Kolb-Archive.digest.vol-bd
November 29, 1998 - December 10, 1998
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Wing Spar Attach |
>about the only safe answer. What bothers me the most is the gap at the
>lower end. Seems like it would have less stress if it was set up like a
>close fitting mortise and tenon, rather than the bending moment it has now.
Larry,
Not sure what gap you are referring to. Is it the gap between the cage tangs
that carry the clevis pin for lower lift strut attachment? On the FS-KXP
these tangs were ~3/4" apart, allowing the lift strut to pull (shear) anywhere
along the 3/4" of clevis pin in that gap. Although the pin is probably plenty
strong enf to do this, I put a ~3/8" long spacer sleeve (aluminum stock)
on the clevis pin every setup. This forces the lift strut end to stay
right next to the rear of the two tangs.
-Ben Ransom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Guys,
I heard on the evening news about an ultralight crash near Radisson
Wisconsin. Does anyone have any more info about this accident? They
reported that it nosed in from 70' and was fatal. The pilot was from
Bloomington Minnesota and a mechanic for Northwest Airlines.
Ralph
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rick106(at)juno.com |
| Subject: | Re: Engine vibration-The answer is:carbon ? |
Firehawk
I am sure the Pennsoil is great oil and a lot of people use it ,I
started out with AV/2
and I like you have had good luck , I have talked to ROTAX factory rep's
and this is what they said they indorse 3 brands of oil Pennsoil ,
AV/2 , & BLIZZARD oil
I find it funny when I get on the phone to order different things that I
need I will ask if they have AV/2 or Blizzard oil ( knowing that they
don't ) they always say why do you want to use that Pennsoil is the oil
that rotax recommends ( this is the rotax salesman talking ,not the
rotax factory rep.
Rick Libersat
writes:
>
>
>Hey Bill, Well, being you cleaned your prop but it's a wood prop,
>when did
>it get wet or when was the last time a front came through your place
>or did
>you leave the prop vertical the last time you flew before you noticed
>the
>vibration? It's funny how one answer can lead to a whole lot more
>questions
>ain't it? I don't know about the snowmobile oil your are using but I
>bet if
>you were to switch to Pennsoil 2 cycle air cool oil and run it a
>little
>harder it wouldn't have a carbon problem. I use to the same problem
>with a
>different brand that works great in a lot of other engines but I
>always had
>a carbon problem too. Then I called John Hunter at Lockwood to find
>out what
>they used in their 582's. He told me that Rotax recommends Pennsoil
>(air
>cooled) in all there aircraft engines regardless of whether it was air
>cooled or liquid cooled because of the way they are run ( long periods
>of
>sustained and steady RPMs and similiar temps). This was after my
>brother had
>put some 800 hours on a Lazair with the 9.5 HP Rotax's using Pennsoil
>with
>out a rebuild. Then there was my wingman Richard who has always used
>the oil
>and has never had a problem. I wasn't satisfied with the evidence
>that they
>gave me either. I had to try something different also. Guess what ? I
>was
>decarboning every 100hours or less. I probably should have done it at
>50
>hours. I have 250 hours since the top end (this is where I started
>using
>Pennsoil) and it is still going strong without a decarboning. I don't
>have
>any of the other problems that goes along with carbon buildup either
>like
>hard cranking from the rings being stuck on the pistons and smoot
>black
>plugs, which I had to change a lot more often. Richard had even gotten
>to
>the point that he would not even crank his plane around me until he
>was sure
>I was cranked. I spent many times hand proping while he held my plane.
>We've
>not had to hand prop but once and that was from a dead battery since I
>switched. I am convienced it was the switch to Pennsoil. I also use
>the
>injection system that is still set from the breakin.
> How many hours do you fly and how often? Did you know that wood props
>absorb water and that it can migrate to one end? I have a wood prop I
>use as
>a spare. In case of emergency only. I know it is as balanced as I can
>get a
>wood prop but compared to my IVO it can't hold a candle to the
>smoothness or
>quietness.
>The whole plane benefits from the lest amount of vibration that can be
>run.
>That old wood prop liked to have beat me to death on our trip to
>Nulltown,
>In. last year while the IVO was being repaired. After that trip I
>decided to
>stay home if I couldn't have the IVO.
> I know there are pros and cons to all of this and would like to hear
>from
>the rest of you. Who knows there might be something out there you are
>using
>with great results and we would all benefit from it. All for now.
>Thanks for
>the return. Firehawk.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>From: WVarnes(at)aol.com <WVarnes(at)aol.com>
>To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>Date: Tuesday, November 24, 1998 3:42 PM
>Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Engine vibration-The answer is:carbon ?
>
>
>>
>>michael.highsmith(at)worldnet.att.net writes:
>>
>><< Bill, I'm glad it wasn't something serious but did you clean the
>prop?
>> Please forgive me but what kind of prop was it? I've never heard of
>carbon
>> causing vibration enough to be able to tell it in flight. I learn
>something
>> new in this sport everday. What a gas. Something to put in the book.
>>>
>>
>>Hi Michael,
>>
>>The prop is a Tennessee, wood, 66 X 30, clean it after each flight,
>looks
>like
>>new. Had checked tracking and balance before removing engine and
>both were
>>good. I usually cruise at 4800 to 5000 RPM with this prop (to keep
>up with
>my
>>buddy who has a KXP 447 with 66 X 32 and turns 4500 most of the
>time). My
>CHT
>>about 250 and EGT indicates 1100, sometimes lower. Plugs are a nice
>light
>>chocolate brown color, so mixture appears to be not overly rich. But
>>apparently something is making lots of carbon. I'm using Castrol
>Super
>>snowmobile oil @ 50:1
>>
>>I know the reccomended prop for this engine is 66 X 28, but when I
>originally
>>got my kit it had a 66 X 32 prop and I flew with that one 3 years.
>And I
>>turned less RPM, in the 4200 to 4500 range The EGT then was really
>low, in
>>the 900 to 1000 range. It didn't seem to make as much carbon, but it
>did
>make
>>it and I decarbon every winter when its to cold to fly. I mostly use
>Amoco
>>fuel, but have also used others on occasion. Guess I'll have to
>start
>>experimenting to see if I can reduce the carbon buildup. Funny thing
>is,
>it
>>only gets on the piston dome. The heads are clean!
>>
>>Bill Varnes
>>Audubon NJ
>>Original FireStar 377
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> List Support Contributions:
>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: "Larry Bourne" |
Hi Possum: It's a Mk III, and I've been working on it 2 yrs. this
month. Hope to fly before next summer. ( Think I've said that before ).
I really enjoyed your pictures, and would return the favor, but so far I've
only learned to scan, can't seem to send them anywhere. Big
Lar.
----------
> From: Possum <possums(at)mindspring.com>
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Kolb-List: Re: "Larry Bourne"
> Date: Sunday, November 29, 1998 5:05 PM
>
>
>
> Larry, Just wondered what kind of plane are you currently building and
how
> ong have you been working on it?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wing Spar Attach |
That's right, Chris. Seems to me that some months ago someone said they had
increased dihedral, and it made the plane much more stable. Must have
rocks in my head. Only comment lately is that up to 3" doesn't seem to
make much difference. Ever watch a pigeon glide ?? Now, there's dihedral
! ! ! Maybe a little extreme, of course. I liked the idea of sequencing
the holes on the attach sleeve, but got busy on other things today, and
didn't check it out. Tomorrow for sure. Big Lar.
----------
> From: CHRISTOPHER DAVIS <cdavis2(at)capecod.net>
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Wing Spar Attach
> Date: Sunday, November 29, 1998 4:53 PM
>
>
> Lar , wouldn't increased dihedral be a funtion of longer struts as the
wing
> attach points either pivot or are universal joints?? chris
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Larry Bourne <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net>
> To: Kolb
> Date: Friday, November 27, 1998 11:34 PM
> Subject: Kolb-List: Wing Spar Attach
>
>
> >
> >Thinking about Wally Hoffman's question on the wing attachment - I set
my
> >Mk III up absolutely level, without the wheels and tires, and bolted it
> >solid to the floor. Stretched parachute cord tightly from wing tip to
wing
> >tip - leading edge and trailing edge, used levels, tapes, rulers, shims,
> >and so on till I was darn near confuzzled. Then walked away for the
day,
> >came back the next and double checked everything. Once those holes are
> >drilled you're done. No adjustments. Now, after reading other comments
(
> >I think from John H. some time ago ) I wish I had somehow made provision
> >for increasing dihedral if necessary. Not sure how you would go about
> >that, but it seems like it would be desirable, if only to fine tune the
> >rigging. As it is, when you drill the struts, that's it.
> >Big Lar.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wing Spar Attach |
That's the ones Ben, and I like your idea. Seems like it would have to be
stronger in " tight shear " than out in the middle. I'm not paranoid,
honest. I even sweat the strut attach bolts on a 172 when I get into heavy
turbulence, and who ever heard of one of those breaking under ANY
conditions. Like I said, the little monkey is hard to convince. When
you've got 2300 lbs of airplane bouncing at 2 or 3 or more G on a 5/16 or
3/8 bolt - - - - - - - - - they've gotta be strong. Big
Lar.
----------
> From: Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu>
> To: Larry Bourne ; kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Wing Spar Attach
> Date: Sunday, November 29, 1998 7:19 PM
>
>
> >about the only safe answer. What bothers me the most is the gap at the
> >lower end. Seems like it would have less stress if it was set up like a
> >close fitting mortise and tenon, rather than the bending moment it has
now.
> Larry,
> Not sure what gap you are referring to. Is it the gap between the cage
tangs
> that carry the clevis pin for lower lift strut attachment? On the FS-KXP
> these tangs were ~3/4" apart, allowing the lift strut to pull (shear)
anywhere
> along the 3/4" of clevis pin in that gap. Although the pin is probably
plenty
> strong enf to do this, I put a ~3/8" long spacer sleeve (aluminum stock)
> on the clevis pin every setup. This forces the lift strut end to stay
> right next to the rear of the two tangs.
>
> -Ben Ransom
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | WGrooms511(at)aol.com |
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
Fellow Kolbitrites;
Take the following for what it's worth.
After reading all about the wonderful attributes of Sea Foam
on this list, I began to use it faithfuly, every ten hours of operation. Thinking,
like a lot of readers that it would /should / may/ eliminate the carbon around
the rings, thereby eliminating the need to decarbonize the piston rings.
I racked up 100 hours on my 618 with no problems.
I do drive my machine very gently, without a lot of fast up and down throttling.
(It's a good thing).
Another Kolbitrite (with a 618) from this list, was using Sea Foam, and had
a piston seizure. Upon tear down he discovered stuck rings, and a stuck RAVE
valve. All stuck of course from carbon build up. I fly over a lot of hostile territory,
over the West Va. mountains, so when I heard about that, I immediatly
grounded my machine untill I could tear it down and look for myself.
Upon tear down, I found both RAVE valves stuck, and both bottom rings so badly
stuck that I had one devel of a time unsticking them without breaking them. Thought
I never would get them free. It is very clear to me that my days, like my
fellow Kolbitrite, were numbered, had I not pulled her down.
My advice; Don't depend on Sea Foam to do your decarbonizing for you. Use it if
you want, but decarbonize
on schedule. Your engine will love you for it.
The truth is so precious that it must be protected by a bodyguard of lies.
Churchill
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wing Spar Attach |
>
>That's right, Chris. Seems to me that some months ago someone said they had
>increased dihedral, and it made the plane much more stable. Must have
>rocks in my head. Only comment lately is that up to 3" doesn't seem to
>make much difference.
I think you are referring to Vince Nicely's post about increased stability
from increased dihedral. He has a FSII, and ample dihedral, and hands off
stability. I have a MKIII and it currently has ample dihedral, and will fly
hands off on a good day for almost 8-10 seconds at a time before falling
off to one side or the other. Whoopee.
Apparently there is a world of difference between MKIII mods and FSII mods
in this area.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | gerken(at)us.ibm.com |
| Subject: | Yaw string, Marvel Mystery Solvent, 3-tank option |
Cliff, I have read your recommendation to install a yaw string. I am still
wondering if there is any difference between correcting the yaw and flying
it crooked. It seems that when I actually straighten the mkiii out, it
slows down a little. Certainly there is no large difference. Maybe it
looks goofy from the ground, when it flys by "sideways", but I can't say
that it is affecting the efficiency measureably. Cliff (or anyone), have
any feedback?
John H.:
Marvel Mystery oil: Yes, I've used it for years in Air tools, but not Air
planes or air vehicles. I was taught by my Dad to squirt a little into the
air drill at the start of each day. A couple years ago I bought a
line-oiler, which goes into the air line with the regulator and supplies
oil to the tools downstream of it. In the literature it SPECIFICALLY
PROHIBITED SEVERAL OILS, including Marvel Mystery oil. It stated that the
polycarbonate bowl would be destroyed by the solvents in MMO. It
recommended using a steel bowl with MMO. Apparently there are solvents in
there that eat certain kinds of plastics. What does it do to synthetic
rubbers in our seals, then? So to me, it doesn't make any sense to put MMO
in a 2-stroke injection system. I would be less apprehensive about adding
a couple caps to the fuel tank, although I don't see any need for it. This
is my opinion, do whatever works for you John. Maybe the complexity of the
four-stroke 912 top-end needs the additional protection.
Three-tank option:
I've come to realize I need more range than 10.5 gallons gives. I read
last week about someone who was using the "3-tank option" which apparently
gave him 16 gallons. Is this a factory option, and can I add it to my
2-tank (stock) Mkiii without welding? Any feedback from guys who are using
it?
(I will also send this request to Dennis.)
jim
________________________________________________________________________________
In a message dated 11/30/98 4:13:18 AM Pacific Standard Time,
WGrooms511(at)aol.com writes:
<< racked up 100 hours on my 618 with no problems.
I do drive my machine very gently, without a lot of fast up and down
throttling. (It's a good thing). >>
Most every Rotax owner tat I know that tries to operate his engine 'very
gently' has carbon problems before the first 100 hrs. A friend with a 618
liked to operate at 5000 - 5200 rpm to reduce fuel consumption but had a stuck
ring at 66 hrs. Another with a 503 felt that rpm's in the low 5k range and
temps at 1000 or below would make his engine last forever.
I helped him recover his Challenger from a field after engine out from totally
gunked up and stuck rings.
Rotax 2 strokes are meant to run at 5800 rpm or even more and will run longest
and most trouble free at that rpm as long as the carb is jetted to keep egt's
in the 1150 degree area and the prop provides enough load to keep chts up
where they belong.
In short: don't baby a Rotax if you want trouble freeoperation.
Pete Krotje
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cavuontop(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Torque For Engine Mounts... |
In a message dated 11/26/98 10:21:04 PM Eastern Standard Time,
fchodson(at)bigfoot.com writes:
<< There is no
suggestion on what to torque the nuts to on the aluminum plate that attaches
to the crankcase, >>
335 inch pounds is what I used. I'm not sure now where I got the number. I
think it came out of the 582 repair manual.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cavuontop(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: FF wing rigging question |
In a message dated 11/27/98 3:16:38 PM Eastern Standard Time,
whofmann(at)eudoramail.com writes:
<< Should the wing tab be centered? >>
No. Let it fall where it will. You have to go through the procedure for
leveling up the cage and getting the wong in the propper angle. Its in the
book.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cavuontop(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: FF wing rigging question |
In a message dated 11/27/98 4:54:01 PM Eastern Standard Time,
FMARINO(at)netlink1.nlcomm.com writes:
<< PS for you guys that have 582,s or larger I have a question concerning the
small oil tank for the valve, I have had to put oil in mine twice since I
got the engine not much oil maybe a couple oil caps full, I checked the oil
tank and there is no water and no oil in the radiator, I was wondering if
this is normal. >>
Frank: This is discussed to a degree in the 582 repair manual. This book
is ridiculously expensive but well worth it.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bob n <ronoy(at)shentel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wing Spar Attach |
Large Lar---A coupla yrs back i tool local paper editor for ride around
the county in my Cardinal. When walking out to flite line he asked if a
certain 172 was my plane. Said NO, mine's the one without the things
holding up the wings! Told him they were optional and I just didn't want
the extra expense.
So why worry abt the 172's struts failing, when the much-reviled
Cardinal didn't have any, and no wing failures in tough turbulance. Grey
Baron
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Carroll " <ron.carroll(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wing Spar Attach |
-----Original Message-----
From: bob n <ronoy(at)shentel.net>
>
>So why worry abt the 172's struts failing, when the much-reviled
>Cardinal didn't have any, and no wing failures in tough turbulance.
Grey
>Baron
Apples & Oranges!
Ron
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | WGrooms511(at)aol.com |
Let me define gently, as I meant it. I run my 618 at 6400RPM max. I cruise at
5900 RPM. My EGT's run at exactly 1200 .
What I don't do is to slam the throttle up and down, like a dirt bike racer
does with his two stroke. That is what I meant by gently.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cliff / Carolyn Stripling <striplic(at)dfw.net> |
To all,
>Cliff, I have read your recommendation to install a yaw string. I am still
>wondering if there is any difference between correcting the yaw and flying
>it crooked. It seems that when I actually straighten the mkiii out, it
>slows down a little. Certainly there is no large difference. Maybe it
>looks goofy from the ground, when it flys by "sideways", but I can't say
>that it is affecting the efficiency measureably. Cliff (or anyone), have
>any feedback?
I'll bet that you cannot tell from the ground that the plane is not flying
perfectly straight. I have tried to measure any difference in speed as you
have mentioned and I also think it slows down just a little. Probably
creates more drag on the rudder trying to correct than it eliminates on the
fuselage.
I allow mine to fly yawed a little most of the time even when I am
correcting some with rudder. I just don't want it to fly so yawed to a
point where if I am flying pretty close to stall that one wing wants to
quit flying earlier than the other. On a Kolb, that might make no
difference at all (high wing pusher, hardly any fuselage to shadow a wing,
big 'ole ailerons). An instrument for a Kolb that would probably tell you
more on that subject and might not be thrown off by flying a little yawed
would be a slip/skid meter. I crudely tried to simulate one with a
level-o-meter (a steel ball in a curved fluid filled tube). It is not very
sensitive but better than not having anything I guess... I figure if I
keep that ball in the center (yawed or not) the plane will fly best.
This may sound silly, but to me it is like a drunk with one foot on the
floor trying to stop the world from going around. That darned yaw string
is like that "foot" for me... If I am flying yawed and "don't know it" I
have a really "goofy" feeling that all is not quite right but can't quite
put my finger on it. If I am fully aware of it by "looking at the string"
I feel just fine. Must be something with my inner ear and changes of
attitude... with me thinging I am facing perfectly straight into the wind
when I am not exactly. Whew! I'm making myself a little nauseaeous
already. ...just joking...
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+ hrs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com> |
>
>Cliff, I have read your recommendation to install a yaw string. I am still
>wondering if there is any difference between correcting the yaw and flying
>it crooked. It seems that when I actually straighten the mkiii out, it
>slows down a little. Certainly there is no large difference. Maybe it
>looks goofy from the ground, when it flys by "sideways", but I can't say
>that it is affecting the efficiency measureably. Cliff (or anyone), have
>any feedback?
Doesn't seem to make a whole lot of difference how it flies. Makes a
difference how it stalls. Makes it real funny to watch it land, if you are
standing beside the runway, and it's someone else landing it.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cliff / Carolyn Stripling <striplic(at)dfw.net> |
| Subject: | Re: FF wing rigging question |
>
>In a message dated 11/27/98 3:16:38 PM Eastern Standard Time,
>whofmann(at)eudoramail.com writes:
>
><< Should the wing tab be centered? >>
>No. Let it fall where it will. You have to go through the procedure for
>leveling up the cage and getting the wing in the propper angle. Its in the
>book.
Cav is right, but in my case (lucky I guess) the holes ended up fairly
close (up/down wise) to the tab centers and more (just barely though) than
3/8" (or whatever is considered the minimum clearance) from the edges. I
got the better edge clearance only because I moved the wing tips a hair
forward of the straight edge along the leading edge the plans called for.
Lifting for dihedral caused the leading edge to become straight again
(again just luck).
Something that worked for me (to steal a phrase from someone)... was to
drill out the holes to 1/4" then open them up with a round file to the
clevis pin size. I marked with thin bright "x" marks the centers of the
holes so when filing I would not move the hole unless I intended to do so.
I did move the outer holes to straighten up the clevis pin, I made sure
that the relationship between all the tabs did not change when the clevis
pin was inserted. It is darned near impossible to drill a perfectly
perpendicular hole through all 3 tabs with a hand drill. When I moved a
hole I left the center tab hole alone and fudged each outside tab hole a
little on opposite sides to straighten up the clevis pin. This "fudging of
holes" isn't for everyone. You can easily screw up. I am sure everyone
would agree that placement of these holes is the most important part of the
whole construction. I checked the level of the whole set up many times
before, during and after drilling those holes to make sure nothing moved.
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+ hrs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rutledge Fuller" <rut007(at)hotmail.com> |
Richard,
I guess you fly only when there is no wind. I hardly ever land with the
yaw string centered due to cross wind and cross wind correction, that is
if I want to land w/o any side load. No wonder you guys are always
tearing up the landing gear.
Rutledge Fuller, Tallahassee
----Original Message Follows----
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 14:06:02 -0500
From: Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Yaw string,
>
>Cliff, I have read your recommendation to install a yaw string. I am
still
>wondering if there is any difference between correcting the yaw and
flying
>it crooked. It seems that when I actually straighten the mkiii out, it
>slows down a little. Certainly there is no large difference. Maybe it
>looks goofy from the ground, when it flys by "sideways", but I can't
say
>that it is affecting the efficiency measureably. Cliff (or anyone),
have
>any feedback?
Doesn't seem to make a whole lot of difference how it flies. Makes a
difference how it stalls. Makes it real funny to watch it land, if you
are
standing beside the runway, and it's someone else landing it.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank_R_Reynen(at)notes.seagate.com |
| Subject: | Re: seizure with AV-2 |
Hi Richard;
After 485 hrs of using AV-2 blend over a 7 year period, my Rotax 582
suffered a cold seizure after a normal warmup and takeoff run on a 70 degr
sunny afternoon in Central Calif. My Rotax did not come equipped with a
thermostat and I believe that this could have been of some help getting the
engine temperature stabilized quicker.
Frank Reynen
http://www.webcom.com/reynen
On this list, I have been reading a lot about cold seizures, hot
seizures and the eventual recognition for the inevitability of failure
with our 2-stroker's.
I'll preface what I wish to ask with: In this area, the east kern
portion of the upper desert of southern california, there has been no
known seizures. I know of one person with a firestar & 447, who waited
until he had 632 hours on the engine before he broke it down. He only
found some minor scratches in the aft piston area.
My question is this: What oil are you using in your mixture's. I
would like to know if there are any seizures using the av-2 oil?
Thank you
Richard of Boron
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cavuontop(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: seizure with AV-2 |
In a message dated 11/30/98 4:42:13 PM Eastern Standard Time,
Frank_R_Reynen(at)notes.seagate.com writes:
<< After 485 hrs of using AV-2 blend over a 7 year period, my Rotax 582
suffered a cold seizure after a normal warmup and takeoff run on a 70 degr
sunny afternoon in Central Calif >>
Frank: My understanding is that the teltale mark of a COLD seizure is
scuffing on the INTAKE side of the piston. Conversely a hot seizure is
scuffing on the exhaust side. Did you examine your pistons? Did one or both
seize? Where did it grab? On the intake (cold) side or the exhaust (hot)
side? When was the last time that you examined your pistons prior to the
seizure.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: seizure with AV-2 |
On Mon, 30 Nov 1998 Cavuontop(at)aol.com wrote:
> Frank: My understanding is that the teltale mark of a COLD seizure is
> scuffing on the INTAKE side of the piston. Conversely a hot seizure is
> scuffing on the exhaust side. Did you examine your pistons? Did one or both
> seize? Where did it grab? On the intake (cold) side or the exhaust (hot)
> side? When was the last time that you examined your pistons prior to the
> seizure.
What's a hot siezure and what's a cold siezure? Does one apply
to water cooled engines only?
Thanks in adv.
- Ben Ransom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rbaker2(at)juno.com (Ray L Baker) |
WGrooms
"I began to use it faithfuly, every ten hours of operation."
Would you mind relating the procedure you used every 10 hours?
Thanks
L. Ray Baker
Lake Butler, Fl
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cavuontop(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: seizure with AV-2 |
In a message dated 11/30/98 6:09:28 PM Eastern Standard Time,
ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu writes:
<< What's a hot siezure and what's a cold siezure? Does one apply
to water cooled engines only?
>>
As I understand it a cold sizure is unique to water cooled engines. The
rotax piston is milled on the exhaust side to be a little undersized, so that
when it expands at temperature it will be the right shape and not too tight.
When you overheat an aircooled 503, by for example running too lean, the
exhaust (hot) side of the piston expands past its design size and gets too big
for the cylinder. So it rubs against the cylinder wall making more friction
and heat and scuffs and scores the cylinder wall making a big mess. If it
gets hot enough it grabs solidly and everything stops moving.
In a 582 the cold seizure scenario is when an engine without a thermostat
is run at idle for long glide to final. The water in the radiator gets quite
cool, and the pump is just loafing along. If the throttle is opened suddenly,
as in an unexpected go around, all the cool water races into the water jacket
and the cylinder is cooled and shrinkes a little, enough that the INTAKE side
(which isn't milled) grabs because the cylinder is cooling and shrinking while
the piston is heating and expanding. This leaves scuffing and scraping on the
INTAKE (cold) side, hence, cold seizure. Stratman discusses this in some
detail in the Care and Feeding . . piece called "Blown Clyinders Tell the
Story." Phil Lockwood told me that you are only at risk for cold seizure at
full throttle. He seemed to think that anything less than that and it
wouldn't happen. I'd welcome other folks' experience on this.
I personally think that Rotax was seriously negligent in making a
thermostat optional on a 582 as opposed to standard equipment. Just my
opinion.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame) |
I do not doubt your stuck rings, but I'm wondering if you would please
describe for me exactly how you applied the Seafoam to your engine.
Please include the
details on: 1) the amount of the Seafoam added to each cylinder 2) how
you added it to the engine 3) the position of each piston when it was
added, and
4) the length of time it soaked for each cylinder. This info would be
very helpful for me. Thanks.
Ralph Burlingame
Original FireStar, 447 powered
so when I heard about that, I immediatly grounded my
>machine untill I could tear it down and look for myself.
>Upon tear down, I found both RAVE valves stuck, and both bottom rings
>so badly stuck that I had one devel of a time unsticking them without
>breaking them. Thought I never would get them free. It is very clear
>to me that my days, like my fellow Kolbitrite, were numbered, had I
>not pulled her down.
>My advice; Don't depend on Sea Foam to do your decarbonizing for you.
>Use it if you want, but decarbonize
>on schedule. Your engine will love you for it.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Guys,
I don't know about you guys, but I would not want to fly without a yaw
string attached to the front of my windshield. Mine fell off once and I
felt naked flying without it. I use it most during a gusty crosswind
takeoff when turning downwind at about 200' where the wind is now strong
enough that I have to apply opposite stick just to keep the bank angle
from getting steeper. I keep my eyes on that yaw string. Another
situation is landing in a heavy crosswind where the bank angle becomes
steep enough to stay in line with the runway before turning to final
approach, a setup for the classic stall/spin. Still one more situation is
circling over a buddy's house at low altitude while waving to someone on
the ground and not paying attention to the yaw string and the airspeed.
These are situations that do inexperienced pilots in. This is the
cheapest instrument on the plane, yet the most valuable under these
conditions and it works great. Others have tried a slip indicator without
any real success on a Kolb, so instead of "stepping on the ball", I
"step on the void" (where the string is not). It's the best indicator of
that possibility of slipping out of the sky.
Ralph Burlingame
Original FireStar, 447 powered
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Highsmith" <michael.highsmith(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: cold seizure? |
Hey guys, I have one for you. How can a round piston in a round cylinder
expand only to contact one side of the wall in order to seize on one side? I
believe that the piston actually is pressing on both sides of the wall with
equal pressure. The side that has the list amount of lubricate is the one
that gets to do the galling first and if it turns out that both sides are
equally lacking lubrication both will seize to some extent. One side may be
a little worse than the other. It may be that there is enough lubricant on
one side to keep that side from seizing but will let the other side take
the heat. (Pun intended) A mild seizure is one that galls on one side, a
major is one that galls both sides and sometimes all the way round the
piston.
Here is another one. Will the engine crank and seem to run fine after a
seizure? I ask these questions because I have recently heard them asked
myself. I have an opinion ( from experience) what is yours? What is the
diffenition to piston seizure? "Sky Hole Pok'r" FIREHAWK
-----Original Message-----
From: Cavuontop(at)aol.com <Cavuontop(at)aol.com>
Date: Monday, November 30, 1998 6:07 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: seizure with AV-2
>
>In a message dated 11/30/98 6:09:28 PM Eastern Standard Time,
>ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu writes:
>
><< What's a hot siezure and what's a cold siezure? Does one apply
> to water cooled engines only?
> >>
>
>
> As I understand it a cold sizure is unique to water cooled engines. The
>rotax piston is milled on the exhaust side to be a little undersized, so
that
>when it expands at temperature it will be the right shape and not too
tight.
>When you overheat an aircooled 503, by for example running too lean, the
>exhaust (hot) side of the piston expands past its design size and gets too
big
>for the cylinder. So it rubs against the cylinder wall making more
friction
>and heat and scuffs and scores the cylinder wall making a big mess. If it
>gets hot enough it grabs solidly and everything stops moving.
>
> In a 582 the cold seizure scenario is when an engine without a
thermostat
>is run at idle for long glide to final. The water in the radiator gets
quite
>cool, and the pump is just loafing along. If the throttle is opened
suddenly,
>as in an unexpected go around, all the cool water races into the water
jacket
>and the cylinder is cooled and shrinkes a little, enough that the INTAKE
side
>(which isn't milled) grabs because the cylinder is cooling and shrinking
while
>the piston is heating and expanding. This leaves scuffing and scraping on
the
>INTAKE (cold) side, hence, cold seizure. Stratman discusses this in some
>detail in the Care and Feeding . . piece called "Blown Clyinders Tell the
>Story." Phil Lockwood told me that you are only at risk for cold seizure
at
>full throttle. He seemed to think that anything less than that and it
>wouldn't happen. I'd welcome other folks' experience on this.
>
> I personally think that Rotax was seriously negligent in making a
>thermostat optional on a 582 as opposed to standard equipment. Just my
>opinion.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rick106(at)juno.com |
| Subject: | Re: Wing Spar Attach |
Big lar
have you drilled the holes in the cage yet if not let me know before you
do
...... IMPORTANT"....
Rick Libersat
writes:
>
>
>That's right, Chris. Seems to me that some months ago someone said
>they had
>increased dihedral, and it made the plane much more stable. Must have
>rocks in my head. Only comment lately is that up to 3" doesn't seem
>to
>make much difference. Ever watch a pigeon glide ?? Now, there's
>dihedral
>! ! ! Maybe a little extreme, of course. I liked the idea of
>sequencing
>the holes on the attach sleeve, but got busy on other things today,
>and
>didn't check it out. Tomorrow for sure. Big Lar.
>
>----------
>> From: CHRISTOPHER DAVIS <cdavis2(at)capecod.net>
>> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Wing Spar Attach
>> Date: Sunday, November 29, 1998 4:53 PM
>>
>
>>
>> Lar , wouldn't increased dihedral be a funtion of longer struts as
>the
>wing
>> attach points either pivot or are universal joints?? chris
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Larry Bourne <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net>
>> To: Kolb
>> Date: Friday, November 27, 1998 11:34 PM
>> Subject: Kolb-List: Wing Spar Attach
>>
>>
>
>> >
>> >Thinking about Wally Hoffman's question on the wing attachment - I
>set
>my
>> >Mk III up absolutely level, without the wheels and tires, and
>bolted it
>> >solid to the floor. Stretched parachute cord tightly from wing tip
>to
>wing
>> >tip - leading edge and trailing edge, used levels, tapes, rulers,
>shims,
>> >and so on till I was darn near confuzzled. Then walked away for
>the
>day,
>> >came back the next and double checked everything. Once those holes
>are
>> >drilled you're done. No adjustments. Now, after reading other
>comments
>(
>> >I think from John H. some time ago ) I wish I had somehow made
>provision
>> >for increasing dihedral if necessary. Not sure how you would go
>about
>> >that, but it seems like it would be desirable, if only to fine tune
>the
>> >rigging. As it is, when you drill the struts, that's it.
>> >Big Lar.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> List Support Contributions:
>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: seizure with AV-2 |
| From: | rbaker2(at)juno.com (Ray L Baker) |
Frank and the list,
I realize that what I have been reading on the list in the last 6 months
does not constitute a scientific sampling. It is often not possible to
determine geographically where the units seizing are being operated, but
it does seem that those in dry areas experience less seizures than those
in areas of high humidity.
It is probably way off of the wall but then carburetor ice reacts to
these conditions. What would be the effect of a slight ice formation
being ingested into a 2 cycle? Is it even possible for ice to form and
be ingested before it could otherwise effect operation?
At this point I am sure it is obvious that I know next to nothing about 2
cycles. I have a thick skin so don't worry about hurting my feelings.
:-)
L. Ray Baker
Lake Butler, Fl
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rick106(at)juno.com |
| Subject: | Re: Yaw string, Marvel Mystery Solvent, 3-tank option |
Jim
if this will help on my M / 3 I use the standard two 5 gal.tank's plus
on a long run I put two 6 gal tanks in the passenger seat as the level
goes down in the mains I transfer from the two six to the main sure
wish JOHN H would start building a tank like he has in his Miss P so
us M /3 guys could have some range.
Rick Libersat
>
>Cliff, I have read your recommendation to install a yaw string. I am
>still
>wondering if there is any difference between correcting the yaw and
>flying
>it crooked. It seems that when I actually straighten the mkiii out,
>it
>slows down a little. Certainly there is no large difference. Maybe
>it
>looks goofy from the ground, when it flys by "sideways", but I can't
>say
>that it is affecting the efficiency measureably. Cliff (or anyone),
>have
>any feedback?
>
>John H.:
>Marvel Mystery oil: Yes, I've used it for years in Air tools, but not
>Air
>planes or air vehicles. I was taught by my Dad to squirt a little
>into the
>air drill at the start of each day. A couple years ago I bought a
>line-oiler, which goes into the air line with the regulator and
>supplies
>oil to the tools downstream of it. In the literature it SPECIFICALLY
>PROHIBITED SEVERAL OILS, including Marvel Mystery oil. It stated that
>the
>polycarbonate bowl would be destroyed by the solvents in MMO. It
>recommended using a steel bowl with MMO. Apparently there are
>solvents in
>there that eat certain kinds of plastics. What does it do to
>synthetic
>rubbers in our seals, then? So to me, it doesn't make any sense to
>put MMO
>in a 2-stroke injection system. I would be less apprehensive about
>adding
>a couple caps to the fuel tank, although I don't see any need for it.
