,
Inc.
Go for it. But since I am hoping to retire soon, and my income will
be cut to zilch, plan accordingly...
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Gentlemen,
I think it's a very wise idea to practice those engine-off landings. Of
course GA pilots don't practice it because the risks are greater, but
what do you think usually happens to all GA pilots when it quits? They
panic, and then it's over. If they were to practice, starting on a very
long runway and working their way down to a 2500 foot strip, I would
wager the chances of putting that plane down without damage, in a real
emergency, would be pretty good. Look at the glider pilots. This gliding
thing is becoming a long lost art. There would not be any glider pilots
if they didn't practice! Let's put a glider pilot into the seat of an
airliner and cut the engine at 45000 feet. Do you think any ordinary
pilot would be able to bring it down safely after gliding 100 miles to an
airport? Well this actually happened in Canada a few years ago. This
proved a point: if you have practiced actual dead stick landings, then
you have a much better chance of landing your plane safely than the guy
who has not attempted it. Flying is as safe as the pilot flying the
plane. The same goes for driving your car. I hear about fatalities on the
highways everyday because these drivers have not practiced good driving
habits that will protect their safety in the event of an emergency. To
sum it all up: there are good drivers and safe pilots. There are many
drivers and pilots that aren't around because they didn't care to take
the time to develop those good habits.
Ralph Burlingame
Original FireStar 400+ hrs
writes:
>
>> If everyone had the same opinion, it would be a boring world
>wouldn't it. I appreciate your comments and observations. I only hope
that
>I am not one of those bold pilots. Rutledge
>
>I hope I'm not considered a bold pilot either; I also like to cut my
engine off on >some landings. It gives me tremendous confidence. Like
>you, I only cut the engine when I know I have the airstrip made. I
>don't attempt to land at the numbers with the engine out, since I like
>the margin of safety of using up some of the runway for this drill.
>
>As a former pilot with a glider rating, every landing with the
>glider was made with no engine and no go-arounds. In a glider, once
you're
>on final, that's it; you absolutely must land. Most GA pilots are
scared
>to death to hear their engine quit, even instuctors with thousands of
>hours of experience; but a glider pilot has that extra confidence and
>experience. I say continue your power-off drills, and continue to do
>so wisely.
>For those of you wishing to try this, first, do so with an instructor
>until you gain some confidence. I prefer to do engine off landings
>with plenty of altitude and to use the forward slip to loose that extra
>altitude on final, if necessary. I also prefer to make several idle
>engine landings first, to test the current wind effect on my sink rate
>and glide ratio. By next summer, I hope to be cutting my engine and
>practicing some actual soaring with the ultralight. I'll report on
>this next year.
>
>Rutledge, I'll look for you on Fri. afternoon in T'ville.
>Champ is OK, but only got 2 hrs in it. It weighs 700 lbs and has a 65 hp
engine; not as good performance as the UL. I have 50 hrs in the
ultralight now
>and love it.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Christensen" <spectruminternational(at)email.msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: noise reduction |
-----Original Message-----
From: Erich Weaver 805-683-0200 <sbaew(at)dames.com>
Date: Wednesday, October 07, 1998 9:52 PM
>Hey guys -
(snip-snip)
I know there are
>headphones with active noise redction systems. Does anybody out there
>use them? How effective are they (i.e. - are they worth the price). I
>also see ads in Ultralight Flying for "air intake silencers" - are these
>anything thats going to help me? Any other systems to consider? Thanks
>in advance for any input.
>
============================================
Erich:
I use David Clark active noise reduction (ANR) headsets, and would NEVER fly
without some sort of ANR headsets, even in GA airplanes. In a nutshell, I
strongly believe ANRs are worth the money.
Ron Christensen
MKIII1/2
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
Hi Dick: Kind of threw me when I saw who posted that. Now I've got a
thought for you. In the last 3 or 4 issues of Contact magazine, Paul
Messinger has published some pretty heavy stuff for wiring your plane. For
the problem you specify, he talks about a "Crowbar" ( I think ) circuit
that will trip and save your system. He goes into extreme detail, and is
right at the limit of my understanding - if not beyond it. Not sure I
could build it, even with his complete instructions - not sure I want to
try. If someone like yourself, especially with your proven reputation,
could build + market such a thing, I'm sure there would be quite a bit of
interest. I already own a set of your wing tip strobes, and have heard
nothing but good about them. In a similar vein, I asked an engineer at
Westach for help designing a high/low voltage warning system. They not
only helped, they built and sold me a prototype for $50.00. I more than
happily paid it, cause it's far better than I could have done myself in any
amount of time. Big Lar.
----------
> From: Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: ?question?
> Date: Thursday, October 08, 1998 6:51 PM
>
>
> >
> >Hi fellow Kolbers,
> > I have a question I would like to ask the group. It has occurred to
me
that
> >there should be something that could be installed on the output side of
the
> >regulator / rectifier to prevent high voltage, say over 15 volts, from
getting
> >through to the battery and associated equipment. When the regulators
we're
> >using for the purpose of charging aircraft batteries fail they either go
open
> >(if you're lucky) or short through (if you're not). I know when, they
short
> >through, as much as 100 volts can be passed to the battery, radios, gps,
etc.
> >My question is would there be enough interest to warrant producing a
device
> >that would prevent damage to expensive equipment should your regulator
fail?
> >
> > Thanks for any comments pro or con.
> >
> > Dick Kuntzleman, Pres.
> > Kuntzleman Electronics,
Inc.
>
>
> Go for it. But since I am hoping to retire soon, and my income
will
> be cut to zilch, plan accordingly...
> Richard Pike
> MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com> |
My 2 cents worth on practicing dead stick landings: Pick a big grass
strip, where no one else will get in the way, and do it. After I had flown
my Hummer for a couple years, and felt pretty comfortable with what it would
do, I went to a 1800' strip and from 1000' over head, killed that 277
upwind, downwind, crossways, and everyway I could, until it was no big deal.
Haven't done it with the MKIII yet, but I will.
When I taught my kids to drive, they learned in the winter, in a
huge parking lot, with snow on the ground, sideways. While they were
learning to stop, start, and steer, they were also learning how to slide,
skid, and catch it when it gets sideways.
Same principle? could be.
Should we do the same thing in PA32's and Skyhawks? Probably not. I
think we are justified in expecting well cared for $20,000 engines to keep
running. I think we are naive to expect as much out of $4500 engines.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Geoff Thistlethwaite" <geoffthis(at)WORLDNET.ATT.NET> |
Have to agree with Richard on this, find an empty strip/pasture and do it.
when I first started flying U/Ls I "didn't know nothin'" about 2 cycles, so
the fellow I bought it from said he would "help" maintain it. The engine
ran fine when I bought the plane but he said that since I weighed less he
could lean out the engine and I'd get more power. Well he "leaned me into 3
pistons/rings/gaskets", with yours truly doing all the hard parts, including
several deadstick landings. Of course I've learned alot about 2 cycles, not
that I'm an expert, and the Firestar will be the first time I've owned a
Rotax. I now have the rather dubious achievement of 9 emergency deadstick
landings in U/Ls. Never bent or broke the plane.
NEVER FLY WHERE YOU CAN'T LAND.
Learn how your aircraft responds at all throttle settings, airspeeds,
attitudes and all combinations of them.
jus' my 2 cents worth
Geoff Thistlethwaite
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
Date: Friday, October 09, 1998 12:42 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Engine Out!
>
> My 2 cents worth on practicing dead stick landings: Pick a big
grass
>strip, where no one else will get in the way, and do it. After I had flown
>my Hummer for a couple years, and felt pretty comfortable with what it
would
>do, I went to a 1800' strip and from 1000' over head, killed that 277
>upwind, downwind, crossways, and everyway I could, until it was no big
deal.
> Haven't done it with the MKIII yet, but I will.
> When I taught my kids to drive, they learned in the winter, in a
>huge parking lot, with snow on the ground, sideways. While they were
>learning to stop, start, and steer, they were also learning how to slide,
>skid, and catch it when it gets sideways.
> Same principle? could be.
> Should we do the same thing in PA32's and Skyhawks? Probably not. I
>think we are justified in expecting well cared for $20,000 engines to keep
>running. I think we are naive to expect as much out of $4500 engines.
> Richard Pike
> MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: noise reduction |
Ron,
Have use tried the ANR's in a Rotax powered plane? I understand that they do
well with
prop noise, but maybe not with carb intake noise or airstream noise. I hate spending
that
kind of money with only "marketing hype" for information.
John Jung
Firestar II 503
Ron Christensen wrote:
> Erich:
> I use David Clark active noise reduction (ANR) headsets, and would NEVER fly
> without some sort of ANR headsets, even in GA airplanes. In a nutshell, I
> strongly believe ANRs are worth the money.
>
> Ron Christensen
> MKIII1/2
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry & Karen Cottrel" <lcottrel(at)kfalls.net> |
| Subject: | Re: noise reduction |
Ron,
I have the Sigtronics headphones recommended for UL (S40's). I first got
them with the foam pads. but found some gel seals later. I like them a lot.
I also put a intake silencer on the 447. I like that enough to put up with
the 2 hp loss that they claim. With the two of them I only need to use the
headset, no ear plugs. The Clarks are a better headset, no doubt, but my
budget was able to handle the Sigs.
Larry
----------
>
> Ron,
> Have use tried the ANR's in a Rotax powered plane? I understand that
they do well with
> prop noise, but maybe not with carb intake noise or airstream noise. I
hate spending that
> kind of money with only "marketing hype" for information.
> John Jung
> Firestar II 503
>
> Ron Christensen wrote:
>
"Ron Christensen"
> > Erich:
> > I use David Clark active noise reduction (ANR) headsets, and would
NEVER fly
> > without some sort of ANR headsets, even in GA airplanes. In a
nutshell, I
> > strongly believe ANRs are worth the money.
> >
> > Ron Christensen
> > MKIII1/2
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry Bidle <jbidle(at)airmail.net> |
I have difficultly visualizing a UL like a glider. I've seen gliders come
in, abort a landing and peel back off and round back around again for a
second try. You can't do that with a UL. Once the engine is stopped, your
sink rate has you committed, make it or not.
While I agree you feel your honing your skills under the impression your
building your confidence, I'm not convinced simulation isn't adequate with
reduced risk. You risk yourself say 100 times for that 1 time it may
happen, that's 99 times more which likely something will. Comparison
between a GA airplane and UL, yes the GA airplane probably cost more, it
also is likely to be insured, is the UL. In the GA airplane I have more up
front to protect me but at a higher rate of speed. The UL I have little
protection but should be slower.
Based upon feedback from Rutledge about the characteristics between engine
at idle versus stopped, it sounds like you could practice fine with an
idling engine and simulate the performance as if it were stopped while
minimizing risk to airplane or yourself. I do agree that without the
engine running speed control is critical at the point of flare as it will
bleed off very quickly.
Jerry
>Gentlemen,
>
>I think it's a very wise idea to practice those engine-off landings. Of
>course GA pilots don't practice it because the risks are greater, but
>what do you think usually happens to all GA pilots when it quits? They
>panic, and then it's over. If they were to practice, starting on a very
>long runway and working their way down to a 2500 foot strip, I would
>wager the chances of putting that plane down without damage, in a real
>emergency, would be pretty good. Look at the glider pilots. This gliding
>thing is becoming a long lost art. There would not be any glider pilots
>if they didn't practice! Let's put a glider pilot into the seat of an
>airliner and cut the engine at 45000 feet. Do you think any ordinary
>pilot would be able to bring it down safely after gliding 100 miles to an
>airport? Well this actually happened in Canada a few years ago. This
>proved a point: if you have practiced actual dead stick landings, then
>you have a much better chance of landing your plane safely than the guy
>who has not attempted it. Flying is as safe as the pilot flying the
>plane. The same goes for driving your car. I hear about fatalities on the
>highways everyday because these drivers have not practiced good driving
>habits that will protect their safety in the event of an emergency. To
>sum it all up: there are good drivers and safe pilots. There are many
>drivers and pilots that aren't around because they didn't care to take
>the time to develop those good habits.
>
>
>Ralph Burlingame
>Original FireStar 400+ hrs
>
>
>writes:
>
>>
>>> If everyone had the same opinion, it would be a boring world
>>wouldn't it. I appreciate your comments and observations. I only hope
>that
>>I am not one of those bold pilots. Rutledge
>>
>
>
>>I hope I'm not considered a bold pilot either; I also like to cut my
>engine off on >some landings. It gives me tremendous confidence. Like
>>you, I only cut the engine when I know I have the airstrip made. I
>>don't attempt to land at the numbers with the engine out, since I like
>>the margin of safety of using up some of the runway for this drill.
>>
>>As a former pilot with a glider rating, every landing with the
>>glider was made with no engine and no go-arounds. In a glider, once
>you're
>>on final, that's it; you absolutely must land. Most GA pilots are
>scared
>>to death to hear their engine quit, even instuctors with thousands of
>>hours of experience; but a glider pilot has that extra confidence and
>>experience. I say continue your power-off drills, and continue to do
>>so wisely.
>
>>For those of you wishing to try this, first, do so with an instructor
>>until you gain some confidence. I prefer to do engine off landings
>>with plenty of altitude and to use the forward slip to loose that extra
>>altitude on final, if necessary. I also prefer to make several idle
>>engine landings first, to test the current wind effect on my sink rate
>>and glide ratio. By next summer, I hope to be cutting my engine and
>>practicing some actual soaring with the ultralight. I'll report on
>>this next year.
>>
>>Rutledge, I'll look for you on Fri. afternoon in T'ville.
>>Champ is OK, but only got 2 hrs in it. It weighs 700 lbs and has a 65 hp
>engine; not as good performance as the UL. I have 50 hrs in the
>ultralight now
>>and love it.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net> |
>
>Hi fellow Kolbers,
> I have a question I would like to ask the group. It has occurred to me
that
>there should be something that could be installed on the output side of the
>regulator / rectifier to prevent high voltage, say over 15 volts, from getting
>through to the battery and associated equipment.
Would a cheap fuse work?
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: | Todd Thompson <TTHOMPS(at)dictaphone.com> |
| Subject: | Re: noise reduction |
Boy, have you guys bitten off a chunk here. This is really a complicated subject
and there is no easy answer to reducing noise in an aircraft - cheaply.
To date ANR is analogue in design and deployment. The Telex ANR system circuitry
is actually built by NCT of Maryland and requires VERY specially designed acoustic
headset with sampling mic built right into the headset. I know that in
one headset situation the glue used in the headset and placed wrongly actually
created a 3 Db performance degradation. Digital ANR would be the way to go
but the DSP chips suck current and would require aircraft voltage and not 9 volt
batteries.
Adaptive Speech filtering ASF is another way to go and could be black boxed but
filtering for the side band - (you hear yourself talk) would cause a delay -
unacceptable. If you didn't mind hearing a "dirty" you and a clear passenger
then ASF might provide a viable cheap alternative to ANR and all it's engineering
design requirements. This would also provide a clear pilot voice over the
radio. Remember, you will hear your voice with all the ambient noise. The
rest of the world would hear you "clear as a bell" . If this is acceptable
then we could build a good relatively cheap product which could be plugged in
line (black box w/ 12 volt power) to the intercom system - with radio. So
is this acceptable? Would you buy it and what is your pricing threshold? $200?
$300?
Let me know I'd be interested to hear from you all on this.
Here's another question, why is aviation still using gigantic 1/4 inch phone jacks?
There's absolutely no justification for this and actually limits our flexibility
and builds gigantic intercom boxes. You should all write to the manufacturers
and voice a complaint . The world has passed us by a decade ago and
are using 3 mm and or 2.5 mm plugs.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Todd Thompson <TTHOMPS(at)dictaphone.com> |
Or a resister?
>>> wood 10/09 11:29 AM >>>
>
>Hi fellow Kolbers,
> I have a question I would like to ask the group. It has occurred to me that
>there should be something that could be installed on the output side of the
>regulator / rectifier to prevent high voltage, say over 15 volts, from getting
>through to the battery and associated equipment.
Would a cheap fuse work?
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: | Adrio Taucer <adrio(at)capitalnet.com> |
Woody,
A fuse limits current (Amps). What Richard is talking about is limiting
voltage (Volts)
so the short answer to your question is - no a cheap (or any other kind)
of fuse will not
work.
For Richard. Since a thread has been started on cheap solutions to this
problem.
Does the battery not act as a filter of sorts, in this situation. And
what about
a fast Zener Regulator diode? Even a 50W one is under $10.
Adrio Taucer
adrio(at)capitalnet.com
http://www.capitalnet.com/~adrio
wood wrote:
> > It has occurred to me that
> >there should be something that could be installed on the output side
> of the
> >regulator / rectifier to prevent high voltage, say over 15 volts,
> from getting
> >through to the battery and associated equipment.
