Kolb-Archive.digest.vol-ee
February 27, 2003 - March 12, 2003
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <cen33475(at)centurytel.net> |
| Subject: | history of ultralights |
http://www.avnet.co.uk/bmaa/histindex.htm
this is another great history...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
rather i believe the horizontal stabilizer
stalls and quits forcing the tail down.
> boyd
Boyd/Gang:
We overcame a similar problem when we built my MK
III. Based on experience flying the factory MK
III, I knew the MK III needed a lot of nose up
trim. Brother Jim designed and fabricated some
adjustable horizontal stabilizer leading edge
mounts. The top position is still a couple inches
lower than what the plans call for. I have three
positions to experiment with. I fly in the middle
position, where the airplane feels best.
Maybe.........dropping the leading edge of the
horizontal stabilizer will help correct your
problem.
At Sun and Fun last year, flying a reporter that
weighed 200 or so lbs, I discovered something I
had not experienced before. I was demonstrating
diving for airspeed with power off, pulling back
hard on the stick to pull G's and gain altitude,
resulting in a really nose high attitude, zeroing
out airspeed and stalling in that nose high
attitude. Finally decided to do it with full
flaps. Previously had done all of them clean, no
flaps.
At 70 mph or so we ran out of elevator authority,
period. Undoubtedly, the flaps had blanked out
the tail section, or could have gotten into an
accelerated stall brought on by the added pitch
down tendancy when the MK III is flying with full
flaps. It will do it with a chubby passenger, but
not when I am solo.
Hope that helps more than cloudy up the water.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
2/27/03 10:06Richard Pike
> then
> make some vortex generators and put them on the ****underside**** of the
stabilizer
> just ahead of the elevators and try it again. Those changes should increase
> your elevator authority.
===================
It should read *top side of the elevator*. The elevator creates negative
lift, for a stable normal flight.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
2/27/03 8:54boyd young
> ps how can i figure where the center of lift is ?????
========================
Center of lift is based on the airfoil, each airfoil is different. However
in general the center of lift is 33% of mean aerodynamic cord. That is 1/3
the way from the leading edge to trailing edge.
I am pretty sure that you know that as long as your cg is forward of the CF
you should be safe. If your CG is too far forward you will not have enough
elevator authority to lift the nose. Again and in general if you can lift
your nose off the ground then you should be able to fly safely. Your margine
of stall recovery however diminishes because of the extra moment on the
nose. On the plus side the aircraft will have a more natural recovery
tendency with a nose heavy cg, than tail heavy cg.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack & Louise Hart <jbhart(at)ldd.net> |
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
>
>2/27/03 10:06Richard Pike
>
>> then
>> make some vortex generators and put them on the ****underside**** of the
>stabilizer
>> just ahead of the elevators and try it again. Those changes should increase
>> your elevator authority.
>===================
>
>It should read *top side of the elevator*. The elevator creates negative
>lift, for a stable normal flight.
>
Ron,
If you want the elevator to create negative lift (lift the nose/pull the tail down),
you need to put the vortex generators on the bottom side to enhance the
effect of up elevator.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Jackson, MO
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart(at)ldd.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
2/27/03 12:43John Hauck
> At 70 mph or so we ran out of elevator authority,
> period. Undoubtedly, the flaps had blanked out
> the tail section, or could have gotten into an
> accelerated stall brought on by the added pitch
> down tendancy when the MK III is flying with full
> flaps.
====================
Read the message I just sent. What happened is that you stalled the tail
before the the wings. Something that should *never* happen in normal flight.
I am glad you posted your message. As it confirms my worst suspicions. Let
me say again, the Tail should *never* stall before the wings in normal
flight. I regret that we have not had this discussion before I installed the
hinges for the H-stabs, as I would not have even bothered to follow the
plans for hinge location.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <cen33475(at)centurytel.net> |
| Subject: | nose heavy mk III |
Center of lift is based on the airfoil, each airfoil is different. However
in general the center of lift is 33% of mean aerodynamic cord. That is 1/3
the way from the leading edge to trailing edge.
not sure what the center of lift is but there is an aerodynamic center which
is where the pitching moment is constant and where we plie the lift and drag
forces for aerodynamic analysis. for the wing it is at the 1/4 chord for
almost all airfoils. a tail moves it aft a bit.
there is also a center of pressure (probably what you are refering to)which
moves on the wing as a function of angle of attack. for a positively
cambered wing it moves forward with increaseing aoa, for a reflexed airfoil
it moves aft with aoa.
using the center of pressure is very complicated so it is not used. lift is
applied at the AC. and the aerodynamic moment is added to account for the
pitching moment, which is almost constant until the stall.
http://wright.nasa.gov/airplane/ac.html
this describes the situation
topher
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: history of ultralights |
> this is about Homer, claims first flight of 1970 and entered the market in
> 1980
Topher/Gang:
Yes, that was the Kolb Flyer, his first commercial
venture with ultralights. Prior to the Flyer, he
designed, built, and flew many others, to include
a four engine ultralight (although he did not call
them ultralights because the term had not been
invented). Homer liked having a lot of engines,
coupled with large ailerons to control his
airplanes at extremely slow flight, even through
and into the stall. Homer wanted to be able to
fly very slowly, right over the treetops, with the
multiple engines as backup to be able to do that
safely. He was into slow flight more than fast
flight.
Homer Kolb is a very quiet man by nature. Those
little wheels in his head are constantly turning.
He is developing airplanes every day, usually on
his bed with yellow legal pad in his old restored
1700's era home that he meticuously rebuilt.
I have been very fortunate to get to spend some
quality time with Homer, his family, and the Old
Kolb Company people. I miss that era
tremendously.
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: history of ultralights |
> http://www.avnet.co.uk/bmaa/histindex.htm
>
> this is another great history...
Topher/Gang:
This article states Homer did not start out with
hang glider roots when he designed the Flyer.
That is absolutely wrong. Homer started out with
hanggliders, hang gliders he designed and built.
I think he got one of his ideas from Ragollo's
flex wing. That is the one he sketched for me on
a legal pad in my 5th wheel at Sun and Fun several
years ago. They launched it behind boats on the
river, behind cars, and off a hill between his
house and Lancaster, out in Amish country.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
> It should read *top side of the elevator*. The elevator creates negative
> lift, for a stable normal flight.
Ron/Gang:
Been building a Yamaha YX426 thumper for my son.
Came up to take a break. Had to fabricate my own
valve spring compressor. Not an easy tool to
use. Have forgotten to put valve seals on the
first two valves. This single cylinder thumper
has 3 intake and 2 exhaust valves. Am building it
from the bare bones engine cases up. Everything
new and fresh. Anyhow, since I am getting more
practice installing the valves than I wanted, it
is time for a cup of coffee.
Have to agree with Jack Hart on this one. I think
Ron Mason meant the other "top side of the
elevator". When we are trying to raise the nose
with up elevator, the air is seperating from the
bottom.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Guy Swenson" <guys(at)rrt.net> |
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
Captain Ron/List,
I cannot tell you who or why the leading edge of the Horizontal Stabs
are mounted with the top surface flush with the top of the boom tube,
I was informed by Kolb that in that position, I could run out of
elevator at a much higher speed than normal with a heavy passenger
and low fuel condition. The new mounting location was to be 1/4in
above the centerline of the boom tube. This was the location mine
were in for the first few flights. In a solo/full fuel configuration
I held a tremendous amount of DOWN pressure on the elevator to
maintain level flight. By adding 200 lbs os sand bags to the
passenger seat, I could release most of the down pressure on the
stick, as fuel was burned down stick pressure would reduce even more.
When I received the new brackets from Kolb I drilled three sets of
holes ( On the recommendation of Bill Futrell. Thanks Bill) I found
that in the top hole, (which is just below the original location)
solo flight in almost all loading/fuel configurations works very
well. Stick pressures can be handled with trim. But if I load in a
200 lb Passenger I need to lower the leading edge at least one hole
if the air temps are below 50 degrees F, and two holes if the temps
are above 50 degrees F. I know this is not the perfect solution to
the "runnung out of elevator" problem. but given the design and light
weight of these aircraft its a solution the works very well. I also
have the original "larger" Horizontal Stabs on my Xtra.
Hope this helps.
Guy S.
MKIII Xtra.
---- Original Message ----
From: CaptainRon(at)theriver.com
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: nose heavy mk III
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 09:41:52 -0700
>
>2/27/03 8:54boyd young
>
>> the main wing has not stalled, rather i believe the horizontal
>stabilizer
>> stalls and quits forcing the tail down.
>======================
>
>Good point, my guess is that with the up turned horizontal
>stabilizers as
>called for in the plans, you exceed their angle of attack limit
>before you
>should. Which makes me question why and for what reason did they
>dial in
>such negative angle of attack in the factory. In mine I have already
>decided
>to install another pair of hinges along the center line of the boom.
>You always want to have your wings stall before your tail in a
>conventional
>design. In a canard it the other way around.
>I wonder if anyone has any idea why it was designed that way?
>It seems to be wrong according to all conventional design criteria
>that I
>know of.... which is quite alot. :-)
>
>
>===
>===
>===
>===
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
> > At 70 mph or so we ran out of elevator authority,
> > period. Undoubtedly, the flaps had blanked out
> > the tail section, or could have gotten into an
> > accelerated stall brought on by the added pitch
> > down tendancy when the MK III is flying with full
> > flaps. john h
> ====================
>
> Read the message I just sent. What happened is that you stalled the tail
> before the the wings. Something that should *never* happen in normal flight.
Ron
Ron/Gents:
I did read your msg. I don't think it applies to
my airplane and my situation. I believe, as I
stated above, that the flaps (40 degrees) deployed
during a high G pull up blanked out the tail
section, losing elevator control, not stalling.
The MK III and all of Homer's designs have more
than enough elevator control authority for safe
flight. The maneuver I discribed is an
exception. I could not repeat the maneuver with
the same results solo.
> I am glad you posted your message. As it confirms my worst suspicions. Let
> me say again, the Tail should *never* stall before the wings in normal
> flight.
The tail of my airplane did not stall in normal
flight. I wasn't any where near normal flight.
Would never attempt a maneuver like that other
than at altitude for recovery purposes. We were
more into testing than normal.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
> I cannot tell you who or why the leading edge of the Horizontal Stabs
> are mounted with the top surface flush with the top of the boom tube,
> I was informed by Kolb that in that position, I could run out of
> elevator at a much higher speed than normal with a heavy passenger
> and low fuel condition.
> Guy S.
Guy S/Gang:
The reason the leading edge of the horizontal
stabilizer is mounted in its prescribed location
is because the airplane was designed to fly tail
high. The tailboom also creates a lot of drag in
this tailhigh position. One of the reasons the MK
III is not a real speedster.
On the other hand, the Sling Shot was designed to
fly with the tailboom parallel to the flight path,
or level, to reduce drag somewhat. It has very
little angle of attack. The down side to this is
in slow flight the SS must drop its tail in an
extremely low attitude in order to get enough
angle of attack of the wings to fly slowly. It
gives one an uncomfortable feeling in this slow,
tail low attitude.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rwpike(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
I meant what I said, and said what I meant. Put the vortex generators on
the underside of the stab, just ahead of the elevator leading edge.
If the elevator is in the up position, and is failing to produce sufficient
down force because it is stalled, you say you would put the vortex
generators on the top? That would be like putting vortex generators on the
under side of a wing or other lifting surface to improve it's stall
characteristics in normal flight.
When the elevator is up and stalled, you put the vortex generators on the
curved side of the surface that is producing lift (In this case it is lift
downwards, that's what up elevator does) which means putting them on the
underside of the stab, just ahead of the leading edge of the elevator.
Since you want more down force, the generators will be on the down side.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>2/27/03 10:06Richard Pike
>
> > then
> > make some vortex generators and put them on the ****underside**** of the
>stabilizer
> > just ahead of the elevators and try it again. Those changes should increase
> > your elevator authority.
>===================
>
>It should read *top side of the elevator*. The elevator creates negative
>lift, for a stable normal flight.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Kolb-List Digest: 12 Msgs - 02/25/03 |
Ed Steuber, do I know you from Hamburg or Buffalo? Pete Hughes
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Hocker" <hocker(at)gte.net> |
| Subject: | Ivoprop for sale |
Hi Kolbers,
I have an Ivoprop ground adjustable prop that went to a Kolb Firestar with a
Rotax 447 for sale. It is 68" in diameter, and is in like-new condition. It
comes with the hub and polished aluminum spinner. Price is $200 plus shipping.
I have tried to get photoshare pictures attached, but if they don't work you
can email for photos at hocker(at)gte.net. Thanks!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rwpike(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Ivoprop for sale |
Sold.
Where do I send the money?
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
Contact me off list at richard(at)bcchapel.org
or
rwpike(at)charter.net
>
>Hi Kolbers,
> I have an Ivoprop ground adjustable prop that went to a Kolb Firestar
> with a Rotax 447 for sale. It is 68" in diameter, and is in like-new
> condition. It comes with the hub and polished aluminum spinner. Price
> is $200 plus shipping. I have tried to get photoshare pictures attached,
> but if they don't work you can email for photos at hocker(at)gte.net. Thanks!
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: history of ultralights |
> try reading it more carefully, here is the quote:
> Saying they are 'absolutely wrong' doesnt seem fair to me. I still think it
> is a great web site.
> topher
topher/Gang:
I agree with you absolutely. I was wrong and I
appologise for my mistake.
I might be a little bit touchy when it comes to
Kolb airplanes.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
2/27/03 13:06Jack & Louise Hart
> If you want the elevator to create negative lift (lift the nose/pull the tail
> down), you need to put the vortex generators on the bottom side to enhance the
> effect of up elevator.
=======================
Well that got me thinking again. I guess the question is where the
seperation occures?
It seems to me that if as the H-Stabs are inclined up' you do not exceed the
angle of attack on the bottom side of the H-stabs. Thus no seperation in
flight there. The angle of attack against the relative wing is lowest on
bottom side as it is inclined top. The angle of attack is high topside as it
is inclined up. The stall is a negative stall!! but its effect is the same,
furthermore what also happens, and that is what your post got me to realize
is that the **elevator** itself maybe stalled.
When I think of the angle that the up deflected elevator has towards the
relative wind after adding the already high angle of incidence of the
H-stabs it looks to me like its close to stall at high speed cruise whenever
you have to make any abropt up pull manuver, or at any speed when nose
heavy. Just visualize the relative wind blasting along parallal the tail
boom at 75+mph. It then hits the leading edge of the H-stabs, on the bottom
side its ok as it hits it and kinda pushes it up. On the topeside after it
clears the leading edge it instantly has to make a turn down, which means
one point of potential seperation, and certain turbulance!
On the bottom side the wind rips back and then if the elevator is in the up
position it will have to change direction again and then rip upwards!!
another seperation point. When I combine those two seperation points
together, the result is very reduced up elevator effectiveness especialy at
high speed when the air is energized++ .
Because of the up inclination of H-stabs, the normal expectation of stall as
in genavcrft do not apply for the tail surfaces.
I am also willing to bet that if someone gets an M3X to about 120mph (could
be less) and goes up elevator the tail will stall,, he will loose all tail
effectiveness till he relaxes pressure on the stick. Which is counter
intuitive when you are in a dive at past vne. The good part is that it is
the same recovery technic that we have for normal stall, it may self recover
if one cuts the power to idle, so much drag will slow it down to where the
relative wind can actually make the turns without seperating (but then if
adding excessive forward cg to the mix and doubts begin to creep in). :-)
My new hinges are going at mid boom or actually past mid boom bottom side, I
rather trim down than trim up!
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
2/27/03 14:24John Hauck
> When we are trying to raise the nose
> with up elevator, the air is seperating from the
> bottom.
================
The only place it can stall Bottom side (see my rather long message just a
couple of minutes ago) is the elevator itself. When I consider the angle of
seperation I doubt that small Vg's on it would do any good. Even if they did
when you make them large enough,, in normal high cruise flight they would
act as both little speed breaks, and a source of buffeting.
I would not install them.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
2/27/03 14:34John Hauck
> I did read your msg. I don't think it applies to
> my airplane and my situation. I believe, as I
> stated above, that the flaps (40 degrees) deployed
> during a high G pull up blanked out the tail
> section, losing elevator control, not stalling.
=====================
John it can't blank your H-stabs when you have a high wing airplane, with
bottom placed stabs. The flow is from the bottom up, not the other way
around.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Blane Cox" <coxhb(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Aero Twin Engine |
The company told me they will miss SnF as production issues/dates are not final.
They expect to be showing the engine "soon" after SnF. They estimate the price
will be $6,500.00. It will have a 2:1 reduction unit (don't know what type).
There is a VTOL being developed in US that uses airbags for low altitude stall.
It's called SoloTrek. Uses twin ducted fan propulsion.
Blane
________________________________________________________________________________
Lar, sent you the page off line, let me know if you got it . Just got
back on line, we have had a good old fashion ice storm here for the last
three days. No flying, no driving, no fishing, no FUN...
Richard Harris
MK N912RH
Lewisville, Arkansas
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: Gap Seals
>
> I've come up with some questions about installing the aileron & flap gap
seals on Vamoose. Could someone scan and send the appropriate pages of the
Mk III construction manual to me. Sure would appreciate it.
Lar.
>
> Larry Bourne
> Palm Springs, CA
> Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
> www.gogittum.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
> > When we are trying to raise the nose
> > with up elevator, the air is seperating from the
> > bottom. john h
> The only place it can stall Bottom side (see my rather long message just a
> couple of minutes ago) is the elevator itself. Ron
Ron/Gents/Ladies:
Guess I did not make myself confusing enough.
Vortex generators might help prevent seperation
from the horizontal stab and the elevator.
Again folks, I do not know what all this concern
about "nose heavy MK III's" and "elevators
stalling"..................
If there was a design problem with the airplane, a
lot of us would have discovered this over the
years, since 1991, when the prototype MK III took
to the air.
I, for one, do not have a concern with it. It is
not an issue for me.
Boyd Young has a problem, but it is not a problem
designed into the airplane 12 years ago. I
believe he has a unique problem related to his
particular airplane, not all the other MK III's
flying around the world.
Based on experience flying passengers for Kolb at
Sun and Fun and Oshkosh, all shapes and sizes,
there is no problem with the Mark III. High
thrust line gives a definite pitch down attitude
if not properly trimmed. Reduction in power will
take the pitch down tendency away immediately for
most MK III's. If not, then you have probably
built a problem into your airplane.
Keep the thrust line as low as you can get it. I
have flown a 72" prop on the 912S and my MK III.
Yes, I could tell a good bit of difference on
takeoff when I poured the coal to it on my first
takeoff. I had raised the thrust line about an
inch over the 912 and I had a lot more power. I
didn't think I was going to get it to rotate. I
reduced power, rotated, and climbed on out of
Gantt International Airport. I might add, we do
not waste space at Gantt. Especially in airstrip
length.
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
> > I did read your msg. I don't think it applies to
> > my airplane and my situation. I believe, as I
> > stated above, that the flaps (40 degrees) deployed
> > during a high G pull up blanked out the tail
> > section, losing elevator control, not stalling. john h
> =====================
>
> John it can't blank your H-stabs when you have a high wing airplane, with
> bottom placed stabs. The flow is from the bottom up, not the other way
> around. Ron
Ron/Folks:
Yes it can, and yes it has, and yes, when put into
the right attitude it will blank out the elevator
again.
I think you are making a mistake comparing the
Mark III to "other" airplanes. Ain't the same
animal. It is a Mark III.
Doesn't have "bottom placed stabs", they are
mounted high. What you see on the ground is not
what you see when the airplane flies. I mentioned
several times today that the Firestar, Mark III,
and the Mark III Extra, fly tail high. The tail
boom is not parallel to the line of flight. A
reason for a lot of drag, dragging that big 6"
tube through the air with a longitudinal profile.
Much larger profile than the Sling Shot which
flies with the tail boom parallel to line of
flight. SS has a little 6" diameter profile for a
tail boom.
So far, during the few hours I have been able to
accumulate flying the Mark III, mine and the
factory Mark III, I have been able to blank the
elevator in two different attitudes.
1) On approach to land, power at idle, full
flaps, cross controlled trying to get the fat ole
gal to slip, and the elevator and most of the
tailsection will try to go away.
2) The maneuver I discribed this afternoon. Full
flaps, idle speed, extreme nose down dive with two
folks on board, abrupt pull up about 70 or 80 mph,
and the elevator disappears.
Number 2) I have only experienced on my airplane.
On the Old Kolb Company Mark III with 582, flying
passengers, demonstrating the airplane, I was
never able to get it into an accerated stall. I
never experienced anything like 2) above except
with my airplane. Probably because that was the
first time I executed the maneuver.
Ain't nuthin wrong with out airplanes, folks, as
far as john hauck is concerned. Yes, there are a
few little things we can tweek to make them fly a
little better and to suit our own taste. But
basically these airplanes have already been
developed, tested, and continue to be tested by
everyone out there flying them. If there was an
extremely serious problem, i.e., running out of
elevator............., folks would be dying left
and right, or at least tearing up a buncha Kolbs.
I recommend standing back, taking a good look,
maybe even listen to some folks that have been
there and done that, before redesigning something
you have not flown very much.
Hopefully, if the weather Gods will cooperate, I
am going to hop in my Mark III, serial number
M3-011, fire her up, and take off for Panama City,
Florida, and the Annual Beach Run. I believe I
can make it down there, maybe fly a few
passengers, and even make it back home Sunday
without running out of elevator. Well, I hope so
anyhow. :-)
Take care,
john h
PS: Did not use spell check. Did not proof
read. I am tired, but feel good. Got the Yamaha
thumper engine back together and only had a
handful or two parts left over. I'll save them
for the next time I tear it down. May come up
short then. hehehe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rwpike(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
>
> Just visualize the relative wind blasting along parallal the tail
>boom at 75+mph.
This is why we are in the middle of all this fuss and turmoil. The MKIII
does not fly along with the tail boom parallel to the relative wind, the
tail boom is higher at the back while in flight.
Jack up a MKIII tail until the wing is at a slight positive angle of attack
relative to the horizon. That is what you will see in flight. Even when you
get up to about 90, it will still retain a slight positive wing angle of
attack relative to the horizon.
Now look at the boom. It is higher in back, it is only parallel to the
horizon when you are in slow flight. Now forget about the boom.
Look at the horizontal stab, (we are still looking at the airplane with the
tail jacked up and the wing at a positive angle of attack) it is roughly
parallel to the horizon, or maybe a bit front low relative to the horizon.
And meanwhile the front of the wing is still higher than the back of the
wing relative to the horizon. Which means that it is like a Guillow's toy
glider, the stab is nose low relative to the wing, and that is all you care
about.
You don't care what angle the boom is at, and you don't attach the front of
the horizontal stab to the boom below the mid point of the boom in order to
arrive at the correct decalage, you gauge it relative to the wing and the
wing only. Ignore the angle of the boom.
Prove this to yourself: I just went down to the garage (doing an annual)
and sighted along the bottom of the upper fuselage center section with gap
seal attached. The lower edge of this structure defines the angle along the
lower edge of the wing. As I sight down this, it is aligned with the
elevator pivot on the boom, which is also the horizontal stab rear point.
As I look at the front stab attach point (in it's standard position) that
point is about two inches below my line of sight. Which means that the stab
has positive decalage relative to the wing. Now go sight your MKIII and see
if the same thing is not true.
>My new hinges are going at mid boom or actually past mid boom bottom side, I
>rather trim down than trim up!
You fixin' to get a really big adrenaline rush that trim is not going to
overcome....
Do you have all your legal affairs in order?
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
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: nose heavy mk III |
>
>2/27/03 13:06Jack & Louise Hart
>
>> If you want the elevator to create negative lift (lift the nose/pull the tail
>> down), you need to put the vortex generators on the bottom side to enhance the
>> effect of up elevator.
>=======================
>
>Well that got me thinking again. I guess the question is where the
>seperation occures?
>
Ron,
I really do not believe that stall of the horizontal stabilizer and/or elevator
occurs. The easiest way for me to think about it is to assume the horizontal
stabilizer and elevator make up a variable shaped airfoil that can be flexed
to provide lift up or down relative to the main wing chord and they are used to
provide a stabilizing moment for the wing. If one balances out a Kolb two place
for a single person flight and then one takes up a passenger, the cg will
move forward. During this flight one will have to add additional back stick
pressure through out the flight. If one slows too much, the flow over the horizontal
stabilizer and elevator will be and may be reduced to the point that not
enough force is generated to keep the nose up. The only solution in this case
is to add additional power/speed to make the horizontal tail surfaces more
effective. This is not a stall, just not enough horizontal tail surface for
the conditions being experienced.
The same thing happened to me when I tried to land the FireFly with full flaperons.
I made a high approach, and I realized the stick was back against the stop,
and I was in a steep decent. I had to reduce the flaps before I increased
the throttle, or I would have made the decent even steeper. There was no stall,
I just ran out of elevator for that condition. And so I added vortex generators
to the bottom of the horizontal stabilizer give me a little more back stick
force on the wing.
act as both little speed breaks, and a source of buffeting.
| Date: | Feb 27, 2003 |
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
2/27/03 19:17John Hauck
> 1) On approach to land, power at idle, full
> flaps, cross controlled trying to get the fat ole
> gal to slip, and the elevator and most of the
> tailsection will try to go away.
>
> 2) The maneuver I discribed this afternoon. Full
> flaps, idle speed, extreme nose down dive with two
> folks on board, abrupt pull up about 70 or 80 mph,
> and the elevator disappears.
>
> Number 2) I have only experienced on my airplane.
===================
John if you wanna think of it as Blanking the H-stabs its fine with me. But
if you wanna try an experiment to see if I am right. Adjust your H-stabs to
a negative angle of incidence and see if you get that blanking out.
I think you would be pleasently surprised.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
> This is why we are in the middle of all this fuss and turmoil. The MKIII
> does not fly along with the tail boom parallel to the relative wind, the
> tail boom is higher at the back while in flight.
> Richard Pike
Hi Richard/Gang:
Yup!!! Even I can understand that...............
I have never run out of elevator landing with a
passenger and I do full stall landings in my
airplane by habit. BTW: The original design was
changed a little in order that I could do full
stall landings. Helps me slow down more and
quicker with the bottom of the wing turned up to
the wind. Also helps it get off the ground
quicker, when her belly is not too full with all
my gear and fuel.
Power off, full stalls at altitude, the nose on my
airplane always drops, but not from a stalling
elevator.
If you fly beside a MK III at cruise, 70 or 80
mph, the elevator will normally be inline with the
horizontal stab, even when that MK III has a
passenger on board.
There is really no great deflection of any of the
controls on the Mark III, especially the elevator,
in flight. Ain't necessary cause it works great.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
> John if you wanna think of it as Blanking the H-stabs its fine with me. But
> if you wanna try an experiment to see if I am right. Adjust your H-stabs to
> a negative angle of incidence and see if you get that blanking out.
> I think you would be pleasently surprised. Ron
Ron/Gents/Ladies/Others (if there are any):
And how do you think I will be pleasantly
surprised if I adjust my horizontal stabilizers to
a negative angle of incidence?
I have been flying with negative incidence for the
last 11 years and over 1,750 hours. I think I
have written very recently, probably even today
and in the recent past, my MK III came out of the
chute with adjustable leading edges on the
horizontal stabilizer. My highest adjustment is
about an inch or so lower than the standard
setting. Anything less than what the plans call
for is going to be negative. I fly in the middle
setting of the three settings available to me.
Miss P'fer and I like the middle setting best. I
have not idea how much from standard this setting
is negatively set. Probably two or three inches.
I haven't paid much attention to the settings as
they relate to the top of the tailboom. After
all, this was designed and fabricated in 1991 by
my brother Jim, 12 years ago.
I haven't been sitting still since I started
playing with Homer's airplanes 19 years ago. It
has been a continuous test, evaluation,
experiment, modification, etc., to get me and my
airplane where it is today. For the most part I
am particularly pleased with her. Would change
her if I could. When we built Miss P'fer, it was
from experience gained from building and flying
the Ultrastar and Firestar, plus time flown in the
Mark III prototype before I started on my
airplane. I had the honor of flying off most of
the first 40 hours of the factory Mark III.
Primarily because it was February in Spring City,
PA, and cold as Hell. Dennis and Homer didn't
want to or have time to get out in the Arctic
weather to fly the bird.
If you can come up with something new to improve,
by all means have at it. I am sure you can find
something.
I might add, there is a lot of Jim and John Hauck
in every Kolb being built and flown out there.
Most of it came from Brother Jim's ability to
improve stuff, and a little bit came from me
breaking it. hehehe Some day when you have time,
I'll show you a little Hauck in your Mark III
Extra, when you get it flying.
Take care,
john h
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
2/27/03 19:32Richard Pike
> This is why we are in the middle of all this fuss and turmoil. The MKIII
> does not fly along with the tail boom parallel to the relative wind, the
> tail boom is higher at the back while in flight.
