Kolb-Archive.digest.vol-ec
January 09, 2003 - February 06, 2003
anubody know who made that gear?
Don Gherardini
FireFly 098
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | TAILDRAGGER503(at)aol.com |
Hello Kolb Flyers, is it easy enough to pull start in flight in the FSII with
the 503 or do you recommend the electric starters for someone that is in good
shape?
David Snyder
Building FSII
Happy NewYear
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fackler, Ken" <kfackler(at)ameritech.net> |
Dear Chris and Fellow Listers:
What is the pump "tune up" you mention?
-Ken Fackler
Mark II / 503
Rochester MI
----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Armstrong" <cen33475(at)centurytel.net>
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Re: Facet Pump
>
> The Facet pump is designed to allow fuel to continue flowing thru it when
it
> is turned off or failed. This allows you to install the Facet in SERIES
> with your other fuel pump, rather than in parallel. And this makes
plumbing
> the fuel system lines simpler - fewer loops and tees to potentially trap
air
> pockets.
>
> Unfortunately the pulse pump we use is not really designed for use inline
> and its failure modes (though quite rare if you tune them up every year)
> allow fuel underpressure into the pulse line and into the crank case of
the
> engine making the engine so rich it would probably quit. I am probably
> going to plumb mine in series anyway as it seams like the best overall
> solution since the failure rate of the pulse pumps when tuned up each year
> is very low... but, it an't perfect. With parallel i you have the
> possibility of check valves failing.
>
> Topher
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Cooley" <johnc(at)datasync.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Pull Start 503 |
Hi David and Gang,
I'll soon be 42 and am in what I consider decent shape. I'm 5'-10" and 190
lbs. I cannot pull start the 503 on my FS II while in the seated position
and the starter handle in the standard location. You might be able to
reroute the starter rope with pulley's to be in front of you and be able to
pull start while in flight. With the stock setup it's a really awkward angle
to snatch on the pull start handle.
Take Care,
John Cooley
> Hello Kolb Flyers, is it easy enough to pull start in flight in the FSII
with
> the 503 or do you recommend the electric starters for someone that is in
good
> shape?
>
> David Snyder
>
> Building FSII
> Happy NewYear
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Cooley" <johnc(at)datasync.com> |
Hi Gang,
It was recommended to me by Mike Highsmith when I was building my FS II to
put a extra hinge on the aileron midway between the steel bolt on the
aileron horn and the plans recommended hinge that would normally be the
innermost one. The Fly may be different, but what was explained to me was
that the inboard end of the aileron tube would vibrate and wear out what is
normally the innermost aluminum hinge prematurely. With the extra hinge
halfway in-between, it will stop most of the vibration and prevents the
hinge from wearing out. This may not always be the case, but it seemed like
cheap insurance to me. Also after talking to Mike for awhile and seeing some
of his work, I got the impression that he is very knowledgeable and knows
what he is talking about. That's been a couple of years ago and I still feel
the same way. Just my humble opinion.
Later,
John Cooley
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Hinges
>
> 1/8/03 19:09Christopher Armstrong
>
> > you do not need an additional hing
> > there.
> ==================
>
> Thanks :-)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kuffel <kuffel(at)cyberport.net> |
Robert: <>
John: <>
Actually the Flo-Scan transducer can be very accurate. Better than 1/2
of one percent with calibration. The problem is it can be fooled.
Unless there is a large mechanical fluid "capacitor" between the Facet
and the transducer, such as a long & large fuel line, the pulses from
the pump give the transducer vanes extra wiggles back and forth. This
makes the instrumentation think the fuel flow is higher than it really
is since the transducer can't tell when the vane makes a backward wiggle
instead of forward.
I have the same problem on my 2-place homebuilt taildragger. The
Flo-Scan transducer is only 6 inches of straight tube downstream from
the pump. Turn on the Facet and the fuel flow goes up a gallon or two,
turn it off and flow returns to normal. One way to validate if this is
the situation with your aircraft is to fill the tank, fly as long as you
can with the pump on 100%, measure actual vs fuel totalizer
consumption. Then repeat with minimal use of the Facet. Assuming the
same profile on both flights, the second run should have about the same
actual fuel usage as the first but the fuel totalizer should be much
closer to actual.
I strongly urge the Facet be turned on for takeoff up to cruse altitude
and for entering the pattern. That way it is on during critical phases
of flight and by turning it off during cruse at altitude you validate
the mechanical pump is working and give the electrical pump a rest.
This auxiliary pump usage pattern is standard practice for most
certificated General Aviation aircraft.
Tom Kuffel
Whitefish, MT
Building Original FireStar
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Hinges/Stork Gear |
Don,
I built the gear. I copied the idea from a similar gear & changed the
dimensions to & tube sizes to meet my needs. I didn't write things down &
the exact details have long evaporated from my memory. By adapting a Rotax
redrive to the Cuyuna & dropping the mount 2", I was able to go to a 60"
prop. The legs were extended about 12" & the axles postion was moved
forward a few inches. To get the best strength per lb, I kept the main tube
walls thin (.035) & the diameter large. The front cage was raised about 10
or 11" as well to decrease the frontal area drag. Diaganal braces were
added to the center of the carry thru tube & some gussets were added on the
sides of the fuselage, all was light & thin & just helped things stay in
column. .... Richard Swiderski
----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Gherardini" <donghe@one-eleven.net>
>
talking about an UltraStar that used to belong to a
> member here, they posted a pic of an unusual landing gear config made of
moly-tubing with a bungee suspension that gave a 'Stork-like" look to that
bird. anubody know who made that gear?
> Don Gherardini
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack & Louise Hart <jbhart(at)ldd.net> |
>
>Hi Gang,
>It was recommended to me by Mike Highsmith when I was building my FS II to
>put a extra hinge on the aileron midway between the steel bolt on the
>aileron horn and the plans recommended hinge that would normally be the
>innermost one. The Fly may be different, but what was explained to me was
>that the inboard end of the aileron tube would vibrate and wear out what is
>normally the innermost aluminum hinge prematurely. With the extra hinge
>halfway in-between, it will stop most of the vibration and prevents the
>hinge from wearing out. This may not always be the case, but it seemed like
>cheap insurance to me. Also after talking to Mike for awhile and seeing some
>of his work, I got the impression that he is very knowledgeable and knows
>what he is talking about. That's been a couple of years ago and I still feel
>the same way. Just my humble opinion.
>
>Later,
>John Cooley
>
John,
You may be correct. The left inboard hinge pin wore out and was replaced on my
FireFly at 51 hours. I shimmed the bolt hinge on the left side to reduce vibration
being transmitted out over the tube to the hinge. Also I cut one side
off the clevis on the aileron horn and bolted the push rod tube ball end bearing
directly to the remaining side of the clevis. Currently the FireFly has 90
hours on it, and the replacement hinge pin is starting to show some wear. Another
hinge in between the one that is wearing out pins and the aileron horn bearing
may be the solution for my problem. For some reason I am not seeing the
same problem with the corresponding hinge on the other side.
This may not be a problem with other FireFlys. I built and installed nine inch
chord ailerons at four hours. I used one inch OD aluminum tubing instead of the
1.25 OD but of the same wall thickness. The smaller size is a little more
flexible than the original and may enhance the problem, but then again the chord
went from 15 to 9 inches so the torsional loads should be less.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Jackson, MO
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart(at)ldd.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Laird <rlaird(at)cavediver.com> |
At 08:14 PM 1/9/2003, you wrote:
>the pump give the transducer vanes extra wiggles back and forth. This
>makes the instrumentation think the fuel flow is higher than it really
>is
Tom --
This sounds exactly right-on.... thanks for mentioning it...
Your description of how GA pilots use an aux. pump is good info, and I may
adopt it (or use the Hauck-method: leave it on, always, and turn it off
just long enough to see if the mechanical pump has failed).
I developed my method -- use it to prime, then shut it off -- because it
takes so long from the time I start my engine, to the time I'm on the
runway, ready for departure, that I *KNEW* that the carburetor bowl
couldn't possibly hold enough gas to keep it running, so the engine would
die on the taxiway. Maybe that's faulty thinking, say, if the mech. pump
was just barely keeping up at taxi idle, it'd just barely keep the bowl
filled, but when I went to full throttle, the faulty mech. pump couldn't
keep up, and I have fuel starvation on climb out. Yeah, (sorry, that was
kind of thinking out loud), that's a possible scenario, so I need to change
my ways.
I think I'll just leave it on.
Thanks!
-- Robert
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)sw.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Pull Start 503 |
> Hello Kolb Flyers, is it easy enough to pull start in flight in the FSII with
> the 503 or do you recommend the electric starters for someone that is in good
> shape?
>
> David Snyder
David/Gents:
Electric Starters and two strokes make a better
pair than pull starters and two strokes. Why?
Because the majority of the time when a two stroke
engine will be lost is when it is on approach and
idling, or just flying around gliding and idling.
Heck of a lot easier to restart by turning the key
or hitting a switch than it is to turn lose of the
controls and try to pull start with both hands,
especially when near the ground.
If a two stroke gets cooled off during the process
of idling and inadvertently shutting down, it is a
real bugger to restart by hand.
I would go with the electric starter, or as my old
buddy that is already gone to the little green air
strip in the sky would say, "A self commencer."
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)sw.rr.com> |
> It was recommended to me by Mike Highsmith when I was building my FS II to
> put a extra hinge on the aileron midway between the steel bolt on the
> aileron horn and the plans recommended hinge that would normally be the
> innermost one.
> John Cooley
Hi John/Gents:
Haven't been bothered with that problem on my MK
III. Maybe that is a FS II characteristic?
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)sw.rr.com> |
> Actually the Flo-Scan transducer can be very accurate. Better than 1/2
> of one percent with calibration. The problem is it can be fooled.
> Unless there is a large mechanical fluid "capacitor" between the Facet
> and the transducer, such as a long & large fuel line, the pulses from
> the pump give the transducer vanes extra wiggles back and forth. This
> makes the instrumentation think the fuel flow is higher than it really
> is since the transducer can't tell when the vane makes a backward wiggle
> instead of forward.
> Tom Kuffel
Hi Tom/Gang:
Long time no hear. Good to hear you are still
alive in Whitefish, MT.
You jogged my feeble brain. I remember something
in the instructions, this has been 12 years ago,
about position of the transducer in relation to
the fuel pump.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
| Subject: | fuel pump tune up |
Somebody asked how we tune up the Mikuni impulse pumps.
You do this by buying a rebuild kit from a supplier such as CPS, Lockwood, or maybe
Olenik Aviation. They are under ten bucks and all seals and check valves
are included. Just open her up clean the old seals out and install the new stuff.
Later,
Denny Rowe
Mk-3 Near completion, western PA
PS: I will be selling my Loehle Sport Parasol. If anyone knows someone looking
for a nice single place airplane, let me know. There is a write up on my bird
in the April, 98 EAA Experimenter magazine if you want to check it out.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <cen33475(at)centurytel.net> |
What is the pump "tune up" you mention?
replaces everything but the castings for about $12.00. easy and basically
gives you a new pump when your done.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Airgriff2(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Too much snow in the Catskills |
A few of us guys spent last Sunday removing snow from our hangars at our
small field, after a 20" storm. One hangar we put up this past summer is a
quanset style, made of metal, and appeared very strong. Because of the height
and shape, it was'nt accessible to reach the snow. Yesterday the owner of a
beautiful Flight Star got the phone call, "you better get on down to the
airport". The center of the hangar caved in compleatly to the ground
destroying the plane. It seems that the snow was ok until it warmed for a
couple days and then it obsorbed alot of moisture and became real heavy. We
all would have bet anything that this style structure would have carried 10'
of snow ? Each panel had 250 nuts and bolts attaching it to the next one. We
can all look back with hindsight, but Dave didn't have insurance.
You can guess that "insurance " seems to be the main topic at the field,
other than wondering how much galvanized metal is bringing these days. I
was wondering if some on the list who think they are getting a good price on
insurance, for a 2 place exp., pass on information as far as: Company:
Ground or in air
coverage
Cost
Phone #
This may be benificial to others also.
Thanks in advance
Fly Safe
Bob Griffin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Gerken" <gerken(at)us.ibm.com> |
01/10/2003 07:24:40 AM
With all the discussion of fuel pumps and systems, I thought I'd share
what I have been using. Currently I have a pair of gascolators feeding a
filter manifold. The manifold has three spin-on fuel filters each feeding
their own 3/4" fuel log to two faucet inline pumps (six faucets total),
which routes to the engine mounting plate where there are two Mikuni Pulse
pumps, "T"d together to feed two carbs after two more filters. As a
backup, I have a 2" trash pump with 9 hp honda engine with direct pickup in
the left tank, output nozzle aimed at the carb air inlets.
OK, if you're still reading and not laughing I should tell you this is a
joke before you head down to Northern to buy a trash pump.
To maybe reassure some of us who are using less elaborate fuel systems
than others, in all honesty I am still using the stock Kolb solution with
perfect track record. This is as dead-simple as a two-tank fuel system
gets. ONE Pulse pump, fed by TWO filters (one from each tank pickup), one
top-mounted pickup per tank, no in-tank dangling screen, leaving water in
bottom of tank. There are NO selector valves or shutoff valves in the
system, so the only way to run the engine out of fuel is to actually use it
all up. There is NO squeeze bulb primer in the system, and the choke
cables were also removed. Instead I run the push/pull primer fed by 1/8
line, fed from its own seperate fuel tank pickup tube and filter. The
primer used to be "T"d into the main system after the filters and before
the Pulse pump, but it dawned on me that if the 1/8 line fell off anywhere,
the Pulse pump would lose its prime since it could then suck air into the
lines where the 1/8 line fell off. So now the primer line is independent.
My Pulse pump is fed fuel stabilizer when left inactive for more than a
month, and the Pulse is rebuilt with the Mikuni kit every other winter.
This year it was replaced since the casting was found to have cracks in it
(see Matronics photoshare page or previous post in Archives by me for
details). The tanks are vacuumed with the squeeze primer/fuel line/copper
tube extension deal I made up, this is done every couple weeks and
resulting gallon of fuel is run thru pickup. Filters are changed yearly
although that is probably overkill. All low pressure lines (before the
pump) are clamped with plastic squeeze clamps, black ones which I reuse a
couple times. After the pump (higher pressure) the lines are clamped with
stainless Oetiker stepless clamps.
I wonder if the stock solution was a single faucet electric pump, would
guys be adding Mikuni Pulse pumps?
Jim
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rwpike(at)preferred.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Too much snow in the Catskills |
I went with EAA's new carrier, Falcon Insurance, the phone # is 512-891-8473.
Costing $600 a year to get $1,000,000 liability, $100,000 each passenger,
and $15,000 coverage on the MKIII for not in flight, not in motion coverage.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
> You can guess that "insurance " seems to be the main topic at the field,
>other than wondering how much galvanized metal is bringing these days. I
>was wondering if some on the list who think they are getting a good price on
>insurance, for a 2 place exp., pass on information as far as: Company:
> Ground or in air
>coverage
> Cost
> Phone #
>This may be benificial to others also.
>Thanks in advance
>
>Fly Safe
>Bob Griffin
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "johnjung(at)compusenior.com" <johnjung(at)compusenior.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Pull Start 503 |
David,
The 377 can be difficult to pull-start from inflight, but I did it many
times. The 503 is so difficult to start from a seated position, that I
never shut mine down in flight. I have electric now and I really like it.
John Jung
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "H MITCHELL" <mitchmnd(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Trailer building |
Ed et al,
Sorry I was not able to get back to you sooner but today was the first chance I
had to weigh the tongue of my trailer. With my Firefly and the loading ramps
(probably 30# loaded at rear of trailer) on board the tongue weighs 328#. This
is a lot more than I would have guessed but she tows so well behind my Ford 150
I keep forgetting she is back there.
This rig is two years old now and I have not had a bit of trouble with any of it.
Duane the plane Mitchell, FireFly, 477, Ivo, 130 hours.
----- Original Message -----
From: DAquaNut(at)aol.com
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Trailer building
Thanks to all who who responded to my Trailer questions:
Now that I have made some final decisions I will need to find the least
expensive place to purchase some F78 -14 trailer Tires.
Thanks Again to All
Ed Diebel
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)sw.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Mikuni Pulse Pump Reliability |
> The small displacement per pulse is why these pumps seem to last forever.
>
> Jack B. Hart FF004
Jack/Gents:
The inlet and outlet flapper valves will go long
before the diaphram has a chance to ruture.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <cen33475(at)centurytel.net> |
| Subject: | Mikuni Pulse Pump Reliability |
Dividing this into the fuel pulse volume gives a diaphragm displacement of
.0035 inches. The diaphragm thickness is .0055 of an inch so the diaphragm
is moving a little more than half of its thickness.
The small displacement per pulse is why these pumps seem to last forever.
good analysis but I think you ought to multiply by some pumping efficiency
factor. lets say the pump and check valves and the drag of all the tubing
and the resistance of the fuel to being increased in pressure results in an
efficiency of 20%... then you would have to multiply your deflections by 5
giving .175 of more then 1/8 inch... probably more close to reality.
These SWAGs are so fun, another way to do this would be to use the know
crank case pressure differential times the diaphragm area to get the force
on the diaphragm and then using the elastic modulus of the diaphragm
material and its thickness calculate the strain required to get that stress
force... of course the strain in a disk of material constrained at the
periphery and pulled sideways by pressure force is probably a bit tricky to
calculate, lots of calculus would be involved...anybody game?
Topher
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Mikuni Pulse Pump Reliability |
In a message dated 1/10/03 1:37:39 PM Eastern Standard Time, jbhart(at)ldd.net
writes:
> If one is running a Rotax 447 at 5,500 rpm, Rotax says it will burn 3.25
> gallons per hour. At 231 cubic inches per gallon this is 750.75 cubic
> inches per hour. In an hour the engine is going to turn a deliver 60 x
> 5,500 = 330,000 pulses to the fuel pump diaphragm. If one divides this
> number into the fuel pumped, you get the fuel delivered per pulse, which
> is, 3.25 / 330,000 = .002275 cubic inches. Using a conservative
> measurement of one inch for the diaphragm diameter, the diaphragm area that
> is going to do the pumping is .785 inches squared. Dividing this into the
> fuel pulse volume gives a diaphragm displacement of .0035 inches. The
> diaphragm thickness is .0055 of an inch so the diaphragm is moving a little
> more than half of its thickness.
>
> The small displacement per pulse is why these pumps seem to last forever.
>
> Jack B. Hart FF004
> Jackson, MO
>
>
To this I merely say, Jack, God bless your mathmatical hart.
George Randolph
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne" <boyter(at)mcsi.net> |
"HI Gang"
I'm planning a trip to SUN-N-FUN this year, And I live on the west coast.
I fly a mark III, I'm very interested to meet some fellow kolb pilots.
And to look at some more kolbs, There is not very many on the west coast.
What are the best days & time to attend?
Wayne Boyter
Kolb Mark III
Rotax 582
255 Hrs.
P.S. My kolb was a tri gear when I first bought it with 2' feet cut off the tail
boom,
I flown it that way for 100 hrs. and then converted back to stock, .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "dama" <dama(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Builder/Pilot Database Monthly Annoucement |
Don't forget about the database located at...
http://www.springeraviation.net/
for finding others that share your fine taste of flying contraptions.
Kip
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary robert voigt" <johndeereantique(at)qwest.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Trailer building |
Hello gang and all... that tounge weight as you know is ok...a rule to remember
is your tounge weight is always suppose to be 10 to 15 % of your gross weight...
that means you should be hauling around
3200 - 4800 lbs of gross weight which i dought you are. your truck and trailer
are not probably level with the ground and are in some type of a pitch at the
tag or ball, if you had a 3/4 ton it would be ok but you don't. as i said you
will get by in life this way but it is harder on the truck... you might even look
into load levelers at some point in
time. just my advice and still pulling john deere tractors...
thanks,
Gary r. voigt
H MITCHELL wrote:
>
> Ed et al,
>
> Sorry I was not able to get back to you sooner but today was the first chance
I had to weigh the tongue of my trailer. With my Firefly and the loading ramps
(probably 30# loaded at rear of trailer) on board the tongue weighs 328#. This
is a lot more than I would have guessed but she tows so well behind my Ford
150 I keep forgetting she is back there.
>
> This rig is two years old now and I have not had a bit of trouble with any of
it.
>
> Duane the plane Mitchell, FireFly, 477, Ivo, 130 hours.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: DAquaNut(at)aol.com
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Trailer building
>
>
> Thanks to all who who responded to my Trailer questions:
> Now that I have made some final decisions I will need to find the least
> expensive place to purchase some F78 -14 trailer Tires.
>
> Thanks Again to All
> Ed Diebel
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Pierzina" <planecrazzzy(at)lycos.com> |
Hey Guys,
I just bought my 503 w/"b" box and 66' IVO ( still in box )
It sounds like I should have went for the electric start.......
What would it take to do that.... can I still use the "B" box ?
Gotta Fly...
Mike in MN FSII,
Fabric cage stage
---
Sometimes you just have to take the leap
and build your wings on the way down...
Gotta Fly...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jon Croke" <Jon(at)joncroke.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 503 pull start |
Mike,
You got the right combo... just ad a GPL starter (in the back of all
popular magazines).
Many of us have been flying that combination ... B box + Ivo + GPL on a 503!
Jon
near Green Bay (COLD!)
www.joncroke.com
www.kolbpilot.com
>
> Hey Guys,
> I just bought my 503 w/"b" box and 66' IVO ( still in
box )
> It sounds like I should have went for the electric start.......
> What would it take to do that.... can I still use the "B" box ?
> Gotta Fly...
> Mike in
MN FSII, Fabric cage stage
> ---
> Sometimes you just have to take the leap
> and build your wings on the way down...
> Gotta Fly...
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SR3SA2L1(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: 503 pull start |
If you can find one, or know someone who has one in your area, you may want
to look into one of the old "Air Drive Service" starters and compare it with
the other brands. These aren't being produced now but you can read up on
them in the old (early 90s) CPS catalogs.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "boyd young" <by0ung(at)brigham.net> |
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Robert/Gents:
The instruments we use in our airplanes are not
absolute, especially fuel flow meters. I don't
have a flow meter in my airplane, but do have one
in the boat. It was designed and built by
Flo-Scan. Gives me a good idea of how much fuel
my 351W is burning or not burning. But it has
proven to be not totally accurate.
I believe your engine would be the first to let
you know if you were in fact getting overflow when
the Facet is energized. I bet it is a false
reading at the flow meter.
john h
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
if the electric pump is causing the level in the float bowl to rise ( but
not overflow ) it would c ause the mixture to to rich.... but it may not
be bad enough to cause it to run rough.... checking the plugs would
tell..... OR if the use of both pumps caused the carbs to overflow
it would use even more. if the vents were open to the outside air... it
could be blowing in the slipstreem and not adversely affecting the way the
engine runs... if the overflow vents were run back into the aircleaners
you would notice it... as the engine would probably quit.
boyd
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bruce McElhoe" <mcelhoe(at)cvip.net> |
Hello All...
What type of gasoline are you using in your Rotax engine? I have been using
auto gas that meets the requirements set forth in my Rotax manual; namely, a
minimum Research Octane Rating of 90 and conformance with ASTM D4814.
I checked with an expert at Chevron and found that their unleaded regular
gas meets Rotax requirements. Now, here's the problem.....under federal
mandate, all the refiners in California will soon be adding ethanol to
gasoline. They already adding ethanol in Southern California. So, auto gas
will no longer meet ASTM D4814 (which allows only one percent alcohol).
My Rotax operating manual discourages using 100LL avgas. They do allow it
only when unleaded fuel is not available. So, I'm interested in hearing
from you mid-westerners that have already dealt with alcohol in their auto
gas. Is leaded 100LL avgas giving you any problems? Is anyone continuing
to use auto gas with alcohol?
Regards
Bruce McElhoe FireFly #88
Reedley, Calif.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com |
Bruce,
I've used ethanol gasoline for 12 years in a Rotax 377 and others are
using it now without any problems in their Rotax engines. The ethanol
content is 7% in Minnesota. I switched to ethanol-free because it was
offered at the station where I get my gas. I have used 100LL in my 447
for short periods of time when I cannot find auto gas.
Ralph
Original Firestar
writes:
>
> Hello All...
>
> What type of gasoline are you using in your Rotax engine? I have
> been using
> auto gas that meets the requirements set forth in my Rotax manual;
> namely, a
> minimum Research Octane Rating of 90 and conformance with ASTM
> D4814.
>
> I checked with an expert at Chevron and found that their unleaded
> regular
> gas meets Rotax requirements. Now, here's the problem.....under
> federal
> mandate, all the refiners in California will soon be adding ethanol
> to
> gasoline. They already adding ethanol in Southern California. So,
> auto gas
> will no longer meet ASTM D4814 (which allows only one percent
> alcohol).
>
> My Rotax operating manual discourages using 100LL avgas. They do
> allow it
> only when unleaded fuel is not available. So, I'm interested in
> hearing
> from you mid-westerners that have already dealt with alcohol in
> their auto
> gas. Is leaded 100LL avgas giving you any problems? Is anyone
> continuing
> to use auto gas with alcohol?
>
> Regards
>
> Bruce McElhoe FireFly #88
> Reedley, Calif.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Cottrell" <lcottrel(at)kfalls.net> |
| Subject: | fuel flow- facet pumps |
All the concern about too much fuel with a facet, and the insistence of
some to turn off the facet when you have reached altitude leaves me
wondering. I am a welder by trade and have used a facet to supply fuel to
the (400 amp) welder that I am sure that I put at least 20 hours a week on,
with never a problem, or sputter. I don't think that the pump is going to
wear out and I just put a pressure regulator between the facet and the pulse
pump, set it to 4 pounds and forget about it. The motor is much too noisy
for the clicking to bother me while I am flying in the Wild blue.
Now I did bring the fuel lines to the left of my seat to a selector
valve then to the facet that is attached to the bottom of the rear seat of
the firestar, then to the pressure regulator, then to the pulse pump.
When I was doing my first few flights after the installation I too cut off
the fuel pump after gaining altitude, "because that is the way they do it in
the real planes." It took one steep climb out and a cough from the engine to
convince me that I wanted to leave the sucker on all the time. Grant you I
did add a 16 inch lift to the process, and that is why the pulse pump had
trouble lifting the fuel from the bottom of the plane. That is primarily why
I added the facet in the first place. I am old and stiff enough that I need
a fuel gage right in front of my face so that I can tell for sure how much
fuel I have. I have so far, changed the pulse pump every year just as a
precaution. I have 1428 hours on the welder and at least 100 on the one in
the firestar. A regulator is about 24 bucks. In the whole scheme of things,
very reasonable.
Just my humble opinion!
Larry (Oregon)
________________________________________________________________________________
Ralph, What kind of oil mix do you use with that ethanol gasoline?
I have seen some brands of 2 stroke mix for chainsaws...Stihl particularly,
that say "this oil will work with up to 10% ethanol"
Does any popular oil that 2 stroke av- engines use make this claim?
http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm
Don Gherardini
FireFly 098
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BILLBEAM(at)aol.com |
Hi gang,
Switched my FireStar instruments to EIS. Have a deal on the
conventional gages taken out. They are all in good condition and were
working when we took them out. They include: CHT, EGT, Compass,
100 MPH ASI, RPM, VSI, ALT, and one old 140 MPH ASI. I had a Rotax 503.
Catalogue is somewhere around $874. I'll take $390 for all of it. I will even
pay the shipping cost.
Picture (poor) available by clicking
http://www.pixhost.com/pixb/billbeam/instruments.jpeg
308 Jessamine Station Road
Wilmore, Kentucky 40390
Phone: 859-858-3168
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Pierzina" <planecrazzzy(at)lycos.com> |
_______HI, Thanks for the reply, I'm not familiar with "GPL" ...is that the company?
Will I still be able to mount the "pull start" ? What is the ballpark price ?
I'll be digging thru some of my magazines.....Gotta Fly...Mike
Mike,
You got the right combo... just ad a GPL starter (in the
back of all
popular magazines).
Many of us have been flying that combination ... B box +
Ivo + GPL on a 503!
Jon
near Green Bay (COLD!)
www.joncroke.com
www.kolbpilot.com
>
> Hey Guys,
> I just bought my 503 w/"b" box and 66'
IVO ( still in
box )
> It sounds like I should have went for the electric start.......
> What would it take to do that.... can I still
use the "B" box ?
> Gotta Fly...
>
Mike in
MN FSII, Fabric cage stage
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ZepRep251(at)aol.com |
Bruce. I used only 100LL for the first 2 years--100 Hrs.I,m oil-injected and
other than a white lead bloom on the plugs and 30-40 degree drop in exhaust
temp.I can't tell much difference from 91 octane car gas.You might be able to
remove the alchol from fuel by adding a pint of water to the five gal
container of gas ,shaking it up and let it stand a few minutes then separate
the gas and water.The alchol will stay with the water
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
Once again, from the Great Procrastinator, come words of belated wisdom.........................(??)
Vamoose has been sitting for a year +, since the re-drive
broke just over a year ago, and about 3 months of that was outside in the
Palm Springs summer sun, tho' the engine was covered with a light tarp. Then
I brought it onto the porch while I was on vacation, etc., and there it's sat
ever since. Yesterday, I finished re-assembling the re-drive, and installed
it, put in the new battery, etc. Today, Vamoose migrated out to the driveway
for a good bath, (nice to have a porch back, too) and look-over. Fine, sun's
shining, neighbors are applauding........................ Disconnected the fuel
return line, stuck it into a jug, and turned on #1 fuel pump to begin flushing
the system. Yes...............Lar left the gas in it. 91 octane unleaded
mogas. It stinks, too. No need for strong comments...............I'm doing
plenty of that to myself, but that's not the reason for this "Heads-Up." When
I built this thing, I used the "imitation" braided fuel line, cause I couldn't
(wouldn't ??) afford the "real" stuff from Earl's or Holley, or wherever.
This is black fuel line inside a loose braided metal (stainless ??) sheath, and
pushes onto a barb inside an end fitting. A partially concealed hose clamp
holds it on. DON'T BUY IT ! ! ! Within a few seconds of turning on the fuel
pump - remember, these are high pressure fuel injection pumps - I was watching
the fuel return line in the jug, and heard the darndest noise. Raining
?? Nah...........sky is clear blue, and temps are 70 deg. Looked up, and fuel
was spraying from all over the place. It would appear that those chintzy, cheap
fuel lines disintegrated inside the braided sheaths. What A MESS ! ! !
And what a smell. You can see several pics of those lines on "Engine & Redrive"
in the "Building Vamoose" section of my website. Soooooo....................time
to shower up & go to work now, and looking eagerly (??) forward to replacing
all those hoses tomorrow morning. Had hoped for engine start today. Oh
well. Boy..............Lar's a happy camper this afternoon. Hope this
helps someone else avoid the same mess. Not Gittin' 'er Lar.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Cleaning Lexan |
Bill, Try this. I have been using these for years and the work great on
lexan and will remove bugs and will not scratch. Note, don't let the wife
get a hold of it or you will have to buy more.....
http://magicmicrocloth.com/
pp.....
======================================================================
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ZepRep251(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Cleaning Lexan |
Bill,On GA plexiglas we used Kleer,a milky liquid cleaner and very mild
polish containing alcohol, I believe, from the fragrance in confinded
spaces.I used it Friday on the lexan on the firestar.It is anti-static as
well.Any airport pilot shop should have it or get online to Sporty's pilot
shop.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <cen33475(at)centurytel.net> |
http://www.recreationalmobility.com/Product/Engines/Engine_Accessories/GPL/G
PL_Starters.asp
one of several sources for the gpl starters I found using www.google.com.
Do you guys use web searches to answer your questions? They are usually
very productive.
topher
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
Not sure about Texas, but I'd assume they follow the same general track as
California, Idaho, Washington, and Saskatchewan, that I know
of..................gas used for off-road should be *much* cheaper, 'cause
there's no road tax on it. They generally dye it a distinctive color to
keep people honest. (??) Same, same with diesel. Farmers & commercial
fishermen are the main beneficiaries. Then, too, it depends on where
they're buying it, and what kind of deal they can get. Lotsa politics.
Could be a humongous mark up, too................they kinda gotcha, there at
the airport. Lar.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: <WillUribe(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Gasoline
>
> All us Rotax users in El Paso purchase the auto gas at the airport, it is
> rated at 87 octane. The airport can buy the auto fuel with no additives
but
> it cost more....You would think if it has no extras it should cost less.
> It's a lot easy to taxi up to the pumps and fuel up then having to pickup
> them heavy gas jugs. The extra cost is worth saving my back.
> Maybe your airport can buy the auto fuel without the additives. Our
airport
> also sells the gas to off road vehicles, ATVs and dirt bikes.
> I have been told the petroleum companies add additives to get a higher
octane
> ratings.
>
>
> NTSB Identification: ANC03CA009
>
> accident occurred Friday, November 01, 2002 at Chugiak, AK
> Aircraft:Arima Kolb Fire Star II, registration: N8199
> Injuries: 1 Uninjured.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Lexan Cleaning correction |
Larry,Gang,
I was calling from memory when I posted the site for the micro cleaning cloth.
Here is the site for the ones I use and yes they work great! Not only on the Lexan
but the whole plane. All you have to do is keep it damp. I keep mine in a
plastic Ziploc bag and rinse it out with clear water from time to time. As for
the sand and dust I recommend and use the original California Dash Duster. It
is great for removing sand and dust and will not scratch Lexan or painted surface.
If you can't find a source for these let me know. I sell them in my store
and can ship them to you via UPS.
http://www.cajuncleanall.com/
Paul the parts guy
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | west coast kolbs |
| From: | Erich_Weaver(at)URSCorp.com |
01/13/2003 12:02:32 PM
Wayne Boyter et al:
There are a few Kolb pilots out here on the west coast, though not a lot on
our list. The 'problem' is the weather has been so nice (at least in
southern California) that we are flying all the time.
I live in the Santa Barbara area, flying out of Santa Ynez, if you want to
stop buy and have a look. It is a really beautiful place to fly,
especially now when the grass is green.
Boyd, if you are listening, Im thinking about another Monument Valley
attempt. Maybe this spring? Meet me in Moab!
regards,
Erich Weaver
erich_weaver(at)urscorp.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)sw.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: west coast kolbs |
> Boyd, if you are listening, Im thinking about another Monument Valley
> attempt. Maybe this spring? Meet me in Moab!
>
> regards,
> Erich Weaver
Erich/Gents:
Include me in on your Monument Valley Flight. Jim
Heffner clued me in on his flight recently. He
has been up there 6 times, but once with his
Firestar. Let me see if I can find his web page.