>This
>is my opinion, do whatever works for you John. Maybe the complexity
>of the
>four-stroke 912 top-end needs the additional protection.
>
>Three-tank option:
>I've come to realize I need more range than 10.5 gallons gives. I
>read
>last week about someone who was using the "3-tank option" which
>apparently
>gave him 16 gallons. Is this a factory option, and can I add it to my
>2-tank (stock) Mkiii without welding? Any feedback from guys who are
>using
>it?
>(I will also send this request to Dennis.)
>
>jim
>
>
>
>
> List Support Contributions:
>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Wing Spar Attach |
If I remember correctly the strut load on a FS2 at 4g is around 3500 #
ultimate and again from memory which is suprisingly poor a 5/16 pin double
shear is about 13500 #. of course the bolt being in bending reduces this and
you have to worry about tearout on the lugs but that little biddy bolt is way
strong enough. Commercial, military and possibly Spamcans have to use two load
paths each capable of taking 60% of the load to preclude a single failure
adversely affecting the driver et al. Single point failures do scare the hell
out of me in ultralights.
Dick C
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
Date: Monday, November 30, 1998 8:01 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Yaw string
>
>Guys,
>
>approach, a setup for the classic stall/spin. Still one more situation is
>circling over a buddy's house at low altitude while waving to someone on
>the ground and not paying attention to the yaw string and the airspeed.
>These are situations that do inexperienced pilots in. This is the
>cheapest instrument on the plane, yet the most valuable under these
>conditions and it works great.
Ralph:
The cheapest instrument on your plane is not the most valuable on mine.
I believe I'll take the ASI over the yaw string. I do like to fly
trimmed up, neither slipping or skidding, however, it is the ASI that
informs me that I am getting close to a stall. Trim, IMHO, is not that
critical in most Kolb aircraft. Especially the MKIII. Us MK III drivers
know how to fly out of trim under power, cause a half ball out is about
standard. Now that is my opinion only, and the way I fly. Oh crap, I
forgot about the rear view mirror. hehehe Just kidding guys.
Others have tried a slip indicator without
>any real success on a Kolb, so instead of "stepping on the ball", I
>"step on the void" (where the string is not). It's the best indicator of
>that possibility of slipping out of the sky.
>
>Ralph Burlingame
>Original FireStar, 447 powered
>
Whoa, wait a minute. This "other" had a Winter slip/skid indicator in his
Firestar and I have one in my MK III. That is how I know I fly 1/4 to 1/2
ball out while under power. However, I calibrated both slip/skid indicators
with a yaw string (piece of yarn and a small piece of tape). The both work
great. I will tell you if you need to twist the S/S indicator to get it
right. And yes I agree with Ralph, it is the best indicator of slipping or
skidding.
john h (hauck's holler, alabama)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com> |
>
>
>Richard,
>
>I guess you fly only when there is no wind. I hardly ever land with the
>yaw string centered due to cross wind and cross wind correction, that is
>if I want to land w/o any side load. No wonder you guys are always
>tearing up the landing gear.
>
>Rutledge Fuller, Tallahassee
>
Ahh, come on Rut, not even the Old Poops is that dense! In a cross wind
landing the string is any/every which way.
But before I had a yaw string, just getting used to the airplane on first
flights, it was hilarious!
The MKIII has a tapered nose, and your feet are closer to the center of
the fuselage than your hips, everything is angled.
With a cockeyed frame of reference and no yaw string, every landing, in
a
calm wind, only got the Tower guy laughing harder.
"No prophet is without honor, save in his own country, among his own people."
And the other controllers were having great joy at my expense. Had to get
a yaw string to shut 'em up.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
>----Original Message Follows----
> Doesn't seem to make a whole lot of difference how it flies. Makes a
>difference how it stalls. Makes it real funny to watch it land, if you
>are
>standing beside the runway, and it's someone else landing it.
> Richard Pike
> MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com> |
| Subject: | Re: FF wing rigging question |
>No. Let it fall where it will. You have to go through the procedure for
>leveling up the cage and getting the wong in the propper angle. Its in the
>book.
I looked through the book again tonight and I couldn't find anything about
the wong. Are you sure you sent that post to the right list?
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wing Spar Attach |
To my knowledge none of 'em have. Big Lar.
----------
> From: Ron Carroll <ron.carroll(at)worldnet.att.net>
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Wing Spar Attach
> Date: Monday, November 30, 1998 7:55 AM
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: bob n <ronoy(at)shentel.net>
> >
> >So why worry abt the 172's struts failing, when the much-reviled
> >Cardinal didn't have any, and no wing failures in tough turbulance.
> Grey
> >Baron
>
>
> Apples & Oranges!
>
> Ron
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wing Spar Attach |
Yeah, sorry Rick. They're drilled. I'm sure all will be OK, but it IS
food for thought. What did you have in mind ?? Big Lar.
----------
> From: rick106(at)juno.com
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Cc: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Wing Spar Attach
> Date: Monday, November 30, 1998 6:52 PM
>
>
> Big lar
>
> have you drilled the holes in the cage yet if not let me know before you
> do
> ...... IMPORTANT"....
>
>
> Rick Libersat
>
> >
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
You mean I wasted my money ( again ) when I bought the ball and tube slip
indicator ?? Why doesn't it work well in a Kolb ?? Maybe too close to the
center of rotation ?? Big Lar.
----------
> From: Ralph H Burlingame <ul15rhb(at)juno.com>
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Cc: Richard.Dewitt(at)HBC.honeywell.com; jburlin181(at)aol.com;
ggleiter(at)minn.net; Scott.Pierskalla(at)HBC.honeywell.com; dwegner(at)isd.net
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Yaw string
> Date: Monday, November 30, 1998 5:47 PM
>
>
> Guys,
>
Others have tried a slip indicator without
> any real success on a Kolb,
> Ralph Burlingame
> Original FireStar, 447 powered
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wing Spar Attach |
Yeah, I know you're pulling my leg, G.B., and if I was really, deeply
worried, I flat out would not fly. Period. I KNOW that thing is OK, but I
think you know what I mean. Big Lar.
----------
> From: bob n <ronoy(at)shentel.net>
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Wing Spar Attach
> Date: Monday, November 30, 1998 7:38 AM
>
>
> Large Lar---A coupla yrs back i tool local paper editor for ride around
> the county in my Cardinal. When walking out to flite line he asked if a
> certain 172 was my plane. Said NO, mine's the one without the things
> holding up the wings! Told him they were optional and I just didn't want
> the extra expense.
>
> So why worry abt the 172's struts failing, when the much-reviled
> Cardinal didn't have any, and no wing failures in tough turbulance. Grey
> Baron
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | WGrooms511(at)aol.com |
In a message dated 11/30/98 7:29:53 PM Eastern Standard Time, ul15rhb(at)juno.com
writes:
<< if you would please
describe for me exactly how you applied the Seafoa >>
Gentlemen:
First of all, the only oil I have EVER used is Amziol 100% Synthetic.
Secondly, for my application method. I remove one spark plug and with a
hypodermic syringe inject five CC's of Sea Foam into the cylinder when the
piston is at top dead center. I twist the syringe around so that 360 degrees
of the piston top gets a shot. I then replace the plug and work the piston up
and down about 1/2 inch from TDC. I let that set for about five minutes and do
the same for the other cylinder.
I let the Sea Foam do it's work for at least one week, sometimes two weeks.
When I start the engine up a week or two later it burns with a lot of white
smoke, like it's supposed to do.
Apparently I appear to some as a doubter of the Holy Grail. Someone who is
attempting to gore a sacred cow. I pass this info on only as an attempt to
save
someone from what could be a very expensive or even fatal mistake.
As I said in my first E Mail. Use Sea Foam all you want. By I would advise
you, based on my own experience, to decarbonize your pistons as recomended by
the manufacturer.
Walter Grooms
The truth is so precious, that it must be protected by a bodyguard of
lies.
Churchill
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rutledge Fuller" <rut007(at)hotmail.com> |
Richard wrote
"Ahh, come on Rut, not even the Old Poops is that dense!"
Just figured that I would stir the pot. Job frustration get's the best
of me sometimes and I got to take it out on someone. But, when I was
reading your post I got this picture in my mind of a 5 mph 90 degree
crosswind. Then here comes some fool shooting a landing while keeping
the yaw string centered.... Then BAM! CRASH, and CRUNCH. It could
happen to the inexperienced who have never encountered crosswind before
and don't realize that the wheels have to be pointed in the direction
that you are traveling.
Rutledge Fuller
Looking toward self-employment or retirement at 28.
Tallahassee, Fl.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: seizure with AV-2 |
Ben Ransom wrote:
> What's a hot siezure and what's a cold siezure? Does one apply
> to water cooled engines only?
Ben and group,
A cold siezure can happen when full power is applied before the engine is warmed
up enough. The piston expands faster than the cylinder, and it will run out of
clearance and sieze. It can happen to air cooled or water cooled engines. I think
that Rotax recommends not opening the throttle until 250 degrees CHT on my 503.
Somebody correct me if they have there manual handy, and I am wrong.
A hot siezure is generally caused be to high a EGT or a lack of lubrication.
John Jung
Firestar II N6163J
SE Wisconsin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cavuontop(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: cold seizure? |
In a message dated 11/30/98 9:14:06 PM Eastern Standard Time,
michael.highsmith(at)worldnet.att.net writes:
<< How can a round piston in a round cylinder
expand only to contact one side of the wall in order to seize on one side? >>
If that were the case I would agree with you. But my understanding is that
the rotax piston is not completely round. As I understand it it is milled on
the exhaust side. Your observation about lubrication is well taken, but I
beleive it supports my point. The fuel is entering the chamber from the
intake side and will be cooling that side of the piston. The exhaust side
must necessarily be hotter and, as engine temps rise be harder to lubricate.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cavuontop(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: seizure with AV-2 |
In a message dated 11/30/98 10:17:11 PM Eastern Standard Time,
rbaker2(at)juno.com writes:
<< Is it even possible for ice to form and
be ingested before it could otherwise effect operation?
>>
The theory, and I repeat this is just theory, I have heard from a number of
sources is that carb ice is next to impossible in Rotax 2 strokes because 1)
the carb is so close to the engine case that the throat is heated by the case.
2) That the fact that the oil is mixed with the fuel so slicks everthing up
that the ice can't stick anywhere. I have no idea if this makes sense and
would welcome the groups' comment.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cliff / Carolyn Stripling <striplic(at)dfw.net> |
To all,
After this post I think I will "give it a rest"...
The comment about not paying attention the the "string" on landing is
absolutely correct. The string is all over the place and should be
ignored. Same thing during take off roll. Also, J.H. is correct about the
most important instrument anytime (on any airplane), the ASI (the very best
anti-stall instrument). During landings I resemble a lizzard with one eye
flicking down to look at the ASI and the other glued outside of the cockpit.
I really should put a trim tab (or other trimming device) on my rudder, but
I have just about retrained myself to flying "Kolb-style". I would hate to
have to re-learn it all over again differently. For instance when doing
figure 8's I really step on the left rudder entering tight left turns, then
muscle the ailerons to roll over into the right turn. Right turns need
almost no right rudder to keep the ball & string centered, then I muscle
the ailreons to roll over into a left turn, etc. ...all the while holding
altitude with the feather-lite elevators. Boy... what a plane, warts and
all. BTW, the whole figure 8 happens really quickly by spam can standards.
Kolbs can really maneuver. You can be going the opposite direction almost
before you can say "turn around"... only a small exageration.
Question to the list. How many of you out there are flying with a
thermostat? My engine did not come with one and not being very engine
mechanically savy I figured... what they did not supply or suggest I get in
their literature, I don't need. I live in the south so am not exposed to
extreme temperature differentials and in the winter I tape off part of the
radiators. Some people have suggested I get one. Others have said not to
bother. The possibility of cold seisure has concerned me. I try to keep
the temps up on glides. You can't do much about landing approaches. Maybe
a thermostat would be a good investment? Anybody out there read anything
from Rotax about whether to use a thermostat or not?
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+ hrs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
Big Lar and group,
My experience is that with a short windschield the ball is not sensitive
enough and the string is maybe too sensitive. Put a full windschield on the same
plane and the ball slip indicator works good. On my Firestar II, the only time
that I need to pay attention to the ball is on full power climb, to get the
right amount of left rudder, and during steep turns. On landing, I fly
coordinated until just before touchdown and then use the rudder. On pavement, I
straighten out earlier, lower a wing and land uncoordinated, but I carry extra
speed to within a few feet of the runway.
John Jung
Firestar II N6163J
SE Wisconsin
Larry Bourne wrote:
>
> You mean I wasted my money ( again ) when I bought the ball and tube slip
> indicator ?? Why doesn't it work well in a Kolb ?? Maybe too close to the
> center of rotation ?? Big Lar.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com> |
A thermostat is a welcome option. The engine warms up quicker, and cools
off slower in a glide. I would not be without one.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
>
>Question to the list. How many of you out there are flying with a
>thermostat? My engine did not come with one and not being very engine
>mechanically savy I figured... what they did not supply or suggest I get in
>their literature, I don't need. I live in the south so am not exposed to
>extreme temperature differentials and in the winter I tape off part of the
>radiators. Some people have suggested I get one. Others have said not to
>bother. The possibility of cold seisure has concerned me. I try to keep
>the temps up on glides. You can't do much about landing approaches. Maybe
>a thermostat would be a good investment? Anybody out there read anything
>from Rotax about whether to use a thermostat or not?
>
>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+ hrs)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: cold seizure? |
Michael Highsmith wrote:
> snip....
> Here is another one. Will the engine crank and seem to run fine after a
> seizure?
snip...
Yes it can. But I wouldn't want to fly with it. I have seen it on Rotaxes. And,
I used to
have an MX dirt bike that had been seized at least 10 times, and once it cooled
down, it
would restart and run like it had no problems.
John Jung
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bob n <ronoy(at)shentel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: FF wing rigging question |
Do two wongs make a Wright (bros) ? GB
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com> |
>
>In a message dated 11/30/98 10:17:11 PM Eastern Standard Time,
>rbaker2(at)juno.com writes:
>
><< Is it even possible for ice to form and
> be ingested before it could otherwise effect operation?
I think carb ice is possible but not likely with the standard air cleaner.
A major factor is that a 2-stroke belches back a lot of mixture out the
carb with every intake cycle.
Pull off the air cleaner, tie the beast down, and run the engine up under
load. Most likely you will see a standing mist just out the carb intakes.
The heavier the prop load, the more noticable it is. With a heated
crankcase, this mist is probably warmer than the straight intake mixture.
I suspect that this helps keep Rotax and other 2-cycles from carb ice.
I
do think that depending on the type of air cleaner system you have, it is
possible to build a "ram air" system that would reduce this blow back
phenomenon to the point that carb ice would become possible.
Years ago we had a flurry of carb ice problems locally on some American
Aerolights "Eagles" and also some Maxair "Hummers" that were using Xenoah
250 engines, with pulse carbs and velocity stacks inside the air cleaners.
My brother in law brought his Quicksilver MX up here in 1982 and we flew
it in the winter. We pulled the air filter off, tied it down, ran it up,
and wached inside the carb to see what it did. A trace of rime ice formed
on the inside of the carb just behind the main/needle jet opening where the
slide needle went into the lower body, and the fuel exits. It never got
more than 3/32" high, or more than 3/8" wide.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
> The theory, and I repeat this is just theory, I have heard from a
number of
>sources is that carb ice is next to impossible in Rotax 2 strokes because 1)
>the carb is so close to the engine case that the throat is heated by the
case.
>2) That the fact that the oil is mixed with the fuel so slicks everthing up
>that the ice can't stick anywhere. I have no idea if this makes sense and
>would welcome the groups' comment.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Carroll " <ron.carroll(at)worldnet.att.net> |
-----Original Message-----
From: Cliff / Carolyn Stripling <striplic(at)dfw.net>
Date: Tuesday December 01 1998 7:16 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Yaw string,
>
>After this post I think I will "give it a rest"...
>
SNIP>
Amen!
Now then, Cliff, I was very interested in the part of your post
regarding your quick handling Kolb. Since I've only recently
(finally) gotten my Firestar into the air, I admittadly speak as a
novice Kolb driver, but I have found the ailerons to be very slow
responding to input. After putting about 5-hours on the Kolb,
yesterday I took the 182 for a sppin to keep the oil moving, and found
it to feel surprisingly quick compared with the Kolb.
It *seems* like I input rudder then aileron for a turn, and then
*wait* for something to happen (VERY sluggish). In fact, if I happen
to fly through another UL's wake and get my wing flipped up I can
hardly bring it back to level. I assumed that this is to be expected
from the Kolb with recommended dihedral, but after reading your post
I'm not so sure. I wonder if others feel the same as you, or if there
are some that get the same sensation that I do.
Other than this it flies great, with outstanding climb. A LOT of
performance from a 377! I'm still struggeling with high EGT/CHT
temps, however. At cruise (5800) I get 1250* EGT and 400*/400* CHTs.
I have the needle all the way up, all jets are stock Bings for
sea-level, and I use Pennzoil mixed at 50:1. For the time being this
is working, but next spring & summer I think I will be in trouble.
I've already seized two pistons during break-in, and get nervous when
the temps go to 400*.
Ron Carroll
Original Firestar
>. For instance when doing
>figure 8's I really step on the left rudder entering tight left
turns, then
>muscle the ailerons to roll over into the right turn. Right turns
need
>almost no right rudder to keep the ball & string centered, then I
muscle
>the ailreons to roll over into a left turn, etc. ...all the while
holding
>altitude with the feather-lite elevators. Boy... what a plane, warts
and
>all. BTW, the whole figure 8 happens really quickly by spam can
standards.
> Kolbs can really maneuver. You can be going the opposite direction
almost
>before you can say "turn around"... only a small exageration.
>
>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+ hrs)
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cavuontop(at)aol.com |
In a message dated 12/1/98 11:15:48 AM Eastern Standard Time,
rpike(at)preferred.com writes:
<< Anybody out there read anything
>from Rotax about whether to use a thermostat or not? >>
As I said in my original post the 582 repair manual discusses a
thermostat, but it is not shipped with the engine and has to be purchased
separately. In my view this is a very short sighted decision. Anyway, I
wouldn't fly without one. BTW I think rotax want $19.00 for theirs. I have a
friend who got what he swears is the same thing for his 618 at the local
autoparts store for a couple of bucks. I'm too chicken and spent th extra
money for the factory part.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cavuontop(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron control |
In a message dated 12/1/98 11:32:15 AM Eastern Standard Time,
ron.carroll(at)worldnet.att.net writes:
<< At cruise (5800) I get 1250* EGT and 400*/400* CHTs >>
Be careful those numbers are high. Where is your egt probe located?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu> |
On Tue, 1 Dec 1998, Larry Bourne wrote:
> You mean I wasted my money ( again ) when I bought the ball and tube slip
> indicator ?? Why doesn't it work well in a Kolb ?? Maybe too close to the
> center of rotation ?? Big Lar.
Hey Larry, No, not a waste of money. The ball/slip indicator turns the
"dashboard" into a "panel". Really, looks count for a little, right?
I think the ball/slip isn't as useful as in a bigger plane because the
UL maneuvers are so much quicker. Like Cliff said, a turn is over with
right away so G forces from an uncoordinated turn never stick around long.
I think the oil in the ball/slip dampens the ball too much.
BTW, different strokes again here: I can't recall ever paying much
attention to the yaw string on approach or landing. I have both
eyes outside, making sure the plane is traveling down the centerline
-- especially on a narrow strip with Xwind and ditch on one side!!.
For me, I don't see any point in watching a string when instead you can
watch side-drift relative to the ground. I do agree though, that in
turns, especially slow turns, the yaw string is a great teacher to the
seat of my pants.
-Ben Ransom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu> |
On Tue, 1 Dec 1998, Richard Pike wrote:
> ><< Is it even possible for ice to form and
> > be ingested before it could otherwise effect operation?
There are those in the northern climates (Ralph, or ?) who
have seen or heard of ice particles that were already formed
in the air getting into the intake and causing a siezure
right away. I can't remember if this occurred with a standard
air filter equipped engine or not. Glad I don't have to worry
about this type of ice. Cold for me is 45-50F. (go ahead, say it)
-Ben Ransom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Carroll " <ron.carroll(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron control |
-----Original Message-----
From: Cavuontop(at)aol.com <Cavuontop(at)aol.com>
>
>In a message dated 12/1/98 11:32:15 AM Eastern Standard Time,
>ron.carroll(at)worldnet.att.net writes:
>
><< At cruise (5800) I get 1250* EGT and 400*/400* CHTs >>
>
>
>Be careful those numbers are high. Where is your egt probe located?
>
I have a single probe (single carb) and as I recall the probe is
located 100 cm from the piston on the PTO end of the engine. The
1250* indicates a slightly lean mixture, but I'm more concerned with
the CHTs @400* and sometimes going to 450*. In reading the
instructions that came with the CHT gauge/probes, they say that it is
calibrated at 75* F, and to adjust the indicated readings based on the
current outside air temp. therefore, I have been flying in around 50*
OAT and have adjusted the reading down 25*s to get the actual CHT
temps. Even with the adjustment I am at 400/400* to 450/450* F. Scary,
and I can't figure out why.
Ron Carroll
Original Firestar
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank_R_Reynen(at)notes.seagate.com |
| Subject: | Re: seizure with AV-2 |
Only the Mag side piston seized. It showed three scored areas 1/2 inch
wide,starting from the top down aprox 1/3 th down the sides and two were
located next to the exhaust port and one straight across to provide three
areas almost 120 degr apart that grabbed the piston. The piston rings were
not scored at these areas, only the piston and the rings were not stuck in
the grooves.The cylinder walls were only scuffed and have been
reconditioned but did not need oversized pistons. I measured the new
mag-side and PTO side piston and both show approx. 6-7 mil clearance in the
reconditioned bores and according to CPS/Rotax info,this is acceptable.The
last time the engine was decarboned with the pistons removed was 175 hrs
ago and a heads off inspection and cleaning was done 55 hrs prior to the
seizure.I have always used the oil injection system and oil was visible in
both intake bores @ post seizure inspection including proper fuel level in
both bowls.I do not recall any abnormal egt or cht readings on my dual
gauges at anytime before this happened.
Frank Reynen MKIII@485hrs
http://www.webcom.com/reynen
In a message dated 11/30/98 4:42:13 PM Eastern Standard Time,
Frank_R_Reynen(at)notes.seagate.com writes:
<< After 485 hrs of using AV-2 blend over a 7 year period, my Rotax 582
suffered a cold seizure after a normal warmup and takeoff run on a 70 degr
sunny afternoon in Central Calif >>
Frank: My understanding is that the teltale mark of a COLD seizure is
scuffing on the INTAKE side of the piston. Conversely a hot seizure is
scuffing on the exhaust side. Did you examine your pistons? Did one or
both
seize? Where did it grab? On the intake (cold) side or the exhaust (hot)
side? When was the last time that you examined your pistons prior to the
seizure.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cavuontop(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron control |
In a message dated 12/1/98 12:16:44 PM Eastern Standard Time,
ron.carroll(at)worldnet.att.net writes:
<< 250* indicates a slightly lean mixture, but I'm more concerned with
the CHTs @400* and sometimes going to 450*. >>
Everybody has their own threshold for this stuff, but those numbers are
higher than I would fly with. On the other hand single probe egts are
notoriously unrelaiable. There is nothing I like better than spending other
people's money so here is my recomendations: my guess is you probably have
the old style muffler. The new style three piece muffler is a much better
muffer (and remember on a 2 stroke if the muffler doesn't work you don't go)
and it has these nicely welded threaded bosses to accept a standard
(translation: expensive) GA EGT probes just like on a "real" plane. Throw in
the dual westrberg egt guage, the new (and better) mounting hardware from
kolb, jet hot coating for the whole thing and what do you get for the 800
dollars I just spent for you? I think a significantly improved margin of
safety. You must have reliable egt information on BOTH cylinders to run a
rotax safely in my opinion. Plus the new three piece muffler is significaly
less prone to cracking, which is a safety issue in itself. The one forced
landing I had in my mark 2 resulted from a crack that opened in the exhaust
manifold during flight.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cavuontop(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: seizure with AV-2 |
In a message dated 12/1/98 12:28:13 PM Eastern Standard Time,
Frank_R_Reynen(at)notes.seagate.com writes:
<< It showed three scored areas 1/2 inch
wide,starting from the top down aprox 1/3 th down the sides and two were
located next to the exhaust port and one straight across to provide three
areas almost 120 degr apart that grabbed the piston. >>
Frank this is very interesting. So what do you think seized it? It sounds
like the scuffing is on the exhaust side, which suggestst hot seizure. I have
heard rebuilders say that carbon on top of the piston is not significant, but
that carbon depositis on the rings, which may not be so easy to see, is very
serious. So what do you think?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
>
>On Tue, 1 Dec 1998, Larry Bourne wrote:
>> You mean I wasted my money ( again ) when I bought the ball and tube slip
>> indicator ?? Why doesn't it work well in a Kolb ?? Maybe too close to
the
>> center of rotation ?? Big Lar.
I think the slip/skid ind works well in Kolb acft and any other acft. If I
understand correctly, the slip/skid ind is calibrated so it indicates center
position when the airframe is level in its roll axis, on the ground. When
flying and the acft is trimmed to relative wind, the ball is centered. If
making a turn and the ball is outside the turn you are skidding, and if you
are making a turn and the ball is inside the turn you are slipping, or
something like that. Hard to fly sitting in front of a monitor. Some
things I take for granted when flying are hard to explain with a keyboard.
>I think the ball/slip isn't as useful as in a bigger plane because the
>UL maneuvers are so much quicker
Why is the slip/skid (not ball/slip)(not turn and bank) indicator not as
useful on
ULs as on larger GA type acft? I don't know. I thought it served the same
purpose on all acft, to help keep the acft in trim to relative wind.
> Like Cliff said, a turn is over with
>right away so G forces from an uncoordinated turn never stick around long.
Please explain the above. Ya lost me. Seems as though duration of turn
depends on whether you are making a steep or shallow turn. If the turn is
coordinated you will only experience vertical g's. Uncoordinated, both
vertical and lateral, I theeennnk.
>I think the oil in the ball/slip dampens the ball too much.
If the ball wasn't damped, it would be rocking and rolling like a mag
compass in rough air in a Firestar. Would have to interpolate to read the
instrument. Yaw string doesn't have that problem, unaffected by turbulence.
Saves weight, space, and money, yet does the same job. Also, does not
require any calibration for installation.
john h (trying to keep my computer trimmed up in Hauck's Holler, Central,
Alabama)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rob Reynolds" <rfreynol(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: seizure with AV-2 |
Well, one of my friends had and engine out a few months ago due to carb-ice
on a 503 (mounted on a Challenger II).
It was a cool day, with less than a 8 degree difference between the OAT and
the dew-point, a prefect condition for carb-ice. After a long, low power
descent, his engine died. He set it down in a field, and suspecting carb
ice, pulled one of the carbs.... it was iced up. Cleaned out the ice,
cranked it up, and flew home.
You statment is correct, only if you are running your engine at high power
settings. At low power settings, a Rotax, CAN and WILL develop carb ice.
-Rob
-----Original Message-----
From: Cavuontop(at)aol.com <Cavuontop(at)aol.com>
Date: Tuesday, December 01, 1998 7:12 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: seizure with AV-2
>
>In a message dated 11/30/98 10:17:11 PM Eastern Standard Time,
>rbaker2(at)juno.com writes:
>
><< Is it even possible for ice to form and
> be ingested before it could otherwise effect operation?
> >>
>
>
> The theory, and I repeat this is just theory, I have heard from a number
of
>sources is that carb ice is next to impossible in Rotax 2 strokes because
1)
>the carb is so close to the engine case that the throat is heated by the
case.
>2) That the fact that the oil is mixed with the fuel so slicks everthing
up
>that the ice can't stick anywhere. I have no idea if this makes sense and
>would welcome the groups' comment.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rutledge Fuller" <rut007(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron control |
Ron, I have a 377 Original Firestar with close to 100 hours. I too had
a seziure. I reduced my CHT's by more than 20 degrees by honing the
cylinders to .004 - .005 in clearance. I talked to several certified
Rotax mechaincs who agreed that the piston to cylinder wall clearances
are often too tight which is conducive to seziure and high CHT. Stock
engines are sometimes as tight as .002 in. At 5800 rpm's I run EGT
1050* and CHT 316*, 350*. The rear cylinder always has run 40* cooler.
Go figure. I think it is due to a lack of a baffle as see on newer
engine models.
My 2 cents.
Rutledge Fuller
Tallahassee, Fl.
From: "Ron Carroll " <ron.carroll(at)worldnet.att.net>
Other than this it flies great, with outstanding climb. A LOT of
performance from a 377! I'm still struggeling with high EGT/CHT
temps, however. At cruise (5800) I get 1250* EGT and 400*/400* CHTs.
I have the needle all the way up, all jets are stock Bings for
sea-level, and I use Pennzoil mixed at 50:1. For the time being this
is working, but next spring & summer I think I will be in trouble.
I've already seized two pistons during break-in, and get nervous when
the temps go to 400*.
Ron Carroll
Original Firestar
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu> |
> I think the slip/skid ind works well in Kolb acft and any other acft. If I
> understand correctly, the slip/skid ind is calibrated so it indicates center
...Not much of a calibration here. Just mount it with the ball centered
when the plane is parked on level terrain.
> > Like Cliff said, a turn is over with
> >right away so G forces from an uncoordinated turn never stick around long.
>
> Please explain the above. Ya lost me. Seems as though duration of turn
What I was trying to say is that the oil in the ball/slip is too viscous
for the duration of most UL maneuvers. The ball moves because of G
forces, that's all. In syrup, it moves slower, and by that time the
uncoordinated turn is usually either over with or possibly brought back
to coordinated. Maybe with lighter syrup it would work better. BTW, a
compass I used for a time had dampening oil that was too thin, and the
good ol 2-stroke would send that compass card a jittering something
awful. I successfully drilled a hole, exchanged to a slightly heavier
oil, and plugged the hole, correcting the problem. (But then I got
a GPS.) Anyway, it could be tried on a ball/slip "instrument" too,
if anyone cared. I think we all agree that the string is far superior
anyway.
Then again, maybe I too am staring at a monitor too long.
-Ben Ransom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cavuontop(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: seizure with AV-2 |
In a message dated 12/1/98 1:12:35 PM Eastern Standard Time,
rfreynol(at)mindspring.com writes:
<< He set it down in a field, and suspecting carb
ice, pulled one of the carbs.... it was iced up. Cleaned out the ice,
cranked it up, and flew home. >>
Thanks for the response. This is the best account of 2 stroke carb ice I have
ever heard. Where inside the carb did the ice build up?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Ransom <mlransom(at)ucdavis.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: 2-stroke reliability |
edu>
>Another little point about keeping an emergency landing field in site: One
>of the things I find a little bit of a game is to keep track of the good
>em fields that go behind you.
Hi. I don't follow the list much anymore (you guys/gals(?) are too
prolific!) but my filters catch stuff posted by Ben or mentioning ultrastars.
Very good idea to remember good em. landing spots you've already passed
over. One of the biggest problems, *even if you do have lots of altitude*
is that the spots near the perimeter of that "magic cone" are not as
verifiably good--you can't see the fences, ditches, poles, texture well
enough from a distance. Like John said, you don't get a second chance--no
go-arounds. Your options would increase with the square of your altitude
but for this fact.
If you continuously take note of good spots more directly below you, your
options will generally be better behind you, particularly if you have a
significant tailwind.
Mike Ransom, Programmer/Analyst, Dept of Agronomy & Range Science
University of California, Davis U.S.A.
mlransom@ucdavis.edu http://agronomy.ucdavis.edu/ransom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron control |
Ron,
Make sure that the idle air screw is in the correct position. I have been told
that it can cause a lean condition at the high end.
John Jung
Ron Carroll wrote:
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cavuontop(at)aol.com <Cavuontop(at)aol.com>
> >
> >In a message dated 12/1/98 11:32:15 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> >ron.carroll(at)worldnet.att.net writes:
> >
> ><< At cruise (5800) I get 1250* EGT and 400*/400* CHTs >>
> >
> >
> >Be careful those numbers are high. Where is your egt probe located?
> >
> I have a single probe (single carb) and as I recall the probe is
> located 100 cm from the piston on the PTO end of the engine. The
> 1250* indicates a slightly lean mixture, but I'm more concerned with
> the CHTs @400* and sometimes going to 450*. In reading the
> instructions that came with the CHT gauge/probes, they say that it is
> calibrated at 75* F, and to adjust the indicated readings based on the
> current outside air temp. therefore, I have been flying in around 50*
> OAT and have adjusted the reading down 25*s to get the actual CHT
> temps. Even with the adjustment I am at 400/400* to 450/450* F. Scary,
> and I can't figure out why.
>
> Ron Carroll
> Original Firestar
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rutledge Fuller" <rut007(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron control |
I think that you are nut's. Unless he has a crack or damage to his
exhaust, there is no need in replacing it. There are pilots out there
right now doing just fine with the old pipe and non-GA EGT probes. If
you provide the proper flexability to the exhaust you should not have a
problem. I also seriously doubt that the new style pipe will cure his
hot engine. I would start playing with the jetting, and possibly hone
the cylinders to provide a little more clearance. This, if you have the
tools--is close to free. I do agree that the engine should be cooled
off before flying it any more and testing should be conducted to
determine the temps are accurate.
Duane in Tallahassee will post to this to tell us about those neat temp
sticks.
I hate it when people try to throw unnecessary money at a problem, and
then acheive little in results. This is a subject that I am very
familar with since I work for the State of Florida.
Not meaning to jump down your throat--just wanted to put in my two
cents. America is a great place to live.
Rutledge Fuller
Tallahassee, Fl.
----Original Message Follows----
From: Cavuontop(at)aol.com
There is nothing I like better than spending other
people's money so here is my recomendations: my guess is you probably
have
the old style muffler. The new style three piece muffler is a much
better
muffer (and remember on a 2 stroke if the muffler doesn't work you don't
go)
and it has these nicely welded threaded bosses to accept a standard
(translation: expensive) GA EGT probes just like on a "real" plane.