=========================
Yes it should be higher in back, because of the positive angle of incidence
that it has. The H-stabs produce some positive lift becuase of their
positive angle of incidence, which in turn lifts up the tail as you and John
desribed. But you need to understand that there is an aerodynamic cost to
that lift, and that cost is curving of topside relative wing. The tail is
not ballanced tail high naturally, its that way because of that angle of
incidence.
Another thing that John is not considering is the large gap between where
the flaps/ailrons are and the tail. That gap that clears the prop arc should
allow prop air to the tail. The fact that he noted *blanking* out of the
tail, is not a result of his flaps.
I don't think there is any real danger unless in very forward cg and high
speed pull up.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug Lawton" <skyrider2(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Kolb-List Digest: 23 Msgs - 02/26/03 |
No, not quite the right picture to paint there Fred. Many of my students
were competent and current, light single engine aircraft pilots, not
beginners by a long shot. It didn't take that long to check them out. I
was based out of a busy general aviation field (uncontrolled) near Atlanta
and pilots quite often flew their own general aviation aircraft into our
airport to get checked out in the ultralights.
I also had 2 other instructors working with me during that time that would
often fly much of the preliminary work with newer students. I didn't log
their time as instructors for myself (Wouldn't be Prudent). But, I always
flew with each student prior to solo at least one flight to make sure that
my instructors had done their job properly and that the students had
retained the knowledge. It was my business, my investment, and my ass on
the line. Never had anyone hurt in 9 full years of operation. And that's
something that I'm damned proud of.
Also, the 1600 hours doesn't include my time in "certified" general aviation
planes like my C172, Grumman Tiger, or my Mooney Executive. Nor does it
include the time in rental aircraft over the years or training that I took
for myself. Just true ultralights and the heavy ultralights that were
"experimental".
But you're right, I didn't get to just "fly for fun" very much. It's one of
the reason's that I sucumbed to burnout and soldout. I learned the hard way
that taking a hobby, turning it into a business, letting it engulf your
life, is expensive. Wanna ask about the divorce? Or the house? Or the other
business that suffered because I spread myself too thin?
From the Ultralight School of Hardknocks, better known as
(There's a fortune in the ultralight business, I know, I put it there!)
Doug Lawton
NE Georgia & Whitwell TN
Fred wrote:
From: FRED2319(at)aol.com
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Kolb New Pilot Question
Just looking at new pilot ??? You started 1600 tt 450 soled students, 53
diff. aircraft.
seems like it would take about 4 hrs to solo a student 450 X 4 = 1800
53 diff aircraft aprox . 30 min = 26
hrs to get for lic. approx. 60
Hrs flew just for fun ?? 100 ??
Don't seem to add up maybe a 0 was added or omitted huh?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <cen33475(at)centurytel.net> |
| Subject: | nose heavy mk III |
> Just visualize the relative wind blasting along parallal the >tail
>boom at 75+mph. It then hits the leading edge of the H-stabs, >on the
bottom
>side its ok as it hits it and kinda pushes it up. On
>the topeside after it
>clears the leading edge it instantly has to make a turn down, >which means
>one point of potential seperation, and certain turbulance!
Ron....
the airflow to the tail on a mk III is not straight back along the tail
boom. it is down past the tailboom at a fairly steep angle. Both the
geometry of the plane and the downwash of the wing contribute to this. your
stab is definitely not nose up to the wind in any situation ever in a mk
III. ( unless your flying inverted in which case your already dead.)
there are indeed two possible ways for a stab and elevator combination to
stall. one is if the stab elevator combination exceeds its stall angle of
attack at a given elevator deflection. the other is if the elevator
deflection gets great enough to stall just the elevator even if the stab is
at low angle of attack. the stall on both of these would be in the form of
flow separation on the bottom surface. Again unless your flying inverted,
in which case your already dead.
if you want to know which is happening between stab stall and elevator stall
check your control stops. are they working? do you have less then 30
degrees (40? I dont remember)deflection of the elevator. if so then that is
almost certainly not the problem. also if the elevator is stalling the
stick should be shaking quite noticeably in your hand. ( might feel this
with a stab stall too but less noticeable, the wind is already gone before
it hits the elevator so the elevator doesn't shake.)
what does happen though is that as camber increases the stall aoa of the
stab elevator combination goes down, and the effective aoa of the tail is
going up. aoa is measured along the chord line from the tip to the tail of
the airfoil. as you deflect the elevator the chord line is moving, in this
case up wards. the aoa of the tail is going up (stand on your head if your
confused.)
if any of you are having tail stall, I would strongly incourage you to not
fly that heavy/forward cg ever again. because someday, when you try to
flair on landing you just might go straight into the ground. most likely
that would be bad. or you try to climb out and you can not generate any aoa
on the wing so you get very low climb rate and test the shear strength of
the trees at the end of the runway. They ussually exceed that of your plane
and your body.
John H is probably right, as Ussual, that what he and most of you are
feeling is tail blanking more then stall. ( cause you would be dead if it
was tail stall) the tail in the mk III and the firestar are actually fairly
close in line with the wing. have a look at it. the flow comes off the
wing downwards also ( downwash ya know ya gotta make that air go down if you
want the plane to stay up.) when your heavy your making more lift and more
downwash, if you add some g's in a turn or flair you pull more lift and al
of a sudden dead messy turbulent air ( from the just stalling inboard end of
the wing most likely)hits your tail. The big fan blowing right at the tail
helps here quite a bit but still possible if ya get every thing just wrong.
at least thats one guess.
topher
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
I've been following this thread with interest, & rising concern. For those
of you with a lot of experience, and/or a lot of specialized training, all
this is of interest, and may possibly lead to experimentation. Most of us
are, I hope, going to build to the plans, and fly our planes with pleasure
and success. (Even Vamoose is built EXactly to plans - all the changes
I've made are to other than the - well proven - flying structure. That fine
reputation is what led me to finally choose the Kolb 6 yrs ago, after a year
of research...........and I've neither seen nor heard anything since to make
me regret that decision.) My concern is for the possible few who may decide
to do some experimenting on their own, based on this discussion, without the
proper training, experience, or education. To those people, I would suggest
building to the plans, flying your Kolb, then, if you feel it necessary,
make small changes - one at a time, and see what effect they have. Things
can always be made better, and our sport is a good example of that. On the
other hand...............if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Concerned Lar.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Armstrong" <cen33475(at)centurytel.net>
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: nose heavy mk III
>
> > Just visualize the relative wind blasting along parallal the >tail
> >boom at 75+mph. It then hits the leading edge of the H-stabs, >on the
> bottom
> >side its ok as it hits it and kinda pushes it up. On
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed Chmielewski" <edchmiel(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
Hi Kolbers,
Sorry Ron, but a lot of aero engineers and development time would not
agree. VG's are indeed placed on the bottom of the horizontal stab, and
even on both sides of the rudder on some twins with the Micro or RAM VG
setups. At normal cruise, they provide no discernible drag.
Ed In JXN
MkII/503
----- Original Message -----
From: "CaptainRon" <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: nose heavy mk III
>
> 2/27/03 14:24John Hauck
>
> > When we are trying to raise the nose
> > with up elevator, the air is seperating from the
> > bottom.
> ================
>
> The only place it can stall Bottom side (see my rather long message just a
> couple of minutes ago) is the elevator itself. When I consider the angle
of
> seperation I doubt that small Vg's on it would do any good. Even if they
did
> when you make them large enough,, in normal high cruise flight they would
> act as both little speed breaks, and a source of buffeting.
> I would not install them.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <cen33475(at)centurytel.net> |
1. 118 lbs.
2. 80 hp.
3. Dry sump
4. Fully self contained I.e. Alt,Ignition,Fuel delivery via CV altitude
compensating crab
5. Cost brand new $2900.00
6. upgrade with ignition/heads to get 110 hp for another grand
7. Sound? oh my god!
80 hp at what rpm?
What are you going to do for a reduction drive? DO not even consider using
a rotax gearbox... it would be utterly destroyed by the power pulses of this
engine. (half the power pulses in a 4 stroke turing the same rpm means the
each pulse is twice as large. Thats why the 4 stroke rotaxs have 4
cylinders)
is the above weight with a reduction drive?
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
2/27/03 23:33Ed Chmielewski
> VG's are indeed placed on the bottom of the horizontal stab,
============================
In a normally configured H-stab they would be... as the low pressure side is
bottom side!! (but notice that Cessna placed slates on their Cardinal not
vg's). On the M3X low pressure side is up top, and to counter act it the
elevator control is used. placing the vg's on the bottom side of the H-stabs
will be of no ( indeed contrary to..) benafit on the M3X. The VG's have to
be on the low pressure side,, which weird enough is topside on the M3X.
Well I am getting tired of this, been beating this aero donkey all day. :-)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
I agree, the esoterica we are/were engeged in, should be of little
consequence to all who fly their craft within its box, and proper CG.
To those who are investigating the Kolb craft by reading this list I suggest
that you realize that I and others here are building and flying Kolbs. If I
thought that there was something less than excellent with the Kolb I would
be elsewhere. :-)
=====================
>
> I've been following this thread with interest, & rising concern. For those
> of you with a lot of experience, and/or a lot of specialized training, all
> this is of interest, and may possibly lead to experimentation. Most of us
> are, I hope, going to build to the plans, and fly our planes with pleasure
> and success. (Even Vamoose is built EXactly to plans - all the changes
> I've made are to other than the - well proven - flying structure. That fine
> reputation is what led me to finally choose the Kolb 6 yrs ago, after a year
> of research...........and I've neither seen nor heard anything since to make
> me regret that decision.) My concern is for the possible few who may decide
> to do some experimenting on their own, based on this discussion, without the
> proper training, experience, or education. To those people, I would suggest
> building to the plans, flying your Kolb, then, if you feel it necessary,
> make small changes - one at a time, and see what effect they have. Things
> can always be made better, and our sport is a good example of that. On the
> other hand...............if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
> Concerned Lar.
>
> Larry Bourne
> Palm Springs, CA
> Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
> www.gogittum.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Christopher Armstrong" <cen33475(at)centurytel.net>
> To:
> Subject: RE: Kolb-List: nose heavy mk III
>
>
>
>>
>>> Just visualize the relative wind blasting along parallal the >tail
>>> boom at 75+mph. It then hits the leading edge of the H-stabs, >on the
>> bottom
>>> side its ok as it hits it and kinda pushes it up. On
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vincehallam(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
Dear Capt Ron and all
ARE YOU SAYING THAT THE HSTAB {TAILPLANE} IS A
LIFTING SURFACE???????????????? What are the maths of stabilisation now?
Perhaps the kolb is a canard after all
Vnz reteats to his bunker
________________________________________________________________________________
In a message dated 2/26/03 6:59:32 PM Eastern Standard Time, snuffy(at)usol.com
writes:
> Don't know if Homer was the first. Only been around him a few times at Kolb
> displays and talked to him once on the phone. But he seems like a very
> patient thoughtful kind of man. I think it would have been cool to have
> had
> him for a dad and learn how to build airplanes instead of forts. Just
> think,
> Homer for a Dad and John H. for a grampa........Too cool!!!!!! Snuf......
>
Now this has GOT to be a classic statement!!
George Randolph
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
In a message dated 2/27/03 11:18:11 AM Eastern Standard Time,
by0ung(at)brigham.net writes:
> ps how can i figure where the center of lift is ?????
>
isn't the center of lift always at the thickest part of the airfoil?
George Randolph
Firestar driver from Akron
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kirk Smith" <snuffy(at)usol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
ARE YOU SAYING THAT THE HSTAB {TAILPLANE} IS A
> LIFTING SURFACE????????????????
Group,
This statement makes me think. I know as I watch Kolbs taking off that many
times the tail comes up first so this tells me that the tail flys before the
wings do. In the manuever that John referred to about the blanking of the
horizontal stab, it makes logical sense because the wings were still flying
I think. If the forward speed was fast enough for the wings to fly then the
tail should also have been flying unless the airflow to them was very
disturbed. Heading for my foxhole..........snuf
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kirk Smith" <snuffy(at)usol.com> |
| Subject: | FAA notice on nukes |
A notice on flying near nuke plants issued 2/26/2003
http://www.eaa.org/communications/eaanews/030226_nuclear_facilities.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
> I need a prop please!
>
> pp....
Paul P/Folks:
If all you need is a "club" prop for testing, I
have a two blade wooden GSC fixed pitch prop that
made one flight from Alabama to Lakeland, Florida,
in 1989. Got put down by heavy rain in a dry
ditch south of Crystal River, Florida, on the
first leg out of Lakeland on the way home. It has
rain damage on its unprotected leading edge, but
would work well as a club prop for bench stand
testing of your big humper thumper HD. It was
still balanced and ran smooth after the damage,
but was pulled off and put on the shelf when I got
home. Never took time to repair.
BTW: Even with quite a bit of leading edge damage
from the rain, the prop pushed the Firestar back
to Alabama. Was a good lesson to me. Don't fly
long cross countries with unprotected props.
Doesn't take much rain to destroy one. That
flight cost me about $25 an hour for props alone.
Money I did not have at that time.
Let me know if you want it and I will stick it in
the mail, or you can fly to Wetumpka AP and pick
it up.
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
> On the M3X low pressure side is up top, and to counter act it the
> elevator control is used. placing the vg's on the bottom side of the H-stabs
> will be of no ( indeed contrary to..) benafit on the M3X. The VG's have to
> be on the low pressure side,, which weird enough is topside on the M3X.
>
> Well I am getting tired of this, been beating this aero donkey all day. Ron
Ron/Gang:
Who is the jackass in this situation?
Sorta like everyone in the Company formation is
out of step but you!!!
Either you or I have dyslexia, but listen
carefully. Have you heard of anyone on this List
that flies a Mark III ever say he had to use nose
down trim to keep the nose from pitching up? I
haven't. Although I built nose up and down trim
into my own Jim Hauck designed trim system, I have
never had to use nose down trim. If you look at
your own Mark III Extra Kit you will notice that
Homer Kolb did not see any need to configure the
pitch trim system with nose down trim capability.
That means I am going to be pulling back on the
stick with or with out the assistance of some
mechanical forced trim to help take the load off
me. That means that the pressure is going to be
on the top of the horizontal stabilizer and
elevator. Got to push down on the tail of the
Mark III in order to lift the nose and counteract
the tendancy for the nose to pitch down. You
know, like a seesaw.
Snuffy said something about the tail flies first
on takeoff in a Mark III. Probably does a little,
but most of the tail lift on takeoff is created by
high thrust line. Don't have to use forward stick
on the Mark III to raise the tail on takeoff. I
usually relax on the stick until the tail comes
up, then come back on it to hold it level and wait
that split second for it to lift off.
Ron, if you think you are getting tired of this
discussion on the ass end of Mark IIIs, what do
you think about the other 300 souls on the Kolb
List?
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug Lawton" <skyrider2(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Kolb New Pilot Question |
John,
Good point, I agree. The tires will definetly grip a paved runway better
than on grass. But it shouldn't really matter if a student will heed the #1
suggestion and only taxi and test hop in absolutely calm conditions. But s_
_ _ happens.
Fly Safely,
Doug
NE Georgia and Whitwell TN
Doug and Group,
There is one more thing that should be mentioned: grass or pavement
Landing on grass, a Kolb being a taildragger is a non-issue, but on pavement
(espessically in any crosswind), it's not as easy as a tricycle.
Taildragger is a non-issue for take-off's on either surface, IMO.
John Jung
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | FRED2319(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
Hi Guys been following this nose heave thing and two things stand out. One if
the plane is flown as a single seat (mid range CG) there is no problem. Two
if you have a heavy pass. ( fwd. Cg. ) you may run out of up elevator. it
seems like an easy fix to add weight to aft end to move CG back into the mid
range where it flys OK. or is this to simple.
Fred
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerb <ulflyer(at)airmail.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Kolb New Pilot Question |
The advantage of landing on the a grass runway for the new pilot is it's
more forgiving. First place there usually wider then center alignment is
not as critical. Second, it reduces the bad effects if your directional
alignment is slightly off at time of touch down. Grass also slows the
plane faster which helps reduce the time of maintaining directional
control. You can get away with more on grass but that can bite you in the
butt later as it allows you to get sloppy and then when you land on
pavement, things can get exciting very quickly.
In the past I posted a recommend way for a new pilot to prepare by doing
practice taxi runs which should keep them out of trouble if they follow
it. Do a search and see if you can find it, if not let me know and I'll
see if I can post it again. By the way, I've seen more planes busted
trying to crow hop or unintentional flight when just "taxiing" and they
panic and slam it back down rather than just flying it. "Always" be in a
flight ready condition (seat belt on with adequate fuel on board) before
doing any taxiing, period.
jerb
>
>John,
>
>Good point, I agree. The tires will definetly grip a paved runway better
>than on grass. But it shouldn't really matter if a student will heed the #1
>suggestion and only taxi and test hop in absolutely calm conditions. But s_
>_ _ happens.
>
>Fly Safely,
>
>Doug
>NE Georgia and Whitwell TN
>
>
>Doug and Group,
>
>There is one more thing that should be mentioned: grass or pavement
>
>Landing on grass, a Kolb being a taildragger is a non-issue, but on pavement
>(espessically in any crosswind), it's not as easy as a tricycle.
>
>Taildragger is a non-issue for take-off's on either surface, IMO.
>
>John Jung
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack & Louise Hart <jbhart(at)ldd.net> |
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
>
>2/27/03 23:33Ed Chmielewski
>
>> VG's are indeed placed on the bottom of the horizontal stab,
>============================
>
>In a normally configured H-stab they would be... as the low pressure side is
>bottom side!! (but notice that Cessna placed slates on their Cardinal not
>vg's). On the M3X low pressure side is up top, and to counter act it the
>elevator control is used. placing the vg's on the bottom side of the H-stabs
>will be of no ( indeed contrary to..) benafit on the M3X. The VG's have to
>be on the low pressure side,, which weird enough is topside on the M3X.
>
>Well I am getting tired of this, been beating this aero donkey all day. :-)
>
>
Ron,
One last try. I believe where you are leading your self astray is by what you
believe to be "normal". Forget "normal" and think about function. If you want
to raise the nose and your plane is close to trim balance, you would use up
elevator or back stick. The low pressure side would be on the bottom of the horizontal
stabilizer elevator combination, and for a given air speed, this is where
the VG's would go if you want increased down force on the tail.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Jackson, MO
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart(at)ldd.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <cen33475(at)centurytel.net> |
| Subject: | nose heavy mk III |
On the M3X low pressure side is up top, and to counter act it the
elevator control is used. placing the vg's on the bottom side of the H-stabs
will be of no ( indeed contrary to..) benafit on the M3X. The VG's have to
be on the low pressure side,, which weird enough is topside on the M3X.
Ron,
you're completely wrong. totally wrong. you are not right . you are the
opposite of correct. you are in error. your percentage of accuracy is
zero. you are simply outside the realm of truth.
worse yet you are not listening to the people who know tell you the answers.
if the tail on a rear tailed aircraft lifts upwards in steady level flight,
then the cg is aft of the ac and the aircraft is unstable and would be tail
heavy and unflyable without stability augmentation. your lack of
understanding on this basic principle of stability leads me to think you
should fly until you (re)complete a ground school course and understand your
aircraft better.
not that I really care about your butt, but it would be a shame to have you
smash a perfectly good plane. I sincerly hope you're just yanking our
chains as I find it hard to believe anybody is actually this dense.
Topher, the discusted, mean version!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hans vanAlphen" <hva(at)bellsouth.net> |
Paul,
It is great to be a pioneer, I though I was, until I found that others
preceded me in Europe with the development of the BMW engine.
First of all you MUST use a reduction gear. PRSU.
The greatest concern is not vibration, but TORSIONAL vibration, it needs to
be dealt with or failure is imminent. And torsional are magnified when you
add a prop.
See how the Geo engine destroyed the Rotax C gearbox in just a few hours.
Read about torsional vibration on the geo site and here...
www.sportflight.com/kfb/torsion.htm
I do use the Rotax C gear box on the BMW boxer engine. First I used a
centrifugal clutch, the RK 400, but it failed with the inflight adjustable
Ivo prop.
Replaced it with a heavier flywheel to dampen the torsionals. So far so
good.
If I were going to design a reduction drive from scratch I would use a Gates
Poly Chain or GoodYear Eagle PD belt drive.
www.goodyearindustrialproducts.com/polyurethanebelts/eagle.html
Remember these belts have no stretch in them and you will need additional
torsional vibration insulation with a donut or sorts.
A lot to think about....... Good luck.
Hans van Alphen
Mark III Xtra
BMW powered
94 hours.
> >
> > Kolbers,
> > I am in the process of testing a Harley Davidson 1340cc 80CID engine as
a
> possible candidate for a Kolb aircraft engine......snip
> > 1. 118 lbs.
> > 2. 80 hp.
> > 3. Dry sump
> > 4. Fully self contained I.e. Alt,Ignition,Fuel delivery via CV altitude
> compensating crab
> > 5. Cost brand new $2900.00
> > 6. upgrade with ignition/heads to get 110 hp for another grand
> > 7. Sound? oh my god!
> >
> > Down side. Who knows we will have to see........
________________________________________________________________________________
Ok Guy's
I will try and explain my madness somehow.
80 hp at what rpm?
What are you going to do for a reduction drive? DO not even consider using
a rotax gearbox... it would be utterly destroyed by the power pulses of this
engine. (half the power pulses in a 4 stroke turing the same rpm means the
each pulse is twice as large. Thats why the 4 stroke rotaxs have 4
cylinders)
is the above weight with a reduction drive?
Chris, 80 hp is the factory's estimate at the crankshaft @ 5500 rpm. For the first
test I plan to use a #40 chain drive to a 1" driveshaft from a 24 tooth sprocket
to a 48 tooth to give me a 2:1 reduction. The gizmo will be mounted on
pillow block bearings and supported separate from the engine. This is just to
see how the power "act's" with the load of a prop vs. the normal primary drive
and clutch of the motorcycle. As for an aircraft redrive we plan to mill a gear
box from billet aluminum and have the starter drive run in the lube along with
the straight mesh gears.
Power Pulses..... There's that phrase again? I'm sorry but my limited brain can't
understand. I assume that you are talking about the leverage of the connecting
rod on the crankshaft on the power stroke? Or is it because the cubic inch
displacement vs. number of cylinders?
Something you may not know about these engines. The have a compensating drive sprocket.
It's a three finger cam gizmo that has a stout spring that allows the
drive sprocket to "give" 30 or so degrees either way to absorb the "power pulses
perhaps?"
In a two-cylinder, horizontally opposed engine, the pistons are timed so that one
fires on one revolution of the crankshaft and the other fires on the next revolution
-- so one of the two pistons fires on every revolution of the crankshaft.
This seems logical and gives the engine a balanced feeling. To create this
type of engine, the crankshaft has two separate pins for the connecting rods
from the pistons. The pins are 180 degrees apart from one another.
A Harley engine has two pistons. The difference in the Harley engine is that the
crankshaft has only one pin, and both pistons connect to it. This design, combined
with the V arrangement of the cylinders, means that the pistons cannot
fire at even intervals. Instead of one piston firing every 360 degrees, a Harley
engine goes like this:
a.. A piston fires.
b.. The next piston fires at 315 degrees.
c.. There is a 405-degree gap.
d.. A piston fires.
e.. The next piston fires at 315 degrees.
f.. There is a 405-degree gap.
And the cycle continues.
At idle, you can hear the pop-pop sound followed by a pause. So its sound is pop-pop...pop-pop...pop-pop.
That is the unique sound you hear!
Oh almost forgot, the 118 lbs is engine only less starter,carb,exhaust ect....
hope this helps
I will post some pictures soon. I want to clean it up a bit before I start showing
it off hehehe...
pp....
________________________________________________________________________________
Hans,
Thanks a lot! That's good info. TORSINAL now there's a new word for this
redneck. And makes perfect sense too. I guess for lack of better words, the
big thumper will just beat the redrive to pieces right?
pp
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hans vanAlphen" <hva(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Harley
>
> Paul,
> It is great to be a pioneer, I though I was, until I found that others
> preceded me in Europe with the development of the BMW engine.
>
> First of all you MUST use a reduction gear. PRSU.
>
> The greatest concern is not vibration, but TORSIONAL vibration, it needs
to
> be dealt with or failure is imminent. And torsional are magnified when you
> add a prop.
>
> See how the Geo engine destroyed the Rotax C gearbox in just a few hours.
> Read about torsional vibration on the geo site and here...
>
> www.sportflight.com/kfb/torsion.htm
>
> I do use the Rotax C gear box on the BMW boxer engine. First I used a
> centrifugal clutch, the RK 400, but it failed with the inflight adjustable
> Ivo prop.
> Replaced it with a heavier flywheel to dampen the torsionals. So far so
> good.
>
> If I were going to design a reduction drive from scratch I would use a
Gates
> Poly Chain or GoodYear Eagle PD belt drive.
>
> www.goodyearindustrialproducts.com/polyurethanebelts/eagle.html
>
> Remember these belts have no stretch in them and you will need additional
> torsional vibration insulation with a donut or sorts.
>
> A lot to think about....... Good luck.
>
> Hans van Alphen
> Mark III Xtra
> BMW powered
> 94 hours.
>
>
> > >
> > > Kolbers,
> > > I am in the process of testing a Harley Davidson 1340cc 80CID engine
as
> a
> > possible candidate for a Kolb aircraft engine......snip
>
> > > 1. 118 lbs.
> > > 2. 80 hp.
> > > 3. Dry sump
> > > 4. Fully self contained I.e. Alt,Ignition,Fuel delivery via CV
altitude
> > compensating crab
> > > 5. Cost brand new $2900.00
> > > 6. upgrade with ignition/heads to get 110 hp for another grand
> > > 7. Sound? oh my god!
> > >
> > > Down side. Who knows we will have to see........
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
> Ron,
>
> One last try. I believe where you are leading your self astray is by what you
> believe to be "normal". Forget "normal" and think about function. If you
> want to raise the nose and your plane is close to trim balance, you would use
> up elevator or back stick. The low pressure side would be on the bottom of the
> horizontal stabilizer elevator combination, and for a given air speed, this is
> where the VG's would go if you want increased down force on the tail.
>
> Jack B. Hart FF004
> Jackson, MO
>
=====================
:-)
Considering all the flack that I got over this, I went back and started to
rethink that.
Well thats what this list is for (I hope). That bro that mentioned (you?)
that he went down and looked at his airframe in its flight attitude, in his
garage kinda kept me thinking about that. John H mentioned something about
the boom needing to be out of the airstream also had me thinking about the
boom's to cage insertion angle. Then the other fellow last night about vg's
to whom I replied that in the M3X the pressure point is weird also got me
thinking,, it aint supposed to be weird! Then I started thinking about the
CG pivot point etc.. It looks like the high pressure would indeed be topside
on the h-stabs in normal to forward cg.
I have to say that if someone would have answered my question 3 days ago as
to the reason for the +angle of incidence of the h-stab relative to the tail
boom, this place would have been a bit less active. And now off to the
hanger to finish the main gear so I can stand this flying donkey on its
wheels and then see it in its flight attitude, and then see what all the
fuss is about. L
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "boyd young" <by0ung(at)brigham.net> |
. Which makes me question why and for what reason did they dial in
such negative angle of attack in the factory. In mine I have already decided
to install another pair of hinges along the center line of the boom.
if i am not mistaking moving the front of the horizontal stabilizers down causes
up elevator trim... a piper supercub moves the front of the horizontal up and
down instead of a flying trim.
boyd
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "boyd young" <by0ung(at)brigham.net> |
You always want to have your wings stall before your tail in a conventional
design. In a canard it the other way around.
I wonder if anyone has any idea why it was designed that way?
in a canard both the wing and the canard create up force...... in a conventional
aircraft the back wing creates a down force.... the reason if for stability.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kirby Dennis Contr ASC/TM <Dennis.Kirby(at)kirtland.af.mil> |
| Subject: | Re: Kolb New Pilot Question |
James Alderson wrote:
<< my question is, do I need training specifically in a Kolb?
How many of you didn't fly a Kolb, or a taildragger, before you flew your
Kolb? I am a low time pilot (20 hrs GA, 15 hours Ultralight Trike) and the
guys at my airport are saying I should just do some training hours >>
James, and other new Kolb pilots -
Get the training!
Don't repeat my mistake. I was over-confident with my 500+ hours of GA
airplane experience (which includes 100 hrs of Citabria time) and thought I
could handle my Mark-III for the first flight. I was wrong. Bent both gear
legs on my first landing. My Kolb handles much differently than the heavier
airplanes I've flown before, and my previous experience didn't help me.
Kolb control response is much lighter and responsive, and the drag will slow
you down WAY faster when the power is reduced than on GA planes. Despite
all the good advice I read on this List over the past 5 years that followed
the common theme to "fly the airplane all the way to the ground," my
inexperience still got the better of the situation and I let myself get too
slow over the runway and dropped it in from 8 feet. (how embarrassing!)