He has some nice shots of the Valley posted. I
was there a couple Octobers ago, but on the
ground. He says it is dramatically different
(better) from the air in a Kolb.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
John,
Very informative post, and thankyou very much ! Maybe you can help me with
some info that has bet put forward to me in my biz. (I am a sales rep or an
engine manufacturer) In the engine biz, gasoline questions come up very
often!
Do I understand that ALL the gasoline sold in the united states at retail
must conform to the standards regulated by the US government?,, and that in
the formulas for making gasoline, there are mandated "recipies" that all
refineries must use as mandated?
Any additive packages requested by a "retailing company" must be from the
approved list?
I have believed that gasoline is similiar to prescription drugs, and no
matter what the brand label, there are only certain recipies and ingredients
that may be used.
About the only thing I know for sure, is that in the mandated :"reformulated
gas areas" the gasoline is indeed changed from a summer blend to a winter
blend according to law, and that can cause starting problems if you use a
summer "reformulated gasoline" in the winter. I believe it has to do with
reed vapor pressures and outside air temps which cause the gasoline in low
compression ratio 4 strokes(8 to 1)to be very hard to start.
I am not sure that this would be the case with a 2 cycle, as they usually
are of a higher compression ratio and might work on it.
Your info might make me more(or less) confidant in believing what I think I
know!!!!!
Don Gherardini
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)sw.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: west coast kolbs |
> Let me see if I can find his web page.
> He has some nice shots of Monument Valley posted.
> john h
Gang:
Here tis. Hope you don't mind sharing with the
entire Kolb List Family:
http://groups.msn.com/HefnersFamilySite/monumentvalleytrip.msnw?action=ShowPhoto&PhotoID=741
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BILLBEAM(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Monument Valley Flight |
Hey folks. Any one looking for a great Nav/Com radio at a cheap price? Check
out
the Bendix KX 99 I'm running on eBay. eBay
item 3000484261 (Ends Jan-19-03
Thanks
Bill
308 Jessamine Station Road
Wilmore, Kentucky 40390
Phone: 859-858-3168
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "boyd young" <by0ung(at)brigham.net> |
| Subject: | email address change |
for all who keep a list of email addresses...... note a change....
by0ung(at)brigham.net is my new address.
boyd young
ps my web pages should remain the same.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Timandjan(at)aol.com |
Used the information you sent me about the push pull cables, thanks.
Do you have any knowledge on Napa parts for the VW Thing, typw 181, 1973
model. Looking for front and rear shocks and new tie rod ends, specifically
the drivers outside.
Know this is not a Kolb question, but can't fly all the time. Gotta tinker on
some of the other projects.
Thanks
Tim
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Monument Valley Flight |
Vamoose is back together, re-drive on, and ready for the prop; new fuel
lines installed; fuel tank, ready for re-start;
(hopefully) and will be making the trip up to the covering shop in Yucca
Valley next Monday. I can't believe how much "hangar rash" the tail
feathers have already sustained. Amazing, since it hasn't even seen a
hangar yet. (I still haven't decided for sure if Vamoose is a "he," "she,"
or "it.") Wings, flaps, and ailerons are already up there; finished,
waiting for me, and ready for the hinges. I also published 2 pics of the
door lexan on photoshare yesterday, looking for words of wisdom from you
guys. C'mon, Matt ! ! ! When the guy in Yuckey Valley is done covering
the fuselage, (pod ??) it'll be ready for new doors, (probably), final
assembly, and a visit from the FAA man. I guess I'm a gonna hafta start
digging around, getting the paperwork ready. Finally..............starting
to feel the good ol' GoGittum feeling again. 'Bout bloody time ! ! ! This
past year has been a long 'un. Wore Out Lar.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: <WillUribe(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Monument Valley Flight
>
> Larry,
> So that means you'll have your MK III ready by spring, ready for the
Monument
> Valley Flight?
> It's a great place to go flying, check out the picture.
> http://www.tnkolbaircraft.com/assets/images/01DSCF0010-lg.gif
>
> Regards,
> Will Uribe
> El Paso, TX
> FireStar II N4GU
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Monument Valley Flight |
Don't know what happened, but my copy says "fuel tank & system
flushed"....................?????
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Monument Valley Flight
>
> Vamoose is back together, re-drive on, and ready for the prop; new fuel
> lines installed; fuel tank, ready for re-start;
> (hopefully) and will be making the trip up to the covering shop in Yucca
> Valley next Monday. I can't believe how much "hangar rash" the tail
> feathers have already sustained. Amazing, since it hasn't even seen a
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ted Cowan" <tcowan1917(at)direcway.com> |
| Subject: | Re: monument valley |
sounds interesting. Beverly and I have been wondering where we would go if
we took a trip west. That would be Funtastic. The furthest we have towed
my "White Lightning" was a thousand miles to Texoma, Texas flyin back about
five years ago. I know better how to pack the tail boom now. Sustained a
little damage in Texas when we encountered a rail road crossing that someone
had taken the wood out of. Big Badda Bump. Small dent in the lower section
of the tail boom aft but still did more flying than anyone else in Texoma.
Gonna keep this idea in our head and mill it around and see what pops up.
Ted and Beverly Cowan, near Auburn, Al.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)sw.rr.com> |
> Beverly and I have been wondering where we would go if
> we took a trip west.
> Gonna keep this idea in our head and mill it around and see what pops up.
> Ted and Beverly Cowan, near Auburn, Al.
Hi Ted/Gang:
I had good luck trailering a couple years ago.
Forget exactly how many miles we pulled Miss
P'fer, but it was 5,000 to 6,000, from Muncho
Lake, BC, to Oshkosh, and then home to Titus,
Alabama.
Only damage incurred was dust and dirt from the
gravel roads in Canada. Ate up my new lexan
pretty badly. Enough to have to replace all of it
before I got ready for the 2001 attempt on Barrow,
Alaska.
I used carpet, spruce studs, tie down straps.
Removed the wings and placed them on their leading
edges on each outside wall. Main gear and
tailwheel were chocked front, rear, and each side
with screwed down 2X4 blocks. Made a saddle right
behind the "H" section in the tailboom. Line it
with carpet. A piece of carpet on top of the tail
boom, capped with an small piece of 2X4 held the
airplane secure in place. A couple lateral lines
front and rear to help stabalize and we were off
and running.
More fun to fly though. :-)
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Monument Valley Flight |
In a message dated 1/14/03 10:11:24 AM Mountain Standard Time,
possums(at)mindspring.com writes:
>
> How about "Hanger Queen" that's kinda nice.
More like "Porch Queen"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wood, John T." <woodjt(at)spawar.navy.mil> |
| Subject: | Facet Pump update |
I want to start off by thanking everyone for their inputs on my facet pump
problem. The Facet pump is within 12 inches of the bottom of the fuel tank.
The feed to the pump is from the top with a filter installed between the
tank outlet and the facet pump. The output of the pump feeds the pulse pump.
I have an on/off switch for the pump. So far I have left it on while the
engine is running. I also have a primer installed.
The plane started right up after turning on the Facet pump and waiting for
the pump to quiet down. One little squirt from the primer, a pull on the
rope and engine purred like a kitten. I still noticed that there was a
little air in the lines but that was soon displaced by fuel once the engine
started running. Everything worked as I hoped it would and did not observe a
single glitch in the operation of the engine.
Thanks,
John Wood
Firestar N670JW
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)sw.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: monument valley |
Boyd/Gang:
Someone suggested sometime in May. That sounds
like a good time for me. I am packing my bags.
The airplane is ready to go.
Let's do it!
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Erich_Weaver(at)URSCorp.com |
01/14/2003 08:15:13 PM
Wow! I was startled to see the instant and overwhelming interest in
Monument Valley following my not-so-private message to Boyd Young. It was
like the EF Hutton commercial.
Boyd and I were part of a small group that flew from Beaver, Utah across
Capitol Reef Natl Park and over to Moab, Utah last fall. We had intended
to continue on to Monument Valley and other great sights, but he was
committed to stay with the others who apparently could not afford to wait
out a day of bad weather, and had to skedaddle back home. I stayed in Moab
with my wife and kid manning our own support vehicle, and was treated to
perfect weather the following day for a solo flight around Arches Natl
Park, Dead Horse Point, and Canyonlands. My heart was pounding during most
of it, due to both the awesome beauty and a tightly clinched rear end over
the sheer drop-offs. Anyway, you'all should know there is a lot more to
look at besides Monument Valley in southern Utah. Im not religious, but
this area has a powerful, converting influence.
Late spring should be a good time to see it. Hope to meet some of you
there. If it works out, I would likely trailer out from Santa Barbara.
Erich Weaver
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick & Martha Neilsen" <neilsenrm(at)cs.com> |
For those of us east of the rocky mountains, how would one flying a Kolb get
to monument valley. For John Hauck this may be no big deal but for the rest
of us is there a southern route that doesn't require one to fly in the
oxygen required altitudes.
At some point in my life I plan on doing some traveling in my MKIII but I
figured I would have to stay east of the Rockies.
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIII
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of John Hauck
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: monument valley
Boyd/Gang:
Someone suggested sometime in May. That sounds
like a good time for me. I am packing my bags.
The airplane is ready to go.
Let's do it!
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)sw.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: monument valley |
> For those of us east of the rocky mountains, how would one flying a Kolb get
> to monument valley.
> Rick Neilsen
Rick/Gents:
I usually start off with my handy dandy road
atlas. I like AAA, but Rand McNally works good
to. On a long flight that will consume several
days or weeks to get there, I lay out a tentative
route of where and how I want to fly.
Start with the US map in the front of the atlas.
Decide on a general route. Then go to the state
maps and further refine your route. Once you have
this decided, get your sectionals and lay out your
route on the sectionals. A map recon is a lot of
fun to do. You can check out elevations,
restricted areas, airports (I like to use small
uncontrolled airports). Airport symbols that
overlap the little towns are good places to land
for chow. Usually they are within walking
distance of some place to eat if a courtesy car is
not available. Don't ask the FBO for a courtesy
car to go down to the store to buy mogas for your
airplane. He's trying to make a living too. Buy
100LL from him is you have to.
Now days it is even simpler to fly cross country.
For the most part on long long cross countries I
punch in a way point and fly for it. When I need
to land I go to the nearest airport on my route of
flight. Takeoff again and pickup the heading for
my way point way up there some where. When I
departed Titus, Alabama, for Alaska, my first
waypoint was Minot, ND. Took me three days to get
there and I flew the most direct route minus my
little op stops and RONs just off course and
sometimes right on course. I can deviate when it
is best to take another route. Always try and
keep up with my position on the sectional in case
I lose the GPS. This has happened before. Most
of the time I get reception again in a few
minutes.
A long cross country is made up of a lot of short
legs. For me, about one to two hours in length.
Usually dictated by the capacity of my bladder.
The flight is primarily the fun of meeting the
people. If I don't land I don't get to meet the
folks.
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim and Phyllis Hefner" <hefners_tucson(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: monument valley |
-- Kolb-List message posted by: John Hauck jhauck(at)sw.rr.com
Boyd/Gang:
Someone suggested sometime in May. That sounds
like a good time for me. I am packing my bags.
The airplane is ready to go.
Let's do it!
john h
========================================
John/others planning to do Monument Valley:
We would need fix a set of dates and get a count of names and # planesthat wouldbe
there at once and get that cleared with Gouldings to lock-in on a plan. Everyone
would also need to make reservations for camping or staying at the lodge.I'm
sure this will likelybe a lot more traffic than normal, so I'm not sure
what they will say.They have Caravan's flying in/out acouple times during the
day hauling visitors, but early in the morning and later in the evening, it is
wide open and winds light.
There is a pretty big bare dirt tie down area with cables that you can tie off
to. The strip is half paved, up toward the lodge end and the rest is dirt. There
is only one choice for take off and landings. Since there is a big bluff up
behind the lodge, all take-offs are toward the North and all landings are toward
the South. Its a short flight to the monuments from there.
May is peak season at the lodge so rooms are pricey $120+, but they do give some
Sr discounts and there is a pilot lounge/room that my friend rented one night
for around $85 It's half way down the strip and out pretty far from the main
lodge restraunts and it's only one room. Campground is great and during the
week not hard to get a reservation in with hook-ups around $25/night. The weekend
when I was up there (5/18)an Airstream convention descended on the place and
there was not an empty spot in the campground, so doing this during the week
would be the safest bet for campers and possibly those staying at the lodge.
We left on Sat morning, after the crowd arrived Fri, which worked out well.
Gouldings strip is a private strip, so permission is required. They said they needed
copies of liability insurance, but I sent them a letter of our planned visit
and relieved them of any liability and they were OK with that and sent me
a return fax approval to use their runway. Would probably need to do that individually
by fax, since they want something signed for their files.
Gouldings Lodge is a really great place, even has a museum, which is really interesting
and a really good restraunt with great food and reasonable prices. There
is a Conoco station right at the lodge for autofuel.
Thats about it for now. As noted in another post, there are lots of other things
to see and fly to in that area, including Lake Powell and many other attractions
in Southern Utah. I've been to Moab a couple times by car and want to fly
Arches and Canyonlands Ntl Parks sometime. Need more vacation, or better yet,
to retire!
Jim Hefner
Tucson, AZ
FF#022
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | New books for Homebuilders |
| From: | sonja.englert(at)juno.com |
Hi everyone,
I would like to introduce myself to this group. I am an aeronautical engineer,
pilot, airplane homebuilder and writer. I have written 3 new books for airplane
homebuilders, which you can check out on my web page www.caroengineering.com.
They are mainly for airplane homebuilders, but should be of interest to anyone
who wants to install engines, work with composites or flight test an airplane.
Cheers,
Sonja Englert
www.caroengineering.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Clay Stuart" <tcstuart(at)adelphia.net> |
Trying to design aluminum gas tanks for my Mark IIIXtra. My plan is to make two
tanks approximately 13" high x 9.5" deep x 17" front width tapering to 13" rear
width. Each tank would hold 8 gallons and could be slipped in without cutting
any of the fuselage members. I will do a cardboard mockup first to make
certain. I will have tabs welded onto each tank that would join the tanks after
placement, but with enough separation to straddle the aileron torque tube.
Now for some help- what about lower feeds from the gas tanks to a gascolator?
Any water should settle out of the tanks into the gascolator and would be drained
on the pre-flight. Would you T the tanks together before the gasolator?
If the T is above the gascolator, could I get by with a filler on one tank and
let the other tank fill throught the T? Another option might be to have separate
feeds to the gascolator and a U-connector between the tanks, but that would
involve two more openings in the tank. Would a gascolator with two separate
feeds allow the tanks to equalize or should I have fillers on both tanks. I
assume that I should top-vent each tank with the tubes exiting below the tanks.
Thanks for you input and thanks to Travis Brown at Kolb today for his friendly
help,
Clay Stuart
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rwpike(at)charter.net> |
What about a U connector between the tanks of a larger than usual diameter
tubing, something like at least 3/8" or so? Years ago I was a lineboy, and
the old Aero Commander 500's had only one filler opening to feed both wing
tanks, one wing tank in each wing, and you could grow old waiting for that
thing to cross bleed on a top off.
If in the middle of the U, you had a metal section, you could
braze/weld/solder in a 1/4" pipe to tap off to the gascolator and save any
extra holes in your tanks?
If it was me, I would go to Lowes, pick out some of those small size copper
fittings & elbows that would be easy to adapt to your U and then tap off
from the copper to the gascolator and then size the rubber tubing and tank
outlets to match.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>Trying to design aluminum gas tanks for my Mark IIIXtra. My plan is to make
>two tanks approximately 13" high x 9.5" deep x 17" front width tapering to
>13" rear width. Each tank would hold 8 gallons and could be slipped in
>without cutting any of the fuselage members. I will do a cardboard mockup
>first to make certain. I will have tabs welded onto each tank that would
>join the tanks after placement, but with enough separation to straddle the
>aileron torque tube.
>
>Now for some help- what about lower feeds from the gas tanks to a
>gascolator? Any water should settle out of the tanks into the gascolator
>and would be drained on the pre-flight. Would you T the tanks together
>before the gasolator? If the T is above the gascolator, could I get by with
>a filler on one tank and let the other tank fill throught the T? Another
>option might be to have separate feeds to the gascolator and a U-connector
>between the tanks, but that would involve two more openings in the tank.
>Would a gascolator with two separate feeds allow the tanks to equalize or
>should I have fillers on both tanks. I assume that I should top-vent each
>tank with the tubes exiting below the tanks.
>
>Thanks for you input and thanks to Travis Brown at Kolb today for his
>friendly help,
>
>Clay Stuart
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Cooley" <johnc(at)datasync.com> |
Hi Don, Bob and Gang,
Sorry to be this long responding to your questions. I've been on night shift
the past couple of nights and haven't made time to respond.
All gasoline has to meet a recognized set of standards. These are regulated
by API (American Petroleum Institute) see this link
http://api-ec.api.org/aboutapi/index.cfm?bitmask=001010001000000000 and ASTM
(American Society for Testing and Materials) Most of the current testing
methods in use have been developed by ASTM. Check this link for more info
http://www.astm.org/cgi-bin/SoftCart.exe/ABOUT/aboutASTM.html?L+mystore+elby
7771+1042674481
The recipes are not mandated. Each company can use whatever recipe they
choose as long as the finished product meets the industry standard specs.
These "recipes" will vary depending on the type of crude oils being
distilled and the type of "reforming" processes used to make higher
quality/octane components. We sample our component rundown tanks on a
regular basis and the info is feed into a computer program. When we get
ready to blend for example a blend of 93 octane supreme then the required
info is fed into the computer system and based on the components available a
recipe is developed. Some of the criteria that the computer program uses to
determine the recipe is also determined by the time of year and the RVP
requirements (Reid Vapor Pressure) for the season. We make gasoline with 5
different RVP values depending on the time of season and the place that the
fuel is going. We make a special low vapor pressure gasoline for the Atlanta
area in the summer and the other grades are known as summer grade,
intermediate grade, transition grade and winter grade RVP. The major
difference in these fuels are the vapor pressure only. We have cutoff dates
that we must meet when selling these various grades of gasoline. In other
words after a certain date we can no longer sell winter grade gas. It has to
be transition grade and so on. Of course summer grade has the lowest RVP
value because of the season and so forth. Most of our fuel either goes to
the Florida panhandle, Tampa, Port Everglades area via barges and ships and
up the east coast via pipeline. Our average barrels per day of gasoline
blended is 129,000 BPD.
The additive packages are formulated by the major players making gas. They
are primary a cleaner for fuel injectors etc. I don't know the particulars
of getting it approved for use but am sure that it has to be approved by a
governing body. The Chevron additive is know as "Techron". I don't know what
Exxon, Shell etc call theirs. Techron is injected into the gas as it's
loaded at our truck rack for the local market. We also have Exxon's additive
for trucks picking up gas to go to the Exxon stations and a generic additive
for the other brands. This is handled by the Marketing folks, which is a
separate organization within the Chevron/Texaco company. No additive is put
into the fuel going on ships and barges or up the pipeline system. This is
done later on at the final destination.
Again I will repeat what I said in my first post about gasoline. I don't
want people getting mad because they are buying Exxon gas that may have
actually been blended in a Chevron refinery. All gasoline has to meet
minimum industry requirements. The requirement is the same for Exxon as it
is for Chevron, Shell etc. If you are buying Exxon you are still getting
their additive package. I will add this bit of info to chew on. Some
companies blend gasoline to meet the minimum requirement. If it is supposed
to be 93 octane supreme, then the gas is blended to meet the 93 octane
minimum requirement. If the octane is 93.9 then that is known as "give-away"
or blending "fat" because you have to use higher quality/octane components
which of course are more valuable. If you want the most profit possible and
you have the equipment to control with then it makes sense to try to hit the
93 minimum as close as possible. Some companies will blend gasoline straight
onto a ship and therefore are willing to have some "give-away" to make sure
it is on-test. I think this is the reason some people say a particular brand
of gas runs better than another.
The reformulated gas referred to in Don's post just has to meet more
stringent guidelines as I understand it. I believe this is currently for
the California market. We don't make reformulated gas at this time or any
gas with alcohol in it.
Ok guys, as Paul Petty asked me in an earlier post, I'm out of gas.
Take Care,
John Cooley
>
> John,
> Very informative post, and thankyou very much ! Maybe you can help me with
> some info that has bet put forward to me in my biz. (I am a sales rep or
an
> engine manufacturer) In the engine biz, gasoline questions come up very
> often!
> Do I understand that ALL the gasoline sold in the united states at retail
> must conform to the standards regulated by the US government?,, and that
in
> the formulas for making gasoline, there are mandated "recipies" that all
> refineries must use as mandated?
> Any additive packages requested by a "retailing company" must be from the
> approved list?
>
> I have believed that gasoline is similiar to prescription drugs, and no
> matter what the brand label, there are only certain recipies and
ingredients
> that may be used.
>
> About the only thing I know for sure, is that in the mandated
:"reformulated
> gas areas" the gasoline is indeed changed from a summer blend to a winter
> blend according to law, and that can cause starting problems if you use a
> summer "reformulated gasoline" in the winter. I believe it has to do with
> reed vapor pressures and outside air temps which cause the gasoline in low
> compression ratio 4 strokes(8 to 1)to be very hard to start.
> I am not sure that this would be the case with a 2 cycle, as they usually
> are of a higher compression ratio and might work on it.
>
> Your info might make me more(or less) confidant in believing what I think
I
> know!!!!!
>
> Don Gherardini
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Cooley" <johnc(at)datasync.com> |
John Hauck / Gang,
I know John has a lot of experience in the area of this question. I welcome
any and all responses. As most of you know I purchased Jeremy Casey's
uncompleted Mark III. Before buying Jeremy's plane I had been considering
buying Bill Griffin's uncompleted kit which has the same modifications as
John's plane but he had sold it already. I love the manly looking high
stance of John's plane and all Slingshot's. John, please tell Ms Pfer that's
not an insult. She's purty even if she is a little manly looking. Anyway
here's my question, Can the stock Mark III be put on gear legs similar to
the slingshot without doing all the extra stuff John did to his plane. Maybe
not quite as high as the Slingshot, but enough that it's not squatty
looking. I know the angle of bend in the legs would have to be different and
the legs heat treated etc. Is there any other reason it wouldn't work?
Thanks,
John Cooley
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | tom sabean <sabean(at)ns.sympatico.ca> |
| Subject: | Finishing the Cage |
Listers...
I am getting ready to cover/finish the cage of my Mark111Xtra and lets
just say the plans are quite sparse in that area. Does anyone have any
pictures or links to builders sites that show how the sheet aluminum is
attached at the rear of the cage? Also, looking for pictures of how the
fiberglass piece at the front of the gap seal is mounted. While I'm at
it, how about how the doors are attached and are there any secrets to
attaching the nose cone.
All help appreciated.
Thanks,
Tom Sabean
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)sw.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Landing gear |
> Is there any other reason it wouldn't work?
>
> Thanks,
> John Cooley
John/Gang:
The major reason, besides hard landings, that the
MK III has a bad reputation for bent landing gear
legs is the fact that the angle of the leg coming
out of the fuselage is very flat. To lengthen the
legs to get some fuselage height and a nice 3
point stance just won't work. We got away with it
on the Firestar and it worked out perfect. Really
changed the looks of the airplane on the ground.
It also did nice 3 point landings.
As far as I know there is only one other MK III
that has the Miss P'fer look. Dave Patrick, here
in my area, bought Bill Griffin's MK III.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SGreenpg(at)aol.com |
In a message dated 1/15/03 12:15:34 PM Eastern Standard Time,
tcstuart(at)adelphia.net writes:
> . Would you T the tanks together before the gasolator? If the T is above
> the gascolator, could I get by with a filler on one tank and let the other
> tank fill throught the T?
Clay,
Mine is a single fuel tank but I have two outlets because of the channel over
the aileron torque tube. I made my gascolator with two inlets so that even
fuel passing from one side to the other has an opportunity to drop the water
in the colator. If you use a two tank setup and one filler you would be
flowing fuel through the gascolator as it fills the other tank. That would
be good but you would need a gascolator with about 1/2" inlets.
Steven G.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Futrell" <Bill-Jo(at)prodigy.net> |
Clay I would be interested in the tank set-up if you can get it in
there without cutting the frame. I think they would have to rest on the tank
mounting frame that is in the plane. With Tabs welded on so they could be
bolted together is a good idea. You would need a support around the tanks
that would bolt to he cage also.
If it was me I would have the feed lines coming from the bottom of the
tanks to a T and then to the facet pump and then to a gascolator. The
gascolator would have the drain line on it to drain any water you may get
before each flight. Then I go from there to a in- line filter. I would vent
the tanks from the top out to the r/r behind the cage. I have mine vented
out just under the prop below the boom tube. If you run the line from the
tanks to a t-fitting before the pump and gascolator they will always
equalize from one tank to the other.
Let me know what a tank set up like this is going to cost you.
Thanks Bill FutrellOriginal Message -----
From: Clay Stuart <tcstuart(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: gas tanks
>
> Trying to design aluminum gas tanks for my Mark IIIXtra. My plan is to
make two tanks approximately 13" high x 9.5" deep x 17" front width tapering
to 13" rear width. Each tank would hold 8 gallons and could be slipped in
without cutting any of the fuselage members. I will do a cardboard mockup
first to make certain. I will have tabs welded onto each tank that would
join the tanks after placement, but with enough separation to straddle the
aileron torque tube.
>
> Now for some help- what about lower feeds from the gas tanks to a
gascolator? Any water should settle out of the tanks into the gascolator
and would be drained on the pre-flight. Would you T the tanks together
before the gasolator? If the T is above the gascolator, could I get by with
a filler on one tank and let the other tank fill throught the T? Another
option might be to have separate feeds to the gascolator and a U-connector
between the tanks, but that would involve two more openings in the tank.
Would a gascolator with two separate feeds allow the tanks to equalize or
should I have fillers on both tanks. I assume that I should top-vent each
tank with the tubes exiting below the tanks.
>
> Thanks for you input and thanks to Travis Brown at Kolb today for his
friendly help,
>
> Clay Stuart
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Olenik" <olenik-aviation(at)buyitsellitfixit.com> |
"Powerchutes(at)Yahoogroups. Com" ,
"FreePPC(at)yahoogroups. com" ,
"Eaa860(at)Yahoogroups. Com" ,
"Engines-Ul(at)Yahoogroups. Com" ,
"Kolb-List(at)Matronics. Com" ,
"UltralightTrikes(at)yahoogroups. com"
| Subject: | 800x6 Tires on 3" Wide Wheels??? |
Hi guys,
I was wondering if anyone out there has run the 800x6 Titan Turf Glide
"Tundra" tire on the fairly narrow 3" wide wheels. I have been using the 4"
wide Azusa wheels which works just fine, but I would sort of like to use the
Zytel wheels to lighten it up and they only come in 3" wide. If you have
run them on the 3" wide aluminum wheels, I would like to hear about it as
well since those are the same dimensions as the Zytel wheels. I know it
will fit and inflate on that wheel because I have done it, but has anyone
flown with that combination? My only concern is that the tire bead might
pop off the wheel on a hard landing.
Thanks,
Tom Olenik
Olenik Aviation
http://www.buyitsellitfixit.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: 800x6 Tires on 3" Wide Wheels??? |
How would that happen? Most tire beads, the edge of the tire opening has a
steel bead. It won't expands so the tire would have a very hard time coming
off as long as the beads are forced out on the wheel flange be air pressure.
Tubeless tires sometimes are deflated by sliding sideways. You would more
like to have a ground loop by that time so that a tire problem would be the
least of your worries.
Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
Editor, EAA Safety Programs
cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
Always looking for articles for the Experimenter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Olenik" <olenik-aviation(at)buyitsellitfixit.com>
"Powerchutes(at)Yahoogroups. Com" ;
"FreePPC(at)yahoogroups. com" ; "Eaa860(at)Yahoogroups.
Com" ; "Engines-Ul(at)Yahoogroups. Com"
; "Kolb-List(at)Matronics. Com"
; "UltralightTrikes(at)yahoogroups. com"
Subject: Kolb-List: 800x6 Tires on 3" Wide Wheels???
>
> Hi guys,
>
> I was wondering if anyone out there has run the 800x6 Titan Turf Glide
> "Tundra" tire on the fairly narrow 3" wide wheels. I have been using the
4"
> wide Azusa wheels which works just fine, but I would sort of like to use
the
> Zytel wheels to lighten it up and they only come in 3" wide. If you have
> run them on the 3" wide aluminum wheels, I would like to hear about it as
> well since those are the same dimensions as the Zytel wheels. I know it
> will fit and inflate on that wheel because I have done it, but has anyone
> flown with that combination? My only concern is that the tire bead might
> pop off the wheel on a hard landing.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tom Olenik
> Olenik Aviation
> http://www.buyitsellitfixit.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
1/15/03 17:29Jim Ballenger
> I am most interested in the gas tanks you
> are building. Are you going to have baffles in the tanks or is there a need
> for it?
===================
I just got kit number two. I looked at the plastic tanks 2 of them. No need
for baffles on the factory set up. They are fairly narrow sitting upright,
so sloshing and unporting should not be a concern.
I am following this with interest as well, I think I may opt to install a
custom 15 gallon tank. The Hirth on a full head of steam will give me about
2 hours on 15 gallons. The 10 gallon factory set up is not enough for any
serious cross country flying. I see no problem in cutting the guide rods
that hold the tanks in place, they do not seem to serve any stractural
purpose. One big tank would do just fine. I think uncle Hauck has a larger
tank in his bird. Can't remember the capacity though.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)sw.rr.com> |
> One big tank would do just fine. I think uncle Hauck has a larger
> tank in his bird. Can't remember the capacity though.
Ron/Gang:
25 gal usable, baffled, vented out the bottom of
the fuselage, drained from the lowest point
(center rear), sight gauge, .050 5052 aluminum,
finger strainer, homemade water seperator and fuel
shut off valve.
Originally designed for the 582 installation, 5 to
5.5 gph. Worked great with the 912, 4 gph. Still
working well with the 912S, 5 gph. Can't run the
tank dry on cross countries without going down. I
get uncomfortable when mine gets down to 12.5
gal. I like lots of fuel. If I have lots of
fuel, when I screw up at least I have more time to
try and figure out how to get out of my jam before
the engine gets quiet.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Landing gear |
John and others,
Would taller tires help raise the Mk-3 up into a little more aggressive
stance?
Denny
----- Original Message -----
From: John Hauck <jhauck(at)sw.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Landing gear
>
>
> > Is there any other reason it wouldn't work?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > John Cooley
>
> John/Gang:
>
> The major reason, besides hard landings, that the
> MK III has a bad reputation for bent landing gear
> legs is the fact that the angle of the leg coming
> out of the fuselage is very flat. To lengthen the
> legs to get some fuselage height and a nice 3
> point stance just won't work. We got away with it
> on the Firestar and it worked out perfect. Really
> changed the looks of the airplane on the ground.
> It also did nice 3 point landings.
>
> As far as I know there is only one other MK III
> that has the Miss P'fer look. Dave Patrick, here
> in my area, bought Bill Griffin's MK III.
>
> john h
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
1/16/03 8:09Peter Volum
> Is the Hirth THAT much less efficient than the 912? Or are you planning
> to fly at full gross and Vne the entire time?
====================
Its the nature of two cycle engines to burn gas at about twice the rate of a
four cycle engine for same HP. Go to the Hirth site and take a look at their
fuel burn rates at 100HP. It aint pretty! Of course I have no intention of
runing the sucker at full bore all the time, but if I do I want some range
out of it. Take a look at their tables.
******* http://www.recpower.com/f302c11.htm *****
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)sw.rr.com> |
> I can remain aloft for about 4 hours on 10 gallons with my Rotax 912 at
> a cruise of about 60mph.
> Is the Hirth THAT much less efficient than the 912?
> P.
Peter/Gang:
I discovered there is considerable difference
between fuel burn playing around the patch than
there is on a cross country flight.
My 912 burned 4.0 gph at 5,000 rpm, 4.25 at 5,200,
and 4.5 at 5,400 rpm. These figures were verified
on long cross country flights.
Makes a lot of difference in fuel burn when the
throttle is set and forgotten at cruise, than it
does when we are taking off, landing, loafing
around the airport.
582 on my MK III:
5,800 rpm cruise equaled 5.0 gph.
912S at 5,000 equals 5.0 gph.
5,200 equals 5.5 gph.
I'm happy.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)sw.rr.com> |
> Do you have a photo of it, or a drawing.
Ron/Gang:
Have no drawings. It is one of a kind. Brother
Jim designed, built a prototype out of cardboard,
fitted it into the fuselage by cutting a couple
diagonal tube braces on the upper rear side.
It was designed and built to fit the shape of the
upper rear inclosure.
I'll see if I can find a pic and put it on my
index page.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack & Louise Hart <jbhart(at)ldd.net> |
>
>1/16/03 8:09Peter Volum
>
>> Is the Hirth THAT much less efficient than the 912? Or are you planning
>> to fly at full gross and Vne the entire time?
>====================
>
>Its the nature of two cycle engines to burn gas at about twice the rate of a
>four cycle engine for same HP. Go to the Hirth site and take a look at their
>fuel burn rates at 100HP. It aint pretty! Of course I have no intention of
>runing the sucker at full bore all the time, but if I do I want some range
>out of it. Take a look at their tables.
>
>
>******* http://www.recpower.com/f302c11.htm *****
>
CaptainRon & Others,
The above statement may not necessarily be true for reed valve engines. Simonini
makes a 100 hp 2-cycle two cylinder engine, that is basically a twin of the
Victor 1+. Maximum fuel flow rate on the Victor 1+ is 2.75 gph, so this engine
should develop 100 hp using 5.5 gph with the Hirth using 8.7 gph. The difference
is the benefit of reed valve induction and a great exhaust system.
Out of curiosity, I checked the Rotax web site and found the 912ul at 83 hp burns
6 gph, the 912uls at 98 hp burns 7+ gph and the 914ul at 100 hp burns 8.3 gph.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Jackson, MO
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart(at)ldd.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kirby Dennis Contr ASC/TM <Dennis.Kirby(at)kirtland.af.mil> |
| Subject: | Re: Monument Valley |
AAaarghh - I'm so frustrated!
All this chatter about a trip to Monument Valley, which is only a couple of
hours flying distance from me, and, as much as I REALLY wanna go, I likely
will NOT be able to join you all.
Reason - I probably won't be done flying off my obligatory 40 hours in my
newly-finished Mark-3 by early-summer.
If any of you plan on passing thru the Albuquerque area, please let me know.