>
> Would a cheap fuse work?
>
> Woody
>
>
--
Adrio Taucer
adrio(at)capitalnet.com
http://www.capitalnet.com/~adrio
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cavuontop(at)aol.com |
In a message dated 10/8/98 5:01:02 PM Pacific Daylight Time, Dickk9(at)aol.com
writes:
<< My question is would there be enough interest to warrant producing a device
that would prevent damage to expensive equipment should your regulator fail?
>>
Dick:
I'm kind of a dummy when it comes to electrical stuff. I understand that a
big voltage spike could fry my handheld radio, but how likely is that with my
Kuntzelman hot box? I don't understand how likely that failure scenario is.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Gross <rpgross(at)yahoo.com> |
Personally, I think anyone who doesn't regularly do dead stick
landings, falls into the category of "BOLD", and as such will not live
to be very old, because the life saving skills and confidence needed
will be vacant when he needs them most..... "when the Rotax quits"..
My two cents worth.
Bob Gross - Jupiter, FL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bob n <ronoy(at)shentel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: over voltage protection |
I have no idea what the so-called voltage regulator circuit looks like
on the Rotaxs, but why not a simple cheap external Zener diode with it's
properly sized resistor, mounted on a bit of Al heat sink. Zeners need a
minimum load to start regulating, and can be had in wide specs of power
handling capabilities
GB
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: noise reduction |
Todd,
Your message sounds like this is your line of work. Then, I noticed your address;
"dictaphone.com". Let's see, 1 + 1 = 2 ? So are you going to design a
new product if their is enough interest?
John Jung
Todd Thompson wrote:
>
> Boy, have you guys bitten off a chunk here. This is really a complicated subject
and there is no easy answer to reducing noise in an aircraft - cheaply.
>
> To date ANR is analogue in design and deployment. The Telex ANR system circuitry
is actually built by NCT of Maryland and requires VERY specially designed
acoustic headset with sampling mic built right into the headset. I know that
in one headset situation the glue used in the headset and placed wrongly actually
created a 3 Db performance degradation. Digital ANR would be the way to
go but the DSP chips suck current and would require aircraft voltage and not 9
volt batteries.
>
> Adaptive Speech filtering ASF is another way to go and could be black boxed but
filtering for the side band - (you hear yourself talk) would cause a delay
- unacceptable. If you didn't mind hearing a "dirty" you and a clear passenger
then ASF might provide a viable cheap alternative to ANR and all it's engineering
design requirements. This would also provide a clear pilot voice over
the radio. Remember, you will hear your voice with all the ambient noise.
The rest of the world would hear you "clear as a bell" . If this is acceptable
then we could build a good relatively cheap product which could be plugged
in line (black box w/ 12 volt power) to the intercom system - with radio.
So is this acceptable? Would you buy it and what is your pricing threshold?
$200? $300?
snip...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Christensen" <spectruminternational(at)email.msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: noise reduction |
-----Original Message-----
From: John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com>
Date: Friday, October 09, 1998 5:00 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: noise reduction
>Ron,
>Have use tried the ANR's in a Rotax powered plane? I understand that they
do well >with prop noise, but maybe not with carb intake noise or airstream
noise. I hate >spending that kind of money with only "marketing hype" for
information.
>John Jung
>Firestar II 503
=================================================
Hi John:
My MKIII is Rotax 912 powered, so I have not used my ANRs against the 2
cycle sound, however I'm certain that it would provide the desired ear
protection. The ANRs really are amazing ear savers. The David Clarks are a
bit expensive; there are other manufacturers that claim very good
performance also. Perhaps you could borrow a pair of ANRs and try them. I
think you will be surprised at their effectiveness.
Ron Christensen
MKIII1/2
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rayfield, Don" <drayfiel(at)kcc.com> |
I saw a note regarding a flyin at Thomasville? Can someone fill me in on
when and where this one is? Is it Thomasville, Ga or another one?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bobdoebler(at)juno.com (Robert L Doebler) |
>
>>
>>Hi fellow Kolbers,
>> I have a question I would like to ask the group. It has
>occurred to me that
>>there should be something that could be installed on the output side
>of the
>>regulator / rectifier to prevent high voltage, say over 15 volts,
>from getting
>>through to the battery and associated equipment.
>
>
>
> Would a cheap fuse work?
>
>
>
> Woody
>FYI :fuse only limits current, you may want to look into an after market
voltage reg or clamp. See CPS or LEAF
Bob D
> 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: | Todd Thompson <TTHOMPS(at)dictaphone.com> |
| Subject: | Re: noise reduction |
So, what do I admit to in front of this prestigous group. My grandfather used
to say that "life is hard, but it's harder when you're stupid". Hum, Maybe I'll
engraved this on my Mk III dashboard...
I'm a product development manager for Continuous Sp Sp SPeech Recognition Systems
and get involved in many technologies which may or may not help us in improving
the recognition accuracy rate. Noise reduction, active or passive, analog
or digitial, hardware or software solutions, are technologies we get involved
with. So this got me, as an ultralight, slim budget pilot, to thinking (dangerous).
I made a few calls to see what aviation ANR work was being done to
date, who's working with whom, etc. and a general lay o' the land.
I think the Kolb-List is actually a good forum to discuss new technologies. Whether
you, me or Dick Kuntzleman develop a new product is not the question. The
question is would you guys buy such a product and what are the pricing pain
levels you could tolerate.
To answer your question - If I thought I could make some money at it, yes, I'd
build it and sell it in a brown wrapper, sent from my home via the internet.
But, so could you. Anybody want to partner?
>>> John Jung 10/09 12:36 PM >>>
Todd,
So are you going to design a new product if their is enough interest?
John Jung
T
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cavuontop(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: noise reduction |
I have some small experience with ANR that may be worth repeating. First
I
flew in a Bonanza with Bose ANR headsets. The results were quite
extraordinary. ANR has been out of my price range, but a couple of Lakelands
ago I met a guy who was selling an ANR kit that would retrofit into a Dave
Clark headset for a couple of hundred bucks. It looked pretty good. He had a
booth and his stchick was to turn up these speakers which put out quite a
racket, then you would put on the headsets and things would get really quiet.
I was impressed, but then I asked him if the peak attenuation of his system
just happened to be the same frequency that the speakers were putting out. He
sheepishly admitted that that was the case. I didn't mind the guy trying to
make his system look good, and he told me that he had tuned the peak
attenuation to coincide with the sound of a GA aircraft engine. The lesson to
be learned there is that the Rotax puts out what I hear to be frequencies that
are quite a bit higher. If you were going to do ANR for Kolb class planes you
would want to tune the system to get maxmum attenuation at that high whiney
vacume cleaner frequency that is so annoying.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry & Karen Cottrel" <lcottrel(at)kfalls.net> |
I have a 16 volt breaker installed between my rectifier and the battery.
Will it work indeed?
Larry
----------
> From: wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net>
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: ?question?
> Date: Friday, October 09, 1998 8:29 AM
>
>
> >
> >Hi fellow Kolbers,
> > I have a question I would like to ask the group. It has occurred to
me
that
> >there should be something that could be installed on the output side of
the
> >regulator / rectifier to prevent high voltage, say over 15 volts, from
getting
> >through to the battery and associated equipment.
>
>
>
> Would a cheap fuse work?
>
>
>
> 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: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Thanks Bob,
and this is exactly why that glider pilot was able to glide and land that
airliner without an engine. You can only guess what other senario would
have taken place if there were an "ordinary" pilot in that seat.
>Let's put a glider pilot into the seat of an airliner and cut the engine
at 45000 >feet. Do you think any ordinary pilot would be able to bring it
down safely after >gliding 100 miles to an airport? Well this actually
happened in Canada a few >years ago. This proved a point: if you have
practiced actual dead stick >landings, then you have a much better chance
of landing your plane safely than >the guy who has not attempted it.
Flying is as safe as the pilot flying the plane.
Ralph Burlingame
Original FireStar 400+ hrs
writes:
>Personally, I think anyone who doesn't regularly do dead stick
>landings, falls into the category of "BOLD", and as such will not live
>to be very old, because the life saving skills and confidence needed
>will be vacant when he needs them most..... "when the Rotax quits"..
>
>My two cents worth.
>Bob Gross - Jupiter, FL
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rbaker2(at)juno.com (Ray L Baker) |
Don,
Thomasville, GA October 9,10,11 1998. Municipal Airport
400 + planes in 96 & 97. On site camping, food and nightime activities.
L. Ray Baker
Lake Butler, Fl
writes:
>
>I saw a note regarding a flyin at Thomasville? Can someone fill me in
>on
>when and where this one is? Is it Thomasville, Ga or another one?
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bob n <ronoy(at)shentel.net> |
| Subject: | Re:over voltage protection |
Larry, does this "breaker" open at voltages over 16? And how fast?
Mechanical or electronic? It's got to be fast for voltage spikes. And
how does it reset? Things to considerin keeping stuff safe downstream
from breaker. G (dual 4th grade=8th) B
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: noise reduction |
Hola
I have been told by the experts where I work an ANR headsets has a hard time
keeping up with the frequencies a 2 cycle engine puts out.
Will Uribe
Building a FireStar II
http://members.aol.com/WillU/index.html
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/lee_hager/
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re:over voltage protection |
Hi Gang,
Well, it looks like I'm getting some good questions I'll try to answer the
best I can.
The "crowbar" circuit Big Lar mentioned is what we use in our constant current
switching regulator the Precision Power Supply. If the output circuit ever
sees anything over a set voltage the crowbar kicks in and the regulator is
turned off before any damage can happen.
As for the fuse or circuit breaker they perform the same function. To watch
current flow (Amps) and if it goes over the fuse rating the element inside
melts or trips and opens the circuit. Voltage ratings on fuses simply mean
that it should not be used in a higher voltage circuit than their ratings.
This is because under certain conditions a blown fuse can arc like a welder at
high voltages, while continuing to conduct current. Voltage and Amps are like
a see saw to perform the same work (watts). When Voltage goes up Amperage
goes down and visa versa.. So if the regulator shorts through and the voltage
shoots up the fuse alone will see a decrease in amps and just sit there fat,
dumb, and happy until something downstream burns up, shorts out, and caused
the amps to go up. Then the fuse will blow, sort of like locking the barn
door after the horse has left town. A fuse is to protect everything in front
of it not what has already burned up and caused it to operate.
Zener diodes, resistors, capacitors are all parts of the shunt regulators that
I mentioned we are now using. These are popular regulators because they do
the job and are pretty cost effective. They are very little more than 4 large
diodes to change the AC from the alternator to DC to operate our equipment. A
control circuit, the Zener diode to hold the voltage to a given level and in
some a capacitor for smoothing out DC ripple or to filter. They are called
"shunt regulators" because the zener diode turns on, at say 14 volts and dead
shorts the incoming AC to ground. When the voltage drops below 14 volts the
zener turns off and lets the voltage go up to 14volts, over and over and over
again. This can be seen with a vom meter. Take an AC reading on the output
of your lighting coil from the engine. Without the reg/rect connected on a
503/582 CDI Rotax the voltage will go to as high as 100 volts at about 6500
rpm. With it connected you'll read the same level on the AC side of the REG
as you see on the DC side about 14 volts. This shorted power is going to
ground, that is why they get warm and in some cases HOT. The Ducati regulator
used on the 912/914 engines is a "switching regulator" works by selecting a
portion of the incoming AC sign wave and using what it needs to obtain the
desired output. The output is continually being monitored and sent back to
the control circuit to make adjustments in voltage output level. Very little
wasted energy making it much more efficient.
Adrio, yes the battery may take the brunt of the voltage shock, ask Bill
Martin of Kolb Aircraft about the "very bulged" 17 Amp hour battery off the
company Mark III. The Regulator failed at Sun n Fun this year. There wasn't
any radios, etc. on at the time so we don't know what they would have done.
What I have in mind is not redesigning the regulators we now have. But,
making a device that would sample the voltage coming out of the regulator and
if it ever sees higher than normal levels would cause the 15A fuse we are now
using to blow before damage can be done to any equipment. For this to happen
the reg would have to fail so it needs to be replaced, replacing the fuse
won't fix the problem. I'm shooting for under $25, hopefully, much less than
new equipment.
As for the Kuntzleman Hot Box, this circuit would definitely be used in them.
I hope this helps answer some of the questions.
Safe and enjoyable flying,
Dick Kuntzleman
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher John Armstrong" <Tophera(at)centuryinter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: noise reduction |
Adaptive Speech filtering ASF is interesting approach noise reduction... I
think that the DSP chips requireing aircraft current is not a big deal, your
in an aircraft so just plug in. Digital reduction should be nearly perfect
and should be fairly cheep... and you should only have to do it once for a
whole plane load of people cause the band with is high enough, right? I
agree that using 1920 phone system plugs, or any of the other antique stuff
that is still in planes is really pathetic. Why we cant have an electronic
fuel and oil injected engine just baffles me. they have this stuff on lawn
mowers these days.
Topher
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Pat Kegebein <pak(at)niia.net> |
Hi,
My name is Bruce Kegebein, and i am looking for installers of 912
engines. I am wondering about anything that you changed for your
engine. The book talks about a inline water temperature censor which I
do not have, and am wondering where do i put the sensor on the engine.
Thanks,
Bruce
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Thacker <gthacker(at)mciunix.mciu.k12.pa.us> |
| Subject: | foot lbs to inch lbs |
Does anyone know the convertion to change inch lbs to foot lbs? This may
or may not be a stupid question but I don't know the answer :-}} For
example what would 200 inch lbs be in Newtons or foot lbs?
Gary
Souderton,Pa.
gthacker(at)wsd.k12.pa.us (work only)
____F i r e S t a r____
___(+)___
(_)
\ /
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "harry pridgen jr" <pridgen(at)WORLDNET.ATT.NET> |
| Subject: | Re: foot lbs to inch lbs |
-----Original Message-----
From: Gary Thacker <gthacker(at)mciunix.mciu.k12.pa.us>
Date: Friday, October 09, 1998 9:32 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: foot lbs to inch lbs
>
>
>Does anyone know the convertion to change inch lbs to foot lbs? This may
>or may not be a stupid question but I don't know the answer :-}} For
>example what would 200 inch lbs be in Newtons or foot lbs?
>The only stupid question is a unasked one. 12 inch lbs=1 ft. lb
>harry pridgen, wilmington,nc
>Gary
>Souderton,Pa.
>gthacker(at)wsd.k12.pa.us (work only)
>
> ____F i r e S t a r____
> ___(+)___
> (_)
> \ /
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Davis" <ldavis(at)netusa1.net> |
| Subject: | Re: foot lbs to inch lbs |
> Does anyone know the convertion to change inch lbs to foot lbs? This may
> or may not be a stupid question but I don't know the answer :-}} For
> example what would 200 inch lbs be in Newtons or foot lbs?
>
>
> Gary
> Souderton,Pa.
> gthacker(at)wsd.k12.pa.us (work only)
>
> ____F i r e S t a r____
> ___(+)___
> (_)
> \ /
Gary,
12 inch pounds equal 1 foot pound. 200 inch pounds equal 200
divided by 12 or 16.6666 foot pounds. See:
http://www.oddparts.com/acsi/defines/torque.htm
--
Larry Davis
Marion, Indiana
http://www.netusa1.net/~ldavis
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "merle hargis" <merlepilar(at)WORLDNET.ATT.NET> |
----------
Ralph H Burlingame you wrote on the subject: Re: Kolb-List: Engine Out!
and I agree with you. On thur.. I practiced a couple engines out. I fly
from a 3300 foot grass strip in Zellwood, fl. so I had a lot of room for
mistakes. I found it to be enjoyable this time. I had done it once before
but that time it was for real and I didn't have time to enjoy the trip.
Practice does help.
Date: Thursday, October 08, 1998 11:14 PM
>
>
> Gentlemen,
>
> I think it's a very wise idea to practice those engine-off landings. Of
> course GA pilots don't practice it because the risks are greater, but
> what do you think usually happens to all GA pilots when it quits? They
> panic, and then it's over. If they were to practice, starting on a very
> long runway and working their way down to a 2500 foot strip,
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Henry Wortman <hwortman(at)datasys.net> |
Don:
The Thomasville, Ga. Flyin is Oct 9, 10, & 11. I was over there today
and they had a great beginning with many more expected tomorrow.
Rayfield, Don wrote:
>
>
> I saw a note regarding a flyin at Thomasville? Can someone fill me in on
> when and where this one is? Is it Thomasville, Ga or another one?
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dralle(at)matronics.com (Matt Dralle 925-606-1001) |
| Subject: | PLEASE READ - Final Days of List Op. Survey... |
Kolb Listers,
There are only about 2 more days left to cast your vote for the List Operation
Survey!! Sunday, October 11 I will close the voting and post the results of
the survey and once and for all set the operational configuration on the
Kolb-List. As of Friday night, the voter turn out is at just under 25%.