My plane is fixed now (another good feature about Kolbs: easy to fix!) but
I'm waiting until I get some dual in another Mark-III before I fly mine
again.
I'm planning to visit TNK in London, KY right after SnF and will fly with
their chief pilot in the company demonstrator Mark-III. Yeah, it's an
airline ticket, a hotel room and rental car, but not bending my airplane
every time I fly it is worth that price!
Dennis Kirby
Verner-powered, Powerfin-72
Cedar Crest, NM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | woody <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
| Subject: | Re: history of ultralights |
>He was pretty much within the EAA mold, and his designs were fairly
>conventional. It was those bandito hang glider pioneers to whom we owe!
I would like to think that a poor farm boy that builds a plane that
weighs less than himself and designed to fly 50 ft up because he figures if
he can build a silo that tall then he can do whatever he wants in that
airspace should get more credit than a guy that sticks an engine on a
proven airframe. Just my opinion ofcourse. Never heard of Homers designs
being considered conventional except for having wings and a tail.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
In a message dated 2/28/03 11:28:07 AM Eastern Standard Time,
cen33475(at)centurytel.net writes:
>
> cen33475(at)CenturyTel.net>
>
> On the M3X low pressure side is up top, and to counter act it the
> elevator control is used. placing the vg's on the bottom side of the H-stabs
>
> will be of no ( indeed contrary to..) benafit on the M3X. The VG's have to
> be on the low pressure side,, which weird enough is topside on the M3X.
>
>
> Ron,
> you're completely wrong. totally wrong. you are not right . you are the
> opposite of correct. you are in error. your percentage of accuracy is
> zero. you are simply outside the realm of truth.
>
> worse yet you are not listening to the people who know tell you the
> answers.
>
> if the tail on a rear tailed aircraft lifts upwards in steady level flight,
> then the cg is aft of the ac and the aircraft is unstable and would be tail
> heavy and unflyable without stability augmentation. your lack of
> understanding on this basic principle of stability leads me to think you
> should fly until you (re)complete a ground school course and understand
> your
> aircraft better.
>
> not that I really care about your butt, but it would be a shame to have you
> smash a perfectly good plane. I sincerly hope you're just yanking our
> chains as I find it hard to believe anybody is actually this dense.
>
>
> Topher, the discusted, mean version!
>
Hey, Topher....relax, ...ol dogs take longer to learn new tricks. I was in
the same camp with Ron for many years myself and some on this list may
remember me making a statement only within a year ago about deciding to
believe that the stability of a conventional aircraft is achieved by having a
constant down vector on the stabilizer. I've been around airplanes all my
life (my dad ran a model airplane shop in Sharon, Pa during and shortly after
the Big One in the 40s and 50s.) And I built planes since I was 3, not the 64
that dominates what is left of my life now.
In many models and real airplanes of the past, the symmetry of the airfoil of
the horizontal stabilizers varied from truly symmetrical to almost a clark y
airfoil...and, indeed, one would wonder, why put a nonsymmetrical airfoil on
a horizontal stabilizer if it wasn't supposed to be a lifting body, ie. low
pressure on top. Well, I suppose many of the ol designers didn't even know
the real reason for the stab, either, hence the non symmetrical airfoils of
old!
In the observations of models it is easy to see that they will fly free
flight with dihedral in the wings and a perfectly non incidental ( no angle
of incidence) in the stab but perfect balance of cg. Or they can get by
with no dihedral at all and a severe angle of incidence between wings and
stab....Go on folks ...just look at some models that fly without any input
from anyone.
Well, I notice that this is gettin kinda long, so let someone else finish it.
I didn't state any conclusive summary here, but this is a smart group, you
do it yourselves........please.
George Randolph
Firestar driver from Akron
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vincehallam(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
look closer at some of those"nonsymetrical"tail feathers youllseev they were
upside down
vnz
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | woody <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
| Subject: | Re: history of ultralights |
>
>s John said earlier, it
>wasn't until friends pressed him to offer a kit that the Ultrastar was born
>around 1980.
I visited him and bought a Flyer kit around 1980 Ultrastars were a
couple years later I believe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | woody <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
>
>Chris, 80 hp is the factory's estimate at the crankshaft @ 5500 rpm. For
>the first test I plan to use a #40 chain drive to a 1" driveshaft from a
>24 tooth sprocket to a 48 tooth to give me a 2:1 reduction.
You might want to rethink that one. Add a couple more teeth to a
sprocket. A direct 2:1 ratio may give you a weird harmonic vibration. Thats
why reduction drives always have an odd ratio. The power pulse is when the
engine fires it gives a shot of power to the crank. The clutch mechanism
you mention will probably compensate for it.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | woody <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
A
for what reason did they dial in
>such negative angle of attack in the factory. In mine I have already decided
>to install another pair of hinges along the center line of the boom.
Will that interfere with the foldability of the tail?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dennis Souder" <flykolb(at)pa.net> |
| Subject: | Re: history of ultralights |
John and fellow historians,
I haven't had much time of late to follow the list. But this thread caught
my attention and thought I'd toss in my recollections.
I could be wrong ... I'm old enough to not trust my memory like I used to.
But John may have a more advanced case of the contagion than myself - but
Homer did not start with hangliders. His first "ultralight" had 4 engines
(either Chrysler or Mac 101's), it had a 12 ft wingspan and as I recall,
Homer flew it very little because it was very HOT (55 mph stall as I
recall), which is about what you would expect with a 12 ft span. He later
increased the wingspan to 17 ft and removed one engine resulting in the Kolb
TriMotor. This one flew better, but it was still not a wholesome aircraft.
These 2 aircraft were high wing pushers with sort traditional aluminum wings
for the structure and skin. The next aircraft, while being similar in
configuration, was a long hop from the first two. On the next iteration,
Homer increased the span to 30+ feet and used 2 Mac 101's. This was the
"Flyer" and it flew in the late 60's as I recall. This was the first "low
and slow" aircraft and it was a fabric-covered wing. Compared to early
ultralighting, Homer's designs were traditional.
But even before the multi-engine configurations, Homer did some towing with
a glider (not a hang glider) behind a boat on the river. I recall one of
these very early flights, I was in grade school at the time and we had come
north to Pa for a visit (my parents moved from PA to FL when I was 5). The
flight was very short because a wing support wire let go at the attachment.
Homer had used hardware store eyebolts (not welded) to anchor the wires and
it simply opened up and let go.
Homer typically was more of a designer and builder than flyer of his
experimental aircraft . counting by the hours anyway. The proto "Flyer" was
flown and then collected dust for many years. During this time Homer played
with the kites. I was around and saw some of the building of the 3 engine
aircraft, but did not see it fly. But I did help to fly the hang gliders he
built, which we did around 1970. I remember because we used my 1967 VW for
some of the towing. We towed on Homer's runway. The VW made a great tow
vehicle because of the rear bumper. We would have someone sit on the rear
engine hood with his feet planted on the bumper. The towrope would have a
turn or two taken around the round portion of the bumper and then it took
very little pressure to hold the rope. The rope-holder was facing aft and
could keep a careful watch on what was happening and could instruct the
drive to speed-up, slow down or whatever.
We just hung from our armpits on two parallel aluminum tubes. You could
move forward and aft, but it wasn't particularly easy; and you could put
more pressure on one side or the other to do some shallow turns. Two
friends of Homer, John and Andy Longacre (they were brothers) flew it more
than anyone. I was one of the first to do a free flight, sans towrope -
mainly due to my ineptness at flying the thing. I was too far back on the
tubes and it climbed to high and the rope-holder released the rope because
of the steep angle of the rope. I don't recall how I recovered . luckily I
didn't stall and crash. One time, either John or Andy got too high on one
flight and could not get it down in time and flew into the pond at the end
of Homer's airstrip.
When Homer was got tired of this new toy, he went back to the flyer and
recovered it and got it flying again. About this time he was bugging me to
help him get a business started. I was still in college studying mechanical
engineering and I wasn't really interested. As I would stop by on
occasional visits he would typically mention about starting the business
thing. In the late 70's I decided to go to Oshkosh and that was the year
Homer decided to take his newly recovered Flyer. I got pretty excited about
ultralights and came close to buying a Quick or a Pterodactyl. But when we
got back Homer was all excited about the reception his Flyer had received
and when he started talking about starting a business, I listened more
carefully and eventually agreed and we incorporated in 1979 and Kolb Co. got
going in 1980. I started flying the Flyer that fall and I can still recall
that first flight with those two unmuffled Mac 101's screaming in both my
ears. I did not get to fly it for long though, Andy Longacre was also
flying it some and on one flight he did not gain altitude like he should
have and tried a turn at the end of the runway and crashed it. End of the
Flyer - Andy was not hurt at all. I was upset because now I had nothing to
fly. So that winter we built another and took it to SNF. Andy did penance
and towed the new Flyer to SNF for us. It was Andy, by the way, the came up
with the name UltraStar. We were driving back from one of the SNF shows and
we were brainstorming about a name and we were getting close to it, but it
was Andy that put the words together and UltraStar was officially named.
The Flyer gave us a start, but almost immediately we started thinking about
something else and it was only a couple years before we had the UltraStar
and it was a major success.
Hope this helps puts some things into perspective. I think my recounting of
the early chronology (before the Kolb Co years) is close - but I could be
mixed up a bit too, I'll check next time I see Homer.
I do agree with John on one major point: those were some good years!
Dennis
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
2/28/03 15:51woody
> Will that interfere with the foldability of the tail?
============================
Don't think so. Can't see why it would not fold ok with a different angle.
It should pivot ok.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: history of ultralights |
> John and fellow historians,
>
> I haven't had much time of late to follow the list. But this thread caught
> my attention and thought I'd toss in my recollections.
> I do agree with John on one major point: those were some good years!
>
> Dennis
Good Morning Dennis/Gang:
It is 0500 hours. That's 5:00 AM National Guard
time. I am working on my first cup of coffee. My
eyes are barely open. I do not normally get up at
0500 anymore. But this morning I am going to fly
one of Homer Kolb and Dennis Souder's creations
186 miles south to Lucedale, Mississippi, to
tighten up the torsional vibration dampner my Mark
III's (Miss P'fer) ("P" fer plane) 100hp 912S.
With luck I can be at Ronnie Smith's airstrip at
South Mississippi Light Aircraft in about 2.5
hours. The weather is "iffy" at this time. Still
need to call Flight Service for a weather briefing
before I load up my gear and depart. I will be
comfortable in my enclosed two place cockpit,
warmed by my electric vest powered by onboard 12V
power. This is 2003. Nineteen years ago I was
flying an Ultrastar for the first time. Wide open
cockpit with nothing around me but air. Read my
map and memorize headings and checkpoints because
I couldn't look at it while flying. Had to fold
it up and sit on it before takeoff. We have come
a long way since then.
Dennis, thanks for refreshing an tired ole memory
and sharing some of the Kolb history with us. You
were a big part of it for many years. Time goes
by so fast. So many things were accomplished in
such a short period of time. My first visit to
Sun and Fun was 1984. You were a young man
zipping around the skies of Lakeland Airport in
the fast, maneuverable, and beautiful Ultrastar.
I drooled on it for 7 days. I followed your every
move. I stood for hours at the fence for a chance
to see it fly and out perform everything in the
Ultralight Area. I took hundreds of pictures
because I had alread sent my check to Homer Kolb
for $3,495.00 for my first airplane kit. How
sweet it was. This was March 1984, and three
months later I had finished building my Ultrastar
and was ready for the first flight.
It is hard to believe how far we came and how
quickly. A short 10 years later, 1994, Miss P'fer
was landed at Dead Horse, Alaska.
Good to have you back. Don't stay away so long.
We need you to help us keep things straight.
Please give my regards to your family.
john h
PS: I miss those early years.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | woody <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
>
>2/28/03 15:51woody
>
> > Will that interfere with the foldability of the tail?
>============================
>
>Don't think so. Can't see why it would not fold ok with a different angle.
>It should pivot ok.
I just wondered if the original hinge points will hit the leading edge
of the stabilizer as it is folded up or if they will puncture the fabric
(depending on where they hit.)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Airgriff2(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: history of ultralights |
>
> >>
>> Hope this helps puts some things into perspective. I think my
>> recounting of
>> the early chronology (before the Kolb Co years) is close - but I
>> could be
>> mixed up a bit too, I'll check next time I see Homer.
>>
>> I do agree with John on one major point: those were some good years!
>>
>> Dennis
>>
>
Thank you Dennis for replying with information in regards to some of the Kolb
history, with Homer. With all the talk on the list lately about Homer, I
kept saying to myself, "where are you Dennis"? Then I hear this faint
chainsaw sound getting louder, I turn and look over the trees and "BAMB"
there you come. High speed dive, steep climb out with agressive bank, going
for enough altitude to do another loop! Or , as you put it, "those were
some good years"!
Do you realise how many times, Homer and Dennis were used in the same
sentence over the past 20 yrs.?
Some time , when you get a minute, let us know a little about yourself as
far as what you are up to, do you attend any fly-ins, do you get to fly at
all, etc?
Fly Safe
Bob Griffin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerb <ulflyer(at)airmail.net> |
| Subject: | Is the 447 going the way of the 277 & 377 |
Tom,
What's going on here with the 447. Having two of these air pumps I'm a
little concerned about what I just heard. It is true, Rotax is not
providing service parts for the engine (replacement crank) - or is it their
charging so much for it, it forces owners to buy another engine?
It may be time to rally the troops and rattle Rotax's ear a little at Sun &
Fun.
2Si, it may be your opportunity to grab market share. Can they get it
together and produce a engine that holds together? Hirth can't seem to do
it and 2Si hasn't had much better success.
jerb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Olenik" <olenik-aviation(at)buyitsellitfixit.com> |
| Subject: | RE: [cgshawk] Is the 447 going the way of the 277 & 377 |
jerb,
They are not selling enough 447's to justify making them in the eyes of
Rotax. The crankshafts have not been available for the older 377/477's for
several years because they stopped making them. The justification was that
they had not sold very many of them, but the reason they didn't sell any is
because that engine lasts so long on the crank that they are just now
starting to need them. We can still get all of the parts for the current
production engine, but I have been told to not count on it being around in
the future regardless of what happens to part 103 or sport pilot. In other
words, don't be designing any aircraft around it which is what the context
of the conversation was.
Concerning 2SI, I think they have actually been outselling the 447 in that
power class and they ARE holding together. The kitfox lite uses the 2SI
engine almost exclusively and the only problems they seem to have are
because Skystar sends it out with a prop that is grossly under loading the
engine. The prop they are putting on there is a 60x28 where they should be
using a 60x32 or even a 60x34. Once the owners get a good adjustable pitch
prop, they are much happier with it.
Think about it....if you are building a single place part 103 legal
ultralight, you are probably not going to need a charging system. 2SI will
sell the engine with or without that charging system which is a 5 pound
difference. When you use their belt drive you are then saving 12 pounds
total off the weight of a 447 with gearbox and the power isn't that much
different. 12 pounds will make a lot of fat UL's with 447's legal UL's.
Also, when you have a problem, and every engine will eventually have a
problem if you run it long enough, the parts are 1/3 the price to fix the
2SI and the labor is 2/3 the price because it's so much simpler of an
engine. I had a new mechanic take appart two of them in as many hours
yesterday. He had never even seen one before and was simply following the
outdated manual. These were two old ULII02's that have probably been
sitting for 15 years. The current 2SI 430FE-35 is almost identical to the
ULII02 except that it uses a different brand of ignition and a Bing carb.
BTW, at least one of these ULII02's is going to be going back together maybe
this week and will be available for sale. Don't know how much yet. I have
not measured clearances on the other one yet to see if we can get good
clearances, but maybe that one will be available too if it can be overhauled
economically.
Tom Olenik
Olenik Aviation
http://www.buyitsellitfixit.com
877-AIR-MOTORS ...we support what we sell.
-----Original Message-----
From: jerb [mailto:ulflyer(at)airmail.net]
Subject: [cgshawk] Is the 447 going the way of the 277 & 377
Tom,
What's going on here with the 447. Having two of these air pumps I'm a
little concerned about what I just heard. It is true, Rotax is not
providing service parts for the engine (replacement crank) - or is it their
charging so much for it, it forces owners to buy another engine?
It may be time to rally the troops and rattle Rotax's ear a little at Sun &
Fun.
2Si, it may be your opportunity to grab market share. Can they get it
together and produce a engine that holds together? Hirth can't seem to do
it and 2Si hasn't had much better success.
jerb
Get POP access, more storage, more filters, and more.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Hcb0iA/P.iFAA/46VHAA/1yWplB/TM
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
cgshawk-unsubscribe(at)yahoogroups.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
3/1/03 7:05woody
> I just wondered if the original hinge points will hit the leading edge
> of the stabilizer as it is folded up or if they will puncture the fabric
> (depending on where they hit.)
====================
Good point! I can devise a simple cover over them, and if the new hinge
location is as much better as I think, then the old ones can be just filed
down.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RE: [cgshawk] Is the 447 going the way of the 277 & 377 |
Tom, speaking of 2si...ULII02's and such...Maybe you can help me with some
thing I have been wondering about. I have the ULIIO2 service manuals cd
from ZDE and I notice the power listed at 38...with a 42hp version in there
somewhere with dual carbs.
What is the difference exactly between the UII02 and the new 35 hp 2si
version?....is it port timing?..bore/stroke/?...if so that indicates to me
that a ULII02 jug and piston assembly is different.
Will a ULII02 piston fit in a new 2si jug?..
Can you use an ULII02 exhaust system on the new 2si?
Will the new jugs fit on the old block?
Can you use a new 2si electric starter on the ULII02, and if so..how much
weight does it add vs a rope start /belt redrive? I heard you cant use an
electric start with a belt redrive on this engine..
I have a single carb ULII02 single carb for use on my FireFly (Mikuni/cdi)
and I have 2 props . 1 is a 62 inch 3 blade sport prop and the other is a 60
inch IVO 3 blade. In your post you mention props..were you talking about a
2 blade or a 3 blade 60 "?.....which would you recommend using?...The IVO
could be used with 2 blades only...the sport prop cannot. Due to the shorter
more compact config of the ULII02 with the belt re-drive, I notice when i
put it up there on the Firefly...the center of the engine must set 4 or 5
inches aft of the where the center of the 447 geardrive would to achieve 5
inchs of prop/trailing edge clearance. it seems a prop extension would be in
order...How long an extension can you use on a new 2si belt drive?
and ditto on those prices!...I ordered a complete overhaul gasket set for
the ULII02.,,seals an all...30 bucks or something. .WOW.....how about them
prices rotax fans!
And finally...the static rpm load...in my mind I'm thinking of adjusting the
prop to load the engine to 6500 rpm static (test stand). Does that seem
about right to you?
What EGT would you consider correct on full load on the test stand?
Gettin kinda long...making me feel guilty...If you answer all this I'm gonna
owe you shop time Tom!
need any Honda general purpose indus engine parts?!!!!!Ill see you get
treated right!
http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm
Don Gherardini-
FireFly 098
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Olenik" <olenik-aviation(at)buyitsellitfixit.com> |
| Subject: | Don's ULII02 questions |
Don,
The current 2SI 430FE-35 is identical in both power and design to the ULII02
except a different brand of ignition and a different brand of carburetor.
That is the only difference. The 460F-35 has a larger bore, but they never
changed anything else in that engine. So it really didn't make more power
and was harder to tune just like the 447 is harder to tune than the 377 and
for the same reasons. They are going back to the original 67.5mm bore in
all of there engines now so that every engine will use the same
piston....the same one that your ULII02 uses. That makes it nice for the
guy who has to keep them in stock. :-)
Every part of the ULII02 and the current 430FE is interchangeable except if
you wanted to switch ignition parts, you would have to switch the whole
ignition.
Yes, the electric starter can be added, but you are right...it will not work
with the belt drive. I guess they figure that if you are not trying to save
weight, you would be using the gearbox anyway....and the current gearbox
will work on the older engine as well as the older gearbox working on the
newer engine. The only thing you need to watch out for there is if you have
an older gearbox, it should not be used on the 690L-70.
The props that I was talking about were all two blade props. A 60" 2-blade
adjustable prop would be fine, but the longer the better in most cases. My
ideal prop on the 2.5:1 belt drive would be a 68" 2-blade. Also, I am not a
fan of prop extensions on ANY drive, and I'm told that only props that flex
a lot like the Ivo need that 5 inches you are talking about. A Powerfin or
GSC probably would not need that much. Prop extensions will magnify the
harmful effects of propeller inertia and vibration caused from any deviation
in the blade balancing.
Your static RPM should be lower than what you would see with a Rotax because
that engine makes it's rated power at 300 RPM lower than a Rotax 447. That
is precisely the problem the Kitfox Lite guys were having. Skystar was
trying to load it like they would a Rotax. If you add dual carbs, it should
turn a little faster, but with the single carb, rated power will be at
around 6200 RPM. So if you load it to anywhere between 6000 and 6200
static, that would be fine depending on what you are trying to accomplish,
cruise or climb.
1200F would be EGT limit, but I like to jet all my 2-stroke aircraft engines
as rich as they will run smoothly. That will give the engine the longest
life.
Tom Olenik
Olenik Aviation
http://www.buyitsellitfixit.com
877-AIR-MOTORS ...we support what we sell.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Don Gherardini
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: RE: [cgshawk] Is the 447 going the way of the
277 & 377
Tom, speaking of 2si...ULII02's and such...Maybe you can help me with some
thing I have been wondering about. I have the ULIIO2 service manuals cd
from ZDE and I notice the power listed at 38...with a 42hp version in there
somewhere with dual carbs.
What is the difference exactly between the UII02 and the new 35 hp 2si
version?....is it port timing?..bore/stroke/?...if so that indicates to me
that a ULII02 jug and piston assembly is different.
Will a ULII02 piston fit in a new 2si jug?..
Can you use an ULII02 exhaust system on the new 2si?
Will the new jugs fit on the old block?
Can you use a new 2si electric starter on the ULII02, and if so..how much
weight does it add vs a rope start /belt redrive? I heard you cant use an
electric start with a belt redrive on this engine..
I have a single carb ULII02 single carb for use on my FireFly (Mikuni/cdi)
and I have 2 props . 1 is a 62 inch 3 blade sport prop and the other is a 60
inch IVO 3 blade. In your post you mention props..were you talking about a
2 blade or a 3 blade 60 "?.....which would you recommend using?...The IVO
could be used with 2 blades only...the sport prop cannot. Due to the shorter
more compact config of the ULII02 with the belt re-drive, I notice when i
put it up there on the Firefly...the center of the engine must set 4 or 5
inches aft of the where the center of the 447 geardrive would to achieve 5
inchs of prop/trailing edge clearance. it seems a prop extension would be in
order...How long an extension can you use on a new 2si belt drive?
and ditto on those prices!...I ordered a complete overhaul gasket set for
the ULII02.,,seals an all...30 bucks or something. .WOW.....how about them
prices rotax fans!
And finally...the static rpm load...in my mind I'm thinking of adjusting the
prop to load the engine to 6500 rpm static (test stand). Does that seem
about right to you?
What EGT would you consider correct on full load on the test stand?
Gettin kinda long...making me feel guilty...If you answer all this I'm gonna
owe you shop time Tom!
need any Honda general purpose indus engine parts?!!!!!Ill see you get
treated right!
http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm
Don Gherardini-
FireFly 098
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hans vanAlphen" <hva(at)bellsouth.net> |
Paul,
The BMW has a "Shock Absorber Cam" in the transmission, similar to what you
describe in the Harley.
I was not able to use that part easily in my conversion, but I think that
would be an excellent part to use to fight the Torsional vibrations, it
almost acts as a Sprague clutch.
I would recommend a higher reduction gear ratio, I use 3:1 , our props are
most efficient at 1600-2000 rpm.
Hans van Alphen
> .....snip.....
> Something you may not know about these engines. The have a compensating
drive sprocket.
> It's a three finger cam gizmo that has a stout spring that allows the
> drive sprocket to "give" 30 or so degrees either way to absorb the "power
pulses
> perhaps?"...........snip
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Is the 447 going the way of the 277 & 377 |
> > 2Si, it may be your opportunity to grab market share.
> =========================
>
> Exactly! and I hope they succeed. I don't see why americans should spend
> lots of $$$$ to offset the socialist labor costs of the Austrians.
Ron/Gang:
Before that will happen, someone must be able to
supply a product that is equal to or better than
the Rotax. I fly what I fly because I am
comfortable and have faith in its reliability. I
am not about to downgrade to less reliability.
The new market will have to prove what they want
to sell.
It ain't the Austrians that are getting rich. I
think it might be a French/Canadian in the Bahamas
that owns Rotax (the ultralight/lightplane side of
the house). In addition to charging extremely
high prices for their products, they probably have
found a loop hole to get by US import taxes, among
other things.
Musing at hauck's holler, alabama.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rwpike(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Tom's rich jetting |
>
>
>
>1200F would be EGT limit, but I like to jet all my 2-stroke aircraft engines
>as rich as they will run smoothly. That will give the engine the longest
>life.
>
>Tom Olenik
>Olenik Aviation
>http://www.buyitsellitfixit.com
>877-AIR-MOTORS ...we support what we sell.
Interesting. I would have thought that jetting as rich as possible would
fill the ring grooves, exhaust ports, piston tops, & cylinder head chambers
with carbon quicker, so I am interested to hear why you think rich jetting
prolongs engine life.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
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: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Hauck's Web Page |
Hi Kolbers:
My son, Mike, has put my 1994, 2000, and 2001,
Alaska and US perimeter flights on a real web
page. Unlike my index page, which I uploaded
basic files, because I didn't know how to do it
any differently, my new web page has the pictures
with the articles and pages are linked. A couple
are dead links, but Mike says he can get those
sorted out in time. Right now to go from page to
page one must hit the back button to go back and
link to the next page. A little more work, for
now, but will be fixed soon.
http://webpages.charter.net/bird82/
There are a couple pictures that do not agree with
the captions. One is captioned Avra Valley
Airport, AZ. The picture is Atigun Pass, Alaska.
This will also be corrected.
I hope you enjoy the articles.
Additional thanks goes to Dana Labhart for
building the basic web pages for the New Kolb
Company web site, and Mike Richardson of the Kolb
List who volunteered to sort out the files, and my
Mike for providing the web space and uploading for
me.
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Olenik" <olenik-aviation(at)buyitsellitfixit.com> |
| Subject: | Tom's rich jetting |
Not with a decent oil. In the old days maybe, but with most good oils and
running oil injection, the engine stays clean. Also carbon does not wear
out the engine and only becomes a problem when it is excessive. Most
engines need new seals and gaskets before carbon is an issue.
If you are running an engine that has cheap parts that you don't have to
rely on, then carbon is your worst enemy because the labor to scrape carbon
is so much. With these engines, I can scrape a lot of carbon, buy a lot of
extra fuel, and buy a lot of extra spark plugs for what an in flight piston
seizure might cost. So carbon is of secondary concern.
Running rich burns more fuel, makes a little more carbon, needs plugs
changed more often. However, running too lean makes more power and will
make the engine run the best it every has right up to the second that it
quits. Too rich...runs rough. Too lean...quits.
Tom Olenik
Olenik Aviation
http://www.buyitsellitfixit.com
877-247-6686
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Richard Pike
Subject: Kolb-List: Tom's rich jetting
Interesting. I would have thought that jetting as rich as possible would
fill the ring grooves, exhaust ports, piston tops, & cylinder head chambers
with carbon quicker, so I am interested to hear why you think rich jetting
prolongs engine life.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
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
________________________________________________________________________________
Kolbers,
New carb and fine tuning paid off. Running on it's own now and fairly smooth.Because
the engine is "unloaded" you can't hardly crack the throttle at all or it
will hit 10 grand before you know it! Ran it up to about 3 grand and let me
tell you, this is one mean mammy jammy! Vibration levels are weird. at idle it
just chug a lugs fine. Then at say 1500 rpm it will walk the stand all over the
shop. Then at (I'm guessing) 2000 it smoothes out and just hit's like a jack
hammer. I really doubt this engine will be a fit for a Kolb however, we sure
are having fun with it. I will have a digital video soon to share with all. But
for now let me describe, when you start it, it goes BANG! then rotates a few
revs then takes off on a smooth idle like a radial. A real crowd pleaser!! I
have it fitted with 8" stack's for exhaust. Ear plugs required. No doubt a beast.
Will keep those interested posted.John Hauck has offered a prop and after Mr. Hans
has given me some new direction on ratios, I have to reorder a sprocket for
the driveline. Can't go down on the counter sprocket so it's up with the drive
sprocket. May just abandon the chain approach and use a belt and pulley drive
so I don't break anything. I'm thinking V belt so it can slip until we can
get a indication of just how this thing may play out. Any ideas?
pp.....
Redneck Research Labs.......
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack & Louise Hart <jbhart(at)ldd.net> |
| Subject: | Tom's rich jetting |
Tom,
What EGTs do you recommend at cruise speed?