We can feed ya, put you up for a night, and I can recommend a UL-friendly
airport to RON at.
Dennis Kirby
Mark-3, with less than 5 hours of flying time in
Cedar Crest, New Mexico
(505) 281-0873
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeremy Casey" <jrcasey(at)ldl.net> |
> Do you have a photo of it, or a drawing.
Ron/Gang:
Have no drawings. It is one of a kind. Brother
Jim designed, built a prototype out of cardboard,
fitted it into the fuselage by cutting a couple
diagonal tube braces on the upper rear side.
It was designed and built to fit the shape of the
upper rear inclosure.
I'll see if I can find a pic and put it on my
index page.
john h
Here's a fairly small picture of John's gas tank. Taken from the right
side looking back up into the rear fuselage area...
Jeremy "Former Kolb Project owner" Casey
P.S. This Monument Valley thing sounds fun...other makes and models be
welcomed???
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
| Subject: | Grahm Lee designed Emergency chute. |
Kolbers,
A flying friend from Georgia sent me some info on a plans built emergency chute
system designed by Grahm Lee. The plans are only $13 bucks and the info says
its been demonstrated at Oshkosh. Originally designed for the Chinook UL, but
easily adapted to other light planes.
Anybody know anything about it?
I am sure it wouldn't be as good as a BRS, but for those of us on a tight budget
it may be better than none at all.
Hey, when I started flying in the early eighties, the hot ticket was a hand deployed
chute.
I think I'll forward the info to the list for proper fire testing.
Denny
Mk-3 N616DR 2SI 690L-70 near completion ( I'm gonna beat ya Lar ) :-}
South Western, PA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
| Subject: | Fw: Low cost ChuteSYS.(KenR. |
Ok folks,
Lets here what you think, Anything to slow down the Monument Valley talk that
makes us frozen Yankees green with envy.
Denny
----- Original Message -----
From: CJR41170(at)aol.com
; gtswift(at)wideopenwest.com
Subject: Low cost ChuteSYS.(KenR.
Low cost and light weight
Categories rns (3)
ECDS EMERGENCY CHUTE DEPLOYMENT SYSTEM $12.95
(Click to Enlarge)
Our Price
$12.95
View Description
Availability
In stock
Shipping: $2.00
Ask the seller a question
Description:
A Graham Lee Design.
E.C.D.S. Emergency Chute Deployment System.
These Retail for 12.95 .
This is the lifesaver that you should not be without, Designed specifically for
the WT-11 Chinook UL this deployment system has been flight tested and proven
successful in front of the crowds at Oshkosh.
Dennis Maland climbed to circuit altitude and pulled the chute. The engine quit,
the chute deployed and the plane drifted half way down. Dennis then pulled the
chute release and glided to a landing, hopped out of the plane and gathered
the chute before it hit the ground.
After deployment time from release to full envelope is about 1.5 seconds at 30
mph.
The body tube was originally a piece of 4 inch aluminum drainage pipe. It can be
plastic or aluminum tube any size greater than 4 inch. The length will depend
upon what size chute and cords to be stuffed in and allow a few inches extra
for the end caps.
These plans contain full Cad Drawings plus instructions on building your own Emergency
Chute Deployment System.
Clear Cad Drawn pages, 10 pages including Card Stock front and back cover with
complete building instructions.
You get color front cover pix and one other color pix inside plans set.
We print each order from our Master CAD file. You get fresh drawings, not copies.
This system can be adapted to most any small aircraft depending on chute size you
select for it.
This item is a must for your safety.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Clay Stuart" <tcstuart(at)adelphia.net> |
" Hi Clay. I made up my design with cardboard and duct tape. I needed to remove
and sleeve two side tubes on cage. I ordered 5052H32.-.050 Proper material
for fuel tanks. It is so thin and flexible, it went through 5 welders at the shop
before it was done. Pressure testing showed 18 pin holes. They were touched
up, but for me to feel comfortable, I had a radiator shop coat the inside and
he assured me that I was all set now. In the 7 yrs. of flying, I am now dealing
with my 4th leak. Tank is coming out!. I looked alot on line, boat tanks(below
deck), etc. What I will replace it with is a poly fuel cell I found listed
under (street rod fuel cells)(Speedway Motors) Sells for like $125 and you install
the fittings where you want. Others have had good results with al. I did'nt
and wanted to pass that along to you to concider.
Fly Safe
Bob Griffin
Upstate NY "
With the above email sent to me, I am still considering the aluminum tank. I have
a local fellow who was Navy trained for underwater welding, so I think he
can do a good job.
I have completed the mock up of my gas tanks for my Mark IIIXtra. The maximum
size I can place is 9" deep x 13" tall and 18 1/2" wide tapering to 13 1/2" wide
to the rear. That calculates to 8.1 gal per tank. I had to use a tie down
strap between the motor mount area and the diagonal tube that slightly interferes
with placement. By tightening the strap, I could flex the tube up an inch
or so to allow easier placement of the tank. The only thing I had to cut so
far are the lateral containment tubes that went on the outside of the stock 5-gal
tanks. I left the inner two positioning tubes intact. I have decided to
put fill openings on both tanks and not try to fill from just one side through
a cross-over or U-tube. It was going to complicate the placing of the finger
strainers in my tank if I opted for a larger line and the subsequent sizing down
to the gascolator. I am considering making hatch doors to access the fillers
in the Lexan side windows instead of a set-up like Big Lars'. I have found
a gas cap at Aircraft Spruce that is vented but uses a one-way spring loaded
ball which allows air to enter, but stops fuel from leaking from the tank: P/N
10600 for $48.00. Do you think I can trust this arrangement and avoid the vent
openings and lines? It would also seem to prevent fuel from leaking in case
of an inverted landing.
Does anyone have hatch doors into the rear enclosure? I was thinking about making
one side large enough not only to access the gas tank on that side, but to
access and possibly store light items behind the gas tanks.
Thanks,
Clay Stuart
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Clay Stuart" <tcstuart(at)adelphia.net> |
" I am getting ready to cover/finish the cage of my Mark111Xtra and lets
just say the plans are quite sparse in that area. Does anyone have any
pictures or links to builders sites that show how the sheet aluminum is
attached at the rear of the cage? Also, looking for pictures of how the
fiberglass piece at the front of the gap seal is mounted. While I'm at
it, how about how the doors are attached and are there any secrets to
attaching the nose cone.
All help appreciated.
Thanks,
Tom Sabean"
Dear Tom,
I agree that there is little information available in the book or plans about this.
Bill Futrell has already been down this road and has been very helpful to
me. I have attached one door and I did it by first clamping it into the position
that looked correct. I used some spacers and a clamp to get the top tab
and tube on the cage lined up. I then held the bottom of the door correctly
and used a 1/4" turbomax drill with the sharp point (thanks Big Lar for the drill
recommendation) through the tube to mark the center of the hole on the lower
tab. Drilled it out and placed a bolt and then repeated the procedure on the
top tab. You might need a washer or two between the tab and tube on the lower
bolt while lining up the upper tab. I used the rear and top-rear cage to
line up the door frame the best I could with these two structures. The door doesn't
exactly mirror the frame and I have a little more gap near the bottom front
of the door and frame than I do in the rear, but I wanted the latch area
to be parallel. Along the bottom of the door is the only area that doesn't look
parallel. I am considering some weatherstripping later on to help seal of
the doors. I am hoping that the flex of the Lexan alongside the windshield and
on the edges of the door Lexan that overlap the door frame will give, or flex
enough, to help mate the surfaces. I tried to line up the door frame just slightly
outside of vertical to the corresponding tube of the cage. I hope that
is what I should have done, but I may not know until it is near completion.
I can't help you on the other areas, but I hope someone responds so I can learn
too. Looks like the nosecone attachment is straight forward however, just rivet
it to place under the front of the Lexan windshield.
Thanks,
Clay Stuart
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)sw.rr.com> |
Hi Clay/Bob G/Gang:
I had some leaks to chase around in my Firestar
many years ago, but that 5052 fuel tank was not
sloshed.
My 25 gal tank was sloshed four times by me and a
couple2, 3 or 4 quarts of Randolph Fuel Tank
Slosh/Sealer for aircraft/automotive fuel. Has
leaked narry a drop in it 12 year life time. That
equates to about 1,750 flight hours and a couple
really hard landings and three crashes.
I think the secret to sealing the tank is not a
radiator shop like Bob G did, but using the right
material for the task.
Pin holes in aluminum fuel tanks are extremely
hard to prevent. We pressure test, mark, then go
back and reweld until we think we have all the
leaks. But the final and most crucial task is the
slosh/sealer. Do it right and it will do the job.
Bob, if it was my tank, I think I would pulll it
out, have it steam cleaned, flush it good with
MEK, make sure all the old radiator sealer is
out. Then go back and use the Randolph
Slosh/Sealer. Might not be able to get the inside
of the tank sparkling clean though. In that case
I probably would sell it to my brother in law or
scrap it.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rwpike(at)charter.net> |
I have only one thing to add to John's very through suggestions: if it
appears that the old sealer cannot be readily cleaned out, then I would
carefully cut the top or end off the tank, and clean it out, and then rivet
a flange around the edge, and then rivet the top or end back on, and then
slosh it. I have a friend who has riveted up four gas tanks for AirCams,
glommed the inside of them with Pro-Seal fuel tank sealant, and none of
them have leaked a bit, even though they are totally riveted together. It
all comes down to using the right stuff for the job.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldpoops)
>
>Hi Clay/Bob G/Gang:
>
>I had some leaks to chase around in my Firestar
>many years ago, but that 5052 fuel tank was not
>sloshed.
>
>My 25 gal tank was sloshed four times by me and a
>couple2, 3 or 4 quarts of Randolph Fuel Tank
>Slosh/Sealer for aircraft/automotive fuel. Has
>leaked narry a drop in it 12 year life time. That
>equates to about 1,750 flight hours and a couple
>really hard landings and three crashes.
>
>I think the secret to sealing the tank is not a
>radiator shop like Bob G did, but using the right
>material for the task.
>
>Pin holes in aluminum fuel tanks are extremely
>hard to prevent. We pressure test, mark, then go
>back and reweld until we think we have all the
>leaks. But the final and most crucial task is the
>slosh/sealer. Do it right and it will do the job.
>
>Bob, if it was my tank, I think I would pulll it
>out, have it steam cleaned, flush it good with
>MEK, make sure all the old radiator sealer is
>out. Then go back and use the Randolph
>Slosh/Sealer. Might not be able to get the inside
>of the tank sparkling clean though. In that case
>I probably would sell it to my brother in law or
>scrap it.
>
>john h
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Grahm Lee designed Emergency chute. |
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
1/17/03 11:18rowedl(at)highstream.net
>
> Kolbers,
> A flying friend from Georgia sent me some info on a plans built emergency
> chute system designed by Grahm Lee. The plans are only $13 bucks and the
> info says its been demonstrated at Oshkosh. Originally designed for the
> Chinook UL, but easily adapted to other light planes.
> Anybody know anything about it?
> I am sure it wouldn't be as good as a BRS, but for those of us on a tight
> budget it may be better than none at all.
> Hey, when I started flying in the early eighties, the hot ticket was a hand
> deployed chute.
> I think I'll forward the info to the list for proper fire testing.
> Denny
> Mk-3 N616DR 2SI 690L-70 near completion ( I'm gonna beat ya Lar ) :-}
> South Western, PA
>
>
===============================
Go check this site.
***** http://www.mcp.com.au/xair/online/category17_1.htm ******
Its in Ozi Land and the money is in Ozi dollars, relatively inexpensive in
US dollars. They have an exchange calculator there.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dallas Shepherd" <cen23954(at)centurytel.net> |
| Subject: | steel landing gear |
The steel landing gear for the Mark3 has been sold.
Dallas Shepherd
cen23954(at)centurytel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Green With Envy |
Hate ta rub it in, ya know, but one frozen Yankee showed up here the other
day, so yesterday we warmed him up a little by having lunch at a GREAT
Mexican restaurant....................out on the patio in sunny 80 deg.
weather. Hadta get that in there..............now the Lar gets to pick on
YOU guys ! ! ! Hah ! ! ! Yah, Bob Bean was here, and seemed to enjoy
himself. He stayed long enuf to meet Hugh Hume this morning, who is
researching which plane to build, and has pretty much settled on a Mk III.
Hope Vamoose didn't scare him off. Both those guys are real nice fellas,
Hugh's little daughter Savannah is a nice, well mannered young lady and I
had a very pleasant couple of days with them all. Good excuse for 2 days in
a row at my favorite restaurant, too. (but a bad thing for my waistline)
I tried to start Vamoose for them, but turns out the engine is frozen.
(didn't expect THAT either) Sprayed some WD-40 in the cylinders, but so far
it hasn't helped. If it ain't one thing, it's another. Gonna kick that
plane in the butt ! ! ! (maybe I should buy my buddy's J-5 after all)
Humph...................tomorrow, I'll get serious, and sort out this latest
glitch; meantime the GoGittum is back in the Lar, and we gonna DO IT ! ! !
Monument Valley time approacheth. Big Lar. Do not
Archive.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: <rowedl(at)highstream.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: Fw: Low cost ChuteSYS.(KenR.
>
> Ok folks,
> Lets here what you think, Anything to slow down the Monument Valley talk
that makes us frozen Yankees green with envy.
>
> Denny
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
Several years ago, I had a need to do some welding on a portable outboard
motor tank. Rinsed it good, then stuck a tube from a nitrogen bottle into
it; turned it on to a low hiss; waited a while, then commenced to weld -
after 1st hiding it behind a corner, and reaching out with a match on the
end of an 8 foot stick - just in case. (I used silver solder - but it's
still flame around gasoline fumes) The nitrogen displaced the air in the
tank, so if there WERE any fumes left over from the rinsing, there was no
oxygen in there to cause a problem. Food for thought. Lar.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Pike" <rwpike(at)charter.net>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: gas tank
>
> I have only one thing to add to John's very through suggestions: if it
> appears that the old sealer cannot be readily cleaned out, then I would
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Cottrell" <lcottrel(at)kfalls.net> |
Well you can do the same thing by sticking a hose up your car exhaust, and
then sticking the other end in the tank, but I wouldn't recommend it.
Larry
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: gas tank
>
> Several years ago, I had a need to do some welding on a portable outboard
> motor tank. Rinsed it good, then stuck a tube from a nitrogen bottle into
> it; turned it on to a low hiss; waited a while, then commenced to weld -
> after 1st hiding it behind a corner, and reaching out with a match on the
> end of an 8 foot stick - just in case. (I used silver solder - but it's
> still flame around gasoline fumes) The nitrogen displaced the air in the
> tank, so if there WERE any fumes left over from the rinsing, there was no
> oxygen in there to cause a problem. Food for thought.
Lar.
>
> Larry Bourne
> Palm Springs, CA
> Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
> www.gogittum.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Richard Pike" <rwpike(at)charter.net>
> To:
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: gas tank
>
>
> >
> > I have only one thing to add to John's very through suggestions: if it
> > appears that the old sealer cannot be readily cleaned out, then I would
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | woody <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Green With Envy |
>
>.....tomorrow, I'll get serious, and sort out this latest
>glitch; meantime the GoGittum is back in the Lar, and we gonna DO IT ! ! !
>Monument Valley time approacheth. Big Lar. Do not
>Archive.
Hey Lar
If your wings are done and the cage is getting done you may just make
it in time for the monument valley flight. Might take a bit of serious
overtime but it is possible. We're all pullin for ya.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
This has come up before, but just in case.......................for stock
TOK 15 gal aluminum tank measurements, look on my website under "Picture
Page 1." GoGittum Lar.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeremy Casey" <jrcasey(at)ldl.net>
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: gas tanks
>
>
> > Do you have a photo of it, or a drawing.
>
> Ron/Gang:
>
> Have no drawings. It is one of a kind. Brother
> Jim designed, built a prototype out of cardboard,
> fitted it into the fuselage by cutting a couple
> diagonal tube braces on the upper rear side.
>
> It was designed and built to fit the shape of the
> upper rear inclosure.
>
> I'll see if I can find a pic and put it on my
> index page.
>
> john h
>
>
> Here's a fairly small picture of John's gas tank. Taken from the right
> side looking back up into the rear fuselage area...
>
> Jeremy "Former Kolb Project owner" Casey
>
>
> P.S. This Monument Valley thing sounds fun...other makes and models be
> welcomed???
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | [ Larry Bourne ] : New Email List Photo Share Available! |
| From: | Email List Photo Shares <pictures(at)matronics.com> |
A new Email List Photo Share is available:
Poster: Larry Bourne
Subject: Cloudy Lexan
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/biglar@gogittum.com.01.18.2003/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: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)sw.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Lexan Rejuvenation? No! |
>
> Poster: Larry Bourne
>
>
> Subject: Cloudy Lexan
Larry/Gang:
If it is cloudy, most likely replacement will save
you a lot of work, hassle, time, not necessarily
money. Try some automotive wax/polish/cleaner.
If they doesn't remove the cloudiness, replace
with new lexan.
I spent a lot of time, money for an expensive kit,
and a lot of elbow grease to find out I could not
salvage a lexan windshield on my Firestar. Does
not recoup like plexiglass.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Lexan Rejuvenation? No! |
Thanks, John. That's pretty much how I feel, but I sent that to photoshare
a week ago, and have been busy since. The guy who's doing the covering has
some stuff that he says may just do the job. I believe it's the kit that AC
Spruce sells. He'll give it a short effort to see how it goes, and if it
doesn't look like a winner, he'll quit. Meantime, I'm leaving that lexan on
there for the duration of the covering process. When Vamoose comes home in
his new clothes, he'll get new eyes, too. Lar.
Hmmmm................guess he's a he, eh ??
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)sw.rr.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: Lexan Rejuvenation? No!
>
>
> >
> > Poster: Larry Bourne
> >
> >
> > Subject: Cloudy Lexan
>
> Larry/Gang:
>
> If it is cloudy, most likely replacement will save
> you a lot of work, hassle, time, not necessarily
> money. Try some automotive wax/polish/cleaner.
> If they doesn't remove the cloudiness, replace
> with new lexan.
>
> I spent a lot of time, money for an expensive kit,
> and a lot of elbow grease to find out I could not
> salvage a lexan windshield on my Firestar. Does
> not recoup like plexiglass.
>
> john h
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Graham Lee Parachute |
| From: | "Lawrence M. Rice" <tailwind5(at)juno.com> |
Where do you get in touch with Graham Lee?
Larry the MicroMong guy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Clay Stuart" <tcstuart(at)adelphia.net> |
Dear Bill,
What kind of fuel gauge did you put in your Mark IIIXta? Did you just put it in
one tank? I have looked at the EIS fuel management system and it has many bell
and whistles, but at $375 over the EIS price of $523, I don't know if it is
justifiable. I believe that you have your fuel gauge mounted in the gap seal.
If you have any more pictures of door hardware, rear enclosure, gascolator I would
like to see them.
Thanks,
Clay Stuart
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SR3SA2L1(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Fw: Low cost ChuteSYS.(KenR. |
I have not seen this system and do not know how it is deployed, but is this a
system that those of us with the old rocket deployed Second Chance systems
might want to use to update with? Does anyone have any idea how to make an
air pressurized system to replace the old rocket for the Second Chance units?
Maybe John (and the rest of us with these units sitting on our back porches)
could modify and use the chute this way instead of buying a whole new system.
Steve
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fw: Low cost ChuteSYS.(KenR. |
Steve,
If nothing else, folks with Second Chance systems already have a canopy to
use with this set up. I would think the canopy would be the big money item
in building this unit.
If anyone decides to risk the $15 for these plans, let us know if they are
worth it. I'm so cheap that I squeek, but I'm am curious to know more about
it, and would buy the plans if I was sure the thing was viable.
Denny (the freezing cheapskate) Rowe
----- Original Message -----
From: <SR3SA2L1(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Fw: Low cost ChuteSYS.(KenR.
>
> I have not seen this system and do not know how it is deployed, but is
this a
> system that those of us with the old rocket deployed Second Chance systems
> might want to use to update with? Does anyone have any idea how to make
an
> air pressurized system to replace the old rocket for the Second Chance
units?
> Maybe John (and the rest of us with these units sitting on our back
porches)
> could modify and use the chute this way instead of buying a whole new
system.
>
> Steve
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | [ Bill Vincent ] : New Email List Photo Share Available! |
| From: | Email List Photo Shares <pictures(at)matronics.com> |
A new Email List Photo Share is available:
Poster: Bill Vincent
Subject: Aerial Photography
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/emailbill@chartermi.net.01.19.2003/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
--------------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | [ Steven Green ] : New Email List Photo Share Available! |
| From: | Email List Photo Shares <pictures(at)matronics.com> |
A new Email List Photo Share is available:
Poster: Steven Green
Subject: Kolb Fuel Tank
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/SGreenpg@aol.com.01.19.2003/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: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
Guess I hafta keep learning................don't trust anyone but yourself. I
mentioned that Vamoose' engine had mysteriously siezed up the other day. Fella
at AirCooled.net in Salt Lake City suggested I try loosening the cap screws
holding the flywheel on. It Worked ! ! ! The new input assembly is slightly
shorter than the original - tho' I specifically told him to make it EXACTLY the
same depth. When I tightened it down, it crammed the thrust bearing against
the case, and siezed the engine. I'm lucky nothing broke. What a relief..................thought
I had a tear-down in my near future. That guy at aircooled.net
is sharp. He's the same one who got the jetting for the Weber carb on
my Baja Bug sorted out, after several local "professionals" hit it and bounced.
Relieved Lar.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim and Phyllis Hefner" <hefners_tucson(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: monument valley |
From:
John Hauck (jhauck(at)sw.rr.com)
Date:
Sat Jan 18 - 8:06 AM
-- Kolb-List message posted by: John Hauck jhauck(at)sw.rr.com
Be nice if we can get something set up with the
Lodge to feed us, maybe have one night for a
special supper. How far is the lodge/food from
the airstrip? I will be roughing it, if the
weather is not too bad. Prices for rooms will buy
me a lot of fuel to get home on.
===============================================================
John and others considering the Monument Valley trip:
In my 1/14 post, I noted that this visit and usage of Gouldings airstrip will need
to be approved by Gouldings lodge mgmt, since it is their private strip, anddepending
how large the groupgets large, they may have concerns. Think I saw
in a note a few days ago that someone was annointed trip leader... forgot who.Whoever
that is, needs to get a count of planes coming and dates for usage of
the stripand call Gouldingsto discuss what they will require to approve the plan.
I discussed some of thatinmy 1/14 post.Gouldings is not a "just show-up"
kind of place, especially with quite a few planes planning to come. Once they
approve of the plan, the idea of a special dinner could be discussed. When I arrived
and was just starting to unload my Firefly, I was greeted by Gouldings
staff, asking me to movemy Explorer andtrailer, since a Caravan was coming in
and I was close to their parking spot... they keep a close eye on what goes on
at the airstrip, since a lot of business comes to them that way. John, you asked
how far the strip is from the lodge/food. The airstrip is right across the
road from the lodge - easily walkable, same for fuel.
As far as roughing it goes, if I am able to come, I'll have my trailer parked in
the campground and would have room for you and several others to sleep in there
with sleeping bags. My trailer is 28'l x 8'w x 6.5'hinside, with a flourescent
light, that I powered from the campsite hookup when my daughter and I camped
there last May. There may be other trailers there too, so roughing it shouldn't
be too rough for the guys that fly in, that don't want to fork over the
big bucks at the lodge. The campground is top notch, with all facilities, including
laundry, pool, showers, the works. $25/night split a few ways, won't break
anyone's bank that flies these expensive toys.
I flew down to Sierra Vista airport (from my base at SanManuel - E77) Saturday
(160mi r.t) and visited Captain Ron, who is building a MKIIIand John K, who is
building a Challenger. They both are gonna try to finish their planes in time
to make the M. V. trip, so I'm rooting for them to both make it! They've both
got a lot of work left, but now they've got plenty of motivation after my weekend
visit.
My uncertainty is that I have a new grandson due to arrive in early May, so nature
will need to stay on time for me to make it. My daughter is in DesMoines,
IA, so I'm gonna give her a pep talk to stay on schedule .... 
http://graphics.hotmail.com/emsmile.gif"
width=12>
Later, Jim Hefner
Tucson, AZ
Firefly #022
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "boyd young" <by0ung(at)brigham.net> |
"Kolb-List Digest List"
| Subject: | leaky fuel tanks. |
when i ordered the mk III kit i bought the 16 gal alum tank from the old
kolb. after installing it and filling it with gas i found it to be
leaking.... on closer examination the leak was from an area where a brace
was welded to the center of the alum sheet.... i could tell that the
welder was not happy with the weld and ground it out and re welded it....
i contacted a local welder and he told me that the only way he would touch
it was if i had it steam cleaned...... he sugested that i have someone with
a steam generator just place a hose in the tank and let it run for an hour
... so in an effort to save money i took an old water heater, fitted it
with a propane burner, filled it with about 10 gal of water, and started
cooking.... i run two hoses from the top of the water heater into the fuel
tank it was amazing how many gas rainbows came out of the bottom of it with
the condensate.... after a couple hours i had it welded with no problems
and have not used any slosh sealer and no leaks.
boyd
i have pictures on another system if someone is interested.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Airgriff2(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Low cost ChuteSYS.(KenR. |
I'd be interested in any replies to this topic. My Second Chantz chute isn,t
on my porch. It's in the gap seal between the wings.
Bob Griffin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Joel Reed" <jfreed(at)dejazzd.com> |
Hello fellow Kolbers,
I have a 1984 Firestar which has a 5 gallon fuel tank on. Last year I did
a cross country trip and the range on 5 gallons for me would be like 55-65 miles,
depending on conditions, and I would like to put more fuel on board so I
can extend my range. My Firestar is fully enclosed and the fuel tank is hanging?sitting
high up on the back, and theres a space underneath it, I had tried
putting a marine outboard 3 gallon fuel tank and it does not fit, but its close.
I was thinking that I would like to be able to add three more gallons as
I figured that I could extend my range to about 100.
Now my question is would it be better to remove the tank in it now and put
a bigger one in or is there any creative way to put another tank in somewhere
that I could pump into the orignal tank after it goes low?
I had posted a message last summer about flying cross country and all the replys
I got really helped me and I now really enjoy flying cross country. So
this is late but I just wanted to say thanks for all the help I get on this list.
Thanks,
Joel Reed
84 Firestar w/377
Lancaster Co, Pa
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | possums <possums(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Extra fuel?? |
We had one a the club that put a 5 gallon tank behind the sling seat.
It was about 5 or 6 inches thick and rectangle - about 2 ft x 3 ft - and
black in color.
The rear tank fed the seat tank with a turn off valve. You would fly till
the seat tank ran low (sight line) and then turn on the valve and refuel
it from the back tank. Also had quick disconnects so you could remove it to
be legal and hook up the 5 gallon tank in the back.
George (the possum) Murhpy has it now, but he is in Alabama - so
I don't know if they have computers there yet.
PS he's on the list - you might ask him if he remembers where they got it.
>Hello fellow Kolbers,
> I have a 1984 Firestar which has a 5 gallon fuel tank on. Last year
> I did a cross country trip and the range on 5 gallons for me would be
> like 55-65 miles, depending on conditions, and I would like to put more
> fuel on board so I can extend my range. My Firestar is fully enclosed
> and the fuel tank is hanging?sitting high up on the back, and theres a
> space underneath it, I had tried putting a marine outboard 3 gallon fuel
> tank and it does not fit, but its close. I was thinking that I would
> like to be able to add three more gallons as I figured that I could
> extend my range to about 100.
> Now my question is would it be better to remove the tank in it now
> and put a bigger one in or is there any creative way to put another tank
> in somewhere that I could pump into the orignal tank after it goes low?
> I had posted a message last summer about flying cross country and all
> the replys I got really helped me and I now really enjoy flying cross
> country. So this is late but I just wanted to say thanks for all the
> help I get on this list.
> Thanks,
> Joel Reed
> 84 Firestar w/377
> Lancaster Co, Pa
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | woody <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
| Subject: | Re: monument valley |
This trip is starting to sound tempting. Is there a spare seat
anywhere. I'll buy the gas.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SR3SA2L1(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Extra fuel?? |
Hi Joel,
I have the same model Firestar and had the same problem. I took the 5 gal
tank out and was able to make one out of alum. that fits in the same space
(without any other changes or modifications) that holds 11 1/2 gal. John H.
is the real pro at this (he put enough fuel aboard his to refuel three F16s
in flight and still fly to Alaska and back nonstop (almost). You may want to
ask him if he has any pictures.
Steve
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Airgriff2(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Check out FUEL TANKS BELOW DECK PLASTIC |
FUEL TANKS
BELOW DECK PLASTIC
Speedway
Motors: Product: 'Street Rod Fuel Cell
Here are a couple of sites you can check out to possibly carry more fuel.
Hopefully you can click on them, if not you'll have to go through "search"
How many on the list are planning to attend Sun & Fun ?
Fly Safe
Bob Griffin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
| Subject: | Mk-3 elevator trim |
Kolbers,
I am about to swage the elevator trim cable at the cockpit end. I assume that with
the elevator in the neutral position, and the trim lever full forward, the
cable should be pulled taut with no spring deflection.
Is this what you Mk-3 drivers recommend?. If not, what is your method?
Thanks,
Denny Rowe
Mk-3 N616DR
2SI 690L-70
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Mk-3 elevator trim |
For all the wire swaging, I went to the hardware store, and got some
"kernies", to temporarily pre-tension the wires, and get an idea of how they
would work, before actual swaging. Kernie is a copper clamp with a screw
in the side; meant to connect wiring - sort of an un-insulated wire nut.
You'll quite often see them used to connect the ground wire of your house to
the ground rod. When you use them, just tighten down the screw enuf to
hold the wires in position. If you clamp down too hard, you'll mash the
wires, and possibly damage them. It's hard to remember that far back,
:-) but seems to me I put some stretch in those trim springs with the lever
full forward. With the wires held by the kernie, you can pull back the
lever, and see if you get elevator deflection. Lar.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: <rowedl(at)highstream.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: Mk-3 elevator trim
>
> Kolbers,
> I am about to swage the elevator trim cable at the cockpit end. I assume
that with the elevator in the neutral position, and the trim lever full
forward, the cable should be pulled taut with no spring deflection.
> Is this what you Mk-3 drivers recommend?. If not, what is your method?
> Thanks,
> Denny Rowe
> Mk-3 N616DR
> 2SI 690L-70
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
I was just reading the caption on page 57 of the January, 2003 National Geographic
magazine. It describes the infra-red picture on page 56, of an ice fisherman
wrapped in a "Polartec Heat Blanket." He's bright red against a dark blue
background. I entered that in a search engine, and came up with a short blurb
on the "Malden Mills Polartec Heat Blanket," Knowing how much John H. enjoys
his Chilly Vest, I thought this might be of interest to you frozen Least Coasters.
and Mid-Westerners, and give you a starting point. (Maybe coveralls ??)
Enjoy. Now................if they'd only make a refrigerated version for
us desert rats in the summertime.......................! ! !
Helpful Lar.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Mk-3 elevator trim |
Thanks Lar,
I got a drawer full of the kernies from my old Pterodactyl days and use them
on every cable end.
I checked the archives after my last post and Old Poops pretty much answered
my question.
I'm gonna set it so she pulls the wire tight on the first click, no spring
deflection with the lever full forward.
Be careful with some deflection on your springs with no back trim, you may
find yourself needing to hold forward stick pressure to keep Vamoose from
looping on ya, especially with that big honking engine behind your c/g.
Later,
Denny
----- Original Message -----
From: Larry Bourne <biglar(at)gogittum.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Mk-3 elevator trim
>
> For all the wire swaging, I went to the hardware store, and got some
> "kernies", to temporarily pre-tension the wires, and get an idea of how
they
> would work, before actual swaging. Kernie is a copper clamp with a screw
> in the side; meant to connect wiring - sort of an un-insulated wire nut.
> You'll quite often see them used to connect the ground wire of your house
to
> the ground rod. When you use them, just tighten down the screw enuf to
> hold the wires in position. If you clamp down too hard, you'll mash the
> wires, and possibly damage them. It's hard to remember that far back,
> :-) but seems to me I put some stretch in those trim springs with the
lever
> full forward. With the wires held by the kernie, you can pull back the
> lever, and see if you get elevator deflection. Lar.
>
> Larry Bourne
> Palm Springs, CA
> Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
> www.gogittum.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <rowedl(at)highstream.net>
> To: "kolblist"
> Subject: Kolb-List: Mk-3 elevator trim
>
>
> >
> > Kolbers,
> > I am about to swage the elevator trim cable at the cockpit end. I assume
> that with the elevator in the neutral position, and the trim lever full
> forward, the cable should be pulled taut with no spring deflection.
> > Is this what you Mk-3 drivers recommend?. If not, what is your method?
> > Thanks,
> > Denny Rowe
> > Mk-3 N616DR
> > 2SI 690L-70
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rwpike(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Mk-3 elevator trim |
That method has worked fine for me.
You are probably not ready for this yet, but when the time comes to rig for
your first flight, have your flaps and ailerons drooped just a bit. That
will make the stick feel a bit noseheavy and you will need a hair of up
elevator trim. ( A slightly noseheavy trimmed airplane is safer for the
first flight than one that has trimmed to act slightly tailheavy, because
if you get distracted, you don't want the nose easing it's way up, and the
airspeed dropping off unnoticed, and a slight droop in the wing control
surfaces will make it act noseheavy)
After you get a bit of time in it, then rerig the ailerons and flaps so
that it trims out neutral stick when you are solo, and the trim lever is
full forward.
Bear in mind that with the high thrust line, you may find that it takes a
bit of back trim cruising at 80% power, but wants to ease it's nose up when
cruising at 60% power, even with the trim lever full forward. That's when
you fine tune it with the flaps and ailerons to suit yourself.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>Kolbers,
>I am about to swage the elevator trim cable at the cockpit end. I assume
>that with the elevator in the neutral position, and the trim lever full
>forward, the cable should be pulled taut with no spring deflection.
>Is this what you Mk-3 drivers recommend?. If not, what is your method?
>Thanks,
>Denny Rowe
>Mk-3 N616DR
>2SI 690L-70
________________________________________________________________________________
I have sent some photos to the photo share of a Kolb. Does anyone know the owner
of model?