If you haven't yet cast your vote for the List operation method, please do
so soon!
While there is currently an operation method in the lead (no, I won't say
which one), there is no clear winner considering that only 25% of the
Kolb-List members have voted so far. *Your vote does count*, so surf over
and cast it today!
For a complete description of each of the "candidates", please review the
following URL where a detailed description is given on each method:
http://www.matronics.com/kolb-list/surveydefs.html
If you havn't yet voted for your preferred method of operation for the
Kolb-List, please use your web browser to surf over to the Survey web page
and cast your vote. The Survey URL is:
http://www.matronics.com/kolb-list/survey.html
Let's try to get the voter turn out as close to 100% as possible!!
Thank you for your support,
Matt Dralle
Kolb-List Administrator
--
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: | wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net> |
| Subject: | Re: foot lbs to inch lbs |
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Gary Thacker <gthacker(at)mciunix.mciu.k12.pa.us>
>To: Kolb-List
>Date: Friday, October 09, 1998 9:32 PM
>Subject: Kolb-List: foot lbs to inch lbs
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>Does anyone know the convertion to change inch lbs to foot lbs? This may
>>or may not be a stupid question but I don't know the answer :-}} For
>>example what would 200 inch lbs be in Newtons or foot lbs?
>>The only stupid question is a unasked one. 12 inch lbs=1 ft. lb
>>harry pridgen, wilmington,nc
>>Gary
>>Souderton,Pa.
>>gthacker(at)wsd.k12.pa.us (work only)
I don't like to pick on anyone but I wouldd like to use your reply as an
example. I hope you don't mind. Could we use a bit more carefull editing and
separate our answers from the original message. In the above example I had a
hard time finding the response. this happens quite often and the solution is
simple.
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> |
| Subject: | Re:over voltage protection |
>
>Hi Gang,
>Well, it looks like I'm getting some good questions I'll try to answer the
>best I can. --(deleted to save space)---
I'm shooting for under $25, hopefully, much less than new equipment.
>I hope this helps answer some of the questions.
>Safe and enjoyable flying,
>Dick Kuntzleman
turn it down?
BTW, if anyone on the list could use one, I have one of Dick's Power
Separators that I have never used, (turned out I didn't need it), and will
give it to anyone that can use it. Send me $5 for postage and overcoming
inertia, and it's yours.
What it does is:(from the enclosed instructions)
"The Power Separator will enable operation of a regulator/rectifier,
for charging a battery, and a lighting coil powered strobe system to be
connected to the same lighting coil."
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | MIII Drag Strut Fit Problem |
Hello Group,
I could use some help. It is my plane work weekend and Dennis' off weekend.
The following is an excerpt from a note I sent to Dennis. It is a problem I'm
having lining up the drag strut and interference with gussets on the pre-built
ribs I was sent. If anyone else has come across this problem I would love to
hear from you. It would make me feel better. First real head scratcher
since I started.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
The problem is the fit of the drag strut. I'm running into some serious
interference with the 4" gusset (2nd from rear) on the "B Rib" and the smaller
gusset (3rd from rear) on the next rib. When I lay the drag strut in between
these gussets, the centerline(CL) of the end of drag strut is ~2" away from
the short steel tube on steel rib. There is no play either.
This is the problem as I see it. Tell me if you agree. After finally pouring
through the manual on the rib construction I found the "IMPORTANT" note on
page 16. It talks about the "B ribs" having a 3" gusset instead of a 4"
gusset. And even with that, the 3" gusset may have to be filed for clearance.
The dimension for the smaller gusset on the third rib is 2 3/16 x 1 instead of
1 1/2 x 1 as specified in the manual and on the plans. The manual refers to
the "dotted line" for B-ribs but I don't have that in my plans.
The only solution that I can see is to remove the metal on the both gussets.
I would think I would have to have ~1/8" clearance to prevent chafing and
rubbing due to flexing. I want to check with you on this before I proceed. I
don't like the idea of removing metal from structural members without your
input. Wouldn't want to become a statistic and give your aircraft a bad name.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - - - - -
Thanks for any and all help,
John Bickham
M3-308
St. Francisville, LA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cliff and Carolyn Stripling <striplic(at)dfw.net> |
| Subject: | Re: MIII Drag Strut Fit Problem |
>...The only solution that I can see is to remove the metal on the both gussets.
>I would think I would have to have ~1/8" clearance to prevent chafing and
>rubbing due to flexing. I want to check with you on this before I proceed...
John,
I had the same problem with my MKIII wing drag strut. I took a little metal
off of the gusset or gussets (I can't remember whether one or two) as you
have described and that fixed that.
Later,
--
Cliff & Carolyn Stripling Him: Retired Pharmacist
(972)247-9821 Dallas Texas Her: Real Estate Broker - Texas
and Marble Falls Texas Both: 5th Wheel - RV - Travel
Kolb MKIII - N582CC (50.5 hrs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Bruner" <brunerd(at)ulster.net> |
-----Original Message-----
From: Geoff Thistlethwaite <geoffthis(at)WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
-snip-
>NEVER FLY WHERE YOU CAN'T LAND.
This is VERY bad news to a Kolber wannabe like me or anyone else who lives
in mountainous, forested, remote areas. Does this mean that the only sail I
should ever use will be attached to a boat? That if I want to fly in these
areas I should have 5000' AGL? There's GOTTA be something reliable
(assuming proper maintenance) for Kolbs.
Let's have it: is the 503 the most reliable?
David Bruner
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: MIII Drag Strut Fit Problem |
In a message dated 10/10/98 5:48:49 PM Central Daylight Time, striplic(at)dfw.net
writes:
>
>
> >...The only solution that I can see is to remove the metal on the both
> gussets.
> >I would think I would have to have ~1/8" clearance to prevent chafing and
> >rubbing due to flexing. I want to check with you on this before I
proceed..
> .
>
> John,
>
> I had the same problem with my MKIII wing drag strut. I took a little
metal
> off of the gusset or gussets (I can't remember whether one or two) as you
> have described and that fixed that.
>
> Later,
>
> --
> Cliff & Carolyn Stripling Him: Retired Pharmacist
> (972)247-9821 Dallas Texas Her: Real Estate Broker - Texas
> and Marble Falls Texas Both: 5th Wheel - RV - Travel
> Kolb MKIII - N582CC (50.5 hrs)
>
Thanks Cliff,
You and Dennis agree. This was really my first snag and this was the first
time that I got to experience Kolb's great support. While I was outside
yesterday (Saturday), Dennis called me and E-mailed me within a couple of
hours. I missed the phone call but he talked to the machine. I don't think I
could expect any better than that.
For those of you on the fence while deciding which design or company to commit
to, this is one of the reasons I went with Kolb. It's true, good people and
good support. I wonder if those F_______ people were manning the computers
and phones on Saturday.
Thanks to Dennis, Cliff, and all who responded.
Onward and upward,
John Bickham
St. Francisville, LA
M3-308
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Terry Swartz <Tswartz(at)ptdprolog.net> |
I believe the inline water sensor is really not necessary since the CHT
sensors monitor the same thing. I am using the EIS system and did
install an inline sensor in the big radiator that comes from the
engine. I used a brass right angle fitting the I got at a hardware
store which I drilled and taped and installed a sensor. It works fine
but shows about the same temp as the CHT sensors. I will probably
remove it sometime and replace it with an outside air temp.
Terry
Pat Kegebein wrote:
>
>
> Hi,
>
> My name is Bruce Kegebein, and i am looking for installers of 912
> engines. I am wondering about anything that you changed for your
> engine. The book talks about a inline water temperature censor which I
> do not have, and am wondering where do i put the sensor on the engine.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bruce
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dralle(at)matronics.com (Matt Dralle 925-606-1001) |
| Subject: | Survey Results - Voting Closed... |
Kolb Listers,
Voting is now officially closed and a winning method has been selected based
on the majority vote. Here is a summary of the two-week voting statistics:
Total Kolb-List Members: 320
Total Voting Kolb Members: 93
Voter Turnout Percent: 29.1%
Reply to List Only: 46 (49.4%)
Reply to Both List and Sender: 21 (22.5%)
Reply to Sender Only: 17 (18.2%)
Don't Care: 9 (10.0%)
So, the desired List operation is obvious. The List will continue to operate
in its current mode of operation which is to set the "Reply-To:" header to
"kolb-list(at)matronics.com". This has the default effect of causing replies
to back to the entire list.
I want to thank everyone that participated in the survey and for all of the
kind email I received regarding the voting mechanism.
If there are other issues or topics that members would like to see a vote
on, please let me know. I would be happy to organize a survey similar to
the List Op vote.
Again, thanks for your support.
Matt Dralle
Kolb-List Administrator
--
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: | "A. J. Vann" <redhill(at)rose.net> |
David Bruner wrote:
> Let's have it: is the 503 the most reliable?
>
> My partners and I purchased a 503 dcdi less than one year ago with 50 hrs. We
now have 250 hrs on it with not so much as a falter. We change the plugs and
decarbon with "seafoam" every 25 hrs. We change the fuel pump every 100hrs;
we plan to change the fuel lines annually. I don't know about the other engines,
but the 503 is reliable for us, so far.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jon P. Croke" <joncroke(at)CompuServe.COM> |
| Subject: | Survey Results - Voting Closed... |
One thing I didnt know....
320 Kolb list members!!! WOW! Thats a lot!!!!!
Sounds, tho, that only 90 or so are ACTIVE, (enough to vote..... )
What do the other 200 do...... lurk!!????
I say this in fun..... its great knowing that there are that many
interested people in Kolbs... makes me feel like there is good company in
this hobby.....
Hello to all (and BTW, my vote did NOT win.... but I respect democracy.....
its better than the other possiblities... and thank you Mat)
Jon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cliff and Carolyn Stripling <striplic(at)dfw.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Survey Results - Voting Closed... |
To all:
> Reply to List Only: 46 (49.4%)
> Reply to Both List and Sender: 21 (22.5%)
> Reply to Sender Only: 17 (18.2%)
> Don't Care: 9 (10.0%)
Well, now I can't whine anymore.
I went out to the airport to get some very needed flying time in and
discovered that my landlord had poured a nice new apron of concrete in front
of the hanger. Good, I thought, now not so much dirt will blow under the
door and get all over everything. When I looked closer I noticed the
concrete guys had slopped a lot of concrete up against and under the door
completely burying the track that the door opens on. Gulp! I guess my
plane will be in prison until they can chip it all out from around the
track. Glad I don't have that job.
Later,
--
Cliff & Carolyn Stripling Him: Retired Pharmacist
(972)247-9821 Dallas Texas Her: Real Estate Broker - Texas
and Marble Falls Texas Both: 5th Wheel - RV - Travel
Kolb MKIII - N582CC (50.5 hrs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "harry pridgen jr" <pridgen(at)WORLDNET.ATT.NET> |
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | skip staub <skips(at)bhip.infi.net> |
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Geoff Thistlethwaite <geoffthis(at)WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
>>NEVER FLY WHERE YOU CAN'T LAND.
>This is VERY bad news to a Kolber wannabe like me or anyone else who lives
>in mountainous, forested, remote areas. Does this mean that the only sail I
>should ever use will be attached to a boat? That if I want to fly in these
>areas I should have 5000' AGL? There's GOTTA be something reliable
>(assuming proper maintenance) for Kolbs.
>
>Let's have it: is the 503 the most reliable?
David, "NEVER FLY WHERE YOU CAN'T LAND" is some pretty good advice
regardless of the engine used. It can't always be avoided, but I know that
I try to do just that--- even when using a $20,000 Lycoming on a certified
flying machine! :)
Regards,
Skip
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rick106(at)juno.com |
| Subject: | Re: Survey Results - Voting Closed... |
Cliff
the sky's are getting better all the time get your aux. tank's in
Rick Libersat
writes:
>
>
>To all:
>
>> Reply to List Only: 46 (49.4%)
>> Reply to Both List and Sender: 21 (22.5%)
>> Reply to Sender Only: 17 (18.2%)
>> Don't Care: 9 (10.0%)
>
>Well, now I can't whine anymore.
>
>I went out to the airport to get some very needed flying time in and
>discovered that my landlord had poured a nice new apron of concrete in
>front
>of the hanger. Good, I thought, now not so much dirt will blow under
>the
>door and get all over everything. When I looked closer I noticed the
>concrete guys had slopped a lot of concrete up against and under the
>door
>completely burying the track that the door opens on. Gulp! I guess
>my
>plane will be in prison until they can chip it all out from around the
>track. Glad I don't have that job.
>
>Later,
>
>
>--
>Cliff & Carolyn Stripling Him: Retired Pharmacist
>(972)247-9821 Dallas Texas Her: Real Estate Broker - Texas
>and Marble Falls Texas Both: 5th Wheel - RV - Travel
> Kolb MKIII - N582CC (50.5 hrs)
>
>
>
>
>
at it does is:(from the enclosed instructions)
> "The Power Separator will enable operation of a
>regulator/rectifier,
>for charging a battery, and a lighting coil powered strobe system to
>be
>connected to the same lighting coil."
> Richard Pike
> MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com> |
| Subject: | Re: MIII Drag Strut Fit Problem |
>
>Hello Group,
>
>I could use some help.
>The problem is the fit of the drag strut. I'm running into some serious
>interference with the 4" gusset (2nd from rear) on the "B Rib" and the smaller
>gusset (3rd from rear) on the next rib.
>John Bickham
>M3-308
>St. Francisville, LA
Sorry, I don't remember anything like that. (That doesn't mean it
wasn't there, just that I don't remember it...)
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rutledge Fuller" <rut007(at)hotmail.com> |
I would be interested.
I didn't know that Dick was with the group. I have called Kuntzleman a
couple of times and have gotten nothing but the best service, even when
it was one of those "FREE" information calls. I recently ordered a
replacement bulb for my 10 year old dual strobe kit. Dick talked me out
of spending extra cash with him and sold me only a replacement bulb. To
my suprise it was in my mailbox w/i three days. He sent it priority.
Glad to see that good old service is still available. I have tried
every mailorder ultralight outfit there is, and none have surpassed the
service that Kuntzleman has given me. Oh, yea! The new bulb works
great. I was going to call Kuntzleman today, but saw the posting and
decided to give a testimonial instead.
Thanks Dick,
Rutledge Fuller
Tallahassee, Fl.
>Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 21:51:51 -0400
>To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>From: Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
>Subject: Re: Kolb-List: ?question?
>Reply-To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>
>
>>
>>Hi fellow Kolbers,
>> I have a question I would like to ask the group. It has occurred to
me that
>>there should be something that could be installed on the output side
of the
>>regulator / rectifier to prevent high voltage, say over 15 volts, from
getting
>>through to the battery and associated equipment. When the regulators
we're
>>using for the purpose of charging aircraft batteries fail they either
go open
>>(if you're lucky) or short through (if you're not). I know when, they
short
>>through, as much as 100 volts can be passed to the battery, radios,
gps, etc.
>>My question is would there be enough interest to warrant producing a
device
>>that would prevent damage to expensive equipment should your regulator
fail?
>>
>> Thanks for any comments pro or con.
>>
>> Dick Kuntzleman, Pres.
>> Kuntzleman Electronics,
Inc.
>
>
> Go for it. But since I am hoping to retire soon, and my income
will
>be cut to zilch, plan accordingly...
> Richard Pike
> MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rutledge Fuller" <rut007(at)hotmail.com> |
I thought that this was a very interesting outlook from my instructor.
I thought that I would share.
I appreciate everyones response to "Enigne Out"
Thanks,
Rutledge Fuller
>Reply-To: "Michael Highsmith"
>From: "Michael Highsmith" <michael.highsmith(at)worldnet.att.net>
>To: "Rutledge Fuller"
>Subject: engine out
>Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 07:04:30 -0500
>
>Now do you see why I stress the 45 degree rule from the horizon? You
can
>never have to much altitude in a real emergency. Some people think that
=
>if they fly real low and have an engine out that somehow they will not
=
>get hurt when they contact the ground. You and I both know this is not
=
>the case. The rule will apply at any an all altitudes. The base of the
=
>landing cone that your plane sits on at all times in flights is
>multiplied with height, therefore giving you more options with respect
=
>to time for a restart or chute deployment. Sometimes you may even have
=
>time to choose a spot closer to your home base or at lest closer to
>where there may be help. If you have ever had to put down in the woods
=
>it can be a long walk back to civilization and even longer if you are
>hurt. These are only common sense rules and do not apply to those bold
=
>pilots Jerry was talking about. Of course there is one rule that one
>must believe or the others will not apply. It is not if but when your
>engine stops that you will be forced to apply all the other rules. The
=
>first time it happens a true pilot, that has been trained and has
>practiced for emergences procedures, will execute them with precision.
