Kolb-Archive.digest.vol-ds
July 23, 2002 - August 06, 2002
months then got to where it wouldn't register that the door was closed.
(Have you ever drove 30 miles with the door chime ding-ding-dinging in
your ear telling your door is ajar when it wasn't??? It's like Chinese
water torture...) Long story short, if a little dirt got up inside the
door latch it would mess up the electronic eye and it wouldn't work.
(Now where would dirt come from when you live 2 miles from the nearest
paved road??? Hummmm) Same vehicle... Turning left as I drive through a
busy 4-way intersection...windshield washer fluid starts spraying on the
windshield, but wipers don't come on to wipe it away. (Did it on it's
own...I didn't mash the button.) Luckily I had the drivers side window
down, so dumb 'ole me hangs my head out the window, to see where I'm
going, with washer fluid spraying in my face till I can get through the
intersection to somewhere to pull over and figure out what's happening.
If the window hadn't been down, I could have had a good lawsuit against
the "unnamed" manufacturer... (I know talking Ford/Chevy/Dodge/Toyota,
etc. is like talking religion).
To quote Scotty (the venerable engineer from the original Starship
Enterprise) , "the more you over-tick the plumbing, the easier it is to
stop up the drain..."
P.P.S. General observation.....
This list has been un-believably friendly over the 6-7 years
I've followed it, but recently there has been a rash of recent posts
with people telling other people "where to go" and "what to do , when
they get there" (RE: the header on this email...) . I'd certainly
prefer to keep it friendly so I don't have to explain to my daughter why
my airplane buddies want me to "Kiss certain parts of their anatomy"
when she reads over my shoulder at the computer. Her mother already
tells her me and all my flying buddies are weird...I don't want to give
them more evidence... ;-)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kirk Smith" <snuffy(at)usol.com> |
. And when you run into a "real" problem come on back to the list.
>
> Jack B. Hart FF004
> Jackson, MO
Your no fun at all Jack! Golly...............
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SR3SA2L1(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: "perfect" streamline definition??? |
Richard,
I did not ever read any followup on the GA guy that did this. On one hand it
does make sense that the lift vector could be a problem and on the other it
seems like with the strut being located at the approx center of lift it
should be okay.
As much as I like the idea of turning any source of drag into a source of
lift, I don't think I will be trying this myself as I do not have the
knowledge, but if it could be managed with safety and stability it would be
awesome on a Kolb. If anyone ever perfects this idea please let me know.
Regarding the plastic slip on streamline sleeves with the little turbulator
line that are sold in the UL mags - I have only talked to one UL pilot that
has actually run before and after tests with them - afterward he took them
off and put them in his hanger instead of on his plane. He said they made
his numbers worse but that it may have been due to the fact that the diameter
of the covers were a little larger that needed for his struts.
I have read that the best shape for streamlining is the one that forms in
nature - the tear drop.
Steve
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kirk Smith" <snuffy(at)usol.com> |
> Well Kirk,
>
> It goes a little farther than that....there are those that have
> built several Kolbs and those like myself who are building our first
> (although I am a repeat offender to the crime of airplane building...)
> Quite frankly there are those who have reinvented the wheel and those
> that are trying too. The "old guard" get lot's of chuckles when they
> speak from experience and try to keep us from following the road to
> nowhere that has already been traveled, and then we hike off down it
> anyway. Personally the local flyer's around me wish I'd just build the
> plane cause they would like the flying company when they go off to some
> fly-in every Saturday. No the Kolb's aren't perfect, but it's quite
> funny to those that have followed the Kolb's over the years and watched
> the cycle the "new" builders go in... most come up with great "new"
> ideas and when it's all said and done, they end up realizing that the
> Kolb guys, (Homer and Dennis Souder) pretty much had it figured out from
> the start. So go ahead and wave the flag of creativity and ingenuity
> and go ahead and "re"invent the wheel. RARELY there are a few tweaks
> that get a little squeak of improvement out of the design (Richard
> Pike's new radiator scoop comes to mind) but more often than not those
> trying to "improve" the design end up flying around with some weight
> that is of no use, and certainly the flying is put off farther down the
> calendar with every "Improvement" the builder puts into it. Me
> personally, I "reinvented" the wingtip bows, and the seat design, and
> the fuel tank (for more capacity, not cause I thought the original
> design was unsafe). And quite frankly, I've about decided that the seat
> design wasn't worth the time and effort, and for simplicity and weight,
> the factory setup can't be beat. The wingtips won't flex as much as the
> plans way, but the plans way was fine and would have been a heck of a
> lot easier to build, and the fuel tank has been a royal pain in the
> rear. I have probably doubled the build time that would have been
> required to get to the stage I'm at in the building process. Sooooo,
> all that to say this....It's not some hokey pokey cult-like love affair
> with the Kolb designers, it's a hokey pokey cult-like RESPECT for them
> after trying to "improve" their design. Now take it for what you paid
> for it, but what would you think about the Kolb's if everyone you knew
> that flew and/or built one gave you a laundry list of things they hated
> about it, or told you to do different??? I would have walked away from
> it and built something else....
>
>
> Jeremy Casey
> jrcasey(at)ldl.net
>
> P.S. One more example...from the automotive world. KISS works...even
> the gadgets that you put in a vehicle can actually cause more danger
> than the "problem" they were supposed to fix.
>
> '95 "unnamed make/model" pickup truck...the manufacturer decided to
> replace the time tested (simple) push-button switch in the door jamb (to
> tell the truck that the door was shut) with an electronic "eye" inside
> the latch mechanism. (I'm sure there had to be a good reason to make
> the change...but I have no idea why...electronic eye salesman was very
> persuading?) Anyway, this "improved" system worked great for about 6
> months then got to where it wouldn't register that the door was closed.
> (Have you ever drove 30 miles with the door chime ding-ding-dinging in
> your ear telling your door is ajar when it wasn't??? It's like Chinese
> water torture...) Long story short, if a little dirt got up inside the
> door latch it would mess up the electronic eye and it wouldn't work.
> (Now where would dirt come from when you live 2 miles from the nearest
> paved road??? Hummmm) Same vehicle... Turning left as I drive through a
> busy 4-way intersection...windshield washer fluid starts spraying on the
> windshield, but wipers don't come on to wipe it away. (Did it on it's
> own...I didn't mash the button.) Luckily I had the drivers side window
> down, so dumb 'ole me hangs my head out the window, to see where I'm
> going, with washer fluid spraying in my face till I can get through the
> intersection to somewhere to pull over and figure out what's happening.
> If the window hadn't been down, I could have had a good lawsuit against
> the "unnamed" manufacturer... (I know talking Ford/Chevy/Dodge/Toyota,
> etc. is like talking religion).
>
> To quote Scotty (the venerable engineer from the original Starship
> Enterprise) , "the more you over-tick the plumbing, the easier it is to
> stop up the drain..."
>
>
> P.P.S. General observation.....
> This list has been un-believably friendly over the 6-7 years
> I've followed it, but recently there has been a rash of recent posts
> with people telling other people "where to go" and "what to do , when
> they get there" (RE: the header on this email...) . I'd certainly
> prefer to keep it friendly so I don't have to explain to my daughter why
> my airplane buddies want me to "Kiss certain parts of their anatomy"
> when she reads over my shoulder at the computer. Her mother already
> tells her me and all my flying buddies are weird...I don't want to give
> them more evidence... ;-)
Jeremy,
Points well taken. I would like to clarify my position on the Kolb
Flyer. I think the Kolb is an elegant and wonderful aircraft and I am
certainly not the one to make any judgements about the quality of the plane.
I'm sorry if I have given the impression that it's a poorly designed and
built aircraft. That certainly was not my intention. I have developed the
habit of analyzing machinery because of the job I have done for many years
of analyzing machines. In a sense, I suppose I have become an analysis
machine. My questions and proposals are merely an extension of those habits.
I can see that I have left the impression that I think the Kolb is a machine
in need of vast improvement. Hardly do I think that ! I'm sorry if I have
offended . However, I'm human too and have been offended by some rather
abrasive comments directed towards me. I will attempt to keep my own
emotional reactions under better control and try not to analyze too much and
do more building. However I do like the group discussions about all the
little things characteristic of a Kolb. Machinery fascinates me.
Aeronautical machinery is a new area for me.
Ps; In the automobile industry, overlooking little things can cost a
fortune in law suits. They have also had some simple and elegant designs and
it cost them dearly. Sometimes I wish we could just build simple cars
again. Alas that won't happen.
________________________________________________________________________________
In a message dated 7/23/02 5:04:01 PM Eastern Daylight Time, snuffy(at)usol.com
writes:
<<
. And when you run into a "real" problem come on back to the list.
>
> Jack B. Hart FF004
> Jackson, MO
Your no fun at all Jack! Golly...............
>>
Good response Kirk!!....it appears we have a lack of understanding between
...age groups here? I see the fires of invention and technological
improvement and scientific query going on here on one hand and rebuffing "I
tried that ....or I know better... old farts", of which I could most easily
qualify, on the other hand ....going on in this thread....and....it is
GOOD!!....keep it up Kirk and Steve.....you may not win....but your sails may
die from being blown out instead of moldy ....and that....is .... GOOD!
George Randolph...the ol glider pilot from GM in Ohio
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kirby Dennis Contr ASC/TM <Dennis.Kirby(at)kirtland.af.mil> |
Bob Bean asked: "I'm considering the optional full-swivel tailwheel
sold by TNK for mkIII. Opinions would be appreciated."
Bob -
I bought a full-swivelling tailwheel from RANS (in Hays Kansas) for my
Mark-3. It has a 3.5-inch diam solid rubber tire, and appears to be a
robust, very well made unit. Cost was $180. I have only taxi time on my
airplane so far, but it works perfectly.
Dennis Kirby
Cedar Crest, NM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SR3SA2L1(at)aol.com |
Perhaps age is not the primary factor - I to am an "old fart". I would
suggest that differences in experiences, values, philosophy and type of
flying may create differences in the perceived value of concepts like
redundancy Vs Kiss.
To some of us perfection has been obtained when we can add nothing else to
our aircraft - to others perfection has been obtained when we can take
nothing else off.
To those of us who have had in flight failures, there is no such thing as to
much redundancy - to those who have flown their entire career without a
skipped heart beat, redundancy is wasted weight.
To those of us that never fly out of site of our local airpark, even a radio
is excess and to those of us that go where no man has gone before (at least
where we have never gone before) even a GPS needs a backup system.
For me personally there is no right or wrong here, I just want to modify my
own little Strarship Firestar to meet my own personal needs, wants and
desires. As in all things, beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: modifications? |
Kolbers,
I certainly agree that Homer & Dennis are brilliant designer of
aircraft. But I would be willing to bet that neither of them would claim
their designs could not be improved upon. Their genius was in providing an
economical, high performing, safe aircraft that appealed to a large
population. Cost was certainly an overriding concern for them. If they
could do what ever they dreamed of, their kits would be according priced out
reality. That does not stop the individual builder from dreaming & being
willing & capable of spending extra time & $ to improve his plane. Because
a plane is less complex does not necessarily mean it is safer, but it
almost always means it is economically more viable. Too many of us have
seen Kolbs turned into lead-sleds & dangerously modified, but so to, many of
us have seen or are living proof that the Kolb aircraft can be successfully
modified, both slightly or radically. The Laws of Physics are not mystical,
secret or owned by 2 people, however, anyone who ignores them or unwittingly
breaks them, may receive punishment not limited to the price of his plane,
and/or injury up to the point of death. This did not stop the Wright
bothers, nor will stop countless others. The purpose of this list is not to
maintain the status quo, but to provide a pool of wisdom that would not
otherwise be available; to help us avoid the mistakes of others; to avoid
injury; to promote efficient aircraft to share
piloting knowlege; & to have fun. The fun part is quickly lost when we
resort to disparaging others or when we are subjected to absolute/pontifical
statements. One of the reasons I love this List is because its been a
friendly place where I am not afraid to ask dumb questions & where
disagreement has been respectful & logical. ....Richard Swiderski
Subject: Kolb-List: modifications?
>>snip<<
Most incidents happen from people trying to re-engineer a time proven
design. Build it to plans and go fly. The most dangerous part of flying it
is the drive to and from the airport. Ralph's post says it as it is.
Listen to the man.
<>
> Homer Kolb and Dennis Souder made a fine light aircraft for simple safe
flying. There is no need to make modifications. If a person builds the plane
per plan and learns to fly it safely, he/she will have a fun plane to fly. I
am living proof of that and there are many others on this list who have done
the same.
> >snip<<
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <tophera(at)centurytel.net> |
i'll be around friday night sat and synday am... hopefully I will see some
of you guys
topher
________________________________________________________________________________
In a message dated 7/23/02 5:38:06 PM Eastern Daylight Time, snuffy(at)usol.com
writes:
<< However, I'm human too and have been offended by some rather
abrasive comments directed towards me. I will attempt to keep my own
emotional reactions under better control and try not to analyze too much and
do more building. However I do like the group discussions about all the
little things characteristic of a Kolb. Machinery fascinates me.
Aeronautical machinery is a new area for me.
Ps; In the automobile industry, overlooking little things can cost a
fortune in law suits. They have also had some simple and elegant designs and
it cost them dearly. Sometimes I wish we could just build simple cars
again. Alas that won't happen.
>>
I hear ya Kirk and I even understand you.....having been in a similar role in
GM.
Don't ever apologize for your ideas, and don't ever show less humor than some
of the "serious" ones on this list....they are all good people as I'm certain
you are too. Remember, do it by the numbers, otherwise it is only an
"opinion" and you know what that means, whether it comes from them or you.
George "muddy water" Randolph
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kirk Smith" <snuffy(at)usol.com> |
Thanks George! :o)
Kirk
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Woody <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
| Subject: | Re: "perfect" streamline definition??? |
I think that was called a Tomcat. It had a canard that moved around on a
universal joint for flight controls and that was where the difficulties were.
><swiderski@advanced-connect.net>
>
>Steve,
> Back in the '80s, there was an UL design that incorporated wings as lift
>struts. I read a report that the design was discontinued because of
>stability problems in turns. The I remeber it, the struts vectors of lift
>were problematic in severe banks. The idea has been tried several times
>for sure, but it never has taken hold in a successful way that I know of.
>...Richard Swiderski
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <SR3SA2L1(at)aol.com>
>To:
>Subject: Re: Kolb-List: "perfect" streamline definition???
>
>
> >
> > I read a while back in one of the GA mags that their tests indicated that
>a
> > 4.5 - 5 to 1 ratio provided the best streamline of a round tube. That was
>for
> > wing struts and I suppose for any other horizontal or verticle tube or
>wire.
> > You could run some simple tests by taking a sample length of tube and
>various
> > streamlining sizes and shapes, attach a scale to it and running down the
> > freeway with it in the wind. The less effective the streamline the
>greater
> > the "weight" (or push or pull ) should be.
> >
> > At the risk of being "flamed" for not sticking with "as originally
>designed"
> > struts and off the shelf available slip on covers ( and in the interest of
> > the advancement of our sport) - I would like to mention that I also read
> > about a gentleman who had designed a very STOL version of his high wing
>spam
> > can by turning his wing struts into small wings by making the struts
> > streamlining in the shape of a wing thus creating lifting airfoils where
>once
> > only drag existed. I am sure there is more involved, like balancing the
>lift
> > from the front with the necessary down force on the tail, etc., but once
> > done he was able to get off the ground in 75 feet with a GA spam can. Can
> > you imagine what we could do if we could do the same sort of thing!
> > Positively scary.
> >
> > Steve
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Woody <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
| Subject: | Re: modifications? |
><swiderski@advanced-connect.net>
>
>Kolbers,
>
> I certainly agree that Homer & Dennis are brilliant designer of
>aircraft. But I would be willing to bet that neither of them would claim
>their designs could not be improved upon.
>One of the reasons I love this List is because its been a
>friendly place where I am not afraid to ask dumb questions & where
>disagreement has been respectful & logical. ....Richard Swiderski
Well said Richard. As the one of the foremost modifiers on this list I
know that some will be upset with my modifications. Others are waiting for
the results of my experiments so they can use it on theirs. If you remove
the spark of imagination or the willingness to experiment society could not
advance. Adding a different wing to a Kolb may not be a major move upward
for society but to me it is a challenge and that is what I love in life.
Others may go the safe an sure route and never have an adventurous day in
their life. Others may try so hard to make things safe they never get
anything done. Yes I take risks. Calculated ones. I have jumped out of
good airplanes and grabbed a shark by the tail. That is my personal life
style and cannot see being able to change it or want to. I have built or
rebuilt more Kolbs than anyone on this list except Dennis and now I feel
confident that experience allows me to change a few things and allow my
curious mind to say "what if" and then find the answer.However all my
modifications have been well thought out and planned. I did the research
and I am confident they will work. I have grown very attached to my hide
over the years and do not intentionally try to damage it. If you wish to go
the safe and sure way be my guest but for others like myself let us have
our fun also. That is why we call it experimental aircraft so lets all
enjoy our planes in whatever way we decide to build them..
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <tophera(at)centurytel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: modifications? |
your getting close to flying that woody winged kolb arn't you? I am going
to be real curious to hear what that thing can do.
Topher
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: modifications? |
Woody,
Are you using a Harry Ribblit aifoil on your modified wing? If not, what
airfoil did you select? Thanks .
...Richard Swiderski
Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Armstrong" <tophera(at)centurytel.net>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: modifications?
>
> your getting close to flying that woody winged kolb arn't you? I am going
> to be real curious to hear what that thing can do.
>
> Topher
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kirk Smith" <snuffy(at)usol.com> |
> So, let's all use this resource to the fullest extent, but let's try
to practice a bit of brevity...
And of course limit the personal attacks on one another.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <tophera(at)centurytel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: "perfect" streamline definition??? |
I would like to mention that I also read
> about a gentleman who had designed a very STOL version of his high wing
spam
> can by turning his wing struts into small wings by making the struts
> streamlining in the shape of a wing thus creating lifting airfoils where
once
> only drag existed. I am sure there is more involved, like balancing the
lift
> from the front with the necessary down force on the tail, etc., but once
> done he was able to get off the ground in 75 feet with a GA spam can. Can
> you imagine what we could do if we could do the same sort of thing!
> Positively scary.
>
> Steve
If your going to add wing area it would be better to add it in a way that
doesn't put its lift at a large angle (which is just canceled out by the
angled lift of the other lift strut) cause it just isn't very efficient.
As far as the minimum drag shape, the easy answer is that the perfect shape
is the rain drop. Unfortunately that's only for one Reynolds number (
terminal velocity of rain isn't real high and a rain drop is less then a
half inch long so you get a very small Reynolds number, even compared to
ultralights), and for the viscosity of water. So that doesn't do anybody
much good.
the tough answer is it is a function of Reynolds number, length, thickness
and the 3d flow field that you stick it in. but if you look at your typical
streamlined lift strut you cant get a whole lot better then that in
practical application in the turbulent mess that you would be putting this
on so make it look about right and you will get most of the improvement over
circle that you can get. Often you will not break even when you do stuff
like this. since the profile drag is only one component, you also have skin
friction, interference and induced drag to consider. but the big old lift
struts are the worth streamlining, gear legs too. but all the little struts
at the back of the cage probably wouldn't get you much.
Topher.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: "perfect" streamline definition??? |
Had a similar thing happen, but on a much smaller scale. After I slipped
the plastic streamlines over my gear legs, I noticed the airplane had a
slight but noticable tendency to fly with the nose a bit higher. Don't know
if it was less drag at the lowest point of the airplane, or the tiny amount
of lift that might have been created, but you could tell that something had
changed.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
I would like to mention that I also read
>about a gentleman who had designed a very STOL version of his high wing spam
>can by turning his wing struts into small wings by making the struts
>streamlining in the shape of a wing thus creating lifting airfoils where once
>only drag existed. I am sure there is more involved, like balancing the lift
>from the front with the necessary down force on the tail, etc., but once
>done he was able to get off the ground in 75 feet with a GA spam can. Can
>you imagine what we could do if we could do the same sort of thing!
>Positively scary.
>
>Steve
>
>
>---
>Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
---
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | b young <byoung(at)brigham.net> |
| Subject: | Re:painting lexan |
can a person put polly tone paint over lexan plastic????
i know that if you accidentally got some on it would only
come off with a large helping of explosives... maybe a
grinder or something.... but if you really wanted it to
stick, would it? or would it just slide off? would it be
necessary to use some scotch bright or sand paper to rough
it up, or just paint it on? or on the other hand would it
make the plastic go brittle and fall apart? i have heard
the term 'creasing' is it a term to describe visual clarity
or a state just before it crumbles apart? has anyone had
any experience?
boyd
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kirk Smith" <snuffy(at)usol.com> |
| Subject: | Tuton on the Futon |
Beauford,
Maybe a little time on the couch with the resident Kolblist
psychologist is in order. That's not my area of expertise as I'm the
resident safety expert. I must inform you that I was in tears as I read
of your delemna. Gettin old is hell! My personal experience with
orgiastic delight aflight is limited to Citabrias and Pipers. I have
found that it's really all in the way you caress the pitch and role
control. You must be gentle but firm. A smooth co-ordinated motion can
bring about surges of delightful ecstacy. Careful not to overdo it
though as too much of a good thing can render you senseless and
disoriented. I have an irrational, phobic fear that I will die from
having too much orgiastic delight in the wild blue yonder. I suppose
that one day I will be found prostrate on my prostate from an overdose
of pitching and rolling in the cockpit. But at this point in my life it
would be a most pleasant form of expiration. In conclusion, I guess the
only real advice I could offer would be to grab ahold of that stick and
fly. If you can find a lady to share the flight with, that would be an
excellent adventure! I highly recommend it. ...........Kirk
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
I wonder if there is an advantage of plastic or composite
over metal
> for reducing condensation?
> Richard Pike
Richard/Gang:
Do you ever find any water in your carb float bowls?
I get a drop or two of water occasionally when I drain my
sump and in the float bowls. I have alum tank, but I do not
keep it topped off. If I kept it topped off it would not be
as prone to collect condensation. However, I have to push
up a hill coming out of my hanger, plus I do not like to fly
with full tank locally.
Most of the moisture is in the air in the tank, is it not?
As the air warms and cools the moisture condenses on the
sides and runs down and to the bottom of the tank, plastic,
aluminum or steel. I theeeenk!!!
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re:painting lexan |
> can a person put polly tone paint over lexan plastic????
i have heard
> the term 'creasing' is it a term to describe visual clarity
> or a state just before it crumbles apart? has anyone had
> any experience?
>
> boyd
boyd/Gang:
I have found that certain fuel and MEK will "craze" lexan.
That includes any of the "Stitts" products.
I used to paint portions of the windshield on my Firestar
with flat black spray can paint on the inside. The finished
look on the outside was purty. Had a shine a foot deep.
Had to spray a light coat, let it dry, then another light
coat, ect.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kirk Smith" <snuffy(at)usol.com> |
> Most of the moisture is in the air in the tank, is it not?
> As the air warms and cools the moisture condenses on the
> sides and runs down and to the bottom of the tank, plastic,
> aluminum or steel. I theeeenk!!!
>
> john h
John/gang
I wonder if an alphanumeric condenser could be mounted in the fuel tank
to illiminate this situation? Ok , I just couldn't resist! Ouch! Ooch! LOL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
> I wonder if an alphanumeric condenser could be mounted in the fuel tank
> to illiminate this situation?
Kirk/Gang:
I don't know what a "alphanumeric condenser" is?
If you keep your tanks full, have a sump/water seperator,
drain it after it has sat all night into a clear glass jar
to check for water, you probably will not have a
water/contaminated fuel problem. Also periodically check
the carb float bowls. If a drop of water and other gunk
that seperates out of the fuel is allowed to remain in the
"pot metal" float bowls on the Bing carbs, they will
eventually eat away at the metal providing good material to
stop and impede fuel as it enters the main jet. On a two
stroke engine, this can lead to lean mixture and seizure.
It is also a good idea to check fuel sump after fueling,
especially at an unfamiliar location and source. Both
forced landings in my Mark III powered by 912 was caused by
fuel contamination.
john h
PS: If you can see contamination in your tank, it will
eventually end up in your float bowls.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: modifications? |
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com |
Woody, Richard, and others,
Modifications are the things that keep some us going, but for you two guys who
know what they are doing when it comes to making mods, this is great. I was referring
to the newbies who think they want to change a lot of things before they
have ever flown. They are the ones that I think could be dangerous to themselves.
If I want to go faster, I will get another plane that is faster. I see no point
in modifying my Firestar.
Ralph Burlingame
Original Firestar
15 years flying it
> I certainly agree that Homer & Dennis are brilliant designer of
>aircraft. But I would be willing to bet that neither of them would claim
>their designs could not be improved upon.
>One of the reasons I love this List is because its been a
>friendly place where I am not afraid to ask dumb questions & where
>disagreement has been respectful & logical. ....Richard Swiderski
Well said Richard. As the one of the foremost modifiers on this list I
know that some will be upset with my modifications. Others are waiting for
the results of my experiments so they can use it on theirs. If you remove
the spark of imagination or the willingness to experiment society could not
advance. Adding a different wing to a Kolb may not be a major move upward
for society but to me it is a challenge and that is what I love in life. Woody
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Beauford's lament |
>
>beauford(at)tampabay.rr.com
>The Rotax part of this mess has left me a mere smokin' shell of a man....
>totally defeated and devoid of hope....
>Beauford, the Aluminum Butcher of Brandon, FL
>FF #076
OK Beauford, this simply will not do.
As one of the list's premier raconteurs, it is absolutely necessary (both
for the good of the list, and your own necessity) to get you back into the
air, and if the Rotax is hindering that effort, then we need to deal with it.
Some of this stuff might sound obvious, but sometimes, nothing is obvious;
bear with me. Even if I can't figure it out (which is likely what will
happen) there are probably others on the list that can.
What are the symptoms of misbehavior of your engine?
Do the symptoms vary under different conditions?
Fill in the following checklist:
Type of Rotax:
Type of ignition system: points or CDI?
Do your spark plugs have solid tops or screw off?
Standard spark plugs or resistor?
Gap setting?
Do you have the standard 5000 ohm spark plug caps or something different?
Are you using a TinyTach or anything similar that requires a wire wrapped
around a spark plug lead?
Do you have chokes and how are they hooked up?
Do you have a primer system?
Brand of prop, length and number of blades?
Prop pitch if fixed?
Rpm at full throttle, static?
Egt at full throttle, static?
Cht at full throttle, static?
Rpm at climbout?
Egt at climbout?
Cht at climbout?
Rpm at cruise?
Egt at cruise?
Cht at cruise?
Rpm at full throttle, level flight?
Egt at full throttle, level flight?
Cht at full throttle, level flight?
Describe the color of carbon on your spark plugs tips.
What type of fuel are you using?
Did you check it for alcohol/ethanol/methanol?
What type of oil are you using?
How many ounces of oil are you adding to how many gallons of gas?
Typically, how old is your fuel mixture?
Smack your muffler - any internal rattles?
Did you ever disassemble your carburetor slide/needle assembly? Or did
anyone else?
Is there anything about your engine that doesn't seem to make sense, or
you're not sure about, that might be worth bringing up or discussing?
Jump all over it Beauford, we're a-waitin'...
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
---
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Lloyd O'Dell" <wander10(at)infi.net> |
| Subject: | Aileron stick adjustment |
Hello Kolbers.
I have a Firestar II from the old Kolb Company, that I am finishing
and getting ready for the first flight. I am presently trying to adjust
the ailerons to center position, before drilling and riveting the
control horns into the aileron tubes. With the cage level, and the
aileron crank, (located under the tube at the rear of the fuselage)
level, the control stick is not standing up straight. It is about 3 or
4 degrees toward the left side. I see no way to adjust this stick to
center.
My questions are: 1. Was the Firestar designed this way for a
reason?
2. If not, should I try to center the
control stick to center by cutting a notch at the weld joint, bend it to
center and reweld the tube?
3. Not worry about it at this time
until after the first flight, and see how it fly's, then make the
necessary adjustments?
Thanks in advance for the advice. Lloyd O'Dell - Central
Florida
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | possums <possums(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron stick adjustment |
>
> Hello Kolbers.
> I have a Firestar II from the old Kolb Company, that I am finishing
>and getting ready for the first flight. I am presently trying to adjust
>the ailerons to center position, before drilling and riveting the
>control horns into the aileron tubes. With the cage level, and the
>aileron crank, (located under the tube at the rear of the fuselage)
>level, the control stick is not standing up straight. It is about 3 or
>4 degrees toward the left side. I see no way to adjust this stick to
>center.
> My questions are: 1. Was the Firestar designed this way for a
>reason?
> 2. If not, should I try to center the
>control stick to center by cutting a notch at the weld joint, bend it to
>center and reweld the tube?
> 3. Not worry about it at this time
>until after the first flight, and see how it fly's, then make the
>necessary adjustments?
>
Mine's more confortable leaning to the left - I'm right handed.
If you can get enough deflection in the ailerons.
I rebuilt my stick with a extra "bend" in it to keep it to the left.
Cut the notch (I think your talking about) too.
http://www.mindspring.com/~possums/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kirk Smith" <snuffy(at)usol.com> |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Pike" <richard(at)bcchapel.org>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Fuel lines
> Interesting point. Both my onboard tanks are fiberglass, and there is an
> outlet at the lowest point for a water sump, but I almost never see any
> water. I wonder if there is an advantage of plastic or composite over
metal
> for reducing condensation?
> Richard Pike
> MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
Richard,
Did you coat your tanks inside with something? I'm not familiar with
fiberglass gas tanks. It seems the texture of the fiberglass would absorb
moisture. I know sailboats and such use a gelcoat on the outside.
Thanks.....Kirk
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob, Kathleen, & Kory Brocious" <bbrocious(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Rotax 912 for sale on Ebay |
Kolbers,
If any one is interested there is a Rotax 912 for sale on Ebay. $3,999. Search
on "Rotax."
Bob
Mark III 98%
Bob, Kathleen, and Kory BrociousTenacity Farm
Campbellsburg, Kentucky
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: Click Here
________________________________________________________________________________
Got to get my 2 cents in here , I have been driving outboards for almost 40
years.. As far as I know black hose is all you can get for that application,
and its been premix for ever,,
Richard Harris
MK3 N912RH
Arkansas
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Hauck" <hawk36(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Fuel lines
>
>
> > I have heard there has been some experience of separation with premix
being
> > run thru the black hoses. Perhaps it brand associated but I recall it
has
> > been reported on UL list.
>
> jerryb/Gang:
>
> What kind of explanation did these folks with fuel oil
> seperation give when "premix is run through black hoses"?
>
> How did they know it was the "black hose" that caused the
> seperation?
>
> john h
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
I feel sure a quadrostatic spring & a fauntknotely rod would be a great
improvement in this applacation..
Richard Harris
MK3 N912RH
Arkansas
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Hauck" <hawk36(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Fuel lines
>
>
> > I wonder if an alphanumeric condenser could be mounted in the fuel
tank
> > to illiminate this situation?
>
> Kirk/Gang:
>
> I don't know what a "alphanumeric condenser" is?
>
> If you keep your tanks full, have a sump/water seperator,
> drain it after it has sat all night into a clear glass jar
> to check for water, you probably will not have a
> water/contaminated fuel problem. Also periodically check
> the carb float bowls. If a drop of water and other gunk
> that seperates out of the fuel is allowed to remain in the
> "pot metal" float bowls on the Bing carbs, they will
> eventually eat away at the metal providing good material to
> stop and impede fuel as it enters the main jet. On a two
> stroke engine, this can lead to lean mixture and seizure.
>
> It is also a good idea to check fuel sump after fueling,
> especially at an unfamiliar location and source. Both
> forced landings in my Mark III powered by 912 was caused by
> fuel contamination.
>
> john h
>
> PS: If you can see contamination in your tank, it will
> eventually end up in your float bowls.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Woody <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
| Subject: | Re: modifications? |
>
>Woody, Richard, and others,
>
>Modifications are the things that keep some us going, but for you two guys
>who know what they are doing when it comes to making mods, this is great.
>I was referring to the newbies who think they want to change a lot of
>things before they have ever flown. They are the ones that I think could
>be dangerous to themselves.
So true. There is an old saying that perfectionists build airplanes. Non
perfectionists build and fly airplanes. I learned long ago not to modify
anything untill I know it can be improved on or there is a problem with it.
I was interested in subaru's for awhile. The thing that surprised me the
most were all the improvements the guys were making to get the engines to
fly safer were the first things to fail in a real life situation. I came up
with the attitude that if it worked great in a car unmodified it will work
great in an airplane unmodified. I would even go so far as to say if it was
running good in the car it will run good in the plane without a teardown. A
friend found this out the hard way when an inexperienced (in subaru's )
mechanic made a mistake as he was putting it back together. I know two
examples of this in this area, one expensive. one fatal.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Woody <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
| Subject: | Re: modifications? |
I hope to have the new plane in the air with a few hours on it by Aug 10
so I can fly it to a pig roast. The working title I had for it was the MkX
but due to the indian inspired design I am putting on it I will be renaming
it the Thunderbird. You will understand why when you see it. I can no
longer call it a Kolb although none of the airframe was changed except the
airfoil Does Terra Torn still have the rights to that name or are their
birds officially T-Birds.
The airfoil is an eiffel series I think. It is a bit slimmer but
similar to a Pietenpaul airfoil. I found it in an EAA flying and glider
manual (1936?) It was used on the Ramsey flying bathtub. Same weight, wing
span and chord as a Mk111 Stalled at 18 mph and topped out at 70 on a 30
hp engine. Of course the numbers were probably fudged a bit but it should
still give good results. I will let the list know what happens. Photos
available on the photo share list.
><swiderski@advanced-connect.net>
>
>Woody,
>
> Are you using a Harry Ribblit aifoil on your modified wing? If not, what
>airfoil did you select? Thanks .
>...Richard Swiderski
>
>
>
> >
> > your getting close to flying that woody winged kolb arn't you? I am going
> > to be real curious to hear what that thing can do.
> >
> > Topher
> >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Key" <dhkey(at)msn.com> |
That close call was a scary story. I haven't praticed dead stick with a
passanger, I don't get a good feeling about it when I think about it either.
Nice Job.
Pennzoil for air cooled engines? Are you running an air cooled engine? The
local experts tell me not to run that oil since I don't have an air cooled
engine.
Dave Key
Mark III
582
For information on the lowest priced web site design please contact me.
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SGreenpg(at)aol.com |
In a message dated 7/25/02 8:15:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time, dhkey(at)msn.com
writes:
> Pennzoil for air cooled engines? Are you running an air cooled engine?
Dave,
It is a liquid cooled engine but that oil is widely recommended.