Paul Petty
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "boyd young" <by0ung(at)brigham.net> |
Maybe we better move it up a month,
forget about Sun and Fun, and do it in April
Wonder what the temps are in March? :-)
john h
cant say much for southern utah.... but in the north april can be quite cold...
and the early part of the month is the rainy season..... so if you are thinking
april thnk the end .... when i go out to the golden spike site on may 10
the temp can vary from 45 and rain to 75-80 and hot and dry..... nights are
always quite cold and i have seen the time where on may 10 we had 6 inches of
snow.... is your crystal ball better than mine??? also i thought that
to involve mothers day weekend in may, would end up getting some of us shot.
i will try to fine some average data for mid april to the end of may and then we
can decide based on the facts.
boyd
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Laird <rlaird(at)cavediver.com> |
| Subject: | N-numbered night cert? |
To those of you with N-numbered experimentals... The regs for the
Airworthiness Certificate for experimentals state that it's for "VFR, Day
Only." Does anyone know what it takes -- after I add navigation lights --
to have it changed to allow night flying?
-- Robert
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bruce McElhoe" <mcelhoe(at)cvip.net> |
| Subject: | Re: N-numbered night cert? |
Robert,
First, be sure your operating limitations say something like, "After
completion of phase 1 flight testing, unless appropriately equipped for
night and /or instrument flight in accordance with Section 91.205, this
aircraft is to be operated under VFR, day only." If they don't say
something similar, go back to the FSDO and have them changed.
If that is taken care of and you've completed phase 1, then simply comply
with the six requirements listed in 91.205(c), make a log-book entry, and
fly.
Check the regs for details.....basically they require position lights,
anti-collision light, adequate energy, and spare fuses.
Regards,
Bruce McElhoe FireFly #88
Reedley, Calif.
>
>
> To those of you with N-numbered experimentals... The regs for the
> Airworthiness Certificate for experimentals state that it's for "VFR, Day
> Only." Does anyone know what it takes -- after I add navigation lights --
> to have it changed to allow night flying?
>
> -- Robert
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Cottrell" <lcottrel(at)kfalls.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Extra fuel?? |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joel Reed" <jfreed(at)dejazzd.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: Extra fuel??
I have been thinking about how I can carry enough extra fuel to make a long
trip worth while and I have decided that I am going to add another facet
fuel pump, plumb a 5 gal plastic container lid with a pick up tube, run it
to the extra pump, run it to my first tank that is installed in the Kolb.
When the first tank gets close to empty, (I have a gage that will tell me
the level) turn on the extra pump and refill it while I am flying. When I
don't need it I can set it aside, plug the lines and forget about it.
Nothing permanent or in the way, but there when I need it. That should give
me a 250 mile range, or damn close to it. Investment about 35 bucks or less.
Larry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
Finished the seat and seat belt installation today, hope to mount the nose cone
and instruments tommorrow so I can get the enclosure popped together. Man do
those anodized floor pans look sweet!
Spent an hour this evening helping the gas company service guy thaw out our gas
regulator. This weather is horrible! 0 degrees F and expected to be -5 F by
morning.
I am so glad we have the wood burner to back up the gas furnace or we would have
been in real trouble tonight.
Did I mention my garage workshop is unheated? Neither rain nor snow nor COLD freaking
winters will keep this dude from finishing his Kolb by next month.
How about you Lar? :-)
Denny Rowe
Mk-3, 690L-70 South Western PA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bruce McElhoe" <mcelhoe(at)cvip.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Extra fuel?? |
Joel,
One of the tricks used around here to transfer fuel from a reserve tank to
the main tank is to simply blow in the vent on the reserve tank. Run a
long enough vent tube to reach your mouth. Simple....effective...takes
awhile though.
Regards
Bruce McElhoe FireFly #88
Reedley, Calif.
>
> Hello Fellow Kolbers,
> I just wanted to say thanks to those who shared their ideas with me on
how I could carry more fuel on my plane, I got more ideas than I had before
but I haven't quite decided yet. I am still pondering which would work for
the best for me.
> Thanks
> Joel Reed
> 84 Firestar
> Lancaster Co, Pa
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Neitzel" <neitzel(at)newnorth.net> |
Top of the morning from sub zero Wisconsin!
I have a concern about the trim system on my Mark III Classic. I fished through
the parts bin and located the springs that connect the trim lever to the elevator
bellcrank. They appear to be extremely strong springs for this application.
I can just barely pull one spring back by hand, much less two. I double
checked the springs against the plans and what I selected appears to be the
correct spring. It appears that the purpose of this spring system is to hold
the elevator in a neutral position at rest and apply back pressure to trim in
flight. With the springs supplied it would seem difficult to overcome this spring
tension. Has anyone else substituted lighter springs? I found a spring
that is quite a bit longer that not only eliminates the harness assembly but
balances the elevator and can easily be over powered with the application of down
elevator. Do these springs really have to be that heavy?
I also am wondering what kind of tension is applied to the elevator cables. If
mine are adjusted loose so the elevator moves freely the cables slap on the boom
tube. When I go tight enough to eliminate the slapping then there is a quite
a bit of stiffness in the system. With no cables attached everything moves
freely with no binding. Maybe a little slap is ok??
Another problem that I ran into was with the chokes (enricheners) on the 582.
With the stock springs above the enrichening valves I could not pull them on from
the cockpit. I substituted some weaker springs and WD-40ed the cables and
now I can operate the lever freely. Anybody else run into this problem? If
so what was your cure?
Also someone was concerned about powder coating on bolt shanks and in other areas
that it really shouldn't be. I discovered by accident that Acetone dissolves
power coating. It doesn't peel it up like a paint remover but after a brief
soaking it is softened enough so that gentle scraping will remove the unwanted
coating. Worked great on the bolts of the bellcrank and throttle. I took
a short length of plastic tubing and pinched one end closed with a pliers, added
a small quantity of Acetone then submerged the bolt. That way I could control
where solvent went.
Thank you all ahead of time. Sure enjoy the flow of information on this site.
Wood furnace is finally starting to take the bite out of the air so better get
busy.
Richard Neitzel Mark III Classic neitzel(at)newnorth.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rwpike(at)charter.net> |
>
>Top of the morning from sub zero Wisconsin!
>
>I have a concern about the trim system on my Mark III Classic. I fished
>through the parts bin and located the springs that connect the trim lever
>to the elevator bellcrank. They appear to be extremely strong springs for
>this application. I can just barely pull one spring back by hand, much
>less two. I double checked the springs against the plans and what I
>selected appears to be the correct spring. It appears that the purpose of
>this spring system is to hold the elevator in a neutral position at rest
>and apply back pressure to trim in flight. With the springs supplied it
>would seem difficult to overcome this spring tension. Has anyone else
>substituted lighter springs? I found a spring that is quite a bit longer
>that not only eliminates the harness assembly but balances the elevator
>and can easily be over powered with the application of down elevator. Do
>these springs really have to be that heavy?
Yep. You'd be amazed how much back pressure it takes when you have a big
passenger. Remember that all the useful load of people is ahead of the CG.
>I also am wondering what kind of tension is applied to the elevator
>cables. If mine are adjusted loose so the elevator moves freely the
>cables slap on the boom tube. When I go tight enough to eliminate the
>slapping then there is a quite a bit of stiffness in the system. With no
>cables attached everything moves freely with no binding. Maybe a little
>slap is ok??
Clang, bang - it's a MKIII all right...
>Another problem that I ran into was with the chokes (enricheners) on the
>582. With the stock springs above the enrichening valves I could not pull
>them on from the cockpit. I substituted some weaker springs and WD-40ed
>the cables and now I can operate the lever freely. Anybody else run into
>this problem? If so what was your cure?
Didn't notice a problem. If there is any leakage where the enrichners press
into their place, you will get extra fuel.
>Also someone was concerned about powder coating on bolt shanks and in
>other areas that it really shouldn't be. I discovered by accident that
>Acetone dissolves power coating. It doesn't peel it up like a paint
>remover but after a brief soaking it is softened enough so that gentle
>scraping will remove the unwanted coating. Worked great on the bolts of
>the bellcrank and throttle. I took a short length of plastic tubing and
>pinched one end closed with a pliers, added a small quantity of Acetone
>then submerged the bolt. That way I could control where solvent went.
>
>Thank you all ahead of time. Sure enjoy the flow of information on this site.
>
>Wood furnace is finally starting to take the bite out of the air so better
>get busy.
>
>Richard Neitzel Mark III Classic neitzel(at)newnorth.net
>
>
Help Stop Spam!
Delete all address information (especially mine) off everything you
forward, and make Blind Carbon Copy a way of life.
Thanks! And have a blessed day.
rp
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | NealMcCann(at)aol.com |
Hi guys,
On the issue of choke cables, etc....during some safety issue talks in our UL
flying club, some members advised us to use graphite or other means of
lubrication other than using WD 40. I think WD 40 is more of a water based
substance which could introduce freezing cables up in cold weather operation
and possibly rust in the future. I never used WD 40 but I flew on a cold
Sept. morning a few days after my FS II was out in the rain, and I had the
throttle stick wide open. I had to dead stick land since I had to kill the
ignition. I believe the moisture seeped into my cables (dual card 503) from
the previous rainfall and froze up during the flight. Anything like this
happen to anyone else.
Neal McCann
FSII 503
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
Richard,
I had the same problem with my enrichers on my 690, except I have three
carbs instead of two, I think a lot of the stiffness is due to the 180
degree turn in the cables between the carbs and the splitters. I also
installed lighter springs, but as Richard said, we will both have to watch
our EGTs for signs of leakage. The springs I used seem to be plenty heavy,
but time will tell the story.
On the trim problem, I have not flown mine yet but I also have double
springs, mine are 5.5 inches long between centers of bolt hole loops, .5
inches in coil diameter, and the wire cross section is a good 1/16 of an
inch thick. These are 1992 vintage Kolb springs. I do not seem to have
the drag in my elevator linkage that you have, my turnbuckles are cranked
pretty snug. I do not have the left side tail wires on right now
(stabilizer and elevator are setting on a stool) so I can't shake it to
check for slapping, I imagine it will with that small of clearance over the
length of the boom.
Wow building a Mark-3 classic in sub zero temps and wood heat, you would be
right at home at the Rowe house. :-)
Good luck,
Denny Rowe
Mk-3 N616DR Leechburg, PA
----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Neitzel <neitzel(at)newnorth.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: Trim system
> Richard Neitzel Mark III Classic neitzel(at)newnorth.net
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SGreenpg(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Preservation of two cycle engines |
Kolbers,
While looking for the root cause of the rod bearing failure on my, 210 hour
since new, Rotax 582 I would always get asked the same questions by the
service shops that I talked to. Did the engine set for long periods of time
without running it? Did you follow the preservation procedures? Probably
the longest the engine set without running was about a month. I accumulated
210 hours in 18 months. And no I didn't follow the preservation procedures.
The procedures in the operators manual say to inject approx. 3 cc of oil into
each carb. and then run at high idle for 10-15 seconds with the engine warm.
This is if not running for 1-4 weeks.
My solution, on the new engine, was to install a primer pump and connect the
discharge to the carbs where you would normally connect the primer and "teed"
into the oil line from the oil injection tank for the supply. The primer
pump displaces 2.5 cc per stroke so 2 full strokes and part of another just
before shutting down and that part of the preservation is done without
removing the air filters.
Steven Green
Mk III 211 hours
N58SG
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Preservation of two cycle engines |
hmmm....Well Steve, that suprises me...I mean when you said what all the
rotax service shops asked you.
If a fella has an engine and a rod bearing fails on a Honda GP engine, and
calls us, ( I work for Honda GP and industrial engine division).....The
first question we would ask is whas the possibility of an intermittant load
on the output side of the crank? Was it hookd up to a gearbox?..If so how
much lash was in the gears and if we found out it was on a ventalation fan
of some kind, (closest thing to an airplane Honda would approve) Then are
the blades turning in free air, with no obstacles to cause a pressure pulse
to be transmitted thru the crank. This particularly if the bearing looked
"hammered" apart...and not just simply overheated. This happens alot, and if
it came into question about warranty, then we would send some engineer out
(probably me if its in the midwest) and qheck the installation. If I saw the
same kind of config as we have on a Pusher aircraft installation, then I
would quickly examine the gearbox if there was one used...(Like we use on an
airplane) and If it was not tight as hell, with almost no lash, I would
blame the rocking motion on the load as the pressure pulses in the air
caused by the intake airflow disturbance as some air flows around the
obstacles and some air is "clean"....,, for the failure. I would say.."I'm
sorry sir, but warranty will not apply in this case".
Then if he asked me for some advice on how to keep it from happening again,
( this is assuming he would speak to me at all after the warranty
denial)...I would suggest a number of things that Might help.
1st....get a new gearbox,or overhaul the one you have and get it as tight as
possible before heat develops, and if there are none that are any better
than just about every gear reduction unit that I have EVER seen on a Rotax,
or a Hirth or a 2Si, or any like we must use in the Small plane biz, ......
then try a different drive...I always suggest a gates poly chain setup..( I
should get commission for gates as much as that comes up) for it is the best
economical "high Shock" power transfer I know of . Unless you can get away
with a v-belt.
2nd...try and clean up the "obstacles" and get as much of the airflow
entering the blades to do so at the same speed and the same direction.
3rd..run as long an extension on the shaft as you can to get the blades as
far away from the pressure differential as you can.
This scenario has been run many times in my biz.
I may be wrong, but as I look at our aircraft installations, I wonder if
this is why we see so much crankshaft and bearing failures, this coupled
with running our engines at over 100% duty cycle so much of the time by
governing the rpms with the load while maintaning wide open throttle is
awful tuff on em!
Don Gherardini
FireFly 098
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vincehallam(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Preservation of two cycle engines |
Getting V-belts tight enough to transmit the power withot slippage was a
problem I think .The side loads on the lay shaft caused bearing failures and
once per cycle bending loads [in the lay shaft].Gearboxes were always a
difficult area on real aircraft [oops] and required alot ofdevelopment for
each individual installation lockheed orions had big problems with props
flailing right off , Our bristol helicopters had their gearboxes
deliberately built out of line to a small degree to line up under nomal
loads.Inever did like the twin rotaxes they are so intolerant of anyhing
under 2500rpm on light load My own preference is forget lfocussing only on
theoretical efficiency ,save the weight,cost,hassle of the gearbox and
tallground or boom clearances ,pack in a wee bit more power usew direct
drive
[I await the deluge] vnz
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SGreenpg(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Preservation of two cycle engines |
Don,
I didn't mention that I was using a "C" gearbox which has a torsional
coupling between the crankshaft and gearbox.
Steven
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | tom sabean <sabean(at)ns.sympatico.ca> |
| Subject: | Fuselage Tube Alignment |
Listers,
When I installed the H-brace in the fuselage tube I followed the
instructions but when I fit the tube into the cage it appears not to be
lined up properly.
It almost looks like either the internal H-brace isn't exactly 90
degrees or the frame isn't square in the area of the bolt holes.
When I fit the bolt through it slides in until it gets to the opposite
side cage attachment point and hangs up there. It lines up vertically
but looks like it may be off approximately 1/8th of an inch in the
horizontal plane.
Anybody else run into this problem or have any suggestions.
Thanks,
Tom Sabean
Mark111xtra
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | [ Paul Petty ] : New Email List Photo Share Available! |
| From: | Email List Photo Shares <pictures(at)matronics.com> |
A new Email List Photo Share is available:
Poster: Paul Petty <ppetty@c-gate.net>
Subject: Kolb? Who When Model?
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/ppetty@c-gate.net.01.25.2003/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: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)sw.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuselage Tube Alignment |
> When I installed the H-brace in the fuselage tube I followed the
> instructions but when I fit the tube into the cage it appears not to be
> lined up properly.
> Tom Sabean
Tom/Gang:
Seems to be a common problem. I built three
different Kolbs and had similar problem with all
of them.
Here's what I did:
1. Try rotating tail boom 180 deg. If that
doesn' work, go to step 2.
2. Take an old 3/8", I think, bolt, grind a nice
bevel on the threaded end. Tap it through the
fuselage and "H" brace. Now, take the good bolt
and use it to back the old bolt out. Might also
use some persuasion, in the form of a two by four,
to lever the vertical tubes at the rear to the
cage. Usually, just a little help will do it.
When the 4130 fuselages are welded up, there is a
lot of movement as the tubes are welded, heated
and cooled. Impossible to get them to line up
perfectly all the time. This is also true of
smaller 4130 peices that are welded.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)sw.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuselage Tube Alignment |
> If its only
> 1/8 I would think that it would be safe to bore it out nicely.
Captain Ron
Ron/Gang:
Recommend you take a deeper look prior to
enlarging that hole to accept the "H" brace bolt.
To bore out the 3/8" hole to get the 1/8"
clearance you need would require a 1/2" bit.
I have to disagree on enlarging the hole to get
the bolt to align. The attachment at the "H"
brace on the tail boom is a critical load bearing
component on the fuselage and the "H" brace. Not
only does this fitting take a Hell of a beating in
the air, but even more so on the ground taxiing on
rough fields. Also gets loaded up pretty good
during trailering.
If you look back on the history of Kolb crashes
where a tail boom fails during the crash, it
always fails at the rear end of the "H" brace.
We need to be extremely careful handing out
information that deviates from the builder's
instruction manual.
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)sw.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuselage Tube Alignment |
> To bore out the 3/8" hole to get the 1/8"
> clearance you need would require a 1/2" bit.
> john h
Gang:
The above is wrong. Would take a 5/8 bit to get
the 1/8" side clearance on a 3/8" hole. I
theenk! Hell, what do I know. :-)
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
John was good enuf to post the pictures of Vamoose going for a truck ride
yesterday, so here they are. 3rd pic is the completed wings. Those of you
in the frozen east, might notice the background in the pic of the truck.
Gotta rub it in now, cause I'll be crying next summer.
GoGittin'em Lar.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)sw.rr.com>
Subject: Pics
> Lar:
>
> The 3 new pics of Vamoose are posted:
>
> http://home.sw.rr.com/jhauck/Flying%20Friends/
>
> I'll give you the privilege of posting them to the
> Kolb List.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuselage Tube Alignment |
I had the same problem, but not quite 1/8". Mine was hanging the bolt up
where it tried to come out from the steel H-brace thru the aluminum tail
boom wall. I took a round file, and gently took a little off one side on
the front of the hole, and a matching amount on the back side of the
opposite hole, rather than taking the whole 1/8" off of one side of the tail
boom. Also clean up the hole thru the H-brace, but be careful. Don't
remove a lot of metal on this critical component. Go a bit at a time with a
fine tooth file; it doesn't take much, and you'll hardly see the "ovalling"
on each side. It's still tight on the top and bottom, so I doubt if that
little bit would compromise strength. John's suggestion of turning the
H-brace 180 deg. is a good one. You can rotate it 180 deg in the tube, or
flip it end for end. Mine was way out one way, and only a little out the
other. Yours just might line up.................it's worth a try. My
H-brace was a little large for the tube, and I was scared to death of
scratches inside the tailboom. I used some Quick-Grip rubber faced bar
clamps, and squeezed the tube a little from top to bottom, and the brace
slid right in. It takes quite a bit of pressure - that tube is tough. Also
be sure to check the brace for rough spots that might cause those dreaded
scratches. It's gotta be SMooooothhh. Big Lar.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "tom sabean" <sabean(at)ns.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Kolb-List: Fuselage Tube Alignment
>
> Listers,
>
> When I installed the H-brace in the fuselage tube I followed the
> instructions but when I fit the tube into the cage it appears not to be
> lined up properly.
> It almost looks like either the internal H-brace isn't exactly 90
> degrees or the frame isn't square in the area of the bolt holes.
> When I fit the bolt through it slides in until it gets to the opposite
> side cage attachment point and hangs up there. It lines up vertically
> but looks like it may be off approximately 1/8th of an inch in the
> horizontal plane.
> Anybody else run into this problem or have any suggestions.
>
> Thanks,
> Tom Sabean
> Mark111xtra
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fuselage Tube Alignment |
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
1/25/03 13:47John Hauck
> We need to be extremely careful handing out
> information that deviates from the builder's
> instruction manual.
===========================
Since we are neat picking. :-)
I consider forcing one bolt out with another bolt to be a worse choice than
slightly boring out the cage chrom molly tube which is what I believe is the
problem. Here is why, by forcing the bolt through the holes the way you are
suggesting, you are introducing permanent stress point somewhere, most
likely right against the aluminium tube itself where the bolt is obviously
forcing itself through the tube. Will it crack there?? possibly,, depending
on the mis-alignment and the local area vibrations. I need to add that I
read his message differently than you have. You think its not going clear
through the tube, where I understood it to go clear through the tube but not
through the cage. If you would have read my message a bit more carefully you
would have understood that.
Again I stand by my advice for the problem as I understand it, and again
without being critical I may add that building a number of aircraft and all
of them potentially wrong, is not a qualification to offer advice based on
that. :-)
================
JH>>If you look back on the history of Kolb crashes
where a tail boom fails during the crash, it
always fails at the rear end of the "H" brace.
=================
Indeed, which supports my point that the H bracket bolt carry through area
is over built by a substantial margin. Also keep in mind that the load on
the Tube H bracket area is shared by both the Bolt and the inner ring, where
the bolt to a large extent is a pivot point for the load carried by the
inner ring. In other words the weakest area is exactly where you noticed it
is, and it will remain so even after you bore out the Chrome Molly down tube
a bit.
Build it the way you wanna... John.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Honda's for aircraft message of Fri, 24 Jan |
Mike,
I am of course talking about Honda 4 strokes...but generally my post was to
respond to what causes rod bearing failures in IC engines. I believe that
the problems we encounter in those typical vent fan installations might be
similiar however to aircraft installations. Also I should qualify my
predjudices. We design our engines to last for 2000 hours at 90% duty cycle.
(thats what the market demands) I swallow hard when I see all of my flying
friends, and myself, forced to overload the design parameters of the engines
we use and get lucky if we got more than 300 hours out of an engine on an
light aircraft.
Food for thought for all.....when an engine designed to run at 6500rpms max
sustained is loaded down to ..say 5850 rpms at wide open
throttle(WOT)....then it is considered to be running at 110% duty cycle.
6500x 10%=650rpms.......6500-650=5850.....
Now, from my expierience in a honda industrial engine(4stroke) when you run
it under this kind of load, the 2000 hour life is cut by 50% IF you can keep
it under max temp. If you cannot....life becomes very short. Its hard for me
to understand that the same is not true for our pet 2 strokes.
I make no claims as to being any kind of expert on a rotax or Hirth or 2si
or whatever , and have little personal expierience here.
I do observe a sport however (and also participate) in which i see engines
failing right and left at 200 to 300 hours due to crank and bearing related
failures, and I am only offering my thoughts and expieriences for all to
mull over, You see when one of my customers has bottom end failure at these
low times he most likely will never buy another one just like it...because
he has many other choices, but an Ultralighter has few, and most likely must
replace with another just like the one that just failed. (this probably
bothers me the most of all!)
And Rotax mandating a crank replacement at 250 hours or something like
that?...jeez, in my biz...we would be laughed right out of the country!
About the only thing I know for sure, is why thay make this
recommendation....They, like we at Honda, are very aware of the propeller
and its load impulses and the effect on a crankshaft these vibes have.
Now..on the trash pump and generator comparison....it is not valid. the
occasional rock or other sudden stoppage of a trash pump, if not bad enuf to
snap a crank or a rod...is much different than the air pressure differential
that happens every rpm 2,..3 , or 4 times per rev . this constant pounding
is usually what makes a well lubed rod bearing fail IF heat is NOT
determined to be the culprit.
However you bring to mind the application we HATE the most in my biz....the
high pressure washer!
this application has the Highest crankshaft failure rate in my
industry...regardless of engine manufacture!
It is commonly known in my biz that whatever engine you put on a pressure
washer....it will bring you the highest frequency of warranty claims.
Why?....because of the direct drive hookup, and the pulsating load of a high
pressure piston pump. These constant pulses cause more havoc than anything
else . from snapping of work-hardened, vibration -weakened cranks to
hammered rod bearing failures and similiar damage scenarios, even when
Love-Joy style(torsional vibe absorbing) connections are used.....again,
reminds me of the forces encountered on a prop/pusher airplane engine crank.
Any lash by the way in the gearbox would not be the source of the
problem...just a magnifying component.
Steve, I am not trying give you an analysis of your failure, only describing
some expieriences that might possibly give you some insight , because I, as
I suspect you, dont buy that preservation procedure stuff one bit!
You mentioned that you had a C-box with the built-in torsion coupler. thats
good, but it only means that if the problem was infact determined to be the
above "speculation"...then it most likely would have only failed sooner
without it. I have pressure washer manufacturer customers that install over
size torsional isolating couplers to battle this constant problem....it
helps...but seldom eliminates.
Mike...quote...."sounds like Honda is under engineered in this
area"........grrrrrrrrrrrrrrr, you trying to get me going pard ??????/
LoL.....hehe
its cold in Illinois men, cant work on my plane, and I only offer thoughts
here....no solutions!
Don Gherardini
FireFly 098
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Honda's for aircraft message of Fri, 24 Jan |
Don, It is fruitless to try to defend your Honda ( or any other ) engines
here on the list, because everyone believes that the engine they are using
at the present is the only one that is worth a damn. Having said that, I
truly do believe Honda could make a very good engine for our aircraft, if
they just would. .. Its called liability and they are not willing to take
the chance.... They did in 41 and lost..
Richard Harris
MK3 N912RH
Lewisville, Arkansas
>
> Mike,
> I am of course talking about Honda 4 strokes...but generally my post was
to
> respond to what causes rod bearing failures in IC engines. I believe that
> the problems we encounter in those typical vent fan installations might be
> similiar however to aircraft installations. Also I should qualify my
> predjudices. We design our engines to last for 2000 hours at 90% duty
cycle.
> (thats what the market demands) I swallow hard when I see all of my
flying
> friends, and myself, forced to overload the design parameters of the
engines
> we use and get lucky if we got more than 300 hours out of an engine on an
> light aircraft.
> Food for thought for all.....when an engine designed to run at 6500rpms
max
> sustained is loaded down to ..say 5850 rpms at wide open
> throttle(WOT)....then it is considered to be running at 110% duty cycle.
> 6500x 10%=650rpms.......6500-650=5850.....
> Now, from my expierience in a honda industrial engine(4stroke) when you
run
> it under this kind of load, the 2000 hour life is cut by 50% IF you can
keep
> it under max temp. If you cannot....life becomes very short. Its hard for
me
> to understand that the same is not true for our pet 2 strokes.
>
> I make no claims as to being any kind of expert on a rotax or Hirth or 2si
> or whatever , and have little personal expierience here.
> I do observe a sport however (and also participate) in which i see engines
> failing right and left at 200 to 300 hours due to crank and bearing
related
> failures, and I am only offering my thoughts and expieriences for all to
> mull over, You see when one of my customers has bottom end failure at
these
> low times he most likely will never buy another one just like it...because
> he has many other choices, but an Ultralighter has few, and most likely
must
> replace with another just like the one that just failed. (this probably
> bothers me the most of all!)
> And Rotax mandating a crank replacement at 250 hours or something like
> that?...jeez, in my biz...we would be laughed right out of the country!
> About the only thing I know for sure, is why thay make this
> recommendation....They, like we at Honda, are very aware of the propeller
> and its load impulses and the effect on a crankshaft these vibes have.
> Now..on the trash pump and generator comparison....it is not valid. the
> occasional rock or other sudden stoppage of a trash pump, if not bad enuf
to
> snap a crank or a rod...is much different than the air pressure
differential
> that happens every rpm 2,..3 , or 4 times per rev . this constant
pounding
> is usually what makes a well lubed rod bearing fail IF heat is NOT
> determined to be the culprit.
>
> However you bring to mind the application we HATE the most in my
biz....the
> high pressure washer!
> this application has the Highest crankshaft failure rate in my
> industry...regardless of engine manufacture!
> It is commonly known in my biz that whatever engine you put on a pressure
> washer....it will bring you the highest frequency of warranty claims.
> Why?....because of the direct drive hookup, and the pulsating load of a
high
> pressure piston pump. These constant pulses cause more havoc than anything
> else . from snapping of work-hardened, vibration -weakened cranks to
> hammered rod bearing failures and similiar damage scenarios, even when
> Love-Joy style(torsional vibe absorbing) connections are used.....again,
> reminds me of the forces encountered on a prop/pusher airplane engine
crank.
> Any lash by the way in the gearbox would not be the source of the
> problem...just a magnifying component.
>
> Steve, I am not trying give you an analysis of your failure, only
describing
> some expieriences that might possibly give you some insight , because I,
as
> I suspect you, dont buy that preservation procedure stuff one bit!
> You mentioned that you had a C-box with the built-in torsion coupler.
thats
> good, but it only means that if the problem was infact determined to be
the
> above "speculation"...then it most likely would have only failed sooner
> without it. I have pressure washer manufacturer customers that install
over
> size torsional isolating couplers to battle this constant problem....it
> helps...but seldom eliminates.
>
> Mike...quote...."sounds like Honda is under engineered in this
> area"........grrrrrrrrrrrrrrr, you trying to get me going pard ??????/
>
> LoL.....hehe
>
> its cold in Illinois men, cant work on my plane, and I only offer thoughts
> here....no solutions!
>
> Don Gherardini
> FireFly 098
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rwpike(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | 110% duty cycle? |
Excellent food for thought here, and I want to ask you a "What if."
I have been in the habit of adjusting my prop so that I get 6500 rpm (more
or less) at full throttle in level flight. Therefore on take off and climb
out, I am getting about 6000-6200 rpm, or on hot summer days, about
5900-6000 rpm at full throttle, so that puts me within your 110% duty cycle
scenario.
"What if" you pull the throttle back a bit so that the engine drops back
just enough rpm's to notice, say 50 or 100 rpms less, the throttle being
retarded probably about 20% of it's throw. Is the engine now back within
it's normal duty cycle, and the 5800 rpm load is at 80% -90% of it's duty
cycle or some where similar? Explain this for us non professional types,
because this could be important in terms of longevity.
Thanks,
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>Mike,
>
>Food for thought for all.....when an engine designed to run at 6500rpms max
>sustained is loaded down to ..say 5850 rpms at wide open
>throttle(WOT)....then it is considered to be running at 110% duty cycle.
>6500x 10%=650rpms.......6500-650=5850.....
>Now, from my expierience in a honda industrial engine(4stroke) when you run
>it under this kind of load, the 2000 hour life is cut by 50% IF you can keep
>it under max temp. If you cannot....life becomes very short. Its hard for me
>to understand that the same is not true for our pet 2 strokes.
>
>Don Gherardini
>FireFly 098
>
>
Help Stop Spam!
Delete all address information (especially mine) off everything you
forward, and make Blind Carbon Copy a way of life.
Thanks! And have a blessed day.
rp
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | WhiskeyVictor36(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: 110% duty cycle? |
In a message dated 01/25/2003 11:34:49 PM Eastern Standard Time,
rwpike(at)charter.net writes:
> I have been in the habit of adjusting my prop so that I get 6500 rpm (more
> or less) at full throttle in level flight. Therefore on take off and climb
> out, I am getting about 6000-6200 rpm, or on hot summer days, about
> 5900-6000 rpm at full throttle, so that puts me within your 110% duty cycle
>
> scenario.
> "What if" you pull the throttle back a bit so that the engine drops back
> just enough rpm's to notice, say 50 or 100 rpms less, the throttle being
> retarded probably about 20% of it's throw. Is the engine now back within
> it's normal duty cycle, and the 5800 rpm load is at 80% -90% of it's duty
> cycle or some where similar? Explain this for us non professional types,
> because this could be important in terms of longevity.
> Thanks,
> Richard Pike
> MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
Me not a rocket scientist, so more food for thoughts. You get 6500 rpm at
wot level flight. During climb you get 6000~6200 rpm because of prop load on
engine. If reduce throttle, but maintain previous climb speed, load not
reduced. Seems engine would still be in %110 range.
What if you lower the nose, climb at higher air speed, maybe returning to
6300~6400 rpm. Would this lower the duty cycle to say 100% or so?
Bill Varnes
Kolb FireStar
Audubon NJ
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 110% duty cycle? |
Richard, you are right on track pard!...at least with my treatment of my
engines...all of them, on my Garden tractor...and my 2 stroke ultralights.
Engine Longevity is exactly what at stake here, nothing else i care about.
Here are some pretty normal design parameters for IC engines in our world.
Automotive(Car)....25%to 35% duty cycle will give the manufacturer a
lifetime that will equal current warranty periods for the average target
market. Your car will run....lets say, 100 mph flat out. The engine is at
100% duty cycle if it is approaching max rpms at that speed. If you ran it
at that speed all the time, it wont last the 5 years or 50,000 miles that
the manufacturer warranties it for...not by a long way. Remember how long
that car lasted that 18 year old All- American lead footed boy? ( anybody
remember him?..hehe!)
Now that that kid is an ole fart..he easily gets over a hundred tho from his
cars because he drives them at the speed limit alot more often that not.
todays high torque lower rpm designs are operating at 10 % duty cycle in
overdrive on the highway, So thus is how the entire industry designs IC
engines, So YES, as someone said a post or 2 back, it has everything to do
with warranty. And all of Hondas best competitors design engines with the
same priorities. (If they dont we dont consider them a competitor).
back to design parameters...
Automotive..(heavy truck)....65 to 75% dutycycles
Aircraft 4 cycle gas........80 to 90 %DC...for as many hours as Man. rec.TBO
times
General purpose consumer gas (governed) 500 to 1500 hours at 80%duty cycle
Industrial Gasoline. (governed) 2500 hours at 80 to 85% DC
Industrial Diesel (governed) 3000 to 10000 at 85 to 100% DC
Consumer string trimmer( that walmart cheapie)...25 to 50 hours at 80% DC
Pro chainsaw (not the "pro" model at Walmart) 1000 hours at 100% DC
Recreational Motorcycle...25 to 35%DC
Recreational Snowmobile..25 to 35%DC
Recreational Marine........40% to 60%DC anywhere from 500 to 2500 hours
(lotsa market variations here)
Now you fellas know where most of us Kolber's fall with 2 strokes....we do
not have a single 2 cycle engine designed for us from the major
manufacturers like Rotax, Hirth, 2si ..etc... What we have are very slightly
modified recreational snowmobile ant watercraft engines to attempt to
lengthen their miserably short lives at the duty cycle we ask of them. And
this industry is struggling with that goal, as we all can easily see.
Unfortuneatly the market is so small that no major is going to consider us
for along time. Someone said that Honda is never gonna run the liability
risk....well thats only partly correct...it is always a risk VS gain factor
it.
For instance, if I come and see you Richard because you wanna use a Honda
engine on generators that you build, if we dont have one that fits your
machine just right in production, and you need a slight variation, lets say,
an airfilter on the other side...or a different crankshaft to base
height...just a modification of an exsisting model..NOT a new design
altogether...then I would need a purchase order for a minimum of 10,000
engines to get them to consider doing it for you. In the Entire ultralight
engine industry there are barely 10000 engines sold a year in the world...by
all manufacturers combined.