=
>Your conscious analitical mind becomes the co-pilot and the trained
>subconscious mind becomes the pilot only then will you have a chance to
=
>survive.
>You know that piloting an airplane is parallel to how we live. We must
=
>have a destination in both or destiny will give us one. We can choose
>where to go and how to get there or we can not choose and destiny we
>drag us there kicking and screaming but we cannot sit still, so it is
=
>when we fly. Once in the air as being born we must land or live. With
>training and practice both life an flying are very rewarding just don't
=
>leave it up to destiny. You seem to have a pretty good handle on
both.
>That's all for now. Stay aware and don't forget to stop and smell the
>flowers.
>Firehawk.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rutledge Fuller" <rut007(at)hotmail.com> |
Thomasville was very busy. I was in the pattern with a Citation and a
King Air, not to mention the Glasair's and RV's. Firday was nice. The
Ultralights and slow aircraft used 04 and turned before the intersection
while the GA's used 32. Saturday, everyone used 04 until the Waco
flipped over. I left before this happened. I took off to head back to
Quincy at lunch time. As I departed a Glasair did a flyby just over me
(seemed like 5 feet) rolling his airplane the entire length of the
runway. Get me the Hell outta here. The flight back to Quincy was
great. It was very turbulent and my GPS failed. I had to fly IFR (I
fly the roads) When my GPS started to work, it pointed North and not
West. My GPS was giving me incorrect information. I didn't fall for
the trick, and continued IFR, and made it safely back to Quincy. Great
flight experience, except the Thomasville air traffic. I guess if it
doesn't kill you it makes you stronger. I learned that I will probably
stay grounded until the hotshots come down. I felt that the traffic
situation was dangerous, and if I had it to do over, I would have stayed
home or at least grounded.
I am planning on making South Mississippi this weekend. See you there.
>To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 18:42:43 -0400
>Subject: Re: Kolb-List: flyin
>From: rbaker2(at)juno.com (Ray L Baker)
>Reply-To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>
>
>Don,
>Thomasville, GA October 9,10,11 1998. Municipal Airport
>400 + planes in 96 & 97. On site camping, food and nightime
activities.
>
>L. Ray Baker
>Lake Butler, Fl
>
>
>writes:
>>
>>I saw a note regarding a flyin at Thomasville? Can someone fill me in
>>on
>>when and where this one is? Is it Thomasville, Ga or another one?
>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cavuontop(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re:over voltage protection |
In a message dated 10/9/98 5:40:29 PM Pacific Daylight Time, Dickk9(at)aol.com
writes:
<< As for the Kuntzleman Hot Box, this circuit would definitely be used in
them. >>
Dick: Could you make this product retrofittable into an existing hot box?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cavuontop(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: MIII Drag Strut Fit Problem |
In a message dated 10/10/98 3:48:49 PM Pacific Daylight Time, striplic(at)dfw.net
writes:
<< I had the same problem with my MKIII wing drag strut. I took a little
metal
off of the gusset or gussets (I can't remember whether one or two) as you
have described and that fixed that. >>
Interesting. I didn't have to take any metal off but I did have parts
that were very close. Durring my pre-cover inspection my tech counselor
suggested that I put anti-chaffe tape around the parts that were contacting so
they wouldn't be able to rub.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re:over voltage protection |
Dick and anyone doing electrical
Bob Nuckolls at AeroElectric Connection offers a number of circuits for the
experimental aircraft electrical systems.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/catalog.html
Therein he offers a crowbar for $ 35.
He has written extensively on the aspects of the Aircraft electrical system
and provides at his web site a number of documents on the on the various
transient suppression techniques. These articles have generally been
published in either Sports Aviation of Kitplanes. If you have several
hundred dollars of electrical equipment connected to the aircraft/engine
electrical system, you need to address the transients caused by all
electromechanical devices, i.e., alternators, relays, landing lights etc.
Also Harris has a very good technical literature at
http://www.semi.harris.com/families/tvs.htm#Transient Voltage Suppression
Application Notes
Their notes in AN9312 are very pertinent to aircraft. One should recognize
that the conditions discussed are for proper functionality of the
electrical components. When there is a malfunction in the voltage
regulator the condition is not transient and could be destructive of the
battery as well as the avionics and alternator.
Ron
BTW I have never been able to get the schematics or circuit from Rotax for
their regulator on the 912 and the Tech folks at their suppliers don't even
understand the phenomena or issues for failure modes.
>
>Hi Gang,
>
>Well, it looks like I'm getting some good questions I'll try to answer the
>best I can.
>
>The "crowbar" circuit Big Lar mentioned is what we use in our constant
current
>switching regulator the Precision Power Supply. If the output circuit ever
>sees anything over a set voltage the crowbar kicks in and the regulator is
>turned off before any damage can happen.
>
>As for the fuse or circuit breaker they perform the same function. To watch
>current flow (Amps) and if it goes over the fuse rating the element inside
>melts or trips and opens the circuit. Voltage ratings on fuses simply mean
>that it should not be used in a higher voltage circuit than their ratings.
>This is because under certain conditions a blown fuse can arc like a
welder at
>high voltages, while continuing to conduct current. Voltage and Amps are
like
>a see saw to perform the same work (watts). When Voltage goes up Amperage
>goes down and visa versa.. So if the regulator shorts through and the
voltage
>shoots up the fuse alone will see a decrease in amps and just sit there fat,
>dumb, and happy until something downstream burns up, shorts out, and caused
>the amps to go up. Then the fuse will blow, sort of like locking the barn
>door after the horse has left town. A fuse is to protect everything in front
>of it not what has already burned up and caused it to operate.
>
>Zener diodes, resistors, capacitors are all parts of the shunt regulators
that
>I mentioned we are now using. These are popular regulators because they do
>the job and are pretty cost effective. They are very little more than 4
large
>diodes to change the AC from the alternator to DC to operate our equipment. A
>control circuit, the Zener diode to hold the voltage to a given level and in
>some a capacitor for smoothing out DC ripple or to filter. They are called
>"shunt regulators" because the zener diode turns on, at say 14 volts and dead
>shorts the incoming AC to ground. When the voltage drops below 14 volts the
>zener turns off and lets the voltage go up to 14volts, over and over and over
>again. This can be seen with a vom meter. Take an AC reading on the output
>of your lighting coil from the engine. Without the reg/rect connected on a
>503/582 CDI Rotax the voltage will go to as high as 100 volts at about 6500
>rpm. With it connected you'll read the same level on the AC side of the REG
>as you see on the DC side about 14 volts. This shorted power is going to
>ground, that is why they get warm and in some cases HOT. The Ducati
regulator
>used on the 912/914 engines is a "switching regulator" works by selecting a
>portion of the incoming AC sign wave and using what it needs to obtain the
>desired output. The output is continually being monitored and sent back to
>the control circuit to make adjustments in voltage output level. Very little
>wasted energy making it much more efficient.
>
>Adrio, yes the battery may take the brunt of the voltage shock, ask Bill
>Martin of Kolb Aircraft about the "very bulged" 17 Amp hour battery off the
>company Mark III. The Regulator failed at Sun n Fun this year. There wasn't
>any radios, etc. on at the time so we don't know what they would have
done.
>
>What I have in mind is not redesigning the regulators we now have. But,
>making a device that would sample the voltage coming out of the regulator and
>if it ever sees higher than normal levels would cause the 15A fuse we are now
>using to blow before damage can be done to any equipment. For this to happen
>the reg would have to fail so it needs to be replaced, replacing the fuse
>won't fix the problem. I'm shooting for under $25, hopefully, much less than
>new equipment.
>
>As for the Kuntzleman Hot Box, this circuit would definitely be used in them.
>
>I hope this helps answer some of the questions.
>
>Safe and enjoyable flying,
>Dick Kuntzleman
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Todd Thompson <TTHOMPS(at)dictaphone.com> |
| Subject: | Prop Pitch & group advise needed |
This weekend was pretty much of a wash out here in Connecticut but I was able to
get a W&B and almost finished my breakin on the 582. So here are the numbers:
at 4800 - 4900 RPM:
radiator water- 147 - 160 (water applied)
CHT 180 - 190
EGT 1147 -1185
Anything past 4900 and the EGT's headed to the roof.
AT 4900+ to 6500
Radiator - 150-175 (depending on amount of water sprayed)
CHT 190
EGT 1200!!!!
Can't run in this range for more than 5 seconds without EGT hitting the ceiling.
Prop under pitched : can hit 6920 RPM at full throttle on the grd. Clearly, this
prop needs to be re-pitched.
CHT 180 - 190
EGT 1147
Water temp 145 - 160 (depending on amount of water sprayed.
CHT of cyl. 1 & 2 are always within 10 degrees of each other. #2 cyl jet needle
is on #4 clip position. Cyl. 1 is on third. (From top to bottom)
EGT 's are with in 20 degrees of each other.
SO if I up the pitch to control static runnup to 6300 will it bring my EGT down
in the 5000 - 6500 range? Or is this a mid range rejetting issue?
And why are my head temps so low? I was expecting 230 range but never got there
even when my water temps were up around 170.
In advance, thanks for your help.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cavuontop(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Prop Pitch & group advise needed |
In a message dated 10/12/98 11:08:24 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
TTHOMPS(at)dictaphone.com writes:
<< SO if I up the pitch to control static runnup to 6300 will it bring my EGT
down in the 5000 - 6500 range? Or is this a mid range rejetting issue?
>>
The book says your static max rpm should be 6200. Pitch for that number
and your egts should come into line.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank_R_Reynen(at)notes.seagate.com |
| Subject: | Re: Prop Pitch & group advise needed |
In a message dated 10/12/98 11:08:24 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
TTHOMPS(at)dictaphone.com writes:
<< SO if I up the pitch to control static runnup to 6300 will it bring my
EGT
down in the 5000 - 6500 range? Or is this a mid range rejetting issue?
>>
The book says your static max rpm should be 6200. Pitch for that number
and your egts should come into line.
I agree.
Your CHT are also low because your engine is not sufficiently loaded by the
prop/gearbox combination.Once you have that in the range,the CHT should be
around 200 +/- 10 F.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank_R_Reynen(at)notes.seagate.com |
| Subject: | Re: over voltage protection |
Hi Rick,
My hobbs also required a capacitor across the terminals for proper
operation with the single phase rectifier on the 582.
Frank Reynen MKIII@482hrs
Richard
I have never heard of any of the KOLB 582 ROTAX users .If they had
trouble with the power coming out of the rectifier to the hobbs the way
it is shown in the KOLB book
as well as the CPS proper care and feeding of the Rotax .
This will not work with my set up unless you put a cap. with the full
wave bridge rect.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Russell Duffy" <rv8(at)mindspring.com> |
>
>Thanks Bob,
>
>and this is exactly why that glider pilot was able to glide and land that
>airliner without an engine. You can only guess what other senario would
>have taken place if there were an "ordinary" pilot in that seat.
To continue this line of reasoning, we should require all airline pilots to
do actual engine out landings in their airliners :-)
I was out of touch when most of this thread occurred, but I'm with Jerry
100%. I think practicing simulated engine outs at idle is perfectly
sufficient, and reduces the risks. Of course the key word here is
"practice". The method is less important than the action.
If you feel you must shut your engine off, have at it. All I ask is that
you make sure I'm not in the pattern. Otherwise, I might have to bring the
RV-8 over for a high speed pass or two when it's finished :-)
Rusty
PS- Flame away. I'm stuck in Cleveland for 4 weeks, and can use the heat :-)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Lanny Fetterman <donaho(at)csrlink.net> |
Jon
My dad taught me to turn the axle nut snug, then back off one hole and
put
the cotter pin in. Always seemed reasonable to me.
Lanny
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rick106(at)juno.com |
| Subject: | Re: over voltage protection |
Frank
I glad to know that I am not the only one that to put in a capacitor with
my hobbs
don't know if I ask you about this or not Rotax 582 14hr.on
engine all readings read perfectly , then the tachometer went from 6300
to 8200 rpm's come to find out after changing out the tachometer, (
no fix ) Then a call to Richard Thompson at KODIAK RESEARCH they
sent out a new sator put it in and (no fix) this went on for a
while the fix was... get this change out the RECTIFIER - REGULATOR
#264870 Frank do you or anyone else know why this would be when the
rect. reg has nothing to do with the tach This came out of the EAA
Experimenter Recipes food for thought on page 38 feb.1995
Rick Libersat
writes:
>
>Hi Rick,
>My hobbs also required a capacitor across the terminals for proper
>operation with the single phase rectifier on the 582.
>
>Frank Reynen MKIII@482hrs
>
>
>
>
>
>Richard
>
> I have never heard of any of the KOLB 582 ROTAX users .If they
>had
>trouble with the power coming out of the rectifier to the hobbs the
>way
>it is shown in the KOLB book
>as well as the CPS proper care and feeding of the Rotax .
>This will not work with my set up unless you put a cap. with the full
>wave bridge rect.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eugene Zimmerman <tehz(at)redrose.net> |
| Subject: | full stall landing |
One of my druthers about Kolb planes, would be the ability to make full
stall three point landings. Kolb however has designed this capability out of
their planes. With their long straight fuse tube it is simply impossible to
flare hard enough for a full stall three point landing because the tail
wheel will hit down long before a full stall angle is achieved. I know it is
probably a much more idiot proof design the way Kolb configured wing and
horizontal surface angles, and I understand why they would do that. However
I think it does compromise the ultimate slow speed and short field landing
capabilities of their planes.
Landing with full flap deflection does make the landing closer to a full
stall three point, but the tail wheel can still be made to hit first.
Do not misunderstand I love my little ultimate flying machines, maybe Im
just nuts about ultimate.
Is there any one else out there that has flaps on a Firestar?
Eugene Z.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Reed Lindberg <reed(at)indra.com> |
| Subject: | Re: full stall landing |
>
>
> Is there any one else out there that has flaps on a Firestar?
>
> Eugene Z.
>
>
This caught my attention. I have been lurking for a week or two, and have not
yet
ordered a kit.I'd like to hear more about flaps on a firestar.
Reed Lindberg
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Swiderski <swidersk(at)digital.com> |
| Subject: | Re: full stall landing |
E.Z.
That bothers the dickens out of me too. I freely admit to being greedy &
wanting every last drop of performance I can get. My old UltraStar spoiled me.
I
added 45 degree flaperons & raised the gear 12". I could full stall land it
almost like a Robin lighting on a birdbath. I do exagerate a little bit
sometimes. I often wondered if it would full stall land with only flaperons &
not
raising the gear height?
Eugene Zimmerman wrote:
>
> One of my druthers about Kolb planes, would be the ability to make full
> stall three point landings. Kolb however has designed this capability out of
> their planes. With their long straight fuse tube it is simply impossible to
> flare hard enough for a full stall three point landing because the tail
> wheel will hit down long before a full stall angle is achieved. I know it is
> probably a much more idiot proof design the way Kolb configured wing and
> horizontal surface angles, and I understand why they would do that. However
> I think it does compromise the ultimate slow speed and short field landing
> capabilities of their planes.
> Landing with full flap deflection does make the landing closer to a full
> stall three point, but the tail wheel can still be made to hit first.
> Do not misunderstand I love my little ultimate flying machines, maybe Im
> just nuts about ultimate.
>
> Is there any one else out there that has flaps on a Firestar?
>
> Eugene Z.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "john hauck" <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: full stall landing |
>
>
>
>One of my druthers about Kolb planes, would be the ability to make full
>stall three point landings. Kolb however has designed this capability out
of
Hello EZ and Kolb Gang:
My Firestar (1985) did not have flaps, but it was capable of and did make
beautiful 3 point full stall landings. The cure was to undo a little of
Homer's design to make the Firestar a safer airplane for low time pilots.
My cure was to replace the original gear legs with 4130 legs heat treated
and cut at 35.5 inches. The legs were inserted all the way in the gear leg
sockets til they contacted the end of the socket. This put the Firestar in
the correct position. Did wonders for landing on my 600 ft strip because at
that time I was not equipped with brakes.
Did something similar with my MK III. It too makes excellent 3 pt landings
(full stall).
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "john hauck" <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: full stall landing |
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: full stall landing
>
>E.Z.
>
>almost like a Robin lighting on a birdbath. I do exagerate a little bit
>sometimes. I often wondered if it would full stall land with only
flaperons & not
>raising the gear height?
Hi Richard and Gang:
My old Ultrastar did not need any modifications to do nice 3 pt landings.
It was truly a beatiful flying machine. Had a few little problems, but
basically a really neat little airplane to fly.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "john hauck" <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: full stall landing |
>>
>>One of my druthers about Kolb planes, would be the ability to make full
>>stall three point landings. Kolb however has designed this capability out
>of
>
>
>
>
>Hello EZ and Kolb Gang:
>
The cure was to undo a little of
>Homer's design to make the Firestar a safer airplane for low time pilots.