Steven
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
>
>
>Richard,
> Did you coat your tanks inside with something? I'm not familiar with
>fiberglass gas tanks. It seems the texture of the fiberglass would absorb
>moisture. I know sailboats and such use a gelcoat on the outside.
>Thanks.....Kirk
No, actually I have built several tanks using different methods. My current
MKIII tanks are fiberglass cloth and the same epoxy that Aircraft Spruce
sells for building VariEze's, Cozy's, etc.
The Anglin J-6 I built in the early 90's, I used fiberglass cloth and
polyester resin, and those fuel tanks are still doing just fine.
In both instances, the cloth was fairly heavily saturated with resin, (not
the lightest way to build, but all I care about is that they don't leak...)
and still seems to have the same characteristics as when they were new.
Tony Bingelis' book "Sportplane Construction Techniques" has a large
section on fabricating fiberglass fuel tanks, and I just did what he said
to do. (All his books are excellent resources)
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
---
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
>
>Pennzoil for air cooled engines? Are you running an air cooled engine? The
>local experts tell me not to run that oil since I don't have an air cooled
>engine.
>
>Dave Key
>Mark III
>582
Pennzoil for air cooled engines is the correct oil for all Rotax 2-cycles,
assuming you really want to use Pennzoil...
I think I'll continue to use Phillips Injex.
(19 years, 900+ 2-stroke hours, and so far, so good)
(Probably blow the bottom end out of the 532 on the next flight!)
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
---
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hans van Alphen" <HVA(at)bellsouth.net> |
>snip
>Are you using a TinyTach or anything similar that requires a wire wrapped
>around a spark plug lead?
>snip
>
>Richard Pike
>MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
Richard and others,
What problems have you had with the TinyTach ?
Lately I have a intermittant slight miss in my engine, only at full
throttle...
Replaced sparkplug wires.
Thanks.
Hans van Alphen
Mark III Xtra
BMW powered
61 hours.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kirk Smith" <snuffy(at)usol.com> |
| Subject: | Deadstick landings |
Deadstick landings ain't hard. Done hunerts of em.That's all I been
doing since the wife left little over a year ago. ..........:o) Kirk
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kirk Smith" <snuffy(at)usol.com> |
> Tony Bingelis' book "Sportplane Construction Techniques" has a large
> section on fabricating fiberglass fuel tanks, and I just did what he said
> to do. (All his books are excellent resources)
> Richard Pike
> MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
Thanks Richard,
I'll have to get that book............Kirk
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob, Kathleen, & Kory Brocious" <bbrocious(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Deadstick landings |
Kolbers,
I have had the good fortune to begin my flight training in sailplanes. As a 15
year old then and a 46 year old now the habits I learned have never left me and
I continue to practice them in powered aircraft. The story about the engine
failure reminds me of three things I learned.
1. A sailplane accelerates to land. The reason is,a sailplane needs a safe cushion
above stall. There is no "go around" option. In an off field landing one may
find themselves forced to land downwind or crosswind. The added speed reduces
the "pucker" factor. I can almost always get rid of excess speed but it is
tough as hell to find it when I need it.
2. Make reasonable but steep approaches. Again, I can almost always get rid of
excess altitude but it is toughto get it back when you need it. You will never
see me making a 2.5 - 3 degree approach to ANY runway in VFR conditions, even
with long, clear approaches. It is habit. A sudden tailwind or a tree that seems
to grow before your eyes becomes a simpler issue to deal with. Altitude is
money in the bank. You can almost always spend it.
3. Always have a field identified for an off field landing. If the thermals suddenly
disappear you have a plan ready. It becomes second nature in a sailplane.
Should be true with experimentals as well.
Flying sailplanes takes a lot of my fear away should things suddenly get quiet.
Your plane will fly if you fly it. Practice saved the lives of these two people.
If you have the opportunity to take some dual in a sailplane I encourage it
as a good investment.
Bob (Mark III 98% complete)
Bob, Kathleen, and Kory BrociousTenacity Farm
Campbellsburg, Kentucky
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
> > Tony Bingelis' book "Sportplane Construction Techniques" h
> > Richard Pike
>
> Thanks Richard,
> I'll have to get that book............Kirk
Richard/Kirk/Guys:
Tony has two books:
Sport Plane Builder (Aircraft construction methods)
Firewall Forward (Aircraft engine installation methods)
They are both worth their weight in gold. Easy to read and
understand. If you don't understand words, he has lots of
pics and diagrams. :-)
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kirk Smith" <snuffy(at)usol.com> |
> understand. If you don't understand words, he has lots of
> pics and diagrams. :-)
>
> john h
Can ya color in em too John? hehehe.........;o))
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeremy Casey" <jrcasey(at)ldl.net> |
> > Tony Bingelis' book "Sportplane Construction Techniques" h
> > Richard Pike
>
> Thanks Richard,
> I'll have to get that book............Kirk
Richard/Kirk/Guys:
Tony has two books:
Sport Plane Builder (Aircraft construction methods)
Firewall Forward (Aircraft engine installation methods)
They are both worth their weight in gold. Easy to read and
understand. If you don't understand words, he has lots of
pics and diagrams. :-)
john h
4 actually...
Sportplane builder
Sportplane construction techniques
Firewall forward
Bingelis on engines
Aircraft Spruce has them all for $75 or about $20/apiece...
He has his own section on their online catalog in the books section.
Jeremy Casey
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "D Smalec" <smald(at)shianet.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Kolb-List Digest: 24 Msgs - 07/24/02 |
> SR3SA2L1(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> There may be some insignificant changes, but the only structural
differences
> between the FS i and the FS II are the number of ribs (GW), and the
diameter of
> the gear legs- 1.125 vs. 1.250. And, the 503 engine.
Also, there are two steel drag strut supports in the FS II vs. one in the FS
I .
Lurkin' Darren, FS I, 180 hrs, @100 hr. decarbon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vincehallam(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: modifications? |
please tell us more about the flying bath tub .I like your performance
figures. You could email me vince hallam@aol tks vnz
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vincehallam(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Deadstick landings |
please again whatis bnsp?
vnz
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
Not had any problems with a Tiny Tach. But any time you wrap a wire around
a spark plug lead and then go snaking that same wire off down through your
harness, past various metal structural members, bringing it into close
proximity to things that would normally be good at grounding out spark plug
leads...
Well, you get my drift. They seem to work great, but... that wire has a
potential for mischief.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>
>>snip
>>Are you using a TinyTach or anything similar that requires a wire wrapped
>>around a spark plug lead?
>>snip
>>
>>Richard Pike
>>MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>>
>
>Richard and others,
>What problems have you had with the TinyTach ?
>Lately I have a intermittant slight miss in my engine, only at full
>throttle...
>Replaced sparkplug wires.
>Thanks.
>
>Hans van Alphen
>Mark III Xtra
>BMW powered
>61 hours.
>
>
>---
>Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
---
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | b young <byoung(at)brigham.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Kolb-List Digest: 49 Msgs - 07/23/02 |
What is the easiest way to define/draw a "perfect"
streamline shape.
==============================
jim i have been told that the way you open up a space does
not greatly affect the problem it is the way you close up
the space that makes the greatest drag reductions. for
example on a gear leg start with the gear o and end with a
> o> you need to line them up a bit better.
for a test i have thought of taping a bit of poster board
around the gear leg to see how much it helpes.
boyd
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Airgriff2(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Kolb-List Digest: 24 Msgs - 07/24/02 |
In a message dated 7/25/02 2:51:21 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
kolb-list-digest(at)matronics.com writes:
> engine
> > began to drop RPM and then almost immediately a loud metallic hammering
> > followed by silence.
Steve, could you hear your instructors saying "FLY THE PLANE" ? Way to go
on a good landing !! It's amasing how focused you are on doing what is needed
in that short time. There isn't even time or room in your mind to become
scared. That may come after you are on the ground and that's ok. I've flown
my MK3 as a glider on two different occassions.
Really glad it worked out well for you and passenger.
Bob Griffin
Albany NY
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeffrey Jones" <jeffrey.jones(at)fuse.net> |
| Subject: | Used Kolb w/tail number |
Everyone,
Looking for information and or your experiences in buying a used Kolb
which has a tail number. My passion is to build my own Kolb some
day....however with my time available and family duties I will need to
wait. I desire to have a two place plane. I have my PPL and fly an Ultra
Star.
So many are available but my concern is dealing with yearly inspections
required by the FAA on experimental registered aircraft. When one buys
a Kolb with a tail number, can it be removed paper work wise? If so,
how difficult would it be to apply for a tail number again.......do
something to the plane to claim it as salvage, fix and file as
registered builder?
Thanks
Jeff
Burlington KY
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Woody <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
| Subject: | Re: modifications? |
>
>please tell us more about the flying bath tub .I like your performance
>figures. You could email me vince hallam@aol tks vnz
The whole story is in the 1932 Flying and Glider manuals are available from
the EAA. This is a great collection of books and the info in them is still
relevant today.
Top speed 65-70
cruise 60-65
landing speed 20
climb 1 person 400 fpm
climb 2 people 300 fpm
Motor aeronica 30 hp at 2500 rpm
span 32'
chord 5' 3"
area 168 sq ft.
weight 400 lb
load 300 lb
This is a metal tube frame and is a high drag aircraft.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Used Kolb w/tail number |
> So many are available but my concern is dealing with yearly inspections
> required by the FAA on experimental registered aircraft. When one buys
> a Kolb with a tail number, can it be removed paper work wise? If so,
> how difficult would it be to apply for a tail number again.......do
> something to the plane to claim it as salvage, fix and file as
> registered builder?
>
> Thanks
>
> Jeff
Jeff/Gents:
Is the Kolb Builders List the appropriate place to find out
how to forge aircraft documents?
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerryb <ulflyer(at)airmail.net> |
I seem post in the past about this either on this or the UL list. There
were also some comments made during a Pennzoil presentation at a Safety
Seminar our UL chapter hosted. It caught me off guard when I heard
it. I'll see if I can find any past.
jerryb
>
>
> > I have heard there has been some experience of separation with premix being
> > run thru the black hoses. Perhaps it brand associated but I recall it has
> > been reported on UL list.
>
>jerryb/Gang:
>
>What kind of explanation did these folks with fuel oil
>seperation give when "premix is run through black hoses"?
>
>How did they know it was the "black hose" that caused the
>seperation?
>
>john h
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SR3SA2L1(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Used Kolb w/tail number |
John,
I don't believe that Jeff was asking how to "forge" anything. I believe that
he has the same legitimate questions that many others have regarding
experimental aircraft. There is difficulty even in accurately defining what
constitutes a 51% rule build ( is it based on time? On volume? On weight?
etc.). Even certified aircraft can be decertified and reclassified and then
recertified by various means, all legal ( expensive and difficult, but legal
).
I believe that Jeff would like to know if he partially (51%) disassembles the
plane and then reassembles it, or goes through some other process, can he
reregister as the builder.
Considering the fact that when dealing with the FAA it often seems that the
answer you get depends on who you ask rather than what you ask, I cannot
think of a more appropriate place to ask a question such as his than the Kolb
Builders List.
Where do you recommend he ask this sort of question about a Kolb if not from
the one group of people who have the most experience with issues such as this?
Sorry Jeff, I really do not know the answer to your question but perhaps
there are some of the others on the list that can provide suggestions on this
issue. Please let me know what you find out, I'm sure you will not be the
only one that faces this issue. Anyone that buys or sells a Kolb will want to
know the answer to your question at one time or another.
Steve
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron or Mary" <ronormar(at)apex.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Used Kolb w/tail number |
Sounded like a reasonable question to me. I don't have my paper work here
but as I remember, there is a form that I carry in the plane that has a
section on how to de-certify a regestered aircraft. Jeff, I will look for it
when I go to the airport and e-mail you off list.
Ron Payne
-------Original Message-------
From: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Date: Thursday, July 25, 2002 10:04:49 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Used Kolb w/tail number
> So many are available but my concern is dealing with yearly inspections
> required by the FAA on experimental registered aircraft. When one buys
> a Kolb with a tail number, can it be removed paper work wise? If so,
> how difficult would it be to apply for a tail number again.......do
> something to the plane to claim it as salvage, fix and file as
> registered builder?
>
> Thanks
>
> Jeff
Jeff/Gents:
Is the Kolb Builders List the appropriate place to find out
how to forge aircraft documents?
john h
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Airgriff2(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Kolb-List Digest: 32 Msgs - 07/25/02 |
In a message dated 7/26/02 2:51:19 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
kolb-list-digest(at)matronics.com writes:
> Pennzoil for air cooled engines? Are you running an air cooled engine?
>
>
The engine does not know how it is cooled. Rotax reccommends Pennzoil (for
air cooled engines) because of the temps that these engines run and what the
oil is designed for.
Bob G
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim" <flykolb(at)carolina.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Used Kolb w/tail number |
Jeff,
I don't know about de-registering and re-registering but I did buy a used
Kolb Mark III with N numbers.
The annual is very simple but you may have to look around for the best A&P
to do it. The one at my little grass strip was happy to do it and actually
found two potential problems in two subsequent annual inspections.
This last year he was too busy but a friend of mine who flys a Rans and is
now a BFI also has an A&P rating and did the annual.
I found that it was a good idea to have someone other than me to check the
plane occasionally. Sometimes we get used to something and could overlook a
potential problem
My annuals usually cost $100-150. Money well spent.
Jim
Mark III
N103TS
Charlotte, NC
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeffrey Jones" <jeffrey.jones(at)fuse.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: Used Kolb w/tail number
>
> Everyone,
>
> Looking for information and or your experiences in buying a used Kolb
> which has a tail number. My passion is to build my own Kolb some
> day....however with my time available and family duties I will need to
> wait. I desire to have a two place plane. I have my PPL and fly an Ultra
> Star.
>
> So many are available but my concern is dealing with yearly inspections
> required by the FAA on experimental registered aircraft. When one buys
> a Kolb with a tail number, can it be removed paper work wise? If so,
> how difficult would it be to apply for a tail number again.......do
> something to the plane to claim it as salvage, fix and file as
> registered builder?
>
> Thanks
>
> Jeff
> Burlington KY
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron or Mary" <ronormar(at)apex.net> |
| Subject: | Re: used kolb wtail number |
-------Original Message-------
From: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Date: Friday, July 26, 2002 07:32:48 AM
Subject: Kolb-List: used kolb wtail number
Another very good post Jim. I agree with you 100%. I had given up on this
list for a while due to some sarcastic responces that I got when asking
legitimate questions. It became apparent that this type of responce always
came from the same 2 or 3 people. I have decided to just ignore these
individuals and pay attention to the vast majority of the excellent posters
on this list.
Ron Payne
Thanks Steve, WELL SAID.
I would add one more comment as a long-time subscriber of the Kolb List,
ALL OF US COLLECTIVELY drive the direction this forum goes and the value it
provides. We won't have anyone "driving" our direction. This is a
democracy, we don't recognise anyone as King, no matter how many posts he's
made or how far he's flown. To me, every person's ideas have value and I
hope no one is ever discouraged by the occaisional slightly sarcastic reply
by one or two other Kolbers. Always remember that the only stupid question
is the unasked one. Others are thinking as you are and you may help to
clarify a point for safety or efficiency.
Jim Gerken
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Bean <slyck(at)frontiernet.net> |
If the seller allowed it, and it is his prerogative, I would just use
his old number. There are a lot more A&P's available than AI's (IA's?).
I'm faced with the same question as my MKIII is the somewhat
broken wings and tail from one plane and a damaged cage from
another. I have it registered but then you could register a shoebox
just as easy. It's all in the paperwork--a very smooth and professional
document presentation will carry the day. That's what these computers
are good at. --BB
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeremy Casey" <jrcasey(at)ldl.net> |
| Subject: | Used Kolb w/tail number |
Everyone,
Looking for information and or your experiences in buying a used Kolb
which has a tail number. My passion is to build my own Kolb some
day....however with my time available and family duties I will need to
wait. I desire to have a two place plane. I have my PPL and fly an Ultra
Star.
So many are available but my concern is dealing with yearly inspections
required by the FAA on experimental registered aircraft. When one buys
a Kolb with a tail number, can it be removed paper work wise? If so,
how difficult would it be to apply for a tail number again.......do
something to the plane to claim it as salvage, fix and file as
registered builder?
Thanks
Jeff
Burlington KY
Jeff,
I just went through part of what your considering doing...let me
lend some insight.
RE: Buying used plane w/ N-numbers. If the plane has got all of
it's paperwork in order (Airworthiness cert.,registration, weight &
balance sheet, etc.) then it's just like buying/selling a Cessna. You
will transfer the N-number into your name and that's that... You will
have to find someone to do your annual inspection though. This may or
may/not be a big deal in your area. I've heard of people who had a hard
time getting someone, but most times not. NOW HERE'S THE DEAL...(In
CAPS for emphasis) The FAA gave us the incredible freedom to build and
fly our own airplanes and operate them in a public airspace system, over
unsuspecting peoples houses and to carry oblivious passengers because
they think you built the plane "for educational purposes" and as such
you learned everything there is to know about YOUR airplane when you
built it. This is the reason they allow you to do the annual
inspections yourself, because as the builder you know the plane as good
as any A&P mechanic ever could. That being said, if you "really" didn't
build it then you really need someone else making sure it's airworthy.
This privilege to get the repairman cert. was hard-won by the early EAA
guys, like Poberezny and Wittman and the abuse of the privilege has
almost cost everyone the privilege more than once. There are guys that
build planes for hire and don't even hide it, then turn them over to
guys that don't know nearly enough to diagnose problems, let alone fix
them. (Case in point...a hired builder built an Air-Cam for a fellow
who upon taking the plane to it's first fly-in taxied up, all grins and
went to shut down the engines. Well the shorting wires had come loose
and the switch wouldn't kill the engine. Since he didn't know anything
about the nuts and bolts of the thing he didn't know where the fuel shut
off was (or if it had one, and if not, why it didn't...) so he climbed
up so gracefully on the wing with a pair of pliers to choke off the fuel
line to kill the engine...) This whole deal about tippy toeing around
the regs gets under some peoples craw and is just not a good idea
anyway, for safety sake.
NOW ON THE OTHER HAND... if you are really talking about buying a used
plane and tearing it apart, past 51% and rebuilding it then that's
another story. And now from personal experience I'll tell you it's a
BAD IDEA!!! Don't do it! I bought a used Challenger, that upon my
closer inspection (I didn't even need an A&P to tell me that it wasn't
fit to fly...but if I had thought it was I'd certainly have had an A&P's
blessing before I commited aviation) decided the only way I'd ever be
comfortable in the plane was after I rebuilt it. So I stripped the
fuselage down to the bare-bones and rewired, replumbed, recovered,
repainted, and re-everything'd it. I ended up with as much time in it
as if I'd built from scratch and within about $1000 of as much money.
So if you are gonna RE-build it, then give TNK the business and start
from scratch...you'll know what you have and you'll never have to worry
what someone else did to it...
My $.02 worth, and almost worth what you paid for it...
Jeremy Casey
jrcasey(at)ldl.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SR3SA2L1(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Used Kolb w/tail number |
Ron,
Please e-mail the info to me also. Although it does not apply to me at this
time, it may in the future and when I go to sell my Kolb it may apply to
whomever buys it and I am sure they will need the info. Thanks.
Steve
SR3SA2L1(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Used Kolb w/tail number |
Jeremy, your answer to Jeff is right on the money. Also, I suspect that
deregistering, disassembling, and then rebuilding and reregistering an
airplane just to try and show yourself as the builder is not something the
feds normally buy into.
Another consideration: if you try to do that, eventually you will have to
present the airplane either to a DAR and have it inspected (Which will cost
you several hundred dollars for their fee) or you will need to present it
to an FAA FSDO person, who may start asking some embarassing and difficult
questions, and possibly end up hanging you out to dry, because what you
propose is not what the FAA envisioned. That could get really ugly, if they
thought you were trying to forge something.
On the other hand, if you learn all the ends and outs of your airplane,
most A&P's will welcome an owner assisted annual (condition inspection) and
if you do 90% of the work, it will probably cost you less than $150 a year.
But if you tear it down and rebuild it, then have to pay a DAR to inspect
it for you, that will eat up many years of A&P fees right there.
In our local area, we have 3 A&P's with IA authorizations, and getting
annual condition inspections for homebuilts is simple. You might want to
just go that route and save yourself a lot of hassle. Check around.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>
>Everyone,
>
>Looking for information and or your experiences in buying a used Kolb
>which has a tail number. My passion is to build my own Kolb some
>day....however with my time available and family duties I will need to
>wait. I desire to have a two place plane. I have my PPL and fly an Ultra
>Star.
>
>So many are available but my concern is dealing with yearly inspections
>required by the FAA on experimental registered aircraft. When one buys
>a Kolb with a tail number, can it be removed paper work wise? If so,
>how difficult would it be to apply for a tail number again.......do
>something to the plane to claim it as salvage, fix and file as
>registered builder?
>
>Thanks
>
>Jeff
>Burlington KY
>
>
>
>Jeff,
>
> I just went through part of what your considering doing...let me
>lend some insight.
> RE: Buying used plane w/ N-numbers. If the plane has got all of
>it's paperwork in order (Airworthiness cert.,registration, weight &
>balance sheet, etc.) then it's just like buying/selling a Cessna. You
>will transfer the N-number into your name and that's that... You will
>have to find someone to do your annual inspection though. This may or
>may/not be a big deal in your area. I've heard of people who had a hard
>time getting someone, but most times not. NOW HERE'S THE DEAL...(In
>CAPS for emphasis) The FAA gave us the incredible freedom to build and
>fly our own airplanes and operate them in a public airspace system, over
>unsuspecting peoples houses and to carry oblivious passengers because
>they think you built the plane "for educational purposes" and as such
>you learned everything there is to know about YOUR airplane when you
>built it. This is the reason they allow you to do the annual
>inspections yourself, because as the builder you know the plane as good
>as any A&P mechanic ever could. That being said, if you "really" didn't
>build it then you really need someone else making sure it's airworthy.
>This privilege to get the repairman cert. was hard-won by the early EAA
>guys, like Poberezny and Wittman and the abuse of the privilege has
>almost cost everyone the privilege more than once. There are guys that
>build planes for hire and don't even hide it, then turn them over to
>guys that don't know nearly enough to diagnose problems, let alone fix
>them. (Case in point...a hired builder built an Air-Cam for a fellow
>who upon taking the plane to it's first fly-in taxied up, all grins and
>went to shut down the engines. Well the shorting wires had come loose
>and the switch wouldn't kill the engine. Since he didn't know anything
>about the nuts and bolts of the thing he didn't know where the fuel shut
>off was (or if it had one, and if not, why it didn't...) so he climbed
>up so gracefully on the wing with a pair of pliers to choke off the fuel
>line to kill the engine...) This whole deal about tippy toeing around
>the regs gets under some peoples craw and is just not a good idea
>anyway, for safety sake.
>
>NOW ON THE OTHER HAND... if you are really talking about buying a used
>plane and tearing it apart, past 51% and rebuilding it then that's
>another story. And now from personal experience I'll tell you it's a
>BAD IDEA!!! Don't do it! I bought a used Challenger, that upon my
>closer inspection (I didn't even need an A&P to tell me that it wasn't
>fit to fly...but if I had thought it was I'd certainly have had an A&P's
>blessing before I commited aviation) decided the only way I'd ever be
>comfortable in the plane was after I rebuilt it. So I stripped the
>fuselage down to the bare-bones and rewired, replumbed, recovered,
>repainted, and re-everything'd it. I ended up with as much time in it
>as if I'd built from scratch and within about $1000 of as much money.
>So if you are gonna RE-build it, then give TNK the business and start
>from scratch...you'll know what you have and you'll never have to worry
>what someone else did to it...
>
>My $.02 worth, and almost worth what you paid for it...
>
>Jeremy Casey
>jrcasey(at)ldl.net
>
>
>---
>Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
---
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeffrey Jones" <jeffrey.jones(at)interactivetechnologies.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Used Kolb w/tail number |
Thanks for your input Jeremy. Good view points on each direction to go.
Jeff
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeremy Casey" <jrcasey(at)ldl.net>
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Used Kolb w/tail number
>
>
> Everyone,
>
> Looking for information and or your experiences in buying a used Kolb
> which has a tail number. My passion is to build my own Kolb some
> day....however with my time available and family duties I will need to
> wait. I desire to have a two place plane. I have my PPL and fly an Ultra
> Star.
>
> So many are available but my concern is dealing with yearly inspections
> required by the FAA on experimental registered aircraft. When one buys
> a Kolb with a tail number, can it be removed paper work wise? If so,
> how difficult would it be to apply for a tail number again.......do
> something to the plane to claim it as salvage, fix and file as
> registered builder?
>
> Thanks
>
> Jeff
> Burlington KY
>
>
>
> Jeff,
>
> I just went through part of what your considering doing...let me
> lend some insight.
> RE: Buying used plane w/ N-numbers. If the plane has got all of
> it's paperwork in order (Airworthiness cert.,registration, weight &
> balance sheet, etc.) then it's just like buying/selling a Cessna. You
> will transfer the N-number into your name and that's that... You will
> have to find someone to do your annual inspection though. This may or
> may/not be a big deal in your area. I've heard of people who had a hard
> time getting someone, but most times not. NOW HERE'S THE DEAL...(In
> CAPS for emphasis) The FAA gave us the incredible freedom to build and
> fly our own airplanes and operate them in a public airspace system, over
> unsuspecting peoples houses and to carry oblivious passengers because
> they think you built the plane "for educational purposes" and as such
> you learned everything there is to know about YOUR airplane when you
> built it. This is the reason they allow you to do the annual
> inspections yourself, because as the builder you know the plane as good
> as any A&P mechanic ever could. That being said, if you "really" didn't
> build it then you really need someone else making sure it's airworthy.
> This privilege to get the repairman cert. was hard-won by the early EAA
> guys, like Poberezny and Wittman and the abuse of the privilege has
> almost cost everyone the privilege more than once. There are guys that
> build planes for hire and don't even hide it, then turn them over to
> guys that don't know nearly enough to diagnose problems, let alone fix
> them. (Case in point...a hired builder built an Air-Cam for a fellow
> who upon taking the plane to it's first fly-in taxied up, all grins and
> went to shut down the engines. Well the shorting wires had come loose
> and the switch wouldn't kill the engine. Since he didn't know anything
> about the nuts and bolts of the thing he didn't know where the fuel shut
> off was (or if it had one, and if not, why it didn't...) so he climbed
> up so gracefully on the wing with a pair of pliers to choke off the fuel
> line to kill the engine...) This whole deal about tippy toeing around
> the regs gets under some peoples craw and is just not a good idea
> anyway, for safety sake.
>
> NOW ON THE OTHER HAND... if you are really talking about buying a used
> plane and tearing it apart, past 51% and rebuilding it then that's
> another story. And now from personal experience I'll tell you it's a
> BAD IDEA!!! Don't do it! I bought a used Challenger, that upon my
> closer inspection (I didn't even need an A&P to tell me that it wasn't
> fit to fly...but if I had thought it was I'd certainly have had an A&P's
> blessing before I commited aviation) decided the only way I'd ever be
> comfortable in the plane was after I rebuilt it. So I stripped the
> fuselage down to the bare-bones and rewired, replumbed, recovered,
> repainted, and re-everything'd it. I ended up with as much time in it
> as if I'd built from scratch and within about $1000 of as much money.
> So if you are gonna RE-build it, then give TNK the business and start
> from scratch...you'll know what you have and you'll never have to worry
> what someone else did to it...
>
> My $.02 worth, and almost worth what you paid for it...
>
> Jeremy Casey
> jrcasey(at)ldl.net
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Used Kolb w/tail number |
> Forge documents?? Certainly not John.
>
> Jeff
Jeff/Gents/and all you piranhas out there:
Good.
I apologize if my question came across the wrong way. I
have a reputation for being blunt, honest, and not to
tactful at times. It was not intended to accuse you of
being a crook. However, the way I interpreted your post it
seemed you were trying to get out of paying an A&P or the
original builder who holds that aircraft's "repairman's
certificate" for an annual inspection.
I don't agree with trying to go around the regs to save
money, or any other reason. One that really bothers me is
folks flying two place airplanes with a placard that reads
"FOR INSTRUCTION ONLY". Yet, they have rarely or never used
the airplane for instruction.
I haven't intentionally attacked anyone on this List. Never
have and never will, although I have received my share of
attacks since I have been here, about 4 years now. I have
found if I spend my time taking someone else's inventory, I
don't have time to take my own.
Here's where to go to start looking for info, "Amateur Built
Aircraft Reference Material". It is a very complete and
comprehensive site and it belongs to the FAA:
http://av-info.faa.gov/dst/amateur/
At the bottom of the opening page is a list of links for
more info. Check them out. If I was in the market to
register and recertify an amateur/homebuilt, I'd look up the
info for you, but since I am not, have at it.
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bob n <ronoy(at)shentel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Used Kolb w/tail number |
The question involving the de-registration problem, and process, was
gone over a lot on the FLY-UL list a year ago. You can't just take the N
number off the plane, you have to play the FnAA game. I could find the
guy who did finally get it done, after a LOT of work. Much easier if you
go through the F-Hoops.
Bob N.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Streamlined Struts |
Howdy Gang/You Piranhas too: :-)
First modification we did to my old Firestar was streamlined
lift struts. I was having problems with the pins vibrating
and elongating the holes. We fixed that problem by making
up some new 4130 struts from streamlined tubing. To stop
the vibration problem, Bro Jim put me some bushings in the
strut bolt holes that would just slip into the upper and
lower attach points. Used aircraft bolts to snug up the
attachment. No more vibration and elongation of holes.
A bi-product of that was a fair reduction in drag. Was
especially noticeable on approaches and landing. Firestar
wanted to glide faster and did not want to slow down once on
the ground (no brakes yet). Another revelation was the 4130
streamlined struts did not vibrate like the aluminum tube
struts did. During cruise power the round alumninum tubes
were a blur with vibration.
Steel weighed out about the same as aluminum struts, were
much stronger, gave me a more comfortable feeling during my
radical flying days.
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Timandjan(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | engine heater advice |
First of all I am not selling the Kolb, just bought an Avid that I am
starting to build. I am considering the Jabiru or Rotax 912 for power. Has
anybody out there (this list is great for advice) used either and set up
heat. The 912 I could use a heater core end blower or the Jabiru I would use
forced air. I like the idea of the Jabiru for the lack of radiator and
plumbing. I probably will wish I had built another Kolb about half way
though this project, but I wanted something different.
Another question (hopefully John H will respond) has anybody ever dealt with
the Government surplus Rotax 912's like the one being sold on ebay. I wonder
if the cost savings would make it worth a try or is the engine and carbs and
general setup too different or would it take a lot of engineering on my part
to modify it.
Just remember Avid is not a dirty word. I guess I really wanted a project,
the price was great and it was unstarted. All the kits I have been looking at
lately are almost complete and I didn't want that.
Thanks for any advice.
Tim
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeremy Casey" <jrcasey(at)ldl.net> |
| Subject: | engine heater advice |
Word I got from Ronnie Smith RE: surplus engines was NO!!!!! They are
government surplus and the guys that did the installations fought high
temps for awhile. He said all that he had seen had been overheated
(i.e. changed the temper of the metal in the heads...soft) and the fuel
injection system is VERY pricey. Also the "government" didn't buy a
bunch of engines and never use them...they run the goodie out of them
and put another one in. For your info., these surplus 912's come out of
the Predator recon drone which has made a name for itself in Afghanistan
lately.
Also the outfit that builds the Predator, buys engines from Rotax,
strips the carbs and puts on a tuned header exhaust and an injection
system that makes it really sip the gas...but it also has a lot of
computers to make it work...and I bet the Air Force would be real
hesitant about handing over the maintenance manuals when you needed to
work on it...
Bottom line...PIG-IN-A-POKE
Jeremy Casey
jrcasey(at)ldl.net
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Timandjan(at)aol.com
Subject: Kolb-List: engine heater advice
First of all I am not selling the Kolb, just bought an Avid that I am
starting to build. I am considering the Jabiru or Rotax 912 for power.
Has
anybody out there (this list is great for advice) used either and set up
heat. The 912 I could use a heater core end blower or the Jabiru I would
use
forced air. I like the idea of the Jabiru for the lack of radiator and
plumbing. I probably will wish I had built another Kolb about half way
though this project, but I wanted something different.
Another question (hopefully John H will respond) has anybody ever dealt
with
the Government surplus Rotax 912's like the one being sold on ebay. I
wonder
if the cost savings would make it worth a try or is the engine and carbs
and
general setup too different or would it take a lot of engineering on my
part
to modify it.
Just remember Avid is not a dirty word. I guess I really wanted a
project,
the price was great and it was unstarted. All the kits I have been
looking at
lately are almost complete and I didn't want that.
Thanks for any advice.
Tim
=
=
=
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bob n <ronoy(at)shentel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: UL: Learning to fly? |
I scanned two articles from old Flight Training mag. They are each16kb
long. I originally mailed copies to several guys interested in ULing.
Here they are in case anyone wants them to give to wannabees. If Fred A.
is still interested, take a look. Delete if flammable!
Bob N.
Taking Wing in the World of Low and Slow
Scott M. Spangler
As a vehicle capable of carrying an adventurer aloft, the ultralight has
been around for almost a century. It first flew long before 1975. when
John Moody, the father of the modem ultralight, bolted an engine to his
Easy Rider, a tailless biplane hang glider. Brazilian Alberto
Santos-Dumont launched his bam boo and silk Demoiselle in 1907. He sat
below the wing, which mounted a two-cylinder, 20-hp engine up front and
a boom with the tail feathers behind. The Quicksilver, an early modem
ultralight, mirrors this design. Some might think the Wright Flyer was
the first ultralight, but it didn't meet the requirements of Federal
Aviation Regulation Part 103, established in 1982 to define and govern
ultralights. According to the author of "The Bird Men," an article on
ultralights in the August 1983 National Geographic, the Flyer weighed
605 pounds. The Demoiselle weighed 243 pounds and cruised at 48 mph,
both of which meet Part 103 requirements. In aviation's early days
designers built light aircraft to research the mysteries of flight, and
develop heavier, faster, and more capable aircraft. Today, ultralights
have one purpose fun. They make flight low. slow, and uncomplicated,
says Ben Morrow, a CFI and ultralight instructor. Most of his students
are in their 40s and 50s, and they are either starting or ending their
flying careers. 'About half of my students have a pilot's certificate.
Many of them are retired airline pilots who want hassle free, fun
flying," Morrow says. "The other half are first-time flyers who want to
explore the adventure of flight. In most cases, about half of the
first-time ultralight flyers go on to earn a pilot certificate so they
can fly bigger, faster aircraft."