I dont want to get to far off track here men but here is my cyrstal ball
prediction for us all.
Then day that 2 cycle snowmibile and PWC engines are outlawed , which as
many know has already begun, with the banning in many Gov rec aeras of 2
cycles, is the last day that any of us will be able to buyb a Rotax 2 cycle
UL engine. The board of directors at Bombadier will take one look at the
small market that the airplane guys give em...and with no other market for
these babies...BOOM....production will cease. Ive been in this biz
everysince a couple a years after I graduated Spartan, with an A&P ticket
and an ASSoc. degree, when I found I needed a better living that i was gonna
get in a dieing aircraft industry, that was almost 25 years ago ,and I
wouldnt give a nickel for the chances of this not happening.
So back to you "what if"question, which you probably already have figgered
out, the engine is not gonna go to 1000 hours or whatever it was designed to
last at 30 % DC in a snowmobile....but the life will increase dramatically
with the throttle limiting the rpms when they drop below max...not the load.
The key to your question is..How much is the throttle reduced exactly...if
20 % of its throw, and the rpms stay at max for instance, then it might be
as low as 75 to 85% DC area, if the Throttle is reduced 20% and the rpms are
reduced say...by 50 or 100 rpms...this is very good....it indicates the
engines is handleing the load pretty easy.
Cooling and EGT factors come in to play to come up with a duty cycle
estimate, this can be tricky with 2 strokes, but the main thing is by
reducing the throttle then BMEP (brake mean effective pressure) is
reduced...call it cylinder/combustion pressure...and thus the engine is not
working as hard. Remember not to judge a throttle opening by the throw on
the operators end tho...slack in cables and linkages and such might change
the relationship to the actual opening....remember where this setting is and
then when you are on the ground,,,engine off...simply set the throttle there
and take a look at the opening thru the filter...or in the case of a
metering rod and butterfly...judge the lever on the butterfly and the height
of the rod.
Also , as Bill has described, unloading the engine by letting the nose down
and letting the rpms comeup at WOT is EASIER on the engine. When that prop
is pitched to limit the rpms at the recommended maximum , it is 100%
dutycycle....climbing out reduces the rpms but increases the BMEP...and
therefore increases the duty cycle above 100%. THe main misunderstanding
most people have is that pitching the prop to limit the rpms down to ..say
5500 or so at WOT is easier on the engine..it is NOT.
Don Gherardini
FireFly 098
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 110% duty cycle? |
In a message dated 1/25/03 11:34:52 PM Eastern Standard Time,
rwpike(at)charter.net writes:
>
>
> Excellent food for thought here, and I want to ask you a "What if."
>
> I have been in the habit of adjusting my prop so that I get 6500 rpm (more
> or less) at full throttle in level flight. Therefore on take off and climb
> out, I am getting about 6000-6200 rpm, or on hot summer days, about
> 5900-6000 rpm at full throttle, so that puts me within your 110% duty cycle
>
> scenario.
> "What if" you pull the throttle back a bit so that the engine drops back
> just enough rpm's to notice, say 50 or 100 rpms less, the throttle being
> retarded probably about 20% of it's throw. Is the engine now back within
> it's normal duty cycle, and the 5800 rpm load is at 80% -90% of it's duty
> cycle or some where similar? Explain this for us non professional types,
> because this could be important in terms of longevity.
> Thanks,
> Richard Pike
> MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>
>
> >
> >Mike,
> >
> >Food for thought for all.....when an engine designed to run at 6500rpms
> max
> >sustained is loaded down to ..say 5850 rpms at wide open
> >throttle(WOT)....then it is considered to be running at 110% duty cycle.
> >6500x 10%=650rpms.......6500-650=5850.....
> >Now, from my expierience in a honda industrial engine(4stroke) when you
> run
> >it under this kind of load, the 2000 hour life is cut by 50% IF you can
> keep
> >it under max temp. If you cannot....life becomes very short. Its hard for
> me
> >to understand that the same is not true for our pet 2 strokes.
> >
> >Don Gherardini
> >FireFly 098
>
Good question Mr Pike, I have a problem with the 110% duty cycle senario as
well as I KNOW that HP or power is a product of Torque times Speed times a
constant.....if the prop is pitched too high, the torque required to reach a
certain speed is too high for the engine at hand, therefore the HP is less
than 110% in my book. As a matter of fact it is less than 100% as the hi
pitched prop would not allow the engine to come up to speed due to too much
torque loading.
well......., that's the way I look at it anyway.
George Randolph
Firestar driver from Akron
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Airgriff2(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Fuselage Tube Alignment |
Tom, Just went through all of what you are now, this past summer, helping out
a friend. According to Kolb, it is perfectly ok to elongate the fuselage
holes, (in your case),one side, 1/16" forward and 1/16" to rear on the other
side.
Fly Safe
Bob Griffin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)sw.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 110% duty cycle? |
> THe main misunderstanding
> most people have is that pitching the prop to limit the rpms down to ..say
> 5500 or so at WOT is easier on the engine..it is NOT.
>
> Don Gherardini
Don/Gents:
Good morning! Still cold in Alabama, but not as
cold as it has been. Only 34F at 0830.
I certainly agree with your last sentence and
always have. That is why I prop my airplanes and
my boat the same way: Pitch to bump the redline
at wide open throttle (WOT), straight and level
flight. With my ground adjustable prop I get the
best climb and cruise performance. Doesn't matter
whether it is 2 or 4 cycle engine.
Worst thing in the world for an engine is to
hammer it down, i.e., overpitch.
The above applies to gasoline as well as Diesel
engines. I used to think Diesels liked to get
lugged down until they stalled, but found out they
are just like most other engines. They have an
operational rpm they like to operate in and it is
not below their max torque producing rpm.
I personally believe the ultralight industry is
providing engines that the customer demands. They
know that the average ultralight probably never
sees more than 100 hours, some 200 hours, and a
few might make it over 300 hours. What is Rotax
TBO on their 2 cycle crank shafts? 300 hours.
Dangerous trying to think and type before I finish
my first cup of coffee. hehehe
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 110% duty cycle? |
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
1/26/03 7:39GeoR38(at)aol.com
> I have a problem with the 110% duty cycle senario as
> well as I KNOW that HP or power is a product of Torque times Speed times a
> constant.....if the prop is pitched too high, the torque required to reach a
> certain speed is too high for the engine at hand, therefore the HP is less
> than 110% in my book.
===============================
I agree. I wanted to stay out of it but since you brought it up I might as
well chime in.
I think he needs to define for us his defifnition of Duty Cycle before I buy
into his analysis. If 100% of Hp is 6200 rpms, by definition anything less
than 6200 rpms at max torque is less than 100% output. If one climbs and his
engine is at 5800 rpms than he is only getting 58/62= 93% of his engin's HP.
On a 65 hp rotax that would work out to .93(65)= 60.45 of his engines
available HP. How does he get 110% duty cycle in his example does not seem
to be mathematically possible.
I think we need his definition of a Duty Cycle. So far the claim defies
logic. :-)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerb <ulflyer(at)airmail.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 110% duty cycle? |
Don,
What is your back ground. This is the first time I've heard this 110%
thing in the years of being on several list.
I know my mode of operation is to back power down a little once I gained a
couple hundred feet but in my case I have plenty of power. I have my 447
engine propped to give me around 6000-6100 RPM on takeoff climb which turns
about 5900 on static test with tail tied down. It is the compromise
between good climb and good cruise.
jerb
>
>Excellent food for thought here, and I want to ask you a "What if."
>
>I have been in the habit of adjusting my prop so that I get 6500 rpm (more
>or less) at full throttle in level flight. Therefore on take off and climb
>out, I am getting about 6000-6200 rpm, or on hot summer days, about
>5900-6000 rpm at full throttle, so that puts me within your 110% duty cycle
>scenario.
>"What if" you pull the throttle back a bit so that the engine drops back
>just enough rpm's to notice, say 50 or 100 rpms less, the throttle being
>retarded probably about 20% of it's throw. Is the engine now back within
>it's normal duty cycle, and the 5800 rpm load is at 80% -90% of it's duty
>cycle or some where similar? Explain this for us non professional types,
>because this could be important in terms of longevity.
>Thanks,
>Richard Pike
>MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>
>
> >
> >Mike,
> >
> >Food for thought for all.....when an engine designed to run at 6500rpms max
> >sustained is loaded down to ..say 5850 rpms at wide open
> >throttle(WOT)....then it is considered to be running at 110% duty cycle.
> >6500x 10%=650rpms.......6500-650=5850.....
> >Now, from my expierience in a honda industrial engine(4stroke) when you run
> >it under this kind of load, the 2000 hour life is cut by 50% IF you can keep
> >it under max temp. If you cannot....life becomes very short. Its hard for me
> >to understand that the same is not true for our pet 2 strokes.
> >
> >Don Gherardini
> >FireFly 098
> >
> >
>
>
>Help Stop Spam!
>Delete all address information (especially mine) off everything you
>forward, and make Blind Carbon Copy a way of life.
>Thanks! And have a blessed day.
>rp
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack & Louise Hart <jbhart(at)ldd.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 110% duty cycle? |
Don,
A few comments interspersed below.
>
>Cooling and EGT factors come in to play to come up with a duty cycle
>estimate, this can be tricky with 2 strokes, but the main thing is by
>reducing the throttle then BMEP (brake mean effective pressure) is
>reduced...call it cylinder/combustion pressure...and thus the engine is not
>working as hard.
The Rotax 447 minimum throttle opening was at 40% when the engine was propped to
top out at 6,000 rpm. When the prop pitch was increased to limit the engine
to 5,600 rpm the minimum throttle position was less than 40%. So less fuel is
being burned and yes the BMEP goes down, and the engine is not working as hard.
But more importantly, bearing and ring life will be extended too. If on
assumes the BMEP are the same for both rpms, the number of bearing/crank hammering
and crank torsional impulses goes down by 400 per minute and so extends the
fatigue life of both bearings and crank. A belt reduction system also helps
to reduce engine crank torsional vibration. But the greatest improvement is
that the crank throw radial bearing load increases with the square of the rpm
decrease. See Tinkem calculation at the bottom of:
http://www.thirdshift.com/jack/firefly/victor_fuel.html
>Remember not to judge a throttle opening by the throw on
>the operators end tho...slack in cables and linkages and such might change
>the relationship to the actual opening....remember where this setting is and
>then when you are on the ground,,,engine off...simply set the throttle there
>and take a look at the opening thru the filter...or in the case of a
>metering rod and butterfly...judge the lever on the butterfly and the height
>of the rod.
I mounted a simple throttle position indicator on the FireFly so that I could determine
throttle position relative to engine speed and prop settings. What I
found was that with the Bing, the engine is operating off the idle, throttle
valve cutaway, and needle jet ranges. The engine cannot pump enough air to ever
get into the main jet region of fuel flow control. It can be seen at:
http://www.thirdshift.com/jack/firefly/firefly58b.html
>
>Also , as Bill has described, unloading the engine by letting the nose down
>and letting the rpms comeup at WOT is EASIER on the engine. When that prop
>is pitched to limit the rpms at the recommended maximum , it is 100%
>dutycycle....climbing out reduces the rpms but increases the BMEP...and
>therefore increases the duty cycle above 100%. THe main misunderstanding
>most people have is that pitching the prop to limit the rpms down to ..say
>5500 or so at WOT is easier on the engine..it is NOT.
May be the trick here is to not use WOT. Open the throttle to the minimum position
that gives max rpm and no further. In the case of the Rotax 447 that position
was no greater than 40% and with the Victor 1 the position is no greater
than 20% (uses the same Bing carburetor). If the EGTs are good at these throttle
position, there is no need to open the throttle further for engine cooling
purposes. Further enrichment (WOT) of the mixture will only be a waste of fuel
and may even reduce the BMEP. The only way the BMEP can increase is if one
can get more air/fuel mixture into the cylinder. In the case of the prop limited
engine, one can get additional fuel but not the air, so combustion becomes
less efficient, combustion temperatures and pressures fall and loads on the
bearings and crank fall.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Jackson, MO
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart(at)ldd.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 110% duty cycle? |
George, and Capt Ron,
The term Duty Cycle as designated as a % Has nothing to do with % of max
Horsepower men. It is used as an indicator as to how long an engine(or
component) will last at the work (duty) being preformed.
The factors in rating duty cycle are several.
For instance how long a connecting rod will last with(how many cycles) lets
just use this example so this post wont be so long.
Q. At what rpm is the maximum pressure applied to the rod?
A. At the rpm where the highest Volumetric effiency occurs.
Q. How can we find this rpms level?
A. It will be the level of peak torque on the curve. Here the BMEP will be
the highest, and VE( volumetric effeicency) is highest, and likely is not at
max rated rpm.
Q.why is the horspower peak not at this point?
A. because Torque is a measured unit and HP is calculated (not measured)
with a time factor added .(and the HP formula sometimes subject to marketing
influeces not relating to engineering values!, particularly in todays
market) Not All manufacturers use Watts hp formula anymore....dont get me
started down that road....
OK...we have established that the most force will be applied to the rod when
the cylinder pressure is the highest...thays is pretty straight forward.
now...how long do we WANT it to last? Herein is the Term Duty cycle's reason
for being. So an engineer on a design Team can decide on just how strong of
a rod to make and just how good of a bearing to request from his vendor. The
market will require the Duty Cycle or the product will not be saleable.
Now, as we all understand he engine being an air pump...and lets just pull a
number out of the hat and say that the max volumetric effiecency(cylinder
filling ability) of an engine is 70 %. This number will occur at a narrow
rpm level and any level above or below it will decrease the VE number. This
is where the engine "likes to breathe" as that all american hot rod boy
would say. The only way to decrease the BMEP at this rpm level is to
restrict the filling ability further....and as Jack mentioned...lower the
throttle. THen BMEP will go down.
If running at this level and the load overcomes the torque, then the BMEP
goes up further at WOT due to increased load. Think of a Hydraulic
cylinder....without the load, there is no pressure. as the load goes up, so
does the pressure. This will give an aproximation of the concept. Not quite
just the same, because we have compressable fluids here...but you get the
idea. LOAD increases BMEP. Here is where you now have that 110% factor.
Other varibles are the ability of the engine to remove the heat....keep
bearings oiled..and so on that can be factored as coeffiecients Capt Ron if
you are looking for the logic in the Math. So they wont be the same for all
engines do to different factors here. That Liquid cooled Diesel ....or maybe
even that 682 compared to that 503 and 447 will have a coefiecient here much
better due to the liquid cooling. A 2 cycle, because of the heat removing
qualities of the Fuel ratio, is sensitive to this as we all know how fast
the temps go up my doing nothing to the load but just adjusting the air/fuel
ratio's.
I have read in previous post's about temps going up when throttles are
lowered. Well I am not sure but I would think that this is a function of a
carburator not maintaining a consistant ratio at different settings. but
thats a tangent...
Capt Ron, you are correct when you say that anything less than 100%hp/ rpm
level ..is .less output. But this is not related weather or not that engine
is "loaded and on its knees" do to the Load it is incurring.
Remember spark knock in your car when you mashed the throttle at low rpms
and it went away as you let off?
It is always blamed on low octane right?...well...low octane for the BMEP is
more specific and letting off the throttle decreases this pressure...and
knock goes away. these are related things. Like John posted, driving your
truck around in 5th at 25mph is a really good illustration of overloading an
engine at less than 100% hp/rpm. And of course he is right...it wont last
long thatway!
And Finally...Jerb, you ask about my backround...well, I'm just a dumb ole
farm boy who got his A&P ticket in the early 70's along with a commercial
multi rating and an engineering degree...who left the industry not long
after because it looked like it was gonna die, became a weedhopper dealer in
1979 (the first one east of the Mississippi my old buddy John Chotia told me
when I sighed on) I have been in the Engine biz one way or another my whole
life...went to Sweden as a young engineer and was employed on a design team
to develop a 2 cycle powered pole saw....entered into engine and equipment
sales from there....and I was Hired 12 years ago by Honda engine division as
the midwest USA rep. I handle all the OEM accounts in my territory as far as
supply and service education and....well...I got plenty to do lets just say.
I have been married to the same gal for 25 years and I have 2 grown kids
whom I am ashamed of about half the time, but I still luv em, and when I
think back of all the hot-roddin and engine building that my son and I have
done from go-karts to motorcycles to alcohol burnin open class pulling
tractors, I am proud that we spent that time together..but I wish he would
have learned more!....what else ya wanna klnow?....I aint lookin fer work an
no ya cant marry me!
Don Gherardini
FireFly 098
terrible how windy a fella gets when the snow is canopy deep aint it!
Have a good SuperBowl Sunday men.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 110% duty cycle? |
Jack, I am not sure I understand your previous post completly..but to sounds
to me like you are hitting around the fuel saving techniques that lindberg
came up with and taught the pilots of ww 2, and are still practiced
today...and yes...if we had an inflight adjustable prop....which it looks
like affordable ones are about here...then we would have just what we
need....have you been looking at Ivos new Inflight adjustable ? could be the
answer to the range we all desire!
Don
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 110% duty cycle? |
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
Ok here is the definition for duty cycle and a nice concise explanation.
It still does not explain your prior claim of lower RPM means higher duty
cycle. Point of fact placing the following definition next to your prior
claim shows exactly the opposit. :-)
""" duty cycle
Duty cycle is the proportion of time during which a component, device, or
system is operated. The duty cycle can be expressed as a ratio or as a
percentage. Suppose a disk drive operates for 1 second, then is shut off for
99 seconds, then is run for 1 second again, and so on. The drive runs for
one out of 100 seconds, or 1/100 of the time, and its duty cycle is
therefore 1/100, or 1 percent.
The more a circuit, machine or component is used, the sooner it will wear
out. Therefore, the higher the duty cycle, the shorter the useful life, all
other things being equal. If the above-mentioned disk drive has a life
expectancy of 1,000,000 hours based on a 1 percent duty cycle, that same
device's expectancy would probably be about 500,000 hours based on a duty
cycle of 2 percent, and 2,000,000 hours based on a duty cycle of 0.5
percent."""""""""
In other words, it would be best if you would go revisit your math and enter
the proper correction. Afterwhich if you would like we can continue on the
rest of your scenario.
===================================
1/26/03 12:25Don Gherardini
>
> George, and Capt Ron,
> The term Duty Cycle as designated as a % Has nothing to do with % of max
> Horsepower men. It is used as an indicator as to how long an engine(or
> component) will last at the work (duty) being preformed.
> The factors in rating duty cycle are several.
> For instance how long a connecting rod will last with(how many cycles) lets
> just use this example so this post wont be so long.
>
> Q. At what rpm is the maximum pressure applied to the rod?
> A. At the rpm where the highest Volumetric effiency occurs.
>
> Q. How can we find this rpms level?
> A. It will be the level of peak torque on the curve. Here the BMEP will be
> the highest, and VE( volumetric effeicency) is highest, and likely is not at
> max rated rpm.
>
> Q.why is the horspower peak not at this point?
> A. because Torque is a measured unit and HP is calculated (not measured)
> with a time factor added .(and the HP formula sometimes subject to marketing
> influeces not relating to engineering values!, particularly in todays
> market) Not All manufacturers use Watts hp formula anymore....dont get me
> started down that road....
>
> OK...we have established that the most force will be applied to the rod when
> the cylinder pressure is the highest...thays is pretty straight forward.
> now...how long do we WANT it to last? Herein is the Term Duty cycle's reason
> for being. So an engineer on a design Team can decide on just how strong of
> a rod to make and just how good of a bearing to request from his vendor. The
> market will require the Duty Cycle or the product will not be saleable.
>
> Now, as we all understand he engine being an air pump...and lets just pull a
> number out of the hat and say that the max volumetric effiecency(cylinder
> filling ability) of an engine is 70 %. This number will occur at a narrow
> rpm level and any level above or below it will decrease the VE number. This
> is where the engine "likes to breathe" as that all american hot rod boy
> would say. The only way to decrease the BMEP at this rpm level is to
> restrict the filling ability further....and as Jack mentioned...lower the
> throttle. THen BMEP will go down.
>
> If running at this level and the load overcomes the torque, then the BMEP
> goes up further at WOT due to increased load. Think of a Hydraulic
> cylinder....without the load, there is no pressure. as the load goes up, so
> does the pressure. This will give an aproximation of the concept. Not quite
> just the same, because we have compressable fluids here...but you get the
> idea. LOAD increases BMEP. Here is where you now have that 110% factor.
> Other varibles are the ability of the engine to remove the heat....keep
> bearings oiled..and so on that can be factored as coeffiecients Capt Ron if
> you are looking for the logic in the Math. So they wont be the same for all
> engines do to different factors here. That Liquid cooled Diesel ....or maybe
> even that 682 compared to that 503 and 447 will have a coefiecient here much
> better due to the liquid cooling. A 2 cycle, because of the heat removing
> qualities of the Fuel ratio, is sensitive to this as we all know how fast
> the temps go up my doing nothing to the load but just adjusting the air/fuel
> ratio's.
> I have read in previous post's about temps going up when throttles are
> lowered. Well I am not sure but I would think that this is a function of a
> carburator not maintaining a consistant ratio at different settings. but
> thats a tangent...
>
> Capt Ron, you are correct when you say that anything less than 100%hp/ rpm
> level ..is .less output. But this is not related weather or not that engine
> is "loaded and on its knees" do to the Load it is incurring.
> Remember spark knock in your car when you mashed the throttle at low rpms
> and it went away as you let off?
> It is always blamed on low octane right?...well...low octane for the BMEP is
> more specific and letting off the throttle decreases this pressure...and
> knock goes away. these are related things. Like John posted, driving your
> truck around in 5th at 25mph is a really good illustration of overloading an
> engine at less than 100% hp/rpm. And of course he is right...it wont last
> long thatway!
>
> And Finally...Jerb, you ask about my backround...well, I'm just a dumb ole
> farm boy who got his A&P ticket in the early 70's along with a commercial
> multi rating and an engineering degree...who left the industry not long
> after because it looked like it was gonna die, became a weedhopper dealer in
> 1979 (the first one east of the Mississippi my old buddy John Chotia told me
> when I sighed on) I have been in the Engine biz one way or another my whole
> life...went to Sweden as a young engineer and was employed on a design team
> to develop a 2 cycle powered pole saw....entered into engine and equipment
> sales from there....and I was Hired 12 years ago by Honda engine division as
> the midwest USA rep. I handle all the OEM accounts in my territory as far as
> supply and service education and....well...I got plenty to do lets just say.
> I have been married to the same gal for 25 years and I have 2 grown kids
> whom I am ashamed of about half the time, but I still luv em, and when I
> think back of all the hot-roddin and engine building that my son and I have
> done from go-karts to motorcycles to alcohol burnin open class pulling
> tractors, I am proud that we spent that time together..but I wish he would
> have learned more!....what else ya wanna klnow?....I aint lookin fer work an
> no ya cant marry me!
>
> Don Gherardini
> FireFly 098
> terrible how windy a fella gets when the snow is canopy deep aint it!
>
> Have a good SuperBowl Sunday men.
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 110% duty cycle? |
In a message dated 01/26/2003 11:16:59 AM Eastern Standard Time,
CaptainRon(at)theriver.com writes:
>
>
> 1/26/03 7:39GeoR38(at)aol.com
>
> >I have a problem with the 110% duty cycle senario as
> >well as I KNOW that HP or power is a product of Torque times Speed times a
> >constant.....if the prop is pitched too high, the torque required to reach
> a
> >certain speed is too high for the engine at hand, therefore the HP is less
> >than 110% in my book.
> ===============================
>
> I agree. I wanted to stay out of it but since you brought it up I might as
> well chime in.
>
> I think he needs to define for us his defifnition of Duty Cycle before I
> buy
> into his analysis. If 100% of Hp is 6200 rpms, by definition anything less
> than 6200 rpms at max torque is less than 100% output. If one climbs and
> his
> engine is at 5800 rpms than he is only getting 58/62= 93% of his engin's
> HP.
> On a 65 hp rotax that would work out to .93(65)= 60.45 of his engines
> available HP. How does he get 110% duty cycle in his example does not seem
> to be mathematically possible.
>
> I think we need his definition of a Duty Cycle. So far the claim defies
> logic. :-)
>
with ya 100% capt Ron, this is exactly the way I look at it as well, but I
think electrically instead of mechanically so the definitions may be the
clinker here. I am looking at his Duty Cycle like "service factor" marked on
the nameplate of electric motors and that may be wrong IAW his definition of
Duty Cycle.
The only way I was aware that the HP could be exceeded was by use of a
Resonant chamber connected to the exhaust ( which I'm sure gave Cuyunna a bad
name as many of their engines had them even though the pilots KNEW that it
was a risk to firewall them for too long....shoot....I did it myself in my
old pterodactyl and ended up listening to the silence before forced landing
one day! ).
I must admit, however, I really do not have a clue why the EGT's go up when
you unload after a steep climb....well, I have a clue, but it may not be
correct...namely that the carburator is automatically leaner at 3/4 throttle
than at 100% throttle....dunno bout this for sure, but I try never to run at
3/4 thottle too long...but I watch the egt's like a hawk anyway.
George Randolph
George Randolph
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rwpike(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | 110% duty cycle vs manifold pressure |
Something that I think is being overlooked in this whole question about
prop pitch vs RPM's vs load vs 110% duty cycle is that the aviation
community has been dealing with this situation for many years and it is
called manifold pressure.
When you fly an aircraft with a constant speed prop, you decide what
manifold pressure you want to fly it at, and once you are up at altitude
you adjust the prop pitch and throttle to give you a certain manifold
pressure at a certain rpm, such as "23 squared", 2,300 rpm at 23" of
manifold pressure or some such similar value.
We do not have constant speed props, but we have ground adjustable props,
(or Ivo inflight adjustables) and we can come up with the same results
through a more tedious method. Why would it not be valid to install a
manifold vacuum gauge (JC Whitney sells them for $9) and then through trial
and error determine how to juggle pitch, throttle setting and rpm to give
you a "happy engine?" Just because we do not use constant speed props does
not change anything. We are arguing about the exact issue that complex
aircraft use manifold pressure gauges to resolve, the inter relationship
between prop pitch, throttle setting, and rpm's.
It seems to me that getting the desired cruise speed at an rpm that you &
the engine are happy with (somewhere between 5,000 and 5,800, depending on
your prejudices and preconceived notions) at the lowest reasonable manifold
pressure (determined by trial and error, in the case of Rotax 2-strokes)
would give the best possible service life out of the engine, and most
economical fuel burn.
Or am I missing something?
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "abbygirlk9" <abbygirlk9(at)netzero.net> |
| Subject: | Just a bit nippy... |
Hey list, I wanted to write & encourage you builders out there especially if you
need a shot in the arm to keep plugging away with that Kolb project. A few
months back Big Lar reported taking a ride with George Thompson in his Firestar
II and scouting the area north of Prescott, AZ looking for critters and such.
Well I did the same last Saturday and it was a needed infusion to remind
me of why I was making a career out of building a plane and a trailer to put it
in.....it was great to finally take a hop in the same plane that I have been
constructing for the past 2 years. After reading Big Lar's post about his hop
(and seeing the pictures) I decided to ask George for the same .....yaa, what
a cool ride (actually about 35 degrees) in very calm & clear air. George's
FS II was rock stable and flew hands off, now that's what I want! The point of
course is that sometimes a person needs more than just reading the list for
a boost - - get a ride and experience the Kolb, and for some it may be for the
first time.
Stephen Feldmann
Glendale, AZ
Firestar II 400+ hours in construction so far
Firestar II custom trailer nearly done after 6 months
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)sw.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 110% duty cycle? |
> I was wondering where this thread was going........ Your explanation is
> exactly what I am experiencing now. My 503 is pitched to WOT at 6400 and I
> have been thinking about taking it to 6800 just as you said and now I will.
> Jeff
Jeff/Gang:
I should have included this with my previous
post. Max continuous power red line for the two
strokes is 6,500 rpm. Prop it to bump 6,500 rpm
WOT straight and level flight. If you prop it for
6,800 rpm you will be too lightly pitched, lose
cruise, and your EGTs will run higher.
IIRC (if not somebody will correct me) static rpm
should be 6,200 to 6,300 to get 6,500. Depends on
what prop you are using too. But that will put
you in the ball park.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed Bonsell" <ebonsell(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Fuselage tube / wing brace alignment |
Hi Friends,
I just got back on the list. This is my first post after getting off last spring.
I have an 86 firestar I flew around eastern Pennsylvania for 12 or 13 years
before it was partially damaged in a hanger fire. Most of the damage was to the
fabric. I have been too busy to work on it during the spring, summer, and fall.
Last year I decided to build a new set of wings using the 7 rib version
instead of the 5 ribs in the original wing.
First I must say I bought the kit from the original Kolb company in Pa. All the
parts and fittings were welded pretty much true and square and I had no trouble
aligning the H sections in the wing or fuselage tube. How ever this wasn't
the case when I got new parts. The first problem I had was with the H sections
for the wings. I drilled the bolt holes and 4 holes to line up the rivets in
the wing tube, first spending hours making sure they were perfectly lined up.
When I put the H sections in position the bolt holes were so far off they couldn't
be used. I ended up sending them back and asking for a pair that were square.
The second pair came ok.
So, the problem I'm having now.
I just tried to temporarily assemble the right inboard wing rib, wing tube, and
diagonal brace to see how everything was going to line up. Well, they don't.
It looks like the rib is not square. Looking from the front it seems to curve
in toward the root tube as it goes back toward the rear spar. The tube that holds
the rear spar tilts up so that when you slip the rear spar over it, it will
not run parallel to the main tube without tension on it. And the diagonal brace,
made to the correct length is now too short to line up at the correct place
at each end.
So now what, Anybody have any strait inboard wing ribs for a firestar lying around?
Then again maybe I'll start looking for a mark II instead.
Ed Bonsell
Ft. Washington Pa
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Just a bit nippy... |
Good for you, Steve. I can see where George could become needed therapy
for jaded builders. (And what a great area for flying. Did you see
antelope ??) That ride was definitely a factor in jump-starting the ol'
Lar into getting moving again. GoGittin' Lar. Do
not Archive.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "abbygirlk9" <abbygirlk9(at)netzero.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: Just a bit nippy...
>
>
> Hey list, I wanted to write & encourage you builders out there especially
if you need a shot in the arm to keep plugging away with that Kolb project.
A few months back Big Lar reported taking a ride with George Thompson in his
Firestar II and scouting the area north of Prescott, AZ looking for
critters and such. Well I did the same last Saturday and it was a needed
infusion to remind me of why I was making a career out of building a plane
and a trailer to put it in.....it was great to finally take a hop in the
same plane that I have been constructing for the past 2 years. After
reading Big Lar's post about his hop (and seeing the pictures) I decided to
ask George for the same .....yaa, what a cool ride (actually about 35
degrees) in very calm & clear air. George's FS II was rock stable and flew
hands off, now that's what I want! The point of course is that sometimes a
person needs more than just reading the list for a boost - - get a ride and
experience the Kolb, and !
> for some it may be for the first time.
>
>
> Stephen Feldmann
>
> Glendale, AZ
>
> Firestar II 400+ hours in construction so far
>
> Firestar II custom trailer nearly done after 6 months
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
A couple of weeks ago, I promised to send some pics of my fuel tank installation
to a List member. Now, I can't find the message. Sorry for my bad memory,
but Who Did I Promise ??? Confuzzled Lar. Do not
Archive.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack & Louise Hart <jbhart(at)ldd.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 110% duty cycle? |
>So you retard the throttle, the load on the prop goes down because you have
>quit climbing, you are now running on a combination of main jet and needle
>jet/jet needle, and depending on what combination of those you have, and
>what notch the clip is in, your egt's can go up or down.
>
Richard,
If you are basing this on a Rotax 2-cycle engine I do not believe "you are now
running on a combination of main jet and needle jet/jet needle" is correct for
5800 rpm. Such a statement assumes that the carburetor is sized correctly for
the engine and that when the engine is operating at top speed the throttle is
close to or wide open.
Earlier, I bought into the "how it works" Bing explanation, but then one day I
asked my self, "Why is the 447 reaching top rpm and the throttle is not close
to being wide open. That is when I made my throttle position indicator. What
I found out is that the Bing 54 carb was greatly oversized for the engine. In
my case, the 447 was running at max speed at 40% open throttle with acceptable
EGTs. This means that main jet has little to no effect in controlling engine
speed. To open the throttle further, will raise the needle and richen the
fuel mixture, and this will lower EGTs.
But if you tune for acceptable EGTs at WOT, the reverse will happen. The carburetor
is oversized, the main jet is ineffective, and so you have artificially
lowered the needle at WOT to get acceptable EGTs. After climb out you start to
reduce the throttle. In my case one has to move from 100% to less than 40%
before there is any change in the rpm. But the needle has dropped 60% with out
an rpm change and in doing so, leans out the air/fuel mixture. As result, the
EGT's float up at an alarming rate. To recover and prevent overheating, one
has two options. One can close the throttle to the 20% region to let the throttle
valve cutaway portion take over, or to advance the throttle again.
The only way out of this dilemma, is to tune for good/desired EGTs with the throttle
opened to the minimum position where engine rpm tops out at the desired
prop limited rpm. Then when the throttle position is reduced the air and fuel
are both reduced and EGT's remain stable if the needle has the correct taper.
Again, I refer you to:
http://www.thirdshift.com/jack/firefly/firefly58b.html
One must remember the Bing chart is only true if the engine and carburetor sizes
are perfectly matched. This is not the case. Therefore, one must think in
the reality of how the engine will operate if an over sized carburetor is installed.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Jackson, MO
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart(at)ldd.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)sw.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 110% duty cycle? |
> Why egt's go up
> after you level off, is strange and I cannot off hand see the reason for it
> except if when you level off unloading the prop you also increase your rpm.
> Now if I am told that you climb at 5800 and you level off at 5800
> and you still have a rise in egt *all else remains constant*, then its just
> magic. (and I don't believe in magic) :-)
Ron/Gang:
Lotta magic in two smokes.
I am not an engineer. Discovered what little I
know about two smokes by using and experimenting
with them. Did a lot of flying back in the early
days of ultralighting. Much more than I do
today. Back when every flight was a test flight.