Hi Gang:
The above sentence in my post was not very well edited before I hit the send
button. I did not make Homr's design safer. Homer made it safer. I only
modified it so I could do 3 pt landings. Also gave it the capability to get
off the ground quicker. In the original design attitude it is difficult to
rotate early before the airplane is ready to fly.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com> |
| Subject: | Re: full stall landing |
>Hello EZ and Kolb Gang:
>
>My Firestar (1985) did not have flaps, but it was capable of and did make
>beautiful 3 point full stall landings.
>My cure was to replace the original gear legs with 4130 legs heat treated
>and cut at 35.5 inches.
>Did something similar with my MK III. It too makes excellent 3 pt landings
>(full stall).
>
>john h
I bet the one thing it would not improve would be the ability of my
short legged little wife to get out of the MKIII unassisted. Us guys take
our upper body strength for granted, and while my wife likes the ride just
fine, she already has trouble hoisting herself up out of the seat while
trying to reach the ground with a foot. If I raised the cockpit much higher,
I might have a rebellion on my hands!
So I guess I will just have to patiently endure the already
excellent landing habits of my MKIII, and just watch you guys put more icing
on the cake.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42OldPoops, one of whom is short)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Todd Thompson <TTHOMPS(at)dictaphone.com> |
| Subject: | Hyperlite Tail Wheel |
I received the tail wheel last night and thought I'd give you all a review. This
wheel will not work without modification. The axlehole is 3/8 so a modification
would have to be made. Secondly the BEARINGS ARE OPEN and would not provide
as long a service life as the Kolb sealed bearings. The wheel is 1 inch
wide and weighs 4 ozs. more than the Kolb. Construction is much the same as
the Kolb - nylon hub with a hard rubber casing for the tire. The width of the
tire is about 1 inch and the bearing hub part is about 1.5 inches wide so, again,
a modification would have to be made to the Kold axle length to accomodate
this width.
Price invoiced to me was $25.00 with $5.00 S&H. So the "actuals" were a bit different
than the phone call quoted.
If the Wheel was to accomodate a inch axle and used sealed bearing this would
solve a great many concerns and issues of the Kolb wheel.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: full stall landing |
Reed,
I currently fly my Firestar II out of a 500 foot grass strip, one way out -
the
other way in. The hanger and some very large trees sit on one end of the runway.
The
only time that I need to use the brakes is landing in a strong tailwind. Also,
the
plane will decend at 1,000 fpm at full idle, without exceeding the normal speed
range.
What more would you want a Firestar to do, with flaps, that it can't do now?
John Jung
Firestar II N6163J 72
SE Wisconsin
Reed Lindberg wrote:
>
> This caught my attention. I have been lurking for a week or two, and have not
yet
> ordered a kit.I'd like to hear more about flaps on a firestar.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DLSOUDER(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: full stall landing |
<< So I guess I will just have to patiently endure the already
excellent landing habits of my MKIII, and just watch you guys put more icing
on the cake. >>
I think a fine point of distinction needs to be made. I would agree with the
argument that you can improve your takeoff performance with setting the
aircraft up higher with longer gear, as John Hauck did. But I don't think you
are hampered much on landing distances with the shorter gear. What I have
done when necessary, is to bring the aircraft in for a full stall landing -
yes your mains are still in the air and the tailwheel will hit first, but the
point is you already are going as slowly as you are able. The only penalty is
a thump as your descent is heavily arrested by the main gear. With a taller
gear you could do it more gracefully, but the point is, you can still do it.
You probably don't' want to adopt it as your normal landing style, but if you
need to come in short, it works. Sorta looks like a carrier landing.
There was at least one FireStar built with flaps that I am aware. The builder
did his own thing, and it was done pretty nicely. He attached flaps to the
trailing edge of the aileron tube - like we do with the Mark-III. He used a
motor drive from an auto electric window unit to power the flaps. I suspect
that with those additions plus the battery and etc., ... all that extra weight
- that his stall was probably no better than with a lightly built stock
FireStar. Who knows, I don't.
Dennis Souder
Pres Kolb Aircraft
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Geoff Thistlethwaite" <geoffthis(at)WORLDNET.ATT.NET> |
-----Original Message-----
From: David Bruner <brunerd(at)ulster.net>
Date: Sunday, October 11, 1998 12:35 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Engine Out!
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Geoff Thistlethwaite <geoffthis(at)WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
>
>-snip-
>>NEVER FLY WHERE YOU CAN'T LAND.
>
>
>This is VERY bad news to a Kolber wannabe like me or anyone else who lives
>in mountainous, forested, remote areas. Does this mean that the only sail
I
>should ever use will be attached to a boat? That if I want to fly in these
>areas I should have 5000' AGL? There's GOTTA be something reliable
>(assuming proper maintenance) for Kolbs.
>
>Let's have it: is the 503 the most reliable?
>
>David Bruner
David,
My reply was meant to be a very safe "rule of thumb".
I know there are folks flying Kolbs, Quicks and assorted other craft around
where it is heavily forested, rocky, etc. and the only other solution that I
know of is get a chute, follow a strict preflight plan, keep up the
maintenance of your engine and airframe.
I've had to fly over large forests and rivers in older Quicksilvers and it
always increases the "pucker factor" but this is also part of the fun!
Don't let the horror stories scare you from the fun!
Geoff Thistlethwaite
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rutledge Fuller" <rut007(at)hotmail.com> |
One of my cohorts is looking for an 8/10 gallon tank for his Firefly
that fits into the existing airframe without modifications. Please help
if you know of anything that would work.
Thanks,
Rutledge Fuller
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: full stall landing |
On Mon, 12 Oct 1998, Eugene Zimmerman wrote:
> One of my druthers about Kolb planes, would be the ability to make full
At first I was a little miffed at hitting tail first too. I got used
to usually making carrier hook, kirplop landings. Not exactly as graceful
as the robin perching, but it was definetly done flying.
Going to tundra tires solved this problem for me. My first tires' outside
diameter was about 13", and I moved up to about 18". So, this makes the
Mains touch about 2.5" sooner. If you like landing at full stall, you
might also be in the category that likes a lot of rough field stuff, and
therefore really like the big fat tires. The only disadvantage is that
they make XWind landings on pavement just a little touchier cuz of so much
grab area with the larger tires. At low pressure (4-5psi) they really
stick to the pavement compared to a little skid allowed with smaller ones.
I wonder if the problem has grown a little worse with the FS getting
heavier. The stall incidence angle might be about the same but the stall
speed higher, thus the kirplop is harder. One thing new builders might
consider is putting the wings at a slightly higher incidence angle when
drilling the main spar clevis holes. Any thoughts out there on this idea?
In doing this the tail would also be higher during cruise and top speeds,
and the effect of this should be considered. Obviously, going to longer
main legs avoids this concern, is easier, and much less permanent.
Ben Ransom
http://mae.ucdavis.edu/~ransom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Todd Thompson <TTHOMPS(at)dictaphone.com> |
I'd like this option in the MK III too. Same mount just a taller jug but will
it fit thru the frame? Do you, Dennis, have figures on the maximum tank dimensions
which can be placed into (and out) the "regular MK III" frame? Of course
for some of us, 103 regs maintain 10 gallons capacity , rrrrright??????
(raised eyebrow) `:-)
>>> "Rutledge Fuller" 10/13 10:44 AM >>>
One of my cohorts is looking for an 8/10 gallon tank for his Firefly
that fits into the existing airframe without modifications. Please help
if you know of anything that would work.
Thanks,
Rutledge Fuller
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Gerken <gerken(at)us.ibm.com> |
| Subject: | Requesting ideas on enclosing the MKiii |
Gentlemen, your creative and innovative suggestions are needed! And to those
with actual experience (DENNIS, JOHN H.), I really need your input;
A few months ago we were talking about mods to the rear of the Mark iii cage
area for reasons of drag reduction, aesthetics and operator comfort.
I will soon actually attempt doing something to enclose this back cage area,
this winter after flying season. Here are my reasons and questions:
+I want to eliminate the strong wind that hits me in the back of the head
during flight. This can be done by the flexible back window but that window
does not do anything for my other requirements.
+I want to fabric-cover more of the cage to develop a more aerodynamic tapered
rear pod-like enclosure, even though I understand there is not enough total
length to make the ultimate 3 or 4 to 1 taper, for aerodynamic reasons. This
may be the entire area or just the top triangular half as defined by the
diagonal tubes that pass thru the area from lower rear area to upper front area
where the front spar 1" tube pass-thru is located. I feel that even if the
flow is still detached along the sides, it will be better than completly
turbulent reversed-flow forward into the cabin from the back, as it works today.
+I will be attempting some noise reduction in the new cavity that will be
formed by the new rear enclosure. Also, the inside of the wing gap seal looks
like a good place to treat for engine noise reduction in the cabin. I have
access to various Soundcoat acoustic foams and a portable battery powered
real-time spectrum analyzer to help make the analysis. This will be an
experiment in balancing weight gain against noise reduction, because the foams
that will have an effect have the additional mass of the septum layer inside.
If a noise reduction solution is not effective, I will not "spend" the weight
on it.
? If I enclose around the back of the cage, can I ever fly with the doors off
again? I would really hate to loose this option.
I am unsure of how much pressure would be exerted on the new fabric without the
doors in place. It might tear off and go thru the prop.? I can use heavier
weight fabric and large overlaps to get more strength, is this enough?
?I thought about plumbing the tanks' fill spouts up and out the sides, then I
could enclose the "bulkhead" right behind the pilots head in addition to all
the way back on the sides. Would this then allow me to fly with the doors
off? This plan has drawbacks too, because it makes it real tough to look down
into the tanks and to "vacuum" the accumulating particulate off the bottom.
And it makes fuel primer bulb and fuel lines tough to service.
?Another solution is maybe to raise the fuel tanks up 8-10 inches. This could
allow their fill spouts to project thru the diagonal top fabric covering, so
the fill spouts would be outside the cabin again, but the penetrations in the
fabric for the fill spouts would weaken it and I am concerned about it blowing
off there if the doors are removed.
This raising the tanks idea has the most promise right now. What do you guys
think? Any CG concerns?
Any ideas, suggestions, or ridicule from the group will be welcomed, Thanks...
Jim G
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank_R_Reynen(at)notes.seagate.com |
| Subject: | Re: Requesting ideas on enclosing the MKiii |
Of the top of my head, what would a removable polycarbon panel from the top
of the seat to the top cross member do for this condition. You would still
be able to get at the tanks for maintenance and not lose any visibility and
it would reduce the reverse flow.
Frank Reynen,MKIII@482 hrs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank_R_Reynen(at)notes.seagate.com |
| Subject: | Re: MKIII engine out/crash |
Found this report while checking NTSB files. Anybody we know?
Accident occurred SEP-17-98 at CASHMERE, WA
Aircraft: Kolb MARK III, registration: N62691
Injuries: 1 Serious.
This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain
errors. Any errors in this report will be
corrected when the final report has been completed.
On September 17, 1998, approximately 1120 Pacific daylight time, a Kolb
Mark III, N62691, collided with
obstructions while attempting a forced landing in a residential area of
Cashmere, Washington. The private
pilot, who was the sole occupant, received serious injuries, and the
aircraft, which was owned by the pilot,
sustained substantial damage. The 14 CFR Part 91 local personal pleasure
flight had departed
Cashmere-Dryden Airport about one minute prior to the accident. No flight
plan had been filed, and there
was no report of an ELT activation. According to an FAA inspector who
responded to the accident,
witnesses reported that while the aircraft was climbing out after takeoff,
its engine suddenly quit and the
propeller stopped rotating. It appeared to the witnesses that the pilot
then attempted to land on a residential
street, but collided with an unidentified obstruction as he began the
landing flare.
Index for Sep 1998 | Index of Months
Frank Reynen MKIII@482 hrs
http://www.webcom.com/reynen
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: full stall landing |
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Guys,
I added the TwinStar gear legs to my Original FireStar years ago and they
are not only thicker but longer too. When I got them in the mail, way
back when,
I also received a message to cut them off to the same length as the
original legs. I decided against it because I knew this would enable me
to perform full-stall landings. Today, I have a stylish FireStar with the
longer legs. Never regretted it. Beauty and function work well together.
PS. I really blame J.H. for not cutting them off because I saw his 447
FS and liked the "nose high" look as it sat on the ground ......
Ralph Burlingame
Original FireStar
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "W.B.Whitehead,Jr." <behead(at)linknet.net> |
>
>One of my cohorts is looking for an 8/10 gallon tank for his Firefly
>that fits into the existing airframe without modifications. Please help
>if you know of anything that would work.
>
>Thanks,
>Rutledge Fuller
>
>
>
>
>
RUTLEDGE,
CHECK WITH BEVER BORNE AT AIR TECH IN RESERVE,LA.GIVE HIM THE MEASUREMENTS
FOR WHAT YOU
WANT AND HE CAN BUILD IT FOR YOU OUT OF FIBERGLASS.HIS NUMBER IS 504-536-3994.
BENNY WHITEHEAD
behead(at)linknet.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Requesting ideas on enclosing the MKiii |
>
>Gentlemen, your creative and innovative suggestions are needed! And to those
>with actual experience (DENNIS, JOHN H.), I really need your input;
>
>A few months ago we were talking about mods to the rear of the Mark iii cage
>area for reasons of drag reduction, aesthetics and operator comfort.
>I will soon actually attempt doing something to enclose this back cage area,
>this winter after flying season. Here are my reasons and questions:
>
>+I want to eliminate the strong wind that hits me in the back of the head
>during flight.
>+I want to fabric-cover more of the cage to develop a more aerodynamic tapered
>rear pod-like enclosure, even though I understand there is not enough total
>length to make the ultimate 3 or 4 to 1 taper, for aerodynamic reasons. This
>may be the entire area or just the top triangular half as defined by the
>diagonal tubes that pass thru the area from lower rear area to upper front area
>where the front spar 1" tube pass-thru is located. I feel that even if the
>flow is still detached along the sides, it will be better than completly
>turbulent reversed-flow forward into the cabin from the back, as it works
today.
>
RP: Kolb has plans for Lexan side rear windows that go down either
side of the MKIII fuselage in the area that you are planning to fabric. Why
not take a look at them?
>+I will be attempting some noise reduction in the new cavity that will be
>formed by the new rear enclosure.
RP: After I made my rear windows, I covered the inside of them with
acoustic foam. MUCH quieter! REALLY cuts down on prop noise.
>
>? If I enclose around the back of the cage, can I ever fly with the doors off
>again? I would really hate to loose this option.
RP: I could take the rear windows off and on in about 25 minutes.
>What do you guys think?
>
>Any ideas, suggestions, or ridicule from the group will be welcomed, Thanks...
>
>
> Jim G
>
My 2 cents worth. Richard Pike, MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jon Croke" <joncroke(at)itol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: full stall landing |
-----Original Message-----
From: Ralph H Burlingame <ul15rhb(at)juno.com>
Date: Wednesday, October 14, 1998 12:07 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: full stall landing
>
>Guys,
>
>I added the TwinStar gear legs to my Original FireStar years ago and they
>are not only thicker but longer too. When I got them in the mail, way
>back when,
>I also received a message to cut them off to the same length as the
>original legs. I decided against it because I knew this would enable me
>
Ralph,
I am very interested in the actual length of these longer legs.... OR, do
you know off hand how much longer they are than the original??
And... how can they be thicker and still fit in the cage sockets and axle
assemblies???
Have enjoyed your comments on dead sticking, etc..... I have been practicing
these myself as a result of your discussions..... I may live longer some day
as a result!!!!
Thanks
Jon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eugene Zimmerman <tehz(at)redrose.net> |
| Subject: | Re: full stall landing |
>
>>
>>
>> Is there any one else out there that has flaps on a Firestar?
>>
>> Eugene Z.
>>
>>
>
>This caught my attention. I have been lurking for a week or two, and have
not yet
>ordered a kit.I'd like to hear more about flaps on a firestar.
>
>Reed Lindberg
Flaps are not available for the Firestar from Kolb as far as I know. I made
some wing modifications to add flaps to mine. I believe it is important to
have extra wing ribs to strengthen the trailing edge where the flaps are
attached to support the extra forces. My Firestar is an R title
(reconstructed). It was damaged when a hanger roof collapsed from snowload.
The wings needed to be rebuilt and it was then that I added two extra ribs .
Flaps lower indicated stall speed a good five mph. Another feature I like
about flaps is the pitch trim affect. I set 1st notch reflexed up 2nd notch
flat, 3rd, 4th, and 5th flaps down. This gives me a great deal more peace of
mind since I now have some redundancy for pitch control. Did you ever think
about what if you lost elevator control for some reason? Real scary
thought for me.