Flying Vehicles
In the eyes of the FAA, ultralights are not aircraft. FAR Part 103
defines them as a "vehicle that is used or intended to be used for
manned operation in the air by a single occupant. [It's] used or
intended to be use for recreation or sport purposes; [it] does not have
a U.S. or foreign airworthiness certificate." In other words, there are
no two-seat ultralights (see sidebar). In addition to ultralight
rotorcraft and gliders, there are three "winged categories"
fixed-wing, flexible-wing, and weight-shift. Besides their
configurations, the essential differences between them are their control
systems. Like airplanes fixed-wing ultralights typically have sticks and
rudders. Flexible wings are powered parachutes and powered paragliders,
and the parachute canopy defines each of them. Powered parachutes use a
rectangular canopy similar to those that skydivers use. Powered
paragliders use an elliptical-shaped canopy that is more maneuverable.
but is more difficult to fly. Basically, powered parachutes, the more
popular of the two, won't stall, spin, or collapse, says Morrow. Powered
paragliders will. Either canopy can be attached to a three-wheeled
airframe (also called a "cart" or "trike") that holds the pilot and
engine. Or. the pilot can wear the engine on his (or her) back.
Regardless of what or who wears the engine. pilots add power to climb
and reduce it to descend. To turn, the pilot pulls on a toggle line that
deflects the one side of the canopy's trailing edge down, creating more
drag. On an airframe, the toggle lines often are attached to their
respective foot pedals. The stick is the throttle. and, typically,
pulling back adds power. Today, the most common weight-shift ultralight
is the "trike." The pilot sits in a three-wheeled airframe that supports
a single wing on a pivot point. Mounted to the wing is a large,
triangular control bar. The pilot pushes this bar to control the trike's
direction of flight. To climb, he pushes the bar forward. which moves
the craft's center of gravity (CG) back. He does the opposite to
descend. To turn. the pilot pushes the bar in the opposite direction
(push left to turn right) to establish the bank angle, then pushes
forward to finish the turn. Regardless of the type of control system,
all such craft must meet the same Part 103-mandated requirements to be
classified as an ultralight,. It must weigh less than 254 pounds,
"excluding floats and safety devices |a ballistic parachute that lowers
pilot and craft to the ground safely]." It can carry no more than five
gallons of gas. fly no taster than 55 knots calibrated airspeed in level
flight at full power, and have a power-off stall speed no faster than 24
knots. There are no two-seat ultralights, even though these craft may be
used for training (see sidebar).
Ultralight Time & Place
Because ultralights are "vehicles" and not aircraft, they don't need
airworthiness certificates, annual inspections. or N-numbers, which
designate FAA-registered aircraft, and their pilots don't need FAA
airman or medical certificates. Wiih this freedom of FAA regulation
comes some restrictions, however. Ultralights may fly only between
sunrise and sunset in VFR weather. (The weather requirements listed by
FAR 103.23 are the same as FAR 91.155.) Ultralights may not fly in
restricted or prohibited areas. Class A. B, C, D, or within the lateral
boundaries of Class E airspace designated for an airport unless pilots
have prior authorization I'rom the ATC facility that controls that
airspace. Finally, ultralights cannot fly over "any congested area of a
city, town, or settlement, or over any open air assembly of persons."
Registration & Training
The lack of FAA requirements doesn't mean ultralights and their pilots
are unrestrained. Like the scuba diving industry, ultralight pilots
regulate them- selves through three organizations. The U.S. Ultralight
Association (USUA), founded in 1985, was first, followed by the Aero
Sports Connection in 1994. The Experimental Aircraft Association
received its two-seat training exemption in 1982. but it didn't start
its pilot and vehicle registration program until 1996. The three
associations "regulate" ultralight flight with registration programs for
pilots and vehicles. Registration isn't required, but insurance
companies insist on it, and it's recommended because it demonstrates
compliance with the association's training standards. The associations
charge for registrations, and their requirements vary somewhat, but they
are essentially the same (see sidebar). Ultralight pilot registration
requirements should be familiar to certificated pilots because they are
based on FAR Part 61 certification standards. Student pilots can
register at age 14, and when they pass a pre-solo exam, they can get a
solo endorsement after five hours of instruction. To earn pilot
registration, students must be at least 16 years old, have received 10
hours of instruction with at least three hours of supervised solo, and
pass a written, oral, and flight test.
The ultralight associations call their teachers "basic (light
instructors (BFI) and "advanced flight instructors (AF1). " Naturally.
BFls and AFIs have more experience than a registered pilot, aind
instructors must take and pass exams on the fundamentals of instruction.
FAR Part 103 and attend seminars specific to their examining
responsibilities. FAA cerltified fight instructors can leach in an
ultralight after they complete an ultralight organiation's prescribed
course of training. Regardless of an instructor's path, all ultralight
instructor registrations are vehicle specific. USUA registers
aerodynamic control and weight-shift control instructors. ASC and EAA
registers these two categories and powered parachutes. BFls train, test
the knowledge of, and give checkrides to ultralight pilots. They can
also train, test, and recommend applicants for the BFI checkride. which
only an AFI can give. AFIs can perform all of the above, although they
are limited on how much instruction they give the BFI applicants they
also test. Ultralight students attend ground school that covers many of
the same topics taught in a certirfied pilot course. These include
aerodynamics, weather,
sidebar between brackets
[Under Far Part103 there are NO two-seat ultralights, but they do exist.
Under an FAA exemption held by ASC. EAA. and ||gg USUA, registered
BFI/AFIs can train ultralight pilots in two-seat light airplanes that
are neither FAA registered nor regulated. A two-seater can be used for
training only, and students can solo them with an instructor's
endorsement. If an ultralight pilot buys a two-seater, he can't fly it
legally, nor can he take friends for a ride. His only option is to
register the vehicle with the FAA as an amateur-built experimental
aircraft, which means he needs an FAA
pilots
certificate and appropriate medical certificate. Before flying an
ultralight, regardless of " prior flying experience, ultralight
associations and instructors recommend highly that you get the necessary
training. Because ultralight flight is self-regulated, you should check
out potential instructors thoroughly. Ask to see their BFI/AFI
registration, and call the applicable organisation to see if the
instructor is current. Inspect the instructor's vehicles. Ultralights
don't hide much, and frayed cables or elongated bolt holes are warning
signs. Finally, talk with the instructor's former students. Ultralight
instructor Ben Morrow also recommends that a prospective ultralight
pilot learn to fly the vehicle he's interested in before buying one.
"New ultralights can cost up to $15,000 or more, and different options,
such as engine power or wing (or canopy) size and shape plays a large
part in the vehicle's performance " he says. "Buying an ultralight
before you learn to fly it and know what performance you want and need
can be a costly mistake."]
navigation, regulations, emergency procedures, and the like. How long
ground school lasts depends on the instructor. Morrow says his run from
three to five hours depending on the pilot's background. Cost depends on
the instructor. Morrow, for example, offers a powered parachute solo
course, which includes ground school and flying, for $150. Low & slow
time Morrow says the training time for the different vehicles is about
the same, and the course is similar to certificated airplanes. Students
learn to control the vehicle in all phases of flight and perform all
emergency procedures. How long this takes depends on the student,
naturally, but Morrow says most students feel comfortable after about 10
hours, and they are competent at 20 hours. Students without any previous
pilot experience often take less time, Morrow says, "because they don't
have to break so many airplane habits." Fixed-wing ultralights are
high-lift, high-drag machines. "When the engine quits, your landing site
is more or less between your feet," Morrow says. Generally, helicopter
and glider pilots have an easier transition because they are used to
"having one shot" at landing. "Pilots who've flown biplanes, such as the
Stearman, do well, too." he says, because their drag is similar to that
of a fixed-wing ultralight. (Editor's Note: To learn more about
fixed-wing ultralight flying qualities, see the sidebar.) Safety is a
big concern, especially because ultralights' early record wasn't the
best. The association's registration and training programs have remedied
that. Because they are not aircraft, the government doesn't record
ultralight accident data. "The last hard numbers we have come from a
1994 study by an insurance company," says ASC head Jim Stephenson.
"According to that information, flying ultralights today is half again
as safe as flying in a general aviation airplane." Stephenson added that
this information surprised him at first because
ultralights make a lot more takeoffs and landings compared to general
avi- ation. But ultralights still have accidents, and the three
associations all agree on the cause of most of them. It's the same as it
is for general avia- tion, Morrow says stupid pilot tricks. "You can't
regulate poor decision making, but you can overcome it with good
training." airpark memories Because ultralights are not aircraft, they
must give way to all certificated flying machines. At some airports
ultralight coexist peacefully with airplanes. and in other places
ultralight pilots congregate at their own airpark. A number of
ultralight clubs and chapters are operating around the nation (see
side-bar). These are the places to find training, rental vehicles, and
new friends. A number of the ASC affiliated clubs hold contests that
include such events as timed cross-country flights, precision landings,
and a "bomb" drop. "Half the fun of flying ultralights takes place on
the ground," Morrow says. "It's an intensely social activity. When we
aren't flying, we're hangar flying and cooking out. Families join in the
fun and create an even larger family. It's what general aviation used to
be 30 or 40 years ago." The whole idea of flight ultralight or
otherwise is to have fun. Morrow says. Today, a lot of pilots seem to
be in too much of a hurry to have fun flying. "But ultralights can't be
in a hurry. and it seems their pilots have a lot more fun because of
it." Morrow says. "If you want to have fun in the sky. you oughta give
it a try."
UNITED STATES ULTRALIGHT ASSOCIATION P.O. Box 667 Frederick. MD 21705
301/695-9100 www.usua.com USUA registers vehicles and pilots and
holds a training exemption lor aerodynamic conirol (land and float) and
weight shift (land and float). Annual membership is S39.95 and includes
Ultralight Flying Magazine. Vehicle registration is $25. Pilot
registration fees are: Student. $5: Pilot. $25: BFI. $300 (includes
24-month full USUA membership at $79.00): AFI. $150. Its Web site has a
BFI/AFI database, list of ultralight clubs, frequently asked questions
(and their answers), and FAR Part 103.
AERO SPORTS CONNECTION P.O. Box 589 Marshall. MI 49068-0589
616/781-4021 www.paraflight.com/ASC/ ASC is composed of "wings" that
encompass the various facets of ultralight flight, such as powered
parachutes, designers, training, powered paragliders. and trikes. The
foundation holds a training exemption for each of them. Annual
membership is $40. and includes Ultraflight magazine. Registration fees
are: Student. $5: Pilot, $25: BFI $200; AFI, no fee to current BFIs:
Vehicle, $25. ASC's Web site has a lists of registered flying clubs, and
BFIs. and information on its competition system.
EXPERIMENTAL AIRCRAFT ASSOCIATION ULTRALIGHTS P.O. Box 3086 Oshkosh.
WI 54903-3086 920/426-4800 www.EAA.org The EAA Ultralight Program
maintains an ultralight vehicle and pilot registration program that's
free to EAA members, and holds a training exemption for fixed-wing,
weight-shift, and powered parachutes. Non-members pay $15 per
registration card. but for the $30 it would cost to register a pilot and
vehicle, a person could join EAA, and receive the Experimenter magazine.
When a student registers, regardless whether he is an EAA member, he
receives a comprehensive ultralight information package that includes an
Experimenter magazine: FAR Pan 103, and a list of EAA Ultralight
chapters, manufacturers, and questions a student should ask the
instructor before taking an introductory lesson. The EAA Web site has a
searchable database of EAA and ASC BFI/AFIs, information on building and
test flying an ultralight, trike, or powered parachute, and a list of
manufacturers, reference publications, FAR Pan 103, and links to other
ultralight Web sites.
2419 words
Do They Fly Like Airplanes?
Ed Kolano
Release the brakes and apply full throttle. By the time you finish
reading this sentence you're airborne. Welcome to ultralight flying.
Flying ultralights can be exhilarating. It's grass-roots aviation using
modern technology, and it's inexpensive compared to most other forms of
flight. These appealing facts draw participants into the fold by the
hundreds. But it's still flying. Despite the lack of regulatory burden,
ultralight flying requires the same degree of good judgement as any
other form of aviation. Bad assumption I am a private (commercial,
airline, instrument rated, military, you-name-it) pilot. I can handle
one of these "toy" airplanes. Better assumption I've never flown one
of these airplanes. I'll invest some time in study and training. Aw,
come on. Stall speed is less than 24 knots. Maximum speed is less than
55 knots. The whole machine weighs only a couple of hundred pounds. How
risky can it be? Remember, it's usually not the flying that injures
people and damages airplanes, it's contact with the ground. Ultralight
airplanes have certain flying characteristics that require extra
vigilance to avoid taking a pilot from the flying part to the ground
contact part.
Mixed Breeds
Virtually all light general aviation (GA) airplanes have a single engine
in front driving a tractor propeller. Physical variety is essentially
limited to high/low wing, nose/tail wheel and high/low horizontal tail.
The pilot usually sits under or over the wing and is usually surrounded
by an enclosed cockpit. Ultralight (U/L) airplanes (the FAA calls them
"vehicles," but pilots still call them "airplanes") abound in physical
variety. Some resemble conventional GA airplanes, others are quite
different. From tail-less flying wings to Rogallo-type wings, U/L
configurations span the appearance spectrum from hang glider to
traditional airplane. Engines are often located above the pilot, either
in front with a tractor propeller or behind with a pusher prop. The
pilot is often at the very front of the machine. In fact, several U/Ls
sit on their tail booms until the pilot climbs aboard and his (or her)
weight lowers the nosewheel to the ground. Some employ traditional
three-axis control, while others rely on the pilot to shift his weight
for pitch and roll control. These physical differences can significantly
affect how the airplane flies and influence its flying qualities.
Equally important, such differences influence the pilot's perceptions.
Imagine flying your Cessna 152. Now trade places with the propeller. You
are now at the tip of the spear. No wing to obstruct your view to either
side. No greenhouse effect of summer sun through Plexiglas. Possibly no
physical visual obstruction of any kind. This lack of visual obstruction
is one feature that makes U/L flying so exciting. Like Rose on the
railing of the Titanic's bow, you're as close to personal flying as you
can get. The view is hard to beat, but it means you don't have all that
airplane structure to give you a visual reference. No glareshield for
pitch and roll attitude reference certainly no artificial horizon. In
fact, many of those instruments you've come to rely on are gone. It's
needle, ball, and airspeed flying but, generally, without the needle,
and perhaps without the ball. Before you don your Icarus mindset based
on the assumption of competence, you should be aware that these machines
are different. They feel, behave, react, perform, and fly differently
from even light GA airplanes. To explore some of the differences between
U/L and GA airplane flying qualities, we visited Kolb Aircraft, which
produces a series of ultralight and very light airplanes in kit form. We
flew the FireFly, an ultralight that comes as a kit or completely
assembled. It was a high-wing taildragger powered by a 40-horse-power,
two-stroke engine mounted backward on top of the wing to drive its
pusher propeller. The pilot sits in front of it all in a cockpit narrow
enough to leave elbows in the breeze and behind a windscreen that
reaches chin level.
Inertia and Drag
By definition ultralights are light weight. They don't have a lot of
inertia, the tendency of an object to resist a change in its motion. An
airplane with low inertia accelerates and decelerates more quickly than
an airplane with high inertia. Drag always acts to slow an airplane. It
delays acceleration and hastens deceleration. Ultralights can have a
fairly high drag count. In fact, some U/Ls actually are designed with
extra drag to help them meet the Federal Aviation Regulation Part 103
maximum speed restriction. Overcoming this drag is one reason U/Ls often
use high power settings. The high drag also contributes to the rapid
airspeed decay when the pilot reduces power. As an illustration we
compared the airspeed decay of a Cessna 152 with the FireFly. Initially
both airplanes were flying straight and level at normal cruise. We
retarded the throttle to simulate an engine failure and maintained level
flight. The 152 stalled 25 to 30 seconds after the power went to idle.
The FireFly stalled in a little more than 10 seconds after we reduced
the power from 5,500 rpm (cruise) to 3,000 rpm. We didn't reduce power
to idle because the two-stroke engine would not continue to run reliably
at low power settings. An actual engine failure would surely result in
less time until stall. If you're thinking this isn't a realistic
scenario, you're right. Following an engine failure most of us are
mentally prepared to establish the maximum glide-range airspeed as a
first order of business. Here are those numbers. The 152 slowed from
cruise speed to glide speed in 12 seconds. The FireFly took less than
three seconds (3,000 rpm again). The U/L pilot must take positive action
quickly to avoid decelerating below glide speed and thereby reducing his
emergency landing field options. Time is not a luxury in the 152 either,
but temporary deviations from the optimum airspeed are less likely to
cause a significant glide-range penalty. Inertia also applies to
rotation. An airplane with a lot of roll inertia (say, full tip tanks)
takes longer for its roll rate to build than a lower roll inertia
airplane. It also takes longer for the high-roll-inertia airplane to
stop rolling after the pilot removes the aileron deflection. U/L
airplane inertia is generally low in all three axes. The U/L's response
to control stick or rudder pedal displacements is often much quicker
than you may be accustomed to in the GA airplane you fly. This feature
adds to the fun of U/L flying, but you must apply your control inputs
more thoughtfully to avoid over-controlling the airplane. The same low
rotational inertia helps account for the U/L's sensitivity to gusts.
Even little gusts can drop a U/L's wing or swing the nose right or left
to a greater degree than in GA airplanes. Returning the airplane to
coordinated, wings-level flight can require a lot of control deflection
and a little patience under certain conditions. At altitude, this
usually isn't a problem just another side of the U/L's personality.
Near the ground, however, most pilots are short on patience where
aircraft control is involved. Gusty conditions are not the best time for
U/L flying. Just how susceptible the U/L is to gusts and how responsive
it is to the pilot's control inputs depends on the airplane. Just as
U/Ls come in a variety of configurations, there is a variety of control
authority among the myriad designs. Stability is another arena best
described as varietal among various U/L designs. Because these airplanes
are exempt from meeting any airworthiness standards, the degree of
longitudinal and lateral-directional stability is left to the
manufacturer.
Throttle-Pitch Relationship
Ultralights designed to resemble GA airplanes generally have the same
pitch-power relationship. More power usually raises the nose and vice
versa. But once the location of the engine changes, the relationship can
reverse. With its high-wing-mounted engine and pusher propeller, the
FireFly is rep resentative of several U/L designs. Advancing the
throttle results in more thrust, but that thrust acts above the
airplane's center of gravity. That means the nose pitches down when you
add power and pitches up when you reduce power. In most GA airplanes the
thrust line is pretty close to the center of gravity. Reducing power
generally lowers the nose gently. This is a nice self-preservation
feature because the airplane seeks the same angle of attack it had
before the power reduction. Reducing the power in a high-thrustline U/L
unbalances the pitching moments and results in a higher angle of attack.
How high depends on the airplane and the flight condition, but the pilot
of a high-thrust-line U/L quickly learns to associate back stick with
power additions and forward stick with power reductions. Many U/Ls use
two-stroke engines. These lightweight powerplants typically run best at
5.000 to 6.000 rpm, where they develop their rated power. The
four-stroke engine in your GA airplane can idle below 1000 rpm; the
two-stroke probably won't. It'll try. but it's clearly not happy there.
It may continue to run roughly and shake the entire airplane, or it
might quit running altogether.
Two-stroke reliability is always a controversial topic, but there's
general agreement on two-stroke engine handling. Two techniques you are
generally advised to avoid are: Frequent rapid changes in engine speed
Prolonged low power operation followed by high power demands This
holds true for air-cooled four-stroke engines also. but the two-stroke
generally is less tolerant of this kind of handling. Engine failures
have been attributed to thermal expansion and contraction of internal
parts associated with engine mis-handling. Proponents say two-stroke
engines are just as reliable as the familiar four-strokes when properly
maintained and operated.
If the engine does quit in flight, the propeller will probably stop
rotating. Without a windmilling propeller, the only way to accomplish an
air start is the same method used on the ground. For many popular
two-stroke engines, this means a hefty tug on a lawnmower-type rope
handle. The utility of this system depends on the location of the handle
relative to the pilot. Access may necessitate loosening your harness or
releasing the flight controls. Given the choice, most pilots would opt
for more power. Engine power in U/Ls often is limited by the FAR's
maximum weight limit. Smaller, lightweight engines are less powerful
than larger, heavier engines. GA pilots accustomed to relying on excess
available power to solve judgment errors should re-think this
potentially dangerous habit before flying an U/L, because that excess
power may not be there. Some U/Ls, like the FireFly, seem to have plenty
of power, but others may not. Just because U/Ls are lightweight, slow
flyers doesn't mean they glide forever. With all that drag, the only way
to maintain the recommended maximum glide-range airspeed following an
engine failure is to lower the nose substantially. Under these
conditions the forward view can be quite intimidating. Without that big
old GA instrument panel in front, the U/L appears to be even more
nose-low.
Takeoffs and Landings
The low inertia and relatively high power of some U/Ls enable impressive
takeoff performance compared to typical GA airplanes. In a light
airplane the take-off roll can be 15 to 30 seconds, depending on its
loading, runway, and atmospheric conditions. The FireFly gets airborne
in three to five seconds, and it's a taildragger. That's only three
"pota toes" to raise the tail, sort out any directional control
issues, check the instruments, and rotate for takeoff. Take-offs in any
airplane require the pilot to be prepared, but in a U/L you have very
little time for mistakes and corrections. Not every U/L gets airborne in
three seconds. Some use smaller, less powerful engines to keep the
overall airplane weight within limits. These airplanes are still capable
of safe take-offs, but their performance is more along the lines of GA
airplanes than the FireFly's STOL performance. Once in the air, the
combination of pilot exposure to the elements, steep climb angle,
limited pitch attitude reference, and possibly high-revving two-stroke
engine nearby can make the pilot feel, well, anxious. A 12 to 15 degree
climb angle is not unusual in some U/Ls. Compare that with a typical
Cessna 152 climb angle of around six degrees. The fairly slow climb
airspeed coupled with an excellent climb rate can have the U/L at
pattern altitude well before the departure end of the runway.
For normal landings, Dan Kurkjian, Kolb's director of training,
recommends power-on approaches. Kurkjian is also an EAA-certified U/L
instructor, an ATP. a CFII, and he holds a helicopter rating. We found
3,500 rpm produced a comfortable base leg and final approach. Carrying
this power through the round-out allowed the airspeed decay to resemble
that of a power-off GA flare.
Reducing the throttle after the round-out plopped the FireFly onto the
grass runway nicely, with the power reduction providing just a trace of
nose-up pitch. Kurkjian said landings pose the biggest challenge to GA
pilots learning to fly U/Ls. Where a GA airplane may be flown at 1.3 Vg
on final, 1.5 or 1.6 Vg is more common in U/Ls. That extra energy helps
carry the airplane through
the airspeed decay of the round-out. GA pilots naturally want to attempt
full stall landings, but, again, the rapid airspeed decay can quickly
eliminate the pilot's options during such a maneuver. Flaring high is
another GA pilot tendency that is driven by the U/L's typically lower
seat height, steeper final approach pitch attitude, and tremendous field
of view over the nose (if there is one). Power-off final approaches in a
GA airplane are fairly common. When it comes time for the round-out and
flare, the GA airplane's extra inertia helps. It slows the airspeed
decay, leaving the pilot with some energy for last minute corrections.
Opting for a power-off final approach in a U/L illustrates its low
inertia and high drag in fairly dramatic fashion. The glide path is
steep and appears even steeper. The U/L pilot basically has one shot at
getting the flare right. The pilot must make a larger pitch attitude
change because of the steeper nose-down glide attitude. The low inertia
and high drag result in a fairly rapid airspeed decay that begins as
soon as the pilot begins the round-out. We observed three seconds from
round-out initiation until touch down. The good news here is the low
inertia and high drag characteristics also mean a short landing roll.
Ultralight flying is fun. It may be the ultimate form of aviation
therapy. The airplanes are reasonably inexpensive and burning two to
four gallons per hour operating costs are low. You can use any field
of reasonable size as an airport, and you can fold most U/Ls and trailer
them home. You should take learning to fly a U/L as seriously as
learning to fly any other airplane. The burden is on you to obtain this
training. Some insurance companies may require training from a
registered U/L instructor, but no federal requirements are in effect for
training of any kind, nor does an FAA written or practical test exist.
So, exercise the same good judgment that brought you this far in your
aviation pursuits. Get the training from a certifled U/L instructor, and
get ready to enioy one of the most thrilling kinds of flying you'll ever
experience.
2538 words
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SGreenpg(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Used Kolb w/tail number |
Jeff,
You might want to read through the Sport Pilot/Plane proposal I think it
makes provisions for what you want to do. There might be some training
required for you to do you own repairs and inspections but training on what
we enjoy is fun.
Steven Green
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
> Oh yeah??? You accused me of being drunk once:)
>
> (and flying like a crazy ultralight pilot:)
> Ralph Burlingame
Ralph/Gang:
Thanks for the reminder. :-) hehehe
Can't remember how I worded those post, but it was probably
cause you were acting as though..............
Some of us have skin that is far too thin. Must have lead a
very sheltered life style.
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Used Kolb w/tail number |
Your post triggered something in my dusty old memory banks on the subject,
look at the end of this post, maybe this will help. it is from our EAA
chapter newsletter. Therefore my post earlier about a couple local guys who
had their IA's is irrelevant, all you need is an A&P for the annual
condition inspection on a homebuilt.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
Anyway, It is not my intention to avoid paying an A&P.....its the
>concern being stuck having difficulty finding one in my area willing to sign
>off on a Kolb experimental. Fact of the matter I might as well concede and
>be open minded in buying a Kolb with a tail number.
>
>To go a step further, I have my FAA authorization to complete the oral and
>practical test for the A&P certificate. Then I could complete the annuals
>and look for an IA sign off.
>
>Jeff
>
>
>Q & A: Question of the Week
>Question For EAA Aviation Information Services:
>I'm writing with some questions about FARs pertaining to airworthiness
>inspections of homebuilt airplanes.
>
>FAR 91.409 (Inspections) says:
>(c) Paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section do not apply to --
>(1) An aircraft that carries a special flight permit, a current experimental
>certificate, or a provisional airworthiness certificate;
>
>Paragraph (a) is the annual inspection requirement. Does FAR 91.409 (c) (1)
>exempt experimental category, amateur-built aircraft from the annual
>inspection requirement? If not, what is it talking about?
>
>Another question: If the annual inspection is required, may it be performed
>and signed off by an A&P, or does it have to be an AI?
>
>Answer: The requirement for an annual inspection, as called out in FAR
>91.409(a)(1), is in fact nullified by the provisions of 91.409(c)(1) if the
>aircraft has a provisional or experimental airworthiness certificate, or a
>special flight permit. This is due to the fact that, by definition, the
>annual inspection verifies that the aircraft in question meets it's type
>design. Aircraft that have provisional or experimental airworthiness
>certificates do not have a type design or type certificate to be compared
>against. Thus, they cannot be inspected in accordance with an annual
>inspection.
>
>These aircraft which are covered by 91.409(c)(1) are instead governed by a
>set of operating limitations. These operating limitations are issued along
>with, and are part of, the airworthiness certificate for that specific
>aircraft. In these operating limitations (OpLims) there will be the
>requirement for a "condition inspection". This condition inspection will
>commonly be required annually. The OpLims will also spell out who is
>authorized to do this inspection, and in general it will require an A&P
>mechanic. However, this A&P mechanic does NOT need an inspection
>authorization (IA).
---
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | b young <byoung(at)brigham.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Kolb-List Digest: 32 Msgs - 07/25/02 |
> So many are available but my concern is dealing with
yearly inspections
> required by the FAA on experimental registered aircraft.
When one buys
> a Kolb with a tail number, can it be removed paper work
wise? If so,
> how difficult would it be to apply for a tail number
again.......do
> something to the plane to claim it as salvage, fix and
file as
> registered builder?
>
> Thanks
>
> Jeff
no no no no when registering a homebuilt one of the
questions they ask is if any of the parts have been used in
another aircraft.....or something to that effect.... i am
not sure the penalty for answering with a lie.
boyd
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | [ Possum! ] : New Email List Photo Share Available! |
| From: | Email List Photo Shares <pictures(at)matronics.com> |
A new Email List Photo Share is available:
Poster: Possum!
Subject: Kolb Ultralight
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/possums@mindspring.com.07.26.2002/index.html
--------------------------------------------
o EMAIL LIST PHOTO SHARE
Share your files and photos with other List members simply by
emailing the files to:
pictures(at)matronics.com
Please view the typical Share above and include the Description Text
Fields as shown along with your submission of files and photos.
o Main Photo Share Index:
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
--------------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave Rains <rr(at)htg.net> |
Check out this engine a little closer. Should be a viable replacement for
the 582. Weighs 80 lbs. complete, fuel injection, and the importer says
the drive will be 2-1 fluid type. Cost about $6,500 and available in
September.
http://www.aerotwinmotors.com/pages/specs.htm
Titanium crank and con rods?
I'm going to get as much info as I can on this one.
They are good about answering e-mail.
Dave Rains
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)sgmmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Kolb Pilots at Oshkosh |
Group,
I meet Sam Thursday, at Oshkosh. His Firestar II has the same paint
scheme as mine. Watching his plane fly was like watching someone flying
my plane. His daughter was flying it, too.
Dick Rahill was flying the factory Firestar II, and amazing the croud,
as usual. I have watched him fly that plane so many times, yet it sill
suprizes me how quickly he can turn that plane around after touching down.
John Jung
John Hauck wrote:
>
>Hi Gang:
>
>Check this out:
>
>http://www.airventure.org/2002/fri26/leap_faith.html
>
>Sam Peachey and his daughter are Kolb pilots. He is usually
>at Oshkosh every year.
>
snip.......
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kirk Smith" <snuffy(at)usol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aero Twin Motor |
Looks interesting Dave!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Olenik" <olenik-aviation(at)buyitsellitfixit.com> |
Hi Dave,
I finally found this group. :)
I gues I'm a little skeptical about that 80 lbs. The engine looks
interesting though. That would be about 40-50 pounds lighter than anything
else in it's class to this point unless 80 lbs is not really as complete as
what I think it is.
Looks like it's making all it's power with bore size. That's certainly a
big bore for an engine that size.
Tom Olenik
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Dave Rains
Subject: Kolb-List: Aero Twin Motor
Check out this engine a little closer. Should be a viable replacement for
the 582. Weighs 80 lbs. complete, fuel injection, and the importer says
the drive will be 2-1 fluid type. Cost about $6,500 and available in
September.
http://www.aerotwinmotors.com/pages/specs.htm
Titanium crank and con rods?
I'm going to get as much info as I can on this one.
They are good about answering e-mail.
Dave Rains
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SR3SA2L1(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: IVO with "B" box |
Kolb Wise and Experienced People,
I am installing an in-flight adjustable 3 blade IVO prop on a 503 with a "B"
gear box and an Air Drive electric starter. I have been told that I may need
to up to a "C" gear box because the load limits are to great for the "B" box.
When I wrote to IVO I told them that that is what I was using and they said
it was no problem. Has anyone had a problem with this combo or heard of
problems with this combo?
I was also told by IVO that I do not need to use the extra spacers to move
the prop further out even though their literature says the prop is to close
without them and can contact and damage if they flex in flight. I have no
experience with the IVO and have only personally known one person who has
used the in flight adj. prop. Any input and words of wisdom?
Steve
orig FS
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SR3SA2L1(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: 5 pt aerobatic harness -sell or trade |
Ken,
Sorry it took so long to get back to you on this, I had packed it away and
had to find it again.
It is a black, TSO'd, full restraint 5 point aerobatic harness with lap pads,
rated for 1500 lbs and has never been installed or used. It has a 3" lap
belt, 2" shoulder belts and 2" crotch belt (which could be left off if you
don't want it). Very heavy duty everything with a quick release. I bought
it from Wag Aero for $177 and shipping and you can see it in their catalog if
you have one laying around -Cat. No. H-824-000.
If it is something you want, make an offer or I will trade for ? You happen
to have an extra set of 6" brakes laying around?
Steve
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)sgmmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: IVO with "B" box |
Steve,
The original Firestar does not need the spacers, like IVO said. It is
different from the Firestar I/II in that aspect. That should help the B
box to take the load, but I can't speak for the in-flight or the Air
Drive starter.
John Jung
SR3SA2L1(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>Kolb Wise and Experienced People,
>
>snip...
>I was also told by IVO that I do not need to use the extra spacers to move
>the prop further out even though their literature says the prop is to close
>without them and can contact and damage if they flex in flight.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dennis Souder" <flykolb(at)pa.net> |
| Subject: | Re: IVO with "B" box |
Steve,
Ivo works great with the B Box - but forget the in-flight adjustable ...
really a waste of money an a FireStar. Worse yet, the in-flight adjust will
make it more likely you'll run too lean at some point and damage your
engine. Also I would go with a 2-blade for more acceleration and climb,
3-blade dia is too small a dia.
Have fun!
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: <SR3SA2L1(at)aol.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: Re: IVO with "B" box
>
> Kolb Wise and Experienced People,
>
> I am installing an in-flight adjustable 3 blade IVO prop on a 503 with a
"B"
> gear box and an Air Drive electric starter. I have been told that I may
need
> to up to a "C" gear box because the load limits are to great for the "B"
box.
> When I wrote to IVO I told them that that is what I was using and they
said
> it was no problem. Has anyone had a problem with this combo or heard of
> problems with this combo?
>
> I was also told by IVO that I do not need to use the extra spacers to move
> the prop further out even though their literature says the prop is to
close
> without them and can contact and damage if they flex in flight. I have no
> experience with the IVO and have only personally known one person who has
> used the in flight adj. prop. Any input and words of wisdom?
>
> Steve
> orig FS
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Olenik" <olenik-aviation(at)buyitsellitfixit.com> |
| Subject: | Re: IVO with "B" box |
What size IVO prop is it? A 60" 3 blade is pretty close to inertia limit of
the B box although there are a lot of guys running higher. The effects are
long term and the most significant is crankshaft life. There is definitely
a correlation between crankshaft life and propeller mass moment of inertia.
There are other factors, but that is one the seems pretty significant. The
mass moment of inertia is pretty easy to check. Go to www.rotax-owner.com
and look for SI-11-UL-1991. It shows you how to check the mass moment of
inertia of your prop.
I have a 58" 3 blade Ivo here that I checked a few months ago and it was
about 2700 or so, and the limit is 3000 for the B box. If it's longer than
64" its probably a little much although you would not be the only one
running one like that.
The lowest inertia propellers that I have found are the Powerfins. Even a
larger Powerfin is within the limits of the B box so when you think of the
cost savings by not needing a C box, the prop is about free. Sounds like a
deal to me.
Just some props that I've tested:
GSC 3 blades 60" is close to 3000 and 68" is close to 6000 with standard
tips.
GSC 2 blades 68" is close to 3000 and 72" is there longest I believe which
is still well under 6000
Warpdrive 3 blade 66" with narrow tips was 6000.