Discovered that loading and unloading the prop on
a two stroke changed EGT while playing around with
the Ultrastar. Finally, tied that in with
different pitch settings. We did not have the
convenience of ground adjustable props in those
days. Had to decide on the prop to use, usually a
two blade fixed pitch wooden prop. If it was
wrong, too much pitch, we could trim the tips to
unload it. If it was too light, we had to save
our pennies and buy another prop. Balancing props
was a contant. They never stayed balanced,
especially if you flew a lot of cross countries
and the airplane sat in the open.
Two and four stroke engines are two completely
different animals. Can not treat them the same
and they do not perform and react the same way.
Once you think you understand the two stroke, it
will do something else to get your attention.
Sorta like a piss ant kid that won't behave.
The 912S has proven to be an engine that has been
easy to get along with. Just turned 401 hours on
it yesterday afternoon. It is predictable and has
never required any carb jetting or needle
changes. I did not have an EGT with the previous
912 (1135 hrs) or this engine. Carbs are as they
left the factory with minor idle mixture changes
and synchronization. Has performed well from
extremely high temps to well below freezing and
from below sea level to 13,500 feet above.
However, I had the advantage of experience and
problems with the 912 to prevent the same problems
with the 912S. Both engines like to run warm.
Cylinder head temps at least 180F. It is
mandatory to keep the engine oil at or above 190F
in order to burn off condensation and solvents in
the oil system. During my first flight to Alaska
I encountered temps in the 40s and 50s in British
Columbia for the first time. Not knowing much
about the 912 I had a hard time determinining what
all my problems were. They were engine heat/cold
related, but I was getting indications that it was
fuel mixture related. Spark plugs were black as
soot. The following winter in Alabama, where I
could experiment more comfortably in the comfort
of my own AO (area of operation), I fould that
bringing cyl head temps up to at leat 180F and
raising the fuel needles one notch would solve my
midrange cruise power problems.
The four stroke does not care if the prop is
loaded or not. The two stroke does. Since fuel
plays a large part in cooling both the air and
liquid cooled two stroke, she is normally happy
until she gets really rich, then usually shuts
down. How do I know this? Had a main jet mixture
control on the Cuyuna ULII02. If it was set a
hair overrich it would should down as soon as the
engine got to a good operating temp or about 100
feet AGL. The four stroke will keep trying to run
even when she is bogging down in an over rich
condition.
Lean out the two stroke and she will put out a lot
more power, but shortly will burn a hole in the
top of the piston or sieze. Amazing how much
power they put out just prior to seizure.
Two strokes should be flown WOT on take off. WOT
the engine is running entirely on the main jet.
Need extra fuel to help cool it. After reaching
cruise altitude, come back on the power into a
very lean condition. The engine is now running on
the needle and needle jet. If everything is just
right there will be a big temperature spike when
the throttle is retarded to cruise power. That is
when my 582 seized, within a second or two of
retarding power. No warning, no nothing. Like I
had an engine brake. I could have probably gotten
around the problem by retarding power more
slowly. I don't really know.
Anyhow, two strokes are good engines. They are
not fuel efficient. They are designed to turn
high rpm. They need a lot of fuel to help cool.
If you fly a lot of hours you can make up the
difference in purchase price over a two stroke by
the fuel, oil, and spark plugs you save with a
four stroke. At over haul time, that is a
different story, but probably come out pretty
close. The 582 would reach 4 TBOs by the time the
912/912S reach one.
If I was a local flyer that did not put many hours
on an ultralight or light plane I would definitely
go with the two stroke.
Not asking anyone to agree or disagree with what I
have shared with you. None of it came out of a
book or off a chart or graph. It came from
everyday playing around with the engines and
airplanes. Doing one thing to see what the result
would be. Making a lot of mistakes, bad
decisions, in order to learn about my hobby. Take
it or leave it.
Ron, I think the reason EGT goes up when unloading
a two stroke is because it breaths better and the
increase in air intake leans out the mixture.
Just the opposite for loading the engine. RPM
slows down, less air injested, mixture is richer.
Nature of the beast.
Just my thoughts and experience. Thinking out
loud again............
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kirk Smith" <snuffy(at)usol.com> |
| Subject: | Dallas Shephards crash |
Something I had thought appropriate to mention about Dallas Shephards crash but
had forgotten. He had mentioned that the fuel was leaking from the the vents
on his tanks and dripping on him . He also mentioned that he couldn't reach the
master switch and I forgot the reason for that. I think it may have been a blessing
that he couldn't reach it. If the the switch was carrying current the
opening of the switch would have caused a spark to occur between the contacts.
CRS snuffy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bruce McElhoe" <mcelhoe(at)cvip.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 110% duty cycle? |
John,
Just a note to say how much I appreciate your contributions to the Kolb list
....and to my own flying pleasure. Your cross-country adventures lend a lot
of
credibility to your comments.
We recently completed our FireFly, and have about six hours of total time.
There have been some confusing suggestions about setting our prop
pitch.....Your recent comment makes the most sense to me....so, we have set
our prop for red-line rpm at WOT. Our EGTs are in the green in all flight
regimes. Wow!, what great performance we get....we have no desire to "back
off" (as long as we stay within allowable temperatures).
Regards,
Bruce McElhoe FireFly #88
Reedley, Calif.
>
> The Rotax engines are set up at the factory to be
> propped to bump the red line, WOT straight and
> level flight. They are jetted for this profile.
> The prop must be pitched to match the profile.
> If the engine is pitched correctly, there is no
> need to play swapping games with jets, spark plugs
> or anything else. In addition, you have the best
> of two worlds with a non-inflight adjustable
> prop: Best climb and cruise.
>
> Carb jetting and profile is also a major factor in
> changing EGT. That is why it is important to
> monitor EGT and stay out of those zones that tend
> to lean out the engine and raise EGT.
>
> Works for me....................
>
> john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 110% duty cycle? |
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
Well I am kinda getting bored with this subject Old Boy.
But I'll make some additional observations, and then off I go to make a
buck.
first I do have some familiarty with 2 cycle motors and in many ways I see
them as a much less complex machine than the 4 cycle version.
See John I have been messing around with those contraptions mostly in the
theoretical part since I was 8 years old. Just say for lack of better stuff
to read. :-)
My hope was that from my last post the understanding would be that the key
to the rise in egt had nothing to do with jets, magic, ballony, or Santa,,
but **everything to do with looking at you tach when you level off**. I
guess next time I should spell it out.
So next time John wheather you are in your Rotax 912 chariot or a lowly 2
cycle one, **do** notice that if you turn level from a climb without
adjusting either your prop or throtle your EGT's **will go higher**. It has
to do with thermo dynamics John, and not the Easter Bunny!
And now I am going to let that castrated old bull alone. :-)
========================================================
1/27/03 9:13John Hauck
>
>
>> Why egt's go up
>> after you level off, is strange and I cannot off hand see the reason for it
>> except if when you level off unloading the prop you also increase your rpm.
>
>> Now if I am told that you climb at 5800 and you level off at 5800
>> and you still have a rise in egt *all else remains constant*, then its just
>> magic. (and I don't believe in magic) :-)
>
> Ron/Gang:
>
> Lotta magic in two smokes.
>
> I am not an engineer. Discovered what little I
> know about two smokes by using and experimenting
> with them. Did a lot of flying back in the early
> days of ultralighting. Much more than I do
> today. Back when every flight was a test flight.
>
> Discovered that loading and unloading the prop on
> a two stroke changed EGT while playing around with
> the Ultrastar. Finally, tied that in with
> different pitch settings. We did not have the
> convenience of ground adjustable props in those
> days. Had to decide on the prop to use, usually a
> two blade fixed pitch wooden prop. If it was
> wrong, too much pitch, we could trim the tips to
> unload it. If it was too light, we had to save
> our pennies and buy another prop. Balancing props
> was a contant. They never stayed balanced,
> especially if you flew a lot of cross countries
> and the airplane sat in the open.
>
> Two and four stroke engines are two completely
> different animals. Can not treat them the same
> and they do not perform and react the same way.
> Once you think you understand the two stroke, it
> will do something else to get your attention.
> Sorta like a piss ant kid that won't behave.
>
> The 912S has proven to be an engine that has been
> easy to get along with. Just turned 401 hours on
> it yesterday afternoon. It is predictable and has
> never required any carb jetting or needle
> changes. I did not have an EGT with the previous
> 912 (1135 hrs) or this engine. Carbs are as they
> left the factory with minor idle mixture changes
> and synchronization. Has performed well from
> extremely high temps to well below freezing and
> from below sea level to 13,500 feet above.
>
> However, I had the advantage of experience and
> problems with the 912 to prevent the same problems
> with the 912S. Both engines like to run warm.
> Cylinder head temps at least 180F. It is
> mandatory to keep the engine oil at or above 190F
> in order to burn off condensation and solvents in
> the oil system. During my first flight to Alaska
> I encountered temps in the 40s and 50s in British
> Columbia for the first time. Not knowing much
> about the 912 I had a hard time determinining what
> all my problems were. They were engine heat/cold
> related, but I was getting indications that it was
> fuel mixture related. Spark plugs were black as
> soot. The following winter in Alabama, where I
> could experiment more comfortably in the comfort
> of my own AO (area of operation), I fould that
> bringing cyl head temps up to at leat 180F and
> raising the fuel needles one notch would solve my
> midrange cruise power problems.
>
> The four stroke does not care if the prop is
> loaded or not. The two stroke does. Since fuel
> plays a large part in cooling both the air and
> liquid cooled two stroke, she is normally happy
> until she gets really rich, then usually shuts
> down. How do I know this? Had a main jet mixture
> control on the Cuyuna ULII02. If it was set a
> hair overrich it would should down as soon as the
> engine got to a good operating temp or about 100
> feet AGL. The four stroke will keep trying to run
> even when she is bogging down in an over rich
> condition.
>
> Lean out the two stroke and she will put out a lot
> more power, but shortly will burn a hole in the
> top of the piston or sieze. Amazing how much
> power they put out just prior to seizure.
>
> Two strokes should be flown WOT on take off. WOT
> the engine is running entirely on the main jet.
> Need extra fuel to help cool it. After reaching
> cruise altitude, come back on the power into a
> very lean condition. The engine is now running on
> the needle and needle jet. If everything is just
> right there will be a big temperature spike when
> the throttle is retarded to cruise power. That is
> when my 582 seized, within a second or two of
> retarding power. No warning, no nothing. Like I
> had an engine brake. I could have probably gotten
> around the problem by retarding power more
> slowly. I don't really know.
>
> Anyhow, two strokes are good engines. They are
> not fuel efficient. They are designed to turn
> high rpm. They need a lot of fuel to help cool.
>
> If you fly a lot of hours you can make up the
> difference in purchase price over a two stroke by
> the fuel, oil, and spark plugs you save with a
> four stroke. At over haul time, that is a
> different story, but probably come out pretty
> close. The 582 would reach 4 TBOs by the time the
> 912/912S reach one.
>
> If I was a local flyer that did not put many hours
> on an ultralight or light plane I would definitely
> go with the two stroke.
>
> Not asking anyone to agree or disagree with what I
> have shared with you. None of it came out of a
> book or off a chart or graph. It came from
> everyday playing around with the engines and
> airplanes. Doing one thing to see what the result
> would be. Making a lot of mistakes, bad
> decisions, in order to learn about my hobby. Take
> it or leave it.
>
> Ron, I think the reason EGT goes up when unloading
> a two stroke is because it breaths better and the
> increase in air intake leans out the mixture.
> Just the opposite for loading the engine. RPM
> slows down, less air injested, mixture is richer.
> Nature of the beast.
>
> Just my thoughts and experience. Thinking out
> loud again............
>
> john h
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)sw.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 110% duty cycle? |
> Jack, I seem to remember quite awhile back someone on the list stating
> that our engines were originally designed for snowmobiles and watercraft
> and turned in the neighborhood of 8000 rpm,s then derated or detuned for
> our use and redlined at 6800 rpm. Could this be part of the problem with
> throttle settings? Just a thought.
>
> Jack Carillon Firestar II 503
Jack C/Gang:
I realize you addressed your comment to Jack Hart,
but I would like to also reply to it.
True, our two stroke engines evolved from hobbies
other than flying. But that has been many years
ago. I am thinking about cleaning out 20 years
worth of aviation mags that I have collected since
I got started in civilian aviation, primarily
ultralights. In those stacks of mags somewhere is
an article about Eric Tucker, Big Daddy of Rotax.
IIRC it was when he was in the process of
configuring Rotax snow machine engines for use in
ultralights. Probably 1983 or 84. These engines
were not only derated from a much higher HP
application, but also engineered to work in a
continuous duty environment with a prop hung on
the end of it.
They have come a long way since then. But one
thing has not changed since the last time I flew a
two stroke. That is where the engine comes up on
the pipe. In the area of 5,200 to 5,500 rpm. Two
strokes don't have valves and camshafts like four
strokes. They rely on other methods to get the
job done. We have straight piston port engines
like the 447 and 503. Intake and exhaust timing
is controlled by the position of the ports in the
cylinder. We have rotary valve and piston port
timing in the 532 and 582, and we have reed valves
in conjunction with piston port timing in the
engine that Jack Hart is experimenting with. On
top of that, the exhaust system is used to enhance
performance, which is usually in a much narrower
band in the two stroke, than the four stroke. In
a 447 you can feel it "come on the pipe" at
5,200-5,500 rpm. From there to 6,500 rpm is the
power band. It is where it wants to run. I doubt
we get any more power out of it after 6,500 to the
6,800 red line. That's why I came back yesterday
and recommended pitching for 6,500 instead of
6,800. That's it gents. That is where the Rotax
engineers tuned all their two strokes to perform,
after it comes up on the pipe. Before it comes up
on the pipe it is not getting much benefit out of
the exhaust system/expansion chamber or its
piston/ports and valves (if it has them). It was
not designed to. It is the nature of the engine.
When the engine is propped and operated as the
engineers intended it to be operated, there is no
problem with EGT, fouled plugs, or lack of power
and longevity. When we try to re-engineer the two
strokes to make them do what they were not
designed to do, we get into a grey area where only
true adventurist (dare devils???) should roam.
Screw with the way they were designed to operate
and they will come back in an instant to bite you,
usually with little or no warning.
The beauty of the two stroke is instant overhaul.
Can do one in a day.
If they went to nicoseal or some other coated
cylinder instead of the cast iron liner, might
make for a better engine. We just had a 4 stroke
thumper cylinder recoated at Langcourt in Auburn,
AL. This is part of a company out of Great
Britain. Cost to bring the cylinder back to new
specs was $149.95. That process would take care
of scored cylinders caused by stuck rings and
seizures. If the damage got worse than that, they
can weld them up, then recoat. Do beautiful work.
Again folks, these are my own ideas, thoughts, as
they come spewing forth after two trips to the big
city of Montgomery today and a pot of coffee.
Take what you want and leave the rest. If it
bores you, hit the delete key. If you are that
smart and been around that long, I probably don't
have much to offer you anyhow.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ZepRep251(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Fuselage tube / wing brace alignment |
Ed, they sent me Firefly inner wing rib for one sideof my firestar.Big
difference so far as drag strut alignment goes.You might check for that.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 110% duty cycle? |
Jack C....I dont know about the rest of the engines...but I have an old
Snowmobile out in the barn with a dual carb point ignition 503 in it. Still
runs jus fine too...tach shows redline of 6500. I also used to have a 440
scorpion with a Cayuna in it, and it also was a 6500rpm redline on the tach.
Don
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 110% duty cycle? |
In a message dated 1/27/03 9:33:37 AM Eastern Standard Time,
rwpike(at)charter.net writes:
>
> However, if you are climbing at 5800, and then lower the nose without
> touching the throttle, the rpm's will rise, the engine will unload, and the
>
> egt's will rise also, but the situation has not remained constant because
> the rpm's have risen. The egt's rise because rpm's have gone up -with an
> associated increase in airflow- without a change in fuel flow.
> (Despite any claims to the contrary, I have yet to see a light plane prop
> for our size aircraft that was truly constant speed. The rpm's always
> change with load)
>
> Richard Pike
> MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
But you didn't say the punchline Richard...namely that the increase in
airflow with no increase in fuel flow constitutes leaner mixture. The only
thing that blows my mind is ....why can you say that the fuel flow has
remained the same....doesn't the carburator automatically keep the mixture
the same? I thought that was the function of it.
George Randolph
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Terry" <tswartz(at)hydrosoft.net> |
| Subject: | 110% duty cycle? |
Richard,
I question the constant fuel flow statement. Since the fuel is sucked from
the carb bowl through the main jets by the venturie (sp?) principle, I think
that the fuel flow would increase with the increased air flow through the
venturie. More air flow, more suction. The idle circuit works on intake
vacuum.
Terry
But at any point along the way, air flow volume is determined by the
position of the slide and the rpm of the engine. If the throttle is set at
75%, and you are in level flight, let's say you are chugging along at 5,800
rpm. Drop the nose, unload the prop, and the rpm climbs to 6,000. Airflow
volume increases with rpm's, (the engine is a pump) but fuel flow remains
constant, the position of the slide has not changed, and the mixture is
leaned out.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 110% duty cycle? |
Richard, You I want to say that I agree completly with your understanding of
the fact that no mechanical or vacuum operated carb does a perfect job in
maintaining a constant ratio of fuel/air at a wide range of rpms. The
varible venturi carb,,(slide), was a large improvement in this area when it
was developed, but it s not perfect. The trouble is when the rpms change,
and the manifold vacuum accordingly, the speed of the air thru the venturi
changes and the fuel pulled thru the main jet (due to the vacuum of the
venturi effect) does not remain constant. The decreasing size of the
Venturi by way of the slide going down helps to keep the velocity up at
reduced rpms, and the needle attemptes to regulate/match the fuel flow, but
it virtually impossible to keep it as close as a 2 cycle requires to
maintain a constant EGT. Then...we add pressure/altitude differences to the
problem and it becomes even more impossible. As we all know, Carburators
have been pretty well abandoned in the engine industry and replaced by
computer controlled Fuel Injection to rectify this problem.
Vacuum diaphram carbs are the closest thing you will be able to find that
will do the best job here, as they keep the venturi size regulated according
to the manifold vacuum. In other words....when at a low rpm/high load, and
the throttle is opened up (IN a butterfly or a cable slide carb)...the
Airflow slows thru the carb...and less fuel is pulled thru the jet creating
a very lean ratio. A vacuum controlled slide will not do this, for it will
keep the venturi size small enough to keep the velocity of the air high
enough to keep pulling fuel thru the jet.
Jack.....when i read some of the data you have collected on throttle setting
and temps and rpms.....the first thing that I wonder is what kind of venturi
control the carb had. Was it a manual cable operated slide?..(which I
suspect by the data) .or a vacuum controlled slide? I ask this only because
I have had similiar expierience on trying to accurately size a carb to a 2
stroke and the load and rpm range the job requires. It IS difficult ,
particularly when the rpm range required is large! Your data kind of reminds
me of that situation we had way back in attempting to design a piston ported
2 cycle powered hydraulic power supply. We ended up going with a much
smaller carb and sacrificing top end power to get a wider , more
controllable curve. The deal was kind of similiar to an aircraft prop
installation, in as the engine was under load from the start. The smaller
carb kept the mix rich enough through out the required range and prevented
the previous lean siezures we had that came from a cold start and quick
opening of the throttle causeing the fuel to just about cease to flow thru
the jet!......YEs..it was all about warranty!....couldnt release the product
untill we couild prove to the accountants that the warranty claim frequency
would be in the acceptable range for the predicted market share!
Don
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack & Louise Hart <jbhart(at)ldd.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 110% duty cycle? |
>
>Jack.....when i read some of the data you have collected on throttle setting
>and temps and rpms.....the first thing that I wonder is what kind of venturi
>control the carb had. Was it a manual cable operated slide?..(which I
>suspect by the data) .or a vacuum controlled slide?
Don,
You guessed correctly.
I am beginning to wonder if the addition of a booster bottle to the intake manifold
may help smooth an engine at the lower end. I have taxied back to the hangar
and when I put the FireFly away I have discovered gas dripping from the air
cleaner. If one runs the engine with the air cleaner off, one can see the
a mist of gas flying out of the carburetor at certain speeds. This indicates
that intake resonance and intake port closing is causing reverse flows which are
sucked back into the carburetor. This may explain why I see such high flow
rates at the lower engine speeds. The same air is passing through the venturi
three times and so the fuel flow doubles and triples at those speeds.
These bottles are used on model airplane engines, motorcycles, etc. and the claim
is that they get a boost in low rpm torque and 15% increase in fuel economy.
If you are curious, you can find more info at:
It would be another interesting experiment.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Jackson, MO
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart(at)ldd.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | two strokes vs 912 |
| From: | Erich_Weaver(at)URSCorp.com |
01/28/2003 01:55:46 PM
Have to say that Ive had a smirk on my face this past week reading all this
stuff on duty cycles, EGTs, prop loading, needle jets, etc etc. Not to
mention the once-a-month debates about brands of oil and how to mix it. Not
a day goes by that Im not glad I went with the 912. Cant seem to recall
reading about many 912 engine outs. During my reading of John H's recent
post, I was singing Hallelujah, amen brother , as it seemed to recite
chapter and verse on why to have a 912 instead of a two stroke - only to
have it end up by saying that if you are not flying that many hours, go
with a two stroke. Not sure of the logic there, but I dont plan on
switching. Granted, you have to lay out a hefty sum of cash, but assuming
one has the plane and financial situation that would allow the 912, I
believe it is the only way to go. And think of all the time you can save
not having to read/write postings to the list regarding oil mixing : )
Hope Im not coming off as too smug, but maybe there are a few people out
there trying to decide on a type of plane / engine. I'll bet John isnt
considering a trade-in for a two-stroke either.
regards to all,
Erich Weaver
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)sw.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 110% duty cycle? |
> I am beginning to wonder if the addition of a booster bottle to the intake manifold
may help smooth an engine at the lower end.
If one runs the engine with the air cleaner off,
one can see the a mist of gas flying out of the
carburetor at certain speeds.
> Jack B. Hart FF004
Hi Fellas:
I know I don't have any fancy formulas, graphs, or
words to add to this discussion, but let me say
something anyway.
Just guessing, but I bet the exhaust system you
are using on your new engine has a power band, and
it probably is not a low speed power band. So,
maybe you need an exhaust system to match your
slow speed, low power requirements before you
start trying to recarb.
Secondly, every gasoline recip engine, 2 and 4
stroke, has what I commonly refer to say "vapor
stand off". When the engine is running it has a
little cloud of fuel vapor standing off the mouth
of the carb all by itself. In the case of the two
stroke it is a gas/oil vapor cloud. Discovered
this way back when I was a kid and played and
experimented with the little Briggs engine on the
lawn mower. Take the aircleaner off, run it at
operational rpm, about 3,600, and there will be a
little cloud of fuel vapor sitting there. Amazed
me then and also when I discovered that the little
V8 in my 35 Ford Pickup did the same thing. Don't
ask me why it does it cause I don't know, but I do
know it does.
Stuff I learned as a kid who was extremely curious
about most stuff, especially mechanical.
Just trying to help folks.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Don Martin" <kolbdriver(at)hotmail.com> |
I'm about ready to buy engine (503) and gearbox for a Firestar II. Been
talking to Stuart over at Powerfin Props and he suggested the E gearbox with
the 3:47 to 1 ratio for max efficiency. Spoke to the folks at Kolb who
indicated that there might be a problem with this setup. They said that
because of the position of the electric start, the entire engine would have
to be raised about 2 inches which might in turn affect the thrust line,
giving the plane more of a tendency to nose over.
Has anyone on the list tried this combination? I've heard of engines on
Rans being raised up by 7-8 inches and not affecting the noseover tendency
significantly. Also, what would be needed to raise the engine? Would four
standoff supports and extra long bolts do?
Been following this list for 2 years now as I've built the Firestar and
found the info invaluable. Some of you guys come up with this answer?
Don (kolbdriver(at)hotmail.com)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rwpike(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: two strokes vs 912 |
You can't hide money...
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>
>Have to say that Ive had a smirk on my face this past week reading all this
>stuff on duty cycles, EGTs, prop loading, needle jets, etc etc. Not to
>mention the once-a-month debates about brands of oil and how to mix it. Not
>a day goes by that Im not glad I went with the 912. Cant seem to recall
>reading about many 912 engine outs. During my reading of John H's recent
>post, I was singing Hallelujah, amen brother , as it seemed to recite
>chapter and verse on why to have a 912 instead of a two stroke - only to
>have it end up by saying that if you are not flying that many hours, go
>with a two stroke. Not sure of the logic there, but I dont plan on
>switching. Granted, you have to lay out a hefty sum of cash, but assuming
>one has the plane and financial situation that would allow the 912, I
>believe it is the only way to go. And think of all the time you can save
>not having to read/write postings to the list regarding oil mixing : )
>
>Hope Im not coming off as too smug, but maybe there are a few people out
>there trying to decide on a type of plane / engine. I'll bet John isnt
>considering a trade-in for a two-stroke either.
>
>regards to all,
>
>Erich Weaver
>
>
Help Stop Spam!
Delete all address information (especially mine) off everything you
forward, and make Blind Carbon Copy a way of life.
Thanks! And have a blessed day.
rp
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
| Subject: | Goulding's at Monument Valley |
Being as the ol' Lar is such a nice guy, here's what I learned a few minutes ago.
I called Goulding's Lodge in Monument Valley, at 1-435-727-3231, and chose
option 3, for the campground, & RV parking. I spoke with a very pleasant lady
named Bessie, and was told that campsites are not a problem, and just come on
in. If flying in, they want a copy of your airplane insurance faxed to them
before arrival at 1-435-727-3344. After landing, call them at the 727-3231
number, and they'll come and pick you up, and take you to the campground. I asked
specifically about a release of liability, and she told me that all they
want is the proof of insurance, in advance. She wasn't real concerned about number
of people or airplanes, except if you want a room, or RV spot. Then, reservations
are necessary. Rooms have either a single king size, or single queen
size, and are $135.00 per night (in May), either way. Soooooo.....................there's
a start for ya. Helpful Lar.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne" <boyter(at)mcsi.net> |
Don
I have a mark III that I put a 582 on with e-gear box, It does push over a
little bite, But not that much, I have tryed it both ways. You have to make
your own spacers. If you would like I can send you some pictures?
Wayne
Kolb mark III
Rotax 582
72" Three blade warp drive
----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Martin" <kolbdriver(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: E gearbox
>
> I'm about ready to buy engine (503) and gearbox for a Firestar II.
Been
> talking to Stuart over at Powerfin Props and he suggested the E gearbox
with
> the 3:47 to 1 ratio for max efficiency. Spoke to the folks at Kolb who
> indicated that there might be a problem with this setup. They said that
> because of the position of the electric start, the entire engine would
have
> to be raised about 2 inches which might in turn affect the thrust line,
> giving the plane more of a tendency to nose over.
> Has anyone on the list tried this combination? I've heard of engines
on
> Rans being raised up by 7-8 inches and not affecting the noseover tendency
> significantly. Also, what would be needed to raise the engine? Would
four
> standoff supports and extra long bolts do?
> Been following this list for 2 years now as I've built the Firestar
and
> found the info invaluable. Some of you guys come up with this answer?
> Don (kolbdriver(at)hotmail.com)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cavuontop(at)aol.com |
Don:
I have over 100 hours on a Mark 3 Classic with a 582 and a 3.47:1 E
box with a 72" Powerfin Prop. The engine is raised about three inches and
gives good clearance for the prop. This was accomplished in 2 ways. 1) The
Lord mounts were inverted. 2) Two "rails" of square aluminum extrusion
about 2" x 1.25" with a 3/16 wall were placed on top of the Lord mounts
running front to back, then the stock engine mounting plate was bolted
through with longer bolts. This set up also has the added appeal of
providing a very convenient place to mount the Mikuni fuel pump.
The system was devised by Dennis Souder, was shipped by the factory,
and was tested extensively by the old Kolb Company. There is factory drawing
for it somewhere. Dennis liked it because it permitted the use of the 3.47:1
E box and worked well with a 72" Powerfin prop. I have found my set up to be
noticeably quieter than my friend's 582 with a B box. It is also very
smooth. At identical power settings of 6000 RPM I walk away from my friend
who has a B box and a 68" Ivo on his classic.
I also have the PTO end electric starter on my E box which as been
trouble free and really turns the engine over. I have not had any problems
with the higher thrust line, but I have also never flown my plane in any
other configuration. Dennis Souder thought the slight elevation if the
engine permitted more of the prop to run in better air and may have
contributed to the improved efficiency.
Mark R. Sellers
Kolb Twinstar Mark III, N496BM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <gdledbetter1(at)fuse.net> |
| Subject: | Help!! My 447 has died |
Kolbers,
I need suggestions for a problem that is new for my 447.
I drove to the Wakulla County Airport at Panacea, FL shortly after
lunch to do some flying with Duane the Plane. Assembled the Fly
and decided to make a few trips around the patch while waiting for
Duane. Did about 3 approaches before making the landing.
Duane arrived at this time so his Firefly came out of his trailer, was
assembled and we were eager to go flying. Duane and I were ready
so I did the starter thing and pulled and pulled and pulled and
nothing happened. To make a long story short, we did many things
trying to trouble shoot the problem and believe it is spark related.
The carb float bowl had the right level of fuel when removed. The
primer was used without success. Pulled the plugs and they were
not wet. Tried to see if the plugs were firing but this seems to be an
impossible dream. We even tried that evil starting fluid with no effect.
Was getting ready to order a new solid state box until I saw that it
costs $228 so I believe well try some other solutions first and hope
that the box is not the problem.
Really could use suggestion on how to troubleshoot the electrical
system. Disconnected the kill switch wire at the engine to make sure
it wasnt shorted somewhere. If the engine had started, would have
killed it with the choke.
So, please share your experiences in this area, especially
troubleshooting tests
Gene Ledbetter
Cincinnati
Firefly 156 hours
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | possums <possums(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Help!! My 447 has died |
>
>Kolbers,
>
>I need suggestions for a problem that is new for my 447.
>
>Duane arrived at this time so his Firefly came out of his trailer, was
>assembled and we were eager to go flying. Duane and I were ready
>so I did the starter thing and pulled and pulled and pulled and
>nothing happened.
>So, please share your experiences in this area, especially
>troubleshooting tests
>
>Gene Ledbetter
Dear Mr Ledbetter "Professional Retiree" .
You might check the vent line - "part # 31 = 60 cents" - on the carburetor
of your 447. It will not start if the little holes in this plastic line
are stopped up with dirt/oil. Amazing, but true.
Or if it is not fairly clean. You can pull and pull all the live long day.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <jimh474(at)velocityonline.net> |
Y'all;
If anyone is interested in Lee's Emergency Chute Deployment System and has
the plans, I will look them over and give you an honest opinion of what I
feel about it.
I have a few days of working with parachutes and allied equipment. From
dropping ducks, chickens and up to 35,000 lbs vehicles. Been playing with
them items almost 50 years. Even prevented Bro John from frying his bacon a
couple of times in his early years of ultralighting.
Jim Hauck
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kirk Smith" <snuffy(at)usol.com> |
| Subject: | Kicking the compost |
Speaking of kicking the manure. Looks like the ex will remarry in May, the $itch
payments will end, and I will be able to finally purchase me an engine and finish
my Mark3 . God bless that guys soul! Now what should I name my bird? No
more $itch? ;o) Snuffy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Laird <rlaird(at)cavediver.com> |
| Subject: | CPS' oil thermostat...???? |
John --
Did you see the latest Experimenter, yet?
On Page 6 there's a short blurb about the CPS Rotax 912-914 engine oil
remote thermostat. It looks like a better solution than blocking off part
of the oil radiator.
What are you thoughts on it?
-- Robert
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)sw.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: CPS' oil thermostat...???? |
Hi Robert/Gang:
> Did you see the latest Experimenter, yet?
Yep.
> On Page 6 there's a short blurb about the CPS Rotax 912-914 engine oil
> remote thermostat. It looks like a better solution than blocking off part
> of the oil radiator.
> What are you thoughts on it?
-- Robert
Good idea and good price, it it has been
throroughly tested and has proven to be a reliable
product. Other than what I saw in the
Experimenter, that is all I know about it. Based
on what CPS and some of the other UL parts houses
sell to the unsuspecting public, I will wait a
while before I spend my $75.00. Would also like
to know what the plumbing is going to look like
once the thermostat is installed and operational.
Big Lar helped me find an oil thermostat once for
dune buggies. IIRC it was like 300 or 400
dollars. Now is CPS can make a buck on something,
it is more like doubling or tripling the normal
price of a product. If that is true, the
thermostat would probably cost them about $15 or
20.
The picture of the thermostat looked like it was
made of pot metal, same same our own Mikuni pulse
pumps and Bing carbs.
Will have to wait and see how it works out. Have
not heard anything from Rotax. Would be great if
it works. However, a couple wraps of gaffers tape
on the radiator in the winter usually last me
until warmup. Then off comes the tape until the
weather gets cold again.
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ZepRep251(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Kicking the compost |
Free at Last!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eugene Zimmerman <eugenezimmerman(at)dejazzd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: two strokes vs 912 |
Richard Pike wrote:
>
>
> You can't hide money...
>
> Richard Pike
> MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
No, but you can always pretend. :)
ez
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeremy Casey" <jrcasey(at)ldl.net> |
So you say you've thrown a thing or 2 out of the back of an airplane? I bet
you could make storytime around the campfire fairly interesting... ;-)
Jeremy Casey
Y'all;
If anyone is interested in Lee's Emergency Chute Deployment System and has
the plans, I will look them over and give you an honest opinion of what I
feel about it.
I have a few days of working with parachutes and allied equipment. From
dropping ducks, chickens and up to 35,000 lbs vehicles. Been playing with
them items almost 50 years. Even prevented Bro John from frying his bacon a
couple of times in his early years of ultralighting.
Jim Hauck
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tiffany Pitra <tif_qtra(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Fwd: Airplane humor |
Note: forwarded message attached.
---------------------------------
From: Skunkmtnldg(at)aol.com
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 16:41:12 EST
Subject: Fwd: Airplane humor
From: Phil4373(at)aol.com
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 22:46:03 EST
Subject: Airplane humor
You should really enjoy this one.......especially the second to last one.
Phil
> Sent: Subject: Cockpit Chatter We Passengers Never Hear It's good to know
> that some pilots have a sense of humor. Here are some conversations that
> airline passengers normally don't hear. The following are actual
> exchanges between airline pilots and control towers from around the world:
>
> While taxiing at London Gatwick, the crew of a US Air flight departing for
> Ft. Lauderdale made a wrong turn and came nose to nose with a United 767.