Eugene Z.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eugene Zimmerman <tehz(at)redrose.net> |
| Subject: | Re: full stall landing |
>
>
><< So I guess I will just have to patiently endure the already
> excellent landing habits of my MKIII, and just watch you guys put more icing
> on the cake. >>
>
>I think a fine point of distinction needs to be made. I would agree with the
>argument that you can improve your takeoff performance with setting the
>aircraft up higher with longer gear, as John Hauck did. But I don't think
you
>are hampered much on landing distances with the shorter gear. What I have
>done when necessary, is to bring the aircraft in for a full stall landing -
>yes your mains are still in the air and the tailwheel will hit first, but the
>point is you already are going as slowly as you are able. The only
penalty is
>a thump as your descent is heavily arrested by the main gear. With a taller
>gear you could do it more gracefully, but the point is, you can still do it.
>You probably don't' want to adopt it as your normal landing style, but if you
>need to come in short, it works. Sorta looks like a carrier landing.
>
Dennis,
You are right for sure. I love the performance of my little Kolb flying
machine. I can out perform the neighbors 582 Rans S7 in flat out top speed,
and then watch him fall out of the sky competing for slow flight, and all
with a little old 377 Kolb Firestar. I love to tinker, and made a few mods
to mine but Im not suggesting you change a thing. Keep up the good work
making super flying products.
Eugene Zimmerman
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Redfield <redfield(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Firefly s/n 058 Maiden Flight |
Hello Group,
I thought that you all would enjoy hearing that another "Family Member"
got airborne for the first time today. : -)
This Firefly was constructed from a quick build kit by Bill & Grace
Redfield in Debary, FL. Nicely done (mom & dad)! First flight was at
approx. 1:00 p.m. at Bob Lee's airport in Deland, FL. Did I say
flight? I ment flights!
I can't say that the flights were uneventfull -- How could a first
flight in such a sweet little (Hot Rod) bird ever be called
uneventfull? Especially since it was the first ultralight flight for
the test pilot - ME ! Okay, first hands-on flight. I did go for a demo
ride in the Mark III at Sun & Fun this past April w/ Dan. Thanks again
Dan.
I will say that the flight characteristics from takeoff, climb, cruise,
stalls, approach & landing are just as the "group" has described over
the months that we have been Kolb-list members. (I sure hate the word
Lurking). The information has been & continues to be so valuable for
those of us new to ultralight type flying machines. Thanks guys!
Total flying time was just over 2 hrs today with over 15 takeoff &
landings. First few were tail wheel first and the last ones being 3
point. Ground handling is fine w/ no tendancy (so far) to tip forward,
using good tail dragger technique - Stick in my lap.
At one point while decending slowly from altitude after going through
the stall series, I took a moment to look from horizon to horizon and
just take it all in. I then realized that this "feeling" is what so
many of the group have tried to describe. It can't be described, it
needs to be felt!
I do have a question or two for the group re: Rotax 447 operation.
- Breakin was per Rotax. We're using the EIS system to moniter
Everything. I have noticed that the EGT's seem to run too hot in the
range between approx. 4000 - 5500 rpm. CHT's ok Static RPM is 6280.
We need to get the mid-range EGT temps lower. It's tough keeping out of
this range!
Any suggestions? (The Rotax manual cautioned only against CHT's not
exceeding 480 - no mention of EGT's at all).
Also, anyone in the Florida area know a good source for Penzoil 2 cycle
oil?
I hope I didn't ramble on too long for my 1st attempt at sharing info w/
the group. Thanks for listening/reading.
Ed Redfield
P.s. - Just for group info. My flight experiance is:
1200 hrs GA. Commercial pilot. Single Eng Land & Sea
1000 tailwheel
600+ banner tow
2 ultralight
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Vince Nicely" <vincenicely(at)intermediatn.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Requesting ideas on enclosing the MKiii |
Jim,
On my Firestar II, I constructed a full, removable rear-cage cover out of
vinyl fabric purchased at the local fabric store. My wife's sewing machine
with a large needle was adequate to let me do all the work easily. It does
make a measurable difference in the drag compared to the Kolb standard full
enclosure for the Firestar, and in a second version has become a
modification of the full enclosure on my airplane. I have been using it
several years and am real happy with it. I know this is not a Mark III and
am not sure of the extent of differences. After you get everyone's ideas,
please let me know if you want more detail on how this one is made
or works.
Vince
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Gerken <gerken(at)us.ibm.com>
Date: Tuesday, October 13, 1998 2:05 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Requesting ideas on enclosing the MKiii
>
>Gentlemen, your creative and innovative suggestions are needed! And to
those
>with actual experience (DENNIS, JOHN H.), I really need your input;
>
>A few months ago we were talking about mods to the rear of the Mark iii
cage
>area for reasons of drag reduction, aesthetics and operator comfort.
>I will soon actually attempt doing something to enclose this back cage
area,
>this winter after flying season. Here are my reasons and questions:
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: full stall landing |
You bet, and it was seeing his Mk III at Arlington WA in ' 94, sitting tall
on its' gear that caught my eye and helped me on the decision to choose a
Kolb. Trouble is, with all the comment a while back about landing gear,
seems like he recommended against it. ( ??? ) Wish I knew for sure ( or
maybe I missed it ) what he did - and used. Looks great, and the full
stall landing idea sounds great too. Big Lar.
----------
> From: Ralph H Burlingame <ul15rhb(at)juno.com>
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: full stall landing
> Date: Tuesday, October 13, 1998 2:50 PM
>
>
> Guys,
>
> I added the TwinStar gear legs to my Original FireStar years ago and they
> are not only thicker but longer too. When I got them in the mail, way
> back when,
> I also received a message to cut them off to the same length as the
> original legs. I decided against it because I knew this would enable me
> to perform full-stall landings. Today, I have a stylish FireStar with the
> longer legs. Never regretted it. Beauty and function work well together.
>
> PS. I really blame J.H. for not cutting them off because I saw his 447
> FS and liked the "nose high" look as it sat on the ground ......
>
> Ralph Burlingame
> Original FireStar
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Requesting ideas on enclosing the MKiii |
Hi Jim: A year or so ago, I drove into the L.A. area to look at a Mk
III under construction. Along with several other neat + functional mods.
he had tapered the rear of the pod to a point, and covered the whole thing,
such as you are suggesting. For gas tank access, he built a very neat door
with latch and hinges, sort of like a very light version of your cars'
filler cover. Easy access + looks great. For access behind the seats a
3/4 zipper was installed. ( Right ?? ) Looks tight, neat + professional,
and gives quick, easy access - plus - nothing back there can blow back into
the prop. Also ventilates the area after refueling. Same guy made light
nylon pockets in front of, and beside the seats for maps and such. Also
used a cellular phone stalk mount from Radio Shack for his GPS. You can be
sure I'm going to copy all that too. Big Lar.
----------
> From: Jim Gerken <gerken(at)us.ibm.com>
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Kolb-List: Requesting ideas on enclosing the MKiii
> Date: Tuesday, October 13, 1998 10:26 AM
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: full stall landing |
This is exactly why I ran a separate cable from my elevator trim spring to
the elevator horn. Sounds like a good way to accomplish the same thing.
Big Lar.
----------
> From: Eugene Zimmerman <tehz(at)redrose.net>
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: full stall landing
> Date: Tuesday, October 13, 1998 12:05 PM
flat, 3rd, 4th, and 5th flaps down. This gives me a great deal more peace
of
> mind since I now have some redundancy for pitch control. Did you ever
think
> about what if you lost elevator control for some reason? Real scary
> thought for me.
>
> Eugene Z.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Reed Lindberg <reed(at)indra.com> |
| Subject: | Re: full stall landing |
> Is there any one else out there that has flaps on a Firestar?
>
> Eugene Z.
Wonder if you would describe the mechanism that works the flaps. Someone
described an electrical method. Would a purely manual mechanical device work?
Reed
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rick106(at)juno.com |
| Subject: | Re: MKIII engine out/crash |
Frank
I have not heard or seen anything about this but will be looking I'll be
sure to let you know if I do .sorry to hear about things like this ,but
the only good thing if one can call it good is if the facts that may help
some one else .Hope that this dose not sound bad or for some one to
take it the wrong way.
Rick Libersat
writes:
>
>Found this report while checking NTSB files. Anybody we know?
>
>
>Accident occurred SEP-17-98 at CASHMERE, WA
> Aircraft: Kolb MARK III, registration: N62691
> Injuries: 1 Serious.
>
> This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain
>errors. Any errors in this report will be
> corrected when the final report has been
>completed.
>
>On September 17, 1998, approximately 1120 Pacific daylight time, a
>Kolb
>Mark III, N62691, collided with
>obstructions while attempting a forced landing in a residential area
>of
>Cashmere, Washington. The private
>pilot, who was the sole occupant, received serious injuries, and the
>aircraft, which was owned by the pilot,
>sustained substantial damage. The 14 CFR Part 91 local personal
>pleasure
>flight had departed
>Cashmere-Dryden Airport about one minute prior to the accident. No
>flight
>plan had been filed, and there
>was no report of an ELT activation. According to an FAA inspector who
>responded to the accident,
>witnesses reported that while the aircraft was climbing out after
>takeoff,
>its engine suddenly quit and the
>propeller stopped rotating. It appeared to the witnesses that the
>pilot
>then attempted to land on a residential
>street, but collided with an unidentified obstruction as he began the
>landing flare.
>
>Index for Sep 1998 | Index of Months
>
>Frank Reynen MKIII@482 hrs
>http://www.webcom.com/reynen
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rick106(at)juno.com |
Todd
If you find the tank's let the list in on it . I will do the same .
What I do now is carry a 6 gal . red plastic tank that I got from
wal-mart ,transfer out of it with elect.fuel pump and dump it in the main
tank's sure wish their was a 20 gal.tank out their on the market
Rick Libersat
writes:
>
>
>I'd like this option in the MK III too. Same mount just a taller jug
>but will it fit thru the frame? Do you, Dennis, have figures on the
>maximum tank dimensions which can be placed into (and out) the
>"regular MK III" frame? Of course for some of us, 103 regs maintain
>10 gallons capacity , rrrrright?????? (raised eyebrow) `:-)
>
>>>> "Rutledge Fuller" 10/13 10:44 AM >>>
>
>
>One of my cohorts is looking for an 8/10 gallon tank for his Firefly
>that fits into the existing airframe without modifications. Please
>help
>if you know of anything that would work.
>
>Thanks,
>Rutledge Fuller
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> !
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)telepath.com> |
>
> One of my cohorts is looking for an 8/10 gallon tank for his Firefly
> that fits into the existing airframe without modifications. Please help
> if you know of anything that would work.
>
> Thanks,
> Rutledge Fuller
All of these are, I believe, HDPE plastic tanks. Though the
manufacturer says not for fuel use, HDPE is what most fuel tanks
are made of.
http://www.ronco-plastics.com/recttank.html
J. Baker
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Firefly s/n 058 Maiden Flight |
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Congratulations Ed! My EGT's were high on my initial flights. If you
have an adjustable pitch prop, increase the pitch so the climbout is
about 6100 rpm.
Ralph
writes:
>
>Hello Group,
>
>I thought that you all would enjoy hearing that another "Family
>Member"
>got airborne for the first time today. : -)
>
>This Firefly was constructed from a quick build kit by Bill & Grace
>Redfield in Debary, FL. Nicely done (mom & dad)! First flight was at
>approx. 1:00 p.m. at Bob Lee's airport in Deland, FL. Did I say
>flight? I ment flights!
>
>I can't say that the flights were uneventfull -- How could a first
>flight in such a sweet little (Hot Rod) bird ever be called
>uneventfull? Especially since it was the first ultralight flight for
>the test pilot - ME ! Okay, first hands-on flight. I did go for a
>demo
>ride in the Mark III at Sun & Fun this past April w/ Dan. Thanks again
>Dan.
>
>I will say that the flight characteristics from takeoff, climb,
>cruise,
>stalls, approach & landing are just as the "group" has described over
>the months that we have been Kolb-list members. (I sure hate the word
>Lurking). The information has been & continues to be so valuable for
>those of us new to ultralight type flying machines. Thanks guys!
>
>Total flying time was just over 2 hrs today with over 15 takeoff &
>landings. First few were tail wheel first and the last ones being 3
>point. Ground handling is fine w/ no tendancy (so far) to tip
>forward,
>using good tail dragger technique - Stick in my lap.
>
>At one point while decending slowly from altitude after going through
>the stall series, I took a moment to look from horizon to horizon and
>just take it all in. I then realized that this "feeling" is what so
>many of the group have tried to describe. It can't be described, it
>needs to be felt!
>
>I do have a question or two for the group re: Rotax 447 operation.
>
>- Breakin was per Rotax. We're using the EIS system to moniter
>Everything. I have noticed that the EGT's seem to run too hot in the
>range between approx. 4000 - 5500 rpm. CHT's ok Static RPM is 6280.
>We need to get the mid-range EGT temps lower. It's tough keeping out
>of
>this range!
> Any suggestions? (The Rotax manual cautioned only against CHT's not
>exceeding 480 - no mention of EGT's at all).
>
>Also, anyone in the Florida area know a good source for Penzoil 2
>cycle
>oil?
>
>I hope I didn't ramble on too long for my 1st attempt at sharing info
>w/
>the group. Thanks for listening/reading.
>
>Ed Redfield
>
>P.s. - Just for group info. My flight experiance is:
> 1200 hrs GA. Commercial pilot. Single Eng Land & Sea
> 1000 tailwheel
> 600+ banner tow
> 2 ultralight
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: full stall landing |
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Jon, I'm not sure how much longer the TwinStar gear legs are, I would
have to go measure. A good guess would be about 8" longer. The original
legs fit into the cage socket with sleeves around it. I had to pull them
out (a chore) to fit the heavier legs into the cage. Since they are
heavier and longer, they last a long time even with some hard landings.
I've had them for 10 years. It is harder to enter the cockpit, but not a
problem. I also have the larger wheels with gives it added height.
Ralph Burlingame
Original FireStar
>Ralph,
>
>I am very interested in the actual length of these longer legs....
>OR, do you know off hand how much longer they are than the original??
>And... how can they be thicker and still fit in the cage sockets and
>axle assemblies???
>Have enjoyed your comments on dead sticking, etc..... I have been
>practicing these myself as a result of your discussions..... I may live
longer
>some day as a result!!!!
>
>Thanks
>
>Jon
>
>>
>>Guys,
>>
>>I added the TwinStar gear legs to my Original FireStar years ago and
>>they are not only thicker but longer too. When I got them in the mail,
way
>>back when, I also received a message to cut them off to the same length
as >>the original legs. I decided against it because I knew this would
enable
>>me
>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Firefly s/n 058 Maiden Flight |
>
>Hello Group,
>
>I thought that you all would enjoy hearing that another "Family Member"
>got airborne for the first time today. : -)
I then realized that this "feeling" is what so
>many of the group have tried to describe. It can't be described, it
>needs to be felt!
>
Congratulations!
>I do have a question or two for the group re: Rotax 447 operation.
I have noticed that the EGT's seem to run too hot in the
>range between approx. 4000 - 5500 rpm. CHT's ok Static RPM is 6280.
>We need to get the mid-range EGT temps lower. It's tough keeping out of
>this range!
> Any suggestions? (The Rotax manual cautioned only against CHT's not
>exceeding 480 - no mention of EGT's at all).
>Ed Redfield
Inside your carburetor there is a long tapered needle in the slide.
This is the "jet needle". There is a clip at the top end, move it one notch
lower, which will raise the needle that distance in the slide, and give it a
little more gas at midrange.
When you reassemble the slide/cup/spring/needle assembly, the needle
and clip goes under the nylon cup, the cup pressing down on the clip, and
the spring pressing down on the cup.
Maybe you already know that, but you'd be surprised how many times
it gets messed up.
P.S. , don't drop the slide, they deform easily against concrete. :(
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Firefly s/n 058 Maiden Flight |
Ed, Bill & Grace,
Congratulations to each of you on the first flight of the FireFly. And,
welcome to "active" group, within this list.
John Jung
Firestar II N6163J
SE Wisconsin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: full stall landing |
DLSOUDER(at)aol.com wrote:
snip...
> What I have done when necessary, is to bring the aircraft in for a full stall
> landing -
> yes your mains are still in the air and the tailwheel will hit first, but the
> point is you already are going as slowly as you are able. The only penalty is
> a thump as your descent is heavily arrested by the main gear. With a taller
> gear you could do it more gracefully, but the point is, you can still do it.
> You probably don't' want to adopt it as your normal landing style, but if you
> need to come in short, it works. Sorta looks like a carrier landing.
snip...