Powerfin F model 72" 2 blade 2200.
Ivo 3 blade 58" 2700.
Let us know what yours is if you test it.
Tom Olenik
Olenik Aviation
www.buyitsellitfixit.com/rotax.htm
www.buyitsellitfixit.com/2si-engines.htm
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
SR3SA2L1(at)aol.com
Subject: Kolb-List: Re: IVO with "B" box
Kolb Wise and Experienced People,
I am installing an in-flight adjustable 3 blade IVO prop on a 503 with a "B"
gear box and an Air Drive electric starter. I have been told that I may
need
to up to a "C" gear box because the load limits are to great for the "B"
box.
When I wrote to IVO I told them that that is what I was using and they said
it was no problem. Has anyone had a problem with this combo or heard of
problems with this combo?
I was also told by IVO that I do not need to use the extra spacers to move
the prop further out even though their literature says the prop is to close
without them and can contact and damage if they flex in flight. I have no
experience with the IVO and have only personally known one person who has
used the in flight adj. prop. Any input and words of wisdom?
Steve
orig FS
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: IVO with "B" box |
You don't want an in flight adjustable with a 2-stroke engine, Dennis
Souder is correct (as usual) because a 2-stroke is almost impossible to jet
once you start varying prop loads. Your engine EGT's will drive you nuts
and spoil your fun.
A three blade prop does not give you the broad speed range that a 2 blade
does, because a three blade prop will have it's blades pitched finer than a
2 blade for a given engine. Go with a 2 blade and forget the inflight
adjustable, a 2 blade doesn't need it.
On your 503: if it was me, I would go with a 2 blade 64" Ivo with one carb
or 2 blade 66" Ivo with two carbs and a 2.58:1 B box. Also, I bet there are
others on the list that have used other combinations with good success, the
503 is a pretty forgiving engine with a good torque curve.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>
>Kolb Wise and Experienced People,
>
>I am installing an in-flight adjustable 3 blade IVO prop on a 503 with a "B"
>gear box and an Air Drive electric starter. I have been told that I may need
>to up to a "C" gear box because the load limits are to great for the "B" box.
>When I wrote to IVO I told them that that is what I was using and they said
>it was no problem. Has anyone had a problem with this combo or heard of
>problems with this combo?
>
>I was also told by IVO that I do not need to use the extra spacers to move
>the prop further out even though their literature says the prop is to close
>without them and can contact and damage if they flex in flight. I have no
>experience with the IVO and have only personally known one person who has
>used the in flight adj. prop. Any input and words of wisdom?
>
>Steve
>orig FS
>
>
>---
>Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
---
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dennis Souder" <flykolb(at)pa.net> |
| Subject: | Re: IVO with "B" box |
Steve,
Overlooked your other question about the spacer. Origan FSs did not need
the spacer; the later FS II series does need the spacer because the engines
were moved forward a bit on the frame. Ivo needs about 5" clearance to the
aileron tube, your FS should have this much - would measure it just to make
sure. The spacers worked fine with no problems that I was aware of, and
other factors being equal, you will reduce the noise a bit if you use the
spacer, even on the original FS.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: <SR3SA2L1(at)aol.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: Re: IVO with "B" box
>
> Kolb Wise and Experienced People,
>
> I am installing an in-flight adjustable 3 blade IVO prop on a 503 with a
"B"
> gear box and an Air Drive electric starter. I have been told that I may
need
> to up to a "C" gear box because the load limits are to great for the "B"
box.
> When I wrote to IVO I told them that that is what I was using and they
said
> it was no problem. Has anyone had a problem with this combo or heard of
> problems with this combo?
>
> I was also told by IVO that I do not need to use the extra spacers to move
> the prop further out even though their literature says the prop is to
close
> without them and can contact and damage if they flex in flight. I have no
> experience with the IVO and have only personally known one person who has
> used the in flight adj. prop. Any input and words of wisdom?
>
> Steve
> orig FS
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Korenek <ken-foi(at)attbi.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 5 pt aerobatic harness -sell or trade |
Steve,
Thanks for digging into this for me. It looks like that is WAY more belting
than I need for my FS II. I'm looking for something more simple-
Thanks,
*********************
Ken W. Korenek
ken-foi(at)attbi.com
Kolb FireStar II, "My Mistress" Back in the Air !!
Rotax 503, Oil Injected
3 Blade Powerfin
http://home.attbi.com/~KolbraPilot/TX_files/image003.jpg
Six Chuter SR7-XL
Powered Parachute
Rotax 582, Oil Injected
3 Blade PowerFin
4906 Oak Springs Drive
Arlington, Texas 76016
817-572-6832 voice
817-572-6842 fax
817-657-6500 cell
817-483-8054 home
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack & Louise Hart <jbhart(at)ldd.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 5 pt aerobatic harness -sell or trade |
>
>Steve,
>
> Thanks for digging into this for me. It looks like that is WAY more belting
>than I need for my FS II. I'm looking for something more simple-
>
>
>Thanks,
>
>*********************
>Ken W. Korenek
>
Ken,
I have reworked my seat belt harness to make it lighter and easier to use. It
may be of interest. You can see it at:
http://www.thirdshift.com/jack/firefly/firefly78.html
Jack B. Hart FF004
Jackson, MO
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart(at)ldd.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron or Mary" <ronormar(at)apex.net> |
| Subject: | Which way do you turn it?? |
On an IVO ground adjustable standing at the rear looking forward, which way
do you turn the screw to increase pitch and reduce RPM? I cannot find this
information in the IVO paper work. I could figure it our by trial and error
but it will make things much easier if some one that knows would let me know
before I start tinkering. I need to cut about 200 RPM off the wide open
throttle.
Ron Payne
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Woody <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
Progress is slow and steady on my Mk X project. I am doing the wiring
and am done except that I do not have a wiring diagram for the westburg
water temp / tach gauge. Could someone check their files and give me the
correct pin out on the back of the gauge. There are 5 pins.
Still looks feasible that I will be flying into the pig roast.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SGreenpg(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Which way do you turn it?? |
In a message dated 7/28/02 10:48:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
ronormar(at)apex.net writes:
> On an IVO ground adjustable standing at the rear looking forward, which way
> do you turn the screw to increase pitch and reduce RPM?
If I remember correctly you turn to the left to increase pitch.
S. Green
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 5 pt aerobatic harness -sell or trade |
> I have reworked my seat belt harness to make it lighter and easier to use. It
may be of interest. You can see it at:
>
> http://www.thirdshift.com/jack/firefly/firefly78.html
>
> Jack B. Hart FF004
Jack B/Gents:
Was admiring your pictures, especially the second from the
bottom which is the termination and attachment of probably
the right lap belt. Looks like you have used 3 1/8" pop
rivets into an aluminum plate and a single wrap around the
tube. Probably have another aluminum plate on the back
side.
Curious if you had done a pull test to see what kind of
numbers you would get prior to failure of the attachment?
Would be easy to pull 20 or 30 G's in a fairly normal every
day type crash. If you weigh 180 lbs, that would be 3600 to
5400 lbs. Quite possibly you would pull much more than 20
to 30 G's.
Are you sure you attachments will hold? Just wondering.
Take care,
john h
PS: Recently had a fatality in a composite Czech twin 582
crash up near Newnan, GA. Had the shoulder harness attach
points not failed, the pilot would most likely have survived
the crash. The passenger in the rear seat did survive.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack & Louise Hart <jbhart(at)ldd.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 5 pt aerobatic harness -sell or trade |
>
>Curious if you had done a pull test to see what kind of
>numbers you would get prior to failure of the attachment?
>
John,
No I have not done a pull test. The cut ends of the belting are flame sealed so
they will not unravel. The two aluminum sandwich plates are match drilled.
The holes through the belt material were burned with a hot nail after the material
has been clamped in between the aluminum clamping plates. The rivets are
stainless steel.
My purpose here is not so much to help me survive a crash as to keep me in the
seat when flying through thermals and letting down into the Mississippi River
bottoms to land. Quite often one will run into a clear air dust devil and it
will spin the FireFly like a top. The belts help keep me in intimate contact
with the seat and let me focus on flying rather that worrying about falling out.
I have found that if I can keep my back touching the seat back, I do not become
uncomfortable flying through just about anything.
One of the reasons I have not worried too much about it is that the loads are distributed
between five different belts and five attachment points. It may not
be valid to assume, but if one assumes an equal load distribution on the five
attachment points for a one g load each and a 200 pound person, each attachment
would have to hold 40 pounds. At six g this would go to 240 pounds and over
six g the FireFly is likely to be coming a part and one would have to rely
on a chute.
When I get the new engine back on and I am flying again, I will run an experiment
to determine what the belt termination system can hold.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Jackson, MO
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart(at)ldd.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 5 pt aerobatic harness -sell or trade |
At six g this would go to 240 pounds and over six g the
FireFly is likely to be coming a part and one would have to
rely on a chute.
>
> When I get the new engine back on and I am flying again, I will run an experiment
to determine what the belt termination system can hold.
>
> Jack B. Hart FF004
Jack/Gents:
I get the jest that you are thinking primarily problems in
rough air. I am thinking problems of staying put in your
seat, securely strapped in. Especially "not" being blasted
out and into immoveable obects when you crash into the
ground.
Based on personal experience, the Ultrastar, Firestar, and
Mark III fuselages make darn good crash cages, very much the
same as the roll cage in a NASCAR stockcar. However, no
matter how much the cage protects you, if the restraint
system does not do its job, neither can the cage.
A system we used back in prehistoric days to attach the seat
belt to the airframe of the Ultrastars was to make about
three or four wraps around the anchor tube, then put 3 or 4
SS pop rivets, probably 1/2 long, through all the wraps.
Can heat a pop rivet mandrel to burn holes through the wraps
for the rivets.
I am not an engineer, but I have a little horse sense and
practical experience. Whether the ends of the seat belt
webbing are heat sealed or not, I do not believe your
attachments will hold in a normal every day type crash, the
kind we would more than likely hop out of the wreckage and
walk away under our own power.
Remember, crashes do not alway occur straight and level with
the same amount of force on all attachments. Most likely,
if you have enough speed, or even landing under a ballistic
canopy with wind, coupled with forward occilation, you are
gonna be screaming when you hit the ground. All those G
forces can go to one attach point, depending on what
attitude you land.
It is also very easy to pull 12 to 15 G's on a bad landing
without bending the gear (on my old airplane anyhow). So,
20, 30, 40 and much more G's can be experienced in your
normal everyday crash.
As I steadily tore up all the Kolb airplanes I have ever
built, some more than once, Homer Kolb and Dennis Souder
used to tell me the airplane is only as strong as it weakest
link. Homer also told me I was Kolb Aircraft's best test
bed. Well, I didn't do it on purpose, I just pushed the
envelope until something failed. Never had a crash because
of pilot error other than the fact that I disregarded limits
set by the manufacturer. Believe me, it is not all that
hard to break one if you fly that way. Of note, I have
never been injured in a Kolb crash. Luck and a strong
airplane and restraint system must be given credit for
that. Brother Jim sews up all my seat belts and shoulder
harnesses. We weld attachment points into the airframe and
attach with aircraft bolts.
Sorry for the long post, but felt I should share my personal
experiences with you all. Maybe save you the same fate that
I have already paid for.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron or Mary" <ronormar(at)apex.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 5 pt aerobatic harness -sell or trade |
This could get very interesting.
Ron Payne
-------Original Message-------
From: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Date: Sunday, July 28, 2002 02:36:18 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: 5 pt aerobatic harness -sell or trade
At six g this would go to 240 pounds and over six g the
FireFly is likely to be coming a part and one would have to
rely on a chute.
>
> When I get the new engine back on and I am flying again, I will run an
experiment to determine what the belt termination system can hold.
>
> Jack B. Hart FF004
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tommy & Carolyn" <TommyandCarolyn(at)centurytel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Which way do you turn it?? |
Ron,
CCW positive pitch
CW negative pitch
Tommy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack & Louise Hart <jbhart(at)ldd.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 5 pt aerobatic harness -sell or trade |
John,
>
>Jack/Gents:
>
>I get the jest that you are thinking primarily problems in
>rough air. I am thinking problems of staying put in your
>seat, securely strapped in. Especially "not" being blasted
>out and into immoveable obects when you crash into the
>ground.
I am optimistic about flying and so I do not plan in crashing in to the ground.
>It is also very easy to pull 12 to 15 G's on a bad landing
>without bending the gear (on my old airplane anyhow).
According to the original literature I received from the old Kolb Company, the
FireFly was designed for +6 -3 ultimate g's. Plus or minus 12 to 15 g's on a
landing bounce would tear the wings off the FireFly and would undoubtedly flatten
the landing gear.
>As I steadily tore up all the Kolb airplanes I have ever
>built, some more than once, Homer Kolb and Dennis Souder
>used to tell me the airplane is only as strong as it weakest
>link. Homer also told me I was Kolb Aircraft's best test
>bed. Well, I didn't do it on purpose, I just pushed the
>envelope until something failed. Never had a crash because
>of pilot error other than the fact that I disregarded limits
>set by the manufacturer.
How can you say this was not intentional? You have been very lucky to have survived
what most would describe as irresponsible behavior.
I have no intention of purposefully exceeding the yield limits of the FireFly while
flying.
John, you have been a very lucky man.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Jackson, MO
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart(at)ldd.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: 5 pt aerobatic harness -sell or trade |
>
>Based on personal experience, the Ultrastar, Firestar, and
>Mark III fuselages make darn good crash cages, very much the
>same as the roll cage in a NASCAR stockcar. However, no
>matter how much the cage protects you, if the restraint
>system does not do its job, neither can the cage.
A number of years ago I made an incredibly firm arrival (wouldn't want to
call it a landing) in my Anglin J-6. It had a landing gear arrangement sort
of like a J-3 Cub, with a spreader bar below the fuselage, and then shock
struts down to the bottom of the main gear. Anyway, it ripped the shock
struts in half, at which point the mains were just sort of out there,
hanging loose with no shock struts to secure things.
As airspeed decayed following the initial bounce, the mains contacted the
ground and then just kept getting higher as the airplane settled closer to
the ground. When the spreader bar dug into the sod, the airplane slid three
feet and stopped. So I went from about 35 mph to 0 in three feet.
The only real damage was to my right hand, because the stitching failed
where the shoulder belt attached to the lap belt, and my right hand was
resting on the throttle lever, center of the panel, index finger laying
along the top of the throttle lever. Torso moving forward caused me to
punch the panel with my index finger hard enough to break several bones in
my right hand. (I am not small boned)
Fixing the airplane was pretty easy. Hand hurt for about 8 months. Food for
thought.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
---
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: IVO with "B" box |
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com |
Richard Pike is right on. I have been flying with a 2-blade prop for
years and I get a very good climb (1000'/minute) and cruise (60-65mph at
5100 rpm) with the 447 engine w/B-box. The prop is a 66" Ivo and have
adjusted it for 6000 rpm climb at 50 mph.
Ralph Burlingame
Original Firestar
15 years flying it
writes:
>
> You don't want an in flight adjustable with a 2-stroke engine,
> Dennis
> Souder is correct (as usual) because a 2-stroke is almost impossible
> to jet
> once you start varying prop loads. Your engine EGT's will drive you
> nuts
> and spoil your fun.
> A three blade prop does not give you the broad speed range that a 2
> blade
> does, because a three blade prop will have it's blades pitched finer
> than a
> 2 blade for a given engine. Go with a 2 blade and forget the
> inflight
> adjustable, a 2 blade doesn't need it.
> On your 503: if it was me, I would go with a 2 blade 64" Ivo with
> one carb
> or 2 blade 66" Ivo with two carbs and a 2.58:1 B box. Also, I bet
> there are
> others on the list that have used other combinations with good
> success, the
> 503 is a pretty forgiving engine with a good torque curve.
>
> Richard Pike
> MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>
> >
> >
> >Kolb Wise and Experienced People,
> >
> >I am installing an in-flight adjustable 3 blade IVO prop on a 503
> with a "B"
> >gear box and an Air Drive electric starter. I have been told that
> I may need
> >to up to a "C" gear box because the load limits are to great for
> the "B" box.
> >When I wrote to IVO I told them that that is what I was using and
> they said
> >it was no problem. Has anyone had a problem with this combo or
> heard of
> >problems with this combo?
> >
> >I was also told by IVO that I do not need to use the extra spacers
> to move
> >the prop further out even though their literature says the prop is
> to close
> >without them and can contact and damage if they flex in flight. I
> have no
> >experience with the IVO and have only personally known one person
> who has
> >used the in flight adj. prop. Any input and words of wisdom?
> >
> >Steve
> >orig FS
> >
> >
> >---
> oming mail is certified Virus Free.
> >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
>
>
> ---
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
>
>
>
>
> messages.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 5 pt aerobatic harness -sell or trade |
Jack B/Gents:
> I am optimistic about flying and so I do not plan in crashing in to the ground.
Not much I can say about your comment. :-) Maybe I should
have been more optimistic about my flying and I would not
have been crashing into the ground.
> According to the original literature I received from the old Kolb Company, the
FireFly was designed for +6 -3 ultimate g's. Plus or minus 12 to 15 g's on
a landing bounce would tear the wings off the FireFly and would undoubtedly flatten
the landing gear.
Easy to peg a G meter on the ground, positive and negative,
without tearing the wings off and flattening the gear. You
all that do a lot of Kolb trailering would be appalled at
the stress applied to the airframe while tooling down the
highway.
> How can you say this was not intentional? You have been very lucky to have survived
what most would describe as irresponsible behavior.
You got that right.
> I have no intention of purposefully exceeding the yield limits of the FireFly
while flying.
Well, I hope you don't unintentionally exceed them either.
Either way, if your restraint system is the weak link,
you'll probably get hurt unnecessarily, unintentionally or
not. Gravity and the ground do not care one way or the
other what your intentions are.
> John, you have been a very lucky man.
That I have Jack. And the important thing about all the
mistakes I made early on in ultralight aviation was to learn
by those mistakes and try not repeat them. During that
process we also learned a lot about the Kolb aircraft and
how to build them better.
During those early years I had a friend who flew a lot like
me or maybe I flew a lot like him. He also tore up some
airplanes in the process, but the end result was stronger
Kolb aircraft. He was also a very lucky man. I don't think
he will mind me mentioning his name, Dennis Souder.
I consider everyone on the Kolb List to be my friends and
Kolb family. Don't want to see anybody get hurt doing what
we all love to do. That is why I mentioned the seat belt
attachments in the first place.
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Which way do you turn it?? |
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com |
writes:
>
> On an IVO ground adjustable standing at the rear looking forward,
> which way
> do you turn the screw to increase pitch and reduce RPM? I cannot
> find this
> information in the IVO paper work. I could figure it our by trial
> and error
> but it will make things much easier if some one that knows would let
> me know
> before I start tinkering. I need to cut about 200 RPM off the wide
> open
> throttle.
>
> Ron Payne
Ron,
CCW more pitch
CW less pitch
Ralph Burlingame
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Irresponsible Flying or Pushing The Envelope |
Hey Gang:
This is a follow on the the msg I sent a minute ago.
I performed my last aerobatic maneuver in my original
Firestar about 15 March 1990. By the time the Firestar and
I got back on the ground the Firestar was totaled and I
learned a tough lesson about stress. An old fella explained
to me the way he understood stress was:
Start off with a whole number.
Every time the aircraft is stressed it takes a little bit
away from that whole number.
Eventually we get to the point that we ask the airplane to
do something and it says, "Sorry, I'm all used up."
That is what happened to me.
I have not done an aerobatic maneuver in a Kolb aircraft or
any other aircraft since that date. Do not intend to
because I know what may happen and I am too old to go
through that again, intentionally or not.
During testing of my Mark III, two years after the Firestar
accident, about 15 March 1992, I totalled my brand new
airplane. Lost an engine on takeoff, could not bend it far
enough around to miss all the large, tall red oak trees.
Figured the trees were better than stalling at 100 feet
above the ground. The left wing went through the red oak,
turned me 90 degrees and rolled me up on my left wing tip.
That is how I hit the ground, on the left wing tip,
vertical. Did not bend the 6" main spar. I did not get
hurt although the left shoulder strap bruised me from my
belly button to the top of my shoulder. Most of the load of
the crash was carried by the left shoulder strap. Had that
strap failed, I would have been injured.
The reason I share this is to let you all know that even
when one is optimistic about his flying, involved in a
serious test program, that he can unintentionally get the
aircraft into situations that are out of his control and
crash.
I hope there are not too many of us out there flying that
think if I have a good attitude about my flying I won't bust
my ass. Ole Murphy will take care of that attitude and
airplane for you.
Off my soap box and into bed. I have the tail off Miss
P'fer so I can take the tail post to Brother Jim in
Woodville, Florida, to rebuild and repair. It has stress
cracked in a couple places, but because of some triangular
gussets and Homer Kolb and Dennis Souder's design, it did
not fail in flight or on the ground. In fact, it looks like
it has been cracked for a while.
I'll try and sketch a diagram of the tailpost and the cracks
so you all can see where it happened on my Mark III. Also
have to take into consideration that my tailpost is carrying
about one third more weight than the normal Mark III and has
1,710 hours on it.
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | possums <possums(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 5 pt aerobatic harness -sell or trade |
>
>John,
>
> >Jack/Gents:
> >
> >I get the jest that you are thinking primarily problems in
> >rough air. I am thinking problems of staying put in your
> >seat, securely strapped in.
>
>I am optimistic about flying and so I do not plan in crashing in to the
>ground.
>According to the original literature I received from the old Kolb Company,
>the FireFly was designed for +6 -3 ultimate g's. Plus or minus 12 to 15
>g's on a landing bounce would tear the wings off the FireFly and would
>undoubtedly flatten the landing gear.
>How can you say this was not intentional? You have been very lucky to
>have survived what most would describe as irresponsible behavior.
>I have no intention of purposefully exceeding the yield limits of the
>FireFly while flying.
>
>John, you have been a very lucky man.
>
>Jack B. Hart FF004
>Jackson, MO
Me neither - but when you do - it hurts real bad and it breaks things.
I think maybe that's what all those straps and buckles are for.
I don't wear a seat belt.Those soldiers couldn't hit a barn at this
distance! Then we just clip this little wire here... Nothing can penetrate
this armor! What's that beeping and where's the smoke coming from? This
area has already been swept for land mines...right?? Naw - it's just
sleeping... What can possibly go wrong? Don't unplug it, it'll just take a
moment to fix. Don't Push that but... Where'd that arrow come from? Hey
there's no handles inside these car doors! It's probably just hibernating.
What does this button do? Are you sure the power is off? What duck? Pull
the pin and count to what? Which wire was I supposed to cut? I wonder where
the mother bear is. I'll hold it and you light the fuse. Nice doggie. I can
do that with my eyes closed. Well we've made it this far.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack & Louise Hart <jbhart(at)ldd.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Irresponsible Flying or Pushing The Envelope |
>
>Hey Gang:
>
>This is a follow on the the msg I sent a minute ago.
>
>
>The reason I share this is to let you all know that even
>when one is optimistic about his flying, involved in a
>serious test program, that he can unintentionally get the
>aircraft into situations that are out of his control and
>crash.
>
>I hope there are not too many of us out there flying that
>think if I have a good attitude about my flying I won't bust
>my ass. Ole Murphy will take care of that attitude and
>airplane for you.
>
John,
I agree with these statements. After getting the FireFly together, I had several
choices where to make the initial flights. I picked K02 because it was 7000
foot runway and little traffic in the late afternoon. It is surrounded by Mississippi
River bottom farm land so there are very few trees. Normally I use
a 1000 foot narrow taxiway for take off and landings. But I use the runway after
all mods. Test flights are made within gliding distance of the airport.
A good attitude does not necessarily mean being careless. The trick is minimize
"Ole Murphy" and to swing things in our favor as much as possible. But when
it comes down to it, each one of us has to make a personal choice. With the
new engine, the first flights were just around the pattern once and things were
checked, and then around the pattern twice before landing, etc. Things have
cracked and broke. One could feel a change in engine/plane vibration as these
failures occurred, so the engine power was cut and the glide started for the
runway. The result is a new muffler mounting system is under way to counter
all the things I have discovered in trying to get the factory designed system
to work.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Jackson, MO
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart(at)ldd.net
________________________________________________________________________________
Hi
I am hoping that someone can help me with a problem with my kolb
twinstar MK11
The problem is that I have too much positive roll and every time that I
bank anymore than about 15 degrees I have to
apply a fair amount of opposite aileron to stop it from rolling into the
turn too much could anybody please advise me is this normal for the MK11
if not can someone give me some leads as to what may be causing this
thanks from bish
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Woody <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
| Subject: | Re: wiring diag. |
Nobody out there with the wiring schematic? I'm a bit stuck untill I get
that.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeremy Casey" <jrcasey(at)ldl.net> |
| Subject: | Honda engines .... |
for what its worth ...
ya know, a while back i saw a piece on one of the Discovery
channels about this retired aeronautical engineer who designed a single
place
all aluminum v-tail aircraft that weighed 175 lbs. the point they made
was he
designed it with only a slide rule and a pencil..... anyway, he used a
28 hp
Honda v-twin for the powerplant and achieved a cruise of over 100 mph.
For the record...
His name is Leon Davis. Engine was 18 hp Briggs & Stratton...
He wasn't an Aero-engineer...just a determined experimenter who did lots
of homework...
http://www.aircraft-spruce.com/da11.html
Jeremy Casey
jrcasey(at)ldl.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Bean <slyck(at)frontiernet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Honda engines .... |
Hmmmm, now a Sonex with that Honda???
Jeremy Casey wrote:
>
>
> for what its worth ...
> ya know, a while back i saw a piece on one of the Discovery
> channels about this retired aeronautical engineer who designed a single
> place
> all aluminum v-tail aircraft that weighed 175 lbs. the point they made
> was he
> designed it with only a slide rule and a pencil..... anyway, he used a
> 28 hp
> Honda v-twin for the powerplant and achieved a cruise of over 100 mph.
>
>
>
> For the record...
>
> His name is Leon Davis. Engine was 18 hp Briggs & Stratton...
>
> He wasn't an Aero-engineer...just a determined experimenter who did lots
> of homework...
>
> http://www.aircraft-spruce.com/da11.html
>
> Jeremy Casey
> jrcasey(at)ldl.net
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeremy Casey" <jrcasey(at)ldl.net> |
| Subject: | Honda engines .... |
Bob B/Gents:
WAsn't it the Quickie that was popularly powered by a direct
drive 18 hp Briggs and Stratton?
john h
Onan...as in generator engine. Was an excellent 1 place airplane...and
a terrible 2 place (Dragonfly)
Jeremy Casey
jrcasey(at)ldl.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerryb <ulflyer(at)airmail.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Aero Twin Motor |
Don't mean to pop your balloon but before you run out and fork down your
hard earned bucks you better do a little more than paper search on
spec's. Better collect some data.
What are they running this engine on, what's the most flights hours they
have on an engine without a failure, how many flight hours do they have on
their engine population in the field, how many engines do they have in the
field. Was this engine any way connected to the Motavia, which never
really delivered.
Until you see some flying, your paying to do R&D and be their test dummy
with the possibility the end cost may be more than you bargained for
(engine/plane/life/limb).
jerryb
>
>Check out this engine a little closer. Should be a viable replacement for
>the 582. Weighs 80 lbs. complete, fuel injection, and the importer says
>the drive will be 2-1 fluid type. Cost about $6,500 and available in
>September.
>http://www.aerotwinmotors.com/pages/specs.htm
>Titanium crank and con rods?
>I'm going to get as much info as I can on this one.
>They are good about answering e-mail.
>Dave Rains
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerryb <ulflyer(at)airmail.net> |
| Subject: | Re: IVO with "B" box |
Richard & All,
Your statement below is not totally correct. For a hi-drag narrower speed
range aircraft like a Kolb, the prop would offer little benefit. For an
aircraft like a Titan or Earthstar Gull, it works find. No problem.
jerryb
snip....
>You don't want an in flight adjustable with a 2-stroke engine, Dennis
>Souder is correct (as usual) because a 2-stroke is almost impossible to jet
>once you start varying prop loads. Your engine EGT's will drive you nuts
>and spoil your fun. snip ....
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerryb <ulflyer(at)airmail.net> |
| Subject: | Re: IVO with "B" box |
IVO now offers a electronic constant speed option for their in-flight
adjustable.
http://www.ivoprop.com/constant.htm
jerryb
>
>You don't want an in flight adjustable with a 2-stroke engine, Dennis
>Souder is correct (as usual) because a 2-stroke is almost impossible to jet
>once you start varying prop loads. Your engine EGT's will drive you nuts
>and spoil your fun.
>A three blade prop does not give you the broad speed range that a 2 blade
>does, because a three blade prop will have it's blades pitched finer than a
>2 blade for a given engine. Go with a 2 blade and forget the inflight
>adjustable, a 2 blade doesn't need it.
>On your 503: if it was me, I would go with a 2 blade 64" Ivo with one carb
>or 2 blade 66" Ivo with two carbs and a 2.58:1 B box. Also, I bet there are
>others on the list that have used other combinations with good success, the
>503 is a pretty forgiving engine with a good torque curve.
>
>Richard Pike
>MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>
> >
> >
> >Kolb Wise and Experienced People,
> >
> >I am installing an in-flight adjustable 3 blade IVO prop on a 503 with a
> "B"
> >gear box and an Air Drive electric starter. I have been told that I may
> need
> >to up to a "C" gear box because the load limits are to great for the "B"
> box.
> >When I wrote to IVO I told them that that is what I was using and they said
> >it was no problem. Has anyone had a problem with this combo or heard of
> >problems with this combo?
> >
> >I was also told by IVO that I do not need to use the extra spacers to move
> >the prop further out even though their literature says the prop is to close
> >without them and can contact and damage if they flex in flight. I have no
> >experience with the IVO and have only personally known one person who has
> >used the in flight adj. prop. Any input and words of wisdom?
> >
> >Steve
> >orig FS
> >
> >
> >---
> >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
> >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
>
>
>---
>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerryb <ulflyer(at)airmail.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Which way do you turn it?? |
Loosen the lock nut and turn out 3 complete turns while watching the
leading edge move, note if the leading edge is moving toward the front of
the plane (increasing pitch or if it is moving towards the rear, decreasing
pitch. Turn it back to where it was, 3 turns in the opposite
direction. You now know which way it goes.
jerryb
>
>On an IVO ground adjustable standing at the rear looking forward, which way
>do you turn the screw to increase pitch and reduce RPM? I cannot find this
>information in the IVO paper work. I could figure it our by trial and error
>but it will make things much easier if some one that knows would let me know
>before I start tinkering. I need to cut about 200 RPM off the wide open
>throttle.
>
>Ron Payne
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dennis Souder" <flykolb(at)pa.net> |
| Subject: | Re: IVO with "B" box |
Jerry,
Not sure, but it may be worth pointing out, that my statement was only in
the context of a FireStar*.
Dennis
Ivo works great with the B Box - but forget the in-flight adjustable ...
really a waste of money an a *FireStar. Worse yet, the in-flight adjust
will
make it more likely you'll run too lean at some point and damage your
engine. Also I would go with a 2-blade for more acceleration and climb,
3-blade dia is too small a dia.
Have fun!
Dennis
>
> Richard & All,
> Your statement below is not totally correct. For a hi-drag narrower speed
> range aircraft like a Kolb, the prop would offer little benefit. For an
> aircraft like a Titan or Earthstar Gull, it works find. No problem.
> jerryb
>
> snip....
> >You don't want an in flight adjustable with a 2-stroke engine, Dennis
> >Souder is correct (as usual) because a 2-stroke is almost impossible to
jet
> >once you start varying prop loads. Your engine EGT's will drive you nuts
> >and spoil your fun. snip ....
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim" <flykolb(at)carolina.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: IVO with "B" box |
Dennis,
What prop do you recommend for a Mark III with a 503?
Jim
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dennis Souder" <flykolb(at)pa.net>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: IVO with "B" box
>
> Jerry,
>
> Not sure, but it may be worth pointing out, that my statement was only in
> the context of a FireStar*.
>
> Dennis
>
>
> Ivo works great with the B Box - but forget the in-flight adjustable ...
> really a waste of money an a *FireStar. Worse yet, the in-flight adjust
> will
> make it more likely you'll run too lean at some point and damage your
> engine. Also I would go with a 2-blade for more acceleration and climb,
> 3-blade dia is too small a dia.
>
> Have fun!
>
> Dennis
>
>
> >
> > Richard & All,
> > Your statement below is not totally correct. For a hi-drag narrower
speed
> > range aircraft like a Kolb, the prop would offer little benefit. For an
> > aircraft like a Titan or Earthstar Gull, it works find. No problem.
> > jerryb
> >
> > snip....
> > >You don't want an in flight adjustable with a 2-stroke engine, Dennis
> > >Souder is correct (as usual) because a 2-stroke is almost impossible to
> jet
> > >once you start varying prop loads. Your engine EGT's will drive you
nuts
> > >and spoil your fun. snip ....
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Woody <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Irresponsible Flying or Pushing The Envelope |
>
>The reason I share this is to let you all know that even
>when one is optimistic about his flying, involved in a
>serious test program, that he can unintentionally get the
>aircraft into situations that are out of his control and
>crash.
>
>I hope there are not too many of us out there flying that
>think if I have a good attitude about my flying I won't bust
>my ass. Ole Murphy will take care of that attitude and
>airplane for you.
True words John. I will be doing a test program on mine in a few days
and I know how fast the ground can jump up and bite you. I think I have my
Kolb Flyer lawn dart photo posted to the list as proof. Luckily I have an
easy out if the trees at the end of my runway get to near and there is a
lot of open farm land here in case of an engine out. Lots to think and
worry about but when finished I will have a great airplane.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Woody <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
| Subject: | Honda engines .... |
>
>
>Onan...as in generator engine. Was an excellent 1 place airplane...and
>a terrible 2 place (Dragonfly)
>
>Jeremy Casey
>jrcasey(at)ldl.net
I have never heard that the Dragon fly was a terrible airplane. It is an
older design but it is still selling plans. Good internet list also.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeremy Casey" <jrcasey(at)ldl.net> |
| Subject: | Honda engines .... |
>
>
>Onan...as in generator engine. Was an excellent 1 place airplane...and
>a terrible 2 place (Dragonfly)
>
>Jeremy Casey
>jrcasey(at)ldl.net
I have never heard that the Dragon fly was a terrible airplane. It is
an
older design but it is still selling plans. Good internet list also.
Originally the VW was used on most D-fly's and they were underpowered.
They were terribly sensitive to bug guts, etc. on the forward wing.
With the wheels out on the tips of the forward wing they had a bad
problem with prop strikes after a "less than gentle" landing cause the
forward wing would flex and allow the prop to strike. Now they
obviously were fast for their power and won awards in the "unusual"
department.