Jack B. Hart FF004
Jackson, MO
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart(at)ldd.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Miss P'fer Stretches Her Wings |
Hi Kolbers:
Had to cancel my flight down to Lucedale, MS,
today because of IFR weather. Luckily, will be
able to get out of here early tomorrow morning. I
am not an early riser and 0500 is too darn early
to be getting up to look out the window at the
fog. Well, actually, I had to wait until after
0600 to see that it was froggy outside. After a
call to FSS, in Greenwood, MS, I was convinced I
did not want to scud run for 186 miles south and
186 miles back north. Getting too old for that
kinda flying.
However, around noon today the ceiling crept up to
near 1,000 feet at Gantt International Airport. I
could see all the way to Kim's country store,
combination gas station, cafe, and bank, about 3
miles from Gantt. My son Mike and his buddy were
about 40 miles SW of Gantt searching for indian
relics along the Alabama River, near Selma,
Alabama. Decided to see if I had enough weather
to fly down that way to find the two Mikes.
Thirty minutes or so later, I was in the vicinity
of where I thought they might be. They had put in
the river in two kayaks to get to the location
they were to search. I looked down and there were
two men in a field right under the airplane. From
1,000 feet couldn't tell if it was the two Mikes
or not. I was looking for two guys in two
kayaks. At tree top level the fugitives were
ID'd. Mike signaled not to try a landing in the
field he was standing in. To me his signals
looked like he wanted me to land. Knowing Mike's
aviation background, zilch, I did a quick recon of
the area, picking the hayfield right next to the
corn stubble field they were in. Full flaps, skim
over the tree line, and Miss P'fer is on the
ground and rolling out. Well, she rolled a
hundred feet or so. Did not want to use full
braking in an unknown field. This was a unique
meeting out in the middle of nowhere 40 miles from
my airstrip.
I recon'd the local area for them. They like
freshly tilled fields, right after a good rain.
Confirmed there were no good fields in their local
area, saving them 3 mile walk out and back.
Really enjoyed my flight back home. I got to see
several dozen deer running across the field where
I landed. Most of them were carrying full racks.
A beautiful site. Thanks to Homer Kolb and Dennis
Souder, I feel really blessed to be able to build
something in my basement, then fly all over God's
green earth in it.
Now the two Mikes have a safety system. Should
they get sick or injured in that area, all it will
take is a cell phone call, take the coordinates
off their GPS, put them in my GPS, and I can be in
their area in less than an hour. With the number
of local hay fields, I can land, load up the
patient, and fly them back to civilization.
The above would take hours for an ambulance to
find and recover them. The Mark III has a purpose
in life.
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Hauck Web Page II |
Gang:
Forgot to mention. I left the sponsors of my 2000
and 2001 flight listed on the web page. Also
those that donated money for Flight Patches. If
for some reason your name is not on the donators
list, let me know and I will get it posted.
Right off I realized that some names had been
dropped somehow. I could not find Homer and Clara
Kolb.
Hopefully, I will find time to write a short
article about the successful 2001 flight to
Barrow. It will also be posted to the page
sometime in the future.
Would also be a good place to post a Homer Kolb
history page.
Won't be accomplished anytime in the near future
though. Got some flying, traveling, and dirt bike
riding to get done first. yippee!!!
Oh, I forgot. Still got all those house repairs
and projects to finish that I put on hold back in
1984 when I started building ultralights. Said I
would get them done just as soon as I got my
Ultrastar finished.
Well........................................
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Olenik" <olenik-aviation(at)buyitsellitfixit.com> |
| Subject: | Tom's rich jetting |
It varies from engine to engine, but generally the Rotax specification for
normal operating range is appropriate. That is 860 - 1080 for the 447 or
503 and 930 - 1150 for the 582.
Tom Olenik
Olenik Aviation
http://www.buyitsellitfixit.com
877-247-6686
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Jack & Louise
Hart
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Tom's rich jetting
Tom,
What EGTs do you recommend at cruise speed?
Jack B. Hart FF004
Jackson, MO
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart(at)ldd.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | possums <possums(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Miss P'fer Stretches Her Wings |
>
>Hi Kolbers:
>
>Had to cancel my flight down to Lucedale, MS,
>today because of IFR weather.
Anybody going to "fly" to Sun & Fun from the southeast??.
Or want to stop by St. Geo. Island on the way down.
Or St. Simmons Island on the way back up the coast.
We are still trying to plan a trip - just for fun.
We ain't killed nobody in the last 3 years.
http://www.georgiasportflyers.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | possums <possums(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Miss P'fer Stretches Her Wings |
>
>Yes. I am and John Williamson, Kolbra/Jabiru is
>planning to fly down from Dallas.
>
> > Or want to stop by St. Geo. Island on the way down.
>
>I bet I could do that. Let us know where ya'll's
>cabin is going to be so I can buzz it and you can
>come pick me up at the airstrip.
>
> > Or St. Simmons Island on the way back up the coast.
>
>Same same St Simmons.
>
>I'll wear my Official Possum Shirt.
>
>Keep us posted on what ya'll are going to do.
>
>john h
We're going just to have fun- been there a bunch of times - bought all the
toys. Ben Methvin is going down for several days with his portable FBO and
stay either in the Ultralight camp area or the one on the lake across the
way. He has to attend a BFI and AFI conference and wants to help fly the
Flightstar demo. Check the trailer at Flightstar guys. If you any of you
guys want to fly down and haven't been before...I hate to say it, but
...."South Lakeland" is where you want to fly into. It's just about 2
miles south of "Sun and Fun" and nobody knows about it - I guess. We've
been flying down there for the last few years. They let you tie down for
next to nothing and have a shuttle to Sun and Fun every half hour or so??
Long grass field - and they demo all the new planes from the "Show" there
so they don't kill anybody. Showers and camp sites. (I didn't tell you -
so don't blame me if it's full).
BTW it never is. And the big thing is when you want to leave - you don't
have to get permission - and you can fly into Sun & Fun anytime you want to
- but have fun gettin out..
http://www.mindspring.com/~possums/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | woody <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
| Subject: | Re: EVO/AIR update |
>
>d.John Hauck has offered a prop a
>Redneck Research Labs.......
Are you trying to run it without a prop?????
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | possums <possums(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | horizontal stabilizer leading edge mounts |
>Snip-Kolb-List message posted by: John Hauck
>We overcame a similar problem when we built my MK III.
>Based on experience flying the factory MK III,
>brother Jim designed
>and fabricated some adjustable horizontal stabilizer leading
>edge mounts. The top position is still a couple inches
>lower than what the plans call for. I have three positions
>to experiment with. I fly in the middle position, where the airplane
feels best.
Me too
http://www.mindspring.com/~possums/Adjstabil.jpg
http://www.mindspring.com/~possums/Modtail&swagedwires.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | woody <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Is the 447 going the way of the 277 & 377 |
>
>
>2Si, it may be your opportunity to grab market share. Can they get it
>together and produce a engine that holds together? Hirth can't seem to do
>it and 2Si hasn't had much better success.
>jerb
I keep hearing about HIrth not holding up. I am wondering what is going
on as I fly 2 of them and they do not seem to have any problems. HAve you
any experience with these Tom? Anyone else? I set them up according to the
HIrth manual (not the Rotax manual for similar engines) and they seem to
run fine.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Tom's rich jetting |
Tom, thanks so very much for your advice on all those questions..I am
indebted to you....
On the jetting, It looks like you think like me in that respect...as rich
as it will still run smooth. (not as rich as it will still run)
I dont have alot of expierience with this ULII02...and I dont know if a
fella can hear the "4-stroking" as we call it of a small 2 stroke when it is
to rich...but a trained ear can adjust a chain saw or a string trimmer
(richen) at WOT till it starts "gurgeling" and then lean it back untill it
clears up and runs smooth. (under load)This position by far give the most
power under load and the longest life. What you are actually hearing is the
engine slightly missing due to an over rich condition. you can also adjust
them under no load the oppisite way...lean em out till they scream and then
richen it up till it just starts to "gurgle"...as soon as a load is
applied...the engine will run smooth and the perfect mixture is attained.
this is also the way I used to adjust that danged old Chotia 460...and I
never had a problem with them...built 5 weedhoppers in the 80 and 81 with
that engine and never had a problem. Just like the Cuyuna's and 2si's....I
think they recieved a bad rep due to people using them who just dont really
understand 2 cycles....but think they do! Any Piston ported engine with
closed port configuration is such a simple and sweet design to me...somje
think they are finicky...well I like to think Precise is a better
term...and will give good service/life if adjusted "precisely".
http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm
Don Gherardini-
FireFly 098
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: history of ultralights |
Dennis....thank you so very much for those reminising memories. If I were a
Hollywood director...I would give you a zillion dollars for the movie rights
What a GREAT american story!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Tom's rich jetting |
> On the jetting, It looks like you think like me in that respect...as rich
> as it will still run smooth. (not as rich as it will still run)
> Don Gherardini-
Don/Kolbers:
My first UL was an Ultrastar with a Cuyuna ULIIO2,
CDI ign and Mikuni carb. Damn good engine. Only
problem I had with mine (I put 385 hours on it)
was the engine heads/cylinders/cases needed
frequent torqueing. In the case of an Ultrastar,
the engine had to be dropped to torque the cases
and cylinders IIRC. The US engine mount
interferred with the bolts. Could not get a
socket on them. So, it was easy to let it go for
too long, which resulted in leakage at the cyl
base gasket. The ULIIO2 was an updated engine
which Cuyuna lightened quite a bit, at the expense
of milling too much material off the cases where
the cyls and cyl base gasket married up. Other
than that, it was a bang up engine. Never fouled
a plug on it.
I had bought and installed Mike Straman's CPS
adjustable main fuel control. I could dial that
thing in anyway I wanted it. Rich for takeoff and
lean it out for cruise to make power and save
fuel. My first engine out happened at Tuskeegee
Airport (Moton Field), Alabama. I was on the way,
250 miles, to Tallahassee, Florida, 7 December
1984. This was my second cross country flight
from Alabama to Tallahassee, Florida. While I was
inside paying for the couple gals of 100LL, three
gentlemen were inspecting my unique flying
machine. When I came back out they had gone. I
took off the parking ramp, got 100 ft in the air,
and my world became silent. Oops! I got behind
the aircraft and landed pretty hard. On the
ground I discovered that the main fuel control had
been turned about a turn too much on the rich
side. Experimentation demonstrated that the
Cuyuna would run perfectly at cruise and high
power settings with increasing richness right up
to the point that it got too rich. At that
point..........it quit running same same hitting
the kill switch. However, a slight turn lean on
the fuel control knob and it would scream like a
banshee. Had I know that I could have prevented
my first engine failure and a slightly bent
airframe.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Airgriff2(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Miss P'fer Stretches Her Wings |
>
> >> Thanks to Homer Kolb and Dennis
>> Souder, I feel really blessed to be able to build
>> something in my basement, then fly all over God's
>> green earth in it.
>>
>
John, was wondering if your flight to Barrow, Alaska was the "flight of all
flights" for you? Not that you could or would want to try to top that for
any reason, but was wondering if you had any "adventure type" flights" , in
mind, on the back burner, or upcoming ? Otherwise, I guess you could result
to starting on all that work on the house that has been piling up ? (lets
see--------WORK ????----FLY ????) ummmm.
Fly Safe
Bob Griffin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Olenik" <olenik-aviation(at)buyitsellitfixit.com> |
| Subject: | Is the 447 going the way of the 277 & 377 |
I don't have much experience with Hirth, but from what I see, most of the
problems have been user induced, failure to follow instructions type things.
Yes, they have had some engines that had manufacturing flaws....every engine
does. Believe me. When my dad's company was still operating as a full
Rotax Service center, we did more warranty work for Rotax engines than
everyone else put together in some years, and I can tell you that they have
had and still have those occasional screw ups just like Hirth, 2SI, HKS, and
Jabiru do. They all do. The only difference is how they take care of
those.
From what I see, however, RPE takes care of those problems very well for
Hirth, and that is what counts in my book. I just don't see much advantage
of the Hirth engine other than it is easier for a small OEM to get better
margins. The retail and maintenance costs are about the same as Rotax, and
the weight and performance isn't any better either.
As far as the engines go, I don't know if they are as bad as so many people
say. I think most of that is just brand loyalty BS. Most will shrug off a
Rotax 503 that Rotax forgot to put piston circlips in as "that happens", but
if someone had a 2706 or whatever it is called now that had the same
problem, everyone here would hear about it.
Tom Olenik
Olenik Aviation
http://www.buyitsellitfixit.com
877-247-6686
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of woody
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Is the 447 going the way of the 277 & 377
>
>
>2Si, it may be your opportunity to grab market share. Can they get it
>together and produce a engine that holds together? Hirth can't seem to do
>it and 2Si hasn't had much better success.
>jerb
I keep hearing about HIrth not holding up. I am wondering what is going
on as I fly 2 of them and they do not seem to have any problems. HAve you
any experience with these Tom? Anyone else? I set them up according to the
HIrth manual (not the Rotax manual for similar engines) and they seem to
run fine.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack & Louise Hart <jbhart(at)ldd.net> |
| Subject: | Tom's rich jetting |
Tom,
I did not phrase the question properly. With an engine set up as you like it,
what EGTs would one expect?
Jack B. Hart FF004
Jackson, MO
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart(at)ldd.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Olenik" <olenik-aviation(at)buyitsellitfixit.com> |
| Subject: | Tom's rich jetting |
Don,
The only thing that I would watch out for with the Cuyuna when jetting is
that it will take a rich idle mixture much better than a Rotax will, meaning
that it will continue to run smooth at idle even if it is slobbering rich.
The problem, then, is that when you go to power off idle, it bogs or even
dies. So for idle mixture, I do just the opposite as I do for higher power
settings. For idle, I lean to peak efficiency. However, when you do that,
it will often have some effect on mid range, and midrange may need to be
adjusted a little to the richer side, then.
Tom Olenik
Olenik Aviation
http://www.buyitsellitfixit.com
877-247-6686
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Don Gherardini
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Tom's rich jetting
Tom, thanks so very much for your advice on all those questions..I am
indebted to you....
On the jetting, It looks like you think like me in that respect...as rich
as it will still run smooth. (not as rich as it will still run)
I dont have alot of expierience with this ULII02...and I dont know if a
fella can hear the "4-stroking" as we call it of a small 2 stroke when it is
to rich...but a trained ear can adjust a chain saw or a string trimmer
(richen) at WOT till it starts "gurgeling" and then lean it back untill it
clears up and runs smooth. (under load)This position by far give the most
power under load and the longest life. What you are actually hearing is the
engine slightly missing due to an over rich condition. you can also adjust
them under no load the oppisite way...lean em out till they scream and then
richen it up till it just starts to "gurgle"...as soon as a load is
applied...the engine will run smooth and the perfect mixture is attained.
this is also the way I used to adjust that danged old Chotia 460...and I
never had a problem with them...built 5 weedhoppers in the 80 and 81 with
that engine and never had a problem. Just like the Cuyuna's and 2si's....I
think they recieved a bad rep due to people using them who just dont really
understand 2 cycles....but think they do! Any Piston ported engine with
closed port configuration is such a simple and sweet design to me...somje
think they are finicky...well I like to think Precise is a better
term...and will give good service/life if adjusted "precisely".
http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm
Don Gherardini-
FireFly 098
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Olenik" <olenik-aviation(at)buyitsellitfixit.com> |
| Subject: | Tom's rich jetting |
Again, it varies. A 503 would probably be in the high 900 or low 1000
range. A 582 would probably be in the mid to high 1000 range.
Tom Olenik
Olenik Aviation
http://www.buyitsellitfixit.com
877-247-6686
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Jack & Louise
Hart
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Tom's rich jetting
Tom,
I did not phrase the question properly. With an engine set up as you like
it, what EGTs would one expect?
Jack B. Hart FF004
Jackson, MO
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart(at)ldd.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Clay Stuart" <tcstuart(at)adelphia.net> |
To anyone, but especially to John Hauck:
John recently mentioned that the 912S was not just a higher HP and higher compression
engine version of the 912. How do the engine designs differ? What are
the octane requirements for the two engines? I am planning to use the 912S on
my Xtra with the Ivo in-flight adjustable prop. The $840 version of the prop
is for up to 100 HP. With the adjustable prop, would the 912 give me 912S-like
performance? Would the 912S be an overkill with this prop?
John, what engine would you use with the in-flight adjustable prop if it were your
plane and I was buying the engine for you?
Thanks,
Clay Stuart
________________________________________________________________________________
Kolbers,
Had a great day today visiting Ronnie Smith and John Hauck and John Cooley down
in south MS. John Cooley was kind enough to loan me a TN. Prop for our experiment
and John Hauck was in for the gear box tune up. Ms P'fer was looking good
as always and we were treated to a special look into the gear drive! To my surprise
I discovered that the torsional absorbing unit in the box was exactly the
same as on my HD test unit.
Ronnie has a assortment of experimental aircraft about and has a great facility!
Charley was very attached to a kitfox that was on hand and the weather was so-so...
We had little Charley on hand for the day (my 11month old son) and here's a tip,
NEVER give a young child caffeine! It's 7:30pm and he is still bouncing of the
walls!!!! But diet coke was all we had at the time so Duh Hu....
For any of you that have not seen J. Hauck's airplane you should really take a
long hard look at this aircraft. With over 1700hrs she is a dandy! He did notice
a break in the V-stab forward leading edge tube. I would have never picked
that out. It broke just above a previous break. Also he pointed out a area on
the elevators inward at the tube that he had reinforced because the surface of
that component relies on a great deal of force with very little metal there...
I snapped some real nice photos of her and will upload to photoshare for you guys.
Great day!
pp...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alderson, James" <James_Alderson(at)jdedwards.com> |
Hey there,
I have figured out, after spending some time in my kolb working out the best
position for everything, that my helmet will not fit due to lack of headroom
caused by the BRS above me. I have read alot of the past conversations in
the archives regarding helmets and the decision to wear one. I am looking at
thick leather helmets as an alternative because I will feel a little naked
without a helmet on. Has anyone of you guys ever tried one of these helmets
or have any words of wisdom for me on the subject. I haven't kid myself into
thinking that they will stop a smack to the head, but they may stop some
lacerations from occuring in the even I was struck by something.
James Alderson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerb <ulflyer(at)airmail.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Is the 447 going the way of the 277 & 377 |
Which model engines are you running?
jerb
>
>
> >
> >
> >2Si, it may be your opportunity to grab market share. Can they get it
> >together and produce a engine that holds together? Hirth can't seem to do
> >it and 2Si hasn't had much better success.
> >jerb
>
>
> I keep hearing about HIrth not holding up. I am wondering what is going
>on as I fly 2 of them and they do not seem to have any problems. HAve you
>any experience with these Tom? Anyone else? I set them up according to the
>HIrth manual (not the Rotax manual for similar engines) and they seem to
>run fine.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerb <ulflyer(at)airmail.net> |
| Subject: | Is the 447 going the way of the 277 & 377 |
It may depend upon who's life and plane are at risk or survived one event
to the next. Also who's paying the bills for repair of the engine and
aircraft damage.
jerb
>
>
>I don't have much experience with Hirth, but from what I see, most of the
>problems have been user induced, failure to follow instructions type things.
>Yes, they have had some engines that had manufacturing flaws....every engine
>does. Believe me. When my dad's company was still operating as a full
>Rotax Service center, we did more warranty work for Rotax engines than
>everyone else put together in some years, and I can tell you that they have
>had and still have those occasional screw ups just like Hirth, 2SI, HKS, and
>Jabiru do. They all do. The only difference is how they take care of
>those.
>
> >From what I see, however, RPE takes care of those problems very well for
>Hirth, and that is what counts in my book. I just don't see much advantage
>of the Hirth engine other than it is easier for a small OEM to get better
>margins. The retail and maintenance costs are about the same as Rotax, and
>the weight and performance isn't any better either.
>
>As far as the engines go, I don't know if they are as bad as so many people
>say. I think most of that is just brand loyalty BS. Most will shrug off a
>Rotax 503 that Rotax forgot to put piston circlips in as "that happens", but
>if someone had a 2706 or whatever it is called now that had the same
>problem, everyone here would hear about it.
>
>Tom Olenik
>Olenik Aviation
>http://www.buyitsellitfixit.com
>877-247-6686
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of woody
>To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Is the 447 going the way of the 277 & 377
>
>
> >
> >
> >2Si, it may be your opportunity to grab market share. Can they get it
> >together and produce a engine that holds together? Hirth can't seem to do
> >it and 2Si hasn't had much better success.
> >jerb
>
>
> I keep hearing about HIrth not holding up. I am wondering what is going
>on as I fly 2 of them and they do not seem to have any problems. HAve you
>any experience with these Tom? Anyone else? I set them up according to the
>HIrth manual (not the Rotax manual for similar engines) and they seem to
>run fine.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "johnjung(at)compusenior.com" <johnjung(at)compusenior.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Leather helmet |
James and Group,
I would like to suggest another alternative to a leather helmet, the one that I
used:
Move the chute higher.
On my Firestar II, the standard position of the chute in the gap seal did not allow
room for my helmet. And I did not like having aluminum angles above my head with
no helmet.
I raised the chute until it was right up against the top of the gap seal. Then
I removed
material from the bottom of the angles that support the chute. Now I can wear a
real helmet.
John Jung
>
Hey there,
I have figured out, after spending some time in my kolb working out the best
position for everything, that my helmet will not fit due to lack of headroom
caused by the BRS above me.
snip.........
________________________________________________________________________________
I am fairly new to the Kolb-list and throughly enjoy all of the information
provided by the members. I only wish I was aware of the list when I was
building my FireStar II, it would have been a great help. I wonder why Kolb
doesn't mention it in their kit material------maybe a potential legal thing.
Please keep the information coming it'a great for us "new guys".
I live in Rochester, N.Y. ( 123 inches of snow so far this year and freezing
weather) and will be heading South shortly to defrost my old bones. I would
like to get some flying lessons in a Kolb product that has similiar flight
characteristics as my FireStar. Does anyone know of any flight instructors
that fly Kolbs down around the Naples and Clearwater Beach areas in Florida?
I will also be in the Lakeland area for Sun N Fun for a few days and was
wondering if anyone gives lessons in that area in a Kolb.I'm really anxious
to get in the air and hope someone can give me some ideas. Thanks in advance
for your help!!!
From: Bob Erb <bserbjr(at)aol.com>
Tel. # 585-624-2789
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Cooley" <johnc(at)datasync.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Luecdale Visit |
Hi Gang,
I just heard John Hauck depart from Ronnie Smith's. That Rotax 912S has an
real mean growl. Hopefully we will hear from him in a few hours and that he
had a safe trip home.
As Paul mentioned we had a good time yesterday at Ronnie's. It was a
pleasure to see John again and talk with him. Paul and Charley are great
guys and I think Paul got confused about which Mark III kit he wants after
seeing John's plane up close. I got to do some close inspecting on John's
plane and definitely picked up on some little tricks I will incorporate on
my MK III project. One major thing that I will add to mine is the extra
gussets that Paul mentions in his post on the elevators and rudder. This
will be much cleaner when done before the covering.These gussets probably
are not necessary for normal use and for planes with normal hours put on
them, but it will be nice knowing that area has been reinforced just in case
my plane ever sees the 1700 hours John's airframe has on it. John mentioned
that it was his opinion that this should be included in the plans. Take note
"New Kolb".
Hopefully I can modify the landing gear on my plane to be like John's. It
has some good advantages, some disadvantages and looks soooo cool.
Who knows, we may see a Mark III "Hauck special" with a Harley thumper
sitting on top on it when Paul gets through with his future project.
Take Care,
John Cooley
>
> Kolbers,
> Had a great day today visiting Ronnie Smith and John Hauck and John Cooley
down in south MS. John Cooley was kind enough to loan me a TN. Prop for our
experiment and John Hauck was in for the gear box tune up. Ms P'fer was
looking good as always and we were treated to a special look into the gear
drive! To my surprise I discovered that the torsional absorbing unit in the
box was exactly the same as on my HD test unit.
> Ronnie has a assortment of experimental aircraft about and has a great
facility! Charley was very attached to a kitfox that was on hand and the
weather was so-so...
> We had little Charley on hand for the day (my 11month old son) and here's
a tip, NEVER give a young child caffeine! It's 7:30pm and he is still
bouncing of the walls!!!! But diet coke was all we had at the time so Duh
Hu....
> For any of you that have not seen J. Hauck's airplane you should really
take a long hard look at this aircraft. With over 1700hrs she is a dandy! He
did notice a break in the V-stab forward leading edge tube. I would have
never picked that out. It broke just above a previous break. Also he pointed
out a area on the elevators inward at the tube that he had reinforced
because the surface of that component relies on a great deal of force with
very little metal there...
> I snapped some real nice photos of her and will upload to photoshare for
you guys.
>
> Great day!
>
> pp...
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Monument Valley schedule |
| From: | Erich_Weaver(at)URSCorp.com |
03/03/2003 12:20:47 PM
The earliest I can make it to Monument Valley is Sunday evening, May 18.
I am trailering in from California, and planning on bringing my wife and
daughter. I made reservations at Gouldings Lodge, but hope to wander down
and mingle with the campers if they let me. Hope to make a side trip or
two - Boyd Young and I discussed possibly going to Lake Powell and/or up
to the Moab area. I did Moab solo last fall, flying over Arches Natl Park,
Dead Horse Point, and Canyonlands. Definitely a highlight of my life.
Hope to see some new faces with familiar names at Monument Valley and share
the experience.
Erich Weaver
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | TAILDRAGGER503(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Horizontal Stabilizer |
Bill, The elevator control mechanism keeps the horizontal stabilizer from
folding when the elevator is not in the neutral position.
David Snyder
Building Kolb FSII
Lakewood, N.J.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Miss P'fer Stretches Her Wings |
> John, was wondering if your flight to Barrow, Alaska was the "flight of all
> flights" for you?
> Bob Griffin
Hi Bob/Gang:
I do not have any plans, other than a return
flight to Alaska that I mentioned in my previous
email.
I takes a lot of time and money to do a really
long solo flight. I have the time, but the money
is the hard part to come by.
I am leary of flying south, or I would like to do
the flight to the southern end of South America.
I do not have the money to grease the skids in all
the countries I would have to entry to get there
and back.
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
John,
You mentioned a fuel control that you used on the ULII02....can you tell me more
about where I might find one?
(SNIPPED)>>>>
{"I had bought and installed Mike Straman's CPS
adjustable main fuel control. I could dial that
thing in anyway I wanted it. Rich for takeoff ....")
http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm
Don Gherardini-
FireFly 098
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Luecdale Visit |
> Hopefully I can modify the landing gear on my plane to be like John's. It
> has some good advantages, some disadvantages and looks soooo cool.
>
> Who knows, we may see a Mark III "Hauck special" with a Harley thumper
> sitting on top on it when Paul gets through with his future project.
>
> Take Care,
> John Cooley
John C/Gang:
I know what the advantages are, and one
disadvantage of my main gear. Biggest advantages
are:
-No problem with nosing over (no "training skid"
required under nose).
-Operates well on unimproved, sand, mud, high
grass and weeds, especially with 800X6 Air Tracs
and 6 psi pressure.
Biggest disadvantage:
-A real taildragger. Requires lots of rudder and
brakes for adequate control landing on pavement.
With about 100 lbs on the tailwheel there is a lot
of enertia when ground handling in turns. Have to
stay well ahead of the airplane or it will ground
loop, wind up like a top. :-)
-If you a a died in the wool standard gear Kolb
pilot, you may be disappointed with the amount of
piloting it takes to fly this set up. But on the
other hand, you may like spending time on your
nose or your back. hehehe
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Control |
> You mentioned a fuel control that you used on the ULII02....can you tell me more
about where I might find one?
> Don Gherardini-
Don G/Gang:
I bought that "main fuel aduster" in 1984 from
CPS. Have no idea where you could get one.
However, Mike Jacober, in Birchwood, Alaska,
"Arctic Sparrow Ultralights" designed and sells
something similar. His web site is:
http://www.arcticsparrowaircraft.com/
Ask me if I would ever fly a two stroke with
adjustable main fuel. Don't think I would. Too
easy to make a costly mistake. Not really
necessary for good fun, safe, reliable flight.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Miss P'fer Stretches Her Wings |
> John, a flight down south has been on my radar screen for some time now.
> Peter
Peter/Gang:
Thanks for the invite. Will have to rob bank,
maybe several banks to get enough fuel money for
trip. Don't know what I will do for food.......
john h
DON NOT ARCHIVE
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | woody <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Is the 447 going the way of the 277 & 377 |
>
>Which model engines are you running?
>jerb
I have a 2703 on my Twinstar and a 2706 on a buddies Mk111. My flying
totem pole will have a Jabiru this summer and our club mk111 will have a
582, The airframe I recieved from Dallas Sheppard will also fly again with
a 582. I also have a Hirth f 30 100 hp in the basement waiting for a
project or I may just sell it outright. Lots of engine variety and I set
them up by their own Mfg. recommendations. If I can buy a BMW or Harley
engine for under $3000 then why can't Rotax be more price competitive. My
Jabi is $9500 new. Did Rotax set the price and everyone happily tries to
keep up to it. I believe in the old adage- sell for a bit less and make
your profit on volume. How many new engines come out and go by the wayside.