Group,
On the 500 foot strip where I hanger, my normal landing style is the "carrier
landing", described by Dennis.
John Jung
Firestar II N6163J
SE Wisconsin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bob berrie <rberrie(at)snet.net> |
Hi Kolbers
This appeared
in our local paper here in
connecticut. A 65 year old pilot fell out of his open cockpit plane and
plummeted to his death about a mile from oxford airport. The body of
Eugene Foreit of norwalk was found saturday afternoon by a woman walking
her dog in a field about a mile from oxford airport. Police sunday
found the small blue and white plane about a quarter of a mile from
where Foreit's body was found. The plane appeared to be intact, but
police said it was too early to tell weather a mechanical problem with
the plane caused the crash. An autopsy showed Foreit died of multiple
traumatic injuries. Looks to me like seat belts really do save
lives.
Bob
Mark 111 95% done
N350RB
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cavuontop(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Firefly s/n 058 Maiden Flight |
In a message dated 10/13/98 7:25:12 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
redfield(at)earthlink.net writes:
<< Also, anyone in the Florida area know a good source for Penzoil 2 cycle
oil? >>
Lockwood Aviation at 800 527 6829. Phil Lockwood is a Rotax guru.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MitchMnD(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Rotax 447 Hard Starting |
Tues afternoon Rut and I met at the Quincy AP for a hop up to Bainbridge GA.
The trip up there was beautiful. My only concern was a red-lined EGT on one
cylinder. This cylinder has always run above the 1100 degree I prefer to have
but it had not been a problem so far (~20 Hrs). We made contact with a
Cessna in the area and landed at the closed FBO. When we started to return
to Quincy my engine refused to start. Rut brought out his trusty Rotax tool
kit and we checked the plugs (bone dry and clean), carb bowl (full), wiring
etc. We set the needle one notch lower to reduce the run temperatures and
even tried the "blow in the carb vents" priming method. No joy. We knew there
would be a glorious sunset but we were not quite ready for it yet. The
decision was made for Rut to fly back to Quincy and get my truck and drive it
back to Bainbridge to pick me up. In the meantime I would be feeding most of
the mosquitoes in SW Ga. As Rut taxied out I gave the engine a few more tugs
and.... it started ! I called Rut on the radio and told him to come back
while I made sure my engine was running well. By the time he taxied up the
engine had warmed up and smoothed out. As we lifted off I made sure my engine
was making her full 6,200 rpm and climbed out for the cruise home. The sun
was flirting with the horizon by now and it was time to go home.
It was then that I noticed that the removable antenna of my GPS had removed
itself. I hoped that it was somewhere in the seat or floor of the cockpit.
We still had our compasses but it is nice to know how far, ground speed etc
and watch the little pointer on the GPS. I was groping like Clinton when I
noticed the antenna stuck in the back of my seat. Finally the GPS was
working, the EGTs were ~ 1,100 and we were soon approaching home field. The
runway lights were on when we lined up and we both made good twilight
landings.
At least I know what I'll be doing on my next trip to the airport. I plan to
check and re-torque the plugs, make sure my engine shut down switch circuit
is not shorting out, recheck the carburator and enricher control and the air
filter. It should have started on the first or second pull with the engine
still warm.
Constructive suggestions appreciated.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Todd Thompson <TTHOMPS(at)dictaphone.com> |
Just to through in my 2cents - I heard from locals (I live 3 miles from the airport)
that the pilot suffered a heartattack and was reaching for medicine. Speculation
is that he removed his seatbelt to get his medicine and somehow lost
control of the aircraft, fell out and died.
Has anybody put in an enertial seatbelt retractor spool thing-a-ma-jig (technical
name) in an aircraft? Would the FAA allow it? Of course, you could argue
that he should have had his medication within reach with a tightened seatbelt.
But he did'nt think ahead. I'm glad his aircraft did'nt plow into a house and
kill somebody(ies). A thought: if he was on medication for a heart problem
then how was he flying under FAA? I didn't hear that it was a UL plane but
understood a home built,
That''s two Experimental accidents for this year at Oxford/Waterbury airport.
Both Pilot errors.
We only have ourselves to fear not fear itself.
Hi Kolbers This appeared in our local paper here in
connecticut. A 65 year old pilot fell out of his open cockpit plane and
plummeted to his death
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu> |
On Wed, 14 Oct 1998, Todd Thompson wrote:
> Just to through in my 2cents - I heard from locals (I live 3 miles from
>the airport) that the pilot suffered a heartattack and was reaching
>for medicine. Speculation is that he removed his seatbelt to get his
>medicine and somehow lost control of the a ircraft, fell out and died.
>
This sounds very very speculative to me.
How could anybody deduce that he had a heart attack *before* falling out
of an airplane while looking for medicine? If autopsy showed heart attack,
my wild guess would be that it might have happened after he left the aircraft.
It is not uncommon for seatbelts to not latch when you think they do. It
should be a final pre-take-off checklist item. For me, "seatbelt secure"
is last thing before "check traffic" and then take-off.
-Ben Ransom
http://mae.ucdavis.edu~/ransom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eugene Zimmerman <tehz(at)redrose.net> |
| Subject: | Re: full stall landing |
>
>
>
>
>> Is there any one else out there that has flaps on a Firestar?
>>
>> Eugene Z.
>
>Wonder if you would describe the mechanism that works the flaps. Someone
>described an electrical method. Would a purely manual mechanical device
work?
>
>Reed
Yes, manual works fine. probably lighter weight and more precise position
control than electrical control. I have an overhead flap lever with five
notch positions. Control rods connect directly from the flap tube control
horns to the overhead lever assembly.
hope this doesn't get too scrambled, double exposure just in case
aileron horn
/
(_______________________( )( )======= < flap
\/ \/ < flap control horn
o_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_0 < control rod
!!
-_-_-_(o) < lever assembly
aileron control horn
/
(__________________________( )( )======== < flap
\/ \/ | Date: | Oct 14, 1998 |
| From: | bob n <ronoy(at)shentel.net> |
For Todd T.did you know Bob Dorr at Oxford arpt? He used to be
ed/publisher of Aviation Digest until he dropped dead abt 3 yrs ago
while raking leaves. Had almost finished a Coot and wanted me to test
fly it. I wrote a col for him for many years. Im at ronoy@shentel, net
if you want to post me off-list. Thanks, Grey Baron
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bob n <ronoy(at)shentel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Looking for a place to land |
When I started learning to fly in '41 in a kinda ultralight50hp
Cubmy instructor seemed to take up abt half the lesson with constantly
asking me where I was going to land, engine out. This was peppered with
him closing the throttle every now and then, saying "where you gonna
landwithout killing us both." His trick was to chop the throttle right
in the middle of a figure-eight, or some other attention-holding part of
the lesson. Over the years I got out of that habit, but now with my new
UL, I have set my mind back almost 60 years! Grey Baron
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry Bidle <jbidle(at)airmail.net> |
When I highlighted that I new a newie was going to panic over it. The
general good rule is try to fly over areas where you could land if you
should need to. This is a good operational practice for a single engine
airplane at any time.
As for engines, there mechanical and electrical things thus are always
susceptible to failure without warning thus fly to protect your bacon. I
know of nothing that doesn't present some risk even GA airplanes. Control
and manage the risk. The only thing that might give you a little more
options if the engine goes out is the AirCam twin engine but your upwards
of $30K plus to set one up.
The two stokes like Rotax are much more reliable than ever before but still
can fail. Operators and dealers tell me the 503 is the more reliable
engine. (Expect to get comments on this) We fly a Rotax 447 on our
FireFly. It's got over 55 hours on it and it hasn't missed a beat. As a
newie I am starting get more confidence in the two stokes (like I have a
choice due to weight). My partner who has flown most of those hours is now
very comfortable with it.
Jerry
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Geoff Thistlethwaite <geoffthis(at)WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
>
>-snip-
>>NEVER FLY WHERE YOU CAN'T LAND.
>
>
>This is VERY bad news to a Kolber wannabe like me or anyone else who lives
>in mountainous, forested, remote areas. Does this mean that the only sail I
>should ever use will be attached to a boat? That if I want to fly in these
>areas I should have 5000' AGL? There's GOTTA be something reliable
>(assuming proper maintenance) for Kolbs.
>
>Let's have it: is the 503 the most reliable?
>
>David Bruner
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry Bidle <jbidle(at)airmail.net> |
What differences did you notice between an at idle simulated engine out and
actual engine off.
Jerry
>
>
>
>----------
> Ralph H Burlingame you wrote on the subject: Re: Kolb-List: Engine Out!
>and I agree with you. On thur.. I practiced a couple engines out. I fly
>from a 3300 foot grass strip in Zellwood, fl. so I had a lot of room for
>mistakes. I found it to be enjoyable this time. I had done it once before
>but that time it was for real and I didn't have time to enjoy the trip.
>Practice does help.
>
>
> Date: Thursday, October 08, 1998 11:14 PM
>>
>>
>> Gentlemen,
>>
>> I think it's a very wise idea to practice those engine-off landings. Of
>> course GA pilots don't practice it because the risks are greater, but
>> what do you think usually happens to all GA pilots when it quits? They
>> panic, and then it's over. If they were to practice, starting on a very
>> long runway and working their way down to a 2500 foot strip,
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher John Armstrong" <Tophera(at)centuryinter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: full stall landing |
excellent post on the flaps. I am adding flaperons to my kit similar to
what is done on the firefly. The redundent pitch control is a safety factor
and the ability to control glidepath will be valuable. The low side area on
a firestar makes using slip for glidepath control a highspeed option,
although still quite effective from what I here. So if I finish my plane
this winter as planned there will be a flapperoned FSII out there flying
next year.
Topher
-----Original Message-----
From: Eugene Zimmerman <tehz(at)redrose.net>
Date: Tuesday, October 13, 1998 7:17 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: full stall landing
>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Is there any one else out there that has flaps on a Firestar?
>>>
>>> Eugene Z.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>This caught my attention. I have been lurking for a week or two, and have
>not yet
>>ordered a kit.I'd like to hear more about flaps on a firestar.
>>
>>Reed Lindberg
>
>
>
>Flaps are not available for the Firestar from Kolb as far as I know. I made
>some wing modifications to add flaps to mine. I believe it is important to
>have extra wing ribs to strengthen the trailing edge where the flaps are
>attached to support the extra forces. My Firestar is an R title
>(reconstructed). It was damaged when a hanger roof collapsed from snowload.
>The wings needed to be rebuilt and it was then that I added two extra ribs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cliff and Carolyn Stripling <striplic(at)dfw.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Requesting ideas on enclosing the MKiii |
To all,
A little off subject, but...
I made a little tail cone that extends behind the square area at the rear of
the cockpit. It encloses the bell crank that activates the aileron
push/pull tubes. The sides were made from part of the material supplied for
the aluminum sheer web bent in a sheet metal bender to a sharp angle and
riveted to the sides of the 4130. A triangle top cap for the tail cone was
made from Lexan and riveted to the aluminum sides. The tail cone hole slots
(reinforced with some aluminum angle stock) double as a stop for the bell
crank. I don't know if it lessens drag any, but it does look nicer than a
squared off rear end to the cockpit.
My thoughts on the "wind hitting the back of the head"... (mine does it too
unless the full enclosure is installed or unless I am flying with the 1/2
doors on and then it is almost eliminated)... is that since I don't plan to
change the fuel tanks to the upper open area above the present stock tanks,
I will instead try to do my best (in warm weather only) to allow more air to
pass over the canopy and under the wing (by lowering the canopy... by making
a 1/2 to 2/3rds canopy) so that the air flow passes just above my head.
Some other guys have already tried it and say it increases lift some... not
sure about how it affects drag, engine cooling, or prop efficiency. Anyway,
I have the materials ready to do this, but will wait until next spring when
the weather starts to turn warm again. Now is about time to button it all
up with the full enclosure.
Later,
--
Cliff & Carolyn Stripling Him: Retired Pharmacist
(972)247-9821 Dallas Texas Her: Real Estate Broker - Texas
and Marble Falls Texas Both: 5th Wheel - RV - Travel
Kolb MKIII - N582CC (50.5 hrs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Damaged Firefly For Sale |
| From: | mefine1(at)juno.com (Mick Fine) |
You may remember Joel from about a month ago. He asked the list's advice
on several things before the maiden flight of his FF. Well, it didn't go
too well or last very long. He suffered some cracked ribs and some cuts,
bumps & bruises but otherwise he's ok.
The plane didn't fair nearly as well. Both wings are damaged. All 4
struts are bent. The cage is not salvageable, IMO. Both gear legs are
bent.
Salvageable parts are; tailboom & empenage, wheels & brakes, brand new
447 and 2-blade wood prop. ASI, ALT, EIS engine monitor.
Joel asked that he be contacted at - joeljon(at)juno.com and not at the
address he used when he was on this list.
-Mick Fine
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Requesting ideas on enclosing the MKiii |
| From: | mefine1(at)juno.com (Mick Fine) |
writes:
>
>
>To all,
>
>A little off subject, but...
>
>I made a little tail cone that extends behind the square area at the
>rear of
>the cockpit. It encloses the bell crank that activates the aileron
>push/pull tubes....
Cliff,
I got a good photo of this (above), your wingtip handles and your
fold-down intrument panel at the Texoma Fly-in. I promised to scan them
and get them on the Web but I've obviously had a hard time getting around
to it.
...I'm warming-up the scanner as we speak - so to speak. Stay tuned for
the URL.
-Mick Fine
Tulsa, Oklahoma
http://www.angelfire.com/ok/froghair
Green Country Ultralight Flyer's Organization (UFO)
http://www.angelfire.com/ok/gcufo
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Jerry, the actual engine out uses more forward stick control and the
landings are more gentle if you hit tailwheel first in a full stall.
Ralph Burlingame
Original FireStar
writes:
>
>What differences did you notice between an at idle simulated engine
>out and
>actual engine off.
>
>Jerry
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>----------
>> Ralph H Burlingame you wrote on the subject: Re: Kolb-List: Engine
>Out!
>>and I agree with you. On thur.. I practiced a couple engines out. I
>fly
>>from a 3300 foot grass strip in Zellwood, fl. so I had a lot of room
>for
>>mistakes. I found it to be enjoyable this time. I had done it once
>before
>>but that time it was for real and I didn't have time to enjoy the
>trip.
>>Practice does help.
>>
>>
>> Date: Thursday, October 08, 1998 11:14 PM
>>>
>Burlingame)
>>>
>>> Gentlemen,
>>>
>>> I think it's a very wise idea to practice those engine-off
>landings. Of
>>> course GA pilots don't practice it because the risks are greater,
>but
>>> what do you think usually happens to all GA pilots when it quits?
>They
>>> panic, and then it's over. If they were to practice, starting on a
>very
>>> long runway and working their way down to a 2500 foot strip,
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)telepath.com> |
> The two stokes like Rotax are much more reliable than ever before but still
> can fail. Operators and dealers tell me the 503 is the more reliable
> engine. (Expect to get comments on this)
The Sun will fail in 4.6 billion years. Feel better now?
J. Baker
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax 447 Hard Starting |
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame) |
>From my experience when a 2-cycle refuses to start after it has been
running, usually it is one of three things: 1) no spark 2) not enough
gas getting into the cylinders 3) too much gas or it's flooded. I would
say your case was #2. When you blew into the carb vents you primed it and
then you probably let it sit for a few minutes. While you were waiting,
the gas was vaporizing and that's all it took. I would say to get a
primer on that engine it's the only way to go. I used the choke
(enrichener), but it's too easy to flood and at times hard to tell if the
engine is getting too much or not enough. With the primer, I give it a
couple of shots and I can see the fuel going into the carb so I know how
much I've given it. When I want to impress folks at a fly-in with a
single pull start, I will give it a shot or two about 15 minutes before I
decide to leave, then I will turn the prop through a few times. When the
big moment comes, one pull and it fires just like the Toro lawn mower
guarantee. Before getting the primer and at my first fly-in, I must have
tugged 25 times before it went. I was a little embarrassed because people
thought there was something wrong with the engine. Then when I got in,
they really watched as I taxied out and took off. I guess either method
is a crowd pleaser.
Ralph Burlingame
Original 447-powered FireStar
>
>Tues afternoon Rut and I met at the Quincy AP for a hop up to
>Bainbridge GA. The trip up there was beautiful. My only concern was a
>red-lined EGT on one cylinder. This cylinder has always run above the
1100 >degree I prefer to have but it had not been a problem so far (~20
Hrs). We >made contact with a Cessna in the area and landed at the
closed FBO. When >we started to return to Quincy my engine refused to
start. Rut brought out his >trusty Rotax tool kit and we checked the
plugs (bone dry and clean), carb >bowl (full), wiring etc. We set the
needle one notch lower to reduce the >run >temperatures and even tried
the "blow in the carb vents" priming method. No >joy. We knew there would
be a glorious sunset but we were not quite ready for >it yet. The
decision was made for Rut to fly back to Quincy and get my truck >and
drive it back to Bainbridge to pick me up. In the meantime I would be
>feeding most of the mosquitoes in SW Ga. As Rut taxied out I gave the
engine >a few more tugs and.... it started ! I called Rut on the radio
and told him to >come back while I made sure my engine was running well.