To each his own... I withdraw the "terrible" comment... maybe should
have said, "peculiar". Had more faults than the single place. O yea,
you had better have 2 small guys, if you want to actually use it as a 2
place...
Jeremy Casey
jrcasey(at)ldl.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeremy Casey" <jrcasey(at)ldl.net> |
Thought I'd drop a note to everyone. Most have probably heard the
glowing recommendations from John H. regarding Temperfoam seat cushions
(and anyone who can sit in a plane for 8-10 hours a day for several
weeks ought to know). Well if you ever check out the Aircraft Spruce
catalog you'll find out the stuff isn't cheap either ($90-$100). Well
boys and girls, I finally run across another alternative. If you go to
your friendly Sam's Club warehouse store, in the bedding area, they sell
Temperfoam posturepedic pillows for approx. $29. They are formed in a
little curve that is intended to fit your head, but interestingly
enough, it also fits my rear end quite well (I said MY rear end...your
mileage may vary). Anyway, I have done my public service for this week.
I should have bought a pallet of them and started selling them at
Oshkosh for about $75/each... ;-)
Jeremy Casey
BCD Drafting, Inc.
jrcasey(at)ldl.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "J.D. Stewart" <jstewart(at)inebraska.com> |
www.seatfoam.com is a good place with helpful people to get your tempur
foam. Coincidentally, I asked them about pillows at the time I ordered my
seat bottoms, and they had pallet loads of them which they were unloading
for $8 each. I only got one, and they're all sold out now. :>( They have
a booth at Oshkosh every year, too.
The 1155 miles flown to Oshkosh and back on tempur foam last week was still
hard on the rear end. Lots of turbulence on the way back.
J.D. Stewart
Internet Nebraska-Norfolk
http://www.inebraska.com
UltraFun AirSports
http://www.ultrafunairsports.com
Challenger Owners E-mail list and Website Administrator
http://challenger.inebraska.com
>
> Thought I'd drop a note to everyone. Most have probably heard the
> glowing recommendations from John H. regarding Temperfoam seat cushions
> (and anyone who can sit in a plane for 8-10 hours a day for several
> weeks ought to know). Well if you ever check out the Aircraft Spruce
> catalog you'll find out the stuff isn't cheap either ($90-$100). Well
> boys and girls, I finally run across another alternative. If you go to
> your friendly Sam's Club warehouse store, in the bedding area, they sell
> Temperfoam posturepedic pillows for approx. $29. They are formed in a
> little curve that is intended to fit your head, but interestingly
> enough, it also fits my rear end quite well (I said MY rear end...your
> mileage may vary). Anyway, I have done my public service for this week.
> I should have bought a pallet of them and started selling them at
> Oshkosh for about $75/each... ;-)
>
> Jeremy Casey
> BCD Drafting, Inc.
> jrcasey(at)ldl.net
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Johann G." <johann-g(at)tal.is> |
| Subject: | Extend instrument panel. |
Hi Kolbers.
I have been thinking about moving the instrument panel on my Firestar
II, approx. 4" closer for me to be able to reach the EIS and Altimeter.
I am 6'2" but that is not enough. Does anyone have any pictures or can
share ideas of building the extension.
I had the idea of adding this part from composite or fiber material.
Here is a picture of the present panel, but I wanted to add the VSI 3
1/8" plus fixing the radio to the left side under the speedometer.
It is in my way as I try to enter the cockpit. Getting stiff.
http://www.gi.is/fis/kolb/cockpit.jpg
Look forward to all your expert advise.
Best wishes from Iceland.
Johann G.
Firestar II 90 hrs.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Extend instrument panel. |
In a message dated 7/30/02 6:26:48 PM Eastern Daylight Time, johann-g(at)tal.is
writes:
> Kolbers.
>
> I have been thinking about moving the instrument panel on my Firestar
> II, approx. 4" closer for me to be able to reach the EIS and Altimeter.
> I am 6'2" but that is not enough. Does anyone have any pictures or can
> share ideas of building the extension.
> I had the idea of adding this part from composite or fiber material.
> Here is a picture of the present panel, but I wanted to add the VSI 3
> 1/8" plus fixing the radio to the left side under the speedometer.
> It is in my way as I try to enter the cockpit. Getting stiff.
> .
> Look forward to all your expert advise.
>
>
What a co-incidence, Johann; we are in the process of doing exactly that to
my friend Chuck's Firestar II.
When you move the panel out 4", you should be able to enlarge it about 1 inch
[2.54 cm] all the way around [except the bottom, which should decrease in
size about 1/2" for knee clearance].
Make a cardboard template dimensioned as above and move your instruments
around to suit you.
The great thing about this is that you can put the new panel on a piano hinge
at the bottom & just pull 2 screws at the top & the panel will hinge down for
maintenance.
We made our new panel & all the brackets out of approximately .060"
aluminum. We laminated a nice woodgrain Formica on to the panel.
Even with the slightly enlarged panel, you may not be able to get another 3
1/8" instrument & a radio on it.
I am going to the hangar on Thursday & will take photo's & email them to you
off list.
I recall that someone else on this list did about the same thing; maybe they
have some better ideas.
Howard Shackleford
FS II
SC
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: MK III CLASSIC |
In a message dated 7/30/02 6:50:51 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
ulpilot(at)cavtel.net writes:
> I currently have a FS KXP with a 447 for power and it is a joy to fly.
> I am thinking about building a MK III with a Rotax 503 for power. Now
> to my questions.
> How does the 503 perform with a passenger? Without a passenger?
> I have heard good things about powerfin props. Is anybody running a 503
> powerfin combination on a MK III Classic? If so, how's the performance?
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> Jim Ballenger
>
I think the experts will tell you that it will fly just OK with the 503 with
one person. For two people you need the 582 or equivalent.
Powerfin- I think you can run a nice 2 blade big one using the "B" box
without exceeding the allowed inertial mass.
Shack
FS II
SC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Johann G." <johann-g(at)tal.is> |
| Subject: | Re: Extend instrument panel. |
Hi Howard.
Great information. Thank you. Look forward to the picture of you panel.
The hinge at the bottom is a great idea. It can be difficult to reach the
instruments and connections when installing ,and if something shakes loose.
With gratitude,
Johann G.
Iceland.
----- Original Message -----
From: <HShack(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Extend instrument panel.
>
> In a message dated 7/30/02 6:26:48 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
johann-g(at)tal.is
> writes:
>
>
> > Kolbers.
> >
> > I have been thinking about moving the instrument panel on my Firestar
> > II, approx. 4" closer for me to be able to reach the EIS and Altimeter.
> > I am 6'2" but that is not enough. Does anyone have any pictures or can
> > share ideas of building the extension.
> > I had the idea of adding this part from composite or fiber material.
> > Here is a picture of the present panel, but I wanted to add the VSI 3
> > 1/8" plus fixing the radio to the left side under the speedometer.
> > It is in my way as I try to enter the cockpit. Getting stiff.
> > .
> > Look forward to all your expert advise.
> >
> >
>
> What a co-incidence, Johann; we are in the process of doing exactly that
to
> my friend Chuck's Firestar II.
>
> When you move the panel out 4", you should be able to enlarge it about 1
inch
> [2.54 cm] all the way around [except the bottom, which should decrease in
> size about 1/2" for knee clearance].
>
> Make a cardboard template dimensioned as above and move your instruments
> around to suit you.
>
> The great thing about this is that you can put the new panel on a piano
hinge
> at the bottom & just pull 2 screws at the top & the panel will hinge down
for
> maintenance.
>
> We made our new panel & all the brackets out of approximately .060"
> aluminum. We laminated a nice woodgrain Formica on to the panel.
>
> Even with the slightly enlarged panel, you may not be able to get another
3
> 1/8" instrument & a radio on it.
>
> I am going to the hangar on Thursday & will take photo's & email them to
you
> off list.
>
> I recall that someone else on this list did about the same thing; maybe
they
> have some better ideas.
>
> Howard Shackleford
> FS II
> SC
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim" <flykolb(at)carolina.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: MK III CLASSIC |
I agree. I have a Mark III with a 503 and usually fly solo. On a cool winter
day I have taken a passenger up to 200 lbs but it is not a comfortable
feeling. A 582 will do the job.
Jim
Charlotte
N103TS
----- Original Message -----
From: <HShack(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: MK III CLASSIC
>
> In a message dated 7/30/02 6:50:51 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> ulpilot(at)cavtel.net writes:
>
>
> > I currently have a FS KXP with a 447 for power and it is a joy to fly.
> > I am thinking about building a MK III with a Rotax 503 for power. Now
> > to my questions.
> > How does the 503 perform with a passenger? Without a passenger?
> > I have heard good things about powerfin props. Is anybody running a 503
> > powerfin combination on a MK III Classic? If so, how's the performance?
> >
> > Thanks in advance
> >
> > Jim Ballenger
> >
>
> I think the experts will tell you that it will fly just OK with the 503
with
> one person. For two people you need the 582 or equivalent.
>
> Powerfin- I think you can run a nice 2 blade big one using the "B" box
> without exceeding the allowed inertial mass.
>
> Shack
> FS II
> SC
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SR3SA2L1(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Extend instrument panel. |
Hi Johann,
When you move your panel towards you, you will also change the height of the
bottom of it and the clearance you have for your legs. Because of the angle
of your legs as you sit, you may not give yourself more leg clearance, but
less. This is one of those things that came as a real surprise to me when I
did the same thing for the same reason as you are doing it. Also, make sure
your joystick will not hit it on full forward deflection. You may want to
build a mock up and place it where you plan to put your panel to make sure
your shins will clear before you spend a lot of time and $ on the real deal
or you could end up doing it a couple of times.
Steve
orig FS
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | King Kolbra how well does it fly? Looking for a project. |
Does anyone out there have any experience flying the kolbra. How does
it fly? What engine was on the plane when flown? What is the room like
on the inside? If anyone knows where one is that is not going to be
finished let me know.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | WillUribe(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Kolb-List Digest: 28 Msgs - 07/28/02 |
Hi Johann,
I installed the remote buttons for the EIS under my seat. I have no problem
using them when I'm flying.
Take a look
http://members.aol.com/cesaru/KolbFSII/248.jpg
Will Uribe
El Paso, TX
FireStar II N4GU
C-172 N2506U
http://home.elp.rr.com/airplane/
----- Original Message ----- From: "Johann G." <<A HREF="mailto:johann-g(at)tal.is">johann-g(at)tal.is>
Subject: Kolb-List: Extend instrument panel.
>
> Hi Kolbers.
>
> I have been thinking about moving the instrument panel on my Firestar
> II, approx. 4" closer for me to be able to reach the EIS and Altimeter.
> I am 6'2" but that is not enough. Does anyone have any pictures or can
> share ideas of building the extension.
> I had the idea of adding this part from composite or fiber material.
> Here is a picture of the present panel, but I wanted to add the VSI 3
> 1/8" plus fixing the radio to the left side under the speedometer.
> It is in my way as I try to enter the cockpit. Getting stiff.
> http://www.gi.is/fis/kolb/cockpit.jpg
>
> Look forward to all your expert advise.
>
> Best wishes from Iceland.
> Johann G.
> Firestar II 90 hrs.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Charles" <chieppa47(at)attbi.com> |
Try Linda @kolb for training information.
Charles
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "jawmson" <jawmson(at)attbi.com> |
| Subject: | Re: King Kolbra how well does it fly? Looking for a project. |
Gary and fellow Kolbers,
My Kolbra is flying and getting better with every flight.
My progress through the 40 hours of flight testing can be followed at:
http://home.attbi.com/~KolbraPilot3/Phase1.htm
As for room, my left elbow rubs continuously on the throttle linkage to the
back seat.
John Williamson
Arlington, TX
N49KK
King Kolbra, Jabiru 2200
http://home.attbi.com/~kolbrapilot/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | possums <possums(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Kolb-List Digest: 28 Msgs - 07/28/02 |
>
>Hi Johann,
>I installed the remote buttons for the EIS under my seat. I have no problem
>using them when I'm flying.
>Take a look
>http://members.aol.com/cesaru/KolbFSII/248.jpg
>
>Will Uribe
Me too - seems to work out real well (3 years now)- sometimes like
playing the piano, with a VSI, Atlimeter, CHTs, EGT, RPM, timer,
hobbs meter,stop watch and all that stuff they put on those things.
http://www.mindspring.com/~possums/Snapinseat.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Charles" <chieppa47(at)attbi.com> |
Say John,
Good to hear (& see) your KOLBRA is coming along. Any plans to go to KOLB
in Sept? (there annual fly (drive) in)
Charles
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Deadstick landings |
In a message dated 7/25/02 10:08:38 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
bbrocious(at)hotmail.com writes:
<< 2. Make reasonable but steep approaches. Again, I can almost always get
rid of excess altitude but it is tough to get it back when you need it. You
will never see me making a 2.5 - 3 degree approach to ANY runway in VFR
conditions, even with long, clear approaches. It is habit. A sudden
tailwind or a tree that seems to grow before your eyes becomes a simpler
issue to deal with. Altitude is money in the bank. You can almost always
spend it.
3. Always have a field identified for an off field landing. If the thermals
suddenly disappear you have a plan ready. It becomes second nature in a
sailplane. Should be true with experimentals as well.
Flying sailplanes takes a lot of my fear away should things suddenly get
quiet. Your plane will fly if you fly it. Practice saved the lives of these
two people. If you have the opportunity to take some dual in a sailplane I
encourage it as a good investment.
Bob (Mark III 98% >>
As an ol glider pilot, you speak my language and I merely say....hear! hear!
These 2 points alone will save a life or two. Flying by these 2 points
enables me to think of the engine as a plus, not a mandatory....at least for
survival. NOT talking about trying to go anywhere. I hate 2.5 to 3 degrees,
and so should any other ultraliter. The only dangerous part of ultralighting
on a clear day is within the 1st 250 ft of takeoff, from then on, you should
always have an idea where YOU want to land if necessary. At least this is the
circumstance where I fly from.....cause of the trees!
George Randolph
Akron Oh.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: MK III CLASSIC |
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com |
writes:
>
> I agree. I have a Mark III with a 503 and usually fly solo. On a
> cool winter
> day I have taken a passenger up to 200 lbs but it is not a
> comfortable
> feeling. A 582 will do the job.
>
> Jim
> Charlotte
> N103TS
Jim,
I have about 30 hours in a 503 powered Mark II and we (two 200 lb guys)
flew without a problem. I thought it performed just fine. Climb was about
600-700 ft/min with a fixed wood prop that came with the kit.
Ralph Burlingame
Original Firestar
15 years flying it
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: MK III CLASSIC |
Agreed. A MKII with a 503 flys fine with two people.
A MKIII with a 503 is a really bad idea.
A MKIII needs at least 65 HP.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>I have about 30 hours in a 503 powered Mark II and we (two 200 lb guys)
>flew without a problem. I thought it performed just fine. Climb was about
>600-700 ft/min with a fixed wood prop that came with the kit.
>
>Ralph Burlingame
>Original Firestar
>15 years flying it
>
>
>---
>Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
---
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Aero Twin Motor |
In a message dated 7/27/02 9:00:58 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
olenik-aviation(at)buyitsellitfixit.com writes:
<< Hi Dave,
I finally found this group. :)
I gues I'm a little skeptical about that 80 lbs. The engine looks
interesting though. That would be about 40-50 pounds lighter than anything
else in it's class to this point unless 80 lbs is not really as complete as
what I think it is.
Looks like it's making all it's power with bore size. That's certainly a
big bore for an engine that size.
Tom Olenik >>
Hi Tom.....are you Jerry Olenik"s son?...part of Green Sky?...the first
registered Rotax repairer?...I'm George Randolph and used to fly with Bob
Morrison. I now live in Akron. Welcome to the list.
Firestar Driver
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Which way do you turn it?? |
In a message dated 7/28/02 12:24:27 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
SGreenpg(at)aol.com writes:
<<
> On an IVO ground adjustable standing at the rear looking forward, which way
> do you turn the screw to increase pitch and reduce RPM?
If I remember correctly you turn to the left to increase pitch.
S. Green >>
I try to remember it by removing strain on nut to increase pitch....I think...
George Randolph
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Woody <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Extend instrument panel. |
>
>Hi Kolbers.
>
>I have been thinking about moving the instrument panel on my Firestar
>II, approx. 4" closer for me to be able to reach the EIS and Altimeter.
>I am 6'2" but that is not enough. Does anyone have any pictures or can
>share ideas of building the extension.
I did it the hard way on my Mk 111. I built a whole new pod out of blue
styrofaoam and epoxy glass. For the EIS what my friend Andy did was wire in
a joy stick grip from a computer. It has 5 buttons so he also has a push to
talk and a spare button for future ideas.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "TopGun" <TopGunPI(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Yes , I'll be there . So far every kolber I know is planning to
attend .Hope to see you there as well .
John
----- Original Message -----
From: "Charles" <chieppa47(at)attbi.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: Re: KOBRA
>
> Say John,
> Good to hear (& see) your KOLBRA is coming along. Any plans to go to KOLB
> in Sept? (there annual fly (drive) in)
>
> Charles
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: King Kolbra how well does it fly? Looking for a project. |
John W/Gents:
Did extensive experimenting with deflection of leading edge of vert stab.
Conclusion was results were not sufficient to warrant bending the vertical
stabilizer out of column. Max deflection was about 1 3/4".
A good rudder trim tab of the correct size and angle will get the adverse yaw
problem squared away, as my Mark III is now.
I am in Florida at Brother Jim's repairing my tail post, so do not have the
dimensions of my rudder trim tab handy. A search of Kolb List Archives should
bring them up. They are for the Mark III, but should not be far off for the
Kolbra.
I have flown the Kolbra for a very short time, .5 hrs, at Osh some years ago.
I enjoyed my short flight which indicated the Kolbra has overcome some of the
adverse characteristics of the Mark III. Should I ever build another
airplane, I would seriously consider the Kolbra, with the normal Hauck mods of
course. :-)
john h
woodville, fl
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Charles" <chieppa47(at)attbi.com> |
| Subject: | Re: IE 6.0 Warning |
I got a IE 6.0 patch today in my email ---- be warned if any of you see
this to not open it. I believe it is a virus.
Charles
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeremy Casey" <jrcasey(at)ldl.net> |
| Subject: | Re: IE 6.0 Warning |
I got a IE 6.0 patch today in my email ---- be warned if any of you see
this to not open it. I believe it is a virus.
Charles
This is non-Kolb related but I'll be real brief...
Microsoft will never SEND YOU a patch...you ALWAYS have to go get it!!!
Yes that was a virus...
Jeremy Casey
jrcasey(at)ldl.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Charles" <chieppa47(at)attbi.com> |
| Subject: | Re: IE 6.0 Warning |
Jeremy Casey,
Thanks for the information, McAfee missed it but I knew not to open any
attachments! It's a people problem.
Charles
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Extend instrument panel |
Anyone interested in the extended instrument panel on a Firestar II should
look at our club's web site under "photo's". There are 5 photo's that pretty
well show how it's done. http://www.trentonflyers.com
If anyone is interested, I will write up some details.
Howard Shackleford
FS II
SC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kirk Smith" <snuffy(at)usol.com> |
| Subject: | With/without windshield |
I have wondered how flying without the windshield or doors or other
removeable lexan affects the flight characteristics of a Mark 3? I know
Kolb says it's ok but it has to have an affect on the way the plane
flys. Anybody out there with some experience in this area?
..........thanks.......Kirk
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Airgriff2(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Kolb-List Digest: 11 Msgs - 07/31/02Loops, rolls, spins |
Wondering if there is a small number on the list which has tried loops, rolls
John H. I was thinking along the lines of a gental, positive manuver which
doesn't stress the plane. There is a chance that one may enter a spin, and
it would be nice to pratice recovery. I,ve done spins in a C-150 and J3 Cub,
and was wondering if there was anything different in the MK3 ? I will
probably practice with a CFI. If anyone has done loops, rolls, and spins,
could you share anything as far as the entries, the manuver itself and the
recovery. I know Kolbs are not built or designed for aerobatics, and in no
way do I intend to over stress the plane. Loops and rolls, if properly done,
put very little g-force on a plane. Then again, if the feedback from the
list is along the line of "DON"T TRY IT", I will listen to that also, and be
content with straight flight, steep turns, and stalls.
Bob Griffin
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: With/without windshield |
| From: | Scott Trask <sctrask(at)diisd.org> |
on 8/1/02 5:34 AM, Kirk Smith at snuffy(at)usol.com wrote:
>
> I have wondered how flying without the windshield or doors or other
> removeable lexan affects the flight characteristics of a Mark 3? I know
> Kolb says it's ok but it has to have an affect on the way the plane
> flys. Anybody out there with some experience in this area?
> ..........thanks.......Kirk
>
>
It fly's better, more lift. For around the patch fling on a hot day you
can't beat it!
Scott Trask IMT
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: With/without windshield |
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com |
>
> I have wondered how flying without the windshield or doors or other
> removeable lexan affects the flight characteristics of a Mark 3? I know
> Kolb says it's ok but it has to have an affect on the way the plane
> flys. Anybody out there with some experience in this area?
> ..........thanks.......Kirk
>
>
It fly's better, more lift. For around the patch fling on a hot day you
can't beat it!
Scott Trask IMT
I agree with Scott about the open lexan. I've flown both and the open lexan is
nice. A complete enclosure has more risks if there were: smoke in the cockpit,
fogging on the inside, or if a condition like freezing drizzle were encountered.
All of the above risks would be overcome with an open cockpit plane.
On the other hand, the complete enclosure is warmer during the winter and is more
efficient with less drag.
Ralph Burlingame
Original Firestar
15 years flying it
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SR3SA2L1(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: With/without windshield |
I too have flown both with no windshield and with a full enclosure on an orig
FS.
Without any windshield:
nicer in summer (better cooling), bug factor is greater, cold at
altitude even in the summer in the mornings, greater fatigue factor from the
wind blowing directly against you (just like a motorcycle with vs without),
more wind inside the cockpit blowing paper (maps etc) around, nice to hang
your arms out and rest elbows on the side of the frame, slightly greater fuel
burn
With a full windshield:
hot summer or winter, no bug factor, hot at any altitude any time the
sun is shines, no more fatigue than driving a car so its really nice for long
flights in this regard, no maps blowing around when you are trying to read
them, no papers etc blowing around, cockpit is much tighter, much less elbow
room, better fuel burn and range, about 7mph faster cruise at the same rpm,
smoooother thru the air
I can't comment on how yours might change as far as handling, sink rates,
glide etc. but the above will probably apply
I am trying a 3/4 next to see if I can get the best of both worlds. Hope
this helps in your deliberations.
Steve
orig FS
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SR3SA2L1(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Re carbs and FS2 wings |
Hello all,
I am still looking for a pair of high alt comp carbs for a DC 503 and a FS2
wing (built or kit, with or without skins). If anyone hears of either of
these in good shape, please refer them my way. Thanks.
Steve
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: With/without windshield |
> A
> complete enclosure has more risks if there
> were: smoke in the cockpit, fogging on the
> inside, or if a condition like freezing drizzle
> were encountered.
>
> All of the above risks would be overcome with
> an open cockpit plane.
>
> On the other hand, the complete enclosure is
> warmer during the winter and is more efficient
> with less drag.
>
> Ralph Burlingame
Ralph and the rest of the Kolb Gang:
It is raining cats and dogs at Bro Jim's place in Woodville, FL. A real frog
strangler.
We got the tailpost repaired and upgraded. Jim did a good job adding some
more strength to the areas that failed. Were able to to the cutting and
welding without damaging the paint and fabric on the upper vertical
stabilizer. Only priming, covering, doping, and painting will be done to the
lower vertical stab. Save me a buncha work. Was thinking about pulling
fabric from all the tail surfaces, but changed mind. The fabric is still good
after 11 years and 1,700+ flight hours.
Now, about those disadvantages of a fully enclosed cockpit:
Smoke in the cockpit??? Open the door. Chance of smoke in the cockpit???
eeeehhhh.....Not much. I don't smoke, and the only other source would be an
electrical fire. If that should occur, then a flip of the Master Switch will
shut down all the electrical power to the instrument panel. Alternator
disconnects from electrical system with the flip of another switch. If that
doesn't work, well, I guess I'll try opening the door.
Fogging inside??? Carry a towel. The only time fogging inside occurs is when
you are sitting still, on the ground, or just before takeoff. The real
hazzard is fogging on the outside. When it happens, it gets your
attention, but don't panic. Usually, the side windows do not fog. Look out
the side windows and in about 10 seconds the windshield will clear off.
Freezing drizzle??? Best bet to stay home. Any weather with possible
icing............stay home.
There are a lot of advantages of an enclosed cockpit.
More comfortable, summer and winter. May be warm on the ground, but a climb
to altitude will soon cool things down. In the winter, as long as the sun
shines on the lexan, it will be warm in the cockpit. Flew, without heat or
electric vest to Arctic in 1994. Was fairly comfortable except when flying
due north. The wing shaded the cockpit and temps dropped. Last year's flight
was great. Chillie Vest, 12vdc powered, worked great and kept me warm, sun or
shade.
Don't get nearly as tired flying with enclosed cockpit. The strain of trying
to hold your head against the wind will wear you down. The wind blowing in
your face and beating you up will also drain energy. Enough flying in those
conditions will make you cranky and hard to get along with.
Rain is not a problem. Neither are bugs and birds, unless they are really
big, like a goose or a buzzard. :-)
Did a lot of cross countries in open and closed cockpits. Prefer closed. All
in what you like and how much punishment you can endure. :-)
Ralph, another disadvantage is, something else to wax occassionally. hehehe
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Woody Weaver" <mts0140(at)ATTGLOBAL.NET> |
| Subject: | Firefly vs Firestar |
Can someone who has some time in both comment about the differences in these
two planes?
I know the specs. I'm really asking about "feel"?
Thanks,
Woody Weaver
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kirk Smith" <snuffy(at)usol.com> |
| Subject: | With/without windshield |
Apparently then, the Mark 3 doesn't pick up any nasty habits or get
squirrely when the lexan is removed ,including the windshield?
Thanks.....Kirk
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: With/without windshield |
In a message dated 8/1/02 6:56:57 PM Eastern Daylight Time, snuffy(at)usol.com
writes:
> Apparently then, the Mark 3 doesn't pick up any nasty habits or get
> squirrely when the lexan is removed ,including the windshield?
> Thanks.....Kirk
>
>
>
I once saw a documentary-type program on "Discovery Channel" [I think],
where some guy was taking photos from a really weird looking aircraft. Turns
out that it was a Kolb MkIII [I think] with the nose pod & enclosure were
removed.
Shack
FS II
SC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kirk Smith" <snuffy(at)usol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: With/without windshield |
> I once saw a documentary-type program on "Discovery Channel" [I think],
> where some guy was taking photos from a really weird looking aircraft.
Turns
> out that it was a Kolb MkIII [I think] with the nose pod & enclosure were
> removed.
>
> Shack
> FS II
> SC
I bet there aren't too many airplanes you can do something like that with?
It would make a super photography platform. ...Kirk
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vincehallam(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: modifications? |
OK now i remember twas the aeronca C3 Iflew one at panshanger UK inthe 50s
you always had to hope there was nobody in front of you because you couldnt
see dead ahead even in level flight. It had agood quart/pintpot sec./versus
performance and I liked it but I bought a Hillson Praga instead ,wooden with
very similar performance,which I hope to find again one day with someones
cast off Kolb.[Itonly cost me 200/$500.....50 years ago!!!]
vnmz
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Korenek <ken-foi(at)attbi.com> |
| Subject: | Wide Open Throttle |
Kolbers,
I've got a 503 with a 3 blade Powerfin.
What should wide open throttle be on takeoff roll? 5900?
How about WOT straight and level? 6400?
I think I need to repitch my prop and add in some pitch. I flew
with a friend with an identical FS II but with an Ivo and at 70 mph, I'm
turning 5600 and he was turning 5200. If I go wot, I can exceed 6800
rpm before i hit Vne.
He is turning lower rpms during climbout, and he is still
outclimbing me. (Can't have that...)
What do I make of this? Better prop performance? Better prop?
I need to adjust pitch?
I know that repitching will effect my cht/egt readings- now 320/
1100 at 70 mph cruise.
What are you guys turning at various speeds?
Got some advice for me?
*********************
Ken W. Korenek
ken-foi(at)attbi.com
Kolb FireStar II, "My Mistress" Back in the Air !!
Rotax 503, Oil Injected
3 Blade Powerfin
http://home.attbi.com/~KolbraPilot/TX_files/image003.jpg
Six Chuter SR7-XL
Powered Parachute
Rotax 582, Oil Injected
3 Blade PowerFin
4906 Oak Springs Drive
Arlington, Texas 76016
817-572-6832 voice
817-572-6842 fax
817-657-6500 cell
817-483-8054 home
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Johann G." <johann-g(at)tal.is> |
| Subject: | Re: Wide Open Throttle |
Hi Ken.
I am using the Rotax 503 DCDI with a IVO three blade 64"
My take off throttle is around 6100-6200 rpm
WOT around 65-6600 rpm
Cruise speed around 70-75 mph. rpm 5200-5400
If your EGT will rise with less pitch, just change the main jet to next size
larger,( from 158 to 160) but monitor the spark plugs for too much carbon.
I am not sure if your cht will be effected by this too much.
Hope this helps,
Best wishes,
Johann G.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken Korenek" <ken-foi(at)attbi.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: Wide Open Throttle
>
> Kolbers,
>
> I've got a 503 with a 3 blade Powerfin.
>
> What should wide open throttle be on takeoff roll? 5900?
>
> How about WOT straight and level? 6400?
>
> I think I need to repitch my prop and add in some pitch. I flew
> with a friend with an identical FS II but with an Ivo and at 70 mph, I'm
> turning 5600 and he was turning 5200. If I go wot, I can exceed 6800
> rpm before i hit Vne.
>
> He is turning lower rpms during climbout, and he is still
> outclimbing me. (Can't have that...)
>
> What do I make of this? Better prop performance? Better prop?
> I need to adjust pitch?
>
> I know that repitching will effect my cht/egt readings- now 320/
> 1100 at 70 mph cruise.
>
>
> What are you guys turning at various speeds?
>
> Got some advice for me?
>
>
> *********************
> Ken W. Korenek
>
> ken-foi(at)attbi.com
>
>
> Kolb FireStar II, "My Mistress" Back in the Air !!
> Rotax 503, Oil Injected
> 3 Blade Powerfin
> http://home.attbi.com/~KolbraPilot/TX_files/image003.jpg
>
>
> Six Chuter SR7-XL
> Powered Parachute
> Rotax 582, Oil Injected
> 3 Blade PowerFin
>
>
> 4906 Oak Springs Drive
> Arlington, Texas 76016
>
> 817-572-6832 voice
> 817-572-6842 fax
> 817-657-6500 cell
> 817-483-8054 home
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave Rains <rr(at)htg.net> |
| Subject: | Wide Open Throttle |
Hi Ken, I also have a 503 and 3 blade PowerFin on my FireStar II.
I think you need a little more pitch. Mine turns 6200 in level flight, and
6000 at climb out. Will has a Ivo on his FireStar, and it has never
performed as well as my PowerFin. Are the two planes in the same
configuration? If his plane has the short windshield and yours is
enclosed, He will out run you every time. One more consideration, is your
friend one of those razor thin fellows who never can put on a pound?
Dave Rains
El Paso
-----Original Message-----
From: Ken Korenek [SMTP:ken-foi(at)attbi.com]
Subject: Kolb-List: Wide Open Throttle
Kolbers,
I've got a 503 with a 3 blade Powerfin.
What should wide open throttle be on takeoff roll? 5900?
How about WOT straight and level? 6400?
I think I need to repitch my prop and add in some pitch. I flew
with a friend with an identical FS II but with an Ivo and at 70 mph, I'm
turning 5600 and he was turning 5200. If I go wot, I can exceed 6800
rpm before i hit Vne.
He is turning lower rpms during climbout, and he is still
outclimbing me. (Can't have that...)
What do I make of this? Better prop performance? Better prop?
I need to adjust pitch?
I know that repitching will effect my cht/egt readings- now 320/
1100 at 70 mph cruise.
What are you guys turning at various speeds?
Got some advice for me?
*********************
Ken W. Korenek
ken-foi(at)attbi.com
Kolb FireStar II, "My Mistress" Back in the Air !!
Rotax 503, Oil Injected
3 Blade Powerfin
http://home.attbi.com/~KolbraPilot/TX_files/image003.jpg
Six Chuter SR7-XL
Powered Parachute
Rotax 582, Oil Injected
3 Blade PowerFin
4906 Oak Springs Drive
Arlington, Texas 76016
817-572-6832 voice
817-572-6842 fax
817-657-6500 cell
817-483-8054 home
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Woody <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
| Subject: | Re: With/without windshield |
>
>I once saw a documentary-type program on "Discovery Channel" [I think],
>where some guy was taking photos from a really weird looking aircraft. Turns
>out that it was a Kolb MkIII [I think] with the nose pod & enclosure were
>removed.
I think that guy is a new list member and flies an original Twinstar
like mine. It has to be the best camera platform flying. I once added a
full windshield to it but it seemed to increase drag... a lot.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Wide Open Throttle |
Some thoughts on prop pitch and Wide Open Throttle:
Last week my wife commented on how tall the powerlines off the end of the
runway are lately. The temperatures here in Tennessee are in the 90's and
my climb rate is down. So I took some pitch out of the old Ivoprop to
improve climb rate. Here is before and after.
Before: (on average)
5900 on climbout
6300 WOT level flight
90-92mph top end @ 6300
5200 rpm=65mph cruise
Now: (on average)
6200 on climbout
6500 WOT level flight
82mph top end @ 6500
5600 rpm=65mph cruise
Acceleration from stop is slightly better.
Climbout is slightly better. EGT's unchanged.
Good for the takeoff conditions, but everywhere else, a minus.
As soon as Tenn. cools down to normal, I'm repitching the prop.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
Rotax 532, 2.58:1 B box, 66" 2-blade Ivo
>
>
>Kolbers,
>
> I've got a 503 with a 3 blade Powerfin.
>
> What should wide open throttle be on takeoff roll? 5900?
>
> How about WOT straight and level? 6400?
>
> I think I need to repitch my prop and add in some pitch. I flew
>with a friend with an identical FS II but with an Ivo and at 70 mph, I'm
>turning 5600 and he was turning 5200. If I go wot, I can exceed 6800
>rpm before i hit Vne.
>
> He is turning lower rpms during climbout, and he is still
>outclimbing me. (Can't have that...)
>
> What do I make of this? Better prop performance? Better prop?
>I need to adjust pitch?