Seems most guys start off at the Rotax price and don't realize that people
will pay more for a proven product and pass on an unknown product for the
same cost. I know R&D cost money but if you try to make it back on your
first engine then you have doomed yourself to failure and all the R&D money
is lost. Just my opinion of course (its not like me to spout off is it). :).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
Clay/Gang:
It is worth every penny to attend one of Eric
Tucker's engine schools, either the two or four
stroke school. I was lucky enough to attend the
912 school the week I picked up my new 912S. Was
a real information intensive course. Plus a lot
of little tidbits of info tossed in by Eric during
the course of instruction.
> John recently mentioned that the 912S was not just a higher HP and higher compression
engine version of the 912. How do the engine designs differ?
The 912S in a completely new engine. As of
January 2000, about 7,000 912 engines had been
sold during an 11 year period. The user
experience with those 7,000 engines were used to
improve the 912S. Primarily the 912S has heavier
engine cases, crankshaft, rods, pistons, and
heads. Nothing in that area will fit in a 912 or
914 turbo. The intake manifolds have been cleaned
up and flow much better than the old 912. Gears
in the gearbox are wider, heavier duty. There are
other improvements that this old memory will not
pull up at this moment.
What are the octane requirements for the two
engines?
The 912 (9.0 to 1 compression ratio) and all two
strokes operate on US octane rating of 87
unleaded. All those years of two stroke and 912
running and I thought I had to use high octane
fuel because I could not read and interpret the
way the Austrians translated octane rating in the
operators manuala. The 912S is 10.5 to 1
compression ratio and requires at least 91
unleaded.
> With the adjustable prop, would the 912 give me 912S-like performance?
Not hardly, unless you could squeeze another 20 hp
and increased reliability out of the 912.
> Would the 912S be an overkill with this prop?
Don't have any personal experience with Ivo,
except flying Kolb Factory aircraft. Can not help
you with that one. I am happy with my prop
setup, 70" 3 blade fast taper Warp Drive with
nickle steel leading edges. Ground adjustable, I
seriously doubt any increased performance, climb
or cruise attained with the IVO inflight
adjustable would offset purchase price and
problems associated with the prop down the road.
>
> John, what engine would you use with the in-flight adjustable prop if it were
your plane and I was buying the engine for you?
With 1,135 hours experience with the 912 and 412
hrs with the 912S, I would go with the 912S.
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | woody <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
>
>
>Summer on my own and supported by me, I would not
>have to be anywhere at any certain time.
>Something to contemplate. Anybody want to go?
>
>Take care,
>
>john h
If I were a retired gentleman of liesure like yourself with lots of time
I would be happy to tag along. Couple more years and we'll see.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rwpike(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | 2 stroke octanes? |
>
>Clay/Gang:
>
> What are the octane requirements for the two
>engines?
>
>The 912 (9.0 to 1 compression ratio) and all two
>strokes operate on US octane rating of 87
>unleaded.
>Take care,
>
>john h
Uhhh, John - I hate to do this - but my gen-u-wine 1994 edition
Rotax shop manual says right here on page 11 that the 532
requires Premium gasoline, not below MON 87 or RON 96,
leaded or unleaded.
(Unlike the 447, 503, 582, etc. which need only regular not below
MON 83 or RON 91, leaded or unleaded)
Gomenasai, neh?
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
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: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 2 stroke octanes? |
> Uhhh, John - I hate to do this - but my gen-u-wine 1994 edition
> Rotax shop manual says right here on page 11 that the 532
> requires Premium gasoline, not below MON 87 or RON 96,
> leaded or unleaded.
Richard/Gang:
Sorry about that. Did not know about the antique
532 requirement. To find the AKI Octane add MON
87 and RON 96 and divide by 2 = 91.5 AKI
> (Unlike the 447, 503, 582, etc. which need only regular not below
> MON 83 or RON 91, leaded or unleaded)
MON 83 + RON 91 = 87
Just didn't do my homework. Octane requirements
were discussed by Eric Tucker during 912 school.
That is when I found out I could have saved a
bundle by running 87. Another time that I could
have saved a lot on fuel was my first Alaska
flight. Would have also saved a lot of worry.
There were a couple times I took on 87 octane
because I had no other choice. Was having some
engine problems and kept thinking maybe it was the
87 octane. Wasn't.
If you all are flying a 532 please use 91.5 AKI
Octane or higher.......
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | woody <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
>
>
>When I throttle tha beast it tends to pick the frame up on the right side.
>This is one strong Thumper!
>Long night in the shop...
Do you have any power charts on this ei, hp - rpm and torque - rpm. I
would be interested in seeing it. There is an old saying. torque flies the
airplane but Hp sells it. You may have enough torque there to omit the
reduction drive.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "boyd young" <by0ung(at)brigham.net> |
| Subject: | nose heavy mi III |
In a message dated 2/27/03 11:18:11 AM Eastern Standard Time,
by0ung(at)brigham.net writes:
> ps how can i figure where the center of lift is ?????
>
isn't the center of lift always at the thickest part of the airfoil?
George Randolph
Firestar driver from Akron
George.... if the thickest part of the wing is the center of lift. ( on the
mark III it is about 13 inches from the leading edge) and the cg range is 16.5
to 23.1
draw a small picture of your kolb and put a string at 13 inches and lift. remember
that the cg can be 10 inches behind the lift point.... with your picture
in hand tell me is the tail a lifting force or a down force in order to level
the plane?
in my view if you lift forward of the cg the tail must lift..... but in a conventional
plane the tail has a down pressure for stabilization..... aslo if
the lift was forward of the cg when it went into a stall the plane would fall
tail first.... you would not be able to recover.....
i do believe there is a pivit point in the wing about the thickest part of the
wing... but the airadynamic center of lift should be behind the cg..... if not
what am i missing????
boyd
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rwpike(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mi III |
No. The center of lift is not always at the thickest part of the airfoil.
But it is probably possible to design and build an airfoil where it could
be the thickest part.
There is a median line between the upper surface of a wing and the lower
surface, and this is the camber line. Typically, it is curved, rising at
the front of the airfoil, reaching it's high point at about a third of the
way back, and then continuing on over, with the back third or sometimes the
back half being almost a straight line. Lift is typically generated from
the high point of that curve to the back end.
Sometimes that camber line is the same as the airfoil itself, such as a
single surface wing, like a Quicksilver MX.
Sometimes that camber line curves back up at the back third, like an Easy
Riser, or most any other flying wing, which gets rid of the pitching moment
of the wing, the airfoil becomes like a wing in front, with a stabilizer at
the back, the back of the airfoil stabilizes the front. But in that case,
the lift quits just ahead of the point at which the reflex begins.
Now let's tie this to Kolbs: The Kolb airfoil has a curved median line from
the leading edge to about two - four inches behind the main spar, and then
is pretty much a straight line to the back of the flaps or the ailerons.
When the flaps are down, then the median line gets an additional curve at
the back end. This has the effect of moving the center of lift farther
back, imagine the wing "growing" a much bigger chord toward the back,
because it has a bigger median overall curve line, greater total camber,
except that the back part is chopped off, but it still moves the center of
lift toward the back. And the airplane feels nose heavier, because the CG
stayed the same, but the center of lift moved aft as the overall proportion
of the camber line moves aft.
Reflex the flaps upward past normal, and the airfoil becomes like a flying
wing airfoil, the back part quits making lift as the lifting part of the
median curve moves forward, consequently whatever lift there is comes from
farther forward on the wing. And the airplane feels tail heavier.
And it is correct that the CG has to always be ahead of the center of lift,
unless you are in a canard like a Long Eze or similar.
Hope this makes sense, if I flubbed any of the terminology or details,
Topher can always bail us out...
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>
>In a message dated 2/27/03 11:18:11 AM Eastern Standard Time,
>by0ung(at)brigham.net writes:
>
> > ps how can i figure where the center of lift is ?????
> >
>
>isn't the center of lift always at the thickest part of the airfoil?
>George Randolph
>Firestar driver from Akron
>
>
>George.... if the thickest part of the wing is the center of lift. ( on
>the mark III it is about 13 inches from the leading edge) and the cg
>range is 16.5 to 23.1
>
>draw a small picture of your kolb and put a string at 13 inches and lift.
>remember that the cg can be 10 inches behind the lift point.... with your
>picture in hand tell me is the tail a lifting force or a down force in
>order to level the plane?
>
>in my view if you lift forward of the cg the tail must lift..... but in
>a conventional plane the tail has a down pressure for
>stabilization..... aslo if the lift was forward of the cg when it went
>into a stall the plane would fall tail first.... you would not be able
>to recover.....
>
>i do believe there is a pivit point in the wing about the thickest part of
>the wing... but the airadynamic center of lift should be behind the
>cg..... if not what am i missing????
>
>boyd
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <cen33475(at)centurytel.net> |
| Subject: | nose heavy mi III |
i do believe there is a pivit point in the wing about the thickest part of
the wing... but the airadynamic center of lift should be behind the cg.....
if not what am i missing????
boyd
Don't believe, know... I think you will find that knowing is much more
valuable the believing.
what are you missing? the tail. the fuselage. they contribute to the
center of lift. the ac of a wing is at the quarter chord, not the thickest
part. so you start out at 25% and then you add the contribution from the
tail, and rest of the plane. the tails on Kolb's aren't very big, lets say
they are ~1/10 of the size of the wing... but they are way back there, so
they move the center of lift of the plane back a fair bit. the thickest
part of the wing has nothing to do with it what so ever, on an old
ultralight with a 2 inch round tube for a leading edge and a single piece of
fabric going to the back the thickest part of the wing would be 1 inch from
the leading edge... no, the wing would not pivot around that point. wings
and anything else not constrained by pivot points pivot about there cg...
not the ac the cg.
there is no possibility that the cg of the Kolb is behind the ac of the
plane. that is not possible, because if it was the plane would be
statically unstable and you or even the great John H could not fly it for
more then 5 seconds before it swapped ends on you and flew backwards. the
fins are at the back of the dart. throw a dart backwards and it swaps ends
and hits the dartboard going point (cg) first. cg is in front of ac.
always... except
I worked on the f-16 for 8 years. it is statically unstable at speeds
greater then around 400 knots, neutrally stable or very slightly stable
below that. supersonic it is very unstable. the ac moves aft from the 1/4
chord to 1/2 chord when your supersonic. we have triple redundant fly by
wire on the f-16, cause even at the best case it would be unflyable without
the computers feeding back to the controls to provide artificial stability.
________________________________________________________________________________
Slow day so I will throw this out there. My engine project is ready to make the
PSRU. I have all the material and was ready to start last night but put it on
hold because Mr. Hans vanAlphen posted an interesting note about this thing may
having enough torque to pull the prop at say 2000 rpm without a PSRU. This
would be great because this way I could make a hub to cover the Vibration dampener
and fill it with oil to keep it lubed then bolt the prop right on to the
hub! This would chop gobs of weight and lots of work.
Any Idea's?
pp..
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "T. K. Frantz" <tkrolfe(at)usadatanet.net> |
John,
Was wondering what you attribute your vertical stab leading edge break
to? If I understand correctly, you said this is the second time it
broke, this time right above the previous repair. Is this residual
damage from you incident two years ago in Alaska. Just curious.
Terry FireFly #95
________________________________________________________________________________
Slow here to Paul.
Lemme discuss some stuff about that harley project, because im very
interested in it also.
you posted a those stats awhile back on that engine...80some hp I think.
I dunno what redline is on a new evo HD...but that hp rating would be
somewhere near the top im sure..
with peak torque falling below that likely a couple a thosand rpms less
right?
Peak torque will always be at the rpm level at which the cylinder filling
effieciency is the best.
This is decided by the cam grind..and the breathing ability of the ports and
valves.
I am sure to take advantage of the horsepower and torque of that engine, you
are gonna need a PSRU...even if you custom grind a cam, which by the way
will likely really help, and should be easy to accomplish since so many cam
grinders do HD cams already, this will make it more economical for sure.
If we look at all the current lightweight 4 strokes being manufactured for
the exp aircraft market...they just about all use PSRU's due the the need
to swing a large prop for best thrust, anyone who has used a VW will aslo
tell ya that it never did have any poop untill the installed a redrive and
ran the rpms up to 4 grand or better.
If you can somehow find a HP/torque curve chart/graph on that HD...then you
will be able to simply look at max rpms you can use with the prop you want
to swing, by the max tip speed allowed,and then see where the torque falls
on the graph...I bet it will be awfully low, and if you do this you will
always wonder just how much prop it would swing up there at an rpm level
where it will make some power!
I also have a question....this engine used the old fashioned master rod
slave rod configuration that HD has had for a long time right?...are there
any HD engines that do NOT use this config?...where both rods connect
directly to the crank independantly of each other on a single journal?
http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm
Don Gherardini-
FireFly 098
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Mark III Vertical Stabilizer |
Hi Terry/Gang:
Let's see if I can answer your questions:
> Was wondering what you attribute your vertical stab leading edge break
> to?
About 5 years and 700 flight hours ago, I began
experimenting with overcoming some adverse yaw
characteristics of my MK III. Started with 3/4"
deflection, then increased to 1 3/8" deflection.
A couple years later, the upper vertical
stabilizer leading edge tube broke where the
internal brace gusset is drilled and riveted to
it. Repaired with an overcenter cut saddle cut
from .058 1 1/8" 6061 tube. Last Sunday
discovered it had broken again, about 1" Forward
of the trailing end of the repair saddle. A
couple years ago I discovered the offset in the
leading edge was not profitable. Moved the
leading edge back to the center position.
Possible causes for failure:
1) Fatigue from flight hours accumulated.
2) Tail section takes a terrific beating from
prop.
> Is this residual
> damage from you incident two years ago in Alaska.
Don't think so. There was no observed damage to
the tail section from the accident at Muncho Lake,
BC.
I built the tail section from .058 material
initially. So it was a little more sturdy that
the .035 called for in the plans.
The repaired upper vertical stabilizer will have a
12 to 24 inch .058 7/8" sleeve, similar to the
sleeve in the tail post and horizontal stabs for
wire brace attachment. When I initially built the
horizontal stabs I also included sleeves in their
leading edges, in case I decided to also include
wire bracing here as well as what the plans call
for. These sleeves may have spread the load in
this area of the leading edges of the horizontal
stabs and prevented failure here also. Just a
guess.
Both times the leading edge tube, upper vertical
stab broke, the fabric and trim tape kept the tube
in place. Both breaks were above the internal
brace attach point.
To make the repair correctly will require pulling
the fabric. That will be the most work intensive
part of the repair. Also will have to remove the
entire tail section again, after removing it last
July for lower tail post repair.
Hope that answers your questions. I have not
removed the tail section or started repairs. I
have a commitment to fly for a Boy Scout Jamboree
15 Mar. I will wait until after 15 Mar to start
the repairs. That will still give me time to
finish it up for Sun and Fun. Don't think I can
get the fabric and painting done before the 15th
though.
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "jam'n" <jghunter(at)nol.net> |
> Peak torque will always be at the rpm level at which the cylinder filling
> effieciency is the best.
actually level where piston pressure... is best... as in more ability to do
work
> This is decided by the cam grind..and the breathing ability of the ports
and
> valves.
and ignition capability/capacity given flame front probagation integrity and
characteristics...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
Torque is fine at 2000 rpms but just how much thrust will you get out of it
driven directly from the crank? Probably 40% on a 5000 rpm motor. You need
your peak HP at maxx RPM for maxx thrust. Find out what is the maxx rpm for
peak Hp for the Harley and then you'd know if you can use it directly from
the crank to the prop. If peak HP happens at 5000 rpms you'd need a
reduction drive, you'd need to step it down to where prop tips don't exceed
the speed of sound. Someone here maybe able to steer you to that site where
you plug in the RPM's and prop length and you will get prop tip speed.
I think I already mentioned that to you in a previous offline mail.
Most aviation props turn between 2.5K and 2.7K. As I said before to make
everything simple choose one speed and let the rest of the world accomodate
by buying the proper length prop/blades. You won't go wrong by making your
RDU turn your RPM's at 2500 at the hub at maxx rpm.
=======================================
>
> Slow day so I will throw this out there. My engine project is ready to make
> the PSRU. I have all the material and was ready to start last night but put it
> on hold because Mr. Hans vanAlphen posted an interesting note about this thing
> may having enough torque to pull the prop at say 2000 rpm without a PSRU. This
> would be great because this way I could make a hub to cover the Vibration
> dampener and fill it with oil to keep it lubed then bolt the prop right on to
> the hub! This would chop gobs of weight and lots of work.
>
> Any Idea's?
>
>
> pp..
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
I got so interested in those harley specs, I did a quick search on the net
for some charts...1st really interesting site i found was night rider
somethin or other....performance stuff...there are alot of numbers
here...and several hp/torque graphs....now I always knew that HD had a lot
of torque...and a fairly flat torque curve....but I didnt know it was THAT
flat! I can see why a fella might be tempted to try it without a PSRU just
tp see how it will pull. here is a link..I suspect Paul already knows this
stuff...but for the rest of you engine buffs....pretty interesting.
http://www.nightrider.com/biketech/hplist_evo80.htm
BTW...80 some hp is a pretty strung out HD it looks like....and I tried
searching the archives for the post when you mentioned Paul just which
engine you had, and those HP specs ..but couldnt find it...matbe not in
there...could you tell me again just what engine it is, and what mods have
been done.
I might add also that a mulit cylinder radial useing HD jugs is very
interesting to me also...
I have these dreams of the BIG MONEY in the light aircraft engine biz by
using exsisting high production (low cost) cylinder and piston assemblies on
a custom caseLOL///,,...course... they are prob just nightmares that i dont
recognize!
Never the less...
opposed twins....opposed 4 cylinders....3 cylinder radials....6 cylinder
double row(twin rows 3 cylinder each) offset for airflow... the right
combination of easy and economical to procure parts has jus got to be out
there..in already made high production engines.
also...Rotax is getting those high prices because they dont sell these
engines in any other market, and they aint gonna just build us engines
oughtta gratitude. Volume = cost reduction..If Bombardier aint gonna make
money at it...they aint gonna do it.period. They are an awful big company
with alot of overhead...and the day that Board of directors decides that it
aint worth it anymore....BOOM.....they will shut those lines down.
Thats why you can get a new 150 hp rotax powered snowmobile for what a 582
costs....cause ey make a zillion of em.
Somebody dissed 2si and said they are interested in them big goverment
contracts and not the ultralight industry...Well...ya oughtta be thankful
they are..cause if they were not sellin all those engines that are about the
same to the gov....their volume would be so small that they would be askin
rotax prices too.
This may seem a little off Pauls subject,, But it is not... here is a
prediction from a fella who has spent a large part of his life in the
wholesale/OEM engine distribution biz men....if somebody like Paul Petty
here dont find a way to get an existing production/high volume engine built
for some other market to work good on a light aircraft..its gonna be a 6500
to 10 grand engine or nothing fer all of us!
________________________________________________________________________________
Jam'n.....right you are...I was simplifing.
Infact the difference between rpm level at best Volumetric efficiency and
the BMEP.(max presseur), which are usually pretty close,,, are in fact due
to the
as you put it...
and parisitic loads, frictions, and other relativly small influences.
Don
________________________________________________________________________________
WAAAAAYYYY over my head. However here are a few numbers that I have been
told.
5500 rpm is max. My engine is a 80 CID EVO V2 1993 model with no mods.
Harley says the engine produces 80 hp at the crank at 4800 rpm. And Don is
right the torque curve is very flat. Calling from memory from a chat I was
looking at last night, the lowest rpm on the chart was like 1500 and the
torque curve line started way up the scale at like 60 ft lbs and rises as
rpm's increased to only like mid 80's
I think I am going to go straight off the crank for a test then build the
PSRU and see. I got a better carb today (stock CV) and are wanting to blow
some air with this thing. I have a digital Video cam corder and should have
some footage with sound by this Sunday. If this bad weather breaks I off to
the airport! It has been bad for the past three weekends.
Thanks for all good info
pp
----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Gherardini" <donghe@one-eleven.net>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Engine
>
> Jam'n.....right you are...I was simplifing.
> Infact the difference between rpm level at best Volumetric efficiency and
> the BMEP.(max presseur), which are usually pretty close,,, are in fact due
> to the
> integrity and
> characteristics...> as you put it...
>
> and parisitic loads, frictions, and other relativly small influences.
>
>
> Don
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
3/6/03 15:27Paul Petty
> WAAAAAYYYY over my head. However here are a few numbers that I have been
> told.
=================
Just be happy you don't know that much. If you just go and build a case to
which you can mate some standard Harley cylinders, you will more than just
make yourself a name in the anals of aviation.
Have the hub turn at 2500 rpm's at max Hp, thats all you really gotta know.
:-)
Keep us posted.
________________________________________________________________________________
Captain Ron/Kolbers
What are the downsides to using VW engines and what is a 1/2 VW?
pp..
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "jam'n" <jghunter(at)nol.net> |
and what is a 1/2 VW?
it is a as stated 1/2 vdub engine cut in half... you see them in the 'legal
eagle' - and u/l ac design out of texas... for example. it is a 4cycle
engine and maint may be easier for some than 2s. vdub relatively easy to
work on. it is reliable. etc etc uses conventional ignition... usually hand
proped...
regards
jam'n
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick & Martha Neilsen" <neilsenrm(at)cs.com> |
The main down side is there is no developed kit, the thrust line is a few
inches higher than ideal and the engine weighs app. 15lbs more than a Rotax
912. The up side is that it can be installed for $3500-5500 and the rebuild
costs are a fraction of Rotax costs.
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 Paul Petty
Subject: Kolb-List: VW
Captain Ron/Kolbers
What are the downsides to using VW engines and what is a 1/2 VW?
pp..
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | woody <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
>
>Slow day so I will throw this out there. My engine project is ready to
>make the PSRU. I have all the material and was ready to start last night
>but put it on hold because Mr. Hans vanAlphen posted an interesting note
>about this thing may having enough torque to pull the prop at say 2000 rpm
>without a PSRU. This would be great because this way I could make a hub to
>cover the Vibration dampener and fill it with oil to keep it lubed then
>bolt the prop right on to the hub! This would chop gobs of weight and lots
>of work.
>
>Any Idea's?
I read over the numbers you sent me I think if you derated the engine to
65 hp you can spin the prop to 4000 rpm max. Torque will still be about 75%
more than a Rotax ( check this months Kitplanes ) Go direct drive for now
and then build the redrive at your leisure.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | woody <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
>
>Morning Gang:
>
>Have not received any Kolb traffic since 1359
>yesterday.
>
>This is a check to see if I am still operational.
Sorry John that one did not come through. Please try again.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "VIC" <vicw(at)vcn.com> |
I have a 503 single carb with oil injection. There are two lines that run
from the pump to the intake manifold. When originally connected the lines
were full. Now the front line has an air bubble in the manifold end that is
about 3/8 of an inch. The rear line is full. There are not apparent oil
leaks (no oil shows) I don't know how long it has been this way because it
is rather hard to see the lines where they enter the manifold. The engine
runs great and both cylinders are running almost the same temps. Is this a
problem.
Vic
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
3/6/03 16:58Paul Petty
> What are the downsides to using VW engines and what is a 1/2 VW?
>
> pp..
===================
Well you might as well trade that .5 VW for a good set of pedals with a 10
speed transmission, you will get about the same performance (well just
kidding), iirc its only about 30hp on the castrated VW.
You are making me nervous thinking about that other stuff, stay with your
original plan make everybody happy and yourself rich. :-)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
Go ahead and do your direct drive run for a comparison base, but be sure to
build that PSRU. It's been amply demonstrated that our planes perform best
with a comparatively large, slow turning prop. Smaller, faster planes, like
the Sonex, or KR series do well with a direct drive with a small, fast
turning prop...........up to about 3300 rpm. Rick Neilsen flew his Mk III
for quite a while with a direct drive VW, and got tired of 912's running
away from him, even tho' they're in the same horsepower range. He then put
a PSRU on his V-Dub, with a bigger prop, and has never looked back. Your HD
engine will fall into the same general range. It would be a shame to
strangle it at low rpm, and not give it a chance to run.
Gogittum Lar.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Petty" <ppetty@c-gate.net>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Engine
>
> WAAAAAYYYY over my head. However here are a few numbers that I have been
> told.
>
> 5500 rpm is max. My engine is a 80 CID EVO V2 1993 model with no mods.
> Harley says the engine produces 80 hp at the crank at 4800 rpm. And Don is
> right the torque curve is very flat. Calling from memory from a chat I was
> looking at last night, the lowest rpm on the chart was like 1500 and the
> torque curve line started way up the scale at like 60 ft lbs and rises as
> rpm's increased to only like mid 80's
> I think I am going to go straight off the crank for a test then build the
> PSRU and see. I got a better carb today (stock CV) and are wanting to blow
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | WhiskeyVictor36(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | FireFly Wing Folding |
Can someone tell me how you fold the wings on a FireFly? Can one person do
it?
I have an Original FireStar and fold the wings by myself for every flight. I
support the wing with my shoulder and using both hands, hold the upper end of
the strut and pull the pin from the top mount. I then lower the strut to the
top of my foot, then lower that to the ground. I then work my way out to the
end of the wing and lower it to the ground, turning the aileron up in the
process.
The FireFly has two struts that do not disconnect from the wing. So how do
you support the wing while removing the pin from the fuselage attach point?
Bill Varnes
Original FireStar
Audubon NJ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vincehallam(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Mark III Vertical Stabilizer |
Dear john
I hope you will cut the end of any inner or outer sleeve either diagonally
or with an end slit so as to relieve the stress ie spread the loads at that
point
Vnz
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rwpike(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Valley Engineering LLC |
These guys make a redrive for the VW.
Saw their airplane at Oshkosh in 98, excellent climb rate.
http://members.sockets.net/~ranchair/index.html
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick & Martha Neilsen" <neilsenrm(at)cs.com> |
| Subject: | Valley Engineering LLC |
This is the reduction drive I have on my VW. It seems to be a great product.
Some people have had concerns that it isn't strong enough to work properly
but Gene Smith has been producing these reduction drives for over six years
with no problems. I spent most of last summer experimenting with different
ratios to get the best performance out of my engine prop setup, talked
Gene's ear off and my only cost was shipping the parts back to him. They own
Culver props so they really would like to have one of their props on my
airplane but they were very willing to work with me to get my PowerFin
matched to my engine. This is also the same reduction drive that Great
Plains Aircraft distributes.
I will say it again the reduction drive transformed my direct drive VW
powered MKIII from marginal single place airplane to a high performance two
passenger airplane with just the change to a reduction drive and a larger
prop.
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 Richard Pike
Subject: Kolb-List: Valley Engineering LLC
These guys make a redrive for the VW.
Saw their airplane at Oshkosh in 98, excellent climb rate.
http://members.sockets.net/~ranchair/index.html
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chuck Davis - Comcast <davis207(at)comcast.net> |
Bill,
I use a painting ladder. Prop it under the wing tip so that the pressure on the
bottom strut attachment is minimal, and pull the pin. After you fold the strut
back along side the underside of the wing, you cal lower the wing tip to the
ground.
PS. We should get together when all the d*&m snow melts. I am in Pennington.
Chuck Davis
Firefly 028
From: WhiskeyVictor36(at)aol.com
Subject: Kolb-List: FireFly Wing Folding
Can someone tell me how you fold the wings on a FireFly? Can one person do
it?
I have an Original FireStar and fold the wings by myself for every flight. I
support the wing with my shoulder and using both hands, hold the upper end of
the strut and pull the pin from the top mount. I then lower the strut to the
top of my foot, then lower that to the ground. I then work my way out to the
end of the wing and lower it to the ground, turning the aileron up in the
process.
The FireFly has two struts that do not disconnect from the wing. So how do
you support the wing while removing the pin from the fuselage attach point?
Bill Varnes
Original FireStar
Audubon NJ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "jam'n" <jghunter(at)nol.net> |
hi...
maybe... but one can do at least a few things...
cams
piston shape
pin heigth
compression ratio
head work
spring work
valve size
valve shape
angle seat cut...ah-h...
rocker ratio
reduce weight
exhaust work
ignition work
timing advance
blower
turbo...
pulley
(am thinking there may be even some more...)
oh, yea...
intake work
carb work
injection
coatings
dry film
deck clamp
deck heigth
port and relieve... hmmm.... [thinking...]
fasteners...
prob even some more... but i am at a loss... sorry...
then there is all the trim items...
california was/is famous for vdub hop up mods and parts...
> > works fine for the legal eagles...
> > usually requires a redrive to get piston speed to make torque
> > can be hopped up
>
jam'n
>
> jam'n/Gang:
>
> Don't think I have ever seen one with a redrive.