Throw in
the dual westrberg egt guage, the new (and better) mounting hardware
from
kolb, jet hot coating for the whole thing and what do you get for the
800
dollars I just spent for you? I think a significantly improved margin
of
safety. You must have reliable egt information on BOTH cylinders to run
a
rotax safely in my opinion. Plus the new three piece muffler is
significaly
less prone to cracking, which is a safety issue in itself. The one
forced
landing I had in my mark 2 resulted from a crack that opened in the
exhaust
manifold during flight.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Hi CHT (was Aileron control) |
On Tue, 1 Dec 1998, Ron Carroll wrote:
> current outside air temp. therefore, I have been flying in around 50*
> OAT and have adjusted the reading down 25*s to get the actual CHT
> temps. Even with the adjustment I am at 400/400* to 450/450* F. Scary,
> and I can't figure out why.
I personally would not fly at those CHTs. Something ain't right and
is worth finding at whatever expense. (If it finds you first, it will
be inconvenient at least, and even more expensive.) For comparison, in
50F OAT, I read 260-280 normal, ~325 after sustained full power climb.
(447 SC) I believe high CHT usually is abnormal timing, stuck rings,
or wear.
-Ben Ransom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rutledge Fuller" <rut007(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Hi CHT (was Aileron control) |
Good point about timing. I took it for granted that he has it timed
properly. Most of the manuals say to always check the timing before
anything else, and with a 377 he should have points ignition unless it
was converted.
Rutledge
----Original Message Follows----
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 1998 10:41:54 -0800 (PST)
From: Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Hi CHT (was Aileron control)
On Tue, 1 Dec 1998, Ron Carroll wrote:
> current outside air temp. therefore, I have been flying in around 50*
> OAT and have adjusted the reading down 25*s to get the actual CHT
> temps. Even with the adjustment I am at 400/400* to 450/450* F. Scary,
> and I can't figure out why.
I personally would not fly at those CHTs. Something ain't right and
is worth finding at whatever expense. (If it finds you first, it will
be inconvenient at least, and even more expensive.) For comparison, in
50F OAT, I read 260-280 normal, ~325 after sustained full power climb.
(447 SC) I believe high CHT usually is abnormal timing, stuck rings,
or wear.
-Ben Ransom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher John Armstrong" <Tophera(at)centuryinter.net> |
| Subject: | turn instruments |
Hi all,
What is the instrument called when it is shaped like an inverted u and has
an airbubble in alcohol as opposed to an upright u with a ball in oil? I
have seen these on old planes and wonder if they work better for slow
planes then the ball in oil or if it is a totally differant deal.
Topher
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bob n <ronoy(at)shentel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: turn instruments |
Topher, this gizmo isn't really a turn-type instrument. If you'll think
a bit, you can see that it's a type of level, but with a lot of
senitivity because of the small radius of the tube. Since the air bubble
has no inertia, it isn't affected by any turning accereration/ decel.
and hence just shows level. If it's mounted horizontally, it shows when
wings are level; if mounted fore/aft it shows nose up/down. I suppose it
could be used to show bank angle, but you wouldn't know if you were in
slip, slide, slop or yaw.
Called an inclinometer. Ain't it wonderful to be my age to know this
useless stuff? Grey Baron
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | gerken(at)us.ibm.com |
| Subject: | Drag, one more time |
Topher (and anyone still interested), once you wrote:
I am an aerospace geek and can tell you a little about drag. As far as
the Mark III pod goes there are several things that make it draggy. It
is abit short and fat, tailcones should taper at a bit better then 3 to
1 for least drag. The tail end needs to be sharp. On my FS II the tail
end is 6 inches across, not sure but I think the Mark III is the same.
Laminar flow is best, turbulent flow increases drag around 30%,
separated flow another 50% or more. The Mark III is separated flow
behind the wind screen, and turbulent or separated everywhere else but
maybe the first foot or two of the nose. I dont think your going to get
much laminar flow out of this shape.
My question is: do these characteristics change, depending on airspeed?
Your guess about detached flow everywhere but the first foot of the pod is
incorrect, by my best seat of the pants experiments, and maybe that is
because we are dealing with only 60 mph air. I ask because I am still
working toward enclosure of the sides of the rear pod, which at best will
produce about a 1:1 closing taper starting at the rear edge of the doors
and ending in a vertical line at the top of boom tube.
I have built a vacuum source with regulator and have been running
(Vinyl-Ester/Fiberglass cloth on 4lb 1/4" urethane foam) experiments each
evening to develop removable panels for the pod sides above the turtledeck.
To these I will attach a pc of aluminum to form the tip of the enclosure
near the prop, as Cliff shows on his Homepage. I feel this is the
shortest route (and may show only mild success) to drag reduction without
major modification of the pod.
Next I will be drawing up a new wing gap seal that blends the windshield
top edge to the wing leading edge as is done on the Slingshot, and will add
an engine frontal area fairing. This one is pretty ambitious for me but it
is a long term goal as I gain composite experience. Any suggestions on
composites are welcome.
jim
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Carroll " <ron.carroll(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron control |
John, this may be a good place to look because of the following
conditions:
1. The engine WOULD NOT start until I installed a primer
2. The engine won't keep running right after a cold start (keeps
dying until warmed up)
3. The engine hesitates badly when throttle is applied after a long
idle, i.e., taxi.
I'd be surprised if the idle jet could cause trouble in another range,
but anything is possible with these little guys.
BTW, I finally saw your FS-II in the Experimenter. At first glance I
thought it was a picture of my own original Firestar. Of course I
thought it is beautiful! Six weeks absolutely blows my little mind
though. Great job!
Ron Carroll
Original Firestar
-----Original Message-----
From: John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com>
Date: Tuesday December 01 1998 10:33 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Aileron control
>
>Ron,
> Make sure that the idle air screw is in the correct position. I
have been told
>that it can cause a lean condition at the high end.
>John Jung
>
>Ron Carroll wrote:
>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Cavuontop(at)aol.com <Cavuontop(at)aol.com>
>> >
>> >In a message dated 12/1/98 11:32:15 AM Eastern Standard Time,
>> >ron.carroll(at)worldnet.att.net writes:
>> >
>> ><< At cruise (5800) I get 1250* EGT and 400*/400* CHTs >>
>> >
>> >
>> >Be careful those numbers are high. Where is your egt probe
located?
>> >
>> I have a single probe (single carb) and as I recall the probe is
>> located 100 cm from the piston on the PTO end of the engine. The
>> 1250* indicates a slightly lean mixture, but I'm more concerned
with
>> the CHTs @400* and sometimes going to 450*. In reading the
>> instructions that came with the CHT gauge/probes, they say that it
is
>> calibrated at 75* F, and to adjust the indicated readings based on
the
>> current outside air temp. therefore, I have been flying in around
50*
>> OAT and have adjusted the reading down 25*s to get the actual CHT
>> temps. Even with the adjustment I am at 400/400* to 450/450* F.
Scary,
>> and I can't figure out why.
>>
>> Ron Carroll
>> Original Firestar
>
>
+---------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
>
+---------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
> List Support Contributions:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
+---------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Carroll " <ron.carroll(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Hi CHT (was Aileron control) |
Good thinking, Ben. I intend to pursue this, for sure. I probably
already have a good idea what is causing the high CHT reading. I had
to mount my BRS upright in front of the engine, and it is probably
interfering with clean air to the fan. I did this after seeing
several pictures of other Kolbs in various places on the web. I would
have mounted it inside the cage, but it wouldn't fit (750# BRS-5). My
alternative is to mount it below the cage, on the boom tube. This can
and probably will be done unless I find another cause for the heat. I
ran out of money, so the only thing left is to fix it!
BTW, the timing is .085" BTDC on the PTO end, and .086" on the mag
end. And the rings are only 5-hours old in one cylinder, and 14-hours
old (TT on engine/airframe) in the other, so they shouldn't be an
issue.
Thanks,
Ron Carroll
Original Firestar
-----Original Message-----
From: Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu>
Date: Tuesday December 01 1998 10:43 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Hi CHT (was Aileron control)
>
>On Tue, 1 Dec 1998, Ron Carroll wrote:
>> current outside air temp. therefore, I have been flying in around
50*
>> OAT and have adjusted the reading down 25*s to get the actual CHT
>> temps. Even with the adjustment I am at 400/400* to 450/450* F.
Scary,
>> and I can't figure out why.
>
>I personally would not fly at those CHTs. Something ain't right and
>is worth finding at whatever expense. (If it finds you first, it
will
>be inconvenient at least, and even more expensive.) For comparison,
in
>50F OAT, I read 260-280 normal, ~325 after sustained full power
climb.
>(447 SC) I believe high CHT usually is abnormal timing, stuck rings,
>or wear.
>
>-Ben Ransom
>
>
+---------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
>
+---------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
> List Support Contributions:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
+---------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "F J MARINO" <FMARINO(at)netlink1.nlcomm.com> |
oldpoops, I have a 582 and have never change the jets since I started flying
it, it runs a little rich which I think is good (right) and my temps are
normal except during the winter months the water temp never gets to the
lower limit of the normal range egt and cht are in range, so is there a
certain thermostat that should be used. It makes me nervous to fly with the
water temp so low, especially after reading about the cold seizures.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
Date: Tuesday, December 01, 1998 8:11 AM
Subject: Kolb-List: Thermostat
>
>
>A thermostat is a welcome option. The engine warms up quicker, and cools
>off slower in a glide. I would not be without one.
> Richard Pike
> MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
>
>
>>
>>Question to the list. How many of you out there are flying with a
>>thermostat? My engine did not come with one and not being very engine
>>mechanically savy I figured... what they did not supply or suggest I get
in
>>their literature, I don't need. I live in the south so am not exposed to
>>extreme temperature differentials and in the winter I tape off part of the
>>radiators. Some people have suggested I get one. Others have said not to
>>bother. The possibility of cold seisure has concerned me. I try to keep
>>the temps up on glides. You can't do much about landing approaches.
Maybe
>>a thermostat would be a good investment? Anybody out there read anything
>>from Rotax about whether to use a thermostat or not?
>>
>>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+ hrs)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cavuontop(at)aol.com |
In a message dated 12/1/98 6:15:41 PM Eastern Standard Time,
FMARINO(at)netlink1.nlcomm.com writes:
<< so is there a
certain thermostat that should be used. >>
Yeah, get the standard Rotax part. The part number is referenced in the
repair manual.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Highsmith" <michael.highsmith(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: seizure with AV-2 carb icing? |
HEY GUYS, It can happen to a 582 or it did in mine as I was climbing out
to 1500' on my way to Sun-N Money one year. The air temp has to be close to
dew point as it was on that fateful morning.
________________________________________________________________________________
( Bluebird ) in his Challenger CWS just ahead of me. I called " Let's level
off here and Bluebird nosed down to straight and level. Not to run over him
I jerked the throttle back to 4000' RPM , an act I very seldom perform. It
was at that time the engine kind'a slowed down to full stop. I thought " oh
no , here I am ready to go to Sun-N -Money and this has to happen". Well,
I guess it could be worse, it could have fall'n off. I was still flying
straight ahead as I called to bluebird " I have an engine out, turning
towards the runway". Bluebird replies" didn't we do this a couple months
ago?'' " I know and don't rub it in". The 180* turn brought me to 1200' and
on down wind about at the end of the 3500' strip. The thought of 'fly the
plane' kept rolling over in my head. It looked real good for a normal dead
stick so far so I tried the starter. It started right up and idled until I
was on final then it went dead again. After a smooth and safe landing in a
lot nearest the hanger off the side of the runway, I pushed the bird to the
hanger and tied it down in disgust. Bluebird didn't know what it could have
been either at the time. I did observe a lot of condensation on the carb
socks and wondered about that. It had good compression; it wasn't seized;
and when I hit the starter it fired right up. After running it for some time
on the ground we decided to try again to leave as it was getting on towards
our cut off time. I flew for about 6 hours that day before we stopped at
Sheats near Groveland, Fl. for the night.
Later that evening it occured to us that the temp and dew point was only 3*
apart and where we had leveled off it probably was right on, because there
was a light cloud layer at that altitude.
If it wasn't carb ice I don't know what it could have been because I put
some 285 hours on it before I topped the engine. As for that experience I do
not jerk the throttle back anymore and I pay closer attention to the
temperature and dew point. Haven't had another engine out since now with 550
hours and still going strong. I can even run off and leave Bluebird in a
climb now - even if he takes off ahead of me. HoHoHo! Started using
Pennzoil at the rebuild.
Has anyone else had an experience like this? Let us know, never can tell who
it may help.
See Ya, FIREHAWK
--Original Message-----
| From: | Cavuontop(at)aol.com <Cavuontop(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: seizure with AV-2 |
>
>In a message dated 11/30/98 10:17:11 PM Eastern Standard Time,
>rbaker2(at)juno.com writes:
>
><< Is it even possible for ice to form and
> be ingested before it could otherwise effect operation?
> >>
>
>
> The theory, and I repeat this is just theory, I have heard from a number
of
>sources is that carb ice is next to impossible in Rotax 2 strokes because
1)
>the carb is so close to the engine case that the throat is heated by the
case.
>2) That the fact that the oil is mixed with the fuel so slicks everthing
up
>that the ice can't stick anywhere. I have no idea if this makes sense and
>would welcome the groups' comment.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Geoff Smart" <gsmart(at)iinet.net.au> |
Don't risk your life and aircraft, for the sake of a thermostat, get a copy
of the CPS catalogue and read and follow ALL the recommendations in teh last
50 pages and you will be a lot safer.
Seized Rotax owner and thermostat owner.
Geoff
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
Date: Wednesday, 2 December 1998 0:35
Subject: Kolb-List: Thermostat
>
>
>A thermostat is a welcome option. The engine warms up quicker, and cools
>off slower in a glide. I would not be without one.
> Richard Pike
> MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
>
>
>>
>>Question to the list. How many of you out there are flying with a
>>thermostat? My engine did not come with one and not being very engine
>>mechanically savy I figured... what they did not supply or suggest I get
in
>>their literature, I don't need. I live in the south so am not exposed to
>>extreme temperature differentials and in the winter I tape off part of the
>>radiators. Some people have suggested I get one. Others have said not to
>>bother. The possibility of cold seisure has concerned me. I try to keep
>>the temps up on glides. You can't do much about landing approaches.
Maybe
>>a thermostat would be a good investment? Anybody out there read anything
>>from Rotax about whether to use a thermostat or not?
>>
>>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+ hrs)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Geoff Smart" <gsmart(at)iinet.net.au> |
Read the CPS catralogue and follow the information on the last 50 or so
pages and you will be a lot better of.
Make sure you read the section on thermostats I don't know why the temp
difference but it works and works well.
Even thought the older 582 didn't come with a thermostat the new one did and
most of the problems I here about come from the older 582's.
Geoff
-----Original Message-----
From: F J MARINO <FMARINO(at)netlink1.nlcomm.com>
Date: Wednesday, 2 December 1998 7:34
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Thermostat
>
>oldpoops, I have a 582 and have never change the jets since I started
flying
>it, it runs a little rich which I think is good (right) and my temps are
>normal except during the winter months the water temp never gets to the
>lower limit of the normal range egt and cht are in range, so is there a
>certain thermostat that should be used. It makes me nervous to fly with the
>water temp so low, especially after reading about the cold seizures.
>
> Frank
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
>To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>Date: Tuesday, December 01, 1998 8:11 AM
>Subject: Kolb-List: Thermostat
>
>
>>
>>
>>A thermostat is a welcome option. The engine warms up quicker, and cools
>>off slower in a glide. I would not be without one.
>> Richard Pike
>> MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
>>
>>
>
>>>
>>>Question to the list. How many of you out there are flying with a
>>>thermostat? My engine did not come with one and not being very engine
>>>mechanically savy I figured... what they did not supply or suggest I get
>in
>>>their literature, I don't need. I live in the south so am not exposed to
>>>extreme temperature differentials and in the winter I tape off part of
the
>>>radiators. Some people have suggested I get one. Others have said not
to
>>>bother. The possibility of cold seisure has concerned me. I try to keep
>>>the temps up on glides. You can't do much about landing approaches.
>Maybe
>>>a thermostat would be a good investment? Anybody out there read anything
>>>from Rotax about whether to use a thermostat or not?
>>>
>>>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+ hrs)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | T Swartz <tswartz(at)desupernet.net> |
Hello all.
I'm finally getting around to the Home Pages stuff, and this is my first
experiment. My Wife is an artist and I plan to develop a home page for
her work, but I thought I'd better learn on something else and as you
can see it need lots of refinement. I thought some of you might be
interested on seeing a few unique things on my MK III.
Instead of the oil radiator, I made fins from aluminum channel and
clamped them around oil tank with large hose clamps. Keeping the oil
tank on the full side, oil temp maxed out around 250 to 260 degrees this
summer in Southeastern PA.
Control panel makes an easy reach for all switches. It is hinged at
the bottom and allows quick access to fusses and wiring. Com radio fits
in a recessed pocket in seat cushion. GPS is Velcro attached to a heat
formed piece of lexan attached to the control stick. This allows you to
see, fly, and push buttons with one hand. This location idea came from
Richard Pike, I think, and I like it.
I had to make my own mounts to mount the VLS which fits nicely in the
wing gap area.
http://users.success.net/tswartz/
Enjoy
Terry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Geoff Smart" <gsmart(at)iinet.net.au> |
Read the CPS catalogue and follow the last 50 pages of information you will
fly with a lot more confidence.
Geoff
-----Original Message-----
From: Cavuontop(at)aol.com <Cavuontop(at)aol.com>
Date: Wednesday, 2 December 1998 7:41
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Thermostat
>
>In a message dated 12/1/98 6:15:41 PM Eastern Standard Time,
>FMARINO(at)netlink1.nlcomm.com writes:
>
><< so is there a
> certain thermostat that should be used. >>
>
>
> Yeah, get the standard Rotax part. The part number is referenced in the
>repair manual.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | T Swartz <tswartz(at)desupernet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: seizure with AV-2 carb icing? |
I've had problems while warming up the engine when temps were in the mid to low
30's and
there was the early morning low layer of haze. You must get the oil temp to 120
degrees on
the 912 before take off. Engine would begin to idle rough and I would have to
keep adding
throttle to keep it running. Every time it has happened, I would shut the engine
off, let
set a minute, then restart and it would idle smoothly. I assumed this is carb
ice.
Terry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | KHe1144783(at)aol.com |
Geoff- Gee ! You left out the kitchen sink ! Maybe electric seats ? No I
didnt have a problem with the wing mounts, just thought aluminum was less than
adaquate. Only did it for what we in the kitplane group call " warm fuzzies ".
The wing spar holes were located by drilling through the leading edge skin
into the existing holes, temporaraly installing the sheet metal wing panels to
the ribs with clecos and drilling through them using the existing holes. They
dont look lazer punched, but it worked out fine. Hey ! I'd like to get the
electric flaps too. How do you like them ? Have yet to see them. The VLS chute
is also on the list as well, my wife has offered to buy it. (Twist my arm ! )
" Later
Dates" - Kris-Palm Springs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Walter,
Thanks for your reply. The method you are using to apply the Seafoam is
somewhat correct. The problem that I see with the application is twofold:
1) You need to use a lot more than 5cc's. I would recommend at least 4
times that amount to be effective. I would say 4 or more capfuls, and
lately I've been filling up the cylinder to the top to insure plenty gets
down to the lower ring.
2) You have to do only ONE cylinder at time for each treatment because
when you rotate the crank to treat the other cylinder, the Seafoam runs
down the transfer port and into the crankcase without giving it a chance
to seep down into that bottom ring. The piston MUST stay at TDC for the
treatment to work.
3) Once you have poured it in the cylinder, lift the tail to get it
spread around to the front of that cylinder.
4) The longer the soaking time, the better.
I hope this clears things up, but like you have said, one cannot assume
the rings are free, they have to checked. One easy way is to take off the
exhaust manifold to see that they are free.
Thanks,
Ralph Burlingame
Original FireStar, 447 powered
>Gentlemen:
>First of all, the only oil I have EVER used is Amziol 100%
>Synthetic. Secondly, for my application method. I remove one spark plug
and >with a hypodermic syringe inject five CC's of Sea Foam into the
cylinder
>when the piston is at top dead center. I twist the syringe around so
that 360
>degrees of the piston top gets a shot. I then replace the plug and work
the
>piston up and down about 1/2 inch from TDC. I let that set for about
five
>minutes and do the same for the other cylinder. I let the Sea Foam do
it's work >for at least one week, sometimes two weeks. When I start the
engine up a >week or two later it burns with a lot of whitesmoke, like
it's supposed to do.
>Apparently I appear to some as a doubter of the Holy Grail. Someone
>who is attempting to gore a sacred cow. I pass this info on only as an
>attempt to save someone from what could be a very expensive or even
fatal >mistake. As I said in my first E Mail. Use Sea Foam all you want.
By I would
>advise you, based on my own experience, to decarbonize your pistons as
>recomended by the manufacturer.
>Walter Grooms
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Walter,
Thanks for your reply. The method you are using to apply the Seafoam is
somewhat correct. The problem that I see with the application is twofold:
1) You need to use a lot more than 5cc's. I would recommend at least 4
times that amount to be effective. I would say 4 or more capfuls, and
lately I've been filling up the cylinder to the top to insure plenty gets
down to the lower ring.
2) You have to do only ONE cylinder at time for each treatment because
when you rotate the crank to treat the other cylinder, the Seafoam runs
down the transfer port and into the crankcase without giving it a chance
to seep down into that bottom ring. The piston MUST stay at TDC for the
treatment to work.
3) Once you have poured it in the cylinder, lift the tail to get it
spread around to the front of that cylinder.
4) The longer the soaking time, the better.
I hope this clears things up, but like you have said, one cannot assume
the rings are free, they have to checked. One easy way is to take off the
exhaust manifold to see that they are free.
Thanks,
Ralph Burlingame
Original FireStar, 447 powered
>Gentlemen:
>First of all, the only oil I have EVER used is Amziol 100%
>Synthetic. Secondly, for my application method. I remove one spark plug
and >with a hypodermic syringe inject five CC's of Sea Foam into the
cylinder
>when the piston is at top dead center. I twist the syringe around so
that 360
>degrees of the piston top gets a shot. I then replace the plug and work
the
>piston up and down about 1/2 inch from TDC. I let that set for about
five
>minutes and do the same for the other cylinder. I let the Sea Foam do
it's work >for at least one week, sometimes two weeks. When I start the
engine up a >week or two later it burns with a lot of whitesmoke, like
it's supposed to do.
>Apparently I appear to some as a doubter of the Holy Grail. Someone
>who is attempting to gore a sacred cow. I pass this info on only as an
>attempt to save someone from what could be a very expensive or even
fatal >mistake. As I said in my first E Mail. Use Sea Foam all you want.
By I would
>advise you, based on my own experience, to decarbonize your pistons as
>recomended by the manufacturer.
>Walter Grooms
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Guys,
I think I may have had a carb icing problem a few years back when I was
ready to takeoff and it started to throttle up then hesitated. The engine
had been warmed up and ready. The outside temp was right around the
freezing mark with high humidity. After taxing back to the end again, I
gave it another try and it was fine the rest of that day and afterwards.
I believe it may have been some icing that caused the hesitation. I have
flown under similar conditions since then and never had a problem.
Ralph Burlingame
Original FireStar, 447 powered
>
>In a message dated 11/30/98 10:17:11 PM Eastern Standard Time,
>rbaker2(at)juno.com writes:
>
><< Is it even possible for ice to form and
> be ingested before it could otherwise effect operation?
> >>
>
>
> The theory, and I repeat this is just theory, I have heard from a
>number of sources is that carb ice is next to impossible in Rotax 2
strokes
>because 1) the carb is so close to the engine case that the throat is
heated by
>the case. 2) That the fact that the oil is mixed with the fuel so
slicks
>everthing up that the ice can't stick anywhere. I have no idea if this
makes >sense and would welcome the groups' comment.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Aileron control |
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Ron and Cav,
I transferred my old 377 muffler to my new 447 and have not seen a
problem. BTW, my EGT's are running 1200-1250 in cruise with the colder
OAT's in the 40's. They were 1150-1175 a few weeks ago in the warm air.
This is normal.
Ralph Burlingame
Original FireStar, 447 powered
>my guess is you probably
>have the old style muffler.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Bluhm <irena(at)ccis.com> |
This list seams to be able to answer any & all problems.
Problem: I have a MK3 and long flying leaves me with a tired left leg.
I have talked to a few people about a rudder trim tab, but I get
different responses to it's requirements. To releave the pressure on my
left foot, do I put the tab on the right side, or left? I won't try to
explain the different responses, but both sides have carried logical
responses. My impression is to tab the right side to force the rudder
to the left.
Hey Big Lar (who-ever you are) Your Pennzoil is known to have less
carbon deposits and the plugs are cleaner with it's use, however::: If
you have a pusher, rub your finger over your prop. You will see a dark
sooty effect. The Pennzoil is burning during combustion. This burning
will eventually decrease the lubrication we need with our 2-strokers.
The AV-2 oil doesn't burn. If you feel the prop, you have wet oil over
it from the exhaust. Good luck with your future flying! Did I read
correctly that it will take you another 2 years to finish your MK3???
Richard of Boron
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Scott Olendorf" <olendorf(at)empireone.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Hi CHT (was Aileron control) |
-----Original Message-----
From: Ron Carroll <ron.carroll(at)worldnet.att.net>
Date: Tuesday, December 01, 1998 12:23 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Aileron control
>Other than this it flies great, with outstanding climb. A LOT of
>performance from a 377! I'm still struggeling with high EGT/CHT
>temps, however. At cruise (5800) I get 1250* EGT and 400*/400* CHTs.
>I have the needle all the way up, all jets are stock Bings for
>sea-level, and I use Pennzoil mixed at 50:1. For the time being this
>is working, but next spring & summer I think I will be in trouble.
>I've already seized two pistons during break-in, and get nervous when
>the temps go to 400*.
>
>Ron Carroll
>Original Firestar
I think you may have this jetting idea backwards. In the summer you will be
running richer with the same size jets you are using now and the temps will
be better. In the cold air you have to increase the size of your jets due
to the higher (denser) amount of air entering the system.
Rutledge says --->" At 5800 rpm's I run EGT
1050* and CHT 316*, 350*. "
I also run temps right about here. I have the 377, needle jet 2.66, main
162 in summer, 165 in winter, stock jet needle 8Oh I think. At 50 degrees
air temp I was seeing 1200 egt so changed from the 162 main jet to the 165
and temps came back down to 1150 at full power climb.
Did you check EVERY jet for correct size?
Start out with much richer main jet and go down from there.
I know this doesn't answer you question but may give a little help.
Scott Olendorf
Original Firestar, Rotax 377
Schenectady, NY USA
http://members.aol.com/olefiresta
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Aileron control |
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame) |
John,
I've never heard of this, how is this possible with the 3 circuits: idle,
midrange, and high end?
Ralph
>Make sure that the idle air screw is in the correct position. I
>have been told that it can cause a lean condition at the high end.
>John Jung
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Walter,
Thanks for your reply. The method you are using to apply the Seafoam is
somewhat correct. The problem that I see with the application is twofold:
1) You need to use a lot more than 5cc's. I would recommend at least 4
times that amount to be effective. I would say 4 or more capfuls, and
lately I've been filling up the cylinder to the top to insure plenty gets
down to the lower ring.
2) You have to do only ONE cylinder at time for each treatment because
when you rotate the crank to treat the other cylinder, the Seafoam runs
down the transfer port and into the crankcase without giving it a chance
to seep down into that bottom ring. The piston MUST stay at TDC for the
treatment to work.
3) Once you have poured it in the cylinder, lift the tail to get it
spread around to the front of that cylinder.
4) The longer the soaking time, the better.
I hope this clears things up, but like you have said, one cannot assume
the rings are free, they have to checked. One easy way is to take off the
exhaust manifold to see that they are free.
Thanks,
Ralph Burlingame
Original FireStar, 447 powered
>Gentlemen:
>First of all, the only oil I have EVER used is Amziol 100%
>Synthetic. Secondly, for my application method. I remove one spark plug
and >with a hypodermic syringe inject five CC's of Sea Foam into the
cylinder
>when the piston is at top dead center. I twist the syringe around so
that 360
>degrees of the piston top gets a shot. I then replace the plug and work
the
>piston up and down about 1/2 inch from TDC. I let that set for about
five
>minutes and do the same for the other cylinder. I let the Sea Foam do
it's work >for at least one week, sometimes two weeks. When I start the
engine up a >week or two later it burns with a lot of whitesmoke, like
it's supposed to do.
>Apparently I appear to some as a doubter of the Holy Grail. Someone
>who is attempting to gore a sacred cow. I pass this info on only as an
>attempt to save someone from what could be a very expensive or even
fatal >mistake. As I said in my first E Mail. Use Sea Foam all you want.
By I would
>advise you, based on my own experience, to decarbonize your pistons as
>recomended by the manufacturer.
>Walter Grooms
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
Hi Richard: Your impression is right on the money. Go for it.
I've been a-building for 2 yrs, and that's plenty. I'm enjoying the
building process up to a point, but I'd rather be flying. If things go
even remotely well, and the finances hold up, I hope to be in the air by
next summer. Hoo man, I hope it's not another 2 yrs. Larry
in Palm Springs.
----------
> From: Richard Bluhm <irena(at)ccis.com>
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>
My impression is to tab the right side to force the rudder
> to the left.
> Hey Big Lar
>Good luck with your future flying! Did I read
> correctly that it will take you another 2 years to finish your MK3???
> Richard of Boron
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher John Armstrong" <Tophera(at)centuryinter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Drag, one more time |
jim says "
>Your guess about detached flow everywhere but the first foot of the pod is
>incorrect,"
what I said was separated past the wide point and turbulent or separated
past about one foot in. I dont think there is going to be any laminar flow
on this shape past 1 foot.
Airflow is a function of Reynolds number and Mach number, not airspeed, but
airspeed is a factor in both of these parameters. for us Mach number is not
going to come into play only RN, and it isnt going to change much over our
flight speeds, 30 to 90mph. RN=density*characteristic length * airspeed
/viscosity of air. For your pod the length is the length of the pod= about
6 feet. Airspeed needs to be in feet per second so 30 to 90 mph*1.46 = 44
to 132 feet per sec.
density by viscosity at sea level is 198.
So Rn for the pod is 6*44*198.075=52272 and at 132 =156816
(if I havent done something stupid)
transition from laminar to turbulent occurs above RN=530000 (under ideal
conditions, very smooth no adverse pressure gradiant and no external
turbulance on a flat plate ) So the RN is well under the transition number
because of our low speed and small size, that helps alot, but...
The pod has adverse pressure on the rear because the pressure increases as
the velocity slows down behind the pod due to the air spreading back out
again. It also has external turbulance from thefabrik vibrating, the prop,
the wing skins vibrating, the wings making lift etc. It isnt real smooth
and has sharp kinks all over it so I still think it is turbulent.
Separation is another matter entirely. Separation is reversed flow on the
surface of the body and the forward flow is detached away from the body.
Separated flow increases drag by up to a factor of 10! turbulent flow only
increases drag by less then a factor of 2. Separated flow is the enemy!
Sure the perfect length of a tail cone is a function of RN and Mach... I
dont have the numbers around here but sufice it to say that the slower you
go the shorter the tail cone can be cause there is more time for the flow to
stay attached to the surface. If you go reeeeaaaal sloooooooow the flow
will stay attached to the back of a cube. so you mght be able to keep the
flow attached on the back of the MK III... let me know the results!
Topher
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Sorry guys for the multiple posts on the seafoam response. I had a
problem with my email provider.
Ralph
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com> |
| Subject: | Poor throttle response |
>
>John, this may be a good place to look because of the following
>conditions:
>
>1. The engine WOULD NOT start until I installed a primer
>2. The engine won't keep running right after a cold start (keeps
>dying until warmed up)
>3. The engine hesitates badly when throttle is applied after a long
>idle, i.e., taxi.
>
>I'd be surprised if the idle jet could cause trouble in another range,
>but anything is possible with these little guys.
What you are describing is a classic example of a carb that is too lean
off idle. I think you should go one bigger on the idle jet.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
Does this mean I'll be an airplane driver ?? Or a car pilot ?? No
allusions to my driving habits, please. Big Lar.
----------
> From: Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu>
> To: Larry Bourne
> Cc: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Yaw string
> Date: Tuesday, December 01, 1998 8:53 AM
>
>
> Hey Larry, No, not a waste of money. The ball/slip indicator turns the
> "dashboard" into a "panel". Really, looks count for a little, right?
>
-Ben Ransom
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Highsmith" <michael.highsmith(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Hey guys, Don't for a minute think that the Rotax thermo is better than the
one you can buy at the marine or auto store. I thought so too. So I took the
one I had bought locally out and installed one from Rotax. About 50 hours
later,
I was teaching Rut how to fly a tail dragger in my Ferguson.
We had just finished up with a fly-in at Geneva, Al. and was doing some
touch and goes. We were climbing out and I was checking the gauges (normal
climb out procedure) when I watched the water temp go off the scale. " We
got a problem Houston" I pulled the throttle and took over the controls.
I'll make this one short.
After some time of trying to figure it out, we pulled the thermostate out.
It literally had fallen apart in the engine. All the peices were still there
but one of the braded ends to the housing had pulled lose and the water
outlet valve attached to the thermo spring could not open. I took it out,
flew it home (130* water temp) took it apart again and put my old marine
thermostat back into service. Make sure you use the rap around gasket on the
thermostat.
I still fly with it and another one in my tool bag alone with plugs,
multimeter,safty wire ,tire patch, tire pump and a kitchen sink to clean up
after I work on THE BEAST. I know it sounds like Ripley's but it's true. I
bet ya'll got some stories just like this one. FIREHAWK
-----Original Message-----
From: Cavuontop(at)aol.com <Cavuontop(at)aol.com>
Date: Tuesday, December 01, 1998 10:32 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Thermostat
>
>In a message dated 12/1/98 11:15:48 AM Eastern Standard Time,
>rpike(at)preferred.com writes:
>
><< Anybody out there read anything
> >from Rotax about whether to use a thermostat or not? >>
>
>
> As I said in my original post the 582 repair manual discusses a
>thermostat, but it is not shipped with the engine and has to be purchased
>separately. In my view this is a very short sighted decision. Anyway, I
>wouldn't fly without one. BTW I think rotax want $19.00 for theirs. I
have a
>friend who got what he swears is the same thing for his 618 at the local
>autoparts store for a couple of bucks. I'm too chicken and spent th extra
>money for the factory part.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Highsmith" <michael.highsmith(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: cold seizure? |
Hey John, I,m an old MX racer myself. I never had a bike engine seize on me.
I use to run that thing so hard it would wear me out but it just kept on
running. I raced a YX250D from the time it was brand new for 4 years. So now
you know my age or do you? Won a ton of trophies with it.
airplane engines seem to be real finicky. It will soon be time for the big
tear down again to see if I can go for another 300 hours with the same crank
shaft. We'll see. Thanks FIREHAWK
-----Original Message-----
From: John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com>
Date: Tuesday, December 01, 1998 10:14 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: cold seizure?