By the time he >taxied up the engine had warmed up and smoothed out. As
we lifted off I made >sure my engine was making her full 6,200 rpm and
climbed out for the cruise >home. The sun was flirting with the horizon
by now and it was time to go home.
>
>It was then that I noticed that the removable antenna of my GPS had
removed
>itself. I hoped that it was somewhere in the seat or floor of the
>cockpit. We still had our compasses but it is nice to know how far,
ground
>speed etc and watch the little pointer on the GPS. I was groping like
Clinton
>when I noticed the antenna stuck in the back of my seat. Finally the
GPS was
>working, the EGTs were ~ 1,100 and we were soon approaching home
>field. The runway lights were on when we lined up and we both made good
>twilight landings.
>
>At least I know what I'll be doing on my next trip to the airport. I
>plan to check and re-torque the plugs, make sure my engine shut down
switch
>circuit is not shorting out, recheck the carburator and enricher control
and
>the air filter. It should have started on the first or second pull with
the
>engine still warm.
>
>Constructive suggestions appreciated.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Christensen" <spectruminternational(at)email.msn.com> |
-----Original Message-----
From: David Bruner <brunerd(at)ulster.net>
Date: Saturday, October 10, 1998 10:35 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Engine Out!
>Let's have it: is the 503 the most reliable?
>
>David Bruner
================================
Hi David:
In my humble opinion, any 4 stroke engine is far more reliable than any 2
stroke.
I have a Rotax 912 on my MKIII; it is a sweet engine.
Ron Christensen
MKIII1/2
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Frank & Winnie Hodson" <fwhodson(at)megalink.net> |
Is there somebody out there reasonably close by that would be willing to
provide a check ride in a Kolb for a 240# GA pilot?
I have about 550 hrs in GA aircraft and about 20 hrs in UL's but none in
Kolbs.
My FS II project is complete except the engine/prop package which has not
arrived yet.
My desire is to have both myself and the Firestar survive our maiden voyage
if possible.
Thanks: Frank Hodson,
Oxford ME
fwhodson@megalink.net http://www.megalink.net/~fwhodson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax 447 Hard Starting |
MitchMnD(at)aol.com,
In general, a hard starting Rotax is an indication of a problem. But it is
not always the case. A partially cooled down Rotax can be difficult to start. The
trick is to give it enough gas without flooding it. An then to know how to
un-flood it when it happens. This can be a problem for someone new to Rotaxes (or
2 cycles) and it still gives me an occasional problem after 11 years. So, what
I
am saying is: If everything else checks out O.K., don't be overly concerned.
John Jung
Firestar II N6163J
SE Wisconsin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MitchMnD(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax 447 Hard Starting |
Thanks for your response Ralph Burlingame. This is just the kind of thing
that makes my mail worthwhile.
Blowing into the carburator vents makes gas go into the carburator all right
but it is not precise. In my case the gas was dripping out of the intake
filter and I know you were right when you suspected flooding at that point.
Your trick of giving the engine primer a shot a few minutes before trying to
start sounds like a winner. The primer pump does allow a reasonable level of
control on the quantity of fuel supplied to the intake. I'm going to order a
primer kit this right now. This afternoon after I finish my re-check of the
fuel system I am going to give her another try just as she sits. I will be
staying close to the home base.
Look me up if you ever get to N. Fla... Duane Mitchell, Tallahassee FL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cliff and Carolyn Stripling <striplic(at)dfw.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax 447 Hard Starting |
To all,
I am not an expert on 2-cycles, but when I inadvertantly flood my engine by
using too much primer, choke/enricher or whatever, I flip the kill switches
to off, put the throttle on full and pull the engine through with the rope a
few times. Then I close the throttle, flip the kill switches to on and
"vrrrrrooooom!" on the first pull. Apparantly, that proceedure allows the
engine to breath enough fresh air to lean the mixture enough to ignite.
About the primer and all the other fuel hoses on my plane for that matter...
they drain down between flights and I have to pump them full again with the
bulb primer. Concerning the primer, I have to pump it a few times just to
fill the line to the carbs. I watch it fill as I pump the primer until it
reaches the carb then I give it another couple of pumps. That works 98% of
the time for me.
I have never had any trouble starting my engine. In the winter the enricher
helps a lot. In the summer, I never use it at all, but rather use a couple
of shots of primer. On a warm engine, I am careful not to prime but just
one shot as it tends to flood easier.
Later,
--
Cliff & Carolyn Stripling Him: Retired Pharmacist
(972)247-9821 Dallas Texas Her: Real Estate Broker - Texas
and Marble Falls Texas Both: 5th Wheel - RV - Travel
Kolb MKIII - N582CC (50.5 hrs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bob n <ronoy(at)shentel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Damaged Firefly For Sale |
Message for Joel:
All listers, most especially Kolbers, are saddened by your recent bad
experience with your brand new FireFly. Moreover, we hope your injuries
heal with no lasting effects. You can always fix or get more
planes/cars, etc., but good ribs are most necessary.
This makes me even more careful with my almost new FF.
Best wishes for your recovery, Grey Baron FF70
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cavuontop(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Requesting ideas on enclosing the MKiii |
In a message dated 10/14/98 7:43:55 PM Eastern Daylight Time, striplic(at)dfw.net
writes:
<< I made a little tail cone that extends behind the square area at the rear
of
the cockpit. It encloses the bell crank that activates the aileron
push/pull tubes. >>
Maybe dennind will respond to theis. But that is the OLD style kolb design.
Dennis stopped doing that and squarred it off because he found that the prop
blast drummed the fabric back there and ripped it. He went to squared off
design because it was better.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Gerken <gerken(at)us.ibm.com> |
| Subject: | Rotax quit, why?! |
>
>Tues afternoon Rut and I met at the Quincy AP for a hop up to
>Bainbridge GA. The trip up there was beautiful. My only concern was a
>red-lined EGT on one cylinder. This cylinder has always run above the
1100 >degree I prefer to have but it had not been a problem so far (~20
Hrs). We >made contact with a Cessna in the area and landed at the
closed FBO. When >we started to return to Quincy my engine refused to
start. Rut brought out his >trusty Rotax tool kit and we checked the
plugs (bone dry and clean), carb >bowl (full), wiring etc. We set the
needle one notch lower to reduce the >run >temperatures and even tried
the "blow in the carb vents" priming method. No >joy. We knew there would
be a glorious sunset but we were not quite ready for >it yet. The
decision was made for Rut to fly back to Quincy and get my truck >and
drive it back to Bainbridge to pick me up. In the meantime I would be
>feeding most of the mosquitoes in SW Ga. As Rut taxied out I gave the
engine >a few more tugs and.... it started ! I called Rut on the radio
and told him to >come back while I made sure my engine was running well.
By the time he >taxied up the engine had warmed up and smoothed out. As
we lifted off I made >sure my engine was making her full 6,200 rpm and
climbed out for the cruise >home. The sun was flirting with the horizon
by now and it was time to go home.
>
It's been said before, but needs repeating every once in a while: IF YOU HAVE
AN UNEXPLAINED ENGINE FAILURE YOU *MUST* PULL THE EXHAUST MAINFOLD AND INSPECT
THE RINGS, PISTONS, AND CYLINDERS BEFORE FLIGHT! This is a good idea because
what you may have had was a seizure. I believe it could have seized at
shutdown (you stated it was red-lined EGT), and it may then have been hard
starting due to lowered compression. I hope I am totally wrong, but now is the
time to find out, before the next flight. I had this happen on a
Yamaha-powered Teratorn. It was strange because it would not restart after a
flight, but after it cooled down it started up again. And again. And again.
And again. After the third forced landing I hauled it home. But I am telling
you it ran alright once running. The side of the piston from the rings on down
was smeared metal and the rings were no longer free. Please check it out
Jim Gerken
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cavuontop(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax quit, why?! |
In a message dated 10/15/98 4:37:38 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
gerken(at)us.ibm.com writes:
<< IF YOU HAVE
AN UNEXPLAINED ENGINE FAILURE YOU *MUST* PULL THE EXHAUST MAINFOLD AND
INSPECT THE RINGS, PISTONS, AND CYLINDERS BEFORE FLIGHT! >>
These are words to live by for those of us who hang our lives on Rotax
engines. If you factor out fuel starvation as a cause for accidents the
overwhelming majority of remaining two stroke failures come from seizures.
I've even heard of seizures happening during break-in. Buy a few extra
exhaust gaskets, a dental mirror that will fit in the exhaust port and a
flashlight. This is VERY cheap insurance compared to the possible costs of a
forced landing.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Check out ride |
If you are a reasonable GA pilot you will not have a problem, just do not slow
down on final, keep about 4000 rpm and 55-60 mph and fly down to and along the
runway and then slowly ease off the power. If you fly a GA approach your sink
rates will be too high and the gear will bend.
Dick C
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | new seafoam method |
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Guys (and ladies if there are any),
I found a new seafoam product that will reduce the amount of time it
takes doing the procedure. The product is: Seafoam Deep Creep in an
aerosol can. The last time I flew, I used this product prior to takeoff
by spraying it into the cylinders. I removed both sparkplugs and brought
one cylinder to TDC by inserting a plastic oriental chopstick (no
significance, it's long enough to work with) into the sparkplug hole. I
sprayed enough Deep Creep into the cylinder to fill it up to the top of
the hole. I rocked the prop and let it sit for a few minutes. I replaced
the plug and repeated the procedure for the other cylinder. I did this
out at the field. After a few more minutes, I started it up and ran out
the seafoam. It belched out the usual white smoke for about 10 minutes.
After it was finished, I took it for a flight. This is something that can
be done often and doesn't take a lot of time. By filling the cylinder up
after the piston is at TDC, the seafoam has a chance to seep into the
rings where it needs to go. This may be the preferred method due to its
time-saving capability and the convenience of doing it at the field.
Ralph Burlingame
Original FireStar, 447 powered
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Pat Kegebein <pak(at)niia.net> |
i am looking for any 912 owners to tell me what kind of oil they use in
thier engine.
Thanks,
Bruce
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cliff and Carolyn Stripling <striplic(at)dfw.net> |
| Subject: | Little tail cone |
To all,
>But that is the OLD style kolb design.
>Dennis stopped doing that and squarred it off because he found that the prop
>blast drummed the fabric back there and ripped it. He went to squared off
>design because it was better.
You are correct about the change... I am not sure, but I think it was
because of the drumming. I used aluminum and Lexan, not Stits, so no
problem with drumming.
Later,
--
Cliff & Carolyn Stripling Him: Retired Pharmacist
(972)247-9821 Dallas Texas Her: Real Estate Broker - Texas
and Marble Falls Texas Both: 5th Wheel - RV - Travel
Kolb MKIII - N582CC (50.5 hrs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry & Karen Cottrel" <lcottrel(at)kfalls.net> |
Does anyone out there have a good design for a heater that fits on the
muffler? Its really starting to get cold here in the Northwest.
Larry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eugene Zimmerman <tehz(at)redrose.net> |
| Subject: | Re: seafoam (skeptic) |
>
>Guys (and ladies if there are any),
>
>
>I found a new seafoam product that will reduce the amount of time it
>takes doing the procedure. The product is: Seafoam Deep Creep in an
>aerosol can. The last time I flew, I used this product prior to takeoff
>by spraying it into the cylinders. I removed both sparkplugs and brought
>one cylinder to TDC by inserting a plastic oriental chopstick (no
>significance, it's long enough to work with) into the sparkplug hole. I
>sprayed enough Deep Creep into the cylinder to fill it up to the top of
>the hole. I rocked the prop and let it sit for a few minutes. I replaced
>the plug and repeated the procedure for the other cylinder. I did this
>out at the field. After a few more minutes, I started it up and ran out
>the seafoam. It belched out the usual white smoke for about 10 minutes.
>After it was finished, I took it for a flight. This is something that can
>be done often and doesn't take a lot of time. By filling the cylinder up
>after the piston is at TDC, the seafoam has a chance to seep into the
>rings where it needs to go. This may be the preferred method due to its
>time-saving capability and the convenience of doing it at the field.
>
>Ralph Burlingame
>Original FireStar, 447 powered
>
>
What is Seafoam? I know it is a product some of you guys can get at your
NAPA store that supposedly is a decarbon in a can. What chemical
compound is it? What active ingredient? If it really does what some listers
believe, there must be a million and one other uses for it too. Can you by
the same stuff at K-mart to clean the carbon crap off your oven or barbecue
grill.Is this stuff some new secret chemical formula that most chemical
engineers have not caught up with yet? Hardly. What really is it? What
other products are similar? What effects does it have on various metals?
If it is safe to soak the top of the piston, what about running it through
the fuel into the carb? Are there known certified engineering tests to
verify the results of this stuff or must I simply accept the subjective
account of results from someone that I have no way of knowing if they are
merely akin to a water smeller.
As you can tell I am a skeptic, but I am also ready to learn.
Answering, doesn't cut for me. Why?
Skeptically,
Eugene Zimmerman
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eugene Zimmerman <tehz(at)redrose.net> |
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: David Bruner <brunerd(at)ulster.net>
>Date: Saturday, October 10, 1998 10:35 PM
>Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Engine Out!
>
>
>>Let's have it: is the 503 the most reliable?
>>
>>David Bruner
>================================
>
>Hi David:
>
>In my humble opinion, any 4 stroke engine is far more reliable than any 2
>stroke.
>I have a Rotax 912 on my MKIII; it is a sweet engine.
>
>Ron Christensen
>MKIII1/2
>
That is a broad brush you paint with. Ya sho you've seen em all?
EZ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry Bidle <jbidle(at)airmail.net> |
| Subject: | Re: new seafoam method |
Be ware if you fill a cylinder with fluid and put the plug back in then
rotate the prop, you can damage the connecting rod (bend it). You form
what is referred to as a hydralic lock, you can't compress a liquid so
something has to give, usually the rod bends. Be careful....
Jerry
>
>Guys (and ladies if there are any),
I
>snip... I sprayed enough Deep Creep into the cylinder to fill it up to the
top
>of the hole. I rocked the prop and let it sit for a few minutes. I replaced
>the plug and repeated the procedure for the other cylinder. I did this
>out at the field. After a few more minutes, I started it up and ran out
>the seafoam. It belched out ....
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "barry youngblood" <barry(at)hcis.net> |
| Subject: | Re: seafoam (skeptic) |
-----Original Message-----
From: Eugene Zimmerman <tehz(at)redrose.net>
Date: Thursday, October 15, 1998 9:50 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: seafoam (skeptic)
>
>>
>>Guys (and ladies if there are any),
>>
>>
>>I found a new seafoam product that will reduce the amount of time it
>>takes doing the procedure. The product is: Seafoam Deep Creep in an
I was also a skeptic, but figured what the heck. Had several drops of oil
dripping off the air cleaners every flight and couldn't find out why. After
Seafoam treatment my RPM increased 200 at idle and on a 4 hr cross crountry
not one drop of oil. Amazed I am! Now I am going to retreat with Teflon
which I do every 2 years. Have 350 hrs. on 503 with no failures or seizures.
Main thing to watch ia EGT during temperature changes and move those
needles.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: seafoam (skeptic) |
> >>I found a new seafoam product that will reduce the amount of time it
> >>takes doing the procedure. The product is: Seafoam Deep Creep in an
The unexpected engine seizure I had (jan 98) was in a way due to my
carrying out the Rotax recommended decarbon process. I put a lot of care
into doing it right, following Mike Stratmons methods (CPS), yes even
mic'd the pistons and cylinders at various positions to verify no wear out
of tolerence, etc. Before doing the whole thing I had also spoken with
someone else nearby, so had a pretty good set of clues what I was doing.
I put things back together perfectly, so far as I could tell. Used all
new gaskets, everything torqued properly etc, and retorqued, rechecked
4 runtime hours after re-assembly.
About 12 flight hours later my engine gave me some difficulty starting.
I assigned that to my not really knowing it needed priming at the time.
10 hours later my engine quit in flight while at idle. Problem was an
air leak at the PTO exhaust manifold, in spite of what I think were good
methods in the overhall. (When I finally discovered the source of the
air leak I also found that the port facing on the cylinder was not
milled flat -- a dip allowed leakage even at proper manifold torque!)
Guess how I'll be decarboning next time!
October 02, 1998 - October 15, 1998
Kolb-Archive.digest.vol-az