> Also thought they were about as hopped up as they
> could get. If they could have produced more
> power, I am sure a lot of folks would have loved
> to have had that capability, back in the good ole
> days.
>
> john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Timandjan(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: FireFly Wing Folding |
I made a neat holder, basically a saw horse build to the wing angle, works if
it is a bit lower, I set it under the wing, pull the strut off, then remove
the spar pin and fold. I found that by having it a bit lower, the spar pin
comes out (and back in) easier. Also by having it angled as the wing is, if I
need it to be higher or lower, I just move it back and forth to get it to be
higher or lower. It does'nt always use the whole part of the sawhorse but
sometimes just the leading edge might rest on it etc. works as a helping
hand. mine folds up and straps to the trailer to take with me. Worked great
for the almost 200 Firestar 2 hours that I had to fold it each time to fly.
(no more, finally got my own hangar) I also made some neat jigs to hold
things, the aileron push tubes for instance and a jig to hold the ailerons
upright rather than folding them in. Most things bungee to themself. No more
dropping the aileron push pull tubes and having them bang against the ground.
I also made a neat jig that goes around the boom tube, supports the prop so
it does not dig into the fabric. Guess how I know this happens after a long
trailering. (open trailer).
Tim
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Bean <slyck(at)frontiernet.net> |
The vw engine is an honest and durable powerplant and the choice of
aftermarket speed equipment most likely exceeds even that of the
small block chevy. The problem lies in the fact that the vast majority
of airplane builders are not engine people. -out of the box and on the
plane, don't have time for that. How many have seen the greasy, grimey,
looks like it came straight from the junkyard, vw engine running happily
on a dirty old volksplane covered with birdshit. And the guy has the
nerve to go to a flyin breakfast in it. Amazing! -BB, back to some more
welding.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack & Louise Hart <jbhart(at)ldd.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Booster Bottle & Bing - Update #3 |
Kolbers,
I installed a second spring to assist the original throttle slide valve return
spring. This combination seemed strong enough to keep the modified throttle closed.
The engine idled at 1850 rpm. I ran two tests. First with the modified
throttle valve followed with the unmodified throttle valve. No changes were
made except to replace the valves. The modified throttle valve on average
increased the EGT's by 71 degrees.
If you would like to see the data, they can be seen on the bottom of:
http://www.thirdshift.com/jack/firefly/firefly90.html
Over all, the booster bottle concept looks promising but the weather is clearing
and warming, so it is time to fly.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Jackson, MO
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart(at)ldd.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fackler, Ken" <kfackler(at)ameritech.net> |
| Subject: | Battery source needed |
Good afternoon, fellow Kolbers!
The battery in my Mark II has gone kaput. I just finished driving over two
counties trying to find someone who could sell me a replacement of the same
dimensions to no avail. The one I have now is PowerSonic, dimensions 7"
wide, 3" thick, and 6.75 " tall.
Does anyone have any suggestions for a source, hopefully a reasonably priced
one?
-Ken Fackler
Mark II / 503
Rochester MI
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Terry" <tswartz(at)hydrosoft.net> |
| Subject: | Battery source needed |
Ken,
There is a local place here called Battery Warehouse and they seem to have
whatever I've wanted so far. 717-392-8484 Lancaster PA
Terry
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Fackler, Ken
Subject: Kolb-List: Battery source needed
Good afternoon, fellow Kolbers!
The battery in my Mark II has gone kaput. I just finished driving over two
counties trying to find someone who could sell me a replacement of the same
dimensions to no avail. The one I have now is PowerSonic, dimensions 7"
wide, 3" thick, and 6.75 " tall.
Does anyone have any suggestions for a source, hopefully a reasonably priced
one?
-Ken Fackler
Mark II / 503
Rochester MI
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack & Louise Hart <jbhart(at)ldd.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery source needed |
>
>Good afternoon, fellow Kolbers!
>
>The battery in my Mark II has gone kaput. I just finished driving over two
>counties trying to find someone who could sell me a replacement of the same
>dimensions to no avail. The one I have now is PowerSonic, dimensions 7"
>wide, 3" thick, and 6.75 " tall.
>
>Does anyone have any suggestions for a source, hopefully a reasonably priced
>one?
>
>-Ken Fackler
>Mark II / 503
>Rochester MI
>
Ken,
You may want to try:
http://www.power-sonic.com/
Good luck.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Jackson, MO
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart(at)ldd.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery source needed |
Ken/Gents:
I haven't used either of these companies, but the
folks on the Thumper List have and are highly
recommended. I believe both ship free. They have
the latest in Yausa and their own brand name.
The foil type battery that I have been flying with
for the last three years, ATP I think, has gone
belly up and not available on the internet. Tom
Pehigny, Flight Star, told me he has another
source for them. I highly recommend this type
battery. Same technology and same people as Start
Stick for my present bat.
http://www.motorcyclebatteriesusa.com/index.asp
http://www.pacificbattery.com/
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Battery source needed |
What type? Gell,sealed,wet,?
I have them
pp
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fackler, Ken" <kfackler(at)ameritech.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: Battery source needed
>
> Good afternoon, fellow Kolbers!
>
> The battery in my Mark II has gone kaput. I just finished driving over two
> counties trying to find someone who could sell me a replacement of the
same
> dimensions to no avail. The one I have now is PowerSonic, dimensions 7"
> wide, 3" thick, and 6.75 " tall.
>
> Does anyone have any suggestions for a source, hopefully a reasonably
priced
> one?
>
> -Ken Fackler
> Mark II / 503
> Rochester MI
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Battery source needed |
Ken, Just got on line, Take a look at. Batteries4everthing.com. I have had
dealing with these folks.. they are for real
https://www.batteries4everything.com/index.html
N912RH
Lewisville, Arkansas
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fackler, Ken" <kfackler(at)ameritech.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: Battery source needed
>
> Good afternoon, fellow Kolbers!
>
> The battery in my Mark II has gone kaput. I just finished driving over two
> counties trying to find someone who could sell me a replacement of the
same
> dimensions to no avail. The one I have now is PowerSonic, dimensions 7"
> wide, 3" thick, and 6.75 " tall.
>
> Does anyone have any suggestions for a source, hopefully a reasonably
priced
> one?
>
> -Ken Fackler
> Mark II / 503
> Rochester MI
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bruce n' Kathy" <n3nrr(at)erols.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery source needed |
I buy mine at Ham radio fests for about 15 bucs
or Check with a local secuirty alarm company, They sometimes have pulls
from large companys that requre them to be changed more often than
necessary.
--
Bruce n' Kathy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Oil Injection Bubble |
minate the bubble and reinstalled the oil tube.
Flew for an hour and the
> bubble is back in the front oil tube only.
>
> Any one got an idea?
>
> Vic
Vic/Gang:
Yep.
You have an air leak between the tank and the
engine or your oil is being aerated in the tank.
One or the other or both.
MOHO.............
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary robert voigt" <johndeereantique(at)qwest.net> |
| Subject: | obtain rotax service manuals/447 |
Hello fellow flyers, i would like to purchase a set of service
manuals for the rotax 447, where is the best place to purchase these
from. i would like to become more familar with my engine and also do a
partial teardown of rings and decarbon. i'am use to working on the 1
cylinder 350 rpm's vs. the higher revs.
getting ready to blow snow again in the morning.
thanks,
Gary r. voigt
Excelsior, mn.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | possums <possums(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: obtain rotax service manuals/447 |
>
>
> Hello fellow flyers, i would like to purchase a set of service
>manuals for the rotax 447, where is the best place to purchase these
>from. i would like to become more familar with my engine and also do a
>partial teardown of rings and decarbon. i'am use to working on the 1
>cylinder 350 rpm's vs. the higher revs.
>getting ready to blow snow again in the morning.
>
> thanks,
> Gary r. voigt
http://www.kodiakbs.com/tiintro.htm
Just send $5.00 to
Possums
Georgia
USA
Earth
Your welcome
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "D Smalec" <dsmald(at)michonline.net> |
| Subject: | Fw: Just in case this is not a hoax |
Hey,
This has been sent this me and I did go and follow the steps and the "folder" came
up, so in case this is not a hoax, follow the steps and I guess pass it on
to everyone in your address book.
Sorry for the inconvenience.
Dee
This is legitimate. I did find this virus.
Andy Blank
A
> virus has been passed on to me by a contact. My address book WAS
> infected. Since you are in my address book, there is a good chance you
> will find it in your computer too.
>
> The virus (called jdbgmgr.exe) is not detected by
> Norton or McAfee anti-virus systems. The virus sits
> quietly for 14 days before damaging the system.
>
> It is sent automatically by messenger and by the
> address book, whether or not you sent Emails to your contacts.
>
> Here's how to check for the virus and how to get rid
> of it:
>
> YOU MUST DO THIS:
> 1. Go to Start, Find or search option
> 2. In the file'folder option, type the name
> jdbgmgr.exe
> 3. Be sure you search your C: drive and all
> sub-folders and any other drives you may have.
> 4. Click "find now"
> 5. The Virus has a Teddy Bear icon with the name
> jdbgmgr.exe
>
> DO NOT OPEN IT
>
> 6. Go to Edit (on menu bar), choose "select all" to
> highlight the file without opening it.
> 7. Now go to File (on the menu bar) and select
> delete. It will then go to the Recycle Bin. Delete
> items in bin.
>
> IF YOU FIND THE VIRUS, YOU MUST CONTACT ALL THE PEOPLE
> IN YOUR ADDRESS BOOK, SO THEY CAN ERADICATE IT IN
> THEIR OWN ADDRESS BOOKS.
>
> To do this:
>
> a) Open a new e-mail message
> b) Click the icon of the address book next to the "TO"
>
> c) Highlight every name and add to "BCC"
> d) Copy this message enter subject paste to e-mail
>
> I am sorry for the inconvenience. This virus was past
> to me by a contact who had me in their address book.
> Please forward this message to EVERYONE in your
> address book.
>
> Sorry for any inconvenience- It was indeed passed on to me and when I
> checked using the above instructions, I did have it in my system. It
> just takes 2 minutes to get rid of it.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron or Mary" <whyme(at)vci.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fw: Just in case this is not a hoax |
Don't delete the teddy bear. This is a hoax. It has been around for quite a
bit of time =0D
=0D
-------Original Message-------=0D
=0D
From: kolb-list(at)matronics.com=0D
Date: Saturday, March 08, 2003 05:32:27 AM=0D
Subject: Kolb-List: Fw: Just in case this is not a hoax=0D
=0D
=0D
=0D
Hey,=0D
=0D
This has been sent this me and I did go and follow the steps and the "folder
came up, so in case this is not a hoax, follow the steps and I guess pass
it on to everyone in your address book.=0D
=0D
Sorry for the inconvenience.=0D
=0D
Dee=0D
=0D
=0D
This is legitimate. I did find this virus.=0D
=0D
Andy Blank=0D
=0D
A=0D
> virus has been passed on to me by a contact. My address book WAS=0D
> infected. Since you are in my address book, there is a good chance you =0D
> will find it in your computer too.=0D
>=0D
> The virus (called jdbgmgr.exe) is not detected by=0D
> Norton or McAfee anti-virus systems. The virus sits=0D
> quietly for 14 days before damaging the system.=0D
>=0D
> It is sent automatically by messenger and by the=0D
> address book, whether or not you sent Emails to your contacts.=0D
>=0D
> Here's how to check for the virus and how to get rid=0D
> of it:=0D
>=0D
> YOU MUST DO THIS:=0D
> 1. Go to Start, Find or search option=0D
> 2. In the file'folder option, type the name=0D
> jdbgmgr.exe=0D
> 3. Be sure you search your C: drive and all=0D
> sub-folders and any other drives you may have.=0D
> 4. Click "find now"=0D
> 5. The Virus has a Teddy Bear icon with the name=0D
> jdbgmgr.exe=0D
>=0D
> DO NOT OPEN IT=0D
>=0D
> 6. Go to Edit (on menu bar), choose "select all" to=0D
> highlight the file without opening it.=0D
> 7. Now go to File (on the menu bar) and select=0D
> delete. It will then go to the Recycle Bin. Delete=0D
> items in bin.=0D
>=0D
> IF YOU FIND THE VIRUS, YOU MUST CONTACT ALL THE PEOPLE=0D
> IN YOUR ADDRESS BOOK, SO THEY CAN ERADICATE IT IN=0D
> THEIR OWN ADDRESS BOOKS.=0D
>=0D
> To do this:=0D
>=0D
> a) Open a new e-mail message=0D
> b) Click the icon of the address book next to the "TO"=0D
>=0D
> c) Highlight every name and add to "BCC"=0D
> d) Copy this message enter subject paste to e-mail=0D
>=0D
> I am sorry for the inconvenience. This virus was past=0D
> to me by a contact who had me in their address book.=0D
> Please forward this message to EVERYONE in your=0D
> address book.=0D
>=0D
> Sorry for any inconvenience- It was indeed passed on to me and when I=0D
> checked using the above instructions, I did have it in my system. It=0D
> just takes 2 minutes to get rid of it.=0D
=0D
=0D
=0D
=0D
=0D
=0D
=2E
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed Steuber" <esteuber(at)rochester.rr.com> |
Kolbers,
I have a Ken Brock seat tank that I bought awhile ago from someone
on the list and am curious as to the determination of the capacity.I was told
it was 6 gallons but there is no part number or label.I don't really want to
put gas in it yet(or any other liquid) to find out.The reason I am wondering
is I may try to keep the modified Ultrastar I am building in the UL category
. I have the light 2SI 35hp without the lighting coil and the belt drive and have
been careful with weight and may be able to stay under the 254 even with a
partial enclosure. (Probably dreaming?)
How many sizes of Brock seat tanks are there and does any one else manufacture
similar units.I was not able to find any info on the Brock site.
Also , Is it possible to install a permanent gap seal and still fold an
Ultrastar without removing the gap seal ?
Ed (still shoveling) in Western NY
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Olenik" <olenik-aviation(at)buyitsellitfixit.com> |
| Subject: | obtain rotax service manuals/447 |
There is no suitable manual yet published for the air-cooled Rotax. The
only manual they have that is worth anything is the 582 Repair manual which
if full of errors. If you put an engine together the way the manual tells
you, there is a good chance you will be doing it again soon.
I am teaching a course on the overhaul of the 503 coming soon. The 447 is
almost identical to that except in size and the timing spec. I will also be
writing a series of articles on the subject for Ultra-Flight Magazine that
will eventual be collected into an overhaul manual. However, for right now
there isn't much out there that is worth anything.
Tom Olenik
Olenik Aviation
http://www.buyitsellitfixit.com
877-AIR-MOTORS ...we support what we sell.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Gary robert
voigt
Subject: Kolb-List: obtain rotax service manuals/447
Hello fellow flyers, i would like to purchase a set of service
manuals for the rotax 447, where is the best place to purchase these
from. i would like to become more familar with my engine and also do a
partial teardown of rings and decarbon. i'am use to working on the 1
cylinder 350 rpm's vs. the higher revs.
getting ready to blow snow again in the morning.
thanks,
Gary r. voigt
Excelsior, mn.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fw: Just in case this is not a hoax |
> This has been sent this me and I did go and follow the steps and the "folder"
came up, so in case this is not a hoax, follow the steps and I guess pass it
on to everyone in your address book.
>
> Sorry for the inconvenience.
>
> Dee
>
> This is legitimate. I did find this virus.
>
> Andy Blank
Dee/Kolbers:
This is another HOAX!
Check it out:
http://www.snopes.com/computer/virus/jdbgmgr.htm
You should bookmark this page. It is very helpful
in determining if what you have been sent is
legit.
http://www.smsu.edu/contrib/library/resource/hoaxes.html
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Fw: Just in case this is not a hoax |
This is a HOAX! A very OLD HOAX.
This file is a legitimate and useful file.
Go to: http://www.snopes.com/computer/virus/jdbgmgr.htm for more info.
Cy Galley - Webmaster www.qcbc.org
ALWAYS check with www.snopes.com BEFORE sending out a wild unsubstantiated
claim like this.
----- Original Message -----
From: "D Smalec" <dsmald(at)michonline.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: Fw: Just in case this is not a hoax
>
>
> Hey,
>
> This has been sent this me and I did go and follow the steps and the
"folder" came up, so in case this is not a hoax, follow the steps and I
guess pass it on to everyone in your address book.
>
> Sorry for the inconvenience.
>
> Dee
>
>
> This is legitimate. I did find this virus.
>
> Andy Blank
>
> A
> > virus has been passed on to me by a contact. My address book WAS
> > infected. Since you are in my address book, there is a good chance you
> > will find it in your computer too.
> >
> > The virus (called jdbgmgr.exe) is not detected by
> > Norton or McAfee anti-virus systems. The virus sits
> > quietly for 14 days before damaging the system.
> >
> > It is sent automatically by messenger and by the
> > address book, whether or not you sent Emails to your contacts.
> >
> > Here's how to check for the virus and how to get rid
> > of it:
> >
> > YOU MUST DO THIS:
> > 1. Go to Start, Find or search option
> > 2. In the file'folder option, type the name
> > jdbgmgr.exe
> > 3. Be sure you search your C: drive and all
> > sub-folders and any other drives you may have.
> > 4. Click "find now"
> > 5. The Virus has a Teddy Bear icon with the name
> > jdbgmgr.exe
> >
> > DO NOT OPEN IT
> >
> > 6. Go to Edit (on menu bar), choose "select all" to
> > highlight the file without opening it.
> > 7. Now go to File (on the menu bar) and select
> > delete. It will then go to the Recycle Bin. Delete
> > items in bin.
> >
> > IF YOU FIND THE VIRUS, YOU MUST CONTACT ALL THE PEOPLE
> > IN YOUR ADDRESS BOOK, SO THEY CAN ERADICATE IT IN
> > THEIR OWN ADDRESS BOOKS.
> >
> > To do this:
> >
> > a) Open a new e-mail message
> > b) Click the icon of the address book next to the "TO"
> >
> > c) Highlight every name and add to "BCC"
> > d) Copy this message enter subject paste to e-mail
> >
> > I am sorry for the inconvenience. This virus was past
> > to me by a contact who had me in their address book.
> > Please forward this message to EVERYONE in your
> > address book.
> >
> > Sorry for any inconvenience- It was indeed passed on to me and when I
> > checked using the above instructions, I did have it in my system. It
> > just takes 2 minutes to get rid of it.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | KRISTINA L GIBFRIED <tk1991(at)swbell.net> |
I'm building and plan on using a 340, or 440 Kaw. I have found plenty of pro's
and con's and for the budget I have this seems the way to go. I have the option
of buing air cooled, fan cooled, and water cooled. Can I get some feed back
on different experiences with the different cooling?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "D Smalec" <dsmald(at)michonline.net> |
| Subject: | Fw: Just in case this is not a hoax |
This is a HOAX! A very OLD HOAX.
> >
> > This file is a legitimate and useful file.
> >
> > Go to: http://www.snopes.com/computer/virus/jdbgmgr.htm for more info.
> >
> >
> > Cy Galley - Webmaster www.qcbc.org
> >
> > ALWAYS check with www.snopes.com BEFORE sending out a wild
unsubstantiated
> > claim like this.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "D Smalec" <dsmald(at)michonline.net>
> > To: @matronics.com;>
> > Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2003 5:32 AM
> > Subject: Kolb-List: Fw: Just in case this is not a hoax
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Hey,
> > >
> > > This has been sent this me and I did go and follow the steps and the
> > "folder" came up, so in case this is not a hoax, follow the steps and I
> > guess pass it on to everyone in your address book.
> > >
> > > Sorry for the inconvenience.
> > >
> > > Dee
> > >
> > >
> > > This is legitimate. I did find this virus.
> > >
> > > Andy Blank
> > >
> > > A
> > > > virus has been passed on to me by a contact. My address book WAS
> > > > infected. Since you are in my address book, there is a good chance
you
> > > > will find it in your computer too.
> > > >
> > > > The virus (called jdbgmgr.exe) is not detected by
> > > > Norton or McAfee anti-virus systems. The virus sits
> > > > quietly for 14 days before damaging the system.
> > > >
> > > > It is sent automatically by messenger and by the
> > > > address book, whether or not you sent Emails to your contacts.
> > > >
> > > > Here's how to check for the virus and how to get rid
> > > > of it:
> > > >
> > > > YOU MUST DO THIS:
> > > > 1. Go to Start, Find or search option
> > > > 2. In the file'folder option, type the name
> > > > jdbgmgr.exe
> > > > 3. Be sure you search your C: drive and all
> > > > sub-folders and any other drives you may have.
> > > > 4. Click "find now"
> > > > 5. The Virus has a Teddy Bear icon with the name
> > > > jdbgmgr.exe
> > > >
> > > > DO NOT OPEN IT
> > > >
> > > > 6. Go to Edit (on menu bar), choose "select all" to
> > > > highlight the file without opening it.
> > > > 7. Now go to File (on the menu bar) and select
> > > > delete. It will then go to the Recycle Bin. Delete
> > > > items in bin.
> > > >
> > > > IF YOU FIND THE VIRUS, YOU MUST CONTACT ALL THE PEOPLE
> > > > IN YOUR ADDRESS BOOK, SO THEY CAN ERADICATE IT IN
> > > > THEIR OWN ADDRESS BOOKS.
> > > >
> > > > To do this:
> > > >
> > > > a) Open a new e-mail message
> > > > b) Click the icon of the address book next to the "TO"
> > > >
> > > > c) Highlight every name and add to "BCC"
> > > > d) Copy this message enter subject paste to e-mail
> > > >
> > > > I am sorry for the inconvenience. This virus was past
> > > > to me by a contact who had me in their address book.
> > > > Please forward this message to EVERYONE in your
> > > > address book.
> > > >
> > > > Sorry for any inconvenience- It was indeed passed on to me and when
I
> > > > checked using the above instructions, I did have it in my system. It
> > > > just takes 2 minutes to get rid of it.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rwpike(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | 582 Manual Errors |
Uh-oh. I have one of these manuals, where should I look for the errors?
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>
>There is no suitable manual yet published for the air-cooled Rotax. The
>only manual they have that is worth anything is the 582 Repair manual which
>if full of errors. If you put an engine together the way the manual tells
>you, there is a good chance you will be doing it again soon.
>
>Tom Olenik
>Olenik Aviation
>http://www.buyitsellitfixit.com
>877-AIR-MOTORS ...we support what we sell.
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: | "Tom Olenik" <olenik-aviation(at)buyitsellitfixit.com> |
| Subject: | 582 Manual Errors |
There are just a lot of theories instead of facts in there.
For example: They state that new piston clearances should be .002" - .003".
Any experienced mechanic would never set them up much tighter than .003".
They also state that the piston wear out point is .006". If that were the
case, then you would need new pistons in the 582 every 150 hours.
I think both numbers are engineering theories, but have little basis in
actual field experience.
Tom Olenik
Olenik Aviation
http://www.buyitsellitfixit.com
877-247-6686 ...we support what we sell.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Richard Pike
Subject: Kolb-List: 582 Manual Errors
Uh-oh. I have one of these manuals, where should I look for the errors?
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>
>There is no suitable manual yet published for the air-cooled Rotax. The
>only manual they have that is worth anything is the 582 Repair manual which
>if full of errors. If you put an engine together the way the manual tells
>you, there is a good chance you will be doing it again soon.
>
>Tom Olenik
>Olenik Aviation
>http://www.buyitsellitfixit.com
>877-AIR-MOTORS ...we support what we sell.
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: | Richard Pike <rwpike(at)charter.net> |
Assuming that all other things are more or less equal, simpler is better.
Antifreeze is a pain, fan belts stretch and break. What you don't have,
can't break.
If the engine is cooled OK by free air, that is best.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>I'm building and plan on using a 340, or 440 Kaw. I have found plenty of
>pro's and con's and for the budget I have this seems the way to go. I have
>the option of buing air cooled, fan cooled, and water cooled. Can I get
>some feed back on different experiences with the different cooling?
>
>
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
________________________________________________________________________________
Remember you have a pusher not a tractor, in my opinion that means free air
is out of the question. I like fan cooled better because there is no chance
of radiator or pump failure.
mark
twinstar
minnesota
> I have the option of buing air cooled, fan cooled, and water cooled.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hans vanAlphen" <hva(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Powersonic Battery |
Ken and Gang,
See www.gobatteries.com for a sealed lead acid battery, Powersonic 12180
SLA 12 volt, 18 AH, for just $ 37.95 plus I paid $8.41 for shipping.
I also use float charger from Harbor Freight for $ 7.49 (on sale) to keep it
always fully charged.
Hans van Alphen
Mark III Xtra.
BMW powered.
just turned 100 hours.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fackler, Ken" <kfackler(at)ameritech.net> |
| Subject: | Powersonic battery and sources |
To everyone who replied to my request for battery information, THANK YOU!
As always, the Kolb community comes through. Battery should be here in a few
days!
-Ken Fackler
Mark II / 503
Rochester MI
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | [ Bill Hocker ] : 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 Hocker
Subject: Ivoprop photos
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/hocker@gte.net.03.08.2003/index.html
o Main Photo Share Index
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
o Submitting a Photo Share
If you wish to submit a Photo Share of your own, please include the
following information along with your email message and files:
1) Email List or Lists that they are related to:
2) Your Full Name:
3) Your Email Address:
4) One line Subject description:
5) Multi-line, multi-paragraph description of topic:
6) One-line Description of each photo or file:
Email the information above and your files and photos to:
pictures(at)matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| 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: The Harley test w/ p47 prop
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/ppetty@c-gate.net.03.08.2003/index.html
o Main Photo Share Index
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
o Submitting a Photo Share
If you wish to submit a Photo Share of your own, please include the
following information along with your email message and files:
1) Email List or Lists that they are related to:
2) Your Full Name:
3) Your Email Address:
4) One line Subject description:
5) Multi-line, multi-paragraph description of topic:
6) One-line Description of each photo or file:
Email the information above and your files and photos to:
pictures(at)matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| 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: 1956 Homer Kolb
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/emailbill@chartermi.net.03.08.2003/index.html
o Main Photo Share Index
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
o Submitting a Photo Share
If you wish to submit a Photo Share of your own, please include the
following information along with your email message and files:
1) Email List or Lists that they are related to:
2) Your Full Name:
3) Your Email Address:
4) One line Subject description:
5) Multi-line, multi-paragraph description of topic:
6) One-line Description of each photo or file:
Email the information above and your files and photos to:
pictures(at)matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Williamson" <kolbrapilot(at)attbi.com> |
Just read the NOTAM for Sun-N-Fun and Lakeland airport, http://www1.faa.gov/ntap/NTAP03FEB20/AS03003.HTM
New charts come out in 12 days, the flight is planned, only 22 days to departure
time.
John Williamson
Arlington, TX
Kolb Kolbra, N49KK, Jabiru 2200, 205 hours
http://home.attbi.com/~kolbrapilot
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alderson, James" <James_Alderson(at)jdedwards.com> |
| Subject: | Summer Windshield... |
Hello listers,
First, I finally met one of the other list members from my area today (Jim
W). I arrived at the airport at about 12:30 to see a Kolb Mark III sitting
in the hangar area. It was nice to see another Kolb flying in my area (and
when I say another I mean him, cause I still haven't flown mine). It felt
pretty good to show him my Kolb... proud even...
Anyway, to my question. How many firestar II pilots here fly with the full
enclosure and how many fly with a summer windshield? I came from flying a
trike, so I am used to and enjoy the wind in my face type flying. I felt way
too tight in the Kolb with the full enclosure, so I put on the summer
shield. Love it. I like the look of it a whole lot more and with 60-70
degree flying here (at least on the ground and in the sun) right now, I
figured I could just dress for a little warmer. Do most of you guys keep the
enclosure on in the summer or is it a switch when it gets warmer?
Another question, I was out there to taxi test my Firestar II today and I
ended up doing everything but as the traffic and wind were pretty hairy, but
I did do a little bit. The heal brakes.... don't like em... Is there another
solution for the firestar to allow differential braking or is that it. I
have big feet and with running shoes on it was pretty easy to get hung up on
something or another down there... I think I will fly in the summer with the
old converse court shoes rather than jogging shoes. I feel like I need a
little more feel for the rudders and brakes than the thick soles allow me...
is this normal....
Sorry for the long "newbie" email, but I didn't mention a computer virus
once.... well I guess I just did, but it was only to make a point.
James Alderson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "jam'n" <jghunter(at)nol.net> |
| Subject: | Re: [ Bill Vincent ] : New Email List Photo Share Available! |
what i like about the early h kolb picture... aside from the cool tech... is
that it has an 'N' number on tail... is that possible... his bird passed faa
scrutiny?
just wondering...
just jam'n
> A new Email List Photo Share is available:
>
> Poster: Bill Vincent
>
>
> Subject: 1956 Homer Kolb
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/emailbill@chartermi.net.03.08.2003/index
.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kirk Smith" <snuffy(at)usol.com> |
> Remember you have a pusher not a tractor, in my opinion that means free
air
> is out of the question. I like fan cooled better because there is no
chance
> of radiator or pump failure.