>
>Michael Highsmith wrote:
>
>> snip....
>> Here is another one. Will the engine crank and seem to run fine after a
>> seizure?
>
>snip...
>
>Yes it can. But I wouldn't want to fly with it. I have seen it on Rotaxes.
And, I used to
>have an MX dirt bike that had been seized at least 10 times, and once it
cooled down, it
>would restart and run like it had no problems.
>John Jung
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Highsmith" <michael.highsmith(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Thermostat Down-under |
Hey Geoff, Good to hear you are on the list. Hope all is going well down-
under.Good advice too. Can you believe some of the things people say? You
know, you and I experienced a lot while you were over here. When are you
coming back? FIREHAWK
-----Original Message-----
From: Geoff Smart <gsmart(at)iinet.net.au>
Date: Tuesday, December 01, 1998 5:56 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Thermostat
>
>Don't risk your life and aircraft, for the sake of a thermostat, get a copy
>of the CPS catalogue and read and follow ALL the recommendations in teh
last
>50 pages and you will be a lot safer.
>
>Seized Rotax owner and thermostat owner.
>
>Geoff
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
>To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>Date: Wednesday, 2 December 1998 0:35
>Subject: Kolb-List: Thermostat
>
>
>>
>>
>>A thermostat is a welcome option. The engine warms up quicker, and cools
>>off slower in a glide. I would not be without one.
>> Richard Pike
>> MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
>>
>>
>
>>>
>>>Question to the list. How many of you out there are flying with a
>>>thermostat? My engine did not come with one and not being very engine
>>>mechanically savy I figured... what they did not supply or suggest I get
>in
>>>their literature, I don't need. I live in the south so am not exposed to
>>>extreme temperature differentials and in the winter I tape off part of
the
>>>radiators. Some people have suggested I get one. Others have said not
to
>>>bother. The possibility of cold seisure has concerned me. I try to keep
>>>the temps up on glides. You can't do much about landing approaches.
>Maybe
>>>a thermostat would be a good investment? Anybody out there read anything
>>>from Rotax about whether to use a thermostat or not?
>>>
>>>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+ hrs)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Highsmith" <michael.highsmith(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Hey Ron, Put a little Pitch in your prop or go to a larger main jet or
something but don't fly to the point of seizure. The little engine is trying
to tell you something. FIREHAWK
-----Original Message-----
From: Ron Carroll <ron.carroll(at)worldnet.att.net>
Date: Tuesday, December 01, 1998 11:15 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Aileron control
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Cavuontop(at)aol.com <Cavuontop(at)aol.com>
>>
>>In a message dated 12/1/98 11:32:15 AM Eastern Standard Time,
>>ron.carroll(at)worldnet.att.net writes:
>>
>><< At cruise (5800) I get 1250* EGT and 400*/400* CHTs >>
>>
>>
>>Be careful those numbers are high. Where is your egt probe located?
>>
>I have a single probe (single carb) and as I recall the probe is
>located 100 cm from the piston on the PTO end of the engine. The
>1250* indicates a slightly lean mixture, but I'm more concerned with
>the CHTs @400* and sometimes going to 450*. In reading the
>instructions that came with the CHT gauge/probes, they say that it is
>calibrated at 75* F, and to adjust the indicated readings based on the
>current outside air temp. therefore, I have been flying in around 50*
>OAT and have adjusted the reading down 25*s to get the actual CHT
>temps. Even with the adjustment I am at 400/400* to 450/450* F. Scary,
>and I can't figure out why.
>
>Ron Carroll
>Original Firestar
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com> |
>
>oldpoops, I have a 582 and have never change the jets since I started flying
>it, it runs a little rich which I think is good (right) and my temps are
>normal except during the winter months the water temp never gets to the
>lower limit of the normal range egt and cht are in range, so is there a
>certain thermostat that should be used. It makes me nervous to fly with the
>water temp so low, especially after reading about the cold seizures.
>
> Frank
Last Saturday week ago the wife and I flew a short cross country, and the
temps were in the 40's. The water temp never got over 150 on climb out, and
stayed at 130 the rest of the time. Even a thermostat only helps a little
when it gets too cool.
My winter project this year is a folding flap/baffle that will be cable
operated to open and shut in front of the radiator. That will fix it!
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Swiderski <swidersk(at)digital.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron control |
Ralph, the fuel kicks in at idle (bottom end) & increases as you go to the top
end. At full throttle, all circuits are contributing- if take away from the
bottom or mid range, then you take away from the top end. ---Richard
Ralph H Burlingame wrote:
>
> John,
>
> I've never heard of this, how is this possible with the 3 circuits: idle,
> midrange, and high end?
>
> Ralph
>
>
> >Make sure that the idle air screw is in the correct position. I
> >have been told that it can cause a lean condition at the high end.
> >John Jung
> >
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Bruner" <brunerd(at)ulster.net> |
| Subject: | Drag, one more time |
-----Original Message-----
From: gerken(at)us.ibm.com <gerken(at)us.ibm.com>
Date: Tuesday, December 01, 1998 5:11 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Drag, one more time
>
>Topher (and anyone still interested), once you wrote:
>
>I am an aerospace geek and can tell you a little about drag. As far as
>the Mark III pod goes there are several things that make it draggy. It
much talk about streamlining mods to pods
You guys are way beyond me there. The Mk II and then the Mk III were
designed around the luxury of side-by-side seats. I'll be looking forward
to any mods you discover that improve their flight efficiency. But it
reminds me of a HS buddy who increased the output of the engine in his car.
The clutch flew thru the dashboard. He replaced it. Then the drive train
broke: replaced it, then the axles. Well, you get the picture.
In the mean time I hope to be learning to handle what I've got now, which
reminds me: anyone out there with a "stock" Mk II tell me what their best
L/D speed is and what glide ratio they get?
David (lamenting la nia) Bruner
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Bruner" <brunerd(at)ulster.net> |
| Subject: | Re: turn instruments |
>Called an inclinometer. Ain't it wonderful to be my age to know this
>useless stuff? Grey Baron
>
Damn, sounds just like my kind of "artificial horizon".
'Course, WE'RE never out in the soup!
David (wonder if one of those round bubble balancers would work?) Bruner
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron control |
Ralph,
I would have bet that it wasn't possible too. But my neighbor had a
new 447 on a Firestar II that constantly ran above 1200 degrees if he
didn't keep the throttle back. He tried rejetting and it would run too
rich before it would run cool enough. After putting up with the problem
for months and lots of worring, someone told him to check the idle
adjustment. He put it back to stock (1/2 turn, I think) and his problems
were gone.
John Jung
Ralph H Burlingame wrote:
>
>
> John,
>
> I've never heard of this, how is this possible with the 3 circuits: idle,
> midrange, and high end?
>
> Ralph
>
>
> >Make sure that the idle air screw is in the correct position. I
> >have been told that it can cause a lean condition at the high end.
> >John Jung
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Hi CHT (was Aileron control) |
Ron,
My neighbor tried moving the chute, to cool his 447 powered Firestar
II, and it didn't help. Go count the turns on the idle screw and get
back to us. It might save you a lot of time.
John Jung
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Arlyn Moen" <amoen(at)ndak.net> |
Noticed discussion on carb icing on rotax engines. .. Up here we have alot
of snowmobiles with the rotax engines. They do ice up. I have had to break
the ice from around the ventury every mile or so on a couple of occasions.
This wasn't a bing or mec. carb however. It was a Tilitson(puls type). I
haven't had any experience with either the bing or mec. icing up.
Arlyn G. Moen
Upham N. D.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Geoff Smart" <gsmart(at)iinet.net.au> |
| Subject: | Re: Thermostat Down-under |
Hi mike, I would come back tomorrow if I could.
I had a great time flying with you and I will do it again soon.
If I come back I want to stay at least till I die, and if I get my green
card, which we won't know if we have any chance till March - April next
year.
If we did win a place I would have to find some thing to do in the states to
earn a living so I will have to wait to see how things go.
Yes I read some of the things people do and say and it makes me cringe, I
hope I have learnt enough to keep the bugs at bay, I don't like the thought
of another engine out.
Hope Cindy is getting better, how is you new property going.
I hope you build a big hanger I might want to store my plane there next time
we call to say Hi.
catch you soon,
Geoff MAX
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Highsmith <michael.highsmith(at)worldnet.att.net>
Date: Wednesday, 2 December 1998 12:06
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Thermostat Down-under
>
>Hey Geoff, Good to hear you are on the list. Hope all is going well down-
>under.Good advice too. Can you believe some of the things people say? You
>know, you and I experienced a lot while you were over here. When are you
>coming back? FIREHAWK
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Geoff Smart <gsmart(at)iinet.net.au>
>To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>Date: Tuesday, December 01, 1998 5:56 PM
>Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Thermostat
>
>
>>
>>Don't risk your life and aircraft, for the sake of a thermostat, get a
copy
>>of the CPS catalogue and read and follow ALL the recommendations in teh
>last
>>50 pages and you will be a lot safer.
>>
>>Seized Rotax owner and thermostat owner.
>>
>>Geoff
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
>>To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>>Date: Wednesday, 2 December 1998 0:35
>>Subject: Kolb-List: Thermostat
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>A thermostat is a welcome option. The engine warms up quicker, and cools
>>>off slower in a glide. I would not be without one.
>>> Richard Pike
>>> MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
>>>
>>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>Question to the list. How many of you out there are flying with a
>>>>thermostat? My engine did not come with one and not being very engine
>>>>mechanically savy I figured... what they did not supply or suggest I get
>>in
>>>>their literature, I don't need. I live in the south so am not exposed
to
>>>>extreme temperature differentials and in the winter I tape off part of
>the
>>>>radiators. Some people have suggested I get one. Others have said not
>to
>>>>bother. The possibility of cold seisure has concerned me. I try to
keep
>>>>the temps up on glides. You can't do much about landing approaches.
>>Maybe
>>>>a thermostat would be a good investment? Anybody out there read
anything
>>>>from Rotax about whether to use a thermostat or not?
>>>>
>>>>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+ hrs)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Geoff Smart" <gsmart(at)iinet.net.au> |
The kitchen sink is on order.
Electric flats are great, so easy, just press the buttons.
I ask all Titan owners how they found the holes for the wing skin, because I
found a builder who drilled a series of hole some 2" apart the full length
of the spars and didn't know the factory had already drill the spar.
He didn't read the instruction which says ( do not drill any extra holes in
the spars ) he only drilled about 400.
One stuffed wing $4000 F-------g woops.
Let your wife know BRS has a sale on at the moment, check them out.
Catch you soon
Geoff MAX
-----Original Message-----
From: KHe1144783(at)aol.com <KHe1144783(at)aol.com>
Date: Wednesday, 2 December 1998 10:29
Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Titan II
>
> Geoff- Gee ! You left out the kitchen sink ! Maybe electric seats ? No I
>didnt have a problem with the wing mounts, just thought aluminum was less
than
>adaquate. Only did it for what we in the kitplane group call " warm fuzzies
".
>The wing spar holes were located by drilling through the leading edge skin
>into the existing holes, temporaraly installing the sheet metal wing panels
to
>the ribs with clecos and drilling through them using the existing holes.
They
>dont look lazer punched, but it worked out fine. Hey ! I'd like to get the
>electric flaps too. How do you like them ? Have yet to see them. The VLS
chute
>is also on the list as well, my wife has offered to buy it. (Twist my arm
! )
>
> " Later
>Dates" - Kris-Palm Springs
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rutledge Fuller" <rut007(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron control |
From: "Ron Carroll " <ron.carroll(at)worldnet.att.net>
1. The engine WOULD NOT start until I installed a primer
2. The engine won't keep running right after a cold start (keeps
dying until warmed up)
3. The engine hesitates badly when throttle is applied after a long
idle, i.e., taxi.
Rutledge writes: Sounds alot like my engine. I corrected it by
adjusting the idle screw 1 3/4 turns out. Sounds like on the bottom end
you are rich. I am currently running a 170 main jet, stock needle and
needle jet set in the middle. I think that stock jetting is a 165 jet.
Hope this helps.
Rutledge Fuller
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Timandjan(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | problem, Kolb multi mail |
I am getting several mailings from each posting from the Kolb list, usually 3
from each posting, does anybody know how to have this stopped? 1 is just fine
(ha ha)
tim
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "F J MARINO" <FMARINO(at)netlink1.nlcomm.com> |
Richard, I put a rudder trim on my MKIII and put it one the right side I
also put trim on the let aileron I made them with the drawings that Kolb
sent a couple years ago, I believe the drawings reccomend the trim on the
right side. Hope this helps, one thing about the trim Kolb reccomends that
you rivet the tab on three braces on the rudder this makes the tab about 12
inches long and about 6 inches wide. If you want I can get the drawings out
and give you the exact measurements.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Bluhm <irena(at)ccis.com>
Date: Tuesday, December 01, 1998 7:04 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Rudder Trim
>
>This list seams to be able to answer any & all problems.
>Problem: I have a MK3 and long flying leaves me with a tired left leg.
>I have talked to a few people about a rudder trim tab, but I get
>different responses to it's requirements. To releave the pressure on my
>left foot, do I put the tab on the right side, or left? I won't try to
>explain the different responses, but both sides have carried logical
>responses. My impression is to tab the right side to force the rudder
>to the left.
>Hey Big Lar (who-ever you are) Your Pennzoil is known to have less
>carbon deposits and the plugs are cleaner with it's use, however::: If
>you have a pusher, rub your finger over your prop. You will see a dark
>sooty effect. The Pennzoil is burning during combustion. This burning
>will eventually decrease the lubrication we need with our 2-strokers.
>The AV-2 oil doesn't burn. If you feel the prop, you have wet oil over
>it from the exhaust. Good luck with your future flying! Did I read
>correctly that it will take you another 2 years to finish your MK3???
>Richard of Boron
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cavuontop(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron control |
In a message dated 12/1/98 10:41:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, ul15rhb(at)juno.com
writes:
<< BTW, my EGT's are running 1200-1250 in cruise with the colder
OAT's in the 40's. They were 1150-1175 a few weeks ago in the warm air. >>
Don't worry. Your egts are the same, it's just your guage indication has
changed. It drove me nutty until I read the small print on the info that came
with my expensivo GA egt probes (but I believe this is true for all EGT
probes) that they have a "standard ambient tenperature" at which they read
true. I think for mine it is 70 degrees. For every degree above 70 ambient
the guage will read one degree low. Same for degrees below. At 40 degrees
ambiet you are 30 degrees below the temp at which it will read true so you
should expect your guage to read 30 degrees higher. It was a huge relief when
I figured this out, I couldn't understand why my egts went up in the winter
despite rejetting. Sounds to me like your true egt is unchanged.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Carroll " <ron.carroll(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Hi CHT (was Aileron control) |
Will do, John, if it ever stops raining here in Oregon.
Thanks,
Ron Carroll
Original (hot rocket) Firestar
-----Original Message-----
From: John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com>
Date: Tuesday December 01 1998 10:37 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Hi CHT (was Aileron control)
>
>Ron,
> My neighbor tried moving the chute, to cool his 447 powered
Firestar
>II, and it didn't help. Go count the turns on the idle screw and get
>back to us. It might save you a lot of time.
>John Jung
>
>
+---------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
>
+---------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
> List Support Contributions:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
+---------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MitchMnD(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Calibration of EGT Measuring Systems |
In an earlier posting Rut noted that I had the info on an EGT calibration
product.
In my former life as a test engineer in liquid rocket engine development
projects we used a product called a Tempilstik to confirm metal temperatures.
These look just like a child's color crayon and make bright color marks on
almost any metal. When the temperature of the metal reaches a specified
temperature the mark melts to a liquid. They are accurate to 1%. I just
found them again at a local welding supply and purchased one rated for 1200
degrees. To make sure your EGT probe wiring and gage are accurate at that
point: pull the probe, put a Tempilstik mark on it, use a heat gun to heat
the probe until the mark melts and note the EGT gage reading.
Tempistiks are great but don't order a whole set because they come in a wide
range of temperatures and you may have to mortgage your house to pay for them
at ~ $ 8 each. Flying pals can share these things because I think one stick
can make a gazillion marks. neat huh....
Duane the plane in Tallahassee, FL
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Drag, one more time |
>
>
>what I said was separated past the wide point and turbulent or separated
>past about one foot in. I dont think there is going to be any laminar flow
>on this shape past 1 foot.
Topher
This pod looks like an ideal candidate for vortex generators vertically
along the maximum cord of the pod. (assuming the enclosure of the pod).
Do you have any thoughts as to their application and fabrication?
Ron
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cavuontop(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Calibration of EGT Measuring Systems |
In a message dated 12/2/98 11:33:53 AM Eastern Standard Time, MitchMnD(at)aol.com
writes:
<< put a Tempilstik mark on it, use a heat gun to heat
the probe until the mark melts and note the EGT gage reading. >>
Duane: this is a super idea. But will a heat gun get to 1200?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com> |
>
>Noticed discussion on carb icing on rotax engines. .. Up here we have alot
>of snowmobiles with the rotax engines. They do ice up. I have had to break
>the ice from around the ventury every mile or so on a couple of occasions.
> This wasn't a bing or mec. carb however. It was a Tilitson(puls type). I
>haven't had any experience with either the bing or mec. icing up.
> Arlyn G. Moen
> Upham N. D.
>
> This may be a thing worth thinking about: the Tillotson uses a rotating
butterfly to open and close the air mixture. The Bing and Mikuni's use
slides. Marvel Schebler and other "standard aircraft" carbs also use
butterfly's and need carb heat.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com> |
>
>
>From: "Ron Carroll " <ron.carroll(at)worldnet.att.net>
>To:
>
>
>
>1. The engine WOULD NOT start until I installed a primer
>2. The engine won't keep running right after a cold start (keeps
>dying until warmed up)
>3. The engine hesitates badly when throttle is applied after a long
>idle, i.e., taxi.
>
>
>Rutledge writes: Sounds alot like my engine. I corrected it by
>adjusting the idle screw 1 3/4 turns out. Sounds like on the bottom end
>you are rich. I am currently running a 170 main jet, stock needle and
>needle jet set in the middle. I think that stock jetting is a 165 jet.
>
>Hope this helps.
>Rutledge Fuller
>
Disagree. Still sounds to me like symptoms of a lean idle mixture. The
amount of fuel obtained through the idle mixture circuit is fixed by the
size of the idle jet.
Turning the screw in and out controls ONLY the amount of air mixed with
that fixed flow of fuel. The fuel flow (and air flow) can be cut off by
turning the screw all the way in.
The further in the idle mixture screw is turned, (clockwise) the richer
the idle mixture. The further out the idle mixture screw is turned,
(counterclockwise) the leaner the idle mixture.
This subject is covered in depth in the old LEAF catalog, I have an old
1994-1995 copy, and it is on pages 339-340, 343.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bob n <ronoy(at)shentel.net> |
| Subject: | Re:Titan Wing Holes |
Geoff--Those extra wing spars holes had a purpose!!
Once during tha Last Great Unpleasantness, a certain A/C factory was
having trouble with the wings being pulled off in terminal test dives.
During the emptying of the company suggestion box, an idea so simple,
yet effective was discovered. At an all-hands ceremony the co. pres.
asked the submitter to come forward for his large reward. A lowly
janitor stepped up (probably wearing Oshkosh overalls)! Pres. asks him
to explain the "fix' to the assembled engineers who had previously been
baffled. "Wal, you should jes drill a row of teeny holes the width of
each wing, right whar hit attaches to the body." Won't this weaken the
wing? "Wal, ah work in the crappers, puttin' in terlit paper. You know
terlit paper won't tear along them teeny holes."
Grey (keep some part of the thing right-side up) Baron
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rutledge Fuller" <rut007(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: low speed blues |
>Rutledge writes: Sounds alot like my engine. I corrected it by
>adjusting the idle screw 1 3/4 turns out. Sounds like on the bottom
end
>you are rich. I am currently running a 170 main jet, stock needle and
>needle jet set in the middle. I think that stock jetting is a 165 jet.
>
>Hope this helps.
>Rutledge Fuller
>
Disagree. Still sounds to me like symptoms of a lean idle mixture. The
amount of fuel obtained through the idle mixture circuit is fixed by the
size of the idle jet.
Turning the screw in and out controls ONLY the amount of air mixed with
that fixed flow of fuel. The fuel flow (and air flow) can be cut off by
turning the screw all the way in.
The further in the idle mixture screw is turned, (clockwise) the richer
the idle mixture. The further out the idle mixture screw is turned,
(counterclockwise) the leaner the idle mixture.
This subject is covered in depth in the old LEAF catalog, I have an old
1994-1995 copy, and it is on pages 339-340, 343.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
Well, theres one way to determine if it makes a difference---turn the
screw and try it out. It seems to me that 1/2 a turn out provides a
richer mixture than 1 3/4--right? Then, 1 3/4 turns out would be a
leaner idle setting? Regardless, I was able to work out most of the
stumble at idle by adjusting the idle screw to 1 3/4. Sometimes it is
difficult to determine problems over the net--you almost have to be
there. Try a few things and see if you get any improvement.
Richard, why in your opinion do you think that his motor is suffering
from a lean condition at idle? I would agree that his motor might be
lean on top and mid due to his EGT and CHT readings, but fail to
understand the logic behind lean at idle. Thanks.
In a Rut in Tallahassee
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: low speed blues |
> Well, theres one way to determine if it makes a difference---turn the
> screw and try it out. It seems to me that 1/2 a turn out provides a
> richer mixture than 1 3/4--right? Then, 1 3/4 turns out would be a
> leaner idle setting? Regardless, I was able to work out most of the
The idle mixture screw goes against conventional wisdom: Like RP said,
this screw adjusts the amount of AIR, not the amount of fuel. So, turning
out that screw increases air, thereby leaning idle. You gotta be paying
attention to find this tidbit in the books ...or be listening to this
list!
As a footnote, I would be surprised if this idle mixture thing has much
at all to do with the high CHT. If it were me, I'd just put idle at
nominal (1/2 turn), forget it for now, and go after the more serious
problem of CHT. I have some thinking that correcting the CHT might
also correct the high EGT.
-Ben Ransom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Drag, one more time |
>
>Topher (and anyone still interested), once you wrote:
>
>
>I am an aerospace geek and can tell you a little about drag. As far as
>the Mark III pod goes there are several things that make it draggy. It
>is abit short and fat, tailcones should taper at a bit better then 3 to
>1 for least drag. The tail end needs to be sharp. .
I experimen5ted a few years ago with a wing using a Kline-Fogleman
airfoil. The unusual characteristic of this is that there is a sharp step on
the air foil. Looking sideways at the airfoil at 60% back from the leading
edge the top surface goes straight down to the camber line then goes
straight back to the trailing edge. I built a wind tunnel to see what was
happening and found the step created an additional low pressure area on the
wing which drew the airflow into the notch area smoothly. Sorta but not
quite like a big vortex generator. Anyway I converted an old Vector 600 to
this wing and reduced the stall speed 10%. Other tests done by other people
with RC aircraft have also given it great praise. The notch carved into a
prop tip increased the thrust 10% and made it quieter. This theory should be
adaptable to the side area of a M3 with the notch running vertical. Warning
no matter what tests show and your own experience tells you, this idea does
not look aerodynamic. Be prepared for a lot of advise on why it doesn't work
and will never work from well meaning but uninformed experts.
For more info on this concept find the book "The Ultimate Paper Airplane"
Woody
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MitchMnD(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Calibration of EGT Measuring Systems |
My heat gun has a row of red hot filiments that can be seen if you look into
the barrel when it is on "high" range. It could fry a steak and will burn
Lexan if you not carefull. I am a more concerned about over heating so I
recommend allowing a minute or so for heat soak while bringing it up to the
1200* threshhold.
Duane the plane in Tallahassee
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "youngblood" <barry(at)hcis.net> |
| Subject: | Re: low speed blues |
-----Original Message-----
From: Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu>
Date: Wednesday, December 02, 1998 1:29 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: low speed blues
>
>> Well, theres one way to determine if it makes a difference---turn the
>> screw and try it out. It seems to me that 1/2 a turn out provides a
I would like to know what the max static RPM is because the engine sounds
like it could be underproped. Barry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "youngblood" <barry(at)hcis.net> |
| Subject: | Re: low speed blues |
-----Original Message-----
From: Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu>
Date: Wednesday, December 02, 1998 1:29 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: low speed blues
>
>> Well, theres one way to determine if it makes a difference---turn the
>> screw and try it out. It seems to me that 1/2 a turn out provides a
I would like to know what the max static RPM is because the engine sounds
like it could be underproped. Barry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: low speed blues |
Hi Gang:
Might check the ign timing, it is a 377? Early or late timing can increase
CHT. Don't know about EGT, but I imagine it does. One thing to remember
when trouble shooting an eng: Always start with the ign timing and insure it
is correct. Whether a 377 or a 351W. If timing is off there is no way you
can zero in on carb adj. The complicated, involved, nerve grating ign set
up on 377s is a pain in the butt. I had dual pt ign on my 447s. Biggest
headache I had with them. One cyl can be right on the button and the other
fast or slow, or they can both be off. In addition, on pushers when
mechanic/pilot wears bifocal glasses and has arthritis, it is almost
imperative to pull the dang eng to time it. Pts wear, not only on contacts,
but the metal pivot post and the micarta bushing. When this occurs, and it
will if you put enough hours on them, there is no way to have consistent
correct timing. Also the method for installing condensers was invented by a
demented Austrian who knew many Americans would be flying in front of these
Rotaxes. He secretly hates us and wanted to drive us crazy trying to
install them without damage.
Just another thought and I'll shut up. Westach gauges were known to be
notoriously inaccurate when I flew with them. My philosophy was: If the
engine is running good, feels good, sounds good, and is performing well at
low, middle, and high power settings, then don't get heartburn over an egt
or cht or tach that is telling you otherwise. I chose to run VDO marine
engine instruments, based on decent price and reliability and accuracy. I
ran them on two strokes and on my 912. Do a much better job than Westach.
Hope I didn't hurt any Westach fans feelings out there in cyber land.
Lastly, if I had a pt ign Rotax, I would update to CDI and go fly with a lot
less problems.
Forgot one: On some of my long XCs with 477 and Firestar I would have to
scrounge up new coils because vibration would try and disintegrate them.
They would come apart. Started using JB Weld epoxy around the coil and the
metal frame to reinforce and get a little more time out of them.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
An individual with a 582 powered parachute has installed something
similar to what you are describing; it can be seen at:
http://www.powerchutes.com/jleonpod.htm
I know no more about it than what can be seen from the picture.
Marc Robertson
marc@blackberry-ridge.com
Richard Pike wrote:
> Last Saturday week ago the wife and I flew a short cross country, and
the
> temps were in the 40's. The water temp never got over 150 on climb out, and
> stayed at 130 the rest of the time. Even a thermostat only helps a little
> when it gets too cool.
> My winter project this year is a folding flap/baffle that will be cable
> operated to open and shut in front of the radiator. That will fix it!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
Over the past few days I have read some interesting comments on carb ice.
Someone said, can't remember who and it isn't important, that crankcase heat
from two stroke might help prevent ice. I can't go along with that because
the crankcase on a two stroke when it is working its butt off is about as
cool as ambient OAT. If you doubt what I am saying, try this. Tie down
your airplane, crank it up, run it up to cruise power or wide open throttle.
Then lean over the wing and put your hand on the crank case. If it is hot
come back and we'll figure out what is wrong with it. On my two strokes the
cases remained cool during power on static tests. Since the carb is
connected to the intake manifold with a rubber socket, not too much heat
transfer there.
Now on the 912 it is just the opposite. Crankcase is about as hot as oil
temp that usually runs 210F. The problem is long unheated intake manifolds
and carbs sitting out on the end of them on rubber sockets.This is the
reason 912s have a problem leaning out in the winter in midrange power
settings, I think. A friend machined me an aluminum thermostat housing that
keep the cyl head temp normally at 210 and about 180 to 190 on really cold
days, 30s and 40s.
I don't know if I have experienced ice or not with 2 or 4 stroke Rotaxes. I
imagine I have based on when and where I have flown. A noticeable
characteristic of the 912 is thoroughly drenched carbs on post shut down
inspections. Temps do not have to be cold to produce ice. Living with engs
that do not have carb heat has become a way of life for me. One of the
things I accept to participate in this sport. If it starts killing people
(ice) then I'll take another look at it. Until then, fly and have fun.
One more comment and I'll shut up. I have flown both 912 and 447 in rain.
447 started losing power in an intense downpour, I mean when I could not see
where I was flying. I flew rain all day long many days of my trip to Alaska
with the 912. Sometimes really hard downpours. No indication of power loss
at any time. However, when flying in hard rain I do not come back on power
very much below cruise power, just to keep me from possibly losing an eng
and not be able to do an air restart. I do not fly in the rain for fun.
Only on very serious XCs when I have no other choice cause there ain't no
place to land.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Swiderski <swidersk(at)digital.net> |
| Subject: | Re: : Kolb-List:Used Engine Parts |
Wanted:
Used 582 Muffler (Can even have some cracks in it!)
Provision 8, 503 engine case (Would consider provision 4)
I have a 582 from a Sea-Doo watercraft that I converted & mated to a Rotax B drive.
I
thought I'd put it on my SlingShot & fly it while I'm finishing & testing my turbo
Geo
Metro. I've been wanting to sell the 582, so now I'll be able to demonstrate it
at Sun
& Fun. I appreciate any help or tips. Thanks.
---Richard Swiderski, 352-622-4064 Ocala, FL
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Aileron control |
Why fight it? Why not go to the next larger needle jet and dump some more
fuel into it in the 5 to 6k range?
Dick C
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Rut,
Be careful, I ran a 170 main jet from the nominal 165 and it caused the
rings to stick prematurely. I use a 165 year 'round now because in the
winter it's just right with the cold dense air and in the summer it's
slightly rich but provides better cooling.
Ralph Burlingame
Original FireStar, 447 powered
writes:
>
>
>
>From: "Ron Carroll " <ron.carroll(at)worldnet.att.net>
>To:
>
>
>
>1. The engine WOULD NOT start until I installed a primer
>2. The engine won't keep running right after a cold start (keeps
>dying until warmed up)
>3. The engine hesitates badly when throttle is applied after a long
>idle, i.e., taxi.
>
>
>Rutledge writes: Sounds alot like my engine. I corrected it by
>adjusting the idle screw 1 3/4 turns out. Sounds like on the bottom
>end
>you are rich. I am currently running a 170 main jet, stock needle and
>
>needle jet set in the middle. I think that stock jetting is a 165
>jet.
>
>Hope this helps.
>Rutledge Fuller
>
>
>
>
> List Support Contributions:
>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: low speed blues |
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Barry, Ron, and others,
Ron probably has the 66" x 28 wood prop that came with his kit which is
underpropped. This is why my EGT's were the same as his are now. I doubt
the OAT's are in the 30's and 40's out in Oregon where he lives to make a
difference on the EGT instrument. He needs to get an IVO prop and set it
for 6100 on takeoff. The high CHT's may be the fan belt that is either
slipping or so tight that it is changing the engine timing. Ron, that fan
belt should be adjusted so you can easily use your hands to place the
pulley, that it rides in, on the flywheel without a lot of strain.
Ralph
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu>
>To: Rutledge Fuller
>Cc: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>Date: Wednesday, December 02, 1998 1:29 PM
>Subject: Re: Kolb-List: low speed blues
>
>
>
>>
>>> Well, theres one way to determine if it makes a difference---turn
>the
>>> screw and try it out. It seems to me that 1/2 a turn out provides
>a
>
>
>I would like to know what the max static RPM is because the engine
>sounds
>like it could be underproped. Barry
>
>
>
>
> List Support Contributions:
>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Rotax fan cooling |
My 503 is enclosed and sucks essentially dead air for cooling and did not see
any higher temps than when open. Also it seams that everyone believes their
gauges when they should not. One of our members has a factory calibrator and
has found EGT instruments to be reading as much as 200 degrees low, not sure
about CHT but my guess is that they are not always right either. Will advise
on my results when I get around to pulling them out. By the way my long
Titanium gear is still too springy.
Dick C
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
Hey Old Poops: What are you planning on using for the mighty project ??
For interest value, I've seen some heating and cooling duct ventilator
covers that are louvered and lever operated. They come in various sizes,
shapes and materials. Seems that some I've seen are quite light, tho' I
wasn't looking at them with this application in mind. It's a great idea -
you'd have faster warm up, and more consistent temperatures, as well as a
potential source of cabin heat. Good luck. Big Lar.
----------
> From: Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Thermostat
> Date: Wednesday, December 02, 1998 7:45 AM
> My winter project this year is a folding flap/baffle that will be cable
> operated to open and shut in front of the radiator. That will fix it!
> Richard Pike
> MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Calibration of EGT Measuring Systems |
More food for thought. If you contact a commercial appliance tech, he'll
most likely have hi-temp test meters for calibrating thermostats. I can't
remember if mine have J or K type thermocouples, but they are several feet
long, and could wrap around the probe, and give a side by side reading all
the way up the scale, and you could use any heat source you choose. My
digital will go up to 1100 F., and the analog to 1500 F. Hadn't thought
about it in this context before, but I do believe I'll check my own in the
very near future. Thanks for the idea. Big Lar.
----------
> From: MitchMnD(at)aol.com
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Calibration of EGT Measuring Systems
> Date: Wednesday, December 02, 1998 1:39 PM
>
>
> My heat gun has a row of red hot filiments that can be seen if you look
into
> the barrel when it is on "high" range. It could fry a steak and will burn
> Lexan if you not carefull. I am a more concerned about over heating so
I
> recommend allowing a minute or so for heat soak while bringing it up to
the
> 1200* threshhold.
>
> Duane the plane in Tallahassee
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Adrio Taucer <adrio(at)capitalnet.com> |
Hello the list,
I have a comment/question on this carb ice topic (being from Canada and
having spent the past week hearing people jump for joy because the
outside temperature has been ABOVE freezing by a degree or two, I hold
this topic dear). I always thought the big factor that causes carb ice
has nothing to do with how much crank case heat transfers to the intake
manifold/carb. Rather I think it is the fact that the air pressure
takes a sudden drop as it passes the narrow venturi of the carb. This
sudden drop of pressure results in a comparable sudden drop in
temperature, which could put the air temperature at that place below
the dew point (temperature). One notices the same same thing when you
let compressed air exit rapidly out the end of a hose or from your air
tool, it gets real cold at the pressure drop point (the word adiabatic
heat jumps to mind from school days I think).
I think one of the contributors to the list on this subject indicated
they noticed a ring of ice in the carb right at this narrowing.