> An irate
> female ground controller lashed out at the US Air crew, screaming: "US Air
> 2771, where the hell are you going? I told you to turn right onto Charlie
> taxiway! You
> turned right on Delta! Stop right there. I know it's difficult for you to
> tell the difference between Cs and Ds, but get it right!" Continuing her
> tirade to the
> embarrassed crew, she was now shouting hysterically: "God, you've screwed
> everything up! It'll take forever to sort this out! You stay right there
> and don't move till I
> tell you to! You can expect progressive taxi instructions in about half an
> hour and I want you to go exactly where I tell you, when I tell you, and
> how I tell you! You
> got that, US Air 2771?"
> "Yes ma'am," the humbled crew responded. Naturally the ground control
> frequency went terribly silent after the verbal bashing of US Air 2771.
> Nobody wanted to
> engage the irate ground controller in her current state. Tension in every
> cockpit at LGW was running high. Then an unknown pilot broke the silence
> and asked:
> "Wasn't I married to you once?"
>
> A DC-10 had an exceedingly long rollout after landing with his approach
> speed a little high. San Jose Tower: "American 751 heavy, turn right at
> the end of the
> runway, if able. If not able, take the Guadalupe exit off Highway 101, make
> a right at the lights and return to the airport."
>
> Unknown aircraft: "I'm f...ing bored!"
> Air Traffic Control: "Last aircraft transmitting, identify yourself
> immediately!"
> Unknown aircraft: "I said I was f...ing bored, not f...ing stupid!"
>
> The German air controllers at Frankfurt Airport are renowned as a
> short-tempered lot. They not only expect one to know one's gate parking
> location, but how to get
> there without any assistance from them. So it was with some amusement that
> we (a Pan Am 747) listened to the following exchange between Frankfurt
> ground
> control and a British Airways 747, call sign "Speedbird 206":
> Speedbird 206: "Frankfurt, Speedbird 206 clear of active runway."
> Ground: "Speedbird 206. Taxi to gate Alpha One-Seven."
> The BA 747 pulled onto the main taxiway and slowed to a stop.
> Ground: "Speedbird, do you not know where you are going?"
> Speedbird 206: "Stand by, Ground, I'm looking up our gate location now."
> Ground (with arrogant impatience): "Speedbird 206, have you not been to
> Frankfurt before?"
> Speedbird 206 (coolly): "Yes, twice in 1944 but it was dark and I didn't
> stop."
>
> O'Hare Approach Control: "United 329 heavy, your traffic is a Fokker, One
> o'clock, three miles, eastbound."
> United 239: "Approach, I've always wanted to say this... I've got the
> little Fokker in sight."
>
> A PanAm 727 flight engineer waiting for start clearance in Munich Overheard
> the following:
> Lufthansa (in German): "Ground, what is our start clearance time?"
> Ground (in English): "If you want an answer you must speak English."
> Lufthansa (in English): "I am a German, flying a German airplane, in
> Germany. Why must I speak English?"
> Unknown voice (in a beautiful British accent): "Because you lost the bloody
> war!"
>
>
You should really enjoy this one.......especially the second to last one.
Phil
exchanges between airline pilots and control towers from around the world:
While taxiing at London Gatwick, the crew of a US Air flight departing for Ft.
Lauderdale made a wrong turn and came nose to nose with a United 767. An irate
female ground controller lashed out at the US Air crew, screaming: "US Air 2771,
where the hell are you going? I told you to turn right onto Charlie taxiway!
You
turned right on Delta! Stop right there. I know it's difficult for you to tell
the difference between Cs and Ds, but get it right!" Continuing her tirade to
the
embarrassed crew, she was now shouting hysterically: "God, you've screwed everything
up! It'll take forever to sort this out! You stay right there and don't
move till I
tell you to! You can expect progressive taxi instructions in about half an hour
and I want you to go exactly where I tell you, when I tell you, and how I tell
you! You
got that, US Air 2771?"
"Yes ma'am," the humbled crew responded. Naturally the ground control frequency
went terribly silent after the verbal bashing of US Air 2771. Nobody wanted to
engage the irate ground controller in her current state. Tension in every cockpit
at LGW was running high. Then an unknown pilot broke the silence and asked:
"Wasn't I married to you once?"
A DC-10 had an exceedingly long rollout after landing with his approach speed a
little high. San Jose Tower: "American 751 heavy, turn right at the end of the
runway, if able. If not able, take the Guadalupe exit off Highway 101, make a right
at the lights and return to the airport."
Unknown aircraft: "I'm f...ing bored!"
Air Traffic Control: "Last aircraft transmitting, identify yourself immediately!"
Unknown aircraft: "I said I was f...ing bored, not f...ing stupid!"
The German air controllers at Frankfurt Airport are renowned as a short-tempered
lot. They not only expect one to know one's gate parking location, but how to
get
there without any assistance from them. So it was with some amusement that we (a
Pan Am 747) listened to the following exchange between Frankfurt ground
control and a British Airways 747, call sign "Speedbird 206":
Speedbird 206: "Frankfurt, Speedbird 206 clear of active runway."
Ground: "Speedbird 206. Taxi to gate Alpha One-Seven."
The BA 747 pulled onto the main taxiway and slowed to a stop.
Ground: "Speedbird, do you not know where you are going?"
Speedbird 206: "Stand by, Ground, I'm looking up our gate location now."
Ground (with arrogant impatience): "Speedbird 206, have you not been to Frankfurt
before?"
Speedbird 206 (coolly): "Yes, twice in 1944 but it was dark and I didn't stop."
O'Hare Approach Control: "United 329 heavy, your traffic is a Fokker, One o'clock,
three miles, eastbound."
United 239: "Approach, I've always wanted to say this... I've got the little Fokker
in sight."
A PanAm 727 flight engineer waiting for start clearance in Munich Overheard the
following:
Lufthansa (in German): "Ground, what is our start clearance time?"
Ground (in English): "If you want an answer you must speak English."
Lufthansa (in English): "I am a German, flying a German airplane, in Germany. Why
must I speak English?"
Unknown voice (in a beautiful British accent): "Because you lost the bloody war!"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim" <flykolb(at)carolina.rr.com> |
kolbers
On my Mark III, I replaced my 503 with a 532 and I have two problems:
1- The egt on the front reads just under 1200 while the rear reads about 1000.
Any ideas?
2 - I have not been able to get a tach to read correctly during flight. It will
show about 4800 rpm, then when I increase the throttle it drops rpm. Any more
ideas?
Jim
Mark III
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bweber2(at)earthlink.net |
Hello all,
Does anyone know where I can get liability insurance for my Firestar? Avemco apparently
no longer insures this model as a Part 103 UL. EAA has closed its insurance
program. Is anything else available?
Thanks
Bill
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jimmy <jhankin(at)planters.net> |
Wayne McCullough, would you please contact me off-line.
Jimmy Hankinson
912-863-7384
Rocky Ford, Ga. 30455
jhankin(at)planters.net
Kolb Firefly/447/240hrs
Local field, Pegasus/2000/Grass
Airport JYL/Sylvania, Ga.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rwpike(at)charter.net> |
EAA is using Falcon Insurance, get them to connect you. They are about 30%
cheaper. (Guess how I know this?)
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420lldPoops)
>
>Hello all,
>
>Does anyone know where I can get liability insurance for my Firestar?
>Avemco apparently no longer insures this model as a Part 103 UL. EAA has
>closed its insurance program. Is anything else available?
>
>Thanks
> Bill
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rwpike(at)charter.net> |
>
>kolbers
>
>On my Mark III, I replaced my 503 with a 532 and I have two problems:
>
>1- The egt on the front reads just under 1200 while the rear reads about
>1000. Any ideas?
Not necessarily in order of easiest to do -
1. Swap the probes to make sure that it is the engine and not the probes.
If that doesn't resolve the question:
2. Run a compression test to make sure the cylinders are the same, check
the rings for being stuck - problems.
3. Run a pressure/vacuum test on the crankcase to ensure that there are no
leaking seals.
4. Needle jets/jet needles worn unevenly.
5. One carb has floats that are fuel logged.
6. Points are not set the same. One cylinder is firing late. ( Or early )
(Beware of "Rotax" points from Airstar Discount Sales. They have a useful
life of about 6 hours. Guess how I know this?) (Found out about half way to
Oshkosh...)
>2 - I have not been able to get a tach to read correctly during flight. It
>will show about 4800 rpm, then when I increase the throttle it drops rpm.
>Any more ideas?
Try reversing the leads from the lighting coil to the tach. If the leads
from the lighting coil go to the regulator/rectifier first, try swapping
the wires to the tach between the tach and the regulator/rectifier. If that
doesn't fix it, try swapping the leads from the engine to the regulator
rectifier first, and then if that doesn't work, THEN swap the wires where
they come off the regulator/rectifier. (Now guess how I know how to do all
this? .....sigh) ( If you don't take notes, you'll never keep track of what
you are doing)
Also, what is the part number on your tach? (I am assuming Westach?) If
your tach worked off the lighting coil on the 503, then it ought to work
off the lighting coil on the 532. But if the 503 had Ducati dual ignition....
>Jim
>Mark III
>
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fackler, Ken" <kfackler(at)ameritech.net> |
Found this on the TNK website:
The New Kolb Aircraft Company would like to acknowledge the adventure of Steve
Ledbetter, a Mark III Classic owner who flew his plane, with a friend, from Pendleton,
Indiana round trip to Seattle, Washington. Due to engine problems, Steve
was unable to complete his full return trip with his Mark III. We congratulate
you Steve on your achievement! You are an excellent advertisement for the
durability and dependability of a Kolb Aircraft.
Why in the dickens don't we have some of the "adventures" from the group of folks
on-list?
-Ken Fackler
Mark II / 503
Rochester MI
________________________________________________________________________________
Hello Kolbers,
I have been reading,learning and gaining knowladge about Kolb aircraft and avaition
in general from this list. I would like to thank everyone and Matt for this
neat list. Often questions are posted and anwsered, feelings are tested, and
sometimes folks just plain sound off! Good for the soul. Avaition is new to
me. Just 20 hrs as student pilot with plans to achive a privates certificate and
make avation a big part of "My next 20 years" Humor is also good for the soul
and at times I feel compelled to share with the list members. So I hope that
you will not be offended by my, from time to time postings of such, but rather
a lighter side of this as some times it is good to laugh at other folks experiancens.
Case in point. As Jeremy Casey said to us when we visited him and had our first
encounter with the Kolb airplanes. He quoted a manufacture of a aircraft company's
moto'
"Learn from other pepoles mistakes.... You won't live long enough to make them
all yourself" !!!!!
So with that said I share the following......
innovation shown in these misadventures.
Coors Light and the Ultra Light
2000 Honorable Mention
Confirmed True by Darwin
(13 September 2000, Indiana) The antics of an unidentified Lafayette
pilot are surely a source of private chagrin to his relatives. During his fly-by-night
escapades, the jovial aviator enjoyed circling an area of town and
toasting the people below with Coors beer. This time he went too far.
He was flying his Ultra Light aircraft over a small section of homes,
saluting the spectators with his beer can, when he smashed into a homeowner=92s
huge TV tower. It is a mystery how he could fail to notice the 150-foot structure,
particularly as it was topped with a gaudy Christmas tree star, but
fail to notice it he did. The aircraft knocked a a 45-foot section out of the
tower, sliced through three steel cables, and dove to within 40 feet of the ground
before the embarrassed pilot managed to regain control and fly away.
The Red Baron caused about $4000 of damage. Although his identity is
unknown, several clues were found at the scene: his left shoe, sunglasses, and
a can of Coors Light were among the debris left by the plane. A compass and
speedometer were also found. Police are baffled by the crash, and not sure whether
to consider criminal charges. Lt. Rick Blacker said, "I don't think an Ultra
Light would classify as a vehicle."
The next time you are in Indiana, look for a guy with only one shoe
and holding a beer. He just might be the mystery marauder.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: EAA in Georgia needs some help. |
Wayne & All,
The ignition system you are looking for is what Kawasaki & Cuyuna used
and what Rotax still uses on all their non aviation engines. Nippendenso
(spelling?) makes it. It differs from the Rotax aviation system by Ducatti
(Spelling?), in that it uses a timing curve to retard the timing at lower
rpm. Why Rotax uses this inferior system only on its aviation engines must
be a liability issue. ...Richard Swiderski
----- Original Message -----
From: "CaptainRon" <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com>
>> Subject: Information
>
> David,
> My name is Wayne McCullough and I am the president of EAA chapter 330
here
> in Georgia.
>
> I was wondering if you knew of Steve Beatty at Airscrew Performance and
> what kind of CDI unit he was using on the Rotax engines. I was told it was
> from a Kawasaki 440 , but I do not know if it is a jetski or motorcycle as
> we are not familiar with it over here on the East coast.
>
> I would think that if anyone could get this info, it would be a fellow
> EAAer in the same state.
>
> Thanks for your reply in advance,
>
>
> Wayne McCullough
> Wm2335(at)aol.com
> ================================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "CaptainRon" <captainron(at)theriver.com> |
| Subject: | Re: EAA in Georgia needs some help. |
Thanks Richard I will send your reply to Wayne. He does make this list.
=================================
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Swiderski" <swiderski@advanced-connect.net>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: EAA in Georgia needs some help.
<swiderski@advanced-connect.net>
>
> Wayne & All,
>
> The ignition system you are looking for is what Kawasaki & Cuyuna used
> and what Rotax still uses on all their non aviation engines. Nippendenso
> (spelling?) makes it. It differs from the Rotax aviation system by
Ducatti
> (Spelling?), in that it uses a timing curve to retard the timing at lower
> rpm. Why Rotax uses this inferior system only on its aviation engines
must
> be a liability issue. ...Richard Swiderski
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "CaptainRon" <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com>
>
> >> Subject: Information
> >
> > David,
> > My name is Wayne McCullough and I am the president of EAA chapter 330
> here
> > in Georgia.
> >
> > I was wondering if you knew of Steve Beatty at Airscrew Performance
and
> > what kind of CDI unit he was using on the Rotax engines. I was told it
was
> > from a Kawasaki 440 , but I do not know if it is a jetski or motorcycle
as
> > we are not familiar with it over here on the East coast.
> >
> > I would think that if anyone could get this info, it would be a fellow
> > EAAer in the same state.
> >
> > Thanks for your reply in advance,
> >
> >
> > Wayne McCullough
> > Wm2335(at)aol.com
> > ================================
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack & Louise Hart <jbhart(at)ldd.net> |
| Subject: | Five Gallon Fuel Tank Scale |
I worked up a new tank scale for the FireFly so that I could easily read the tank
gas level with improved accuracy. At this point I don't know how the scale
will hold up due to gas spilling on it, but the scale will be covered with clear
packaging tape. I hope this will protect it. The scale can be seen at:
http://www.thirdshift.com/jack/firefly/firefly88.html
Jack B. Hart FF004
Jackson, MO
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart(at)ldd.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim" <flykolb(at)carolina.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Weather; Sun N Fun |
Lar
Is this the airport place you needed?
Jim
Mark III
Charlotte, NC
http://www.airnav.com/airports/search.html
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: Weather; Sun N Fun
>
> Leave it to Lar.....................when I got the new computer last Oct.,
I forgot to transfer the "favorites" file into the new one. Got most of the
stuff re-found, and entered, but there's 2 (at least) that I missed, and
hope you guys can help. 1st was the one that had all the airports, as well
as all the little private airstrips listed, along with their owners, phones,
etc.; and the other was the one that let you check weather by entering the
airport identifier. Seems like I should know that one, but I guess I'm
having a senior moment, or a brain fart, or something. Totally blank.
Also, between buying the J-5; finishing Vamoose; insuring (groan) both of
them; going (soon) to get the J-5, (watching for a weather window now) etc.,
etc., it just don't look like the ol' Lar is gonna make it to SnF. Sorry
'bout that.............I had a ball last year, was really looking forward to
this year, and told a lot of you I'd meet you there,
but........................ !
> Penniless (penurious ??) Lar. Do not
Archive.
>
> Larry Bourne
> Palm Springs, CA
> Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
> www.gogittum.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <cen33475(at)centurytel.net> |
My thoughts go to our lost fellow aviators from the Space Shuttle Columbia.
a very sad day
topher
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Cooley" <johnc(at)datasync.com> |
| Subject: | Re: lost aviators |
It was approx. 2:00 pm when I learned of the Space Shuttle Columbia's
accident. I still feel like I've been hit between the eyes with a hammer. My
thoughts and prayers will be with their families. It truly is a tragic and
very sad day.
John Cooley
>
> My thoughts go to our lost fellow aviators from the Space Shuttle
Columbia.
>
> a very sad day
>
> topher
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Weather; Sun N Fun |
Thanks, Richard. Once again, it's not the one I had, but Intellicast does
the job just fine. Today, I'll phone my boss, and broach the subject of a
few days off next week...................and duck the screaming. From what
I see on that map, and the forecast, next Tuesday on should work for a trip
to get the J-5. Thanks again. Lar. Do not
Archive.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Pike" <rwpike(at)charter.net>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Weather; Sun N Fun
>
> Not sure what you're looking for - you might
> try Intellicast.com or Accuweather.com.
>
> Richard Pike
> MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | tom sabean <sabean(at)ns.sympatico.ca> |
| Subject: | Fuselage Tube Alignment |
Many thanks to all those who responded to my question about fuselage
tube alignment. I may not have described the situation that clearly in
my initial request, the problem was that the bolt went through the tube
ok but was hanging up on the cage upright tube. It was lined up in the
vertical plane but mis-aligned about 1/8th inch horizontally.
After reading all the responses I thought the idea of filing a small
amount off the upright tubes sounded like the way to go. Rotating the
tube 180 degrees was a non-starter as I had already attached the tail
feathers.
I called Ray at TNK and he agreed that since the bolt was mis-aligned by
about 1/8th inch, filing 1/16th from each side of the upright support
would work. He said most of the stress is in the vertical plane so this
would be acceptable.
Hope this info helps any fellow builders who may run into this problem
in the future.
Tom Sabean
Building Mark111Xtra
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Williamson" <kolbrapilot(at)attbi.com> |
Hey Lar,
This is the weather site I use all the time.
http://adds.aviationweather.noaa.gov/projects/adds/
John Williamson
Arlington, TX
N49KK, Kolb Kolbra, Jabiru 2200, 182 hours
http://home.attbi.com/~kolbrapilot/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SR3SA2L1(at)aol.com |
Dear "Illigal unregistered aircraft owners",
This is why we have been trying forever (maybe it just seems that way) to get
the USUA and FAA to push to change or modify the part 103 rules to meet what
most of the rest of the world seems to use for the definition of ultralights
("microlight" weights, fuel and speed rules). Since I have only about 20
years or so left to fly, I don't think I will be around to see it happen
though.
Steve
do not archieve
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim" <flykolb(at)carolina.rr.com> |
Richard,
Thanks for the info. Today I switched the probes and now both are reading
about 1000. But I don't understand that! If the probe or gauge was wrong,
wouldn't the readings be the same as before I switched except for being
opposite to what it was before switching?
Jim
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Pike" <rwpike(at)charter.net>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Rotax 532
>
>
> >
> >kolbers
> >
> >On my Mark III, I replaced my 503 with a 532 and I have two problems:
> >
> >1- The egt on the front reads just under 1200 while the rear reads about
> >1000. Any ideas?
>
>
> Not necessarily in order of easiest to do -
> 1. Swap the probes to make sure that it is the engine and not the probes.
> If that doesn't resolve the question:
> 2. Run a compression test to make sure the cylinders are the same, check
> the rings for being stuck - problems.
> 3. Run a pressure/vacuum test on the crankcase to ensure that there are no
> leaking seals.
> 4. Needle jets/jet needles worn unevenly.
> 5. One carb has floats that are fuel logged.
> 6. Points are not set the same. One cylinder is firing late. ( Or early )
> (Beware of "Rotax" points from Airstar Discount Sales. They have a useful
> life of about 6 hours. Guess how I know this?) (Found out about half way
to
> Oshkosh...)
>
>
> >2 - I have not been able to get a tach to read correctly during flight.
It
> >will show about 4800 rpm, then when I increase the throttle it drops rpm.
> >Any more ideas?
>
> Try reversing the leads from the lighting coil to the tach. If the leads
> from the lighting coil go to the regulator/rectifier first, try swapping
> the wires to the tach between the tach and the regulator/rectifier. If
that
> doesn't fix it, try swapping the leads from the engine to the regulator
> rectifier first, and then if that doesn't work, THEN swap the wires where
> they come off the regulator/rectifier. (Now guess how I know how to do all
> this? .....sigh) ( If you don't take notes, you'll never keep track of
what
> you are doing)
> Also, what is the part number on your tach? (I am assuming Westach?) If
> your tach worked off the lighting coil on the 503, then it ought to work
> off the lighting coil on the 532. But if the 503 had Ducati dual
ignition....
>
>
> >Jim
> >Mark III
> >
>
> Richard Pike
> MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Twinstar/MarkIII |
Hello Kolbers,
Great weather here this weekend in central Mississippi. Charley and I flew up to
a small airport in Newton MS. to investigate some ultralight aircraft that we
heard was on the field. Not much there but the trip was worth while as we found
a Twinstar Mark III in an outdoor hanger that looked to be covered for winter.
The data plate on the fuselage tube indicated that the builder was Allen
Sasser from Jacksonville FL. And that the engine was a veneer? Any one know this
fella or the plane? Very nice instrument panel and console. Rudder had a gash
that had been fixed with clear packing tape but other than that it looked pretty
nice. If any of you want photos let me know and I will send.
Two questions please....
1.Is the Veneer or Veneer engine a 2 or four cycle? It was covered and I could
not tell. The exhaust system implicated that it was four cycle.
2.What measures have to be taken to be compliant with the FAA to fly a MarkIII.
I.e. inspections, airworthiness ect. Charley is having to write up a check list
and note and document Vx,Vy, stall speeds and so on for his RV-8.
sidebar... We are drawing up plans to build a 5 cylinder radial engine using Harley
Davidson 1200cc top ends, base up, for our 1/2 scale P-47 replica. any takers?????
Final note... Hopefully the warmer weather will spark the motorcyclist to buy one
of my bikes so I can order kit one.
Looking forward to meeting everyone at SnF...
Fly safe..
pp.....
N4968P
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Pierzina" <planecrazzzy(at)lycos.com> |
Hey Guys,
Just thought I'd share one of my Ideas.... After the wings are
built , they're always in the way....even when I hung them on the wall.
Well , I found one of those furniture carts with 4 caster wheels ( Harbor
freight sells them for $14.00) I made a simple rail in the center for the wing
trailing edge to lean on.....out of 3 pieces of sq tube and a couple of angles
to bolt the rail in the center of the cart.....the leading edge rests on the
carpet of the cart , I screwed some round dowel material so the leading edge
would stay put...
It has been working GREAT.... if I need the wings out of the way or the wing
on the back side, it's easy to move around the garage...
It's probly going to be handy even after I'm done building.
I might have it in a picture if any body's interested...
Gotta Fly...
Mike
---
Sometimes you just have to take the leap
and build your wings on the way down...
Gotta Fly...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Peter Volum" <peterv(at)etsmiami.com> |
| Subject: | Twinstar/MarkIII |
Paul, I believe that's a Verner engine you saw.
You can get more information about Verner engines from:
http://www.vernermotors.com
and
http://www.verneraircraftengines.com/PDF_files.htm
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Paul Petty
Subject: Kolb-List: Twinstar/MarkIII
Hello Kolbers,
Great weather here this weekend in central Mississippi. Charley and I
flew up to a small airport in Newton MS. to investigate some ultralight
aircraft that we heard was on the field. Not much there but the trip was
worth while as we found a Twinstar Mark III in an outdoor hanger that
looked to be covered for winter. The data plate on the fuselage tube
indicated that the builder was Allen Sasser from Jacksonville FL. And
that the engine was a veneer? Any one know this fella or the plane? Very
nice instrument panel and console. Rudder had a gash that had been fixed
with clear packing tape but other than that it looked pretty nice. If
any of you want photos let me know and I will send.
Two questions please....
1.Is the Veneer or Veneer engine a 2 or four cycle? It was covered and I
could not tell. The exhaust system implicated that it was four cycle.
2.What measures have to be taken to be compliant with the FAA to fly a
MarkIII. I.e. inspections, airworthiness ect. Charley is having to write
up a check list and note and document Vx,Vy, stall speeds and so on for
his RV-8.
sidebar... We are drawing up plans to build a 5 cylinder radial engine
using Harley Davidson 1200cc top ends, base up, for our 1/2 scale P-47
replica. any takers?????
Final note... Hopefully the warmer weather will spark the motorcyclist
to buy one of my bikes so I can order kit one.
Looking forward to meeting everyone at SnF...
Fly safe..
pp.....
N4968P
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Scott Olendorf" <solendor(at)nycap.rr.com> |
| Subject: | 447 not starting and tach trouble. |
Well I'm a little bit behind in my email and I didn't see too much about Gene Ledbetter's
problem being solved. I had a problem with my brancd new 447 after
5 hours the engine stopped running while I was flying along. It acted just like
I shut off the engine. Well I called Lockwood where I purchased the engine
and they ran me through lots of tests with an ohm meter to see if the CDI unit
was bad. I don't have all the details but my CDI ohmed out perfectly as did
my stator.
Bottom line, I replaced my CDI with one I borrowed off of a 503 and she fired right
up first pull. I bought a new CDI and sent mine back to Lockwood under warrantly
in August. I still haven't received any word on the CDI I sent back
and haven't gotten reimbursed for the $228 either. I must say though that Lockwood
has been great and supposedly Rotax has been sitting on it all this time.
Second thing is for Jim with the Mark III that has had a tach problem. When I
changed out my 377 with a 447 I needed a new tach. I wired it up and it acted
very flakey. It worked great for the first hour or two then it wouldn't hold
a value between 4800 and 6200 rpms. It turned our that the engine must be grounded
to the frame or the tach must be grounded directly to the engine. After
I installed a ground strap from the engine to the airframe my tach started working
perfectly. Westach tested my new tach and sent it back to me no charge.
I hope this helps someone.
p.s. Those monument valley pictures make great backgrounds for my PC. There is
a problem though, some of the pictures do not have a Kolb in them.
Scott Olendorf
Original Firestar, Rotax 447, Powerfin prop.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Duncan McBride <duncanmcbride(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Twinstar/MarkIII |
I know Al, and I flew in that plane while he still had it. He sold it
several years ago. The engine was a Verner two cylinder four-stroke with a
belt drive reduction unit.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Petty" <ppetty@c-gate.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: Twinstar/MarkIII
>
> Hello Kolbers,
> Great weather here this weekend in central Mississippi. Charley and I flew
up to a small airport in Newton MS. to investigate some ultralight aircraft
that we heard was on the field. Not much there but the trip was worth while
as we found a Twinstar Mark III in an outdoor hanger that looked to be
covered for winter. The data plate on the fuselage tube indicated that the
builder was Allen Sasser from Jacksonville FL. And that the engine was a
veneer? Any one know this fella or the plane? Very nice instrument panel and
console. Rudder had a gash that had been fixed with clear packing tape but
other than that it looked pretty nice. If any of you want photos let me know
and I will send.
> Two questions please....
> 1.Is the Veneer or Veneer engine a 2 or four cycle? It was covered and I
could not tell. The exhaust system implicated that it was four cycle.
> 2.What measures have to be taken to be compliant with the FAA to fly a
MarkIII. I.e. inspections, airworthiness ect. Charley is having to write up
a check list and note and document Vx,Vy, stall speeds and so on for his
RV-8.
>
> sidebar... We are drawing up plans to build a 5 cylinder radial engine
using Harley Davidson 1200cc top ends, base up, for our 1/2 scale P-47
replica. any takers?????
>
> Final note... Hopefully the warmer weather will spark the motorcyclist to
buy one of my bikes so I can order kit one.
>
> Looking forward to meeting everyone at SnF...
>
> Fly safe..
>
> pp.....
> N4968P
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)sw.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Ultralight Pilot Busted |
> The pilot was Adriel Heisey in his Kolb Mark II performing a special for our
local PBS (Public Broadcast Station) here in Arizona.
> Tim
Hi Tim/Gang:
Adriel flies a very old Kolb Twinstar, unless he
changed plane recently. Never met Adriel or seen
the entire aircraft, but helped Brother Jim
overhaul the fuselage (I held the parts for Jim,
when told to do so) many years ago after Adriel
pranged it pretty good. Was a lucky man to walk
away from it. Back then it was powered by a 503,
but now, I understand, it is powered with a 912.
Believe the 912 was for reliability more than any
other reason.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kuffel <kuffel(at)cyberport.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Stupid Question! |
Paul Petty:
<>
Not a stupid question at all and worth archiving.
1) You are dramatically changing the load paths of the structure. In
other words, there is a high probability you could be making the
airplane less strong. The metal skin transfers stresses in ways not
intended or tested by the designer. These loads can wind up being
focused at a particular point instead of being distributed, causing a
failure which otherwise would not occur. This is not likely to be a
problem for metal skin attached to the fuselage cage of a Kolb because
of its high design strength mandated by other factors.
2) There is some data which imply the scalloping of the fabric at the
leading edge of the wing improves the airflow over the wing at high
angles of attack.
3) I very much doubt you could detect any speed improvement by replacing
the fabric with metal skin of the same shape. The Kolb configuration is
inherently so high drag that any improvement in skin friction, even if
it did exist, would reduce total drag by only a percent or two at most.
4) Perhaps obvious, but weight really is a major downside to consider.
It would be like lugging around 10 gallons of unusable fuel, an
intolerable inefficiency for most light airplane drivers.
Hope this helps you avoid straying too far from the plans.
Tom Kuffel
Whitefish, MT
Building (a modified) Original FireStar
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "johnjung(at)compusenior.com" <johnjung(at)compusenior.com> |
Jim,
Did you move the probes in the exhaust or just change the wires?
Whichever you did, now do the other. Then get new readings, and report back.
All you know now is that either the gage(s) or the porbe(s) or both are wrong.
If they were all consistant, the reading would have switched.
John Jung
Richard,
Thanks for the info. Today I switched the probes and now both are reading
about 1000. But I don't understand that! If the probe or gauge was wrong,
wouldn't the readings be the same as before I switched except for being
opposite to what it was before switching?
Jim
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerb <ulflyer(at)airmail.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Stupid Question! |
>
>
>snip...
>4) Perhaps obvious, but weight really is a major downside to consider.
>It would be like lugging around 10 gallons of unusable fuel, an
>intolerable inefficiency for most light airplane drivers.
>
>Hope this helps you avoid straying too far from the plans.
>
>Tom Kuffel
>Whitefish, MT
>Building (a modified) Original FireStar
>
>snip....
The extra weight is a very good point. Build it light, they fly better
that way.
What's the reason (desire) behind wanting to cover it with aluminum or does
it need recover and if so are you trying to avoid the covering
process. It's not that bad once you get the hang of it and start to
understand what your doing. Get some one with a little covering experience
to come help you get started. Wouldn't be surprised many Kolber's probably
be willing to come to your location for a weekend to get your started if
you offered to put them up.
As far as covering the tail components I don't think you really would have
a problem doing it. You might need to add a rib or two so the aluminum
will not oil can or drum. If it works it will eventually crack. I'm a
metal wacker, built a RV6 tail kit and helped a friend do his wings and
fuselage. Also got a ThunderGull in the garage under construction. The
wing kit I got was part metal and fabric. I decided to go completely metal
after discussing what mod's I would have to do with the factory. This is
an interesting point - when you fully metalize the wing on it, you have to
use thicker aluminum on the center section top and bottom due to the extra
loading the weight adds. So things do change. My recommendation, build it
to the plans, its a proven airplane in that configuration. My self I like
the fabric, it's easier to repair dings should you have to do so.
jerb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rwpike(at)charter.net> |
John is correct in his analysis, but there may yet be another variable -
what if the two cylinders are running at different temps? (And that is
certainly not unusual)
What do your spark plugs look like? Similar?
Any chance you can borrow a gauge and probe known to be relatively accurate
from a friend and get a "second opinion?"
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>
>Jim,
>
>Did you move the probes in the exhaust or just change the wires?
>Whichever you did, now do the other. Then get new readings, and report back.
>
>All you know now is that either the gage(s) or the porbe(s) or both are wrong.
>If they were all consistant, the reading would have switched.
>
>John Jung
>
> >
>
> Richard,
>
> Thanks for the info. Today I switched the probes and now both are
> reading
> about 1000. But I don't understand that! If the probe or gauge was
> wrong,
> wouldn't the readings be the same as before I switched except for being
> opposite to what it was before switching?
>
> Jim
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "H MITCHELL" <mitchmnd(at)msn.com> |
After Gene Ledbetter could not get his started last weekend he insisted that I
fly on without him because it was such a perfect day. My engine was running great.
I landed at a friend's pasture, turned the plane around and visited for
about 30 minutes. When I was ready to go home mine would not start. I tried everything
but ended up getting a ride back to Panacea, hooking my trailer up and
hauling the plane home G-r-r-r.
It is not fuel mix. We bought our fuel at different times at different stations.
I rebuilt my carb but she still would not start.
The plugs were on the black side but not wet.
I built a nifty little tool for viewing the spark and found that there was no spark
at the plugs.
My meter measured 170 ohms to ground through the pick-up coil. The Stratman sheet
says it should be 60. Gene Ledbetter's coil to ground measurement read "open".
Confirmed with a second meter.
It is weird that we both have starting problems at the same time. Maybe it was
an EMP from Tyndal AFB experiments when we flew in that direction?... Naw :(
When I placed the order for replacement coils I knew the price would be outrageous
but was astonished to find that the price had gone from the former $60 to
an incredible $92. It seems that Rotax had also upgraded to a new part number
so the old $60 ones were not all that good. Rotax must be buying from one of the
U.S. government's man-rated suppliers.
The worth-their-weight-in-gold coils will be delivered today and on the planes
this PM.
Stay tuned for further developments.
Maybe I have bee watching too many news programs :)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dixieshack(at)webtv.net (Mike and Dixie Shackelford) |
| Subject: | Re:Aluminum covering...?? |
How about all those extra drilled holes in the airframe required to
rivet the aluminum in place? Looks like you'd end up with a weaker and
heavier structure....
Then, remember sometime back about the question of removing Homer's
"scallops" from the airfoil......? Don't remember much about it but
didn't a smooth surface devoid of those scallops between the ribs
detract from performance? Maybe I'm missing the point?
Mike in WV
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim and Phyllis Hefner" <hefners_tucson(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Ultralight Pilot Busted |
John Hauck wrote:
Adriel flies a very old Kolb Twinstar, unless he changed plane recently.