Fanbelt failure? How are the Jabiru engines staying cool on pushers? Kirk
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary robert voigt" <johndeereantique(at)qwest.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Summer Windshield... |
James, i will respond to your question even though i have a fs1 kxp...i have
flown with a short windshield
(longer than most) for a couple of years now and i must say here in minnesota it
is
very nice to have that breeze in your face on a warm summer night for 10 or so
days
of the year!!! thats it. now that i have put on a full enclosure (90%) i will never
go back and i took off my helmet (please lets not get started on that helmet topic
thing again...lordy...lordy...lordy...) because it would touch the top of my gap
seal. also if you operate a radio i think it can be a little quieter than with
the
short windshield. i don't know what state you are flying in so as you know that
can
make a difference. here in mn. ralph and i can sometimes get 10 to 15 hrs. in the
winter flying. i can take my full enclosure off but it would require taking out
some
rivets and when i built it i kinda mad it permanent.
thanks,
Gary r. voigt
fs1 kxp/john deere tractors & stationary engines!!!!!
"Alderson, James" wrote:
>
> Hello listers,
>
> First, I finally met one of the other list members from my area today (Jim
> W). I arrived at the airport at about 12:30 to see a Kolb Mark III sitting
> in the hangar area. It was nice to see another Kolb flying in my area (and
> when I say another I mean him, cause I still haven't flown mine). It felt
> pretty good to show him my Kolb... proud even...
>
> Anyway, to my question. How many firestar II pilots here fly with the full
> enclosure and how many fly with a summer windshield? I came from flying a
> trike, so I am used to and enjoy the wind in my face type flying. I felt way
> too tight in the Kolb with the full enclosure, so I put on the summer
> shield. Love it. I like the look of it a whole lot more and with 60-70
> degree flying here (at least on the ground and in the sun) right now, I
> figured I could just dress for a little warmer. Do most of you guys keep the
> enclosure on in the summer or is it a switch when it gets warmer?
>
> Another question, I was out there to taxi test my Firestar II today and I
> ended up doing everything but as the traffic and wind were pretty hairy, but
> I did do a little bit. The heal brakes.... don't like em... Is there another
> solution for the firestar to allow differential braking or is that it. I
> have big feet and with running shoes on it was pretty easy to get hung up on
> something or another down there... I think I will fly in the summer with the
> old converse court shoes rather than jogging shoes. I feel like I need a
> little more feel for the rudders and brakes than the thick soles allow me...
> is this normal....
>
> Sorry for the long "newbie" email, but I didn't mention a computer virus
> once.... well I guess I just did, but it was only to make a point.
>
> James Alderson
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
While we've got a thread going on batteries...................I've got a nearly
new Napa 8229 battery here, and I can't find what its' amp rating is. Anyone
?? Is it husky enuf to crank that VW engine on Vamoose ?? Lar.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RWilliJill(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Drag strut end fitting |
Question?
Both the wings to my firestar II are almost complete and rigging them to
the fuselage cage will be the next big hurdle. I had put a very light coat of
epoxy primer
on the 2 drag strut end fittings and tried sliding them into the drug strut
tube. Well, they sure don't go in as far as the plans call for, which calls
for them to protrude 3/4 inches out of the drag strut tube so I figured I
had too much primer. I took it all back off on the last half of the fitting
and it still sticks out 1 1/4." The single rivet
that temporally holds the drag strut to the inboard rib isn't the problem
because the fitting goes a little past that point. The drag strut fitting is
flattened on the end where the small tube is welded. This slightly flattened
portion is what is preventing it from going all the way in. I realize the 3/4
" measurement is approximate because the final drilling for the bolt when
rigging will determine that. The question is, if I have to file either the
steel drag strut fitting or the inside if the aluminum drag strut tube, which
would cause less weakening of the structure. I'm hoping it doesn't have to go
in that far. I looked in the archives and this particular question hasn't
been posed.
Thanks to any one who will respond to this
lengthy question.
Ron Williams
Firestar II
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Drag strut end fitting |
I ran into the same thing, and didn't want to remove any steel from the
fitting.............for obvious reasons. I did what you're thinking - very
carefully, watching the alignment, file a little material at a time from the
inside of the aluminum tube with a round file, until the fitting pushes in
nice and snug. I don't believe that it weakens the strut at all.
Ah, I see now that you're saying "drag strut." S'OK....................I
don't recall the problem on my drag struts, only on the wing struts, but the
same would apply. Lar.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: <RWilliJill(at)aol.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: Drag strut end fitting
>
> Question?
>
> Both the wings to my firestar II are almost complete and rigging them to
> the fuselage cage will be the next big hurdle. I had put a very light coat
of
> epoxy primer
> on the 2 drag strut end fittings and tried sliding them into the drug
strut
> tube. Well, they sure don't go in as far as the plans call for, which
calls
> for them to protrude 3/4 inches out of the drag strut tube so I figured I
> had too much primer. I took it all back off on the last half of the
fitting
> and it still sticks out 1 1/4." The single rivet
> that temporally holds the drag strut to the inboard rib isn't the problem
> because the fitting goes a little past that point. The drag strut fitting
is
> flattened on the end where the small tube is welded. This slightly
flattened
> portion is what is preventing it from going all the way in. I realize the
3/4
> " measurement is approximate because the final drilling for the bolt when
> rigging will determine that. The question is, if I have to file either the
> steel drag strut fitting or the inside if the aluminum drag strut tube,
which
> would cause less weakening of the structure. I'm hoping it doesn't have to
go
> in that far. I looked in the archives and this particular question hasn't
> been posed.
>
> Thanks to any one who will respond to this
> lengthy question.
>
> Ron Williams
> Firestar II
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rwpike(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: [ Bill Vincent ] : New Email List Photo Share |
Available!
And why not?
You can get N numbers on anything that you built 51% of if it has the
appropriate required equipment on it.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>what i like about the early h kolb picture... aside from the cool tech... is
>that it has an 'N' number on tail... is that possible... his bird passed faa
>scrutiny?
>
>just wondering...
>
>just jam'n
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: | "Bruce n' Kathy" <n3nrr(at)erols.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Powersonic Battery |
Hay Larry
Float chargers >>>> they are little transformsers with a voltage
regulator attached, so they won't over charge, I belive 13.6 volts@ up
to 500 MA
They are great for gell cells and other stuff (sure wish they made them
for 6 volts) I use them on car batteries and mc and everything.
Here are a couple tricks for Harbor Freight.
You may use this cupon # when ordering it expires Apr 1, you get free
shipping and $5 bucks off handling. # 237-784-939 Ph 800-423-2567
Trick 1. You can mix and match from any catalog.
2. If you dont find it on sale in the current catalog use an older
catalog # if you cant find it on sale, give them the part # such as
41288-0rub. and if thy dont give you the best price give them the
first digits and change the extiontion to -1 or dash 2 EX(41288-2)or up
to 9 untill they give you the price you find is the best, they hate
this but what the HEY. it works on all thieir products.
3. Be sure to order by visa, mc or some sort of card for your conviene.
I hope buy now you use visa for all purchases,, Mine gives me $1 percent
back on all purchases, plus buyers protection.
4. The reason for using credit is, if harbor freight offers the same
item cheeper within 1 year they refund the diffrence.
Dont forget to play this game on other items
Nitrle gloves are 12.99 unless u cheat then they are 6.99 for 100
I have had a few bad runs of their gloves such as wrong sizes in
correct box. inferiour nitrle that rips etc. but they pay to
mail/return bad ones, I alwasy order extra stuff Makes great stocking
stuffers.
--
Bruce n' Kathy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bruce n' Kathy" <n3nrr(at)erols.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Powersonic Battery |
Anybody use the 9" saftey wire pliers Harbor feright has for 7.99?
--
Bruce n' Kathy
Come and visit us at http://www.frugalbee.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BSaf119141(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Summer Windshield... |
Gang,
I fly a 1989 Firestar single
seater with a full enclosure. Sitting on the ground in 95 degree weather it
gets pretty hot, but your not on the ground for very long. I also put in the
snap vents and once in the air there is no problem. I live in Nebraska so in
fall, winter and spring its needed. I also have a question, how many of you
that have a firestar 11 actually fly a passenger in it? I am thinking of
building one and would like to take my daughters once in a while. I know I
would need a liscense and I'm looking into that also. Does the mark111 fly
much different than a firestar? Thanks
Brad
Firestar1
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "johnjung(at)compusenior.com" <johnjung(at)compusenior.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Summer Windshield... |
James and Group,
I started flying my Firestar II with the small windscreen, but once I
put on the larger one, I never went back. IMO the Firestar II is too
fast for the small windscreen. There is one problem with the larger
windscreen: reflected light from inside the cockpit. To minimize this, I
have black carpet and have painted about everything inside the cockpit
flat black.
John Jung
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | zoperman(at)att.net |
Jim, I bought a C-170 from a guy who always flew it wearing slippers,for
better feel. He was right, as the brakes on that bird were real touchy.
Get the slimmest shoes you can find, keep them in the plane and be carefull
who sees you in them.Del.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Cooley" <johnc(at)datasync.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Drag strut end fitting |
Hi Ron and Gang,
I had a similar problem on my FS II when I built it. I wound up enlarging
the alum drag strut just enough to get the drag strut fitting to the
required depth. If you don't get it in far enough, then when rigging the
wings you probably won't be able to get them aligned properly. What happened
to me was that I didn't get the drag strut fitting in far enough initially
and when rigging the wings using a sting along the leading and trailing
edges I didn't have enough metal to drill through on the wing tabs. Didn't
realize this till after the fact. Wound up having new tabs welded on the
root rib. Also be careful to not get them too deep. This is only a problem
if you fold your wings. If too deep then the bolt in the universal joint
will hit the bottom tube of the root rib and bend or dent it. Hope this
helps some.
Later,
John Cooley
Subject: Kolb-List: Drag strut end fitting
>
> Question?
>
> Both the wings to my firestar II are almost complete and rigging them to
> the fuselage cage will be the next big hurdle. I had put a very light coat
of
> epoxy primer
> on the 2 drag strut end fittings and tried sliding them into the drug
strut
> tube. Well, they sure don't go in as far as the plans call for, which
calls
> for them to protrude 3/4 inches out of the drag strut tube so I figured I
> had too much primer. I took it all back off on the last half of the
fitting
> and it still sticks out 1 1/4." The single rivet
> that temporally holds the drag strut to the inboard rib isn't the problem
> because the fitting goes a little past that point. The drag strut fitting
is
> flattened on the end where the small tube is welded. This slightly
flattened
> portion is what is preventing it from going all the way in. I realize the
3/4
> " measurement is approximate because the final drilling for the bolt when
> rigging will determine that. The question is, if I have to file either the
> steel drag strut fitting or the inside if the aluminum drag strut tube,
which
> would cause less weakening of the structure. I'm hoping it doesn't have to
go
> in that far. I looked in the archives and this particular question hasn't
> been posed.
>
> Thanks to any one who will respond to this
> lengthy question.
>
> Ron Williams
> Firestar II
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Summer Windshield... |
I flew for 1 1/2 hours yesterday. Temps on Maryland's eastern shore
reached a balmy 55 deg. About three years ago I installed a slightly longer
summer windshield I made out of slightly thicker lexan I purchased from
Aircraft Spruce. The original windshield deflected somewhat at higher speeds,
allowing a cold blast of air to hit you.
For cool weather flying I purchased a neoprene face mask. They can be
found at most ski or motorcylce shops. That along with a full coverage helmet
allow for comfortable cool weather flying.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack & Louise Hart <jbhart(at)ldd.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Summer Windshield... |
>
>Hello listers,
>
>Anyway, to my question. How many firestar II pilots here fly with the full
>enclosure and how many fly with a summer windshield? I came from flying a
>trike, so I am used to and enjoy the wind in my face type flying. I felt way
>too tight in the Kolb with the full enclosure, so I put on the summer
>shield. Love it. I like the look of it a whole lot more and with 60-70
>degree flying here (at least on the ground and in the sun) right now, I
>figured I could just dress for a little warmer. Do most of you guys keep the
>enclosure on in the summer or is it a switch when it gets warmer?
>
>Another question, I was out there to taxi test my Firestar II today and I
>ended up doing everything but as the traffic and wind were pretty hairy, but
>I did do a little bit. The heal brakes.... don't like em... Is there another
>solution for the firestar to allow differential braking or is that it. I
>have big feet and with running shoes on it was pretty easy to get hung up on
>something or another down there... I think I will fly in the summer with the
>old converse court shoes rather than jogging shoes. I feel like I need a
>little more feel for the rudders and brakes than the thick soles allow me...
>is this normal....
>
>James Alderson
>
James,
I fly with a short windshield all year around. During warm weather, I wear a soft
flying helmet and goggles and thin soled shoes. As the air temperature drops,
I add the clothes. When air temperatures fall below 45 degrees F., I wear
a throat sock, leather jacket and gloves and heavy socks. When air temperatures
fall below freezing, I add a head sock, LLBean cold weather jacket (two
piece), ski mittens and pants, and insulated boots. Adding the clothes adds just
a few minutes to flight preparation, but one can fly in complete comfort.
The only problem I have had, is when I forgot to open the google air vents.
I thought I was slowly going blind until I figured out that my google and/or glasses
were fogging up.
It was difficult to get used to the insulated boots with rubber soles on the steel
rudder pedals and the corresponding loss of feel. But one becomes used to
it as one continues to fly with less feel and using more of the visual reference
frame. The FireFly nose cone is small and I have to be very careful getting
in and out of the plane and positioning my feet under the nose cone so that
I do not hit anything, especially with the boots on. What is neat is when it
warms and you do not have to wear the boots. Due to the increased feel, you
think you have a whole new plane to fly. I have a single hand brake lever on
the stick and I have not missed individual wheel brakes. It took a while to get
used to taxiing around and through other planes.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Jackson, MO
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart(at)ldd.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JaGifford(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Kolb-List Digest: 30 Msgs - 03/08/03 |
please change my email address to jagifford(at)charter.net
delete jagifford(at)aol.com
thanks,
jack gifford
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
3/6/03 12:10Kirk Smith
>
> I never understood what the torque ratings were stating. Is it peak torque,
> average torque? Could make a lot of difference. Snuff
==========================>
They aint stating much of practical value. :-)
For me HP is what indicates thrust.
I suppose in a buy round way you can deduce the size of the cylinders kinda
visually,,, more torque bigger piston in same size engine.... Other than
that it means squat in an engine that uses an RDU.
But would be interesting to hear other p'inions.
I remember a saying from motordome; "hp is nice but torque is what moves ya"
or some such dribble... but which cought well in the lexicon of motorcar
soldiers. How it made its way into aviation is another of those
impondrables, after all most would like to leave their dirty shoes at the
door. :-)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bruce n' Kathy" <n3nrr(at)erols.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Float Charger |
Hans
The Frugalbee Is the cheepest!!!
I put up the cupon for free shipping and 5 dollars off handling
it is # 237-784-939 and is good till april Anyone can use it
catch 22 is orders of $29 or more.
--
Bruce n' Kathy
Come and visit us at http://www.frugalbee.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
Thanks to everyone who responded to my float charger question - both on & off List.
I guess I'll need 3 of them, or even 4. Two for the boat, 1 for Vamoose,
and 1 for the J-5, if we ever get the engine sorted out. Thanks again.
Lar.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Summer Windshield... |
> The heal brakes.... don't like em... Is there another
> solution for the firestar to allow differential braking or is that it.
> James Alderson
James/Gang:
To me, it is important and necessary to be
comfortable whether I am flying, riding mountain
bike, or dirt bike. Was the same way flying
helicopters for the Army. Probably, even more so.
I have heel brakes in my MK III that have very
small pedals. Some shoes and boots do not work
well with them. I prefer deck shoes for local
flying and the classic Timberland hiking boots for
cross country. Both have small heels that fit the
pedals well.
Be careful with shoes that are large and bulky.
Can get you into trouble when you least expect
it. Maneuvering on the ground, especially when
landing in wind, depends on good differential
braking on my Mark III. In 1994, I came very
close to losing the MKIII during a landing on the
Dalton Highway (Pipe Line Haul Road) about 100
miles south of Dead Horse. For a frightening
moment I had missed the right brake pedal and was
heading for the shoulder of the gravel road and a
twenty foot drop off. Ouch! Not a good place for
something like that to happen.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RWilliJill(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Drag strut end fitting |
Captain Ron
You are right, I didn't make myself exactly clear. My plans call the wing
compression strut as you refer to it, as the drag strut tubes. It's the 1" O.
D. tube that has the 7/8" O.D. tube slide into it that attaches at the
midpoint of the main wing spar and the other end has the steel drag strut
fitting, as my plans refer to it,
slide into the 7/8" tube and that is the part that is tight. I think I have
the answer that I was looking for from you fellows that had a similar problem
and as long as I can work around a problem, there is no problem. Thank you
all very kindly. I cherish your willingness to answer.
Ron Williams
Firestar II
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
> Fanbelt failure? How are the Jabiru engines staying cool on pushers? Kirk
Kirk/Gang:
There's a big fan on the rear of the Jabiru.
Someone mentioned radiator and water pump
failure. Somebody else mentioned fan belt
failure. I don't think any method of cooling that
works is a problem. Look around you at the number
of engines that are water cooled. How many
failures do you see? VW's had a good rep for
cooling with fans and belts. I never had a
problem with them.
I have flown with fan cooled and water cooled two
strokes, and nearly 1,600 hours with watercooled
four strokes. No sweat.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | woody <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
>
>
>Fanbelt failure? How are the Jabiru engines staying cool on pushers? Kirk
From what I hear we don't spend alot of time on the ground. Sounds good
to me.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
> From what I hear we don't spend alot of time on the ground. Sounds good
> to me. Woody
Woody/Gang:
Based on information from a very reliable source,
someone who flies a straight drive Jabiru,
performance is not up to desired expectations.
They have proven reliable, but do not have the
kick of a 912 Rotax. Why? Can't turn a large
enough prop of more than two blades.
If I did not get that pronounced 912S kick, or in
the past the 912 kick in the pants type
performance, I too would be extremely
disappointed.
Straight drive Jabiru's will probably do better on
higher performance speedy type aircraft, not super
STOL type birds.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: BMW R1100 engines |
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
3/9/03 16:10Kirk Smith
> Wonder how the BMW R1100 engines are performing. They are using them for
> everything from trikes to Europa's in Europe. Air and oil cooled. Checking
> out a website in England they have them from 80 to 100 hp.
=================
Sounds good! (mmmm,, gotta be a pun in there somewhere) do you have a link?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <cen33475(at)centurytel.net> |
>For me HP is what indicates thrust.
>I suppose in a buy round way you can deduce the size of the cylinders kinda
>visually,,, more torque bigger piston in same size engine.... Other than
>that it means squat in an engine that uses an RDU.
>But would be interesting to hear other p'inions.
I think that a little math may clear up the situation for ya.
HP = Torque x RPM 5252
the 5252 is the units conversion factor, it would be something else for a
different set of units, the rest comes from
POWER = FORCE x DISTANCE per unit if time. (basic deffnition of power)
so we get:
POWER = (TORQUE RADIUS) x (RPM x RADIUS x 2 x pi)
and
HP = (TORQUE RADIUS) x (RPM x RADIUS x 2 x pi) 33,000
(One HORSEPOWER is defined as 33000 foot-pounds of work per minute)
By reducing, we get
HP = TORQUE x RPM x 2 x pi 33,000
Since
33000 6.2832 =5252
thus
HP = TORQUE x RPM 5252
Note that at 5252 RPM, torque and HP are equal. At any RPM below 5252, the
value of torque is greater than the value of HP; Above 5252 RPM, the value
of torque is less than the value of HP. )
what all this means is that power is determined by torque and engine
rotational velocity. so a reduction drive is also a torque multiplier.
rearranging the equation and you get
torque = HP/RPM*5252
if you reduce the RPM by 2 you double the torque. so a reduction drive
isn't just good because you can spin a bigger prop slowly to get high
efficiency, and spin the engine fast where it can make more power, but it
increases the torque at the prop for a given power, allowing you to overcome
more prop rotational drag so you can increase prop pitch and generate more
thrust. So reduction drives are win win win.
of course they also add weight, complexity and cost... so they are lose lose
lose!
notice #wins = #loses, which is another basic rule of physics, so we must be
right.
Topher
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | [ Ed Steuber ] : New Email List Photo Share Available! |
| From: | Email List Photo Shares <pictures(at)matronics.com> |
A new Email List Photo Share is available:
Poster: Ed Steuber
Subject: Progress of modified Ultrastar
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/esteuber@rochester.rr.com.03.09.2003/index.html
o Main Photo Share Index
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
o Submitting a Photo Share
If you wish to submit a Photo Share of your own, please include the
following information along with your email message and files:
1) Email List or Lists that they are related to:
2) Your Full Name:
3) Your Email Address:
4) One line Subject description:
5) Multi-line, multi-paragraph description of topic:
6) One-line Description of each photo or file:
Email the information above and your files and photos to:
pictures(at)matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | [ Dennis A Rowe ] : New Email List Photo Share Available! |
| From: | Email List Photo Shares <pictures(at)matronics.com> |
A new Email List Photo Share is available:
Poster: Dennis A Rowe
Subject: Kolb Mk-3 N616DR
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/rowedl@highstream.net.03.09.2003/index.html
o Main Photo Share Index
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
o Submitting a Photo Share
If you wish to submit a Photo Share of your own, please include the
following information along with your email message and files:
1) Email List or Lists that they are related to:
2) Your Full Name:
3) Your Email Address:
4) One line Subject description:
5) Multi-line, multi-paragraph description of topic:
6) One-line Description of each photo or file:
Email the information above and your files and photos to:
pictures(at)matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vincehallam(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Drag strut end fitting |
HI
When you talk about preventing this corrosion ,do you mean inside the
aluminium ? or normal rust on the steel? or are you referring to an
electrolytic action between steel and aluminium? I ve only had
electrolytic between stainless and alum ,...not with fairly mild steels
Vnz
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alderson, James" <James_Alderson(at)jdedwards.com> |
| Subject: | Fuel Filter level... |
Hello listers,
Once again, another question. I noticed my fuel filter has very little fuel
in it at any time, but this doesn't seem to affect anything with the engine.
In looking at a few others filters, they had about half of the filter filled
with fuel, while mine has about half an inch at the bottom. Is this normal,
a couple guys there said it just depends....
Thanks.
James Alderson
Kolb Firestar II / 503
Charlotte NC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rwpike(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: [ Dennis A Rowe ] : New Email List Photo Share |
Available!
A gorgeous piece of work, really first class.
Is there any provision against the effect of the prop pulses on the
streamline fabric covered section that you added on the back of the cage?
On my MKIII, the fabric began to crack the paint and start to pull loose
from the diagonal tubing longeron after about 200 hours, due to the prop
pulses ahead of the prop pulsing against the right side of the cage. I also
saw a MKIII several years ago that had the little "boat tail" like yours
suffering fabric damage and detachment in that area.
I had to go back in and add extra tape on the inside of mine, wrapped
around the tubing and doped up against the inside of the fabric to reducing
the flexing and help adhere it. You may have already done something like
that, there are probably several ways to skin that cat.
I would hate to see it get prematurely beat up by the prop pulses.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>
>
>A new Email List Photo Share is available:
>
> Poster: Dennis A Rowe
>
>
> Subject: Kolb Mk-3 N616DR
>
>
>http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/rowedl@highstream.net.03.09.2003/index.html
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: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: [ Dennis A Rowe ] : New Email List Photo ShareAvailable! |
> Is there any provision against the effect of the prop pulses on the
> streamline fabric covered section that you added on the back of the cage?
> Richard Pike
Dennis/Richard/Gang:
Mine started coming apart at 100 hours. Cut off
some of the fabric bracing. Went back and covered
the tail of the fuselage with .020 alum sheet.
That's been many hours ago, and I haven't looked
back.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
> John, how did you attach the aluminum, with pop rivets? Kirk
Kirk/Gang:
Yes.
Left the bottom and top fabric braces, especially
the one that create the opening for the aileron
bell crank arms. Popped a 1/2" or so vertical
tube up the back with a coupld braces to hold it.
Trimmed the alum to fit with a nice bend in the
rear. Primed and painted, then popped in place.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: [ Dennis A Rowe ] : New Email List Photo ShareAvailable! |
ya John, more detail please detail pard!....did you weld on tabs to attach
the alum to?..did you poprivit to frame tubeing?....and just how far forward
did you go?....any pics anywhere?
http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm
Don Gherardini-
FireFly 098
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: [ Dennis A Rowe ] : New Email List Photo Share Available! |
Dennis, Wonderful pics, and certainly looks like quality work!...my
compliments!
It is pics like these that give a builder so many ideas on how to
acconmplish a task.
And to all the members here....I never dreamed before I started my Kolb
project, that this weath of info and help existed!....If we would have had
the ability to share info in such a way back inthe late 70's and early 80's
when i was building and selling weedhoppers...I cant imagine how much
further along the sport would have been today!
Thankyou all for providing your methods and techniques! Such a time savings
and it helps to bring the quality of every buiders project to a higher
level!
http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm
Don Gherardini-
FireFly 098
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Sheet Metal Fuselage Tail |
> ya John, more detail please detail pard!
> Don Gherardini-
Don/Gang:
Riveted to rear vertical tubes. Then sealed
rivets, plus tube seal in vertical tubes.
Let me see if I can find some pics of it. If I
can find them, I will post.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
3/9/03 18:52Christopher Armstrong
> I think that a little math may clear up the situation for ya.
>
> HP = Torque x RPM 5252
=================================
Thanks for the refresher.
Another way of puttting it, is to say that for a given amount of HP you can
reduce it to any torque value that you want. Most of our engines have an rdu
on them, so at the hub we can within limits dial any torque setting that we
want through the gearing. Its much harder to alter the HP rating on a given
engine.
Its I think easier to just look at the HP red line limit for the engine, and
from there look at prop size and gear it accordingly. I will automatically
get the max torque/prop efficiency at the hub.
From my days at flying turbines the torque gage was just something we kept
an eye on to make sure we didn't break anything, at low altitudes. :-)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Drag strut end fitting |
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
3/10/03 2:04Vincehallam(at)aol.com
> or are you referring to an
> electrolytic action between steel and aluminium? I ve only had
> electrolytic between stainless and alum ,...not with fairly mild steels
> Vnz
===============
Yes. In dry climes I don't think it will be much of a problem over say 10
years. In Florida and or Calif it could be a problem. Dissimilar metal
corrosion is a danger. One of the reasons I coated my H brackets with epoxy
primer and then Rust Oleum. 6061 aluminum is fairly good at corrossion
resistance, still something to keep an eye on.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | More End Cap Pics |
Hi Kolbers:
More fuselage end cap pics by John Cooley and Paul
Petty.
The first two pics are John Cooley's and the rest
are Paul's:
http://home.sw.rr.com/jhauck/
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | woody <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
A
>Woody/Gang:
>
>Based on information from a very reliable source,
>someone who flies a straight drive Jabiru,
>performance is not up to desired expectations.
>They have proven reliable, but do not have the
>kick of a 912 Rotax. Why? Can't turn a large
>enough prop of more than two blades.
I hear they are better than a 582 ( from a guy that swapped a 582 for
the Jabi on a mk 111) and that is good enough for me. Reliability is
important to. I also think that with a well designed wood prop I will get
better performance than with a warp drive.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Another Pic of End Cap |
Kolbers:
Bob Bean sent me one of my older pics. This was
when Miss Pifer came out of the shop Spring 2000
with her new 912S. Thought she was ready for
Point Barrow, Alaska, but I was a little wrong.
:-)
http://home.sw.rr.com/jhauck/Hauck2.jpg
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Filter level... |
James,
My filter has an air pocket in it also, it is the glass Purolater type with
the replaceable element and it is mounted vertically I have 1.6 hours on
her in my driveway now and the bubble does not seem to be inhibiting flow.
I figure its OK to fly so I'm not worrying about it. Lets see if others
agree.
Denny Rowe
----- Original Message -----
From: Alderson, James <James_Alderson(at)jdedwards.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: Fuel Filter level...
>
> Hello listers,
>
> Once again, another question. I noticed my fuel filter has very little
fuel
> in it at any time, but this doesn't seem to affect anything with the
engine.
> In looking at a few others filters, they had about half of the filter
filled
> with fuel, while mine has about half an inch at the bottom. Is this
normal,
> a couple guys there said it just depends....
>
> Thanks.
>
> James Alderson
> Kolb Firestar II / 503
> Charlotte NC
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ALLENB007(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Filter level... |
James,
The fuel filter has always been that way. I Asked John about his firestar
and he said it was the same. Looked at it on sunday by accident while
looking at other parts of his plane and it barely had any in it.
allen
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Peter Volum" <peterv(at)etsmiami.com> |
| Subject: | Fuel Filter level... |
Mine only fills about 1/2 way. 100 hours of flight and no fuel
problems.