I welcome your comments on what I have just said.
Be careful up there, ice can bit you in the engine real fast and even
above freezing temperatures (a temperature I don't expect to see
outdoors for 4 months).
Adrio Taucer
John Hauck wrote:
>
>
> Over the past few days I have read some interesting comments on carb ice.
>
> Someone said, can't remember who and it isn't important, that crankcase heat
> from two stroke might help prevent ice. I can't go along with that because
> the crankcase on a two stroke when it is working its butt off is about as
> cool as ambient OAT. If you doubt what I am saying, try this. Tie down
> your airplane, crank it up, run it up to cruise power or wide open throttle.
> Then lean over the wing and put your hand on the crank case. If it is hot
> come back and we'll figure out what is wrong with it. On my two strokes the
> cases remained cool during power on static tests. Since the carb is
> connected to the intake manifold with a rubber socket, not too much heat
> transfer there.
>
> Now on the 912 it is just the opposite. Crankcase is about as hot as oil
> temp that usually runs 210F. The problem is long unheated intake manifolds
> and carbs sitting out on the end of them on rubber sockets.This is the
> reason 912s have a problem leaning out in the winter in midrange power
> settings, I think. A friend machined me an aluminum thermostat housing that
> keep the cyl head temp normally at 210 and about 180 to 190 on really cold
> days, 30s and 40s.
>
> I don't know if I have experienced ice or not with 2 or 4 stroke Rotaxes. I
> imagine I have based on when and where I have flown. A noticeable
> characteristic of the 912 is thoroughly drenched carbs on post shut down
> inspections. Temps do not have to be cold to produce ice. Living with engs
> that do not have carb heat has become a way of life for me. One of the
> things I accept to participate in this sport. If it starts killing people
> (ice) then I'll take another look at it. Until then, fly and have fun.
>
> One more comment and I'll shut up. I have flown both 912 and 447 in rain.
> 447 started losing power in an intense downpour, I mean when I could not see
> where I was flying. I flew rain all day long many days of my trip to Alaska
> with the 912. Sometimes really hard downpours. No indication of power loss
> at any time. However, when flying in hard rain I do not come back on power
> very much below cruise power, just to keep me from possibly losing an eng
> and not be able to do an air restart. I do not fly in the rain for fun.
> Only on very serious XCs when I have no other choice cause there ain't no
> place to land.
>
> john h
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com> |
| Subject: | Re: low speed blues |
My old 1953 boat,(40 HP Elgin) and the weedeater both have carbs with
adjuster screws for low and high speed jets. Lean out the low speed jet
just a hair and it runs real smooth, but it won't run at idle until it
warms up, it won't readily accelerate off idle, and it tends to readily
stall and die just off idle.
Also, I installed an intake silencer on my Rotax 277, had to rejet
everything. Played with jets all across the range, and the 277 behaved in
this same fashion if I had too small an idle jet in it.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
>Richard, why in your opinion do you think that his motor is suffering
>from a lean condition at idle? I would agree that his motor might be
>lean on top and mid due to his EGT and CHT readings, but fail to
>understand the logic behind lean at idle. Thanks.
>
>In a Rut in Tallahassee
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | A Fuelish Solution |
Hi Grey Baron: Read your article in the new U/L Flyer on fuel transfer.
Very good job. Safe and simple. Received the Far Side print today -
that's the one I wanted. Thanks very much. Big Lar.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rick106(at)juno.com |
Hey you old LIZZARD
As I read all this stuff about cold seisure I am holding the piston out
of my 582 after the first 16 minutes of breaking in and it looks like
this the skuff lines are on the top side's if you were looking at the
piston skirt from the top of the top ring to the middle of the skirt it
looks like it started at the intake side say 3:00 to the 9:00 area,
the top of the piston looks like half of it shinny new the other half
BLACK . The oil I use is AV2
but don't put blame it on the oil the reason for the seizure was I had
the white plastic cup in the carb. in the wrong place. And CLIFF I do fly
with a thermostat and I really caint tell you why . But if it every
hangs up closed I will fly like you are now .
Rick Libersat
writes:
>
>
>To all,
>
>After this post I think I will "give it a rest"...
>
>The comment about not paying attention the the "string" on landing is
>absolutely correct. The string is all over the place and should be
>ignored. Same thing during take off roll. Also, J.H. is correct
>about the
>most important instrument anytime (on any airplane), the ASI (the very
>best
>anti-stall instrument). During landings I resemble a lizzard with one
>eye
>flicking down to look at the ASI and the other glued outside of the
>cockpit.
>
>I really should put a trim tab (or other trimming device) on my
>rudder, but
>I have just about retrained myself to flying "Kolb-style". I would
>hate to
>have to re-learn it all over again differently. For instance when
>doing
>figure 8's I really step on the left rudder entering tight left turns,
>then
>muscle the ailerons to roll over into the right turn. Right turns
>need
>almost no right rudder to keep the ball & string centered, then I
>muscle
>the ailreons to roll over into a left turn, etc. ...all the while
>holding
>altitude with the feather-lite elevators. Boy... what a plane, warts
>and
>all. BTW, the whole figure 8 happens really quickly by spam can
>standards.
> Kolbs can really maneuver. You can be going the opposite direction
>almost
>before you can say "turn around"... only a small exageration.
>
>Question to the list. How many of you out there are flying with a
>thermostat? My engine did not come with one and not being very engine
>mechanically savy I figured... what they did not supply or suggest I
>get in
>their literature, I don't need. I live in the south so am not exposed
>to
>extreme temperature differentials and in the winter I tape off part of
>the
>radiators. Some people have suggested I get one. Others have said
>not to
>bother. The possibility of cold seisure has concerned me. I try to
>keep
>the temps up on glides. You can't do much about landing approaches.
>Maybe
>a thermostat would be a good investment? Anybody out there read
>anything
>from Rotax about whether to use a thermostat or not?
>
>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+ hrs)
>
>
>
>
> List Support Contributions:
>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Highsmith" <michael.highsmith(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Yaw string? Maybe, maybe not. |
Hey guys, What do you do if your airplane has a center post down the middle
of it's wind screen and there is no place to put the yaw string?
Solution--- Use an inexpensive self stick on RV level on your instrument
panel. The ones that have a very slight curve to them.The ones that are
about 2 1/2 inches long with no more than 15* on each side of center. the
best one I found only shows 10*. This one cost me $4. The small straight
ones work well too but they don't have the nice calibrated degrees on them,
cost $.50. Sailors Supply has the exact same thing but you will pay too
much, cost $38. I started using one just to see if it would work as good as
a yaw string, it did. After going through several different kinds ie,
straight, lots of curve, and round disk, I settled on the disk and the
slightly curved one. They are real sensitive to out- of- coordination,but
not so sensitive that the bubble is always moving unless of course you are
tapping the rudder to the beat of your favorite tune. The curved level has
to be installed with the planes' wings as close to level as possible while
on the ground. I have the disk level on an adjustable piece of aluminum
mounted level out from the panel. This will also give you some idea of your
pitch in straight and level flight and can be adjusted for the cruise you
fly at. Pitch up the disk bubble goes forward pitch down the bubble goes
aft. Mine has a small circle around the center that is just outside the
bubble when everything is level. I just keep the buble in the center of the
circle at cruise setting. It has yet to fail me and I use the permanent
mounted one to cross check the adjustable one in roll. The yaw string did
fail a couple times when it got wet from rain or mist and stuck to the wind
screen.
If the bubble is to the left of center all you do is step on the rudder you
want it to come to, just opposite a ball, which would be the right rudder.
It is so quick that you can even keep the controls coordinated in a right
and left Dutch roll. It really comes in handy when the wind is howling
straight down the runway and you're turning from DW to Base and Base to
Final. You know, where the airplane seem to slid across the ground sideways.
It's real important to keep it coordinated low to the ground and in a tight
turn for the runway.
Anyway, it is what I use, it works well and it want ever quit so long as
it stays stuck on the panel. You can even come down through clouds if you
ever find yourself above them and don't have a ground reference not that we
ever fly above the clouds.
Hope this helps. " Sky-Hole-Pok'r" FIREHAWK
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Highsmith" <michael.highsmith(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Yaw string? Maybe, maybe not. |
Hey guys, What do you do if your airplane has a center post down the middle
of it's wind screen and there is no place to put the yaw string?
Solution--- Use an inexpensive self stick on RV level on your instrument
panel. The ones that have a very slight curve to them.The ones that are
about 2 1/2 inches long with no more than 15* on each side of center. the
best one I found only shows 10*. This one cost me $4. The small straight
ones work well too but they don't have the nice calibrated degrees on them,
cost $.50. Sailors Supply has the exact same thing but you will pay too
much, cost $38. I started using one just to see if it would work as good as
a yaw string, it did. After going through several different kinds ie,
straight, lots of curve, and round disk, I settled on the disk and the
slightly curved one. They are real sensitive to out- of- coordination,but
not so sensitive that the bubble is always moving unless of course you are
tapping the rudder to the beat of your favorite tune. The curved level has
to be installed with the planes' wings as close to level as possible while
on the ground. I have the disk level on an adjustable piece of aluminum
mounted level out from the panel. This will also give you some idea of your
pitch in straight and level flight and can be adjusted for the cruise you
fly at. Pitch up the disk bubble goes forward pitch down the bubble goes
aft. Mine has a small circle around the center that is just outside the
bubble when everything is level. I just keep the buble in the center of the
circle at cruise setting. It has yet to fail me and I use the permanent
mounted one to cross check the adjustable one in roll. The yaw string did
fail a couple times when it got wet from rain or mist and stuck to the wind
screen.
If the bubble is to the left of center all you do is step on the rudder you
want it to come to, just opposite a ball, which would be the right rudder.
It is so quick that you can even keep the controls coordinated in a right
and left Dutch roll. It really comes in handy when the wind is howling
straight down the runway and you're turning from DW to Base and Base to
Final. You know, where the airplane seem to slid across the ground sideways.
It's real important to keep it coordinated low to the ground and in a tight
turn for the runway.
Anyway, it is what I use, it works well and it want ever quit so long as
it stays stuck on the panel. You can even come down through clouds if you
ever find yourself above them and don't have a ground reference not that we
ever fly above the clouds.
Hope this helps. " Sky-Hole-Pok'r" FIREHAWK
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Highsmith" <michael.highsmith(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Low Speed Blues, Cowboy |
Rut, He's right, it is too lean at idle. It maybe a little trash may have
gotten past your filter or it may be that it has some gasoline varnish in
the idle jet. It want hurt to take a look. The holes in the idle jet is very
small and it doesn't take much to stop them up. I have a scooter that does
this periodicly from setting too long between uses. I clean the idle jet it
runs fine 'til I let it set too long again. But a small bit of debris will
do the same thing. Also I think you need to screw your idle screw in a
little. FIREHAWK
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Bluhm <irena(at)ccis.com> |
For the inputs of Frank Reynen and F.J. Marino, I wish to give my
appreciation. I thought I was correct, but thought I'd give it the
reinforcement it should have. Last, but not least: I want to ask Jim
Gerken if he has considered a fabric strip connected by velcro between
the wind-screen and the gap seal on his MK3 ??? I was trying to
consider somthing like this as well. It's simple, and cut to fit, but
will the velcro hold up to the wind pressure?
Richard of Boron
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Floats and gross weight |
Jon,
My Firestar II has modified wings to accept spontoons for a monofloat. The
fuselage is not modified. It would need to have 4 plates welded to it. Then the
covering would need to be patched in those areas. I looked into Full Lotus amphib
floats after my plane was built and flying. The 1000 would keep me under gross
weight but the plane would be about 30 lbs too heavy to float on them. The 2000's
would float the plane but would put me over gross weight for flying. After
realizing that, I put the idea out of my mind.
You have the same problem of exceeding the gross weight only with the 1000.
I
think that problem would complicate any chance of getting the plane signed off
experimental.
John Jung
Jon Steiger wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm interested in putting my FireFly on floats; maybe a Full Lotus
> monofloat. It seems like a Full Lotus Monofloat 1000 would be
> sufficient, but the FBO at a local airport has a few used and new
> 1700 and 2000 Full Lotus monofloats which he just aquired and is
> interested in selling (he doesn't know what he wants for them yet
> though); would something like that be overkill for the FireFly?
>
> If I do this, it would definitely have to be an amphib setup; I don't
> want to be stuck with land or water, I want to use both... According
> to Full Lotus' web page, the 1000 and 2000 can be set up for amphib
> (pricey!!!!! $$$$$$) :-( but the 1700 can not. (Any less costly
> options here?)
>
> My main question though is... I'm already at gross weight for
> my FireFly. Actually, I'm slightly over, maybe 520-530lbs and
> I believe the gross weight for the FF is 500lbs. Does adding
> floats affect the gross weight? Obviously they'd add weight,
> but I thought maybe they act as a "lifting body" which
> would offset it... ?
>
> Oops, I thought of another question: How does the monofloat
> attach to the plane? Is there a mounting kit or something that
> I need to buy from someone? (Kolb?) If so, anyone know
> what it costs?
>
> Ummm, one more question. :-) If I were to get my FireFly on
> floats, I've played with the idea of registering it as an experimental
> so that I could build float time (for reduced insurance premiums, etc).
> Is there any problem with using Full Lotus floats on an Exp. aircraft?
> Any "gotchas" to look out for here with registering my FF as an Exp
> floatplane in general? (I am the 2nd owner, and not the original builder.)
>
> Any info or advice on any of the above would be greatly apprecated.
>
> Thanks!
>
> -Jon-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Vince Nicely" <vincenicely(at)intermediatn.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wing Spar Attach - Dihedral Increase |
Larry,
You wrote: Seems to me that some months ago someone said they had
>increased dihedral, and it made the plane much more stable. Must have
>rocks in my head. Only comment lately is that up to 3" doesn't seem to
>make much difference. Ever watch a pigeon glide ?? Now, there's dihedral
>! ! ! Maybe a little extreme, of course.
Well, I am likely the one who made the earlier post you mention. Sorry for
the delayed response, but have been a little behind on my mail. I raised
the wing tips on my Firestar 10 inches above the inboard end. On my
airplane, that ment lengthing the lift struts by 2-1/4". Following are some
clips from my earlier discussion including flying characteristics with
standard rigging and with 10" raised wing tips.
I decided to add more dihedral because that seemed like it had a chance to
make the responses more conventional compared to GA planes which I wanted.
Three degrees of dihedral (raised the wing tip 10 inches) makes my Firestar
II able to fly all day without
touching the stick (I have cockpit adjustable elevator trim - springs under
the seat). Slight rudder inputs provide all the roll controll that
is needed. It can be brought out of a fairly steep (say 20-30 degree) bank
with rudder alone. It has just about neutral spiral stability, i.e., when
put in a bank it will approximately hold or slightly lower the bank angle
without control inputs.
When my plane is stalled, the rudder is very effective at lifting a wing (or
in the other direction for putting it into a spin).
I flew my Firestar II for the first 39 hours rigged with the standard
dihedral, i.e., wing tips raised 1". I took a ride in the factory Mark III
several years ago, but really got no feel for it in a short ride. Have no
other experience in Kolb airplanes.
The airplane was tested for flight characteristics according to the
suggestions of Vaughn Askue in his book, "Flight Testing Homebuilt
Aircraft". I worked through his suggest procedures systematically, and by
the time I got to testing dihedral and such the airplane was otherwise
trimmed and flying according to expectations. I noted two undesirable
characteristics in the standardly rigged airplane. Below are some quotes
from my test notebook describing the behavior while it was fresh in my mind.
(N8233g) Firestar II With Standard Dihedral- Wing tips up 1":
Dihedral Effect. "As the plane begins to roll (left or right), a small
rudder input can correct the roll. However, if much rudder control is
needed, the input of rudder adds significant drag, the nose of the plane
comes up and the plane slows. Then, the roll will stop. However, if the
stick is pushed forward and speed is maintained, then the rudder is
effective in stopping the roll even at relatively large bank angles( say
30-45 degrees)" These notes remind me that I found the rudder effective at
controlling roll if I compensated for the extra drag. The notes do not say,
and I can not remember if it would recover to unbanked without aileron
input.
Spiral Mode. Askue says: "Spiral stability is the tendency for an airplane
to change its angle of bank in a turn". My notebook says of the Firestar
II, " When put in a shallow turn in either direction, the turn tends to
tighten with neutral controls. The amount of bank will double in about 10
seconds." Askue labels this as strongly unstable (divergent) and suggests
it is unacceptable because of what might happen if you were distracted at
certain phases of flight. Further more he suggests the main fix is to
increase dihedral.
Because the control pressures in the Firestar II are light and most of us
naturally use all three controls together, I suspect most people, including
myself, will not notice the above tendencies unless they both have a
carefully trimmed airplane and put it through the hands-off test
procedures.
(N8233G) Firestar II with 3.5 degrees Dihedral - Wing tips up 10"
Dihedral Effect: With the airplane trimmed, the rudder will cause the
airplane to bank and unbank in either direction without touching the stick.
The rudder works like this in all normal flight conditions up to at least 30
degrees, but I have not tested how it works in a steep bank. However, large
rudder inputs still noticably increase the drag, but they are not needed for
normal flight.
Spiral Stability: N8233g now maintains its bank angle or may slowly
decrease the bank angle with neutral controls.
I find that with the increase dihedral, N8233G will fly all day with only
throttle and rudder inputs and with hands off the stick. With hands on the
stick, it is little, if any, different than before the dihedral was changed.
For those who have flown Cessna airplanes, the directional stability and
rudder control are very similar to those of a Cessna 152 or 172.
Vince Nicely
Firestar II (N8233G)
206 Hours
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher John Armstrong" <Tophera(at)centuryinter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Drag, one more time |
Hi Woody,
Kline-Fogleman
>airfoil. The unusual characteristic of this is that there is a sharp step
on
>the air foil. Looking sideways at the airfoil at 60% back from the leading
>edge the top surface goes straight down to the camber line then goes
>straight back to the trailing edge.
LOts of these types of airfoils have been developed over the years.
Sport aviation had an article about a similar airfoil this year or last that
had a double hump to it. some ailerons have a larger thickness then the
wing infront of them to reattach the flow. this waviness is a way of
controlling the boundary layer and controls turbulent and separated flow.
These work best for low RN thus the better low speed performance. If you are
trying to go faster they are not so good, they can result in separated flow.
There are lots of ways to do pressure recovery... I dont know alot about
this but John Roncz and a few others have made millions knowing how to get
the flow up the pressure hill on the backside of objects. Vortex generators
are one way, slats slots bumps divits and gaps can work. the trick is to
get a performance inprovement with them accross the flight envelope. Just
realize that puting things on and around the MK III you can not possible
improve the performance greatly... a couple of miles per hour at most.
Sorry it is just physics.
Topher
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rob Reynolds" <rfreynol(at)mindspring.com> |
Please make sure that the Velcro is secured to the wing. I remember reading
an NTSB report about a Challenger that used Velcro to hold a lexan cover
down at the center of the wings. The Velcro held, but the adhesive pulled
away from the wing, and the lexan went through the prop.
-Rob
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Bluhm <irena(at)ccis.com>
Date: Thursday, December 03, 1998 8:19 AM
Subject: Kolb-List: My thanks
>
>For the inputs of Frank Reynen and F.J. Marino, I wish to give my
>appreciation. I thought I was correct, but thought I'd give it the
>reinforcement it should have. Last, but not least: I want to ask Jim
>Gerken if he has considered a fabric strip connected by velcro between
>the wind-screen and the gap seal on his MK3 ??? I was trying to
>consider somthing like this as well. It's simple, and cut to fit, but
>will the velcro hold up to the wind pressure?
>Richard of Boron
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Damaged FF (still) For Sale |
| From: | mefine1(at)juno.com (Mick Fine) |
Hello Group,
Several weeks ago, I posted a message about Joel Johnson's wrecked FF
being for sale. Well, its still for sale. Joel sent me the following info
and asked me to forward it to the list:
--------- Begin forwarded message ----------
On Sept. 18, while on the maiden flight of my firefly, due to
control problems (aka pilot error), we came into rather violent contact
with the ground. I fared better than the airplane (2 broken ribs). The
remains are in my hangar and are for sale.
I live in Tulsa, Oklahoma and I am not interested in
breaking it down and selling the parts. I want to get the whole thing
out of my hangar at one time. It can probably be hauled off in an
adequate sized U-haul.
More in particular as to a description of the remains, damage, etc.:
1. Cage is damaged beyond repair.
2. The wing spars are intact.
3. The approximate end 15 percent of the wing structure, including
the leading edges and the ailerons , is damaged.
4. The gear legs and wing struts are somewhat bent, probably can be
straightened.
5. Wheels and brakes are OK.
6. The control quadrant appears to be O.K.
7. Nose molding destroyed.
We have left:
1. An intact tail boom and empanage,
2. a new Rotax 447 engine and 2-blade wood prop.
3. A digital Engine Information System which cost over $900, which
includes multiple readouts (including altitude) and insructions.
4. Airspeed indicator and compass.
5. Construction and engine manuals
6. Video tape entitled "Fabric
Covering Kolb Aircraft.
7. My personal notebook containing information pertaining to the
building of the airplane.
8. All the hardware can be reused and I have some rivets.
9. A case of 2-cycle oil. I also have a two-wheel open trailer
which I
will throw in if the buyer can use it. It's modified to haul
the
Firefly for short distances only.
The Kolb people have been very cooperative during the building and
I'm sure would work with a buyer on obtaining the necessary parts.
President Dennis Souder provides excellent tech support.
My price for all of these goodies is $3,000. If you desire personal
contact, my phone number is 1-918-749-1077.
Joel H. Johnson
joeljon(at)juno.com
--------- End forwarded message ----------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Kolbers, this message originated from the ppc (powered parachute) list.
It appears informative and useful to us:
Ralph
From: "Bruce Pritchett"
I have seen this discussion many times before on the rec.sport.jetski
newsgroup (which is also largely a Rotax world). According to the guys
who
build 2-stroke racing engines for jetskis (and do tons of dyno research
on
these things), the seizures are caused by a temporary lean condition that
happens when you throttle back. Keep in mind that everything in a
2-stroke
is driven by the piston in the carb. When the carb piston is opened,
air
is drawn in, which draws fuel in with it (through the jets) in the proper
mixture. When the fuel-air mixture reaches the combustion chamber, the
engine fires. When you open the throttle more, more air (and fuel) is
drawn in, which sends more mixture to the chamber, and the engine speeds
up. Let's say you are running at 6800 rpm. When you throttle back, the
first thing that happens is the carb piston closes some, which allows
less
air to flow through. Because fuel (and oil) are drawn in by the airflow
through the carb, when less air is drawn, less fuel is drawn. Now you
have
an engine turning at 6800 rpms, but for a split second (until it slows
down
some), it is not getting the fuel-air mixture to support 6800 rpms. This
is where the danger zone is. There is actually more danger of seizure
going from full throttle to half throttle than from full throttle to 7/8
throttle. There is also more danger if your carbs are on the lean side
at
full throttle and/or lean in the midrange. The best two-stroke tuners in
the jetski world (who are, by the way, light years ahead of us in terms
of
understanding the Rotax engines), suggest to always tune on the rich side
of the power curve. (Or the richest setting where you can run at a high
sustained rpm level). If your power band is set rich enough, you will
never seize when throttling back. (Check out groupk.com for a lot of
good
2-stroke information. It's by Harry Klemm, a jetski guru, but they
started
out with motorcycles and snowmobiles.)
By the way, the rings should never actually touch the sides of the
cylinder, but ride on a film of lubrication. Seizures happen when this
film is burned away and the rings and cylinder actually do touch. Hence,
the "overcoming friction" argument doesn't really hold much water (or
oil,
in this case!)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wing Spar Attach - Dihedral Increase |
Well Vince, thanks much for the reply. Guess I don't have rocks in my head
after all - tho' there are those who would argue with such a statement.
After Vamoose is operational, we'll take a close look at such ideas,
especially since I'm building it for distance cruising. Might just come up
with a winner. Big Lar.
----------
> From: Vince Nicely <vincenicely(at)intermediatn.net>
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Wing Spar Attach - Dihedral Increase
> Date: Thursday, December 03, 1998 1:41 PM
>
>
> Larry,
>
> You wrote: Seems to me that some months ago someone said they had
> >increased dihedral, and it made the plane much more stable. Must have
> >rocks in my head. Only comment lately is that up to 3" doesn't seem to
> >make much difference. Ever watch a pigeon glide ?? Now, there's
dihedral
> >! ! ! Maybe a little extreme, of course.
>
> Well, I am likely the one who made the earlier post you mention. Sorry
for
> the delayed response, but have been a little behind on my mail. I
raised
> the wing tips on my Firestar 10 inches above the inboard end. On my
> airplane, that ment lengthing the lift struts by 2-1/4". Following are
some
> clips from my earlier discussion including flying characteristics with
> standard rigging and with 10" raised wing tips.
>
> I decided to add more dihedral because that seemed like it had a chance
to
> make the responses more conventional compared to GA planes which I
wanted.
> Three degrees of dihedral (raised the wing tip 10 inches) makes my
Firestar
> II able to fly all day without
> touching the stick (I have cockpit adjustable elevator trim - springs
under
> the seat). Slight rudder inputs provide all the roll controll that
> is needed. It can be brought out of a fairly steep (say 20-30 degree)
bank
> with rudder alone. It has just about neutral spiral stability, i.e.,
when
> put in a bank it will approximately hold or slightly lower the bank angle
> without control inputs.
>
> When my plane is stalled, the rudder is very effective at lifting a wing
(or
> in the other direction for putting it into a spin).
>
> I flew my Firestar II for the first 39 hours rigged with the standard
> dihedral, i.e., wing tips raised 1". I took a ride in the factory Mark
III
> several years ago, but really got no feel for it in a short ride. Have
no
> other experience in Kolb airplanes.
>
> The airplane was tested for flight characteristics according to the
> suggestions of Vaughn Askue in his book, "Flight Testing Homebuilt
> Aircraft". I worked through his suggest procedures systematically, and
by
> the time I got to testing dihedral and such the airplane was otherwise
> trimmed and flying according to expectations. I noted two undesirable
> characteristics in the standardly rigged airplane. Below are some quotes
> from my test notebook describing the behavior while it was fresh in my
mind.
>
> (N8233g) Firestar II With Standard Dihedral- Wing tips up 1":
>
> Dihedral Effect. "As the plane begins to roll (left or right), a small
> rudder input can correct the roll. However, if much rudder control is
> needed, the input of rudder adds significant drag, the nose of the plane
> comes up and the plane slows. Then, the roll will stop. However, if the
> stick is pushed forward and speed is maintained, then the rudder is
> effective in stopping the roll even at relatively large bank angles( say
> 30-45 degrees)" These notes remind me that I found the rudder effective
at
> controlling roll if I compensated for the extra drag. The notes do not
say,
> and I can not remember if it would recover to unbanked without aileron
> input.
>
> Spiral Mode. Askue says: "Spiral stability is the tendency for an
airplane
> to change its angle of bank in a turn". My notebook says of the Firestar
> II, " When put in a shallow turn in either direction, the turn tends to
> tighten with neutral controls. The amount of bank will double in about
10
> seconds." Askue labels this as strongly unstable (divergent) and
suggests
> it is unacceptable because of what might happen if you were distracted at
> certain phases of flight. Further more he suggests the main fix is to
> increase dihedral.
>
> Because the control pressures in the Firestar II are light and most of us
> naturally use all three controls together, I suspect most people,
including
> myself, will not notice the above tendencies unless they both have a
> carefully trimmed airplane and put it through the hands-off test
> procedures.
>
> (N8233G) Firestar II with 3.5 degrees Dihedral - Wing tips up 10"
>
> Dihedral Effect: With the airplane trimmed, the rudder will cause the
> airplane to bank and unbank in either direction without touching the
stick.
> The rudder works like this in all normal flight conditions up to at least
30
> degrees, but I have not tested how it works in a steep bank. However,
large
> rudder inputs still noticably increase the drag, but they are not needed
for
> normal flight.
>
> Spiral Stability: N8233g now maintains its bank angle or may slowly
> decrease the bank angle with neutral controls.
>
> I find that with the increase dihedral, N8233G will fly all day with only
> throttle and rudder inputs and with hands off the stick. With hands on
the
> stick, it is little, if any, different than before the dihedral was
changed.
> For those who have flown Cessna airplanes, the directional stability and
> rudder control are very similar to those of a Cessna 152 or 172.
>
> Vince Nicely
> Firestar II (N8233G)
> 206 Hours
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 2-cycle info |
Ralph and Kolbers:
That's how my seizure occurred with 582 on my MK III. Normal full throttle
climbout for a few minutes, same as always when leaving Wetumpka AP for home
field, done it the same many times. When we got to 1,000 feet, came back to
cruise power and engine immediately seized tight. SQUEAK!!!
Made good forced landing in a confined cowpasture with power transmission
lines, trees and cows. It was near sundown and anxious to get on home.
Tried to start the eng, it started. Ran it up a little, gauges in the green
and sounded and felt good. Got in and did a full power runup. Everything
in the green and full static RPM. Good, I'm going home. Takeoff, get about
50 feet alt and it seeeeizes up tight once more. Only this time I am behind
the power curve and the airplane. With 20 deg of flaps, in a level attitude
(too low to push nose down at around 30 feet agl), me and Miss P'fer
pancaked in HARD! I got out of the airplane to survey the damage. Looked
back in the acft, but couldn't see well. My glasses with David Clark H-4
headset on top of them on my head before the, aaaah crash landing, were now
all the way to the front of the nose pod. We hit hard and flat. The acft
quit flying at 30 feet. From there to the ground I was a passenger,
although I tried to look and act like a pilot til we hit. hehehe The backs
of my thighs were solid black and blue from the front of the seat. Other
than that, both heat treated 4130 gear legs now had nice little 90 deg
bends, and the exterior left main gear structure was wiped off the fuselage.
This was one month after Oshkosh 93. I was not happy with me for being
inpatient and screwing up my airplane. I knew better and got in a hurry.
Go-home-itis.
Sorry for the length, but maybe it will help someone from making the same
mistake I made.
john h
PS: No other damage to acft except fabric on belly, I have an additional
fabric brace that sticks down, got torn. Incredibly strong airplane. Glad
I wasn't in one of the other ULs, especially those with aluminum airframes
popped together.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Drag, one more time |
.>These work best for low RN thus the better low speed performance. If you are
>trying to go faster they are not so good,. Just
>realize that puting things on and around the MK III you can not possible
>improve the performance greatly... a couple of miles per hour at most.
>Sorry it is just physics.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cavuontop(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: 2-cycle info |
In a message dated 12/4/98 1:06:28 AM Eastern Standard Time,
hawk36(at)mindspring.com writes:
<< Tried to start the eng, it started. Ran it up a little, gauges in the
green
and sounded and felt good. Got in and did a full power runup. Everything
in the green and full static RPM. Good, I'm going home. Takeoff, get about
50 feet alt and it seeeeizes up tight once more. >>
John: this is a great story. The wisdom I distill from it is one of the
ten commdments of two stroke flying: Thou shalt not fly again after an
unexplained engine stop without first removing the exhaust manifold to see if
it seized.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "F J MARINO" <FMARINO(at)netlink1.nlcomm.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 2-cycle info |
How many of you Kolbers removed the pistons to check for carbon at the 50
hour mark like the books says, and how many used the sea foam method, I'm at
the 50 hour mark and would like some info. My engine runs good and I have
been running on the rich side never fooled with the jets just watched the
temps.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: John Hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com>
Date: Thursday, December 03, 1998 10:05 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: 2-cycle info
>
>Ralph and Kolbers:
>
>That's how my seizure occurred with 582 on my MK III. Normal full throttle
>climbout for a few minutes, same as always when leaving Wetumpka AP for
home
>field, done it the same many times. When we got to 1,000 feet, came back
to
>cruise power and engine immediately seized tight. SQUEAK!!!
>
>Made good forced landing in a confined cowpasture with power transmission
>lines, trees and cows. It was near sundown and anxious to get on home.
>Tried to start the eng, it started. Ran it up a little, gauges in the
green
>and sounded and felt good. Got in and did a full power runup. Everything
>in the green and full static RPM. Good, I'm going home. Takeoff, get
about
>50 feet alt and it seeeeizes up tight once more. Only this time I am
behind
>the power curve and the airplane. With 20 deg of flaps, in a level
attitude
>(too low to push nose down at around 30 feet agl), me and Miss P'fer
>pancaked in HARD! I got out of the airplane to survey the damage. Looked
>back in the acft, but couldn't see well. My glasses with David Clark H-4
>headset on top of them on my head before the, aaaah crash landing, were now
>all the way to the front of the nose pod. We hit hard and flat. The acft
>quit flying at 30 feet. From there to the ground I was a passenger,
>although I tried to look and act like a pilot til we hit. hehehe The
backs
>of my thighs were solid black and blue from the front of the seat. Other
>than that, both heat treated 4130 gear legs now had nice little 90 deg
>bends, and the exterior left main gear structure was wiped off the
fuselage.
>This was one month after Oshkosh 93. I was not happy with me for being
>inpatient and screwing up my airplane. I knew better and got in a hurry.
>Go-home-itis.
>
>Sorry for the length, but maybe it will help someone from making the same
>mistake I made.
>
>john h
>
>PS: No other damage to acft except fabric on belly, I have an additional
>fabric brace that sticks down, got torn. Incredibly strong airplane. Glad
>I wasn't in one of the other ULs, especially those with aluminum airframes
>popped together.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Franks ? about SFoam |
I'm pretty sure my Rotax book doesn't say to remove the pistons for
this check. I didn't and wouldn't. I would check the rings for freedom
of movement at 50 hr intervals though, and to do this you only need to
remove the Exh manifold. If you need to physically clean carbon out
of the ring grooves, you can easily do this without removing the pistons
too. Just remove the heads and cylinders. Removing pistons pretty
much requires removing engine from plane. I'd try Seafoam before
even removing heads or cylinders, knowing what I do now from Mr. Seafoam
himself (aka Ralph) :). In the past I've only known of the old-fashioned
methods of decarboning, so for my first times with Seafoam I will make
a good visual inspection of the amount of carbon in the ring grooves and
on the piston domes before and after Seafoam treatment.
Frank, isn't this something you can make George do? :)
-Ben Ransom
On Fri, 4 Dec 1998, F J MARINO wrote:
>
> How many of you Kolbers removed the pistons to check for carbon at the 50
> hour mark like the books says, and how many used the sea foam method, I'm at
> the 50 hour mark and would like some info. My engine runs good and I have
> been running on the rich side never fooled with the jets just watched the
> temps.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Lanny Fetterman <donaho(at)csrlink.net> |
Hi Group,
Just wanted to thank the person that posted the discription about building
a cabin heater, it was the push I needed to get started making one!