John/Kolbers:
Adriel is still flying the Twinstar, which he highly modified the front cage
for unobstructed photography. He is "hanging out" in the breeze, with a
fiberglass pod on the right side, which holds his camera gear. The last
time I saw his plane a year or so ago it still had the 503 on it, but have
heard recently that he upgraded to a 912. He flew over my house a few
months ago and did a 360 overhead and I was amazed at how quiet his engine
was... thought he had installed an intake silencer or a different
muffler.... I now know it was the 912 that made the difference. He only
lives a few miles from me, but is rarely there for long in between shooting
trips.
Jim Hefner
FF#022
Tucson, AZ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | NealMcCann(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: 447 not starting and tach trouble. |
Don't know if this could help in this situation but once I had a tach problem
and voltage regulator problem at the same time. My engines ground is straped
to the airframe. I remember my regulator case wasn't grounded to the
airframe. Even though the black wire on the regulator was always connected,
the case itself wasn't. When I properly grounded the case of the regulator,
everything got fixed right up.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "H MITCHELL" <mitchmnd(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re:Aluminum covering...?? message of Sun, 2 Feb 2003 |
23:56:
Mike et al,
A Mk3X builder in panacea Florida has covered his fuselage with aluminum. When
he proposed this change I advised him not to drill any holes the framework. The
next time I saw the plane he had drilled holes only to mount some Al. angles
which he used to attach the skin. It came out surprisingly well and held up during
his first (hard) landing. He even did a pretty clean job of making the seams
smooth in the compound curve areas. It added some weight but met his own
personal preference and looks good.
Duane the plane,Tallahassee FL
----- Original Message -----
From: dixieshack(at)webtv.net
Subject: Kolb-List: Re:Aluminum covering...?? message of Sun, 2 Feb 2003 23:56:09
-0800
How about all those extra drilled holes in the airframe required to
rivet the aluminum in place? Looks like you'd end up with a weaker and
heavier structure....
Then, remember sometime back about the question of removing Homer's
"scallops" from the airfoil......? Don't remember much about it but
didn't a smooth surface devoid of those scallops between the ribs
detract from performance? Maybe I'm missing the point?
Mike in WV
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <cen33475(at)centurytel.net> |
| Subject: | Aerobatics in a Kolb |
Anytime I have ever seen a film or a picture of a Kolb doing aerobatics
it has been an Ultrastar, is the design of the Ultrastar balanced for
aerobatics better than the other Kolbs?
I think that was the only Kolb that existed back when people were uncareful
enough to do this suicidal stuff. Now that we are mostly knowledgable
enough to know that the planes will break if you do aerobatics in them we
dont. The kolbs lift strut is not nearly as strong in compresion as in
tension. so negative g maneuvers would be extremely hazardous, so I don't
think anybody should worry about a negative g fuel supply!
that said the u;trastar was about as strong as a firestar and weighed less,
so it would have better g capability, so would be a "better choice" for this
foolishness.
topher
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim" <flykolb(at)carolina.rr.com> |
Richard and John,
Thanks for the comments. I will try some of your suggestions next time I am
able.
Jim
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Pike" <rwpike(at)charter.net>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Rotax 532
>
> John is correct in his analysis, but there may yet be another variable -
> what if the two cylinders are running at different temps? (And that is
> certainly not unusual)
>
> What do your spark plugs look like? Similar?
> Any chance you can borrow a gauge and probe known to be relatively
accurate
> from a friend and get a "second opinion?"
>
> Richard Pike
> MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>
> >
> >
> >Jim,
> >
> >Did you move the probes in the exhaust or just change the wires?
> >Whichever you did, now do the other. Then get new readings, and report
back.
> >
> >All you know now is that either the gage(s) or the porbe(s) or both are
wrong.
> >If they were all consistant, the reading would have switched.
> >
> >John Jung
> >
> > >
> >
> > Richard,
> >
> > Thanks for the info. Today I switched the probes and now both are
> > reading
> > about 1000. But I don't understand that! If the probe or gauge was
> > wrong,
> > wouldn't the readings be the same as before I switched except for
being
> > opposite to what it was before switching?
> >
> > Jim
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim and Phyllis Hefner" <hefners_tucson(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Follow up on the Pala Verda Incident |
Subject:
Follow up on the Pala Verda Incident
From:
VIC (vicw(at)vcn.com)
Date:
Sat Feb 01 - 7:25 PM
-- Kolb-List message posted by: "VIC" vicw(at)vcn.com
I am not passing judgment on Mr. Heaney because I don't have all the details
but we can learn from this situation by making sure everyone is in the loop
when we fly around sensitive areas. I am sure Mr. Heisey would not want to
repeat his encounter with the Maricopa County Sheriff Department (they feed
you green bologna and moldy bread in the jail), the NRC, or the FBI.
Vic/Kolbers:
I totally agree, we can all learn fromAdriel's misadventure andcommunications with
Flight Services is alwaysa good place to start, after reviewing the sectional,
if there is anything unusual concerning restrictions. When I recently flew
down to the Libbey Army base airport at Sierra Vista, the charts show thatwhole
area as restricted, but Capt Ron told me that was only during the week. Even
on the weekend, I called the tower 30miles out to make sure they knew I was
an ultralight inbound for SV airport, checked on status of airspace and runway
usage. The tower was extremely helpful getting me in and out because they knew
I was coming long before I arrived. Adriel had told the Luke tower he was there
and generally what his purpose was, but obviously didn't have enough specific
discussion about where he would be flying in relation tothe PowerPlant. He
was shooting some old trails that lead into the nearby foothills, away from
the pwr plant and these miscommunicationsled to the incident. I'm sure Adriel
does not wish to repeat his unexpected encounters that day. In his line of work,
this is probably not the first time and won't be the last time for going near
restricted areas, but next time I'm sure there will be a lot more discussion
of the specifics of his intentions with the FS's or tower to make sure it doesn't
happen again.
Adriel's plane is a licensed N-number and he a licensed pilot, with lots of GA
experience flying Navajo tribal leaders around the SW many years prior to his
freelance photography, flying the Twinstar. This shows something like thiscan
happen to anyone, no matter what your experience, and is a good lesson as you
said Vic. My original post was in response to a post that made him out to be a
senseless moron that shouldn't be allowed to fly a kite.... far from the reality
of the situation!
Thanks,
Jim Hefner
FF#022
Tucson, AZ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kuffel <kuffel(at)cyberport.net> |
Jim:
<>
John Jung:
<>
Richard Pike:
<>
There is yet another possibility. The difficulty may be in the wiring
not the engine, guage or probe. Our thermocoupler probes put out a very
low voltage at a very low current. This means even a very small
increase in the resistance of any connection in the circuit can have a
major impact on the temperature reading. In the course of changing, Jim
might have "cleaned" the problem contact simply by manipulating the
wires. If this was the original problem then he should expect normal
guage performance until the contact again gets dirty, oxidized, etc.
Tom Kuffel
Whitefish, MT
Building Original FireStar
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "johnjung(at)compusenior.com" <johnjung(at)compusenior.com> |
Group,
Tom is correct in the possibility that he brings up, (i.e. the connections
could cause the problem). But in my experience, it is less likely than the
gage or the probe, and it can be specifically tested for by putting things
back to starting positions and seeing if the problem is back. If it is, it's
not the connections. Just because there are many possible causes for a problem
doesn't mean that they can't be sorted out with some patience.
John Jung
There is yet another possibility. The difficulty may be in the wiring
not the engine, guage or probe.
snip......
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kirby Dennis Contr ASC/TM <Dennis.Kirby(at)kirtland.af.mil> |
| Subject: | Re: Twinstar/MarkIII |
"Paul Petty" wrote:
< we found a Twinstar Mark III ... data plate on the fuselage tube
indicated that the builder was Allen Sasser from Jacksonville FL. And that
the engine was a veneer? Any one know this fella or the plane? >
Paul -
The airplane you saw, owned by Al Sasser, was the first Kolb in the US to be
fitted with the Verner 4-stroke engine. It was flown for a couple of years
by Steve Flynn of Central Florida Flyers (US distributors for Verner
engines, near Orlando) as CFF's demo plane. I flew in that plane once with
Steve, and it's what sold me on the Verner engine - I have one in my
Mark-III also. (I should have gotten Steve F. to teach me how to LAND the
airplane, though!)
Dennis Kirby
Cedar Crest, NM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RWilliJill(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Wing rib cleanup |
Fellow members
I am in the process of building my first wing on a Firestar II. My question
is this. Is it absolutely necessary to take the wing ribs back off the wing
spar to clean up the holes that are to be drilled in the rib flanges that
slide over the spar? I really hate to do that because of the scratches that I
believe will occur to the spar when I slide them back off. The vertical stab
was a case in point. Just pulling the steel ring off the the boom tube a
very short distance, produced some nasty scrapes from the metal particles.
Besides, you really can't clean the ones inside the wingspar very
effectively. What did some of you fellows do and did you get any scratches
if you did slide them back off?
Thanks for any tips
R Williams
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gherkins Tim-rp3420 <rp3420(at)motorola.com> |
| Subject: | Wing rib cleanup |
R,
It is not necessary to slide the ribs off to clean up the rivet holes, this routine
is not instructed in the/my Kolb manual. Drill and rivet the ribs on. If
you feel you need to slide the ribs off again, use grease and spread it on the
spar tube, as suggested in the Kolb manual. I used grease to slide them on
and was very surprised how well it worked to alleviate scratches and gulling
on the main spar.
Regards,
Tim
-----Original Message-----
From: RWilliJill(at)aol.com [mailto:RWilliJill(at)aol.com]
Subject: Kolb-List: Wing rib cleanup
Fellow members
I am in the process of building my first wing on a Firestar II. My question
is this. Is it absolutely necessary to take the wing ribs back off the wing
spar to clean up the holes that are to be drilled in the rib flanges that
slide over the spar? I really hate to do that because of the scratches that I
believe will occur to the spar when I slide them back off. The vertical stab
was a case in point. Just pulling the steel ring off the the boom tube a
very short distance, produced some nasty scrapes from the metal particles.
Besides, you really can't clean the ones inside the wingspar very
effectively. What did some of you fellows do and did you get any scratches
if you did slide them back off?
Thanks for any tips
R Williams
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Wing rib cleanup |
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
Well there was no way to avoid some scratches, minor ones. I buffed most of
them out using some very find and compatible sand paper. I also lubed the
spar with high pressure oil and I made sure that when I pulled the ribs off
I did it along the axis of the spar. I figured that out after some
scratching when I tried rotating the ribs while pulling them out. If you
gonna scratch do it along the grain. :-)
Also you may want to take your debarring tool and run it along the rib
ring edge. It will take the sharp corners out of it, and it will be less
prone to scratch. But if you want to avoid any scratches at all, I don't
know if its possible.
=============================================
> Fellow members
> I am in the process of building my first wing on a Firestar II. My question
> is this. Is it absolutely necessary to take the wing ribs back off the wing
> spar to clean up the holes that are to be drilled in the rib flanges that
> slide over the spar? I really hate to do that because of the scratches that I
> believe will occur to the spar when I slide them back off. The vertical stab
> was a case in point. Just pulling the steel ring off the the boom tube a
> very short distance, produced some nasty scrapes from the metal particles.
> Besides, you really can't clean the ones inside the wingspar very
> effectively. What did some of you fellows do and did you get any scratches
> if you did slide them back off?
>
> Thanks for any tips
> R Williams
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wing rib cleanup |
On page 502 of the new Aircraft Spruce catalog, is a de-burring tool - p.n.
12-00700 for $14.35. You'll also want a bunch of the 12-00800, #10
de-burring blades, 'cause you WILL break them. This tool is indispensable
when building, for de-burring inside, and outside of the holes. It takes a
little practise, but EVERY hole you drill should be de-burred. The rivets
will pull down tighter, and stay tighter longer. For an example, take a
couple pieces of flat scrap, drill thru them with moderate pressure, and
look at where the drill came thru. When you tighten a rivet in a mess like
that, the burred edges will break away later, under pressure and vibration,
and the rivet will loosen. Yes, de-burring does get tedious. On the wing
rib holes, you should be able to leave the ribs pretty much in place, and
work thru the hole with the tool. If not, move them a minimum distance.
Before you slide the ribs on, clean up and polish all sharp edges
thoroughly, and, as has been said, lubricate them and slide them on. Also,
try each rib for tightness on the spar............the holes do vary
slightly. Put the loosest ones on 1st, and the tighter ones last. I did
mine like this, and have very little scratching. Any deep scratches on the
spar should be polished out, as they are stress risers. I went into quite a
bit of detail on all this in "Building Vamoose" in my web-site, below.
Have Fun ! ! ! GoGittum Lar.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: <RWilliJill(at)aol.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: Wing rib cleanup
>
> Fellow members
> I am in the process of building my first wing on a Firestar II. My
question
> is this. Is it absolutely necessary to take the wing ribs back off the
wing
> spar to clean up the holes that are to be drilled in the rib flanges that
> slide over the spar? I really hate to do that because of the scratches
that I
> believe will occur to the spar when I slide them back off. The vertical
stab
> was a case in point. Just pulling the steel ring off the the boom tube a
> very short distance, produced some nasty scrapes from the metal particles.
> Besides, you really can't clean the ones inside the wingspar very
> effectively. What did some of you fellows do and did you get any
scratches
> if you did slide them back off?
>
> Thanks for any tips
> R Williams
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)sw.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Wing rib cleanup |
R Williams/Gang:
A few of my thoughts on wing ribs.
> > Is it absolutely necessary to take the wing ribs back off the wing
> > spar to clean up the holes that are to be drilled in the rib flanges that
> > slide over the spar?
Don't think I would do that. In fact, I do not
move the ribs, once I start drilling the main spar
flanges. Drill and pop a rivet.
> > Just pulling the steel ring off the the boom tube a
> > very short distance, produced some nasty scrapes from the metal particles.
It is probably too late for you, but a way to
prevent the above is drill the tail post/tail boom
collar first. Then debur the inside of the
collar.
A little more info on main spar tubes and wing
ribs. No two main spar 5 or 6 inch tubes are the
same diameter. In fact, most are not the same
diameter at both ends. It is the nature of the
beast, or of the mandrel formed tube of that
size. If a main spar flange is a little too large
and fits loosely over the main spar, it is not a
big problem, unless it is really loose. If it is
a tight, even a little bit tight, then....... that
is a big problem. Gonna cause some scratching if
forced onto and up a main spar tube. A way to fix
this is inlarge the main spar flange. Pretty
simple to do. Don't even have to go to school to
learn how to do it. Make yourself a rolling pin
out of some scrap aluminum or steel tubing, i.e.,
slip a larger diamter tube over a slightly smaller
tube similar to a baker's rolling pin. Hold the
rib between your knees or someone else's knees or
a vise, and roll the inside of the main spar
flange. Voila!! The inside diameter is getting
larger. Be careful. It gets larger quickly and
we don't want to make it too big. A couple times
around the inside of the hole will probably do
it. Just big enough to slip onto the main spar
tube. No need for special grease, high pressure
oil, pig fat, or anything else that has to be
cleaned up later.
My two cents worth for what it is
worth.......................
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Airgriff2(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Twinstar/MarkIII |
> Dennis wrote
> >> I flew in that plane once with
>> Steve, and it's what sold me on the Verner engine - I have one in my
>> Mark-III also.
>
Dennis, could you share with the list you experiences with the Verner engine.
Any problems, what sort of performance, pros and cons, etc I was really
impressed with their web site. #165 80 hp 4 stroke $6500.. WOW
Fly safe
Bob Griffin
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Twinstar/MarkIII |
Bob,
Could you post that website?
Thanks
pp
----- Original Message -----
From: <Airgriff2(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Twinstar/MarkIII
>
>
> > Dennis wrote
> > >> I flew in that plane once with
> >> Steve, and it's what sold me on the Verner engine - I have one in
my
> >> Mark-III also.
> >
> Dennis, could you share with the list you experiences with the Verner
engine.
> Any problems, what sort of performance, pros and cons, etc I was really
> impressed with their web site. #165 80 hp 4 stroke $6500.. WOW
> Fly safe
> Bob Griffin
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gherkins Tim-rp3420 <rp3420(at)motorola.com> |
| Subject: | Just a bit nippy... |
Hey Feldmann,
It's about time that you stoke that fire underneath your Kolb project. Funny
thing is, that you don't need an engine to start the covering process?! This
is perfect weather to be covering that Firestar of yours.
Seriously, Stephan and I keep tabs on each others progress on our twin Firestar
II projects. I'm starting to cover and he decided to stop on the Firestar and
build a beautiful customized fully enclosed trailer. It's built and looks better
than any commercially built trailer I've seen. Very impressive!
Regards,
Tim
Firestar II soon to be in covering process.
-----Original Message-----
From: abbygirlk9 [mailto:abbygirlk9(at)netzero.net]
Subject: Kolb-List: Just a bit nippy...
Hey list, I wanted to write & encourage you builders out there especially if you
need a shot in the arm to keep plugging away with that Kolb project. A few
months back Big Lar reported taking a ride with George Thompson in his Firestar
II and scouting the area north of Prescott, AZ looking for critters and such.
Well I did the same last Saturday and it was a needed infusion to remind
me of why I was making a career out of building a plane and a trailer to put it
in.....it was great to finally take a hop in the same plane that I have been
constructing for the past 2 years. After reading Big Lar's post about his hop
(and seeing the pictures) I decided to ask George for the same .....yaa, what
a cool ride (actually about 35 degrees) in very calm & clear air. George's
FS II was rock stable and flew hands off, now that's what I want! The point of
course is that sometimes a person needs more than just reading the list for
a boost - - get a ride and experience the Kolb, and !
for some it may be for the first time.
Stephen Feldmann
Glendale, AZ
Firestar II 400+ hours in construction so far
Firestar II custom trailer nearly done after 6 months
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Sellers, Dale" <DSellers(at)sgtcollege.org> |
I need some advice. I am recovering the wings on an Ultra Star and I need
to know if I need to run the surface tapes the entire length of the ribs or
stop it at the end of the rivet line.
Dale Sellers
Georgia Ultra Star
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)sw.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wing covering |
> I am recovering the wings on an Ultra Star and I need
> to know if I need to run the surface tapes the entire length of the ribs or
> stop it at the end of the rivet line.
>
> Dale Sellers
Hi Dale/Gang:
Scratching my head trying to remember. Think the
old Ultrastar instructions indicated covering the
fabric rivest and a little bit more. I do my
wings a little different. I go ahead and wrap the
wing with one single piece of trim tape. Taping
goes fast and it also is stronger and looks
better. I also cover false ribs, but only their
length plus a little overhang.
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Airgriff2(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Check out Verner Motors U.S.A - Ultralight Engine Manufacturing |
Verner Motors U.S.A - Ultralight
Engine Manufacturing
Here is the link to the Verner Engine web page.
Or try www.vernermotors.com/welcome.htm
Fly safe
Bob Griffin
________________________________________________________________________________
SpamAssassin (Message larger than max testing size)
Hi Kolbers,
I have been looking at these Verner Engines the past couple of days. Bob made a
comment of 80 hp for 6500 bucks WOW! I looked at the website he had seen that
engine on and I think that company is no longer. I have sent an e-mail to them
asking if their availability and $6500.00 price is still current. We will see.
On the other hand there are four US distributors of the engines as per the
company website http://verneraircraftengines.com/ that claim the engines, both
the 133m and the VM1400 sell for $7995.00.
My question is this... It appears that the Verner engines that have been used in
the past are the VM1400 models with the belt PRDU and the new 133M is a gearbox
fitted design.
Here are the companies specs....
Technical Specifications For Verner 133M
Rated Power 78 HP @ 5000 RPM (5 minutes maximum!)
Torque 129 Nm (95 ft/lb) @ 3500 RPM
Fuel Consumption 2.2 (U.S.)gph / 8.6 L/hr
Maximum Continuous Power 68 HP @ 4000 RPM
Displacement 1329 cc
Bore 97 mm
Stroke 90 mm
Propeller rotation CCW, viewed from the front, tractor propeller
Compression Ratio 1 : 9.8
Weight 64 kg 142 lbs, including all accessories*
Spark Plugs NGK CR9EK + NGK CR9EVX or Champion RG 92 DC + Champion RG94C
Electric Starter 12V / 1000W
Generator (Alternator) 12V / 160W (13 Amp)
Lubrication Oil class SH/SG 5
Fuel Aviation petrol 100 LL Avgas or motor petrol - octane number 95
Fuel Pump Pierburg 7.20971.63
Carburetor 2 Dellorto PHVE/PHM
Reduction Drive 1 : 2 Gear reduction
Propeller hub 75 mm B.C. x 6 x 8 mm tapped holes (possible also 100 mm once
consulted with the manufacturer)
Battery 17 Ah minimum (24 Ah recommended)
TBO 800 hours
* accessories - include the oil-cooler, instruments, electric start, full exhaust,
air-filter, and oil-filter.
WARNING: This aircraft engine does NOT comply with federal safety regulations for
standard aircraft. This is for use in experimental and microlight uncertified
aircraft only and only in circumstances in which engine failure will not compromise
safety. Read operator=92s manual before operating the engine.
$7,995 F.O.B. Engine gauges, cooler, exhaust, and engine mount sold separately.
OEM inquires are welcome.
Additional option is an upgrade from analog engine gauges to a single multi-sensor
digital gauge.
M133 will be available in Fall 2002. 1/3 deposit is necessary to order a 133M.
Normal delivery 4-6 weeks post-order after September 2002. Manufactured in the
Czech Republic.
Technical Specification For VM 1400
Rated Power 80 BHP (58 kW) @ 5,000 rpm (5 minutes maximum!)
Torque 129 Nm (95 ft. lbs.) @ 3,500 rpm
Fuel Consumption 2.2 (U.S.)gph / 8.6 L/hr @ 3,550 rpm (70% power)
Maximum Continuous Power 70 BHP (52 kW) @ 4,000 rpm
Displacement 1387 cc (85.43 cu.in.)
Bore 94 mm (3.70 in)
Stroke 100 mm (3.94 in)
Propeller rotation Clockwise (viewed from the propeller side)
Compression Ratio 1:10.2
Weight 75 kg (165 lbs.), including all required components* (without oil)
Ignition Timing 14-20 degrees BTDC
Spark Plugs NGK CR9EK, NGK CR9EVX, Champion RG92DC, Champion RG94C
Spark Plug Gap 0.4 mm (0.016 in.)
Electric Starter 12 V / 1,000 watt
Generator (Alternator) 12 V / 70 watt (6 Amp)
Lubrication Castrol SH/SG 5-50W (Synthetic), AEROSHELL 15-50 (Semi-Synthetic)
Fuel Automotive 91 octane minimum or 100 LL AvGas
Fuel Pump AC 816031, Mechnical
Carburetors 2 x Bing 64
Reduction Drive 1.88:1 2.0:1 or 2.20:1, 80-85 mm x 8 mm pitch cog-belt
Propeller hub 75 mm B.C. x 6 x 8 mm tapped holes (100 mm available on request)
TBO 1200 hours
*required components - include the oil-cooler, instruments, electric start, full
exhaust, air-filter, and oil-filter.
WARNING: This aircraft engine does NOT comply with federal safety regulations for
standard aircraft. This is for use in experimental and microlight uncertified
aircraft only and only in circumstances in which engine failure will not compromise
safety. Read operator=92s manual before operating the engine.
$7,995 F.O.B. Engine gauges, exhaust, and motor mount sold separately. OEM inquires
are welcome.
Additional option is an upgrade from analog engine gauges to a single multi-sensor
digital gauge.
Normal delivery 4-6 weeks post-order. Manufactured in the Czech Republic.
ppp........
n4958p
________________________________________________________________________________
Kolbers,
Question: The new Verner 133 claims it has:
2 Dellorto PHVE/PHM Carbs?
What is that? I only see one?
ppp.........
N4958P
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)sw.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Age of cloth |
> The plane is covered with Stits cloth.
> My questions are: How long before I have to recover the plane?
> Should I buy a special tool to check the cloth condition?
>
> Bill Vincent
Hi Bill/Gang:
You didn't say whether the fabric was protected by
Polyspray (aluminized dope). If it is properly
protected with Polyspray, it is good
indefinitely. Far as I know polyester dacron is
impervious to most stuff except UV light. The
Polyspray is used to keep the UV from getting to
the fabric.
Contact the guys at the local EAA Chap for a
fabric tester or your friend the local A&E
mechanic at the airport. They will probably lend
you a fabric tester to test your fabric.
Fabric on my right wing is 11 years old. I keep
my airplane in a hanger, but the front is open, so
UV can get to it. UV can also be reflected, so if
the bottom of the wing is not protected with
Polyspray, UV is working on it also.
My thoughts,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Bean <slyck(at)frontiernet.net> |
Ralph has a new woman AND chili on the ice? There I was startin to feel
sorry
for him. Flying on the flats sure is fun . ---soon to be, BB, mounting the
new carb.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim" <flykolb(at)carolina.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Instructor needed |
Just had a call from a fellow in Charlotte, NC who is buying a Firestar and needs
instructions. Anyone around - within say 4 hrs - of Charlotte who can help
him?
Jim
Mark III
Charlotte, NC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Williamson" <kolbrapilot(at)attbi.com> |
Fellow engine hunters,
Check this website for a great price on the Verner 133M:
http://www.ultrikes.com/index.htm
John Williamson
Arlington, TX
N49KK, Kolb Kolbra, Jabiru 2200, 182 hours
http://home.attbi.com/~kolbrapilot/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alderson, James" <James_Alderson(at)jdedwards.com> |
| Subject: | Charlotte Kolb Instruction |
Hello all,
I just joined the list because I am looking at buying a beautiful Firestar
II from a guy here on the list. He keeps it at the airport I have recently
been flying an Airborne Edge X trike out of. I decided I would like to add
an axis to my control resume, and I have not seen an ultralight built with
the strength, love, and fit/finish that this one is (AB, if you read this, I
really feel you should be proud of your airplane).
Anyway, since its a Firestar II set up for single place flying, and I have
no taildragger experience (most of my GA training has been in a Cherokee 140
and Cessna 172), I need some training in both 3 Axis ultralight (which I can
get no problem) and would love some in a Kolb. I am living in Charlotte NC
right now, but can travel to anywhere within reason to get some training. I
would really like to find someone in the Carolinas that has a two seater
kolb.
With that said, I hope to be a contributing member of this "My Kolb makes me
smile" list you have here.... thanks.
James Alderson
Cell Phone - 704-236-6953
Email - james_alderson(at)jdedwards.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vincehallam(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Verner Engines |
altimiser address not recognised
vnz
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vann Covington <vann_covington(at)ncsu.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Instructor needed |
Check out Joe Carswell in Morganton, NC. He is a great instructor. Vann, KXP,
Raleigh, NC
josephcarswell(at)hotmail.com
Jim wrote:
>
> Just had a call from a fellow in Charlotte, NC who is buying a Firestar and needs
instructions. Anyone around - within say 4 hrs - of Charlotte who can help
him?
>
> Jim
> Mark III
> Charlotte, NC
>
________________________________________________________________________________
\"Richard Swiderski\"" <swiderski@advanced-connect.net>,
"Aloha Moore" , "Barton" ,
"Mike Baker" ,
"Tom Baker"
Kolb Listers,
After a having put aviation on the back burner for almost a year, our 912 powered
Mark III finally flew this past Sunday (2-2-2003), at the Flying Ten Airport,
Archer, FL. Everyting went great. No adjustments required.
I am not current so, Larry Flewelling (Kolb Owner) was the test pilot and did a
super job. I am not sure who had the biggest smile, Larry or me.
I cannot wait to get current so that I too can enjoy the fruits of my labor.
I want to take this opportunity to express my appreciation and gratitude to all
the Kolb Listers who so generously share their experience and knowledge. Your
input was invaluable to this first time builder.
L. Ray Baker
Gainesville, Fl
Mark III, N629RB
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim" <flykolb(at)carolina.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Instructor needed |
Vann
I bought my Kolb from Joe but he is a challenger dealer and I do not think
he has a kolb to train with.
Jim
Mark III
Charlotte, NC
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vann Covington" <vann_covington(at)ncsu.edu>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Instructor needed
>
> Check out Joe Carswell in Morganton, NC. He is a great instructor. Vann,
KXP, Raleigh, NC
> josephcarswell(at)hotmail.com
>
> Jim wrote:
>
> >
> > Just had a call from a fellow in Charlotte, NC who is buying a Firestar
and needs instructions. Anyone around - within say 4 hrs - of Charlotte who
can help him?
> >
> > Jim
> > Mark III
> > Charlotte, NC
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vann Covington <vann_covington(at)ncsu.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Instructor needed |
Right, but I felt the transition to the Kolb tail dragger experience was a kind
of nonevent. The Kolb is rather benign as tail draggers go. With no tail
dragger experience, I had no trouble with the transition. Joe is such a great
instructor, the fact the he didn't have a tail dragger was of very small
concern. Vann
Jim wrote:
>
> Vann
>
> I bought my Kolb from Joe but he is a challenger dealer and I do not think
> he has a kolb to train with.
>
> Jim
> Mark III
> Charlotte, NC
> ----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Vann Covington" <vann_covington(at)ncsu.edu>
> To:
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Instructor needed
>
> >
> > Check out Joe Carswell in Morganton, NC. He is a great instructor. Vann,
> KXP, Raleigh, NC
> > josephcarswell(at)hotmail.com
> >
> > Jim wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Just had a call from a fellow in Charlotte, NC who is buying a Firestar
> and needs instructions. Anyone around - within say 4 hrs - of Charlotte who
> can help him?
> > >
> > > Jim
> > > Mark III
> > > Charlotte, NC
> > >
> >
> >
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kirby Dennis Contr ASC/TM <Dennis.Kirby(at)kirtland.af.mil> |
| Subject: | Re: Verner Engine |
Bob Griffin wrote:
< Dennis, could you share with the list you experiences with the Verner
engine. Any problems, what sort of performance, pros and cons, etc I was
really impressed with their web site. #165 80 hp 4 stroke $6500. WOW >
Bob, and Kolb Friends -
I believe the $6500 price tag is old data. I bought my Verner-1400 two
years ago and paid $7500.
With regrets, I'm not able to share very much info with you regarding the
Verner engine on my Mark-3. My total experience is one flight so far on my
aircraft. For those that may recall, I botched my very first landing last
Sep and bent both gear legs. I've since replaced them with new ones and the
aircraft is ready to fly again anytime. But I haven't flown it, as I'm
waiting until I get some dual instruction in another Mark-3 before I venture
aloft again. (I'm planning on traveling up to TNK next month and fly with
Brian Milburn in their new Mark-3 Classic. Need to learn how to land this
plane without bending things!)
Only two folks on this List fly Kolbs with a Verner engine; myself and Bill
George. Bill has flown nearly 30 hours in his Verner-powered Mark-3, and he
reports the performance as being very close to a 582. From my limited
experience with the engine, I like it and am happy with my choice. Runs
smooth and seems to provide plenty of power for my Mark-3. Plus, factory
support from the US distributor (Central Florida Flyers) has been excellent.
In reality, it's a 70hp engine. Specs say 80, but that's only at the max
RPM of 5000, which is limited to 5 minutes. Max continuous RPM is 4000,
which yields 70hp.
There was lots of talk on this List about the Verner engine last fall. John
Hauck wrote up a thoughtful comparison between the Verner and the R-912.
Check the archives for details. I'm encouraged that more Kolb folks are
showing interest in the Verner, as that will increase our List's experience
base with this powerplant. As soon as I begin flying again, I'll certainly
post some performance figures to share with you all.
Dennis Kirby
Cedar Crest, NM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <by0ung(at)brigham.net> |
| Subject: | weight and balance |
when figuring the w&b. after adding the moment arms and deviding that by the total
weight. we get a distance in inches from the datum to the cg. in the
instructions it says to take that distance and multiply by 100 then devide
the result by 66 to get the %cg which is to be between 25 and 35. All of that
is easy math but the question i have is..... where do we get the figures
100 and 66? what do they represent? just whishing to expand my knowledge.
what prompted this question is i am considering moving my engine back so i am not
so near the front of the cg range when i have two people on board. that leads
to the next question.... do you know the weight of a rotax 912 complete with
the oil canister full of oil mounted on the magneto end of the engine? i
am planning some what if s with a spreadsheet and the info would be valuable
in coming up with a mathamatical solution before driling holes.
boyd young Mark III clasic.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
2/6/03 7:37Mike and Dixie Shackelford
> Used a square and
> penciled a small mark on each rib so the ends would be even when
> sighting down the length of the wing.
======================
One of the things we were told never to do is use a pencile on aluminum, has
to do with corossion. Use only felt Sharpie type,, or a grease pencil. I
hope you were saying it figuratively.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick & Martha Neilsen" <neilsenrm(at)cs.com> |
Yes Altimiser is another VW engine site. They list a engine mount that might
solve the Rotax to VW engine mount problem but there are no pictures and the
description is a bit vague. We need a off the shelf engine mount for
mounting VWs on Kolbs.
I have talked to the owner a few times on the phone and he is big on
promises. Over the course of two years I talked to him three times and each
time he was a few months away from finishing his reduction drive design. It
appears now three years later he is selling the Gene Smith reduction drive.
I will say it again the VW engine is another good option for those that
don't want to spend the big dollars for a Rotax. The engine can be installed
for around $5500.00 with all new parts. With fuel injection add another
$1000.00. You have the option of building it your self for less and it can
be built in just about any HP you want 36-100. I have found that a reduction
drive is mandatory to make this engine perform on a Kolb. Ask me how I know.
Again you will not find any one that will sell you a engine package for a
MKIII but if you willing to buy the parts and bolt it together it appears to
be a suitable, inexpensive and reliable engine package. I have 60 hours on
my redrive VW and 40 hours on the previous direct drive VW.
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIII
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Kirk Smith
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Verner Engines
> altimiser address not recognised
http://www.altimizer.com/ Try this one.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)sw.rr.com> |
Gents
> One of the things we were told never to do is use a pencile on aluminum, has
> to do with corossion.
I believe he was referring to marking fabric with
pencil. This is the recommended method of
marking. Agree not to mark aluminum with pencil.
I use a ball point pen to mark fabric. Problem
for some is it bleeds through. However, I have
not experienced a problem with bleed through
because the Polyspray does a good job of covering
it up.
> Use only felt Sharpie type,, or a grease pencil. I
> hope you were saying it figuratively.
I use a felt tip pen for marking aluminum, but not
a grease pencil. I like a fine line to mark for
cuts and drilling.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
2/6/03 10:04John Hauck
> I use a felt tip pen for marking aluminum, but not
> a grease pencil. I like a fine line to mark for
January 09, 2003 - February 06, 2003
Kolb-Archive.digest.vol-ec