>
> I know that repitching will effect my cht/egt readings- now 320/
>1100 at 70 mph cruise.
>
>
> What are you guys turning at various speeds?
>
> Got some advice for me?
>
>
>*********************
>Ken W. Korenek
>
>ken-foi(at)attbi.com
---
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Quickie .../ still around/Vw redrive |
Rick
Who's redrive are you using?? Herb in Ky
writes:
>
>
>
> Rick Neilsen
> Redrive VW powered MKIII
>
>
> >>> bwr000(at)yahoo.com 08/02/02 02:03AM >>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <stripes(at)voicenet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Head phonesa |
<rharris@magnolia-net.com> wrote :
<rharris@magnolia-net.com>
>
> Bill, I spent upwards of 2000 grand before I found a good headset
for my MK3
> (912) . The solution was Sigtronics. They work great and good
people to
> work with, they will help with any problem that you might have. I
passed
> this on to John H. and I believe they are what he wore to Alaska.
Give them
> a call, I don't think you can go wrong..
>
>
> Richard Harris
> MK3 N912RH
> Arkansas
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "bill-jo" <bill-jo(at)prodigy.net>
> To:
> Subject: Kolb-List: Head phonesa
>
>
> >
> >
> > Hey Gang
> >
> > I need help in selecting a pair of headphones that will work in
> > my MK111. I have a Icom A-22 handheld radio that I am using on
a knee
> > pad and I am using a Softcom intercom that is compatable with
the A-22.
> > I have been trying to use a pair of SoftCom headphones and they
pick up
> > the engine and prop noise so much that with the squelch wont
override
> > the noise.
> > Would like to know what you guy's are using. I have been told
that
> > LiteSpeed Model 20 K will work. Let me know what I need.
> >
> > Thanks Bill Futrell
> > MK111Xtra
> >
> >
>
>
> _-
==================================================
=====================
> _-
==================================================
=====================
messages.
> _-
==================================================
=====================
> _-
==================================================
=====================
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)sgmmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wide Open Throttle |
Ken and Group,
Weight can mean a lot. 50 pounds could change the performance more than
a prop. Even cleaning a prop can make a difference in performance.
John Jung
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Quickie .../ still around |
In a message dated 8/2/02 2:04:10 AM Eastern Daylight Time, bwr000(at)yahoo.com
writes:
<< I got my Private license
last Fall and occassionally fly my brother's Grumman Cheetah. Most of
the time I'm in it I think, gee, I wish I could do "that", and "that"
is always something I used to do in my Firestar. Occassional offers to
buy my Firestar had come in occassionally since it flipped three years
ago, and I pondered a bit, then said no. Every thing has a price, but
at this point I'm awfully glad I still have my Firestar. It's a gem.
I look forward to the day I get to tell you all that it is flying
again. (Think geologic time, but it will happen.)
-Ben >>
Ben...we need you here.....should we measure time in the motion of the
tectonic plates relative to the time your wonderful Firestar is done ....I
remember you used to land that puppy on sand bars in a river somewhere.... I
always had great respect for your insight into flying.....but then God smote
you with a big wind and knocked some out of you too, it seemed. My firestar
is still goin good....I STILL have the EGT sensor at the Y instead of one
near each cylinder, and I watch it like a hawk...went soaring the other day
and it was GREAT! I think I wrote about it but no one cared.My writing must
be gettin bad.
George Randolph
the ol glider pilot in Akron
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kugelair(at)netscape.net |
| Subject: | Aint sure about the tube. |
I just started putting together a Mark III Extra. Anyway in the plans in one plave
it calls for a 1" tube for the leading edge of the elevator, and in another
its calling for .875 x 58 49" tube for the elevator leading edge. I can anyone
tell me which tube it is?
Thanx Ron
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gilan" <gilan(at)gate.net> |
| Subject: | Aint sure about the tube. |
This may be a stupid question but why don't you ask the company that sells
the kit?
I sure hope you are taking pictures of all your work. Do you have a website?
I'm very interested in the Kolb Mark III Xtra. I think I want to build one
but need to talk with a lot more people that are or have built one.
Talk to you later
http://www.mitchellwing.com
Join Ring "The Ultralight & Experimental Aircraft SiteRing"
http://pub27.bravenet.com/sitering/nav.php?usernum=2286862090&action=join&si
teid=38879
Gator's annual Fly-in
http://www.mitchellwing.com/flying_gators_annual_fly.htm
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
kugelair(at)netscape.net
Subject: Kolb-List: Aint sure about the tube.
I just started putting together a Mark III Extra. Anyway in the plans in one
plave it calls for a 1" tube for the leading edge of the elevator, and in
another its calling for .875 x 58 49" tube for the elevator leading edge. I
can anyone tell me which tube it is?
Thanx Ron
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)sgmmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aint sure about the tube. |
Gilian and Group,
The reason that a list member will ask the list rather than call the
company is that the company is only open during work hours. Even besides
that, the list is often faster.
John Jung
Gilan wrote:
>
>This may be a stupid question but why don't you ask the company that sells
>the kit?
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com |
Ben and the good 'ol glider pilot (George),
Yes Ben, it's good to hear from you and I'm glad to hear that you are
still making progress on your Firestar. Congratulations on getting your
private ticket!
I see George still has his EGT sender in the "Y". For the benefit of all
the new guys on this list, the old exhaust manifolds didn't have the EGT
sender ports and we drilled a hole in the "Y" of the manifold. If the
hole wasn't in the right spot, it could make for higher EGT readings on
the gauge.
My EGT sender has been in the "Y" for 15 years and reads normal now
(1100F). All of the high readings in the early days was due to a bad
sender. I remember a post from someone years ago who told me to not to
fly my plane with those high readings. I posted to the list how normal
1250F was for my engine. The plugs told the real story and I was happy to
find that it was the sender all this time. I changed out that sender two
years ago, when it read zero during climbout one day.
My 'ol Firestar is running great and yes I still use Seafoam. As a matter
of fact, I have had some soaking in the front cylinder since last weekend
and I hope to get it blown out tomorrow as todays forecast calls for rain
and severe thunderstorms this afternoon.
That's another thread that went round and round (seafoam). Well I'm happy
to report that between the Klotz synthetic oil and the Seafoam, I'm still
in the air on a weekly basis and that Rotax is very dependable. I have
not tallied up the hours, but I will in a later post.
Ben, I hope to hear more from you soon. You always had a lot of good
technical information for the list.
Ralph Burlingame
Original Firestar
15 years flying it
>
> In a message dated 8/2/02 2:04:10 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> bwr000(at)yahoo.com
> writes:
>
> << I got my Private license
> last Fall and occassionally fly my brother's Grumman Cheetah. Most
> of
> the time I'm in it I think, gee, I wish I could do "that", and
> "that"
> is always something I used to do in my Firestar. Occassional
> offers to
> buy my Firestar had come in occassionally since it flipped three
> years
> ago, and I pondered a bit, then said no. Every thing has a price,
> but
> at this point I'm awfully glad I still have my Firestar. It's a
> gem.
> I look forward to the day I get to tell you all that it is flying
> again. (Think geologic time, but it will happen.)
> -Ben >>
> Ben...we need you here.....should we measure time in the motion of
> the
> tectonic plates relative to the time your wonderful Firestar is done
> ....I
> remember you used to land that puppy on sand bars in a river
> somewhere.... I
> always had great respect for your insight into flying.....but then
> God smote
> you with a big wind and knocked some out of you too, it seemed. My
> firestar
> is still goin good....I STILL have the EGT sensor at the Y instead
> of one
> near each cylinder, and I watch it like a hawk...went soaring the
> other day
> and it was GREAT! I think I wrote about it but no one cared.My
> writing must
> be gettin bad.
> George Randolph
> the ol glider pilot in Akron
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kugelair(at)netscape.net |
>>>>>>>This may be a stupid question but why don't you ask the company that sells
the kit? <<<<<<
Well I would ask Kolb directly, but as you may have noticed Yesterday was Friday
evening, and today is Saturday. Unfortunately they are *Closed* !
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Guy Swenson" <guys(at)rrt.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Aint sure about the tube. |
> I just started putting together a Mark III Extra. Anyway in the plans in
one plave it calls for a 1" tube for the leading edge of the elevator, and
in another its calling for .875 x 58 49" tube for the elevator leading edge.
I can anyone tell me which tube it is?
Ron / Listers,
Just checked my plans (I have copies of both style Horizontal Stabs) The 1"
X .058 X 49" tube is the trailing edge of the Horizontal Stab. The 7/8" X
.058 X 49" tube is the leading edge of the elevator.These tubes are the same
for the Large horizontal stab and the smaller "Original" size horizontal
stab. What serial number Xtra do you have? When Kolb went to the Mark III
Xtra "Light" version they whent back to the original Mark III Classic size
Horizontal Stab. I just completed my MK III Xtra this May and started flying
it in June. Let me know if you have any other questions, on or off list! I'd
be glad to help you get your answers.
Guy Swenson
MK III Xtra / N3053B
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "jrodebush" <jrodebush(at)cinci.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Wood prop for Jabiru |
Dallas,
What diameter wood prop & pitch is recommended for the Jabiru? Who is
saying this? Warp Drive or Jabiru?
Thanks for your help. Will probably buy an engine next year & still
looking at the Jabiru or 912. Really liked the sound of the Jabiru at
TNK fly-in two years ago.
Rex Rodebush (building Mark III X-tra)
From: "Dallas Shepherd" <cen23954(at)centurytel.net>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: MK III CLASSIC
>Jim: Love the Jabiru. About 85 hours on it now and the only problem
is
>the
>propeller0D
>which is a Warp Drive 58 inch. They say it should come off and be
replac
>ed
>with a wooden0D
>prop. A $600 solution I haven't met yet. Warp Drive props are running
i
>nto
>cracking 0D
>problems with the hubs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dallas Shepherd" <cen23954(at)centurytel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wood prop for Jabiru |
Rex: Warp Drive and Jabiru both are recommending to change=0D
props. Warp Drive has found cracks in the hub and in one instance=0D
lost a prop half in Australia. Jabiru no longer recommends Warp=0D
Drive and says to go to a wooden prop. Sensenich has been recommended to =0D
me by Pete at usjabiru(at)thenet.net . For the wood prop Pete is saying=0D
a 58x44 or a 62x38. My inquiry at Sensenich got a W58DJL-40=0D
answer. I do not know what these numbers mean, such as, what difference=0D
does the 58x44 make in comparison to the 62x38 as far as climb and=0D
cruise go. Also,Sensenich is different then both of them. Pete could=0D
explain that I'm sure. Anyone, can you help us?=0D
I have a 58" Warp Drive on my Kolb Mark 3 right now, but I=0D
don't know what the other number is. I got the Jabiru and prop from=0D
Pete at USJabiru.=0D
Dallas Shepherd=0D
Norfork, Arkansas=0D
Kolb Mark 3/2200 Jabiru-------Original Message-------=0D
=0D
From: kolb-list(at)matronics.com=0D
Date: Saturday, August 03, 2002 01:24:42 PM=0D
Subject: Kolb-List: Wood prop for Jabiru=0D
=0D
=0D
Dallas,=0D
=0D
What diameter wood prop & pitch is recommended for the Jabiru? Who is=0D
saying this? Warp Drive or Jabiru?=0D
=0D
Thanks for your help. Will probably buy an engine next year & still=0D
looking at the Jabiru or 912. Really liked the sound of the Jabiru at=0D
TNK fly-in two years ago.=0D
=0D
Rex Rodebush (building Mark III X-tra)=0D
=0D
From: "Dallas Shepherd" <cen23954(at)centurytel.net>=0D
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: MK III CLASSIC=0D
=0D
=0D
=0D
>Jim: Love the Jabiru. About 85 hours on it now and the only problem=0D
is=0D
>the=0D
>propeller0D=0D
>which is a Warp Drive 58 inch. They say it should come off and be=0D
replac=0D
>ed=0D
>with a wooden0D=0D
>prop. A $600 solution I haven't met yet. Warp Drive props are running=0D
i=0D
>nto=0D
>cracking 0D=0D
>problems with the hubs=0D
=0D
=0D
=
=0D
=
=0D
=
=0D
=
=0D
=0D
=0D
=0D
=0D
=0D
=0D
=2E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/9j/4AAQSkZJRgABAgAAZABkAAD/7AARRHVja3kAAQAEAAAALQAA/+4AIUFkb2JlAGTAAAAAAQMA
EAMDBgkAAAPXAAAFwAAAE9f/2wCEAAoHBwcIBwoICAoOCQgJDhENCgoNERQQEBEQEBQTDxEQEBEP
ExMXFxkXFxMeHiAgHh4sKysrLDExMTExMTExMTEBCwkJCwwLDQsLDREODg4RFA4ODg4UFxAQERAQ
Fx4WExMTExYeGx0ZGRkdGyEhHh4hISkpKCkpMTExMTExMTExMf/CABEIAEUDIAMBIgACEQEDEQH/
xADBAAEBAAMBAQEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQIFBgQHAwEBAQEBAQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEDAgQQAAECAwYH
AAMAAAAAAAAAAAECA0AxBCAwUGBBBQAQESESMhNwFBURAAAEBAMGBAYDAAAAAAAAAAAQAWEgESEC
MLHB8DFBURIDQHGRE4GhIkLCI1BiMxIBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAcBMAAQMEAQMFAAMBAQEAAAAA
AQARMSFBUWFx8IHBkaGx0eEQIPFAMFD/2gAMAwEAAhEDEQAAAPx9eo3vk9WfV8t1WmIqwUpEBYCV
QQFSylhAVZLAUKJYhKoQABSAtQFQALBYFSFKIBBQAWCBCxalAQFAAFkAALAKQlURYtfNPTfXnp2X
6cp1PedWAAUWApALLEltQQAFkqLQChLCKQCLQAAAAFhAUKSUDKSSxZSlSAoAqIKCJlAFCxAWCBbY
QAFFEVEFfM93pvRx3s+vxz64goIFqWBYiWyiWCwCwJZShSAFhAVilKsBYAtRYgKCAAoAsSyiAS2B
KFKhYSWFq40WVIJSygiwAoAqJSoIqUgr597dNu8tPF3uo3WmUCiVQgKAAsRYUAEBVgBAFikAWACV
SyyJSwtQAFRBYVFFCLGOUtIAAAAABLFICkFFELEFVjRYgAsIqvl3vOe/oGZeEACCqICqIlKgLiIo
txIUtsJLCkEtFggCUpQgiioEBQFEgLBVEgUJLBZSrCAoAImQICFWioSWFBEyFgRQgT//2gAIAQIA
AQUBGJdfyR//2gAIAQMAAQUBJ7YicyGWY//aAAgBAQABBQHilSVPbjubtGsKCk3sspreV9KdaQ5V
7Qa4yFgQMrMsVnAuF5PFC+XKhv0t6xE8OMJSgl7cN0eo1g+ScwLeV9GXPFyp2tW4L6dLmUbLAZxT
peSaF8uPt+mAzyDSJKnt6rHqd1JKkRk4rW1K6lEqD61tLU45/NpXRdzjp4B3hZnk/wCflQ/s/dv0
v9bs8tbQuNOO0D2uDFf/2gAIAQICBj8Bev/aAAgBAwIGPwF6/9oACAEBAQY/AQiIk9w7dtlqLbb/
AKLd+IS5Ny1wHPQMb7bzY6wsKho9PA6YupalTE1Jg56xZlqXR27Opfuu4ILfatlJKrdWaz4ylQWd
zvXyWf1dKb05VUSTgdDyOcTcQ+Ew0G3oeSB8DMnE+ImHhbAfAbH0DRZDLAn27UvTluUJb7d1kufm
ENw2G2Cwcp47m8T4Dh/AyDDIZjIPBoGNueCkkVeYssstRbUr3FX8QlyblrDmeRecMizGQzwJx5Qu
esTHpG+WHtTBqGLWGuH0duzqX7ruCC32e31KiV6llNfhkLe53f1yWd3GbVFOB5QP4Cp68y8g+Pl/
AMNIaBg4aNi29Tn27UvTluUSXt3WS5+YSDb1OeBt8z0FQxantTAaFw4YvON/D6QMJDWHaomT4bkk
h20s7q2e3uS3iri1VoqolCaPTA5Dang81gcn5hoXDEwyhpHqJRzLMtqxTDHLCovR2k9VFqLS1Eki
W/TT4Cxe5b19CztmqrDQ6RNgaQuVIGLag29Syi/qHhYtvSKW45B4pDLGcMTYLn+rqS5pS+Y/bKTb
94TkMg5uKQMGNhkKFmTFTfHUPCwyPIZhuHgMg2sL8QxZE55YLB+BMTFXceUGcH//2gAIAQIDAT8Q
BiHKEf8Ac3/GAJFEP+0f8gBo0If/AEQACHlCB/7N/wDDH8YXXWv5t/S38n+lv4N/7mAgj/F+vZY/
k/1P8D+Qr/1//9oACAEDAwE/EHCADof9j/8AC/8ALoCAS/b/AIG/+EYLk+P4f/1H/gP+lv4IkgBT
/hP/AJP/AEf+W/pz/wCh79v7BH+D4/sP562ir/zlGf5P8Y/tf+MIf0H8n+D/AD//2gAIAQEDAT8Q
JujWiBIthxU4VTrhBBZ4YWUTqAGiHW4GrDCqOB7cLYPJXTCy5i21q4pxwmvKjyHhbjYp6Ko0Lt1K
rXHR+VG8FzeERZIkYRl7hJlka4m4ynfyUP2FZ3oIJsjuhxYqr3awnqHLvBXzq6e/VMJ/QSEQBWbh
jhTQqZ+1FByRNge6ZopnX4vY2XNHgZ5T+3qPxRX1/FI0jnkFNf8A1PacDGWQ2VPGcKaWwtD/AFDN
r6Xz4+k9WuYOEaO/dfGFqSICBrSrXUcG/wBqhrbNzytGbWBB3Y+uU7+Na5Wj6K9ZymepkJ6sa4CL
3L+dLmfjScCpj4Okzz/n6nNizzvRWrYxwov2KZDCQM75U1MCNF4kJ7lXKDGKH4Tv9ZQpNcdYTd/K
ntc2UzGPK6Buse2uFzXCD9xBXArfavST6NJpsb4IVLbNhcSk6+kWEXgY3wqGZznnSrR3JthpOwls
HaZw+LY2pLPMb5T4LZL+xRLRFtr2TtwOrKZLt07KQ49FVMNnKPfJVVgAOXQVA+wmDs8SeoCIQAAJ
gAAGAFctN0Y6oNpm2+NKlrT+IgA5i2k1Wg3fae5prCnXXTqaqGWxwg5LGRUG3dXYWqP1CtROPKBl
hS+thChDTZUqf9Fcej9U+dqgrbqVUTQmB5Q97jG0/oY3+I9wMjCZqS8KaipsLqtplOBoKE70sG+j
qDuH8EGAGMbUDAsmBA6NrIPMoZNvZTXEI0+kKHLqr0qo59kAToynJLCjVdbabDt79tKhp3KpoO2C
FRmRja7tccIHsLDG0Qz6kYU0HrpUjFap3oew5TtScfqb1uUatLWVXa4uqHjPhaNCLo4gKd+5X3ZD
d83Q3NtI9aXRGlw/koMKSNZ0meeB+lNCGx98qY4G1T06omL+OrKpip+UGG3k7QebH24RaBAurF4x
dXa1vpNaHQitRf8AFPFlJhQy6ozNvLlUpWiDl0DeDhcd0WNbG+VV2MynoMe52tmDKyLggfocotAg
SR4VDUw3r+KombKKj0UF3nHwt2uMqeRA8Kohy/0DCMAhhxdgYZVRLlwcSYWgPzaOuxyhr1eVRmuo
4lbLeOUZeNY2USDSRhbSJOP1fAqD1ZF5EyTjaNQzUn9UM1XjaLmom7eEKxIWhyP0jIahgYKoaWvy
ibHshcs4uN6Xu8a5XNoP2jlqmR5TM59TnuqND4JmLz8uFMdyqChmEjCDNo+vAQH43hczD50ruYsm
xJr1pMKoI6dEuz9bWsJ2ifhS4HqtD1Pym0+vKe1rHynEGbH70nYt3GwTDjP2nrVVB9yYH98qpnh8
aTtFAI0iLClzpUMwPlE2/DIRpbMW3zpFyW7DaYCkjqF3GscKRW0hByK2go2HYgk7wF778qBsTgKa
eg+0dd9p3q/fwuxYW+tpjArsXTsHHc/SpMCyqZE28o6qc9WVSXvjKfEQmHaRtSa0b0Rih8hBgZfL
IVDPTpQog1HoxwiaAB/sFV2Mqk54RIri4+k265T0pQA+6PYm9io1eGUXkzceUMy9vKBsC5TcqQYs
cIntgeVCYu4lUtXIF+EHFbXQyOtI0JQNYCCAFWcVVpXakh4YUOOYDgh1FnexvtEUl93Q3U3A8Kr/
AAcJ2iUoKiDOtqzCmkKNgy8qITAClbBjhRwZ/FMRY+E7VEXK9iKsFOHhaEj3CgF4SrjJ9ipXFmU9
pA6Ze5yLa4QxbP0oihHoFo9xhTeljZQXapgZO0z0XjlS4M3P0jWkMnae6b0RrT0wqXkmounI8s6X
FCLYVFyHdHdcHKzhIztCPg4VSWEicMiRDxHgdpm/FzGfpaRNjan4mv0OVoUu0Ufw6QaHplM5qOMu
E5JaX6ojSgrn6Co9fxsLUqWzY5U1x36CZ6dySGv87UisC9/4itra5XsfK59PpHFsrYvlQNXyprCf
MWCV+9oaqTVNQ+/0VuR1ThfHxpQMAQZZaMyqAOUKPIGQoT5Pp/imj7dJK4kegCYQPRWe/UoC5o3T
KahwMLGbdYU0E3VBrSmjPgK7PWxwnown3WRfXUKXemVd7mBre/4fThmpR75KGYwAB8YhyWGiPODS
CSF2sMGCAiBYAAGBCtUVKifUX4TGYLdiAcGwkqtPY/az8XdAMa0w1lPQlpkZ2ELDGcIiaTLp38b/
AFFu1xtBwX9CmFqCTpSG9NobqUGNT2TtMGesJjc0sVLUYiDCFY/1OGaGvjSEtIQmJpHVldgORjaa
zu8l6AUXeamb9kcR7gdLXqFjgIYuL2CoKWuDlMBNSUA+znOk/wBcFMwe9/xTW+FbIungag0TMR7F
STm6wBFjtMBzhfGfpfHsUUEX0mc/D+VMUy/lUalBjydL2JWmoFWJePxE2vci4QpFDfSswqM/SBbY
NAjDEu/unMi0FUbqidyxnKrw3srRTBtzpTNT1RAVa+MDSmIygzViw2qjr2VfsfSfEYFivnGUQXYf
4qBQ1vtS9muL6CkuPbGFd7CEM+oNlPwJ8oO7mRKbtjCisqYiT9p3p6/i/wAHP6gzP6PlVJb/AF+q
jPZbCrf0yF0eFakYQqd+ENTclE0cRfPKs91+rJ80Fj9qbVwdJFBJqdpv9REQyXf6BhANIi7WoEZV
Brlyx5lE02OnVBJ6yoqYx5QmvJwE4gQc7RuM/CarqEXwFQitBO02aEd05JwM4U0gP74Rp3soq/dT
xhCvGOLp8KsnsVQzN0v8vCFZpBsKQBIwu9b+CZxSjWwhUcUfwrN6FB6byquzVNlRvlDN4H1+oOzC
1ONBA3bjlX3f6VB4XUmunBNZEnKGTQW0oq1MIuDQuUcJmjQnxyg0DkLjhAUbuP1M1ewj4RGUS1G4
HVl7k3Vqxba9wfQDPCM7sTflf60rT36srte+tJ89/wARBdrmD5Q9s5W/ZG5l54Qye36qu5BJdXpV
52E9Mj4Qt7HPKgVpzCYi1VI3fJK5m4QfkmArzXPgKr0gYsqCJNCFWJOMKBo/KOfXJFzWTYYT0f13
sIC7OCiX8s8q9NLjq6hqvjwUVvcL28J6izJrR44U19R8kCTQWN0wIa207kE9nnlO2W1IOkaHd2jk
ITrORpGpYdhhH0z98LZn5V3o5tYcr493UUuJOOFzQ/G1V27BlP6qjKhDG1CKDJUlAQ5yLTwhBOg4
EhBuw9ig9xwRe0Dp09KUzpDAoeoR1GFxQe6YimLi3CkUFML8L0axsEC8+q5gpqtdS9xfbZW5Cejv
S5zpH1W1pPY0InCMXLrj0yqEPbCmpj5T3vYKhrZTzhCGl4OfxOaPNjnR0mftQhUotFUdevhFhEQA
EXfevhNg9/pE9gMXRL1vfhVGyYJtsoUo5Y8h42tWHx9rXp+qz+2Vl+7WFekZTVYFAZtDXLqps5NW
s2VwXFzlUZrYwqD8uqvT6AIszDQHwnZiZt+7TBiDCpF3QkPQ4WXPWwqym32mP71daEicIMMAJ5TX
MGAEK0FQU7xUWe/KhneEJ8qja69loybsIvK8ZfailxJwgwD2FHK5t7KTUVxrK2bGVkmfa6nr5WsJ
AYx1KreLhIbUHGlFBKFYnOEACGMCNokmpV2f6nDP/g/SIL7N7p2JebkeEAOBLj7T2tP6qCljJzwv
8HK+fZbDuMyShUOBWwVstH4oihvpM3hNMZtSK5+AjntD2AIh5PW5TqRuTQQbV+UQSG97Khig6ors
Z1ZGkd/xM1bpH0mt0P1XObnKZKRbC+M40pqOWztaTlO1m6lNSHPr0UvqbKgqY91UEm4EY2NrjhzA
CjLC8lGlPiyBaoPP5tUkQh6wFTn5QPr8IsKXsEQa1a5CsUfK9god6T0cQbZT4m4QDVHcpgzVF2Sq
tr47KHD7cIKVI7ZSJNDJTNUjh55U0v8APG0P8QfMSTfSryGcqsWvtW92V8IeGW4F+cr2RpW9sd0K
P6EYVm7tp2LyTRvpc3o+fsntAHsjTuES82nlGtK1vtHEECpHja9ir2C2zNAzvqFPXync4SQYO09x
3dXVJnSI/EPe3WEMeulWPTYVGuED6KiZ9nKqCx7fqIfqq5obKgmB1RUEP6Kzioz1dexEDCmuJ2vg
RkLojymsIkFT2ki6lvZTNQ90P0ITVpV/RkMfr/E2aiBtcktm/ZSWJANiIZTNAPfhO/CNfAUz6Lbz
DXVyMs8KgV3thAVS9Ik3YMBU7zpYizmSxXuj+qxHDCuW/wAa2hAzZB6u6LvxrwqcL+FXvfLoQMI6
i655fvhevCVw3aOyp36lXPq/Fhobh3XqezfaFmzTPdcTguOzQyHQeHV6dvxB3OGreEILRflcTpBm
p2Qjp1WmFIZ0jHgi7+nbapaLfqvVUY+/CLvSbfqDNyrzvSrdPY/ug94eqzh+gXM9KbRZg6DuaO3U
oO9ZVHozN2ZUk7WeXVX3dH5dlzN+VYe3G18dQhufGlX/ADGkY67O6D9eF0MLPFc9tou1J6eqDNW5
K3dH2aqMX6jur7sg70QKAym7SqUeEt9Ln6IX9+sqjV6/VVxn4bV0vfK5mzIO3Uqj0jz9q+7IyM25
XErDTbyizH1t4Qt+KvSbos1PsquGlUal187Rgo9GNqv08NtFmMz3VXD/AEXH4rV/WR7tpVfw8IxS
FzO5Xx1C/9k
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Elder" <billelder(at)denver.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Extend instrument panel. |
Johann - I extended the instrument panel on my Mark III about 5 inches
toward the pilot so I could reach everything on the panel. Give me a call
at 303-838-2240 for details.
-----Original Message-----
From: Johann G. <johann-g(at)tal.is>
Date: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 4:49 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Extend instrument panel.
>
>Hi Kolbers.
>
>I have been thinking about moving the instrument panel on my Firestar
>II, approx. 4" closer for me to be able to reach the EIS and Altimeter.
>I am 6'2" but that is not enough. Does anyone have any pictures or can
>share ideas of building the extension.
>I had the idea of adding this part from composite or fiber material.
>Here is a picture of the present panel, but I wanted to add the VSI 3
>1/8" plus fixing the radio to the left side under the speedometer.
>It is in my way as I try to enter the cockpit. Getting stiff.
>http://www.gi.is/fis/kolb/cockpit.jpg
>
>Look forward to all your expert advise.
>
>Best wishes from Iceland.
>Johann G.
>Firestar II 90 hrs.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kugelair(at)netscape.net |
| Subject: | Constructing M3E |
Ron / Listers,
Just checked my plans (I have copies of both style Horizontal Stabs) The 1"
X .058 X 49" tube is the trailing edge of the Horizontal Stab. The 7/8" X
.058 X 49" tube is the leading edge of the elevator.These tubes are the same
for the Large horizontal stab and the smaller "Original" size horizontal
stab. What serial number Xtra do you have? When Kolb went to the Mark III
Xtra "Light" version they whent back to the original Mark III Classic size
Horizontal Stab. I just completed my MK III Xtra this May and started flying
it in June. Let me know if you have any other questions, on or off list! I'd
be glad to help you get your answers.
Guy Swenson
MK III Xtra / N3053B <<<<<<<
Thank you Guy. Where are you located. I am in Southern Arizona.
I did in fact went and built and finished one elevator Today, but decided not
to build the second one until I had a resolution on this. I can kinda justify
building one for practice but not two. :-) I do have an extra Horizontal stabilizer
on account that I *thought* that all the surfaces are the same. I may just
go and build an extra set of everything so I can at a point of time have an
"Extra" Mark III.
Glad to hear that you finished yours. I started mine about two weeks ago. I had
kit # 1 in my hanger since August-1999. Just before I started A&P school which
put the whole project on hold until I finished.
I don't know what seriel number it is, I don't know where to go and look for it.
The project is coming right along. My only question at present is how the control
horns go on the elevators, and how to make sure i don't misalign anything.
I wish I had another Mark3E close by so I can go and take a look. Those plans are
not the clearest things ever drafted.
I am taking a lot of DiGi photos as I am going along so at a point in time I may
be able to refference what I have done.
What kinda motor you have in your M3E? I am thinking about the Jabiru, the Rotax
is too expensive. What about the 80hp Hirth?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John <jleclercq(at)charter.net> |
If anyone has completed a Mark 3 Extra from the supplied plans, please
contact me off list.
Thanks
John
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: bad EGT sender |
In a message dated 8/3/02 10:16:14 AM Eastern Daylight Time, ul15rhb(at)juno.com
writes:
<< Ben and the good 'ol glider pilot (George),
Yes Ben, it's good to hear from you and I'm glad to hear that you are
still making progress on your Firestar. Congratulations on getting your
private ticket!
I see George still has his EGT sender in the "Y". For the benefit of all
the new guys on this list, the old exhaust manifolds didn't have the EGT
sender ports and we drilled a hole in the "Y" of the manifold. If the
hole wasn't in the right spot, it could make for higher EGT readings on
the gauge.
My EGT sender has been in the "Y" for 15 years and reads normal now
(1100F). All of the high readings in the early days was due to a bad
sender. I remember a post from someone years ago who told me to not to
fly my plane with those high readings. I posted to the list how normal
1250F was for my engine. The plugs told the real story and I was happy to
find that it was the sender all this time. I changed out that sender two
years ago, when it read zero during climbout one day.
My readings used to be 1250 also, but now are in the neighborhood of 1150
all the time I'm cruisin.....and I didn't do nuthin except watch it more
closely!! Well when it climbs, I do what is necessary to keep the needle
down, but as JH says, ya gotta drive em hard enough to keep the black dust
out. GR
My 'ol Firestar is running great and yes I still use Seafoam. As a matter
of fact, I have had some soaking in the front cylinder since last weekend
and I hope to get it blown out tomorrow as todays forecast calls for rain
and severe thunderstorms this afternoon.
That's another thread that went round and round (seafoam). Well I'm happy
to report that between the Klotz synthetic oil and the Seafoam, I'm still
in the air on a weekly basis and that Rotax is very dependable. I have
not tallied up the hours, but I will in a later post.
Ben, I hope to hear more from you soon. You always had a lot of good
technical information for the list.
Ralph Burlingame
Original Firestar
15 years flying it
>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dallas Shepherd" <cen23954(at)centurytel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wood prop for Jabiru |
=0D
=0D
-------Original Message-------=0D
=0D
From: Dallas Shepherd=0D
Date: Saturday, August 03, 2002 05:06:32 PM=0D
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Wood prop for Jabiru=0D
=0D
Rex: Warp Drive and Jabiru both are recommending to change=0D
props. Warp Drive has found cracks in the hub and in one instance=0D
lost a prop half in Australia. Jabiru no longer recommends Warp=0D
Drive and says to go to a wooden prop. Sensenich has been recommended to =0D
me by Pete at usjabiru(at)thenet.net . For the wood prop Pete is saying=0D
a 58x44 or a 62x38. My inquiry at Sensenich got a W58DJL-40=0D
answer. I do not know what these numbers mean, such as, what difference=0D
does the 58x44 make in comparison to the 62x38 as far as climb and=0D
cruise go. Also,Sensenich is different then both of them. Pete could=0D
explain that I'm sure. Anyone, can you help us?=0D
I have a 58" Warp Drive on my Kolb Mark 3 right now, but I=0D
don't know what the other number is. I got the Jabiru and prop from=0D
Pete at USJabiru.=0D
Dallas Shepherd=0D
Norfork, Arkansas=0D
Kolb Mark 3/2200 Jabiru-------Original Message-------=0D
=0D
From: kolb-list(at)matronics.com=0D
Date: Saturday, August 03, 2002 01:24:42 PM=0D
Subject: Kolb-List: Wood prop for Jabiru=0D
=0D
=0D
Dallas,=0D
=0D
What diameter wood prop & pitch is recommended for the Jabiru? Who is=0D
saying this? Warp Drive or Jabiru?=0D
=0D
Thanks for your help. Will probably buy an engine next year & still=0D
looking at the Jabiru or 912. Really liked the sound of the Jabiru at=0D
TNK fly-in two years ago.=0D
=0D
Rex Rodebush (building Mark III X-tra)=0D
=0D
From: "Dallas Shepherd" <cen23954(at)centurytel.net>=0D
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: MK III CLASSIC=0D
=0D
=0D
=0D
>Jim: Love the Jabiru. About 85 hours on it now and the only problem=0D
is=0D
>the=0D
>propeller0D=0D
>which is a Warp Drive 58 inch. They say it should come off and be=0D
replac=0D
>ed=0D
>with a wooden0D=0D
>prop. A $600 solution I haven't met yet. Warp Drive props are running=0D
i=0D
>nto=0D
>cracking 0D=0D
>problems with the hubs=0D
=0D
=0D
=
=0D
=
=0D
=
=0D
=
=0D
=0D
=0D
=0D
=0D
=0D
=0D
=2E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/9j/4AAQSkZJRgABAgAAZABkAAD/7AARRHVja3kAAQAEAAAALQAA/+4AIUFkb2JlAGTAAAAAAQMA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________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Korenek <ken-foi(at)attbi.com> |
Hey Kolbers,
Any of you guys have an old variometer laying around?