I used most of your ideas, plus some of my own.I was totally happy with
the way it worked on my last flight, more heat then I could use at 55 OAT.
I had to turn it down and open the cabin vents.
I used six foot by three inch ID foam water pipe insulation wrapped with
100 mph tape as my heat duct, light, flexible, and insulated, works great!
My shutoff valve looks like a big carburetor butterfly valve. Made it out
of a three inch plastic water pipe coupler and scraps.
Total cost of heater about 15 dollars.
Lanny Fetterman
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 2-cycle info |
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Cav, John, and others,
There may be a corollary to this rule, and that is to first check the
float bowl after a sudden loss of power. Let me explain. Most of my
flying is from a grass strip in the summer and one day on takeoff the
engine would not go to full power, 4500rpm max. I was off the ground
already and had enough runway ahead of me (another reason for flying from
longer strips) and was able to land without a problem. I stopped the
engine and took off the float bowl. There at the very bottom was a tiny
blade of grass. I discarded the gas (and the grass), put the bowl back
on, pumped some more gas into it, and discarded it again. The second time
I had noticed some grass clippings on the outside of the carb that
somehow got into the bowl, I suppose, when I removed it prior to my
attempted flight. After putting the bowl back on, I didn't have anymore
problems. It may be a good idea to clean the outside of the carb area
before removing the float bowl.
Ralph Burlingame
Original FireStar, 447 powered
>
>In a message dated 12/4/98 1:06:28 AM Eastern Standard Time,
>hawk36(at)mindspring.com writes:
>
><< Tried to start the eng, it started. Ran it up a little, gauges in
>the green and sounded and felt good. Got in and did a full power runup.
>Everything in the green and full static RPM. Good, I'm going home.
Takeoff,
>get about 50 feet alt and it seeeeizes up tight once more. >>
>
>
>John: this is a great story. The wisdom I distill from it is one
>of the ten commdments of two stroke flying: Thou shalt not fly again
after
>an unexplained engine stop without first removing the exhaust manifold
to
>see if it seized.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Franks ? about SFoam |
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Ben and others,
Go for the Seafoam treatment first, you don't have anything to lose and
it will clean things up. Be sure that just one cylinder is done at a
time, ie fill up the cylinder from TDC and wait as long as you can,
preferably a week. You can go fly after you've done one, then the
following week, do the other cylinder.
Mr. Seafoam
I'd try Seafoam before
>even removing heads or cylinders, knowing what I do now from Mr.
>Seafoam himself (aka Ralph) :). In the past I've only known of the
>old-fashioned methods of decarboning, so for my first times with Seafoam
I will >make a good visual inspection of the amount of carbon in the ring
grooves
>and on the piston domes before and after Seafoam treatment.
>
>Frank, isn't this something you can make George do? :)
>-Ben Ransom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MitchMnD(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: High EGTs (again) |
Went for a one hour test after checking the calibration of my EGT gages this
pm. Everything went fine (1100 to 1200) at all rpms. The one thing I did
notice was an increase to just under 1300 as I made a rather steep approach.
This is a single carb 447 on a FireFly. The prop is pitched to give ~ 6100 at
WOT on climbout. The idle bleed is set at 1/2 turn and I am running a 170
main jet with the needle set at the third notch from the top. The approach
was about a 45* angle from about 1200 feet AGL at 5600 rpm. Could it have
been caused by the carb bowl going dry because of the angle ? My plan is to
stay out of that situation in the future but it would be interesting to know
if others have run anything similar.
Duane the plane in Tallahassee, FL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: High EGTs (again) |
jet with the needle set at the third notch from the top. The approach
>was about a 45* angle from about 1200 feet AGL at 5600 rpm. Could it have
>been caused by the carb bowl going dry because of the angle ? My plan is
to
>stay out of that situation in the future but it would be interesting to
know
>if others have run anything similar.
>
>Duane the plane in Tallahassee, FL
Hi Duane and Kolb Gang:
IMHO you just unloaded the prop when you pushed the nose over at a very,
very steep 45 deg angle. I bet if you did not touch the throttle and pulled
the nose up to a 45 deg angle the egt would would go below normal cause you
would have loaded up the eng.
I believe our infamous Bing carb is of motorcycle heritage and there fore
the floats will work at some severe angles. Never had a problem with that
and my little firestar did some very different than normal angle, extremely
unusual attitude flying without a problem.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: High EGTs (again) |
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Duane and others, this is a normal condition of any 2-cycle engine. In a
steep glide, the engine is unloaded and taking in more air causing a
temporary leaner mixture and higher EGT. Try dropping the rpms to about
3500-4000 on approach, there is no need to dive the plane with the engine
at that speed. Story time: A friend and I were out flying one winter day
when the temps were in the 30's. As evening approached, the temps had
dropped to 0 deg and he took off to head for home just before sunset. As
he leveled off from takeoff, the engine quit. He was able to glide down
to the frozen lake, that we were on, get out and ask why it quit? I
didn't have an answer for him at the time. Later that evening it dawned
on me (no I didn't lose sleep over it), and I realized the lower OAT had
changed the overall mixture setting of the engine. BTW the engine started
up fine and he took off and flew home under reduced power. My ultralight
flight instructor once told me the throttle and stick should be opposite
movements, ie. when one goes forward the other goes backwards and visa
versa. These movements should also be slow and easy. It's easier on the
gearbox. We are not snowmobile drivers, but here's something interesting:
the powered parachute pilots are forced into this slow throttle movement
thing because the stick is actually the throttle on these machines. Any
quick movements will cause the cart, they are sitting in, to swing back
and forth. This very rule of physics along with the slow speeds and
constant engine loading (the huge canopy drag) may prevent 2-cycle
seizures in that sport.
Ralph Burlingame
Original FireStar, 447 powered
>
>The one thing >I did notice was an increase to just under 1300 as I made
a >rather steep
>approach.
>Duane the plane in Tallahassee, FL
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: High EGTs (again) |
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame) |
For clarification, the "reduced power" was not limited by the engine, but
because my friend throttled back to prevent another seizure on his return
trip home.
Ralph
writes:
>BTW the engine started up fine and he took off
>and flew home under reduced power.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Lanny Fetterman <donaho(at)csrlink.net> |
Larry, Karen and group,
My heater is nothing more then a sheet of alumnium wrapped around
the
muffler with stove door gasket to create a half inch air space between the
muffler and heater skin. The front end has an opening to let air in, the
rear end is sealed tight.
I anchored this outter skin to the angle iron that supports the
muffler a
very sturdy installation, shake the heater and the entire airplain moves.
At the lower rear of the heater skin I made an alumnium discharge chute
about five inches long, and three inches in dia. this is where I attached
the foam heater duct securing it with a large hose clamp.
The heat duct lays on the top left side of the fuel tanks past
the rear
seat ( if it were installed ) and ends about ten inches from the throttle,
kept my throttle hand nice and toasty ! I was surprised how well the ram
air worked. At 65 mph IAS it had at least the force of my wife`s 1200 watt
hair drier on high.
If you have any specific questions I will be happy to try to answer
them.
I just extended my flying season by several months.
Lanny Fetterman
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: High EGTs (again) |
Duane,
That approach would have been O.K. if you had reduced the throttle to
3,000 rpm or less. If you had done that, the EGT would not have
increased.
John Jung
MitchMnD(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
> Went for a one hour test after checking the calibration of my EGT gages this
> pm. Everything went fine (1100 to 1200) at all rpms. The one thing I did
> notice was an increase to just under 1300 as I made a rather steep approach.
> This is a single carb 447 on a FireFly. The prop is pitched to give ~ 6100 at
> WOT on climbout. The idle bleed is set at 1/2 turn and I am running a 170
> main jet with the needle set at the third notch from the top. The approach
> was about a 45* angle from about 1200 feet AGL at 5600 rpm. Could it have
> been caused by the carb bowl going dry because of the angle ? My plan is to
> stay out of that situation in the future but it would be interesting to know
> if others have run anything similar.
>
> Duane the plane in Tallahassee, FL
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 2-cycle info |
I am up to 140 hours and have not touched the engine except for plugs a couple
of times, 300 hours seems to be the earliest anyone in my club has fooled with
the engine with several still OK at over 400.
Dick C
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MitchMnD(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: High EGTs (again) |
J. Hauck, John Jung, Ralph Burlingame, Thanks for your response on how to
keep my 447 EGTs down during a steep approach. I am going to the Quincy
airport this afternoon and am eager to try your recommendation of reducing
throttle during this type of descent. My experience with other types of
engines where heat is always a result of overloading (climbing a steep grade
or pulling a trailer) is not applicable with these fuel-cooled poppers. Your
unanimous agreement has convinced me that these engines are even more
dependent than I thought on nice cool and slippery fuel to keep them within
tolerances. This is the kind of info that makes the Kolb-List really
worthwhile and I appreciate it.
Duane the plane in Tallahassee, Fl
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: High EGTs (again) |
| From: | rayul(at)juno.com (Raymond L Lujon) |
>snip<
>. The approach was about a 45* angle from about 1200 feet AGL at 5600
rpm. Could <
Question.......What was your airspeed?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MitchMnD(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | EGT gage calibration by Tempilstiks |
Last week I posted a note on using Tempilstik markers to to put a temperature
sensitive mark on the EGT probe then heating the probe and watching the gage
to make sure that the gage reads the right temperature when the mark melts.
When I was actually doing this test I learned that my industrial grade heat
gun was awfully slow at heating the probe as suggested by others. I got the
job done with a Burns-O-matics (LP torch) much more quickly. The other trick
I learned was that the Tempilstik mark had to be on the side of the probe away
from the torch or the blast from the torch will blow the mark away before it
gets a chance to melt. The test did work but it would help to have another
observer on hand because things happen all at once when the mark's melting
threshhold is reached plus there is a safety hazard from on board fuel.
Duane the plane in Tallahassee, FL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | WGrooms511(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Franks ? about SFoam |
Gentlemen;
I am the sacred cow gorrer that origionaly posted the E about cautioning
users of Sea Foam (and I was an avid believer in it at one time) not to
substitute it for piston carbon removal at specified intervals. Several
persons have said that removing the exhaust system and looking in to see if
the rings are stuck is sufficient at the 50 hr
checkup. I had done this ten hours before I tore my engine down, believing,
like they, that that was sufficient. I pressed on the rings with a screw
driver and they sprung in, indicating that all was well. Ten hours later when
I tore her down I discovered that the rings had stuck (hard) on one end, and
on the intake side only, I realized that the exhaust side exam was in fact
worthless.
As for having to remove the pistons to clean them properly; I tried my best to
clean them on the rods, (knowing how much work it was going to be to get them
back on the rods, what with cageless bearings) but found that I could only do
a half assed job. By removing them I could get all the way around them, and do
it right, and see what they looked like all the way around.
Gentlemen, lets think about the deal we made when we saved many thousands
of dollars by buying a two stroke. We agreed, in exchange for those many
bucks, that we would be willing to do a good bit more maintenance on our
engines. It is generally agreed that a two stroke is as reliable as a four
stroke IF THIS MAINTENANCE IS PERFORMED AS SHEDULED!
Now it appears as though we are welching on our agreement, and willing to
use what appears to be snake oil to save us the work of that maintenance.
Well, what is the constantly reappearing cause of two stroke failure,
posted on this forrum? Pistons sticking. What is one of the big causes of
pistons sticking?
Carbon buildup!
Gentlemen, I rest my case.
W Grooms
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Highsmith" <michael.highsmith(at)WORLDNET.ATT.NET> |
| Subject: | Re: High EGTs (again) and again |
Hey Duane, I don't know about everyone else's engine temps at a rapid
descent but mine always goes up to some extent. The good thing is the
cylinder head temp comes down. I believe that is the nature of the expansion
chamber pushing or pulling the hotter exhaust gases right over the probes
when the engine is throttled backed and the prop is unloaded with the
descent. My old GA instructor always told me if you can, avoid the dive. It
made sense to me. I don't worry so long as the temps aren't off the scale
and the head temps are falling. FIREHAWK
-----Original Message-----
From: MitchMnD(at)aol.com <MitchMnD(at)aol.com>
Date: Friday, December 04, 1998 9:08 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Re: High EGTs (again)
>
>Went for a one hour test after checking the calibration of my EGT gages
this
>pm. Everything went fine (1100 to 1200) at all rpms. The one thing I did
>notice was an increase to just under 1300 as I made a rather steep
approach.
>This is a single carb 447 on a FireFly. The prop is pitched to give ~ 6100
at
>WOT on climbout. The idle bleed is set at 1/2 turn and I am running a 170
>main jet with the needle set at the third notch from the top. The approach
>was about a 45* angle from about 1200 feet AGL at 5600 rpm. Could it have
>been caused by the carb bowl going dry because of the angle ? My plan is
to
>stay out of that situation in the future but it would be interesting to
know
>if others have run anything similar.
>
>Duane the plane in Tallahassee, FL
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: High EGTs (again) |
On Fri, 4 Dec 1998 MitchMnD(at)aol.com wrote:
> Went for a one hour test after checking the calibration of my EGT gages this
> pm. Everything went fine (1100 to 1200) at all rpms. The one thing I did
> notice was an increase to just under 1300 as I made a rather steep approach.
> This is a single carb 447 on a FireFly. The prop is pitched to give ~ 6100 at
> WOT on climbout. The idle bleed is set at 1/2 turn and I am running a 170
> main jet with the needle set at the third notch from the top. The approach
> was about a 45* angle from about 1200 feet AGL at 5600 rpm. Could it have
Duane,
You've already seen the answer from others. In addition, I would be
inclined to go to a notch richer (middle postion on needle valve). This
because, as just discussed on this list, it is probably not good to run
on the lean edge of things. This invites a "too lean" condition if the
throttle is quickly brought back from hi or 3/4. As well, 1050-1150 is
better (assuming temps are calibrated).
I too was wondering about airspeed with steep approach at 5600. I would
guess this would go past Vne if sustained. If a 45* descent is "needed"
then it would also seem you'd need the braking advantage of an idle engine.
A big prop at idle feels somewhat like lowering the flaps on a C-150.
-Ben Ransom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Franks ? about SFoam |
On Sun, 6 Dec 1998 WGrooms511(at)aol.com wrote:
> Gentlemen;
> I am the sacred cow gorrer that origionaly posted the E about cautioning
> users of Sea Foam (and I was an avid believer in it at one time) not to
> substitute it for piston carbon removal at specified intervals. Several
> Well, what is the constantly reappearing cause of two stroke failure,
> posted on this forrum? Pistons sticking. What is one of the big causes of
> pistons sticking?
> Carbon buildup!
> Gentlemen, I rest my case.
> W Grooms
Your point is well taken, but...
People do what they find works well. Several have found excellent results
from Seafoam and there must be something about their method that works.
My engine-out occurred as an indirect result of doing a decarbon the
more traditional way. I had actually done more than this -- a full top
end removal and inspection at 115 hours. My engine quit at idle 20
hours after that. The reason: air leak at exhaust manifold gaskets.
There are other details to this, but the point is, even though I did
the engine inspection and reassembly carefully and per CPS guidelines,
I ended up with a failure as a result of engine tear down. I was not
wrong to do the 100 hour inspection. But if I can decarbon at the shorter
intervals with Seafoam and take nothing apart, that is a no-brainer.
Obviously I will check carbon condition after using Seafoam to see if
it worked. In short, we should find the least intrusive method to do
the maintenance required. Finding the right method is also part of
the 2-stroke maintenance "agreement" -- and in my mind it is the time
consuming part.
An important point about your ring check. I not only push on the ring,
I see if I can make it move a teeny bit side to side. I think inability to
see this kind of movement might have indicated the stuck condition you had
on the intake side.
...and then there are those who run for >400 hours with maybe only a
couple of plug changes. It's a funny business.
-Ben Ransom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "CHRISTOPHER DAVIS" <cdavis2(at)capecod.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 2-cycle info |
Frank, I have been using Penzoil fo 382Hrs and have never had the head off
my sc503, every time I take the exhaust off and check the rings and
piston top it, is free and clear I think taking the head off and scraping
off carbon just gets alot dirt where you don"t want it . I run my engine
fairly hard but not too lean so far so good also I have been intrigued with
the seafoam saga < even tried to find some in new england with no luck but
i haven"t tried It < I have a Detroit 1271 in my fishing boat also a2
stroke with about 10000 hrs on it since the last rebuild in 1992 and I know
the fire rings are seased up , smokes like a locomotive when you first
start it I need about a case of SEAFOAM for it . Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: F J MARINO <FMARINO(at)netlink1.nlcomm.com>
Date: Friday, December 04, 1998 3:40 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: 2-cycle info
>
>How many of you Kolbers removed the pistons to check for carbon at the 50
>hour mark like the books says, and how many used the sea foam method, I'm
at
>the 50 hour mark and would like some info. My engine runs good and I have
>been running on the rich side never fooled with the jets just watched the
>temps.
>
> Frank
>-----Original Message-----
>From: John Hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com>
>To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>Date: Thursday, December 03, 1998 10:05 PM
>Subject: Re: Kolb-List: 2-cycle info
>
>
>>
>>Ralph and Kolbers:
>>
>>That's how my seizure occurred with 582 on my MK III. Normal full
throttle
>>climbout for a few minutes, same as always when leaving Wetumpka AP for
>home
>>field, done it the same many times. When we got to 1,000 feet, came back
>to
>>cruise power and engine immediately seized tight. SQUEAK!!!
>>
>>Made good forced landing in a confined cowpasture with power transmission
>>lines, trees and cows. It was near sundown and anxious to get on home.
>>Tried to start the eng, it started. Ran it up a little, gauges in the
>green
>>and sounded and felt good. Got in and did a full power runup. Everything
>>in the green and full static RPM. Good, I'm going home. Takeoff, get
>about
>>50 feet alt and it seeeeizes up tight once more. Only this time I am
>behind
>>the power curve and the airplane. With 20 deg of flaps, in a level
>attitude
>>(too low to push nose down at around 30 feet agl), me and Miss P'fer
>>pancaked in HARD! I got out of the airplane to survey the damage. Looked
>>back in the acft, but couldn't see well. My glasses with David Clark H-4
>>headset on top of them on my head before the, aaaah crash landing, were
now
>>all the way to the front of the nose pod. We hit hard and flat. The acft
>>quit flying at 30 feet. From there to the ground I was a passenger,
>>although I tried to look and act like a pilot til we hit. hehehe The
>backs
>>of my thighs were solid black and blue from the front of the seat. Other
>>than that, both heat treated 4130 gear legs now had nice little 90 deg
>>bends, and the exterior left main gear structure was wiped off the
>fuselage.
>>This was one month after Oshkosh 93. I was not happy with me for being
>>inpatient and screwing up my airplane. I knew better and got in a hurry.
>>Go-home-itis.
>>
>>Sorry for the length, but maybe it will help someone from making the same
>>mistake I made.
>>
>>john h
>>
>>PS: No other damage to acft except fabric on belly, I have an additional
>>fabric brace that sticks down, got torn. Incredibly strong airplane.
Glad
>>I wasn't in one of the other ULs, especially those with aluminum airframes
>>popped together.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: High EGTs (again) |
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Duane, for your approaches try it at 40mph at 3500rpm without such a
steep glide. You will find it more fun to be able to get the feel of a
glide.
Ralph
>On Fri, 4 Dec 1998 MitchMnD(at)aol.com wrote:
>The approach was about a 45* angle from about 1200 feet AGL at 5600
rpm. >Could it have
>
>Duane
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | 2-cycle reliability |
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Mr. Grooms, Ben, and others, I agree with your reasoning that nothing
should substitute regular maintenance and this is part of our
responsibility of 2-cycles used as aircraft engines. Carbon buildup is
the shortcoming of these engines that we all have lived with for awhile.
Over the years, the main contributor to this problem was the use of
"leaded" fuel. With today's "unleaded" fuel and high tech oils, this
problem has been greatly reduced, but still presents a problem none the
less. We as ultralight pilots want our engines to run flawlessly and give
us the reliability we need. If there was a way to give us this with a
minimum amount of maintenance wouldn't you to want to participate in
trying it? My belief is that as time goes on, this problem will
eventually become history as the engine technology and lubricants become
more advanced. Until then, I'm willing to work on a solution. I don't
want to tear that engine apart every 100 hrs or so any more than you do,
and if there is a way around it, I want to know about it. Don't get me
wrong, all engines will need maintenance eventually, I think every 50-100
hours, as recommended, is too much work with the amount flying that we
do. For now, it's also our responsibility to find out what's working for
others out there and have an open mind. It's only then we all can learn
to improve the sport we love so much. As I told Ben, my flying buddy uses
Pennzoil on a 447 Original FS and never had the engine apart in 300 hrs.
He did have a stuck ring and removed it, without maintenance, using
Seafoam and continues to fly. Is he nuts? I'll keep you posted.
Ralph (the experiment) Burlingame
Original FireStar, 447 powered with Klotz all-synthetic oil
It is generally agreed that a two stroke is as reliable as a
>four stroke IF THIS MAINTENANCE IS PERFORMED AS SHEDULED!
>Now it appears as though we are welching on our agreement, and
>willing to use what appears to be snake oil to save us the work of that
>maintenance. Well, what is the constantly reappearing cause of two
stroke
>failure, posted on this forrum? Pistons sticking. What is one of the
big
>causes of pistons sticking?
>Carbon buildup!
>Gentlemen, I rest my case.
>W Grooms
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "F J MARINO" <FMARINO(at)netlink1.nlcomm.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 2-cycle reliability |
I thank all youns guys for the info on the question I asked, I use penzoil
in my engine also which has oil injection I was going to take the exhaust
manifold off today but the grand kids wanted to come over and pound nails in
wood so I think I'll do it this week I will also use the sea foam, I think
the sea foam geru said to use a couple of caps full on one piston at a time.
thanks again, except ole GeoR38,
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: Ralph H Burlingame <ul15rhb(at)juno.com>
ggleiter(at)minn.net ; Scott.Pierskalla(at)HBC.honeywell.com
; dwegner(at)isd.net
Date: Sunday, December 06, 1998 11:03 AM
Subject: Kolb-List: 2-cycle reliability
>
>Mr. Grooms, Ben, and others, I agree with your reasoning that nothing
>should substitute regular maintenance and this is part of our
>responsibility of 2-cycles used as aircraft engines. Carbon buildup is
>the shortcoming of these engines that we all have lived with for awhile.
>Over the years, the main contributor to this problem was the use of
>"leaded" fuel. With today's "unleaded" fuel and high tech oils, this
>problem has been greatly reduced, but still presents a problem none the
>less. We as ultralight pilots want our engines to run flawlessly and give
>us the reliability we need. If there was a way to give us this with a
>minimum amount of maintenance wouldn't you to want to participate in
>trying it? My belief is that as time goes on, this problem will
>eventually become history as the engine technology and lubricants become
>more advanced. Until then, I'm willing to work on a solution. I don't
>want to tear that engine apart every 100 hrs or so any more than you do,
>and if there is a way around it, I want to know about it. Don't get me
>wrong, all engines will need maintenance eventually, I think every 50-100
>hours, as recommended, is too much work with the amount flying that we
>do. For now, it's also our responsibility to find out what's working for
>others out there and have an open mind. It's only then we all can learn
>to improve the sport we love so much. As I told Ben, my flying buddy uses
>Pennzoil on a 447 Original FS and never had the engine apart in 300 hrs.
>He did have a stuck ring and removed it, without maintenance, using
>Seafoam and continues to fly. Is he nuts? I'll keep you posted.
>
>Ralph (the experiment) Burlingame
>Original FireStar, 447 powered with Klotz all-synthetic oil
>
>
> It is generally agreed that a two stroke is as reliable as a
>>four stroke IF THIS MAINTENANCE IS PERFORMED AS SHEDULED!
>>Now it appears as though we are welching on our agreement, and
>>willing to use what appears to be snake oil to save us the work of that
>>maintenance. Well, what is the constantly reappearing cause of two
>stroke
>>failure, posted on this forrum? Pistons sticking. What is one of the
>big
>>causes of pistons sticking?
>>Carbon buildup!
>>Gentlemen, I rest my case.
>>W Grooms
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
I had my 5 years old CHT and EGT tested last week, I am not computer literate
to build a table of results. The EGT was nearly correct at 900 , lhs OK, rhs
25 low. This percentage difference remained the same until at 1200 the lhs
was 45 low and the rhs 70 low. CHT were much more accurate LH and RH reading
the same temps but about 25 degrees low. I understand my Phantoms instruments
which are 16 years old are much worse with the EGT reading around 100 low but
I have not seen the results on paper yet.
Dick C
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 2-cycle reliability |
<< I will also use the sea foam, I think
the sea foam geru said to use a couple of caps full on one piston at a time.
thanks again, except ole GeoR38,
Frank >>
Really Frank, are you just now getting around to removing your muffler!! I
removed mine last Friday . Harris and I are going to take whatever muffler
assemblage we have (he only has down tubes on his Global , 1/2VW
engine)....Oh! don't worry gang, it is on an N3 Pup, not a Firestar!....very
low power, I'm afraid, We are going to take it to someplace that he knows
about for chroming, I think. I have almost 100 hours on it and one of the
springs was broke, but the rust, I guess is not a problem?!
Now I'm not suggesting that my toy Firestar will out shine your full sized
MKIII, but at least, I will be able to hold my head a little higher......I
think.....I mean.....I hope!.....
Hey Frank, you are welcome to go in with us on this classy endeavor.....Oh, I
forgot you still use youns and don't know about "classy" and stuff like
that.........GeoR38
________________________________________________________________________________
<< Others have tried a slip indicator without
any real success on a Kolb, so instead of "stepping on the ball", I
"step on the void" (where the string is not). It's the best indicator of
that possibility of slipping out of the sky.
Ralph Burlingame
Original FireStar, 447 powered >>
I agree 100% Ralph, and would never fly nude.....I always have my Yaw string!
After all there has to be some advantage to a
pusher!!.....................GeoR38 the ol glider pilot
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
> << Others have tried a slip indicator without
> any real success on a Kolb, so instead of "stepping on the ball", I
> "step on the void" (where the string is not). It's the best indicator of
> that possibility of slipping out of the sky.
>
> Ralph Burlingame
> Original FireStar, 447 powered >>
>
The way I remember the sting or ball is: "pull the string or push the
ball".
John Jung
Firestar II 503
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)telepath.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 2-cycle reliability |
> Carbon buildup is
> the shortcoming of these engines that we all have lived with for awhile.
> Over the years, the main contributor to this problem was the use of
> "leaded" fuel.
Just to keep you thinking....do the math concerning the amount of
TEL in relation to lubricating oil content..past problems were
almost exclusively oils related.
> engine technology and lubricants become
> more advanced. Until then, I'm willing to work on a solution. I don't
> want to tear that engine apart every 100 hrs or so any more than you do,
> and if there is a way around it, I want to know about it.
100:1 ratios. 250 hours, no teardown and no decarbon, and I can
still borescope the cylinder and read the machine marks on the
piston top.
J. Baker
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Damaged FF For Sale (NO MORE!) |
| From: | mefine1(at)juno.com (Mick Fine) |
Just to inform the group:
Joel called tonight to say that his FF is on it's way to Texas.
Thanx for the responses and good luck to the new owner!
-Mick Fine
Tulsa, Oklahoma
http://www.angelfire.com/ok/froghair
Green Country Ultralight Flyer's Organization (UFO)
http://www.angelfire.com/ok/gcufo
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rick106(at)juno.com |
| Subject: | Re: 2-cycle info |
FRANK
I think the book said to remove the exhaust man. and move the piston up
and down, what you are looking for is oil between the ring and the piston
just to see that the ring is not stuck, then at 100 hr is when the book
recommends a de-carbon job, a better question how many KOLB-ER'S SPENT
THE $219.00 for the rist pin puller that C P S offers??
I need to know it the cheep $20.00 one will work I will need one soon?
Rick Libersat
writes:
>
>
>How many of you Kolbers removed the pistons to check for carbon at the
>50
>hour mark like the books says, and how many used the sea foam method,
>I'm at
>the 50 hour mark and would like some info. My engine runs good and I
>have
>been running on the rich side never fooled with the jets just watched
>the
>temps.
>
> Frank
>-----Original Message-----
>From: John Hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com>
>To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>Date: Thursday, December 03, 1998 10:05 PM
>Subject: Re: Kolb-List: 2-cycle info
>
>
>>
>>Ralph and Kolbers:
>>
>>That's how my seizure occurred with 582 on my MK III. Normal full
>throttle
>>climbout for a few minutes, same as always when leaving Wetumpka AP
>for
>home
>>field, done it the same many times. When we got to 1,000 feet, came
>back
>to
>>cruise power and engine immediately seized tight. SQUEAK!!!
>>
>>Made good forced landing in a confined cowpasture with power
>transmission
>>lines, trees and cows. It was near sundown and anxious to get on
>home.
>>Tried to start the eng, it started. Ran it up a little, gauges in
>the
>green
>>and sounded and felt good. Got in and did a full power runup.
>Everything
>>in the green and full static RPM. Good, I'm going home. Takeoff,
>get
>about
>>50 feet alt and it seeeeizes up tight once more. Only this time I am
>behind
>>the power curve and the airplane. With 20 deg of flaps, in a level
>attitude
>>(too low to push nose down at around 30 feet agl), me and Miss P'fer
>>pancaked in HARD! I got out of the airplane to survey the damage.
>Looked
>>back in the acft, but couldn't see well. My glasses with David Clark
>H-4
>>headset on top of them on my head before the, aaaah crash landing,
>were now
>>all the way to the front of the nose pod. We hit hard and flat. The
>acft
>>quit flying at 30 feet. From there to the ground I was a passenger,
>>although I tried to look and act like a pilot til we hit. hehehe
>The
>backs
>>of my thighs were solid black and blue from the front of the seat.
>Other
>>than that, both heat treated 4130 gear legs now had nice little 90
>deg
>>bends, and the exterior left main gear structure was wiped off the
>fuselage.
>>This was one month after Oshkosh 93. I was not happy with me for
>being
>>inpatient and screwing up my airplane. I knew better and got in a
>hurry.
>>Go-home-itis.
>>
>>Sorry for the length, but maybe it will help someone from making the
>same
>>mistake I made.
>>
>>john h
>>
>>PS: No other damage to acft except fabric on belly, I have an
>additional
>>fabric brace that sticks down, got torn. Incredibly strong airplane.
> Glad
>>I wasn't in one of the other ULs, especially those with aluminum
>airframes
>>popped together.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> List Support Contributions:
>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rick106(at)juno.com |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron control |
Ron
The temp. E G T is just a little to warm if your jets and needles are
ok then you need to put in about one more degree of pitch in your prop
this will lower the temp. It took a long time for DENNIS to beat the more
pitch /lower temp. theory in my head but it will bring it down.
Rick Libersat
writes:
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Cliff / Carolyn Stripling <striplic(at)dfw.net>
>To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>Date: Tuesday December 01 1998 7:16 AM
>Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Yaw string,
>
>
>>
>>After this post I think I will "give it a rest"...
>>
>
>SNIP>
>Amen!
>Now then, Cliff, I was very interested in the part of your post
>regarding your quick handling Kolb. Since I've only recently
>(finally) gotten my Firestar into the air, I admittadly speak as a
>novice Kolb driver, but I have found the ailerons to be very slow
>responding to input. After putting about 5-hours on the Kolb,
>yesterday I took the 182 for a sppin to keep the oil moving, and found
>it to feel surprisingly quick compared with the Kolb.
>
>It *seems* like I input rudder then aileron for a turn, and then
>*wait* for something to happen (VERY sluggish). In fact, if I happen
>to fly through another UL's wake and get my wing flipped up I can
>hardly bring it back to level. I assumed that this is to be expected
>from the Kolb with recommended dihedral, but after reading your post
>I'm not so sure. I wonder if others feel the same as you, or if there
>are some that get the same sensation that I do.
>
>Other than this it flies great, with outstanding climb. A LOT of
>performance from a 377! I'm still struggeling with high EGT/CHT
>temps, however. At cruise (5800) I get 1250* EGT and 400*/400* CHTs.
>I have the needle all the way up, all jets are stock Bings for
>sea-level, and I use Pennzoil mixed at 50:1. For the time being this
>is working, but next spring & summer I think I will be in trouble.
>I've already seized two pistons during break-in, and get nervous when
>the temps go to 400*.
>
>Ron Carroll
>Original Firestar
>
>>. For instance when doing
>>figure 8's I really step on the left rudder entering tight left
>turns, then
>>muscle the ailerons to roll over into the right turn. Right turns
>need
>>almost no right rudder to keep the ball & string centered, then I
>muscle
>>the ailreons to roll over into a left turn, etc. ...all the while
>holding
>>altitude with the feather-lite elevators. Boy... what a plane, warts
>and
>>all. BTW, the whole figure 8 happens really quickly by spam can
>standards.
>> Kolbs can really maneuver. You can be going the opposite direction
>almost
>>before you can say "turn around"... only a small exageration.
>
>
>>
>>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+ hrs)
>>
>
>
>
>
> List Support Contributions:
>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rick106(at)juno.com |
| Subject: | Re: Wing Spar Attach |
Lar
I will try to keep it short ...with the wings blocked up and you are
walking from the leading edge to check the line that you have running
from wing tip to wing tip to make sure that the leading edge are in line
with each other , then at the trailing edge tip of each wing you measure
back to the horizonal stab. to make sure that your wings are square with
the tail feathers .In doing all of this MAKE SURE that the inboard rib
on BOTH sides have enough room to the upper part of the cage so you will
be able to lay the wing tip on the ground when you go out to set your
airplane up . If you do not make sure that their is enough room from the
inboard rib & the top of the cage you WILL have to have someone to help
you set your KOLB up , or rig something up like a sawhorse to rest the
wing on while you put the pin in the inboard rib . If you haven't
already tryed to lower your wings to the ground ..get someone to watch
the I/B rib so you wont rip the thing out of the main spar Hope all went
ok . I think that the drag strut fitting could of been out just a little
more but not too much or your tab on the I / B rib may be short.
Rick Libersat
writes:
>
>
>Yeah, sorry Rick. They're drilled. I'm sure all will be OK, but it
>IS
>food for thought. What did you have in mind ?? Big Lar.
>
>----------
>> From: rick106(at)juno.com
>> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>> Cc: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Wing Spar Attach
>> Date: Monday, November 30, 1998 6:52 PM
>>
>>
>> Big lar
>>
>> have you drilled the holes in the cage yet if not let me know before
>you
>> do
>> ...... IMPORTANT"....
>>
>>
>> Rick Libersat
>>
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> List Support Contributions:
>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | SeaFoam again and again and again.. |
| From: | mefine1(at)juno.com (Mick Fine) |
writes:
>
>Ben and others, Go for the Seafoam treatment first, you don't have
>anything to lose .....