I'd like to install one so that I can determine where straight and
level is at a given rpm and airspeed. My VSI isn't sensitive enough.
Anybody got one?
Know of a glider owners' list that I could ask on?
It doesn't need to be new or pretty, just work correctly and be
relatively cheap. It probably won't be installed long- just till I get
the "feel" of "My Mistress".
*********************
Ken W. Korenek
ken-foi(at)attbi.com
Kolb FireStar II, "My Mistress"
Rotax 503, Oil Injected
3 Blade Powerfin
http://home.attbi.com/~KolbraPilot/TX_files/image003.jpg
Six Chuter SR7-XL "Elmo"
Powered Parachute
Rotax 582, Oil Injected
3 Blade PowerFin
http://home.attbi.com/~KolbraPilot/TX_files/image005.jpg
4906 Oak Springs Drive
Arlington, Texas 76016
817-572-6832 voice
817-572-6842 fax
817-657-6500 cell
817-483-8054 home
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)sgmmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: soaring with George message of Fri, 2 Aug 2002 23:50:00 |
-0...
George and Group,
I used to try to soar a Falcon ultralight, but with limited success. But
I have had even less luck with my Firestars. One thing that has worked
for me was to fly above a highway on a sunny day, allowing me to reduce
the throttle and hold altitude or fly faster on the same setting. I was
flying around noon on a sunny day, recently, and whenever I crossed a
road I felt a fairly strong bump.
John Jung
Firestar II N6163J
Upper Michigan
GeoR38(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>I hearya buddy, as it is around here too. Do you ever soar in your
>Kolb?...does anyone else?
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Quickie .../ still around |
We cared, George, but I think everyone expects the other guy to say
something. I'm looking forward to trying the same thing in Vamoose.
Yesssss ! ! ! Soon-to-Gogittum Lar.
----- Original Message -----
From: <GeoR38(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Quickie .../ still around
>
> In a message dated 8/2/02 2:04:10 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
bwr000(at)yahoo.com
> writes:
>
> << I got my Private license
> last Fall and occassionally fly my brother's Grumman Cheetah. Most of
> the time I'm in it I think, gee, I wish I could do "that", and "that"
> is always something I used to do in my Firestar. Occassional offers to
> buy my Firestar had come in occassionally since it flipped three years
> ago, and I pondered a bit, then said no. Every thing has a price, but
> at this point I'm awfully glad I still have my Firestar. It's a gem.
> I look forward to the day I get to tell you all that it is flying
> again. (Think geologic time, but it will happen.)
> -Ben >>
> Ben...we need you here.....should we measure time in the motion of the
> tectonic plates relative to the time your wonderful Firestar is done ....I
> remember you used to land that puppy on sand bars in a river somewhere....
I
> always had great respect for your insight into flying.....but then God
smote
> you with a big wind and knocked some out of you too, it seemed. My
firestar
> is still goin good....I STILL have the EGT sensor at the Y instead of one
> near each cylinder, and I watch it like a hawk...went soaring the other
day
> and it was GREAT! I think I wrote about it but no one cared.My writing
must
> be gettin bad.
> George Randolph
> the ol glider pilot in Akron
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Olenik" <olenik-aviation(at)buyitsellitfixit.com> |
If you are going to stick your EGT probe out in the Y, you might as well use
a rectal thermometer. The probe needs to be placed 100 mm from the piston
skirt which is around 2" from where the manifold attaches to the engine +
or -. If you have it in the Y, you might as well smack the face of your
instrument with a hammer, so you can't read it.
That isn't anything new. It's been that way since 1983, just too many guys
did it wrong for so many year, that a lot of guys thought there was a
change.
Tom Olenik
Olenik Aviation
http://www.buyitsellitfixit.com/rotax.htm
http://www.buyitsellitfixit.com/2si-engines.htm
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of GeoR38(at)aol.com
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: bad EGT sender
In a message dated 8/3/02 10:16:14 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
ul15rhb(at)juno.com
writes:
<< Ben and the good 'ol glider pilot (George),
Yes Ben, it's good to hear from you and I'm glad to hear that you are
still making progress on your Firestar. Congratulations on getting your
private ticket!
I see George still has his EGT sender in the "Y". For the benefit of all
the new guys on this list, the old exhaust manifolds didn't have the EGT
sender ports and we drilled a hole in the "Y" of the manifold. If the
hole wasn't in the right spot, it could make for higher EGT readings on
the gauge.
My EGT sender has been in the "Y" for 15 years and reads normal now
(1100F). All of the high readings in the early days was due to a bad
sender. I remember a post from someone years ago who told me to not to
fly my plane with those high readings. I posted to the list how normal
1250F was for my engine. The plugs told the real story and I was happy to
find that it was the sender all this time. I changed out that sender two
years ago, when it read zero during climbout one day.
My readings used to be 1250 also, but now are in the neighborhood of 1150
all the time I'm cruisin.....and I didn't do nuthin except watch it more
closely!! Well when it climbs, I do what is necessary to keep the needle
down, but as JH says, ya gotta drive em hard enough to keep the black dust
out. GR
My 'ol Firestar is running great and yes I still use Seafoam. As a matter
of fact, I have had some soaking in the front cylinder since last weekend
and I hope to get it blown out tomorrow as todays forecast calls for rain
and severe thunderstorms this afternoon.
That's another thread that went round and round (seafoam). Well I'm happy
to report that between the Klotz synthetic oil and the Seafoam, I'm still
in the air on a weekly basis and that Rotax is very dependable. I have
not tallied up the hours, but I will in a later post.
Ben, I hope to hear more from you soon. You always had a lot of good
technical information for the list.
Ralph Burlingame
Original Firestar
15 years flying it
>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kirk Smith" <snuffy(at)usol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: soaring with George message of Fri, 2 Aug 2002 23:50:00 |
-0...
> flying around noon on a sunny day, recently, and whenever I crossed a
> road I felt a fairly strong bump.
>
> John Jung
> Firestar II N6163J
> Upper Michigan
I knew da roads were bad in da UP but Dats a purdy big pothole eh? Maybe
Engler send you guys some money eh! LOL
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: bad EGT sender |
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com |
> If you are going to stick your EGT probe out in the Y, you might as
> well use a rectal thermometer. The probe needs to be placed 100 mm
from the
> piston skirt which is around 2" from where the manifold attaches to the
> engine + or -. If you have it in the Y, you might as well smack the
face of
> your instrument with a hammer, so you can't read it.
> That isn't anything new. It's been that way since 1983, just too
> many guys did it wrong for so many year, that a lot of guys thought
there was
> a
> change.
>
> Tom Olenik
Tom and others,
Ideally the EGT needs to be 100mm from the face of the piston. The probe
that I have in the "Y" is very close to that dimension and reads
correctly. There are inaccuracies in each sender probe and I suspect the
EGT gauge is about 10% accurate itself. EGT readings are used for
detecting changes in the exhaust temperature. There are other things that
will enter the equation like, altitude, mixture, prop load, and outside
air temperature. All of these will affect the most accurate EGT sender
placed exactly 100mm away from the piston face.
Bottom line: my EGT is working fine in the "Y" of my exhaust manifold and
the inaccuracy that I saw was due to a bad sender.
Ralph Burlingame
Original Firestar
15 years flying it
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Flying Technique |
Well when it climbs, I do what is necessary to keep the
needle
> down, but as JH says, ya gotta drive em hard enough to keep the black dust
> out.
> Ralph Burlingame
> Original Firestar
> 15 years flying it
Ralph/Gents:
It is obvious that my flying style is quite different from
yours. What works for me may not work for others.
john h
Original Firestar
2.5 years flying it
755 flight hours on the airframe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
> I'd like to install one so that I can determine where straight and
> level is at a given rpm and airspeed. My VSI isn't sensitive enough.
> Ken W. Korenek
Ken/Gang:
What's wrong with the altimeter?
How about altimeter and horizon?
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SR3SA2L1(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Flying Technique - temps |
Wise and Experienced ones,
Regarding the issue of cht/egt temps and prevention of carbon and oil buildup
(presumably the "black dust" buildup referenced?), would the addition of an
in-flight carb mix control take care of this problem as well as improve gph
burn? Would this also mitigate the problem of "chasing the EGTs" involved
with an in-flight adj prop? If so, it seems like this would be a cheap
(sorry, I meant to say inexpensive) preventative measure to save a relatively
expensive engine as well as adding both greater economy, safety and eliminate
the need to do seasonal/altitude rejetting.
Anyone have experience with the in-flight adj carbs (the ones that you turn a
knob and have a one jet size range)?
Steve
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: soaring with George message of Fri, 2 Aug 2002 23:50:00 |
-0...
George it was interesting, and I want to try it but I just didn't know what
to say.
Merle
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Flying Technique |
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com |
John,
I did not write this and that is not my philosophy on 2-stroke engines. I
have just the opposite approach to yours. I do not believe in driving the
2-stroke hard. I fly mine most of the time at 5000 rpm. I can do this and
not build up carbon in the engine because I use Klotz synthetic oil AND
do the Seafoam treatments.
When you were flying 2-strokes, mineral oil was all that was available
and yes high rpms was one way to keep the carbon buildup down. Not
anymore.
Thought I would clear that up, thanks .....
Ralph Burlingame
Original Firestar
15 years flying it
Ralph did not write this:
> Well when it climbs, I do what is necessary to keep the
> needle
> > down, but as JH says, ya gotta drive em hard enough to keep the
> black dust
> > out.
> > Ralph Burlingame
> > Original Firestar
> > 15 years flying it
>
>
> Ralph/Gents:
>
> It is obvious that my flying style is quite different from
> yours. What works for me may not work for others.
>
> john h
> Original Firestar
> 2.5 years flying it
> 755 flight hours on the airframe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Flying Technique - temps |
Steve/Gang:
> Regarding the issue of cht/egt temps and prevention of carbon and oil buildup
> (presumably the "black dust" buildup referenced?), would the addition of an
> in-flight carb mix control take care of this problem as well as improve gph
> burn?
Two strokes and "fuel economy" do not go hand in hand. Two
strokes depend on the air/fuel misture to help cool
themselves. When one starts "economizing" on mixture, i.e.,
leaning it out, one runs the risk of overleaning and
siezure.
Would this also mitigate the problem of "chasing the EGTs"
involved
> with an in-flight adj prop?
Nope, one gets right back into a multitude of problems when
trying to adjust the mixture. First problem is two strokes
are not so forgiving as 4 strokes when over or under
leaning. From experience with the Cuyuna ULIIO2 with Mike
Stratman's adjustable main jet, if over rich the engine
quits post haste. One does not get up close to overrich
with a rough engine. It gets overrich and quits. Over lean
is more disasterous. Too lean and she seizes.
A lot of things affect two strokes, primarily load or prop
pitch. Too much pitch, EGT is low and mixture is overrich.
Too little pitch, EGT is high and mixture is lean.
I haven't read the manuals in a long time so will speak from
the top of my head. Rotax engines are jetted at the factory
for sea level to about 1,500 feet ASL. They have the
correct spark plug heat range and jets for this altitude and
I think 32F to about 100F. One should not have to change
anything on the Rotax if he loads the prop correctly. Big
time problem with ultralighters and two stroke engines is
chasing problems they do not have, i.e., high EGTs/Low EGTs
because the aircraft is not propped correctly. Instead of
getting the pitch set correctly in the prop, they start
changing jets and heat ranges. That ain't the way I do it.
When one gets a new kit with a fixed pitch prop, that does
not mean that that prop is gonna be the correct load for
that airplane and engine. That was really a problem in the
early days cause we didn't have a big choice in ground
adjustable props. Now days it is simple to adjust the prop
to the engine and airplane.
Don't know or care how you all do it, but I prop the
airplane the same way I prop my boat. Straight and level,
WOT, bumps the red line or a little tiny bit under, then it
is loaded correctly. Tuned this way one will find the EGTs
are right where they belong. The EGT should be a tad rich
at wide open throttle. This helps keep the engine cool on
long climbs. Climbs should be done at WOT to help cool the
engine, not partial throttle which will normally increase
EGT and cylinder head temps. Cruise should be a little
under the red line, about 50F below redline is great.
The above can be accomplished without changing main jet
sizes or plug heat ranges if the prop is properly loade.
If so, it seems like this would be a cheap
> (sorry, I meant to say inexpensive) preventative measure to save a relatively
> expensive engine as well as adding both greater economy, safety and eliminate
> the need to do seasonal/altitude rejetting.
Steve, if it worked perfectly, yes, but it does not work
that way normally. Then you end up buying an engine.
Two strokes are not designed to run like "syrup engines" and
two cylinder John Deere poppers. If one flies them slowly,
over props, lugs 'em down, they will carbon up. I find if I
fly them hard I do not have a carbon problem, not need for
exotic solvents and other witch craft. Alway flew the two
strokes at 5,800 rpm cruise or higher. Depended on how
close to home I was after a long cross country. The closer
home the faster they fly. Put a lot of hours on them on
long cross countries at 6,200 rpm with no noticeable damage.
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Flying Technique |
> I did not write this and that is not my philosophy on 2-stroke
> > Well when it climbs, I do what is necessary to keep the
> > needle
> > > down, but as JH says, ya gotta drive em hard enough to keep the
> > black dust
> > > out.
> > > Ralph Burlingame
> > > Original Firestar
> > > 15 years flying it
Ralph/Gang:
Sorry about that, but the above was listed in the body of
your message. It does not matter who said it. I have
always had the attitude of making two and four stroke
engines work for their living, not babying them by running
low power settings. Any engine, two stroke, four stroke,
diesel or gas, will get clogged up if they are not run at
high enough power settings to keep them cleaned out.
I think the carbon and gunk caused by no lead fuel is the
culprit of two stroke problems. Most of the oil is blown
out the pipe.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fackler, Ken" <kfackler(at)ameritech.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Flying Technique |
Dear Ralph:
I've just purchased a Kolb Mark II after being "out" of the ultralight
flying world for about 10 years. Would you mind speaking a bit more about
your oil choice and the carbon-prevention treatment you mentioned?
Thanks!
-Ken Fackler
Rochester MI
248 601 0566
kfackler(at)ameritech.net
----- Original Message -----
From: <ul15rhb(at)juno.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Flying Technique
>
> John,
>
> I did not write this and that is not my philosophy on 2-stroke engines. I
> have just the opposite approach to yours. I do not believe in driving the
> 2-stroke hard. I fly mine most of the time at 5000 rpm. I can do this and
> not build up carbon in the engine because I use Klotz synthetic oil AND
> do the Seafoam treatments.
>
> When you were flying 2-strokes, mineral oil was all that was available
> and yes high rpms was one way to keep the carbon buildup down. Not
> anymore.
>
> Thought I would clear that up, thanks .....
>
> Ralph Burlingame
> Original Firestar
> 15 years flying it
>
>
> Ralph did not write this:
>
> > Well when it climbs, I do what is necessary to keep the
> > needle
> > > down, but as JH says, ya gotta drive em hard enough to keep the
> > black dust
> > > out.
> > > Ralph Burlingame
> > > Original Firestar
> > > 15 years flying it
> >
> >
> > Ralph/Gents:
> >
> > It is obvious that my flying style is quite different from
> > yours. What works for me may not work for others.
> >
> > john h
> > Original Firestar
> > 2.5 years flying it
> > 755 flight hours on the airframe
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SR3SA2L1(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Flying Technique - temps |
John,
Thanks for the insight. What is your opinion of the high alt comp carbs? Do
they automatically take care of egt/cht problems by adjusting to the correct
fuel mix at each alt? I often fly at cruise at a much higher alt than most
ULs and take off from less than 100' above sea level. This is the reason for
the concern about adj prop and adj carbs. I am looking for the best combo to
accomplish this.
Steve
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Flying Technique |
Would you mind speaking a bit more about
> your oil choice and the carbon-prevention treatment you mentioned?
> -Ken Fackler
Dear Ken/Gang:
Don't get Ralph started on Koltz and Sea Foam. Both have
been beaten to death and the Kolb List Archives are full of
them.
Go to the bottom of this message, click on "archives" and
continue your search. You will find enough info to keep you
busy reading from now on.............................. :-)
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Flying Technique - temps |
I often fly at cruise at a much higher alt than most
> ULs and take off from less than 100' above sea level.
> Steve
Steve/Gang:
If you take off from near sea level, you must be tuned for
that lower altitude or you will be too lean and you know the
results.
Much higher altitude for me is 1,000 feet. I am a retired
helicopter pilot. :-)
What altitude is "much higher alt"?
Anything above 1,000 feet AGL is too high for me.
Two strokes do well up through 5,000 feet and higher. At
10,000 feet, if tuned for sea level, they get pretty rich.
Do not know why anyone would want to fly "really" high and
loose contact with what is happening on the ground.
I have no experience with HAC carbs even though I owned a
pair and never used them. I did study the calibration
procedure for them and they are not bullet proof as long as
we put the operator into the link.
A four stroke engine would probably do a much better high
altitude job. However, Mike Jacober, in Alaska, owns an
altitude and flying record by flying over the top of Denali
(Mount McKinley at 20,320 feet). Did that in his trike and
a Rotax two stroke. Mike designed, builds, and markets an
adjustable main jet kit for Bing Carbs. That is what he
used for the record flight.
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SR3SA2L1(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Flying Technique - temps |
John,
I find each type of flight, low and slow and/or high alt cruise each has an
appeal to me (usually on the same trip).
Depending on where I am flying (terrain below, airspace I am flying in,
reason for flying, fun locally vs a long x/c adventure etc.) I have flown
from 500' to 18,000' with my GA airplane and intend to continue that range
with the Kolb, if possible (I do have O2). This is why I have been seeking
info on the in-flight adj carb and the in-flight adj prop (I have both now
but haven't used them as I have been doing a major rebuild). So far in the
FS, with the orig fixed pitch wood prop and reg carb, I have ranged from 500'
to 6000' just playing around and analyzing it to determine weather or not it
would work for several long x/c adventures I plan to make and what changes
would be needed for these trips. This is also why I have been trying to
figure out what I need to do to get the GW up to the approx. 750 lbs I will
need in extra fuel, equipment etc.
With your background, I believe you probably went through much the same
process as I am going through when you were contemplating a few of your
adventures.
I have a set of Mike's main jet carb kit now, which is why I have been
interested in feed back about both pitch and temps ( I have gone to a 503 DC
but have only done the 1st hour break-in and have no flight time on it). I
would like to find a set of the high alt carbs because I want to reduce the
pilot work load during these planned adventures and frequent changes in alt.
I realize that as long as there is human involvement, nothing is perfect or
absolute.
My reference to economy was not meant as a primary reason for adj carbs but
that it seems that if you can keep temps optimal at various alt and rpm
settings, it would give you optimal fuel burn vs power.
Because you are one who has "been there and done that", I'm sure you can
offer much valuable insight about the issues faced by those of us who are
"desiring to go there and do that". Thanks.
Steve
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "jrodebush" <jrodebush(at)cinci.rr.com> |
| Subject: | MK III Horiz. Stab. |
My original plans for the Mark III show a 1" leading edge tube & a 7/8"
trailing edge tube on the horiz. stab. When I upgraded to the Mark III
trailing edges. The plans call for 7/8" on the leading edge of the
elevator on both models. (The 'Extra' plans call out 7/8" but are drawn
showing the same size for the trailing edge of the horiz. stab. and the
leading edge of the elevator??) I think the "lite" version went back to
the smaller horiz. stab.
Anyway, at present I have the 1" leading & trailing tubes with the 7/8"
elevator tube on center with the 1" tube.
Rex Rodebush
Subject: Kolb-List: Constructing M3E
Ron / Listers,
Just checked my plans (I have copies of both style Horizontal Stabs) The
1"
X .058 X 49" tube is the trailing edge of the Horizontal Stab. The 7/8"
X
.058 X 49" tube is the leading edge of the elevator.These tubes are the
same
for the Large horizontal stab and the smaller "Original" size horizontal
stab. What serial number Xtra do you have? When Kolb went to the Mark
III
Xtra "Light" version they whent back to the original Mark III Classic
size
Horizontal Stab. I just completed my MK III Xtra this May and started
flying
it in June. Let me know if you have any other questions, on or off list!
I'd
be glad to help you get your answers.
Guy Swenson
MK III Xtra / N3053B <<<<<<<
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Flying Technique - temps |
> Because you are one who has "been there and done that", I'm sure you can
> offer much valuable insight about the issues faced by those of us who are
> "desiring to go there and do that". Thanks.
>
> Steve
Steve/Gang:
There may be a lot of the above in the archives also.
My limited two stroke experience has taken me through all
the States east of the Mississippi and a handful on the west
side. Also into Canada (extremely limited, but I can say
the original Firestar has been there).
My style of cross countrying is solo with absolutely no
support other than what I can take with me or obtain when I
land for fuel at airports. I burn 100LL cause that is what
they sell at airports. I do not ask an FBO to borrow his
car or truck to go to town to buy auto gas. In my book,
that is a definite no no. I eat when I can, sleep with my
airplane and only in motels when I can not find a shower at
least once a week. I eat when I find a place and try to get
at least one hot meal a day, if I can. If not, I have
provisions to eat out of the airplane. Early on I did this
because it was the only way to fly. Now I cross country
this way because it does not waste a lot of time trying to
get a ride to a motel and return in the morning. Moteling
burns up a lot of the best flight time in the morning.
My Firestar was built with the KISS principal in mind. So
is my Mark III. Nothing on either aircraft that is not
needed to insure I accomplish my flight. Firestar fuselage
was beefed up where it was needed to make it stronger and
prevent failure of flight. Many mods to the fuselage of the
old Firestar, Cousin P'fer, were adopted by Homer Kolb and
incorporated on the airplanes you all are flying today.
Brother Jim has God's gift for analyzing airframes before
and after failures to result in a stronger airplane.
Firestar was configured with an 18 gal fuel tank, aluminum
.052" 5052, gusseted, and installed above the center line
and right behind the bulk head. This opened up the lower
section for my gear. We had heat treated 4130 gear legs 35"
long inserted into the gear leg sockets until the hit the
end of the socket. Wore a Jim Handbury hand deployed
parachute that I paid $500 for in 1984. It save my ass
twice. I figure that is abour $250 a pop. Cheap
insurance. My engines were 447, point ign models. One from
Gerry Olenik and one from my buddy Chuck Shaunesy who got a
truck load of them when Disney World got rid of their air
show. I kept one on the airplane and one on the bench ready
to install on a moment's notice to make airshows and
flyins. I rebuilt engines a lot in the old days. We did
not have the luxury of CDI ign or some of the improvements
that later engines enjoyed. However, I never seized or
scored a piston or cylinder in those 755 flight hours. I
used Pennzoil Two Stroke Oil for Air Cooled Engines before
the name was even known in Ultralight circles. Searched
until I found a source in Mississippi (SE US distributor) in
1987.
I traveled with minimum gear, but what I needed to survive
in my cross country environment. Longest flights were 21
days in 1988 and 25 days in 1989. Flew 3,000 miles from
Alabama to Oshkosh via all the New England States, Michigan
Penninsula, Sault St Marie, Canada, and into Oshkosh from
the North. Then another 1,000 miles home to Alabama. BTW:
Cousin P'fer picked up the 1989 Oshkosh Grand Champion Gold
Lindy on that flight. Here is a pic of my proud bird in
front of the Ultralight Barn at Oshkosh in 1989. Notice the
instrument panel has been moved back to the end of the
windshield right in front of my face. Also a small
deflector that kicked the wind up over the wing to keep the
blast out of my face and increase my cruise. ***Sorry, can
not find the CD with that pic on it. Will have to find the
pic and rescan before I can put it on my index page.
The requirement for high altitudes is negligible. I can fly
the border of the US and all the way to Barrow, Alaska,
flying two passes, one on the Alaska Highway at about 4500
and Atigun Pass in Alaska Brooks Range at 5000. I find on
cross coutry flight high altitudes in my kind of aircraft
are phycologically defeating. Altitude slows down perceived
ground movement until it seems to stop. Not good for morale
on long flights. Also, it is cold, and I do not have an IFR
equipped aircraft. Neither am I instrument current and have
not been since 1976 in the Army. Don't you normally file
IRF flight plan at 18,000 ft altitudes???
I did all my Firestar flying with Jim Culver 66X32 fixed
pitch wooded prop (IIRC). I had no requirement for inflight
adjustable, ground adjustable props. Had no requirement for
inflight mixture control. Did the 1988 flight without
brakes and the 1989 flight I had brakes. Prefer brakes now.
Sorry for the jumbled reply, but relaxing and letting my
mind ramble around in the cobwebs a little.
john h
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Erich_Weaver(at)URSCorp.com |
08/04/2002 06:34:47 PM
Listers:
I had a scary moment flying today. Had an abrupt change in engine noise
that did not go away, but no warnings appeared on my EIS, and still had
full control and throttle worked ok. Debated about landing out, but was
only a few minutes from the field, so I nursed it back and made an
uneventful landing. The culprit: broken weld on the Titan exhaust system,
near the EGT sender. Although I had operated without probelem for over a
year and the welding job looked real neat and pretty, I strongly suspect
the weld was faulty. It made a clean and complete break right at the
welded joint - I believe a good weld should be stronger thean the
surrounding material, no?.
Well, only real damage is to my confidence in the exhaust system. Titan is
getting a call tomorrow morning.
In other news, those with the Rotax 912 or 912S engines should be aware
that there is a service bulletin out for some serial numbers regarding
inspection/replacement of the rocker arms and pushrods. See
www.rotaxowner.com for details.
regards,
Erich Weaver
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kirk Smith" <snuffy(at)usol.com> |
| Subject: | Whatever happened? |
Does anyone know whatever happened to Rick Trader? He flew a Twinstar to
Alaska and back many years ago. I believe it had the 532 Rotax upgraded
from the 503. Was the one with the 5 inch wingspars and fuselage tube.
As I remember his trip was relatively uneventful with a few minor
problems. I believe he was the first to do that with a Kolb....Kirk
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)sgmmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Flying Technique - temps |
Steve and Group,
I think that I may have answered this question before, but I may not
have given the whole story. So for anyone who thinks that the need
altitude adjusting carbs, manual or automatic, read this before you
spend any money: http://jrjung.0catch.com/Original.html
John Jung
SR3SA2L1(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>Wise and Experienced ones,
>
>Regarding the issue of cht/egt temps and prevention of carbon and oil buildup
>(presumably the "black dust" buildup referenced?), would the addition of an
>in-flight carb mix control take care of this problem as well as improve gph
>burn? Would this also mitigate the problem of "chasing the EGTs" involved
>with an in-flight adj prop? If so, it seems like this would be a cheap
>(sorry, I meant to say inexpensive) preventative measure to save a relatively
>expensive engine as well as adding both greater economy, safety and eliminate
>the need to do seasonal/altitude rejetting.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
> Well, only real damage is to my confidence in the exhaust system. Titan is
> getting a call tomorrow morning.
> Erich Weaver
Erich/Gang:
Got 365+ hours on the same system without a problem, except
a broken exhaust spring. That was my fault cause I did not
change it out or safety it.
Adriel Heisey had the same problem with his 912S and Titan
exhaust. Vibration was eating up his pipes.
How many hours on the system?
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjung(at)sgmmail.com> |
Ken,
I have used a wrist altimeter in my Firestars, prior to getting an EIS
with altitude functions. My experience was that having a more sensitive
(faster) instrument doesn't really help with what you are looking for.
It changes so fast that you would have to average the results anyway.
And as soon as you think that you have the numbers down, the weather
changes everything.
John Jung
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: soaring with George message of Fri, 2 Aug 2002 23:50:00 |
-0...
In a message dated 8/4/02 9:03:24 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
jrjung(at)sgmmail.com writes:
<< George and Group,
I used to try to soar a Falcon ultralight, but with limited success. But
I have had even less luck with my Firestars. One thing that has worked
for me was to fly above a highway on a sunny day, allowing me to reduce
the throttle and hold altitude or fly faster on the same setting. I was
flying around noon on a sunny day, recently, and whenever I crossed a
road I felt a fairly strong bump.
John Jung
Firestar II N6163J
Upper Michigan
>>
that's probably like the bump I feel whenever I fly over a certain copper
factory ...lotsa smoke stakes n stuff. The way (at least out west) you are
supposed to find thermals is to look for small white cumulus just forming and
get under them ....I never see that in Ohio, so I have to look for gaggles of
birds.
George Randolph
firestar driver from Ohio
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: bad EGT sender |
In a message dated 8/4/02 10:30:46 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
olenik-aviation(at)buyitsellitfixit.com writes:
<< If you are going to stick your EGT probe out in the Y, you might as well
use
a rectal thermometer. The probe needs to be placed 100 mm from the piston
skirt which is around 2" from where the manifold attaches to the engine +
or -. If you have it in the Y, you might as well smack the face of your
instrument with a hammer, so you can't read it.
That isn't anything new. It's been that way since 1983, just too many guys
did it wrong for so many year, that a lot of guys thought there was a
change.
Tom Olenik
Olenik Aviation >>
Tom....It was Dennis Souder that told me on this list that sometimes when the
sender is mounted at the "Y" it will pick up higher temperatures than what
would be read at the 100mm point off of 1 cylinder. His logic as best as I
understood at the time was that there can be a "node" of energy there due to
pulse migration (these are not Dennis's words but it is the way I understood
what he said)and the high density of energy there can cause the sensor to
read too high, as indeed my sensor USED TO read too high. But due to the
thread of several years ago, I never let the temp read 1250 anymore usually
by giving a little more throttle, when decending, or less throttle when
climbing, if and only if the egt gets close to 1250 degrees. I only have
about 150 hours on my engine (447) at this point, and it seems to run and
start very well.
george randolph...the ol glider pilot of Akron O
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
> Also, I'm still a rookie and can't "nail down " straight and level quickly
> enough by the "feel of it" like you guys do. I hope to learn that with more
> time in the seat. So, for now, I am looking for tools that will help
> mitigate my handicaps.
Ken
Ken/Gents:
I think you might need to learn to fly by the attitude of
the aircraft first. If you don't, you will chase a VSI,
IVSI, Vario, Altimeter, or any other instrument.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Flying Technique |
In a message dated 8/4/02 2:41:28 PM Eastern Daylight Time, ul15rhb(at)juno.com
writes:
<< Ralph did not write this:
> Well when it climbs, I do what is necessary to keep the
> needle
> > down, but as JH says, ya gotta drive em hard enough to keep the
> black dust
> > out.
> > Ralph Burlingame
> > Original Firestar
> > 15 years flying it
> >>
sorry about my editing Ralph....I wrote it.
George Randolph
ps but I'm glad I did cause now I think I understand another option
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kugelair(at)netscape.net |
Right, thanks Rex.
I saw exactly what you saw, the plans are calling for the .875"x.058 (I had to
convert it to decimal as the tubes are marked in decimal not in fractions) yet
they are drawn to scale same as the one inch tube. The note on the mid bottom
right side says when attaching the hinge to the 1" inch tube showing both leading
of the elevator and trailing of the Horiz Stab as same size. Anyway I built
it right, and you guys helping took away the anxiety. :-)
Finished both Elevators today crummy drawings notwhitstanding. I am pondering wheather
I should attach the hinges tommorow or hold back??? Right off I don't
know if they are needed at this stage for anything?
If not will start on the Vertical/Rudder tommorow.
Looks like the hinges and all that stuff is complex to grasp from the plans. Any
photo's anyone of that area?
I noticed that someone else (being new here I don't remember all the names yet)
mentioned something about large horiz stabs and small horiz stabs, whats the
story behined that.
Also has anyone fabricated the elevators with .017 aluminum sheet. It looks like
it would be a lot quicker to make them that way, instead of all of those silly
gussets, and fabric. Just thinking...
Ron
==================================================================
My original plans for the Mark III show a 1" leading edge tube & a 7/8"
trailing edge tube on the horiz. stab. When I upgraded to the Mark III
trailing edges. The plans call for 7/8" on the leading edge of the
elevator on both models. (The 'Extra' plans call out 7/8" but are drawn
showing the same size for the trailing edge of the horiz. stab. and the
leading edge of the elevator??) I think the "lite" version went back to
the smaller horiz. stab.
Anyway, at present I have the 1" leading & trailing tubes with the 7/8"
elevator tube on center with the 1" tube.
Rex Rodebush
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Cottrell" <lcottrel(at)kfalls.net> |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken Korenek" <ken-foi(at)attbi.com>
> I think I need to repitch my prop and I'm trying to nail down what my
RPM's
> vs MPH's are doing and I'm getting conflicting readings. I suspect that
I
> am in a gradual climb or dive and the altimeter or VSI in the EIS doesn't
> show it- it stays locked on 0 but the rpm keeps rising or falling. By
the
> time I wait for the altimeter to show a change, I've messed up that data
try.
Big Lar as you know visited me on his way north. While he was here he chided
me for being a lurker. For the most part there is little I can add to the
general knowledge of the list. I do think that I have discovered how to
achieve level flight, at least for a little while. Your altimeter will tell
you if you are climbing, your rpm's will confirm that. I set my rpm's to
6000. Then I watch my altimeter, lowering the nose till I see the altimeter
needle begin to creep down, check the rpms, they will be a couple of hundred
higher, begin a shallow climb, they will drop a couple of hundred. the
middle range of rpms must be level flight. Once you have determined the mid
range of rpms, then you only have to match that to fly level. It sounds
complicated even to me and I feel that I am not explaining it well, but it
will become very plain behind the stick.
R Pike got me to thinking about the airflow seperating behind the enclosure,
and what that did to performance. A fella here in the local area bought a
firestar from someone in Arizona. It is really a very nice plane with a lot
of gizmos and added flourishes to it. I flew it for him the first time as he
had no time in anything other than a 140 and a quicksilver. It had a 503,
while mine has a 447. I expected much better performance. It really wasn't
there. I checked the stall and it was breaking to the right at about 40 mph.
Other than that it handled much the same as mine except for the tires. They
were very much out of round. It has Matco wheels with the indivual brakes.
They shook so badly that he was afraid to get it off the ground. I
discovered that he had no gap seal on the ailerons, and he really did not
have very much of a gap seal for the center of the wings. I suggested that
he fix a better wing gap seal and seal the ailerons. He ordered new tires
and found that the original owner had not put tubes in the tires but had
relied on the goop that you squirt into tires to keep them from leaking. It
of course settled to the bottom of the tires and caused a terrible balancing
problem. He replaced the seals and he began to get the extra performance
that it should have had all along. According to his gps he is cruising about
8 mph faster than I can, which would be about right. He was worried about
the wing dropping on stall and asked about the vortex generators that I had
on mine. I found Mr Shackleford's letter explaining it and gave him one for
a pattern. ( sorry it is so long winded, but I think that the area that
caused me so much trouble before on this list is that I don't explain
enough) Anyway this brought me to Mr Pike's idea. I have the original
enclosure that is basically a large sheet of lexan that wraps around the
cage. It by its nature sticks out from the side of the cage a good inch and
a half.. I then put three of the VG's right at the rear of the lexan evenly
spaced on both sides.I flew it for at least a hour on sat. The only change
that I could tell from the seat was that it seemed to be a lot quieter.
Today I got some yarn and my wife and tufted the darn thing behind the doors
all the way back to the edge by the prop. A movie camera and a pair of
binoculars confirm that the air is flowing straight back behind the doors
and it is definately quieter. A side effect of this is that now I may have
to repitch my prop. It stands to reason, the extra noise would be caused by
the prop cavitating in the disturbed air. Less "bite" would cause the prop
to spin faster, making more noise and more rpms. I will have to check
further before I can say for sure, but today my rpms were down by 200 at
least. Whether my conclusions are valid or not, the VG's definitely
reattach the air to the fuselage and reduces the noise level a lot. That
alone is worth the effort. Thank you Mike!
Larry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerryb <ulflyer(at)airmail.net> |
Ken,
Sky Sports sells a electric 2-1/4" panel mount variometer for around
$260. Ain't cheap but it works well, have them in two planes. You can use
the altimeter if you have a sensitive one - there like the ones used in GA
planes that have 100 feet per revolution of Mickey's big arm and 1000 per
rev of Mickey's short arm - I prefer them myself.
jerryb
>
>Hey Kolbers,
>
>
> Any of you guys have an old variometer laying around?
>
> I'd like to install one so that I can determine where straight and
>level is at a given rpm and airspeed. My VSI isn't sensitive enough.
>
> Anybody got one?
>
> Know of a glider owners' list that I could ask on?
>
> It doesn't need to be new or pretty, just work correctly and be
>relatively cheap. It probably won't be installed long- just till I get
>the "feel" of "My Mistress".
>
>
>*********************
>Ken W. Korenek
>
>ken-foi(at)attbi.com
>
>
>Kolb FireStar II, "My Mistress"
>Rotax 503, Oil Injected
>3 Blade Powerfin
>http://home.attbi.com/~KolbraPilot/TX_files/image003.jpg
>
>
>Six Chuter SR7-XL "Elmo"
>Powered Parachute
>Rotax 582, Oil Injected
>3 Blade PowerFin
>http://home.attbi.com/~KolbraPilot/TX_files/image005.jpg
>
>
>4906 Oak Springs Drive
>Arlington, Texas 76016
>
>817-572-6832 voice
>817-572-6842 fax
>817-657-6500 cell
>817-483-8054 home
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Neilsen" <neilsenr(at)michigan.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: Quickie .../ still around/Vw redrive |
I'm using Gene & Larry Smiths reduction drive. Thier company name is
Valley Engineering
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIII
>>> herbgh(at)juno.com 08/02/02 06:00PM >>>
Rick
Who's redrive are you using?? Herb in Ky
writes:
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Woody <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
>
>
>If you are going to stick your EGT probe out in the Y, you might as well use
>a rectal thermometer.
Rather harsh admonishment.The rule of thumb I have always used was that
egt's can lie or be inaccurate. Your spark plugs won't lie. Use the egt as
a reference number and if someday you see a big change find out why.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: bad EGT sender |
Your spark plugs won't lie. Use the egt as
> a reference number and if someday you see a big change find out why.
Woody
Woody/Gang:
You are absolutely right. Spark plug condition does not
lie. However, if you are to rely on them telling you what
condition the engine is in, they must be read correctly.
If I fly, land, taxi back to my pad, pull the plugs and read
them, I am reading idle mixture or very low speeds (whatever
the engine has been doing for the last few minutes. Many
times the spark plug reader is misled because he has not
done his plug check correctly.
Correct me if I am wrong, but here is how I check plugs.
Full power check (main jet):
Tie down the plane.
Run it WOT for a few minutes.
Don't touch that throttle, but kill the engine with the mag
switches.
Now you can read for full power, main jet.
Cruise power, same as above.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Cottrell" <lcottrel(at)kfalls.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Larry Cottrell and vortex generators message |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike and Dixie Shackelford" <dixieshack(at)webtv.net>
dixieshack(at)webtv.net (Mike and Dixie Shackelford)
>
> Thanks for the comment, Larry but you really owe it to Howard
> Shackleford who is the VG guru and has furnished prints and instructions
Sorry about that, it was late and thinking makes me tired. Consider myself
corrected.
Larry
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | in-flight mixture control |
| From: | "Jim Gerken" <gerken(at)us.ibm.com> |
08/05/2002 09:13:24 AM
From: SR3SA2L1(at)aol.com
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Flying Technique - temps
>Wise and Experienced ones,
>Regarding the issue of cht/egt temps and prevention of carbon and oil
buildup
>(presumably the "black dust" buildup referenced?), would the addition of
an
>in-flight carb mix control take care of this problem as well as improve
gph
>burn? Would this also mitigate the problem of "chasing the EGTs" involved
>with an in-flight adj prop? If so, it seems like this would be a cheap
>(sorry, I meant to say inexpensive) preventative measure to save a
relatively
>expensive engine as well as adding both greater economy, safety and
eliminate
>the need to do seasonal/altitude rejetting.
>Anyone have experience with the in-flight adj carbs (the ones that you
turn a
>knob and have a one jet size range)?
>Steve
I will answer, although I dont feel "wise" yet. Steve, I have been
thinking similar to some of your comments above. Fuel burn reduction,
keeping EGT right at 1200 even when cruising easy, etc. I am almost ready
(in geologic terms) to test a new system of mixture control I have devised.
This on a 582. i will keep you all posted if this works out well.
Still, it seems that a person would be awfully busy if trying to adjust a
prop for desired pitch and then adjusting the mixture to keep up, then back
and forth. Maybe you'd have a baseline setting for both; for all pattern
work, then an economy setting for cruise, and rarely attempt to use
anything more creative in-between. I don't have an in-flight adjustable
prop, but still wish to get EGT adjustable for each day's flight
conditions, sometimes slow cruise, sometimes cross country, sometimes 20
degrees warmer or colder ambient, etc. But then, I love gadgets too.
BTW, I'm already using the Rotax HAC, which can compensate for variances of
air density, but does not help with varying engine loads/settings, nor does
the HAC do temp compensation.
Jim Gerken
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kirk Smith" <snuffy(at)usol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rick Trader message of Sun, 4 Aug 2002 23:50:01 |
-0700
Thanks Mike,
So he's alive and well. Glad to hear that. He truly is one of the Kolb
pioneers. ................Kirk
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
>I noticed that someone else (being new here I don't remember all the names
>yet) mentioned something about large horiz stabs and small horiz stabs,
>whats the story behined that.
>Ron
Can anyone with a MKIII Extra and the large horizontal stab give us a pilot
report on control authority with full flaps and a large passenger? I know
that my MKIII Classic seems somewhat limited in up elevator authority with
two people, 40 degrees of flaps and high power settings, and am wondering
if the larger tail surfaces of the Extra helped eliminate that any?
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
---
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: bad EGT sender |
>
It was Dennis Souder that told me on this list that sometimes when the
>sender is mounted at the "Y" it will pick up higher temperatures than what
>would be read at the 100mm point off of 1 cylinder. His logic as best as I
>understood at the time was that there can be a "node" of energy there due to
>pulse migration (these are not Dennis's words but it is the way I understood
>what he said)and the high density of energy there can cause the sensor to
>read too high, as indeed my sensor USED TO read too high.
Years ago on my Hummer with a Rotax 277, I installed a smoke system. Used a
2 liter bottle, pressurized to inject Corvis oil into the exhaust pipe just
downstream from the exhaust manifold. Worked great, but the interesting
part was that the oil was obviously vaporizing and burning in the pipe in
nodes or energy waves because the paint would burn off the pipe in
regularly spaced sections. In between those sections, it stayed normal. You
could look at the pipe and the areas with the paint burned off let you
visualize the pulse waves that were going on inside it.
But the real question is, if you were to put an egt gauge into the
expansion cone area of the muffler, would you get higher readings at the
sections where the paint was blistered? Or would the temperature be
constant, and the blisters were just where the pulses were concentrated
against the walls? From what we are hearing about probe placement, I get
the impression that the temperatures rise and fall according to where the
pulses focus.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
---
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kirk Smith" <snuffy(at)usol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rick Trader message of Sun, 4 Aug 2002 23:50:01 |
-0700
>
>
> > He truly is one of the Kolb
> > pioneers. ................Kirk
>
> Snuffy/Gents:
>
> Just curious. Can you qualify the above for us?
John/Listers
Certainly John. For me personally, he showed me what simple, humble,
average Joe of a guy, could do with a Kolb............Kirk
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SR3SA2L1(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: in-flight mixture control |
Jim,
My thinking on the adj prop was that I would actually only be changing it
twice per average flight. I would take off (pattern work) with it set for
max climb, reset it for cruise when at alt. and reset it for climb when
landing. It would still be set for climb the next time I took off, so only
two changes per flight. I see no advantage in constantly tweaking it in
flight.
As far as the mix control, it is my thinking that most of the time it will
require very little work as there is a range of acceptable temps and I do not
think it needs to be exactly at 1200 at all times. We normally fly with no
changes at all, accepting the + or - range of normal. On GA aircraft you
don't constantly tweak the mix but adj it with major changes of alt or when
the temps indicate the need and that was not a huge burden, but it did keep
the engine safer and more fuel efficient. Take off mix was set as the base
and I never changed it until above 3000' or if the egt indicated the need
(once in a while when taking off from high density alt conditions). Granted
these were 4 strode engines, but it seems like the principle should remain
the same, as should the burden on the pilot.
How do you like the HAC carbs overall? What has been the + and - of them?
How can they compensate for changes in air density and not compensate for
changes in air and engine temps? I thought that if they automatically kept
the fuel mix correct for different density altitudes ( and thus for different
air temps) they would also automatically keep the engine temps at or within
the acceptable optimal range as a result. What am I missing here? They must
work differently than I thought. How do they work mechanically?
How much affect do the various engine loads and settings have on your EGTs?
Is this why you are considering alternatives to the HAC?
Steve
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kirk Smith" <snuffy(at)usol.com> |
Listers,
For anyone interested in a Firefly kit, I noticed one for sale on
Ebay. ..................Kirk
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Titan exhaust |
| From: | Erich_Weaver(at)URSCorp.com |
08/05/2002 12:32:44 PM
Got 365+ hours on the same system without a problem, except
a broken exhaust spring. That was my fault cause I did not
change it out or safety it.
Adriel Heisey had the same problem with his 912S and Titan
exhaust. Vibration was eating up his pipes.
How many hours on the system?
John H. et al:
I have 60 hours on the engine and Titan exhaust system. I also remember
Adriel's problem, but this is somewhat different in that I have never had
any noticeable vibration problem, regardless of rpm. Sure was glad I had
the springs and safety wire.
Titan readily agreed to send out a replacement pipe for cylinder #3 pronto,
and requested I send back the broken weld for inspection.
Erich Weaver
erich_weaver(at)urscorp.com
130 Robin Hill Road, Suite 100
Santa Barbara, California 93117
Tel: 805-964-6010
fax: 805-964 0259
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kugelair(at)netscape.net |
As I have been following this thread something occured to me that may be of very
significant impact on a 2 stroke motor (I like saying motor). :-)
For those that think leaning a 2stroker is good, I think they need to consider
the idea, that as you lean it you also reduce the lubrication quanta in the engine.
It takes a certain amount of lubricant regardless of of fuel to keep the
engine within its lubrication requirements. and since the oil is premixed with
the fuel, then if less fuel less oil. So if you are going to lean the F/A make
sure you enrich the F/O ratio. If you don't it will siezes on ya. It aint because
its lean on Fuel its because its lean on oil. So increase your F/O ratio
if you are going to lean it.
Ron
===================================
I will answer, although I dont feel "wise" yet. Steve, I have been
thinking similar to some of your comments above. Fuel burn reduction,
keeping EGT right at 1200 even when cruising easy, etc. I am almost ready
(in geologic terms) to test a new system of mixture control I have devised.
This on a 582. i will keep you all posted if this works out well.
Still, it seems that a person would be awfully busy if trying to adjust a
prop for desired pitch and then adjusting the mixture to keep up, then back
and forth. Maybe you'd have a baseline setting for both; for all pattern
work, then an economy setting for cruise, and rarely attempt to use
anything more creative in-between. I don't have an in-flight adjustable
prop, but still wish to get EGT adjustable for each day's flight
conditions, sometimes slow cruise, sometimes cross country, sometimes 20
degrees warmer or colder ambient, etc. But then, I love gadgets too.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SR3SA2L1(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: 2 cycle lubing |
Ron,
Thats a good point. I do wonder how much of a problem lubrication would be
with the engine leaned to proper EGT temps though. I don't think anyone is
suggesting that engines be leaned to excess but rather leaned to maintain the
proper EGT range. Do you see any problem using the EGT as the measure of
proper fuel/air mix when adjusting in-flight? I also wonder about any
problems that might occur because of slightly different fuel/air mix in each
cylinder (the in-flight adj carb modification has a separate control for each
carb) - any ideas?
It seems that the one thing a 2 cycle pumps out the back in excess is oil.
Is lubrication a problem with a long glide and the engine idling on the way
down? I have heard that we shouldn't turn off the engine and let the prop
windmill for very long because of the lack of lubrication via lack of fuel
flow thru the engine.
Steve
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: in-flight mixture control |
> As far as the mix control, it is my thinking that most of the time it will
> require very little work as there is a range of acceptable temps and I do not
> think it needs to be exactly at 1200 at all times. We normally fly with no
> changes at all, accepting the + or - range of normal.
Steve/Gents:
> On GA aircraft you
> don't constantly tweak the mix but adj it with major changes of alt or when
> the temps indicate the need and that was not a huge burden, but it did keep
> the engine safer and more fuel efficient. Granted
> these were 4 strode engines, but it seems like the principle should remain
> the same, as should the burden on the pilot.
Best forget about GA 4 stroke engine characteristics when
flying an aircraft powered with a two stroke. About the
only similarities is they both burn gasoline and oil, and
they both turn a prop.
> How much affect do the various engine loads and settings have on your EGTs?
I don't know how much effect the various engine loads and
power settings have on the HAC system, but on normal Bing
carbs there is a lot of difference. This is because prop
loading controls EGT. Pull the nose up with the power set
at cruise and the EGT goes down, push the nose over and the
EGT sky rockets as the engine is unloaded. This is why it
is important to prop the engine and aircraft correctly.
Proper power loading.
I mentioned the above and this the other day. Fuel is
critical for two stroke cooling. Oil for lube. One can get
a tremendous amount of power out of a two stroke over the
normal fuel/air mixture by leaning. Problem is, it is going
to seize because as it makes more hp it also creates a lot
of heat. If the heat is not carried off by air cooling,
and/or water cooling, and excess fuel, it will seize. Two
strokes are not fuel efficient. Were not designed to be.
I have no experience flying a two stroke with in flight
adjustable prop. Primarily because I do not feel it is a
good set up two strokes. I have had in flight adjustable
mixture control for the main jet. It is not a good idea
either, with a two stroke. Too easy to get behind where
your carb is set and where it is supposed to be.
My own personal opinion is, you gain nothing but problems by
introducing the additional work load of inflight prop adj
and mixture control. If set up properly, the two stroke
will get the job done at normal altitudes.
You guys with extrodinary altitude requirements are
different from ordinary ultralight pilots. Reckon you all
need all this other equipment to enjoy your airplanes. :-)
Take care,
john h
PS: The msg was addressed to Jim, but I felt you would not
mind if I tossed my two cents in also.
> Steve
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 2 cycle lubing |
It aint because its lean on Fuel its because its lean on
oil. So increase your F/O ratio if you are going to lean it.
> Ron
Ron/Gents:
I have to disagree with the above. Fuel is critical to cool
the engine. Normally set up two stroke engines are actually
fuel rich in order to keep the egt below 1200F. A four
stroke engine runs temps in the 1,500F's. It is the fuel
that is keeping the egt down and cooling the engine at
higher power settings.
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 2 cycle lubing |
> Is lubrication a problem with a long glide and the engine idling on the way
> down?
Steve/Gang:
Lube is not a problem with a long glide and the engine
idling. However, temperature is. The engine will cool off
and load up. Then very quickly it will die. If you have an
electric starter you probably can get the engine fired back
up if you are not too close to the ground or trees. :-) If
you are pulling a string to start and the engine is cold,
forget it. Fly the forced landing and forget the restart
attempts.
>I have heard that we shouldn't turn off the engine and let the > prop
> windmill for very long because of the lack of lubrication via lack of fuel
> flow thru the engine.
Two strokes with gear reduction do not windmill. Four
stroke Rotax engines with gear boxes do not windmill. Shut
the engine down and you will not have a lube problem, but a
dead stick.
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
> Can anyone with a MKIII Extra and the large horizontal stab give us a pilot
> report on control authority with full flaps and a large passenger? I know
> that my MKIII Classic seems somewhat limited in up elevator authority with
> two people, 40 degrees of flaps and high power settings, and am wondering
> if the larger tail surfaces of the Extra helped eliminate that any?
> Richard Pike
Richard/Gang:
Personally I only use full flaps (40 deg) on approach with
no power whether flying solo or with a pac. I feel it is
not a good idea to fly with full power and full flaps. The
aircraft climbs much better clean than it does with 20 or 40
deg of flaps.
Not much difference in lift between 20 and 40 deg. If I
have to fly around slowly, I use 20 deg most of the time.
Hanging in the pattern at OSH or LAL at slow speeds, I use
40 deg to fly as slow as possible and stay behind that
Quicksilver.
I use 40 deg to pop off muddy, sandy, high grass and weeds,
soft type airstrips. Start ground roll clean and pop full
flaps going through 30 mph or so. As soon as the aircraft
has broken ground a few feet, slowly raise the flaps to the
clean position.
Transitioning from the 912 to the 912S there was a
significant increase in high angle thrust which tried to
over power the elevator and hold the aircraft on the
ground. If one encounters this situation, reduce power a
little and she will come right off. As soon as clear the
ground, come back with full power slowly and she will climb
right out.
The above is with my Mark III. I have very little
experience in the Mark III Extra because I do not like to
fly it and intentionally stayed out of it. Nothing wrong
with the airplane. My personal preference only.
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Woody Weaver" <mts0140(at)ATTGLOBAL.NET> |
| Subject: | Re: 2 cycle lubing |
I believe I read somewhere that oil injection systems are calibrated to run
a very high fuel to oil ratio like a 100:1 at low rpm carb settings. The
ratio drops to 50:1 or so at high rpms. This would seem to contradict the
lack of lube at low rpm theory??
ww
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Hauck" <hawk36(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: 2 cycle lubing
>
>
> > Is lubrication a problem with a long glide and the engine idling on the
way
> > down?
>
> Steve/Gang:
>
> Lube is not a problem with a long glide and the engine
> idling. However, temperature is. The engine will cool off
> and load up. Then very quickly it will die. If you have an
> electric starter you probably can get the engine fired back
> up if you are not too close to the ground or trees. :-) If
> you are pulling a string to start and the engine is cold,
> forget it. Fly the forced landing and forget the restart
> attempts.
>
> >I have heard that we shouldn't turn off the engine and let the > prop
> > windmill for very long because of the lack of lubrication via lack of
fuel
> > flow thru the engine.
>
> Two strokes with gear reduction do not windmill. Four
> stroke Rotax engines with gear boxes do not windmill. Shut
> the engine down and you will not have a lube problem, but a
> dead stick.
>
> Take care,
>
> john h
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Guy Swenson" <guys(at)rrt.net> |
Richard / Listers,
I have the large horizontal stabilizers on my Xtra, I am still in the
40hr FAA required period, however I do take my 180#lb buddy Sandy Bag
with me when I go flying. I'll do somemore testing and report back to
the list. What I know so far is: Solo flight - stall clean 40 mph, 20
degree flap 37 mph, 40 degree flap 35, add my buddy Sandy and full
flap stall goes up to 40 mph haven't noticed any change in elevator
control authority but will pay more attention next flight.
Guy Swenson
MKIII Xtra
---- Original Message ----
From: richard(at)bcchapel.org
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: M3E Tube
Date: Mon, 05 Aug 2002 09:49:22 -0400
>
>>I noticed that someone else (being new here I don't remember all
>the names
>>yet) mentioned something about large horiz stabs and small horiz
>stabs,
>>whats the story behined that.
>
>>Ron
>
>Can anyone with a MKIII Extra and the large horizontal stab give us
>a pilot
>report on control authority with full flaps and a large passenger? I
>know
>that my MKIII Classic seems somewhat limited in up elevator
>authority with
>two people, 40 degrees of flaps and high power settings, and am
>wondering
>if the larger tail surfaces of the Extra helped eliminate that any?
>Richard Pike
>MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>---
>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
>
>
>====
>====
>====
>====
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Guy Swenson" <guys(at)rrt.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 2 cycle lubing |
>a very high fuel to oil ratio like a 100:1 at low rpm carb settings.
> The
>ratio drops to 50:1 or so at high rpms. This would seem to
>contradict the
>lack of lube at low rpm theory??
Woody / Gang,
100:1 = 100 parts gas to 1 part oil
50:1 = 50 parts gas to 1 part oil
The ratio does not drop to 50:1 it increases the oil to 50:1
I'm not sure if these are the actual ratios a rotax oil pump puts out
but the direction of oil increase is, the lower the ratio the higher
the oil content.
Guy
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 2 cycle lubing |
ron is correct on one thing, lean gas means lean oil. BUT REMEMBER THIS.
in a two cycle engine the gas also cools the engine.
a two cycle engine will run great on a lean mix, and put out a lot of power.
BUT IT WILL NOT DO IT FOR VERY LONG. (meaning a melt down)
mark hansen
twinstar
s.e. minnesota
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim" <flykolb(at)carolina.rr.com> |
I'm driving to Atlanta this weekend. Any grass strips with/without
Kolbs that I can visit?
Jim
Mark III
Charlotte, NC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Woody Weaver" <mts0140(at)ATTGLOBAL.NET> |
| Subject: | Re: 2 cycle lubing |
Guy,
We fully understand that 50:1 means more oil than 100:1.
You're missing the point.
Forget the numbers for a minute.
The oil injection system provides less oil at low rpms. OK?
Like you just said, higher ratio, less oil.
ww
----- Original Message -----
From: "Guy Swenson" <guys(at)rrt.net>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: 2 cycle lubing
>
>
> >a very high fuel to oil ratio like a 100:1 at low rpm carb settings.
> > The
> >ratio drops to 50:1 or so at high rpms. This would seem to
> >contradict the
> >lack of lube at low rpm theory??
>
> Woody / Gang,
> 100:1 = 100 parts gas to 1 part oil
> 50:1 = 50 parts gas to 1 part oil
> The ratio does not drop to 50:1 it increases the oil to 50:1
> I'm not sure if these are the actual ratios a rotax oil pump puts out
> but the direction of oil increase is, the lower the ratio the higher
> the oil content.
> Guy
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kugelair(at)netscape.net |
Leaning to peak egt will give you best a/f ratio under your particular situation.
Only with a really rich air/oil ratio will you see much difference in your
egt.
Now this is my opinion, but I am willing to bet that the Oil/fuel ratio is what
the manufacturer determines will give you the best power with *adequate* lubrication,
not the ideal lubrication. My system is to give as much oil to fuel as
it will run good without fouling those sparkers. With syntethics (why would
anyone use mineral nowdays is beyoned me) you also run cleaner.
Again when I look at my egt I only see how efficient is my fuel burn and nothing
else. I am at a loss at the moment how to figure out lubrication efficiency.
I would suggest trial and error by enriching the oil/fuel ratio until its too
much and then backing off some. Same process as we do when we lean a c-150 for
fuel.
Thats a good point. I do wonder how much of a problem lubrication would be
with the engine leaned to proper EGT temps though. I don't think anyone is
suggesting that engines be leaned to excess but rather leaned to maintain the
proper EGT range. Do you see any problem using the EGT as the measure of
proper fuel/air mix when adjusting in-flight? I also wonder about any
problems that might occur because of slightly different fuel/air mix in each
cylinder (the in-flight adj carb modification has a separate control for each
carb) - any ideas?
It seems that the one thing a 2 cycle pumps out the back in excess is oil.
Is lubrication a problem with a long glide and the engine idling on the way
down? I have heard that we shouldn't turn off the engine and let the prop
windmill for very long because of the lack of lubrication via lack of fuel
flow thru the engine.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com |
> vs MPH's are doing and I'm getting conflicting readings. I suspect
> that I am in a gradual climb or dive and the altimeter or VSI in the
EIS
> doesn't show it- it stays locked on 0 but the rpm keeps rising or
falling.
> Ken W. Korenek
Ken,
Look out on the wingtips and see what the angle of attack is in relation
to the horizon. This can give an indication whether it's in a climb or
not. There should be about a 5 deg angle with the horizon in level
cruise.
At a particular throttle setting, such as 5000 rpm, push the stick
forward until the altimeter begins to drop, then come back slightly and
hold. Note the airspeed and this will be your cruise setting for that
particular rpm. Then look out on the wingtips, without moving the stick,
and note the angle with the horizon.
Now push the stick forward again, without changing the throttle setting,
and note the EGT. It should begin to rise. Now pull back on the stick and
load the prop in a climb and watch the EGT fall below normal. When doing
this listen to the sound of the engine in cruise, climb, and a shallow
dive. Soon you will know if the plane is in a climb by the sound.
You don't need a vario. Using one will only make you chase the needle
around. Learn to fly by judging the angles, monitoring your EGT, and
listening to the engine. It will make a better pilot out of you.
Ralph Burlingame
Original Firestar
15 years flying it
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kugelair(at)netscape.net |
If its true what you read than you can tell anyone that would listen that now
you know the main reason why the 2cycle engine is less reliable. :-)
>>>>>>I believe I read somewhere that oil injection systems are calibrated to run
a very high fuel to oil ratio like a 100:1 at low rpm carb settings. The
ratio drops to 50:1 or so at high rpms. This would seem to contradict the
lack of lube at low rpm theory?? <<<<<<
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kugelair(at)netscape.net |
Thank you for the info.
I was about to leave the topic alone, under the "if they want to think that, then
its ok with me". :-)
=====================================
Woody / Gang,
100:1 = 100 parts gas to 1 part oil
50:1 = 50 parts gas to 1 part oil
The ratio does not drop to 50:1 it increases the oil to 50:1
I'm not sure if these are the actual ratios a rotax oil pump puts out
but the direction of oil increase is, the lower the ratio the higher
the oil content.
Guy
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | for newbies only |
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com |
Newbies,
The EGT will rise in a dive with an unloaded prop. The concern is when
the rpms are in what I call the 'danger zone' (4600-4900 rpm). Watch
these rpms in a dive. If the EGT begins to rise past 1250 deg, then
either climb by adding more load to the prop and lowering the EGT, or
lower the throttle setting out of this range. This is where the engine is
most prone to seizing up because you are operating in the leaner midrange
carburetor setting.
Another thing to remember is to NEVER close the throttle unless you are
within safe gliding distance of a good landing area. The 2-stroke is
prone to quitting at idle because it "loads up" with a rich mixture. Use
3000-3500 rpm on approach. The Firestar flies great without engine power,
BUT if the engine quits over a forest or lake, at low altitude, then you
are putting yourself at great risk.
There have been more 2-stroke pilots that closed the throttle on approach
only to find out they botched their landing. When they try to give it
throttle FAST, the damn thing quits when they need that power the most.
Don't fall victim to this. If you follow these simple rules when flying a
2-stroke, they are very reliable engines.
My 2-cents worth .....
Ralph Burlingame
Original Firestar
15 years flying it
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dennis Souder" <flykolb(at)pa.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Rick Trader message of Sun, 4 Aug 2002 23:50:01 |
-0700
Kolbers,
I think Kirk expressed it very well.*
And Rick, as John pointed out, was not a builder ... nor a mechanic. But he
did have this dream to fly an Ultralight to Alaska and he did it despite the
fact that he did not have the large arsenal of skills that John has, for
instance. He purchased the open TwinStar and had Glen Rinck in Florida
build the plane, add the enclosure and pod underneath the fuselage. As far
as pioneering, I think he was the first with a Kolb to Alaska. I think John
would have been first, but he was delayed, for some reasons, as I recall.
Forgive me John if I am in error on this.
Rick did the trip with a 2-stroke engine, which added to the adventure. And
he did it in a less capable aircraft which was significantly overloaded!
Perhaps this would be his distinctive mark as a "pioneer": doing the trip at
gross weights which exceeded 1000 lb. at times in the TS which was only
rated at 725 lb. gross weight. And as Mike pointed out this gave him the
confidence, and the "big reasons why he chose Kolb......figuring that if
Kolbs could do that, they're TOUGH!!"
Many Kolb builders and flyers have also done pioneering work - contributions
both large and small, and as a result collectively have enriched the Kolb
line of aircraft above and beyond what it otherwise would have been.
With appreciation,
Dennis
*Certainly John. For me personally, he showed me what simple, humble,
average Joe of a guy, could do with a Kolb............Kirk
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Hauck" <hawk36(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Rick Trader message of Sun, 4 Aug 2002
>
>
> > He truly is one of the Kolb
> > pioneers. ................Kirk
>
> Snuffy/Gents:
>
> Just curious. Can you qualify the above for us?
>
> What did Trader pioneer? Understand he had someone build
> and modify his Kolb. Did he start out with a Mark II? To
> the best of my knowledge, he has never built an airplane.
> Mike Jacober rebuilt the 582 for him, donated by ROTAX, on
> his arrival in Birchwood, Alaska, as a precautionary
> measure.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerryb <ulflyer(at)airmail.net> |
| Subject: | Lubrication with engine off and prop windmilling? |
If you shut off the ignition, why wouldn't the engine continue to pump air
and fuel through it. It nothing but an air pump, what difference does it
make if a windmilling prop is spinning the engine or the combustion
cycle. Wouldn't it still produce a suction thus suck fuel/air mixture into
the engine.
jerryb
>
>
>Leaning to peak egt will give you best a/f ratio under your particular
>situation. Only with a really rich air/oil ratio will you see much
>difference in your egt.
>
>Now this is my opinion, but I am willing to bet that the Oil/fuel ratio is
>what the manufacturer determines will give you the best power with
>*adequate* lubrication, not the ideal lubrication. My system is to give as
>much oil to fuel as it will run good without fouling those sparkers. With
>syntethics (why would anyone use mineral nowdays is beyoned me) you also
>run cleaner.
>Again when I look at my egt I only see how efficient is my fuel burn and
>nothing else. I am at a loss at the moment how to figure out lubrication
>efficiency. I would suggest trial and error by enriching the oil/fuel
>ratio until its too much and then backing off some. Same process as we do
>when we lean a c-150 for fuel.
>
>
>Thats a good point. I do wonder how much of a problem lubrication would be
>with the engine leaned to proper EGT temps though. I don't think anyone is
>suggesting that engines be leaned to excess but rather leaned to maintain the
>proper EGT range. Do you see any problem using the EGT as the measure of
>proper fuel/air mix when adjusting in-flight? I also wonder about any
>problems that might occur because of slightly different fuel/air mix in each
>cylinder (the in-flight adj carb modification has a separate control for each
>carb) - any ideas?
>
>It seems that the one thing a 2 cycle pumps out the back in excess is oil.
>Is lubrication a problem with a long glide and the engine idling on the way
>down? I have heard that we shouldn't turn off the engine and let the prop
>windmill for very long because of the lack of lubrication via lack of fuel
>flow thru the engine.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <hawk36(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Lubrication with engine off and prop windmilling? |
> If you shut off the ignition, why wouldn't the engine continue to pump air
> and fuel through it.
> jerryb
jerryb/Gents:
When a Rotax 2 stroke is shut down in flight, it stops, the
prop stops. It does not windmill. Same same 912, 912S and
914 Rotax.
Therefore, it pumps no air/oil/fuel.
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
In a message dated 8/5/02 9:27:28 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
dixieshack(at)webtv.net writes:
<< Kirk/listers: I ran into Rick Trader at Sun-N-Fun this past April
and had a good talk over lunch about Kolbs and flying Twiinstars to and
from Alaska and some of his experiences with Kolbs.
Rick gave me his card which reads as follows:
"In Seach of Eagles" (an eagle in a circle)
"education, aviation, ecology "
23 Locust Street, Elwood, New Jersey
08217
(609) 567-1553
Being on a business card, I'm assuming Rick wouldn't mind me
putting this info on the list. If that is not the case, I apologize
Rick.
Rick's and John's travels about the continent and into Alaska are the
big reasons why I chose Kolb......figuring that if Kolbs could do that,
they're TOUGH!!
John just keeps on proving me correct. Atta boy, John!! Live life to
the fullest......ya only git one go-round.
Hillbilly Mike
>>
Hey Mike ....how about Dave and Mikes 4000 mile trip to Oregon and Back in
their brand new Firestars just last year
http://home.elp.rr.com/airplane/oregon.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <tophera(at)centurytel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Lubrication with engine off and prop windmilling? |
----- Original Message -----
From: "jerryb" <ulflyer(at)airmail.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: Lubrication with engine off and prop windmilling?
>
> If you shut off the ignition, why wouldn't the engine continue to pump air
> and fuel through it. It nothing but an air pump, what difference does it
> make if a windmilling prop is spinning the engine or the combustion
> cycle. Wouldn't it still produce a suction thus suck fuel/air mixture
into
> the engine.
> jerryb
well, the throttle would probably be closed... but your not going to
windmill at redrive engine
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Charles" <chieppa47(at)attbi.com> |
Hi All,
I am going to the Sept Fly in (The New KOLB Aircraft) and was wondering how
many others will be there.
Charles
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Woody <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
How are the plastic fairings held on the round struts? I don't have the
plans to tell me. This matter requires urgent attention :)
July 23, 2002 - August 06, 2002
Kolb-Archive.digest.vol-ds