Ok, I admit - I'm VERY skeptical of this "miracle-in-a-can." I also
believe the old saying, "There ain't no free lunches!" so with this in
mind, let me play devil's advocate:
Assuming that Einstein was correct when he said that mass cannot be
created or destroyed - I have one question, where does all the crud go?
As I see it, it has only one path - through the crankcase. Let's assume
that some of the SF-loosened carbon may pass all the way through to the
exhaust but some probably gets lodged in the case. Hopefully, it ends up
in a harmless nook or cranny but I bet some will inevitably get to the
main bearings. It may take a very long time to do it's damage, probably
much longer than a couple (recommended) de-carbon cycles, but regardless,
it will be there wearing away at the bearings. Even the stuff that gets
whisked right through the case still has to pass through the combustion
chamber - does it all blow right on through without abrading the rings
and cylinder wall? - I sure hope so, that would be a very hard thing to
see or measure just by looking in the exhaust ports - at least until the
compression starts dropping.
Here's another way to look at it: Without using the SF, do your next
de-carbon the old-fashioned way. Scrape all that black crusty stuff from
both pistons onto a sheet of paper. Now throw 1/2 of it away to simulate
what MIGHT pass out the exhaust - if you're a real believer, throw 3/4 of
it away. Now, just before you re-install the cylinders, cover your eyes
and sprinkle the rest of the crud back into the crankcase (please - no
cracks about 'blind faith').
We've covered this before but there's such a range of "success" with
2-strokes that any claim of a 'miracle-cure' is very hard to support as
being anything more than simple chance. Before I ever heard of SF, I
heard claims of 1000 hours without so much as checking the timing. Other
guys can't get through the ONE hour break-in without a seizure (some have
two!). I'm so confused ....and quite possibly wrong!
-Mick Fine
Tulsa, Oklahoma
http://www.angelfire.com/ok/froghair
Green Country Ultralight Flyer's Organization (UFO)
http://www.angelfire.com/ok/gcufo
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dralle(at)matronics.com (Matt Dralle 925-606-1001) |
| Subject: | List of Contributors #2... |
Dear Listers,
As promised, please find attached the second List of Contributors (LOC)
for the Fall 1998 List Fund Raiser. I would like to thank each one of
you for your generous support of this service. I would again also like
to thank Allan Mojzisik for all of his wonderful support during this
year's fund raiser! Thanks Allan! And finally, I would like to thank
everyone that has made a contribution this year in support of the List.
Your contributions have truly made this this service possible.
Thank you!
Matt Dralle
RV, Kolb, and Zenith List Administrator
-------------------------- Fall 1998 LOC #2 ----------------------------
John Armstrong
Scott Bentley
Robert Berrie
Charles Brietigam
Peter Christensen
Larry Daudt
Barney Ellis
Monte Evans
Leo Gates
Allan Gibson
Aaron Gleixner
Edward Gmerek
Tom Graumlich
Peter Hanna
Carl Hoffman
Fred Hulen
Richard Martin
Ross Mickey
Ray Murphy
Alan Newell
Jim Nolan
Richard Pike
Brian Salzmann
Grant Schemmel
David Stratmoen
Tod Taylor
Mike Thompson
Glen Worstell
-------------------------- Fall 1998 LOC #2 ----------------------------
--
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: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 2-cycle reliability |
Jim,
If I remember correctly, you fly with Hirth power. If I am correct, the
information that you provided could be misleading and misunderstood. Hirth and
Rotax engines do not use the same style rings. So what engine were you talking
about with the 250 hrs on 100:1 oil? And what kind of oil?
John Jung
Jim Baker wrote:
snip...
> 100:1 ratios. 250 hours, no teardown and no decarbon, and I can
> still borescope the cylinder and read the machine marks on the
> piston top.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eugene Zimmerman <tehz(at)redrose.net> |
| Subject: | Re: SeaFoam, CAUTION |
>
>writes:
>>
>>Ben and others, Go for the Seafoam treatment first, you don't have
>>anything to lose .....
>
>Ok, I admit - I'm VERY skeptical of this "miracle-in-a-can." I also
>believe the old saying, "There ain't no free lunches!" so with this in
>mind, let me play devil's advocate:
>
SNIPP
Mick,
I too am very skeptical about the value of a seafoam treatment. One word of
CAUTION I would have for all Kolb flyers to consider,
NO OTHER Rotax flying group that I am aware of is promoting the use of
seafoam treatment. NO rotax engine rebuilders.
Eugene Zimmerman
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark E Navratil" <menavrat(at)crnotes.collins.rockwell.com> |
I am planning to purchase either a Firestar II or Slingshot. I am very
lightweight (135 lbs) and am wondering if that will result in aft C.G.
problems when flying solo with full 10 gal. or fuel (using the Rotax 503 on
the Firestar, or 582 on the Singshot). Anybody know if I'm likely to have
a problem with this?
Thanks for any input.
--Mark Navratil
(319) 393-4234
menavrat(at)collins.rockwell.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Carroll " <ron.carroll(at)WORLDNET.ATT.NET> |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron control |
Rick, I just may look into this possibility, even though I have a fixed pitch wood
prop.
I am going to put it in the prop shop next week to have a urethane leading edge
installed.
While there I will give him the specs on what it turns (6250 static) and ask if
he would
recommend a repitch.
I really would like to beat this thing before I cause more damage to the engine.
Thanks for your suggestion,
Ron Carroll
Original Firestar
-----Original Message-----
From: rick106(at)juno.com <rick106(at)juno.com>
Date: Sunday December 06 1998 8:56 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Aileron control
>
>Ron
>
>The temp. E G T is just a little to warm if your jets and needles are
>ok then you need to put in about one more degree of pitch in your prop
>this will lower the temp. It took a long time for DENNIS to beat the more
>pitch /lower temp. theory in my head but it will bring it down.
>
>Rick Libersat
>
> writes:
>>
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Cliff / Carolyn Stripling <striplic(at)dfw.net>
>>To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>>Date: Tuesday December 01 1998 7:16 AM
>>Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Yaw string,
>>
>>
>>>
>>>After this post I think I will "give it a rest"...
>>>
>>
>>SNIP>
>>Amen!
>>Now then, Cliff, I was very interested in the part of your post
>>regarding your quick handling Kolb. Since I've only recently
>>(finally) gotten my Firestar into the air, I admittadly speak as a
>>novice Kolb driver, but I have found the ailerons to be very slow
>>responding to input. After putting about 5-hours on the Kolb,
>>yesterday I took the 182 for a sppin to keep the oil moving, and found
>>it to feel surprisingly quick compared with the Kolb.
>>
>>It *seems* like I input rudder then aileron for a turn, and then
>>*wait* for something to happen (VERY sluggish). In fact, if I happen
>>to fly through another UL's wake and get my wing flipped up I can
>>hardly bring it back to level. I assumed that this is to be expected
>>from the Kolb with recommended dihedral, but after reading your post
>>I'm not so sure. I wonder if others feel the same as you, or if there
>>are some that get the same sensation that I do.
>>
>>Other than this it flies great, with outstanding climb. A LOT of
>>performance from a 377! I'm still struggeling with high EGT/CHT
>>temps, however. At cruise (5800) I get 1250* EGT and 400*/400* CHTs.
>>I have the needle all the way up, all jets are stock Bings for
>>sea-level, and I use Pennzoil mixed at 50:1. For the time being this
>>is working, but next spring & summer I think I will be in trouble.
>>I've already seized two pistons during break-in, and get nervous when
>>the temps go to 400*.
>>
>>Ron Carroll
>>Original Firestar
>>
>>>. For instance when doing
>>>figure 8's I really step on the left rudder entering tight left
>>turns, then
>>>muscle the ailerons to roll over into the right turn. Right turns
>>need
>>>almost no right rudder to keep the ball & string centered, then I
>>muscle
>>>the ailreons to roll over into a left turn, etc. ...all the while
>>holding
>>>altitude with the feather-lite elevators. Boy... what a plane, warts
>>and
>>>all. BTW, the whole figure 8 happens really quickly by spam can
>>standards.
>>> Kolbs can really maneuver. You can be going the opposite direction
>>almost
>>>before you can say "turn around"... only a small exageration.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>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+ hrs)
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> List Support Contributions:
>>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher John Armstrong" <Tophera(at)centuryinter.net> |
| Subject: | fuel tank in the nose cone |
>I am planning to purchase either a Firestar II or Slingshot. I am very
>lightweight (135 lbs) and am wondering if that will result in aft C.G.
>problems when flying solo with full 10 gal. or fuel (using the Rotax 503 on
>the Firestar, or 582 on the Singshot). Anybody know if I'm likely to have
>a problem with this?
You can always add weight to the nose to solve this problem. I am 160
pounds and am building a FSII. I am concerned about my ability to carry the
occasional light passenger who isnt so light, or me in the back. The idea
of carrying lead in the nose is icky, but the idea of carrying fuel in the
nose seams less icky. Aside from the safety issue of fire in a crash what
does the list think of putting as large a fuel tank as can fit in the
fiberglass nose as possible. filling the top area and going down between
the feet with something a inch or two wide I should be able to get a gallon
or so, which is 6 to ten pounds. Adjustable CG control, extra fuel, whats
not to like? Comments requested
Topher
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher John Armstrong" <Tophera(at)centuryinter.net> |
| Subject: | fuel tank in the nose cone |
>I am planning to purchase either a Firestar II or Slingshot. I am very
>lightweight (135 lbs) and am wondering if that will result in aft C.G.
>problems when flying solo with full 10 gal. or fuel (using the Rotax 503 on
>the Firestar, or 582 on the Singshot). Anybody know if I'm likely to have
>a problem with this?
You can always add weight to the nose to solve this problem. I am 160
pounds and am building a FSII. I am concerned about my ability to carry the
occasional light passenger who isnt so light, or me in the back. The idea
of carrying lead in the nose is icky, but the idea of carrying fuel in the
nose seams less icky. Aside from the safety issue of fire in a crash what
does the list think of putting as large a fuel tank as can fit in the
fiberglass nose as possible. filling the top area and going down between
the feet with something a inch or two wide I should be able to get a gallon
or so, which is 6 to ten pounds. Adjustable CG control, extra fuel, whats
not to like? Comments requested
Topher
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Russell" <jr(at)rometool.com> |
Hey Mark
I have recently built a slingshot, I weigh about 160# and my weight
and balance was within limits but it was alittle on the nose
heavy side. This nose heavy condition was because I chose the longer nose
cone and installed the battery in the nose (I had planned
on the 912 engine but ended up using the 582. I really believe do
not think you would have a problem with the weight &balance if
you went with the long nose cone and battery up front.
John Russell 70 hrs. on slingshot
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark E Navratil <menavrat(at)crnotes.collins.rockwell.com>
Date: Monday, December 07, 1998 10:38 AM
Subject: Kolb-List: W&B
>
>
>I am planning to purchase either a Firestar II or Slingshot. I am very
>lightweight (135 lbs) and am wondering if that will result in aft C.G.
>problems when flying solo with full 10 gal. or fuel (using the Rotax 503 on
>the Firestar, or 582 on the Singshot). Anybody know if I'm likely to have
>a problem with this?
>
>Thanks for any input.
>
>--Mark Navratil
>(319) 393-4234
>menavrat(at)collins.rockwell.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: fuel tank in the nose cone |
On Mon, 7 Dec 1998, Christopher John Armstrong wrote:
> nose seams less icky. Aside from the safety issue of fire in a crash what
> does the list think of putting as large a fuel tank as can fit in the
> fiberglass nose as possible. filling the top area and going down between
> the feet with something a inch or two wide I should be able to get a gallon
> or so, which is 6 to ten pounds. Adjustable CG control, extra fuel, whats
> not to like? Comments requested
>
I think it is generally considered real icky to have CG changing
during a flight. Take off, fly, things are fine. Time to land, whoops,
stall. I spose you could work around it by operating procedures, but
I can't imagine it being approved by an FAA examiner. Don't worry about
6 pounds of lead in the nose. You've already gotten a performance advantage
by your own 135 lbs. Consider that the rest of us would have to remove
our gut and place it in the nose for each flight. Talk about icky. :/
Ben Ransom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
Mark,
My Firestar II with a 503 and two full 10 gallon tanks has a minimum pilot
weight of about
155. Weight would have to be added to the front for a lighter pilot.
John Jung
Mark E Navratil wrote:
>
> I am planning to purchase either a Firestar II or Slingshot. I am very
> lightweight (135 lbs) and am wondering if that will result in aft C.G.
> problems when flying solo with full 10 gal. or fuel (using the Rotax 503 on
> the Firestar, or 582 on the Singshot). Anybody know if I'm likely to have
> a problem with this?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net> |
| Subject: | Re: fuel tank in the nose cone |
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net> |
| Subject: | Re: SeaFoam again and again and again.. |
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "F J MARINO" <FMARINO(at)netlink1.nlcomm.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 2-cycle reliability |
See I told you guys GeoR38 (ole glider pile it) was jealous
-----Original Message-----
From: GeoR38(at)aol.com <GeoR38(at)aol.com>
Date: Sunday, December 06, 1998 4:37 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: 2-cycle reliability
>
>
><< I will also use the sea foam, I think
> the sea foam geru said to use a couple of caps full on one piston at a
time.
> thanks again, except ole GeoR38,
>
> Frank >>
>
>Really Frank, are you just now getting around to removing your muffler!! I
>removed mine last Friday . Harris and I are going to take whatever muffler
>assemblage we have (he only has down tubes on his Global , 1/2VW
>engine)....Oh! don't worry gang, it is on an N3 Pup, not a
Firestar!....very
>low power, I'm afraid, We are going to take it to someplace that he knows
>about for chroming, I think. I have almost 100 hours on it and one of the
>springs was broke, but the rust, I guess is not a problem?!
>
>Now I'm not suggesting that my toy Firestar will out shine your full sized
>MKIII, but at least, I will be able to hold my head a little higher......I
>think.....I mean.....I hope!.....
>
>Hey Frank, you are welcome to go in with us on this classy endeavor.....Oh,
I
>forgot you still use youns and don't know about "classy" and stuff like
>that.........GeoR38
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: fuel tank in the nose cone |
Topher,
What would be the point of having a 4130 steel cage to save your life if you
are just
going to burn to death? I have seen a few Kolbs that have been stalled and hit
the ground
nose first. I wouldn't have thought that fiberglass could have been broken in so
many pieces
by one impact. But then, this is just MY opinion.
John Jung
Christopher John Armstrong wrote:
>
> You can always add weight to the nose to solve this problem. I am 160
> pounds and am building a FSII. I am concerned about my ability to carry the
> occasional light passenger who isnt so light, or me in the back. The idea
> of carrying lead in the nose is icky, but the idea of carrying fuel in the
> nose seams less icky. Aside from the safety issue of fire in a crash what
> does the list think of putting as large a fuel tank as can fit in the
> fiberglass nose as possible. filling the top area and going down between
> the feet with something a inch or two wide I should be able to get a gallon
> or so, which is 6 to ten pounds. Adjustable CG control, extra fuel, whats
> not to like? Comments requested
>
> Topher
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron control |
Ron,
6,250 static is just right. If you change that because of high EGT's, it will
just be
masking the problem, not solving it. I'm still waiting to find out how many turns
open your
idle air screw is?
John Jung
Ron Carroll wrote:
>
> Rick, I just may look into this possibility, even though I have a fixed pitch
wood prop.
> I am going to put it in the prop shop next week to have a urethane leading edge
installed.
> While there I will give him the specs on what it turns (6250 static) and ask
if he would
> recommend a repitch.
>
> I really would like to beat this thing before I cause more damage to the engine.
>
> Thanks for your suggestion,
>
> Ron Carroll
> Original Firestar
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Lanny Fetterman <donaho(at)csrlink.net> |
Mark,
I fly a FSII with a 503, I weigh 167 lbs. My W&B figures with me in the
airplane fell within the limits on the ground. However in the air, on my
first flights I felt that when I pushed the stick full forward, it took too
long for the nose of the airplane to drop.
I thought that I needed more down elevator, (adjusting that would take
away some of my up elevator) which my more knowledgable flying buddys would
not allow. They felt I was tail heavy and should add weight in the nose.
So I left the elevator alone and moved everything forward that I could.
This included moving my seat back up to shift my weight, an alumnium heel
plate to protect my carpet (about two lbs.) and built in landing lights
(about two lbs. right on the tip of the FSII`S nose).
These things added enough weight to trim out my airplane so it flew more
to my liking.
IMHO If you do buy a FSII with a 503 you may need to add some weight
up
front. But not to worry, it will still outclimb most if not all other
aircraft sitting around the hanger.
Never sorry I bought a KOLB !
Lanny Fetterman
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Carroll " <ron.carroll(at)WORLDNET.ATT.NET> |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron control |
John, the idle screw is screwed out 1/2 turn, as stated in the book of Rotax/CPS.
It was
suggested that I try turning it out to about 1-3/4 turns, but the weather has been
typically *Oregon* for the past week and a half.
Ron
-----Original Message-----
From: John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com>
>Ron,
> 6,250 static is just right. If you change that because of high EGT's, it will
just be
>masking the problem, not solving it. I'm still waiting to find out how many turns
open
your
>idle air screw is?
>John Jung
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Mick, I'm not so sure. If you look at the engine as a pump (which it is),
the only way for the "crud" that is dissolved in the cylinder, with
Seafoam, to get into the crankcase would be through the transfer port. As
the engine is running, it is pumping the fuel mix from the carb into the
crankcase then up the transfer port and into the cylinders. How is it
possible for burned gases and "crud" to go against the mainstream of
incoming fuel and back into the crankcase? Help me out here, guy .......
Ralph (pumping) Burlingame
Original FireStar, 447 powered
>I have one question, where does all the crud
>go? As I see it, it has only one path - through the crankcase.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Wattengel" <wattengel(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Im interrested in finding about your ultra-lights |
I would appreciate it if you could send any information you can on
ultra-lights.
Bill Wattengel(first time flyer).
________________________________________________________________________________
My FS2 with a 2 carb 503 and 1 fuel tank in the aft position and very light
paint job has a min pilot weight of 135 lb. A local FS2 not flying yet with a
professional paint job (many multiple coats of everything) and 2 tanks is
coming in tail heavy but I do not have the details yet.
Dick C
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net> |
| Subject: | Re: fuel tank in the nose cone |
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net> |
| Subject: | Re: SeaFoam again and again and again.. |
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net> |
| Subject: | Re: fuel tank in the nose cone |
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MitchMnD(at)aol.com |
I have built and flown a FireStar, a Mk lll and am now in a FireFly. I weigh
just over 150 Lbs and my solution to possible CG problems has always been the
same. I use a 2" thick life preserver cushion behind my back. This moves my
body forward, allows me to reach the peddles and may save my bacon if I ever
had to land in one of Florida's many lakes, bays, oceans etc. The Kolb manuals
indicate that pilot's under 150 Lbs with a full load of fuel may need to be
extra cautious. You may need to add some shot bags up front if the W&B puts
you at or beyond the aft limit.
Good luck, Duane the plane in Tallahassee, FL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rick106(at)juno.com |
| Subject: | Re: SeaFoam again and again and again.. |
Mick
I hope that I am not one of the hour guys ... that made you so
confused.... I beat their record it took me only 16 min. to seizure my
582 .It will do it every time you have the plastic spring cup on the
wrong side of the carburetor piston . And that oversight will sure got
rid of my rat hole money.
M ick I am with you all the way on this I am sure these guys are
having good luck with this sea foam but I think that if ROTAX thought
for one second this stuff worked they would put their name on it -
up the price by at least $10.00 maybe 20 .00 if they though the weather
was going to be good.
I will do my de-corbon the old fashioned
way.
Rick Libersat
>writes:
>>
>>Ben and others, Go for the Seafoam treatment first, you don't have
>>anything to lose ..... Ok, I admit - I'm VERY skeptical of this
>"miracle-in-a-can." I also
>believe the old saying, "There ain't no free lunches!" so with this in
>mind, let me play devil's advocate:
>Assuming that Einstein was correct when he said that mass cannot be
>created or destroyed - I have one question, where does all the crud
>go? As I see it, it has only one path - through the crankcase.
>Let's assume that some of the SF-loosened carbon may pass all the way
>through to the exhaust but some probably gets lodged in the case.
>Hopefully, it ends up in a harmless nook or cranny but I bet some will
>inevitably get to the main bearings. It may take a very long time to
>do it's damage, probably much longer than a couple (recommended)
>de-carbon cycles, but regardless, it will be there wearing away at the
>bearings. Even the stuff that gets whisked right through the case
>still has to pass through the combustion chamber - does it all blow
>right on through without abrading the rings and cylinder wall? - I
>sure hope so, that would be a very hard thing to
>see or measure just by looking in the exhaust ports - at least until
>the
>compression starts dropping. Here's another way to look at it:
>Without using the SF, do your next de-carbon the old-fashioned way.
>Scrape all that black crusty stuff from both pistons onto a sheet of
>paper. Now throw 1/2 of it away to simulate what MIGHT pass out the
>exhaust - if you're a real believer, throw 3/4 of it away. Now, just
>before you re-install the cylinders, cover your eyes
>and sprinkle the rest of the crud back into the crankcase (please - no
>cracks about 'blind faith'). We've covered this before but there's
>such a range of "success" with 2-strokes that any claim of a
>'miracle-cure' is very hard to support as being anything more than
>simple chance. Before I ever heard of SF, I heard claims of 1000 hours
>without so much as checking the timing. Other
>guys can't get through the ONE hour break-in without a seizure (some
>have
>two!). I'm so confused ....and quite possibly wrong!
>
>
>-Mick Fine
>Tulsa, Oklahoma
>http://www.angelfire.com/ok/froghair
>Green Country Ultralight Flyer's Organization (UFO)
>http://www.angelfire.com/ok/gcufo
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cliff / Carolyn Stripling <striplic(at)dfw.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 2-cycle pump |
To all,
>...the only way for the "crud" that is dissolved in the cylinder, with
>Seafoam,...
Has anyone tried an experiment to actually dissolve a sample of the "crud"
in Seafoam or soak their piston in it. Seriously, does the Seafoam
actually dissolve the carbon or just soften it up so it is burned off, or
actually WHAT happens?
I am one of those who is apprehensive about using it yet... but wouldn't it
be nice if it did help... even some. Maybe as time goes on, more reports
will come in, pro or con.
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+ hrs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)telepath.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 2-cycle reliability |
> Jim,
> If I remember correctly, you fly with Hirth power. If I am correct, the
> information that you provided could be misleading and misunderstood. Hirth and
> Rotax engines do not use the same style rings. So what engine were you talking
> about with the 250 hrs on 100:1 oil? And what kind of oil?
> John Jung
>
> Jim Baker wrote:
> snip...
>
> > 100:1 ratios. 250 hours, no teardown and no decarbon, and I can
> > still borescope the cylinder and read the machine marks on the
> > piston top.
It is a Hirth 2704 and the rings are the 1/32 steel, square type
located well down from the crown.....but the Rotax Dykes style
rings would benefit as much, if not more from 100:1 oils The less
coking produced by excess oil, the better for that type of ring.
One of the things most folks don't realize is that your average 50:1
oil is dilluted with Stoddards Solvent to improve miscibility and low
temp pour point....Pennz included.
Is 100:1 for all? Not if you insist on running the highest octane
unleaded, have a fit over every other small detail, and are unwilling
to take a chance. I performed all the requisite research to satisfy
my curiousity concerning these types of lubricant. If one has no
desire to explore other possibilities, then I say stick to 50:1 as that
will also serve your purpose admirally. Personally, I love what 100:1
does for me.....like same plugs for 110 hours...they look just like a
four stroke's plugs.
J. Baker
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 2-cycle pump |
| From: | mefine1(at)juno.com (Mick Fine) |
writes:
> Mick, I'm not so sure. If you look at the engine as a pump (which it
>is), the only way for the "crud" that is dissolved in the cylinder,
>with Seafoam, to get into the crankcase would be through the transfer
>port. As the engine is running, it is pumping the fuel mix from the
>carb into the crankcase then up the transfer port and into the
>cylinders. How is it
>possible for burned gases and "crud" to go against the mainstream of
>incoming fuel and back into the crankcase? Help me out here, guy
>.......
Ok Ralph, I would go along with that if you could "instantly" go from an
engine at-rest (with a bunch of Sea Foam in the chamber) to several
hundred RPM. I agree that once the "pump" gets going, the flow is as you
say. In the real world, I bet quite a bit of the SF/crud slurry does
indeed flow (in reverse) through the transfer port and into the case
during first few revolutions of the crank. Aside from that, some SF must
leak past the rings for it to do all it's magic - right?
Ralph, you obviously believe the stuff works for you so I'm happy for ya!
What prompted me to respond was your statement that 'you have nothing to
lose with Sea Foam' and I just don't think that's been proven - yet. I'll
let you have the last word, this is starting to be like arguing over
crow-hops. ;-)
-Mick Fine
Tulsa, Oklahoma
http://www.angelfire.com/ok/froghair
Green Country Ultralight Flyer's Organization (UFO)
http://www.angelfire.com/ok/gcufo
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Wing Spar Attach - Dihedral Increase |
<< I find that with the increase dihedral, N8233G will fly all day with only
throttle and rudder inputs and with hands off the stick. With hands on the
stick, it is little, if any, different than before the dihedral was changed.
For those who have flown Cessna airplanes, the directional stability and
rudder control are very similar to those of a Cessna 152 or 172.
Vince Nicely
Firestar II (N8233G)
206 Hours >>
Thanks for the thread, Vince ....it is very conVincing and makes sense to me.
I have only 3" of dihedral in my Firestar and could have increased stability
by adding more. I did not put more in because of a concern about crosswind
landing. Seems like a compromise on my part. ...........................GeoR38
the ol glider pilot
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: fuel tank in the nose cone |
Hi Topher: I know it can be said that a tank mounted behind you can
rupture in a crash and spray you with fuel, but it seems to me that it's
much better protected than in a nose tank. Also in the event of a crunch,
it would give something else to mangle your feet. If you hit rocks or
pavement, the steel tubes would cause a shower of sparks, right in the
middle of the fuel. That's also true with a rear mounted tank, but I think
a rupture would be much less likely. Of course, we hope that such a
scenario won't come about, but it IS a factor that must be considered.
You did ask for opinions. Big Lar.
----------
> From: Christopher John Armstrong <Tophera(at)centuryinter.net>
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com; kolb(at)intrig.com
> Subject: Kolb-List: fuel tank in the nose cone
> Date: Monday, December 07, 1998 8:46 AM
>
>
Aside from the safety issue of fire in a crash what
> does the list think of putting as large a fuel tank as can fit in the
> fiberglass nose as possible. filling the top area and going down between
> the feet with something a inch or two wide I should be able to get a
gallon
> or so, which is 6 to ten pounds. Adjustable CG control, extra fuel,
whats
> not to like? Comments requested
>
> Topher
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 2-cycle pump |
>
>To all,
>
>>...the only way for the "crud" that is dissolved in the cylinder, with
>>Seafoam,...
>
>Has anyone tried an experiment to actually dissolve a sample of the "crud"
>in Seafoam or soak their piston in it. Seriously, does the Seafoam
>actually dissolve the carbon or just soften it up so it is burned off, or
>actually WHAT happens?
>I am one of those who is apprehensive about using it yet... but wouldn't it
>be nice if it did help... even some. Maybe as time goes on, more reports
>will come in, pro or con.
>Later,
>Cliff & Carolyn Stripling Him: Retired Pharmacist
One of our local pilots, Bill Williams has a Rotax 447 in a CGS Hawk, and
he tried the Seafoam bit. Dumped it in to a hot engine and let it sit for a
couple days, and then pulled the engine out and pulled the head off.
Reported that the carbon had gotten very soft and crumbly, and just wiped
away very easily.
It would probably be good for those that want to stick with the
traditional method of pulling the jugs and scraping to give the hot engine
a good dose of Seafoam, let it sit, and then pull it down. Might make it
easier to clean.
I will be doing that to the 532 in about a month, meanwhile, perhaps
someone that is getting ready to pull and scrape could try it and give a
report?
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
P.S. That website mentioned a few days ago, http://www.groupk.com
has some really good stuff on seizures, compression, and case leaks!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cavuontop(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: fuel tank in the nose cone |
In a message dated 12/8/98 2:00:52 AM Eastern Standard Time,
larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net writes:
<< Adjustable CG control, extra fuel, whats not to like? Comments requeste
>>
I think there are a number of greasons not to put fuel in the nose of a
Kolb. As I understand it the FAA will not certify a new lightplane design
with fuselage fuel tanks. They want the fuel in the wings, away from the
people. Say what you will about those boys but they have been around for a
while. Here is another example of why I think it is a bad idea. The guy I
sold my mark 2 to just wiped the gear at a sod farm in central Jersey this
past Sunday. He had a student who did a real hard landing, aparently really
banged it on. After they rolled out he figured that they must have bent a
gear leg because they hit very hard. When he got out to look the plane over
he was amazed to find that everythin d appeared ok. He did a very thorough
preflight and found nothing. So he got in with his next student and away they
went. The next stop was a sod farm and my friend was at the controlls for the
landing, not the student. Anyway, as they touched down the right wheel
departed. The gear leg broke just inboard of the steel axel fitting. They
skidded about 40 feet. My guess is that it was my friend's superb skills that
prevented them from going all the way over. Anyway, the aircraft got pretty
far up on its nose as it skidded along. The nose cone was busted up and when
the tail slammed back down the fuse tube was kinked just aft of the H section.
The interesting point about this is that when I had the plane I had
rotated the gear legs 180 degrees one time, as permitted by Kolb, and noted it
in the logs. I don't know whether my buddy had rotated the legs subsequently,
but I wouldn't be surprised. Anyway, the nose over/nose damage scenario looks
like a good enough possibility that it doesn't look like such a good idea to
put fuel in the nose. If there had been fuel in the nose in this acccident it
could have been way more complicated.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 2-cycle reliability |
Kolb-List message posted by: "Jim Baker"
Jim,
If I remember correctly, you fly with Hirth power. If I am correct, the
information that you provided could be misleading and misunderstood. Hirth
and
Rotax engines do not use the same style rings. So what engine were you
talking
about with the 250 hrs on 100:1 oil? And what kind of oil?
John Jung
Jim Baker wrote:
snip...
It is a Hirth 2704 and the rings are the 1/32 steel, square type
located well down from the crown.....but the Rotax Dykes style
rings would benefit as much, if not more from 100:1 oils The less
coking produced by excess oil, the better for that type of ring.
One of the things most folks don't realize is that your average 50:1
oil is dilluted with Stoddards Solvent to improve miscibility and low
temp pour point....Pennz included.
Is 100:1 for all? Not if you insist on running the highest octane
unleaded, have a fit over every other small detail, and are unwilling
to take a chance. I performed all the requisite research to satisfy
my curiousity concerning these types of lubricant. If one has no
desire to explore other possibilities, then I say stick to 50:1 as that
will also serve your purpose admirally. Personally, I love what 100:1
does for me.....like same plugs for 110 hours...they look just like a
four stroke's plugs.
J. Baker
I am glad your setup works for you, but after listening to my bearings
rattle on my Rotax277 with 100:1, and after reading what the tuners at the
groupk website have to say about the whys and hows of seizures, I will stick
to my 50:1, Thankyouverymuch. :-)
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 2-cycle reliability |
Jim Baker,
I have used Amsoil at about 90:1 for 10 years. What type of 100:1 oil do you
use?
John Jung
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | wndean(at)webtv.net (William Dean) |
| Subject: | Pleasant experience |
Today, 2 years and 38 days after receipt of kit #1 of my Firestar 1 the
FAA Designee approved N643FS for flight.
It was quite uneventful, the only suggestion, not dictated, was to put
nuts on the motor side of the propeller studs as a safeguard. He didn't
spend more than 30 minutes for the inspection. The cost was $200, the
only unpleasant part. The Dean machine will be in the air soon.
Bill
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 2-cycle pump |
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Hey Mick 'ol buddy: me and few others will be flying into Oshkosh this
summer in our Seafoam soaked engines. If you are there we can take this
thread and talk our hearts out about it. I'll even bring a can of the
stuff with me. Gees ..... maybe I should buy some stock in the company.
Enough about the Seafoam. Let's move on.
Ralph
>In the real world, I bet quite a bit of the SF/crud slurry does indeed
flow (in >reverse) through the transfer port and into the case during
first few revolutions of >the crank. Aside from that, some SF must leak
past the rings for it to do all it's magic - right?
>
>-Mick Fine
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net> |
. Lets see if this one gets through.
Woody
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Possum <possums(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: fuel tank in the nose cone |
Hi Topher: I know it can be said that a tank mounted behind you can
>rupture in a crash and spray you with fuel, but it seems to me that it's
>much better protected than in a nose tank.
I Agree with Larry, I observed (I was on the gound, not flying the
plane)the following crash:
NTSB
MIA98LA129
On April 11, 1998, about 1645 eastern daylight time, an unregistered,
homebuilt, Kolb Firestart airplane, collided with trees during approach to
land at a private strip near Dallas, Georgia, while on a Title 14 CFR Part
91 personal flight. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed at the time
and no flight plan was filed. The aircraft was destroyed and the non-rated
pilot received serious injuries. The flight originated from the private
strip minutes before the accident.
The pilot stated he took off from an 800-foot grass strip. He flew around
for about 8 minutes and then made a left pattern to return to the strip for
a landing to the north. While turning from base leg to final leg he
encountered a strong tail wind or downdraft. The aircraft began to sink and
he applied full power, attempting to climb. The aircraft struck the top of
trees at the south end of the runway.
The aircraft was not registered with the Federal Aviation Administration.
The aircraft builder had reserved a registration number for the aircraft;
however, he did not register the aircraft with the FAA after it was built.
The pilot did not hold any FAA pilot or medical certificates.
See NTSB report
The plane was actually a un-registered ,or de-certified, Firestar II.
The pilot applied full throttle into the tops of the trees (about 50'
High). The right wing was knocked off the plane by the first tree, and
absorbed most of the impact. The plane fell approx. 50 feet before striking
the ground. The left wing hit the ground first, and proably kept the pilot
from sustaining any serios injuries. One broken arm and a few bumps and
bruses, he's fine now. Everything broke except the fuel tanks and the
engine. The tanks were not empty and are still usable, got them at home.
Sully
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net> |
| Subject: | Re: shootin blanks |
>
>. Lets see if this one gets through.
>
>Woody
>
>
Now as I was trying to say
If you carry fuel in the nose you will not be able to use it as you will
change your cg as you fly. Maybe add a water tank to the nose then you can
change the water level for different pilots. I don't like the idea of adding
extra dead weight to the aircraft so try moving things around like the
battery into the nose, more instruments maybe brakes. I once suggested to
the group to knock a foot off the tail boom. This would reduce some of the
weight towards the rear and shorten the moment arm. Kolbs are long enough so
it should not have an adverse effect on the handling. This is a common
solution to homebuilders but with tractor designs it usually means
lengthening or shortening the engine mount.
And
Where did all the crud come from if you want to use that reference from
Einstein. Why do you think the crud will go into the crankcase? If I can
find some I will try the Seafaom in my Hirth. If I can't find it I may try
some corolas oil as one of the members accidently did with his smoke system.
In my opinion what happens is the oil is a solvent and softens up the
carbon. Then with the beating it gets when the engine is running the SOFT
bits of carbon are sent their merry way out the exhaust pipe. There is no
way for the particles to get into the crankcase but if they did they would
be soft and quickly re cycled into the intake charge and sent out in the
next exhaust stroke.
Don't know what happened to my email before but it seems to work now. Bet
you guys thought you wouldn't have to listen to me spout off anymore,sorry
no such luck
Woody
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | john hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Changing CG by Shortening Tailboom??? |
wood wrote:
>
I once suggested to
> the group to knock a foot off the tail boom. This would reduce some of the
> weight towards the rear and shorten the moment arm. Kolbs are long enough so
> it should not have an adverse effect on the handling.
Hey Guys:
Done did that. Didn't work. If you think a standard built to plans
MKIII is unstable, try it with 12 inches whacked off the tailboom. Darn
thing just would not settle down in pitch. Get it at cruise and it
would pitch up or down. Chased it around with trim, but could never get
the trim to hold it where I wanted it. Don't recommend shrinking the
length of tailboom.
I flew it to Lakeland, Homer's house, and Oshkosh in that
configuration. On top of that I was also having aileron flutter
problems at anything over 80 mph. Most uncomfortable XCs I ever did.
At Oshkosh had to do air to air photo shoot flying on a Cessna 210. He
couldn't slow down much less than 85 and I was doing all I could to keep
Miss P'fer out of aileron flutter. Shore was glad when that was over.
A couple days after return from OSH 93, the CGS 3-blade wooden prop
split the scene, or rather the tailboom. All three blades collected on
the tailboom. I believe they still have the damaged section of tailboom
at Kolb Aircraft. Kicked the tailboom about 5 degrees out of column.
Did know how much damage was done until I landed in a shoe box hay field
surrounded by tall trees bamboo on two sides and high tension power
lines (big ones) on the other two sides. Vibration popped the carbs out
of their sockets and broke the starter mount. Carbs were hanging by
cables as was the starter. Right flap got some scrapnel thru the fabric
and one rib.
When I replaced the tailboom, it was the length called for in the
plans. Thought I had a new airplane on the first flight. Don't think
I'll do any tailboom butchering in the future. Homer knew how long the
tailboom needed to be when he designed the MK III. He always proves to
be a hell of a lot better designer (and Dennis) than me. I am no
designer, just a shade tree mechanic that loves to build and fly.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dennis Souder <flykolb(at)epix.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Im interrested in finding about your |
ultra-lights
>
>I would appreciate it if you could send any information you can on
>ultra-lights.
> Bill Wattengel(first time flyer).
>
>Could you provide me with a mailing address?
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Geoff Smart" <gsmart(at)iinet.net.au> |
| Subject: | Re: Im interrested in finding about your ultra-lights |
First get a licence, I will help you make your choice.
Talk to as may pilots as you can, and go to as many flying as you can, take
in everybody's advice and then decide for yourself.
( and if you want the best, get a Titan Tornado)
Geoff
-----Original Message-----
From: Dennis Souder <flykolb(at)epix.net>
Date: Wednesday, 9 December 1998 9:07
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Im interrested in finding about your ultra-lights
>
>>
>>I would appreciate it if you could send any information you can on
>>ultra-lights.
>> Bill Wattengel(first time flyer).
>>
>>Could you provide me with a mailing address?
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Changing CG by Shortening Tailboom??? |
>
>When I replaced the tailboom, it was the length called for in the
>plans. Thought I had a new airplane on the first flight. Don't think
>I'll do any tailboom butchering in the future. Homer knew how long the
>tailboom needed to be when he designed the MK III. He always proves to
>be a hell of a lot better designer (and Dennis) than me. I am no
>designer, just a shade tree mechanic that loves to build and fly.
>
>john h
>
>
I stand corrected. I am puzzled why there was such a diffrence maybe
Dennis could explain.
Woody
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | john hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Im interrested in finding about your ultra-lights |
Geoff Smart wrote:
>
> ( and if you want the best, get a Titan Tornado)
>
> Geoff
>
Geoff:
You didn't really mean to send that to the Kolb List, did you?
john h (Kolb builder and flyer for 15 years)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Im interrested in finding about your ultra-lights |
Geoff, when you first came on the group line looking for Titan info, I
referred you on to a local builder as a courtesy to another homebuilder. I
certainly didn't expect you to respond to that courtesy with the insult you
published on OUR line. Thanks for nothing. Big Lar.
----------
> From: Geoff Smart <gsmart(at)iinet.net.au>
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Im interrested in finding about your ultra-lights
> Date: Tuesday, December 08, 1998 5:32 PM
>
>
> First get a licence, I will help you make your choice.
>
> Talk to as may pilots as you can, and go to as many flying as you can,
take
> in everybody's advice and then decide for yourself.
>
> ( and if you want the best, get a Titan Tornado)
>
> Geoff
>
> >>
> >>I would appreciate it if you could send any information you can on
> >>ultra-lights.
> >> Bill Wattengel(first time flyer).
> >>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Im interrested in finding about your |
ultra-lights
>
>First get a licence, I will help you make your choice.
>
>Talk to as may pilots as you can, and go to as many flying as you can, take
>in everybody's advice and then decide for yourself.
>
>( and if you want the best, get a Titan Tornado)
>
>Geoff
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim_Hrib(at)BCBSMD.COM |
| Subject: | Re: Kolb-List Digest: 12/07/98 |
i've got a 1984 firestar with a 377 on it . i use CUA oil and run it
at 100 to 1 using 87 octane gas. my cylinder head temp is 275 at cruise.
friends of mine are using Amsoil at 100 to 1 and say it works great.
anyway, you'll get better performance using a higher grade of oil at 100 to
1 than using a lower grade at 50 to1 ........
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cliff / Carolyn Stripling <striplic(at)dfw.net> |
| Subject: | Fuselage tube shortening |
To all,
I once suggested to
>the group to knock a foot off the tail boom. This would reduce some of the
>weight towards the rear and shorten the moment arm. Kolbs are long enough so
>it should not have an adverse effect on the handling.
I shortened my tail boom 4", but I asked Homer Kolb and Dennis Souder
first. Although they did not say so, I got the feeling that 4" is about
all they would suggest shortening the fuselage boom.
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+ hrs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Geoff Smart" <gsmart(at)iinet.net.au> |
| Subject: | Re: Im interrested in finding about your ultra-lights |
And if you can't get a Titan then I would suggest a Kolb.
Almost as good
Geoff
-----Original Message-----
From: john hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com>
Date: Wednesday, 9 December 1998 10:35
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Im interrested in finding about your ultra-lights
>
>
>Geoff Smart wrote:
>>
>
>> ( and if you want the best, get a Titan Tornado)
>>
>> Geoff
>>
>
>
>Geoff:
>
>You didn't really mean to send that to the Kolb List, did you?
>
>john h (Kolb builder and flyer for 15 years)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Geoff Smart" <gsmart(at)iinet.net.au> |
| Subject: | Re: Im interrested in finding about your ultra-lights |
Lighten Up
-----Original Message-----
From: Larry Bourne <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net>
Date: Wednesday, 9 December 1998 11:09
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Im interrested in finding about your ultra-lights
>
>Geoff, when you first came on the group line looking for Titan info, I
>referred you on to a local builder as a courtesy to another homebuilder. I
>certainly didn't expect you to respond to that courtesy with the insult you
>published on OUR line. Thanks for nothing. Big Lar.
>
>----------
>> From: Geoff Smart <gsmart(at)iinet.net.au>
>> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Im interrested in finding about your ultra-lights
>> Date: Tuesday, December 08, 1998 5:32 PM
>>
>>
>> First get a licence, I will help you make your choice.
>>
>> Talk to as may pilots as you can, and go to as many flying as you can,
>take
>> in everybody's advice and then decide for yourself.
>>
>> ( and if you want the best, get a Titan Tornado)
>>
>> Geoff
>>
>
>> >>
>> >>I would appreciate it if you could send any information you can on
>> >>ultra-lights.
>> >> Bill Wattengel(first time flyer).
>> >>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "F J MARINO" <FMARINO(at)netlink1.nlcomm.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Im interrested in finding about your ultra-lights |
Bill: when I started looking I checked all the light aircraft manufactors
and went with the one who was the most reliable and in business the longest
AKA KOLB, I never had a problem with them on techincal help and when I
screwed up a part I called and it was in the mail the next day usually with
no charge or shipping. If you get a Titan you will probably spend the next
ten years putting it togeather. GO WITH THE KOLB.
Frank Marino
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Wattengel <wattengel(at)hotmail.com>
Date: Monday, December 07, 1998 4:31 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Im interrested in finding about your ultra-lights
>
>I would appreciate it if you could send any information you can on
>ultra-lights.
> Bill Wattengel(first time flyer).
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "F J MARINO" <FMARINO(at)netlink1.nlcomm.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Changing CG by Shortening Tailboom??? |
Bless you my son you are forgiven, plus some good advice.
Frank finally got a retirement check Marino
-----Original Message-----
From: john hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com>
Date: Tuesday, December 08, 1998 4:13 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Changing CG by Shortening Tailboom???
>
>
>wood wrote:
>>
> I once suggested to
>> the group to knock a foot off the tail boom. This would reduce some of
the
>> weight towards the rear and shorten the moment arm. Kolbs are long enough
so
>> it should not have an adverse effect on the handling.
>
>
>Hey Guys:
>
>Done did that. Didn't work. If you think a standard built to plans
>MKIII is unstable, try it with 12 inches whacked off the tailboom. Darn
>thing just would not settle down in pitch. Get it at cruise and it
>would pitch up or down. Chased it around with trim, but could never get
>the trim to hold it where I wanted it. Don't recommend shrinking the
>length of tailboom.
>
>I flew it to Lakeland, Homer's house, and Oshkosh in that
>configuration. On top of that I was also having aileron flutter
>problems at anything over 80 mph. Most uncomfortable XCs I ever did.
>
>At Oshkosh had to do air to air photo shoot flying on a Cessna 210. He
>couldn't slow down much less than 85 and I was doing all I could to keep
>Miss P'fer out of aileron flutter. Shore was glad when that was over.
>
>A couple days after return from OSH 93, the CGS 3-blade wooden prop
>split the scene, or rather the tailboom. All three blades collected on
>the tailboom. I believe they still have the damaged section of tailboom
>at Kolb Aircraft. Kicked the tailboom about 5 degrees out of column.
>Did know how much damage was done until I landed in a shoe box hay field
>surrounded by tall trees bamboo on two sides and high tension power
>lines (big ones) on the other two sides. Vibration popped the carbs out
>of their sockets and broke the starter mount. Carbs were hanging by
>cables as was the starter. Right flap got some scrapnel thru the fabric
>and one rib.
>
>When I replaced the tailboom, it was the length called for in the
>plans. Thought I had a new airplane on the first flight. Don't think
>I'll do any tailboom butchering in the future. Homer knew how long the
>tailboom needed to be when he designed the MK III. He always proves to
>be a hell of a lot better designer (and Dennis) than me. I am no
>designer, just a shade tree mechanic that loves to build and fly.
>
>john h
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Im interrested in finding about your ultra-lights |
>
>And if you can't get a Titan then I would suggest a Kolb.
>
> Almost as good
Since a Titan is a Thunder Gull knockoff, and your preference, I am
surprised that you didn't suggest to the Kolb list that they go get
a Fergie II. That way you could be consistant.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
(I may not be polite, but I'm consistant)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Yates <johny(at)epix.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Titan ad on our list, give me a break!!! |
>
>Lighten Up
>
>
I don't post very often, but i can't let this one go by.
Geoff i sure hope you posted your little Titan ad here by accident.
If not you better have asbestos underwear because you're gonna get flamed
for sure.
John
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Larry Bourne <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net>
>To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>Date: Wednesday, 9 December 1998 11:09
>Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Im interrested in finding about your ultra-lights
>
>
>>
>>Geoff, when you first came on the group line looking for Titan info, I
>>referred you on to a local builder as a courtesy to another homebuilder. I
>>certainly didn't expect you to respond to that courtesy with the insult you
>>published on OUR line. Thanks for nothing. Big Lar.
>>
>>----------
>>> From: Geoff Smart <gsmart(at)iinet.net.au>
>>> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>>> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Im interrested in finding about your ultra-lights
>>> Date: Tuesday, December 08, 1998 5:32 PM
>>>
>>>
>>> First get a licence, I will help you make your choice.
>>>
>>> Talk to as may pilots as you can, and go to as many flying as you can,
>>take
>>> in everybody's advice and then decide for yourself.
>>>
>>> ( and if you want the best, get a Titan Tornado)
>>>
>>> Geoff
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Geoff Smart" <gsmart(at)iinet.net.au> |
| Subject: | Re: Im interrested in finding about your ultra-lights |
touchy lot you Kolb owners aren't you.
lighten up a little
Geoff
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Pike <rpike(at)preferred.com>
Date: Thursday, 10 December 1998 6:21
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Im interrested in finding about your ultra-lights
>
>>
>>And if you can't get a Titan then I would suggest a Kolb.
>>
>> Almost as good
>
> Since a Titan is a Thunder Gull knockoff, and your preference, I am
>surprised that you didn't suggest to the Kolb list that they go get
>a Fergie II. That way you could be consistant.
> Richard Pike
> MKIII N420P (42oldpoops)
> (I may not be polite, but I'm consistant)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Im interrested in finding about your ultra-lights |
On Thu, 10 Dec 1998, Geoff Smart wrote:
> touchy lot you Kolb owners aren't you.
> lighten up a little
> Geoff
You betcha! And here I'm still formulating my reply! :))
I was going to reply earlier saying that I think we Kolb owners can
take on anything out there (all in fun of course), but I'm not up on the
specifics of a Titan/Tgull. Of course it is all a matter of what we each
want in an airplane, so Titan's/TGulls may be good for some, but Kolbs
for others, and (choke) even Quicksilvers for others. Because I won't
really get around to looking up specifics on a Tornado, I'm thinking we
Kolb's have you beat by a good margin on:
- trailerability
- cost (Ouch!) ....the Dundee/Subaru tv ad' comes to mind here
- STOL
- short and rough field capability
- company -- length of time in the business, support
- don't know about relative build time, airframe safety, flying qualities
but they are all darn good in our Kolbs
- obviously way better user list-server ...let us know the address of
yours :)
But for the right mission, pilot, and pocketbook, maybe a Titan is perfect.
OK ...next.
-Ben Ransom
http://mae.ucdavis.edu/~ransom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Bluhm <irena(at)ccis.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Im interrested in finding about your ultra-lights |
While reading "If you want the best, get a Titan Tornado". I must open
my opinion to you all. The appearance of this Titan is appealing
especially with it's aluminium covered wing. It doesn't have the open
gap between the windscreen and the (over-head) gap seal as in my MK3,
but have you seen these Titans fly????? We have one that lands in the
"cow-pasture" that I land in and I see their stability (or lack of) with
each landing and take off. They have a 20 ft wingspan, and seam to have
just a bit too little air flowing over them. It could be the pilot, but
this Titan is always under landing repairs. The landing gear legs are
tied together as the flare used by this plane causes it to touch on it's
small tail wheel first, then it speeeds down the runway with it's nose
pointed skyward still on it's two main gear and small tail wheel.
By the way, a Titan has a nose wheel that is used after this pilot slows
down to a crawl. The jerkyness I see while this plane takes off, has
turned me against them, so when someone say's " For the best, get a
Titan tornado.", I know this is a man who will brag on any car he has to
cover his lack of having a better car...
That's all
Richard of Boron
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dennis Souder <flykolb(at)epix.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Im interrested in finding about your |
ultra-lights
( and if you want the best, get a Titan Tornado)
>> Geoff
>touchy lot you Kolb owners aren't you.
>lighten up a little
>
>Geoff Smart
oh yea ... well ... my mom can beat up your dad!
Dennis (lighen the airplane - not the brain) Souder
Pres Kolb Aircraft
how did he get that name!!!!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | wood <richard.wood(at)usa.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Im interrested in finding about your |
ultra-lights
>
>touchy lot you Kolb owners aren't you.
>
>lighten up a little
>
>Geoff
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ronald L. Perry" <ronaldpe(at)shenessex.heartland.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Im interrested in finding about your ultra-lights |
Dennis Souder wrote:
>
>
>
> ( and if you want the best, get a Titan Tornado)
>
> >> Geoff
>
> >touchy lot you Kolb owners aren't you.
>
> >lighten up a little
> >
> >Geoff Smart
>
> oh yea ... well ... my mom can beat up your dad!
>
> Dennis (lighen the airplane - not the brain) Souder
> Pres Kolb Aircraft
>
> how did he get that name!!!!
>
This is getting rather childish. I thought I was listening to all
legitimate interests on both side of the fence from intelligent people.
Well, guess I was wrong.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bob n <ronoy(at)shentel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Im interrested in finding about your ultra-lights |
Good on yer, Dennis! Grey Baron FF#70
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dennis Souder <flykolb(at)epix.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Im interrested in finding about your |
ultra-lights
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | WGrooms511(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Im interrested in finding about your ultra-lights |
Gentlemen;
As a builder and flyer of both Kolbs and a Titan Tornado, I would like to
add my two cents.(Here we go again Dennis.)
I will be the first to admit that both companies have a very friendly and
helpful staff, that will do everything they can to help a builder of their
product out WHEN THEY ARE THERE. But, as every builder has discovered that
isn't always especially good. A builder works hard all week at his regular
job. He can't wait to get to the weekend to get time to work on his project.
Finally the weekend arrives and early Saturday morning he goes to the shop,
gets out the plans and starts to work. Well, as we all have discovered, the
plans provided (for either the Kolb or Titan) aren't especially clear and easy
to understand if you have never built on before. They also contain mistakes
here and there. So on Saturday morning when you have begun to work on your
project you come across a questionable explanation on the plans.
You call the manufacturer. Guess what. Not home Off on the weekend!
So, knowing that you are building a potentially dangerous machine you have to
wait until Monday to get through. Oh sure, on Monday they are very courteous
and helpful, but you have wasted another complete weekend due to a lack of
customer support.
Gentlemen, we live in the twentieth century! If these manufacturers really
cared about their customers they would make a construction video that came
with the kit.
Then, before you ever picked up your first wrench, you would know exactly what
to do, and best of all, you would know exactly how the experts (with all the
experience)
do it.
How many of you builders have made the statement; "I would love to build
another
Kolb or Titan. This time I would be able to do it right. I would know what I
was doing."
So, to the people who think either of these kit sellers is so great when it
comes to treating their customers right, I say once again; We live in the 20th
century!
If they really thought so much of their customers, they would spend the couple
of lousy bucks to make a construction video. How hard would that be?
As an experienced builder, I will give my advice to the young man who wanted
to know what he should buy in the way of an ultralight kit.
BUY NOTHING, ( including a Kolb or Titan) UNLESS THE SELLER THOUGHT ENOUGH OF
YOU TO PROVIDE A CONSTRUCTION VIDEO WITH HIS KIT!!!!!!!
You will be much happier building, knowing you are doing it right, and you
will have a great deal of confidence when you go to fly it on it's maiden
flight.
W Grooms
The truth is so precious that it must be protected by a bodyguard of lies.
Churchill
________________________________________________________________________________
Hello group,
I'm am approaching decision time on the instrumentation I'll be putting in my
Mark III. I'm on the fence between analog gauges and the EIS system. I know
one of the advantages of the EIS is panel space. In the flying that I've done
to this point I have gotten use to monitoring things on analog gauges. Right
or wrong, my method has been where the needle is and is it changing. I am
apprehensive about remembering a number and doing the math to decide if it is
significant. I've learned to look for ways to reduce mental load as I get
older.
Another concern is the reliability of the EIS system. Has anyone that is
using this system had any failures? Having most of your instrumentation in
one box can force you into a quick termination of the flight should you have a
failure. Losing a single CHT gauge may give you a little more time.
If anyone has had a failure of the EIS, what kind of service did you get? How
long where you grounded?
I'd appreciate any help from those of you that have experience or opinions on
either side of the fence.
Thanks for help any help on this and for all the help in the past.
John Bickham
M3-308
St. Francisville, LA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cavuontop(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Gauges or EIS? |
In a message dated 12/10/98 9:19:24 AM Eastern Standard Time, BICUM(at)aol.com
writes:
<< I'd appreciate any help from those of you that have experience or opinions
on
either side of the fence. >>
John: I have never flown with an eis. The idea of a single integrated
unit is attractive in the abstract, but I think It would leave you very
vulnerable to electrical failure. I hangar my plane, but even then it is not
the most hospitable environment for microprocessors. Also, keep in mind that
the standard egt and cht guages, which are arguably the most important guages
for two stroke flying, are stone simple and require no electrical power at
all. I went with the standard guages. If one is inop I still have the
ability to fly. If you lose the eis I guess you are stuck.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | john hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Im interrested in finding about your |
ultra-lights
>
> Since a Titan is a Thunder Gull knockoff, and your preference, I am
>surprised that you didn't suggest to the Kolb list that they go get
>a Fergie II. That way you could be consistant.
Richard and Gang:
You took the words right out of my mouth.
Don't ya love it when some wannabe starts blowing crap he has no experience
with and knows absolutely nothing about.
I have opinions about other folks aircraft designs, but I don't go to their
"builder's list" to inform them that they are building and flying the wrong
airplane. Wow!!!
I really have no experience with aircraft other than Kolbs with the
exception of US Army helicopters, a few hours in a 152, as well as Bert
Howland's Honey Bee. Have only flown one UL other than Homer's. Don't
really care to fly other designs although I get plenty of offers to fly them.
I guess when we get msgs like the one we are talking about we should use
the delete key and drive on.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <ransom(at)mae.engr.ucdavis.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Im interrested in finding about your ultra-lights |
On Thu, 10 Dec 1998 WGrooms511(at)aol.com wrote:
> BUY NOTHING, ( including a Kolb or Titan) UNLESS THE SELLER THOUGHT ENOUGH OF
> YOU
Again... any plane can be great or dismal, depending on the owner and
how he/she builds it and uses it.
For the record,
I felt a need to contact Kolb only once or twice during my building
so I think that indicates the plans and drawings are pretty clear.
We don't want erector sets ya know. (It takes some user effort.)
I know one time I called the support number on Saturday a.m. and had
a nice little chat with our friend Dennis Souder. I guess I'm not
so positive a construction video would be as helpful as you suggest.
Not sure. Sometimes you need a brief two-way conversation. In addition
to Kolb I would advocate mutual builder support -- get a friend on this
list maybe, including his phone number, or an EAA buddy.
Anybody if you have a Firestar question that I might be able to help
of it. Email in advance (now for example) if you want my number.
Ben Ransom
http://mae.ucdavis.edu/~ransom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cliff / Carolyn Stripling <striplic(at)dfw.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Im interrested in finding about your |
ultra-lights
To all,
>You call the manufacturer. Guess what. Not home Off on the weekend!
Kolb used to have a Saturday call line (for builders only). I don't know
if that is still the case. I think that is being accessable to weekenders.
>If these manufacturers really
>cared about their customers they would make a construction video that came
>with the kit.
They care, but you have a good idea. A video could be a lot of help.
There are already a bunch of "un-official" videos of construction floating
around. One pretty good one is Glenn Rink's. He has mixed it with good
humor about his specialized "jigs"... like a 2X4 with some marks on it. I
would like to meet that guy sometime.
If you are listening Dennis, you might start with a short tour around the
"farm"... Oh, I meant "factory". That is a "hoot" all in itself. You
might make a colage of clips from various "builders videos" if everybody
sent you copies. Perhaps the picture quality or sound might not be good
enough, but there are tidbits in every video worth seeing. Anyway, it is
something to consider.
>How many of you builders have made the statement; "I would love to build
>another
>Kolb or Titan
I did. I would. I might. It was the most rewarding and fulfilling
building project I have ever done.
>This time I would be able to do it right. I would know what I
>was doing."
I would change that to say, this time I could do it in 2/3rds the time
simply because I would already be familiar with the plans and techniques.
The Kolb was my first rag and tube construction.
>So, to the people who think either of these kit sellers is so great when it
>comes to treating their customers right...
As far as Kolb is concerned, I do. Every employee I ever talked to was
always courteous, helpful and friendly (all of the aspect of the "scout
law"). I never had any trouble with builder support or getting missing
parts (a tube, needing extra rivets, whatever.) Good people... all of
them. One day when I called to talk to Barbara about something, Dennis
overheard the conversation and said he wanted to talk to me. He said he
had not heard from me for many months and wanted to know how the building
was going and if I had any questions. Really I didn't, but it was nice to
know he was concerned.
Something else pretty important is that they do not exagerate the
performance, build time or any other aspect of the Kolb in order to
encourage sales (call it honesty - more scout law).
If you can't tell by now, I am happy with my Kolb. I might have been
equally happy with a Titan or other design. I just have not had the
experience.
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+ hrs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Scott Bentley <Scott.Bentley(at)Bentley.COM> |
One of the reasons I'm a fan of the EIS is that I can program (and change)
warning levels for each monitored parameter - including fuel consumption and
elapsed flight time. There's a big red light that is hard to miss on my
panel that goes off if any parameter - even those not displayed on the page
I'm on now - is out of range.
I think the likelyhood of EIS failure is less than the likelyhood I wouldn't
notice an out of range situation on one of several analog gauges.
See http://members.aol.com/mykolbmk3/panel197.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Im interrested in finding about your ultra-lights |
The Titan is that plane that relies on foam ribs glued to aluminum to make up
the main wing d cell, Same idea has killed several people.
Dick C
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Im interrested in finding about your ultra-lights |
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com (Ralph H Burlingame) |
Mr. Grooms, when I built my FireStar there were no videos on the market
of anything except some movies at the spawning video stores. This was in
1986 and be as it may, I received only some typed written pages for a
construction manual with no figures, charts, or pictures to go by. Homer
Kolb did provide 16 pages of well drawn up blue prints which was all I
needed. When I received my kit, some neighbors looked at that typed up
construction manual, and thought I got ripped. I knew better and slowly
the plane took shape. I ended up building my machine in 515 hrs over 6
months. Now 12 years later they're not laughing anymore, and in fact
thinking about getting one themselves. I think I made only two phone
calls to the factory during this period. This is because I studied it and
figured things out! It doesn't take a rocket scientist to build one. It
does take some willingness, an open mind, and some patience (which some
people don't seem to have). By the way, I've seen the new factory
construction manuals that come with every kit. Yes things have improved
tremendously. With all the help that is out there now, including this
list, I personally don't think anyone has anything to complain about! So
what's your beef, guy?
Ralph Burlingame
Original FireStar, 12 years old
>BUY NOTHING, ( including a Kolb or Titan) UNLESS THE SELLER THOUGHT
>ENOUGH OF YOU TO PROVIDE A CONSTRUCTION VIDEO WITH HIS >KIT!!!!!!!
>If they really thought so much of their customers, they would spend
>the couple of lousy bucks to make a construction video.
>W Grooms
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dennis Souder <flykolb(at)epix.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Gauges or EIS? |
>
>Hello group,
>
I've learned to look for ways to reduce mental load as I get
>older.
This is the best feature of the EIS, you don't need to do math, if a
temperature maximum is exceeded, for instance, the red warning light flashes
and the display flashes. Hard to overlook all that comotion.
With the EIS you pre-set all the maximum temps, etc that you want to see.
When that value is exceeded the alarm goes off.
>
>Another concern is the reliability of the EIS system. Has anyone that is
>using this system had any failures? Having most of your instrumentation in
>one box can force you into a quick termination of the flight should you have a
>failure. Losing a single CHT gauge may give you a little more time.
We stopped selling analogue gauges, because we felt there were too many
failures and we wound up eating the defective instrument.
Since we started using EIS, we havent' had any losses - Greg at EIS supports
his product very well.
>
>If anyone has had a failure of the EIS, what kind of service did you get? How
>long where you grounded?
We have had one failure, I think. But it was an infant mortality, died
before the airplane had a chance to fly. A replacement was sent out
immediately and worked fine. I am not aware of any failures beyond the
infant stage.
True you have more of your eggs in one basket, but if I were flying and the
EIS quit. I would not be unduly alarmed. It is unlikely that the engine
would develop a problem at the same time, or within the period of time it
took to fly home. The most important gauge is the EGT. The tach is not
really that critical once airborne. The CHT main function is to let you
know when the fan starts slipping (for air-cooled engines). Again how much
will it start slipping during one flight.
The EGT of the EIS will be more accurate than an analogue, so the most
important function is more accurate and more reliable - plus it warns you.
We sell EIS'. Get an EIS - buy it whereever you please - doesn't have to be
from us. But get the EIS.
Dennis Souder
Pres Kolb Aircraft
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Gauges or EIS? |
| From: | rayul(at)juno.com (Raymond L Lujon) |
>snip<
> I'd appreciate any help from those of you that have experience or
opinions on
> either side of the fence. >>
John....I have flown with both. EIS, being digital is easier to read to a
precise and accurate degree flight and engine conditions than analog
gauges. Example....Analog reads about 5200 rpm......EIS reads exactly
5160 rpm.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | KHe1144783(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Im interrested in finding about your ultra-lights |
Sorry- The Titan D-cell uses foam ribs to HELP hold the shape of the D-cell.
There is no structural necessity to them other than that. The triplex-layered
aluminum L-channel top and bottom handle all the bending loads along with the
stressed skin design. Over 7 G's.
The Kolb kicks ass and is THE best design for the parameters it is designed
for.Strong,
safe, forgiving and the best ultralight money can buy. Anyone with one
deserves a pat on the back for their good judgement and careful research.
Everyone who designs an aircraft probably had a nitch they felt needed
filling. Some do a better than others. Were all responsible for deciding which
is best for us. Kris Henkel
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dennis Souder <flykolb(at)epix.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Im interrested in finding about your |
ultra-lights
>This is getting rather childish. I thought I was listening to all
legitimate interests on both side of the fence from intelligent people.
Well, guess I was wrong.
Dennis Souder responds:
My apologies if I offended anyone's sense of propriety - I was only trying
to "lighten up." Personally I don't think such a trite statement like
"Titan is the best" deserves a thoughtful intelligent reply. I think humor
is a more appropriate response.
Furthermore, there is no reason to expect "all legitimate interest on both
sides of the fence" from a dedicated Kolb group - we are biased, there are
just too many of us! That is our right - it is our group. I would suggest
the FLY-UL group, that is a much more general group.
More to the subject:
Contrary to some ad copy, THERE IS NO "best ultralight."
The "best ultralight does not exist. But there is a best ultralight for a
particular individual's needs. Best for what? STOL capability? High speed?
Slow speed? Portability? Climb rate? Cost? Handling? Visibility? Resale
value? Factory support? Fabulous Newsgroup support? Construction methods?
The list could go on and on.
The best ultralight is the one that best suits the individual owner's set of
requirements and preferences. As Ben pointed out, the ultralight that best
suits his purposes (for the present time) is the Kolb - but he wisely
refrained from declaring the Kolb to be the best ultralight.
I'll pass on a conversation with someone at Ultralight Flying! Magazine.
But first a little backround. For some years UL Flying! took a survey, and
in that survey they asked respondents which ultralight would you like to
have if you were to get another. Kolb moved steadily up in the polls until
we were tied for first place. This was published information - available to
all.
Now the conversation: the poll thing came up in an informal conversation
and it was related to me (unofficially) that they had continued polling but
stopped releasing some of the data. One bit of data they had, but weren't
releasing, was the "which ul would you like to have category" I was told
that Kolb not only was first place, but by a wide margin.
I believe the reason is that Kolb aircraft provides an optimum blend of
desirable features - features that people want: STOL performance,
portability, visibility, traditional construction methods and good handling.
High speed is typically not the issue, many flyers want to operate from
short strips and want an aircraft that flies slowly well - and yes, it does
need to have decent cruise. They want the ability to drop in and see
friends who may only have a very short strip, etc. And for emergencies too,
very comforting to know you can put down in a very short space - helps relax
the mind while flying. This is the kind of flying I enjoy the most and
Homer too - no accident that Kolb developed an aircraft that would do those
things well.
Dennis Souder
Pres Kolb Aircraft .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <larrybiglar(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Pleasant experience |
Good Luck, Bill. Hope you have a great first flight. Big Lar.
----------
> From: William Dean <wndean(at)webtv.net>
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Kolb-List: Pleasant experience
> Date: Tuesday, December 08, 1998 2:23 PM
>
>
> Today, 2 years and 38 days after receipt of kit #1 of my Firestar 1 the
> FAA Designee approved N643FS for flight.
> It was quite uneventful, the only suggestion, not dictated, was to put
> nuts on the motor side of the propeller studs as a safeguard. He didn't
> spend more than 30 minutes for the inspection. The cost was $200, the
> only unpleasant part. The Dean machine will be in the air soon.
>
> Bill
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dennis Souder <flykolb(at)epix.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Changing CG by Shortening Tailboom??? |
>
>
>>
>>When I replaced the tailboom, it was the length called for in the
>>plans. Thought I had a new airplane on the first flight. Don't think
>>I'll do any tailboom butchering in the future. Homer knew how long the
>>tailboom needed to be when he designed the MK III. He always proves to
>>be a hell of a lot better designer (and Dennis) than me. I am no
>>designer, just a shade tree mechanic that loves to build and fly.
>>
>>john h
>>
>>
>
> I stand corrected. I am puzzled why there was such a diffrence maybe
>Dennis could explain.
Nothing magic, just the same with a lot of things you can make some small
changes, and it will probably be okay. Go a little further and all of a
sudden it is not okay. I remember flying someones ultrastar (back in the
old days) who had installed a parachute. What a dog it became with the
addition of another 15 - 20 lbs. That is only an increase of 4% gross
weight - but I could sure feel the difference.
If you look at the distance from the quarter chord point of the wing to the
tail it is about 167 inchs. If you shorten it 12", you reduce the length by
7%, which is not an insignificant number. Hou would you like a 7% increase
in your pay?
Hope this helps
Dennis
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Terry Swartz <tswartz(at)desupernet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Gauges or EIS? |
--------------73B7180E41010C9A5FF5F41F
November 29, 1998 - December 10, 1998
Kolb-Archive.digest.vol-bd