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
rowedl(at)highstream.net
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Fuel Filter level...
James,
My filter has an air pocket in it also, it is the glass Purolater type
with
the replaceable element and it is mounted vertically I have 1.6 hours
on
her in my driveway now and the bubble does not seem to be inhibiting
flow.
I figure its OK to fly so I'm not worrying about it. Lets see if others
agree.
Denny Rowe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
| Subject: | Re: [ Dennis A Rowe ] : New Email List Photo Share Available! |
----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Pike <rwpike(at)charter.net>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: [ Dennis A Rowe ] : New Email List Photo Share
Available!
>
> A gorgeous piece of work, really first class.
Thanks Richard, that is really high praise comming from a craftsman such as
yourself. Linda says my helmets not gonna fit me anymore. :-)
> Is there any provision against the effect of the prop pulses on the
> streamline fabric covered section that you added on the back of the cage?
This kit was # 90 circa 1992,(I know its been a long time in the making, but
I have only really worked seriously on it for about a year and a half total
since we bought the kit in 97 from the original owner) The streamline part
you refer to was Homers own idea. I guess I know now why Kolb quit putting
those on. Well I think we may be OK with the fabric staying put, due to
the fact that my lovely wife Linda insisted on covering both sides of the
fuselage with one continuous piece of fabric. I used a small piece to cover
the top panel of the rear area, and shrunk that little bugger till you could
bounce a basit ball off it without it flexing. Than the bottom was covered
and shrunk. Than we started at the front right side of the fuselage and
unrolled a long piece of fabric back along the side, around the back and all
the way up to the front on the left side. (Just remembered, the thing was
upside down so reverse left and right in what I just described ) Than all
was glued down to the perimeter tubing and trimmed, it overlaped the bottom
fabric at least two inches all the way around. Also, we taped over fabric
in all places it touched tubing.
"I am hoping now" that the wide fabric to fabric glue joints on the bottom,
and the fact that there is no seam around the skinny rear bow tube, as well
as the reinforcing tape will keep her together.
I'll keep a close eye on her. Note: the prop is a little over 5 inches
behind the closest fabric.
> On my MKIII, the fabric began to crack the paint and start to pull loose
> from the diagonal tubing longeron after about 200 hours, due to the prop
> pulses ahead of the prop pulsing against the right side of the cage. I
also
> saw a MKIII several years ago that had the little "boat tail" like yours
> suffering fabric damage and detachment in that area.
>
> I had to go back in and add extra tape on the inside of mine, wrapped
> around the tubing and doped up against the inside of the fabric to
reducing
> the flexing and help adhere it. You may have already done something like
> that, there are probably several ways to skin that cat.
> I would hate to see it get prematurely beat up by the prop pulses.
I'll be bumming if this does happen, but I don't think there is much I can
do about it now. Thanks for the heads up and the kind words on the project,
I hope to post more photos soon with the wings on and would like to get some
clearer photos of the engine installation also.
Thanks to my buddy and co-owner Jay Swager for taking the photos.
Sincerely,
Denny Rowe
>
> Richard Pike
> MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> >A new Email List Photo Share is available:
> >
> > Poster: Dennis A Rowe
> >
> >
> > Subject: Kolb Mk-3 N616DR
> >
> >
>
>http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/rowedl@highstream.net.03.09.2003/index.
html
>
>
> 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: | possums <possums(at)mindspring.com> |
You can still do it the "Old Fashion Way"
Mine's been on 450+ hours and still got no
cracks in the paint, or torn fabric.
http://www.mindspring.com/~possums/covering.jpg
http://www.mindspring.com/~possums/BRSsys.jpg
http://www.mindspring.com/~possums/Modrearframe.jpg
http://www.mindspring.com/~possums/Sideview.jpg
Ain't it cute.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
| Subject: | Re: [ Dennis A Rowe ] : New Email List Photo ShareAvailable! |
John,
Thanks for the tip, if or when mine goes, I'll probably do somthing similar.
Also was nice to see photos Miss Pfer again. It brought back memories of
seeing here for the first time at Sun and Fun, mine and Lindas first year
down there, on the last day of the show as I recall, I think you were
sporting a 65 hp Hirth at the time if I recall correctly, I beleive you
arrived too late for judging or you would surley have won Grand Champion
light plane that year. I was in the middle of building my Loehle Sport
Parasol at the time, and your paint job highly influenced our color choices
on that ship. The next year you had a 582 on her, followed by the 912.
We have hauled a lot of garbage with the Raiders over the years, as well as
met a lot of nice folks and admired a ton of sweet birds at S&F. Now days
with the kids all in school, our April trips to Lakeland will have to wait a
while, I hope you all have as much fun there this year as we have had in the
past.
Sincerely,
Denny Rowe "Sorry about the rambling"
----- Original Message -----
From: John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: [ Dennis A Rowe ] : New Email List Photo
ShareAvailable!
>
>
> > Is there any provision against the effect of the prop pulses on the
> > streamline fabric covered section that you added on the back of the
cage?
>
> > Richard Pike
>
> Dennis/Richard/Gang:
>
> Mine started coming apart at 100 hours. Cut off
> some of the fabric bracing. Went back and covered
> the tail of the fuselage with .020 alum sheet.
> That's been many hours ago, and I haven't looked
> back.
>
> john h
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
| Subject: | Re: [ Dennis A Rowe ] : New Email List Photo Share Available! |
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Gherardini <donghe@one-eleven.net>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: [ Dennis A Rowe ] : New Email List Photo Share
Available!
>
> Dennis, Wonderful pics, and certainly looks like quality work!...my
> compliments!
> It is pics like these that give a builder so many ideas on how to
> acconmplish a task.
>
> And to all the members here....I never dreamed before I started my Kolb
> project, that this weath of info and help existed!....If we would have had
> the ability to share info in such a way back inthe late 70's and early
80's
> when i was building and selling weedhoppers...I cant imagine how much
> further along the sport would have been today!
> Thankyou all for providing your methods and techniques! Such a time
savings
> and it helps to bring the quality of every buiders project to a higher
> level!
>
> http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm
> Don Gherardini-
> FireFly 098
>
> Don,
Thank you for the kind words.
I share all your feelings about the usefullness of this list. It has saved
me many hours of work, provided several inovative ideas, and saved me
several hundred dollars as well. Not to mention the inspiration of watching
others dreams take to the skies.
Now I hope to do a little inspiring of my own.
Denny Rowe
Mk-3, N616DR, 2SI 690L-70, 2.65 to 1, 68" three blade Powerfin F, Gull
wing doors, and a partrige in a pear tree.
Leechburg, PA
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
Wow,
That is one sweet looking bird.
What is the air intake on the side for? It sort of gives it a jet fighter
kind of look.
Kinda cool.
Also gives me hope my rear fabric will stay put.
Denny
----- Original Message -----
From: possums <possums(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: End Cap
>
> You can still do it the "Old Fashion Way"
> Mine's been on 450+ hours and still got no
> cracks in the paint, or torn fabric.
>
> http://www.mindspring.com/~possums/covering.jpg
>
> http://www.mindspring.com/~possums/BRSsys.jpg
>
> http://www.mindspring.com/~possums/Modrearframe.jpg
>
> http://www.mindspring.com/~possums/Sideview.jpg
>
> Ain't it cute.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SGreenpg(at)aol.com |
In a message dated 3/9/03 3:58:27 PM Eastern Standard Time,
jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com writes:
> Steven Green, are you flying down?
John and Other Kolbers,
I am planning to leave Etowah Wed or 'Thur and stay for the weekend (weather
permitting).
Steven
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | WILLIAM D BRADSHAW <PIPERJ5(at)shtc.net> |
| Subject: | Hot Box And Battery Installation on Firestar |
Kolb Builders & Gang
I Posted some pictures to
the photo share of the hot box and battery installation on my Firestar.
Couldn't find any
when I did mine, so hope these might help someone.
Danny Bradshaw
McBee, South Carolina
Firestar 503, electric start, EIS
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
Kolbers,
Its time to get serious about a trailer for my Mk-3. "ENCLOSED"
I am thinking a 22' box with a wedge shaped front to allow enough length for the
plane. Two rubber torsion axles and a flip down back door ramp.
I want to keep it as light as possible (no car haulers) without having it blow
around behind me. I'll probably be removing the wings and racking them against
the side walls of the trailer, instead of folding her.
Can all you guys give me an idea of how big your trailers are, and how heavy they
are emty?
Thanks
Denny Rowe
rowedl(at)highstream.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
> You can still do it the "Old Fashion Way"
> Mine's been on 450+ hours and still got no
> cracks in the paint, or torn fabric.
> Ain't it cute.
Possum/Gang:
I agree with you whole heartedly. I put 755 hours
on the old Firestar with fabric tail (end cap).
The MK III was a different animal. The fabric
lasted aprx'ly 100 hours. I think a lot has to do
with diameter, pitch, and power. The more of
each, the more drumming on the paint, dope, and
fabric.
And yes, by all means, the little sucker is cute
as a speckled pup (with wings).
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Mk-3 trailer |
> I am thinking a 22' box with a wedge shaped front to allow enough length for
the plane.
> Denny Rowe
Denny/Gents:
I borrowed an enclosed trailer that was 24' long
inside. That allowed a few inches for nose
clearance and a few inches for tail clearance. I
stacked a wing on each side, leading edge down on
carpeted blocks. Strapped them snug to the walls
with rachet type tie downs. Hauled Miss P'fer
from Mucho Lake, BC, to Oshkosh and then home,
without any damage from hauling except dust. Dust
did it's job on my brand damn new lexan windshield
doors and quarter windows. We pulled that
trailer, tag along, for about 10,000 miles that
trip. More than half of that with the airplane in
the back. Was an extremely tough trip.
I think the inside width of the trailer was almost
8'. Was just right for hauling the MK III. Would
have been nice to have had an access door on the
right forward side instead of having to raise and
lower the heavy drop down tailgate type door each
time we needed access to get to our baggage.
Built big muscles opening and closing it at least
twice a day.
john h
PS: More fun to fly them than to haul them.
Also, never had a Hirth. Started out with 582,
then 912 and finally the 912S.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Mk-3 trailer |
I've thought about that, too, and heard of several people doing it. Sounds
good in theory, anyway. Howsumever...........................now that
Vamoose' wings are done, complete with flaps & ailerons, I've tried to move
them, and it's like trying to pick up a big bundle of snakes without hurting
or scratching them. Folding, I can see; that rear pivot point/hinge helps
a lot. Taking them right loose, and moving them around - by myself -
uh................I don't t'ink so. Those of you who do take the wings
off, and hang them on the sides of the trailer................how do you do
it ?? 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 trailer
>
> Kolbers,
> Its time to get serious about a trailer for my Mk-3. "ENCLOSED"
> I am thinking a 22' box with a wedge shaped front to allow enough length
for the plane. Two rubber torsion axles and a flip down back door ramp.
> I want to keep it as light as possible (no car haulers) without having it
blow around behind me. I'll probably be removing the wings and racking them
against the side walls of the trailer, instead of folding her.
> Can all you guys give me an idea of how big your trailers are, and how
heavy they are emty?
> Thanks
> Denny Rowe
> rowedl(at)highstream.net
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Mk-3 trailer |
----- Original Message -----
John wrote:
PS: More fun to fly them than to haul them.
> Also, never had a Hirth. Started out with 582,
> then 912 and finally the 912S.
John,
I guess I got your original installation mixed up with another bird I saw
that first year, I also remember a Titan with a small rotary engine. I'll
have to go dig through our old photo albums do restore my slurred memory.
At any rate, I remember how striking of an impression your bird made. Quite
impressive she was and is.
Denny
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Mk-3 trailer |
| From: | Gene Ledbetter <gdledbetter1(at)fuse.net> |
Denny,
I know you don't want a carhauler but I thought you might find photos
of how the wings of my Firefly are mounted on the walls when ready to
travel. Go to homepage.mac.com/gene1930 for the details. Having the
front of the trailer angle down is definitely a good idea. I should
have done that.
Gene
On Monday, March 10, 2003, at 10:37 PM, wrote:
>
> Kolbers,
> Its time to get serious about a trailer for my Mk-3. "ENCLOSED"
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Mk-3 trailer |
| From: | Gene Ledbetter <gdledbetter1(at)fuse.net> |
Larry,
My trailer is parked at the airport and I only remove the wings when I
want to travel with Firefly behind me. It does take two people but you
only need help for a few minutes and there are always good folks
watching who eager to help.
Gene
On Tuesday, March 11, 2003, at 03:04 AM, Larry Bourne wrote:
>
> I've thought about that, too, and heard of several people doing it.
> Sounds
> good in theory, anyway. Howsumever...........................now that
> Vamoose' wings are done, complete with flaps & ailerons, I've tried to
> move
> them, and it's like trying to pick up a big bundle of snakes without
> hurting
> or scratching them. Folding, I can see; that rear pivot point/hinge
> helps
> a lot. Taking them right loose, and moving them around - by myself -
> uh................I don't t'ink so. Those of you who do take the
> wings
> off, and hang them on the sides of the trailer................how do
> you do
> it ?? Lar.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alderson, James" <James_Alderson(at)jdedwards.com> |
Hello listers,
While out at the field this weekend, I made a bonehead move and need some
advice. While starting up the Kolb, I put my foot up on the tire for
leverage and my shoe was wet as its still semi-swampy from all the rain
lately. My foot slipped and caught on the brake cable which apparently goes
through a grommet that is just suspended in a fabric hole. The cord tore the
fabric for about 2 inches toward the front of the plane. I need to repair it
as that will be screaming at me every time I go to the airport... I am about
as much of a perfectionist as the guy who built it.
So, is there a patch I can put on the inside that would make it seamless? I
have access to this spot from the inside and thought that would be the best
way to do it. I don't have any fabric experience at all and don't have the
stitts manual. I don't really want to buy the book to do this so I was
hoping for a product that just slaps on like a patch. In case that doesn't
exist, I do have a bunch of exess fabric that was left over from the plane
being covered...
Thanks for your help.
James Alderson
Kolb FSII 503 EIS BRS 32 Hours
Charlotte NC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Peter Volum" <peterv(at)etsmiami.com> |
James, buy the book! You will use it again. Jim and Dondi Miller will
sell it to you and a patch materials kit at a reasonable price. This is
if you want to do the job right which entails removing paint and getting
a bit of hands-on experience working with Stits fabric.
If you don't, then buy some self-adhesive sail repair tape and just slap
it on. You will hate it every time you look at it, but... hey... it's a
patch!
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Alderson,
James
Subject: Kolb-List: Fabric Repair
Hello listers,
While out at the field this weekend, I made a bonehead move and need
some
advice. While starting up the Kolb, I put my foot up on the tire for
leverage and my shoe was wet as its still semi-swampy from all the rain
lately. My foot slipped and caught on the brake cable which apparently
goes
through a grommet that is just suspended in a fabric hole. The cord tore
the
fabric for about 2 inches toward the front of the plane. I need to
repair it
as that will be screaming at me every time I go to the airport... I am
about
as much of a perfectionist as the guy who built it.
So, is there a patch I can put on the inside that would make it
seamless? I
have access to this spot from the inside and thought that would be the
best
way to do it. I don't have any fabric experience at all and don't have
the
stitts manual. I don't really want to buy the book to do this so I was
hoping for a product that just slaps on like a patch. In case that
doesn't
exist, I do have a bunch of exess fabric that was left over from the
plane
being covered...
Thanks for your help.
James Alderson
Kolb FSII 503 EIS BRS 32 Hours
Charlotte NC
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Rotax-787 100hp question |
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
In what is fast becoming the eternal quest for the *right* motor. I came
across a Rotax rotary model 787 110hp two cycle engine. Went and visited a
shop where they will sell me this motor, for my undisclosed project.
New with all the stuff attached it came to about 4K. Only show stopper that
I could discern is lack of a water pump. This engine is found in the Seadoo
line of water splashers.
Questions;
1 anyone familiar with this engine, and if so is it adoptable for aviation
use?
2. I measured the mount on the engine base it is 90mm wide and 150mm long or
(9cm-x-15cm). I have not measured but it looks exactly like the regular Kolb
Rotax aviation mount.
3. where does the rotax water pump attach at on the 582, thinking maybe its
not integral to the motor and thus I can fit any standard Rotax water pump
onto this plant? I took a bunch of photo's of this engine, and if someone
wants to post them for general viewing I'll email them.
I am not happy to give money to Rotax but for the right engine/HP and a
reasonable bill, I'd do it.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary robert voigt" <johndeereantique(at)qwest.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Mk-3 trailer |
Denny, my enclosed trailer is 24' 6" centerline inside...if i were you i would
get a 24' trailer, only because the resale is far better than a 22' when
it comes time to upgrade or trade in value assuming you go
with the 6000 lb. dexter axles my haulmark is 3460 lbs. curb weight. also Denny
take a good hard look at a 4' beaver tail inside the trailer....mine is setup
this way and can only be done with the 24' otherwise in
the 22' your tail wheel will run past the pitch and youleading edges will be touching.
let me know if you need pics i will be happy to send you some.
thanks,
Gary r. voigt
rowedl(at)highstream.net wrote:
>
> Kolbers,
> Its time to get serious about a trailer for my Mk-3. "ENCLOSED"
> I am thinking a 22' box with a wedge shaped front to allow enough length for
the plane. Two rubber torsion axles and a flip down back door ramp.
> I want to keep it as light as possible (no car haulers) without having it blow
around behind me. I'll probably be removing the wings and racking them against
the side walls of the trailer, instead of folding her.
> Can all you guys give me an idea of how big your trailers are, and how heavy
they are emty?
> Thanks
> Denny Rowe
> rowedl(at)highstream.net
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rwpike(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | 1997 Sea Doo 787 XP Parts Finder |
This is a url to take you to a Rotax 787 parts blowup.
No waterpump shown, intake and exhaust would need changing, I think.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
http://216.37.204.206/xtremepowersports/Seadoo_OEM/Seadoo_PWC.asp?Type=12&
http://216.37.204.206/xtremepowersports/Seadoo_OEM/Seadoo_PWC.asp?Type=12&A=37
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: | SGreenpg(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Mk-3 trailer |
In a message dated 3/10/03 10:28:10 PM Eastern Standard Time,
rowedl(at)highstream.net writes:
> Can all you guys give me an idea of how big your trailers are, and how heavy
> they are empty?
>
Denny,
My trailer is 24' X 8' inside and it is a Continental Cargo car hauler. The
rear door lets down to provide a ramp and the last 4' of the floor is sloped
down toward the rear. I understand your desire to have a light weight
trailer but I pull mine with an Aerostar van with a 4.0L engine. Only about
6 miles to the airport. It's a pretty good load for it but I don't go too
fast and I have the electric brakes hooked up.
I will send you some pictures of the dolly I built to safely trailer the Mark
III. I prefer not to remove the wings each time because I have to trailer
each time I fly.
The Dolly supports the tail of the plane so that no weight is on the
tailwheel and has a padded saddle for each wing to set in. The saddles are
mounted with slotted blocks so that any movement of the wing fore and aft
from the tail boom flexing does not slide the wing in the saddle. There is a
handle that comes to the back of the rudder to pull the plane into the
trailer with. I use a couple of rods to hold the wing steady up front... ( A
picture is worth a lot of words so I will send them to you off list)
Steven Green
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
This is John Wood's reply to me about his crash. Sure glad he's OK, but too bad
about that beautiful little FireStar.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: Wood, John T.
Subject: RE: Kolb
Larry,
It was me. Plane pretty hurt. No personal injuries. Heard a loud bang, vibration
followed, did an emergency landing in a soft plowed field with 18' high green
shrubs. Looked like grass from the air. Was only 1500 ft. not much time to go
fishing for a landing spot. The tires dug in and the plane flipped. Still waiting
for responses back from NTSB and FSDO.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: Larry Bourne [mailto:biglar(at)gogittum.com]
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 11:58 PM
To: Wood, John T.
Subject: Kolb
John.................I heard about a Kolb accident in San Diego. Sure hope it
wasn't you. Lar.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Thomason" <thomason(at)scrtc.com> |
Steve
I for one would love to see those pictures. I'm contemplating a dolly for
my Fire Fly
Mike Thomason
thomason(at)scrtc.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
SGreenpg(at)aol.com
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Mk-3 trailer
In a message dated 3/10/03 10:28:10 PM Eastern Standard Time,
rowedl(at)highstream.net writes:
> Can all you guys give me an idea of how big your trailers are, and how
heavy
> they are empty?
>
Denny,
My trailer is 24' X 8' inside and it is a Continental Cargo car hauler. The
rear door lets down to provide a ramp and the last 4' of the floor is sloped
down toward the rear. I understand your desire to have a light weight
trailer but I pull mine with an Aerostar van with a 4.0L engine. Only about
6 miles to the airport. It's a pretty good load for it but I don't go too
fast and I have the electric brakes hooked up.
I will send you some pictures of the dolly I built to safely trailer the
Mark
III. I prefer not to remove the wings each time because I have to trailer
each time I fly.
The Dolly supports the tail of the plane so that no weight is on the
tailwheel and has a padded saddle for each wing to set in. The saddles are
mounted with slotted blocks so that any movement of the wing fore and aft
from the tail boom flexing does not slide the wing in the saddle. There is
a
handle that comes to the back of the rudder to pull the plane into the
trailer with. I use a couple of rods to hold the wing steady up front...
( A
picture is worth a lot of words so I will send them to you off list)
Steven Green
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Pics of Miss P'fer At SMLA |
Hi Gang:
Paul Petty was kind enough to send me some pics of
my airplane he took right after I landed at Ronnie
Smith's, South Mississippi Light Aircraft,
Lucedale, Mississippi.
I'll share them with you all. Especially the ones
of the gear box and the PTO end of the engine with
gear box removed.
Mark III Pics:
http://home.sw.rr.com/jhauck/P3020014.jpg
http://home.sw.rr.com/jhauck/P3020015.jpg
http://home.sw.rr.com/jhauck/P3020016.jpg
http://home.sw.rr.com/jhauck/P3020017.jpg
This is the 912S gear box after removal and before
being dismantled. Ronnie shimmed up the torsional
vibration dampner as tight as he could possibly
get it. Was a good feeling to see no indication
of wear in 412 hours:
http://home.sw.rr.com/jhauck/P3020021.jpg
This is the PTO end of the 912S. That is the
engine driven fuel pump hanging by the number one
exhaust pipe. The fuel filter has been used on
all my airplanes and engines since the first,
1984. The paper towel is stuffed into the end of
the crank shaft to keep oil from draining out onto
the airplane. It did anyhow. The coolant
recovery bottle is a Nalgene squeeze bottle used
by resturants for catsup and mustard. The first
912 mounted on a MK III was mounted on this
airplane in 1994. There were no provisions from
Kolb or anyone else on how to do it. Jim designed
and fabricated engine mounting, radiator and oil
cooler mounting, and an exhaust system. If you
were at Sun and Fun 1994, and did not see Miss
P'fer, you probably heard her. She sported four
straight stacks 18" long made of mandrel bent
tubing. A 180 deg bend came out of each cylinder
to meet in the middle and then turn 90 deg with
two exhausts point straight out at each wing tip.
WOT she sounded like an Indy car coming down the
straightaway. I made a lot of people frown at
Lakeland with my prototype exhaust system, but
Homer Kolb loved it. I could see him grinning
from ear to ear. The exhaust was so loud it began
pounding my head through the headset after about
two hours flight time at 5,000 rpm.
http://home.sw.rr.com/jhauck/P3020022.jpg
This is a shot of John Cooley taking a pic of the
bridge work that carries my main landing gear.
You can also see my Ultrastar seats that tilt
forward for access underneath them and also to get
into my cargo compartment. Please notice the
Halon fire extinguisher. Both my Firestar and
Mark III have always been equipped with Halon:
http://home.sw.rr.com/jhauck/P3020029.jpg
john h
hauck's holler aviation and gantt international
airport........
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vincehallam(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax-787 100hp question |
Wow ...
Do you really mean rotary like Gnome Rhone where the cylinders
rotate and yhe crankshaft stands still or just some ornery rotary valve
disced 2 stroke?? 1
100 hp 2 stroke still sounds interesting ..Weight Fuel
consumption????
Vnz
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vincehallam(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Junkyard wars motors |
flat fours looked like jabiru or rotax
Vnz
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James, Ken" <KDJames(at)berkscareer.com> |
| Subject: | Junkyard wars motors |
I'm betting that they were 503 Rotax, I have talked with a couple of people
I met at Oshkosh who were on Junk Yards Wars about a month before the show
they talk with the "experts" about what is needed to finish the project in
this case a proper engine and prop,then they seed the yard so it has just
enough stuff to finish, The guy's also said they sometimes do a little
steering of the go-fors so the can find the "right" stuff in time. Remember
the show must go on!
Ken
P.s those brits had balls flying that ship so high the first flight! and the
dam wing on the American
ship scared the hell out of me watching it!! Well worth watching!
-----Original Message-----
From: Vincehallam(at)aol.com [mailto:Vincehallam(at)aol.com]
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Junkyard wars motors
flat fours looked like jabiru or rotax
Vnz
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Peter Volum" <peterv(at)etsmiami.com> |
Captain Ron's pictures can be seen at: http://lafa.com/Rotax787.htm
Peter
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerb <ulflyer(at)airmail.net> |
| Subject: | Junkyard wars motors |
Nope, they were Hirth's according to Chuck S of CGS Aviation fame (aka the
Hawk manufacturer). Chuck was the Judge. Chuck has posted several
comments on the Fly-UL list. It worth watching. Might learn a few things
about wing and horiz. stab incidence.
jerb
>
>I'm betting that they were 503 Rotax, I have talked with a couple of people
>I met at Oshkosh who were on Junk Yards Wars about a month before the show
>they talk with the "experts" about what is needed to finish the project in
>this case a proper engine and prop,then they seed the yard so it has just
>enough stuff to finish, The guy's also said they sometimes do a little
>steering of the go-fors so the can find the "right" stuff in time. Remember
>the show must go on!
>
>Ken
>
>P.s those brits had balls flying that ship so high the first flight! and the
>dam wing on the American
>ship scared the hell out of me watching it!! Well worth watching!
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Vincehallam(at)aol.com [mailto:Vincehallam(at)aol.com]
>To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Junkyard wars motors
>
>
>flat fours looked like jabiru or rotax
> Vnz
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | FRED2319(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: 1997 Sea Doo 787 XP Parts Finder |
Capt Ron Best you do a lot of thinking how you will cool that beauty.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Junkyard wars motors |
> It worth watching. Might learn a few things
> about wing and horiz. stab incidence.
> jerb
jerb/Gang:
Check out this pic of Miss P'fer landing at South
Mississippi Light Aircraft:
http://home.sw.rr.com/jhauck/Final.JPG
Power is at idle, 40 deg (full) flaps, settling in
to land. Wing incidence is slight, horizontal
stabilizer is parallel with line of flight, and
elevator is lined up with horz stab even though it
takes more aft stick pressure to keep the nose up
with full flaps. Inside the cockpit one feels
like we are applying great amounts of aft stick,
in this configuration, when in fact we are
applying force, but not moving the elevator up but
a slight amount. Leading edge of horz stab is
about midway point on boom tube.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
More from John Wood on his crash.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: Wood, John T.
Subject: RE: Kolb
Thanks, to all of you for their concerns. Don't know what caused the bang. It got
the attention of the folks on the ground. Still waiting for NTSB, FSDO and
Insurance. At least I had Hull coverage. We will see what the Insurance folks
have to say after looking at the plane. Once I know more I will send it to the
list. I don't want to speculate and forward incorrect data.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: Larry Bourne [mailto:biglar(at)gogittum.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 6:53 PM
To: Wood, John T.
Subject: Re: Kolb
I'm glad you're OK, but it's sure a shame. All that work ! ! ! Are you going
to fix it ?? Any idea what caused the "bang ??" I forwarded your message
on to the Kolb List. John Hauck saw the report, and asked about you.
Lar.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax-787 100hp question |
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
3/12/03 5:39Vincehallam(at)aol.com
> Wow ...
> Do you really mean rotary like Gnome Rhone where the cylinders
> rotate and yhe crankshaft stands still or just some ornery rotary valve
> disced 2 stroke?? 1
> 100 hp 2 stroke still sounds interesting ..Weight Fuel
> consumption????
>
===========================
Don't know any more specs, then I gave. Its light though, I had little
trouble lifting it out of its shipping box. I would guess about 50 pounds.
It was missing the heads, muffler, and the *Rotary Valve* housing.
I am waiting on Paul to post the photo's that I took, and then get some
feedback from those that have experience in working on the Rotax. I yet have
none.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 1997 Sea Doo 787 XP Parts Finder |
>Ron Best you do a lot of thinking how you will cool that beauty. Fred
Fred/Gang:
Also noticed a good sized fly wheel that appears
to be on the PTO end of crank shaft. Might
interfere with mounting a gear box.
No view of exhaust side of engine where the water
pump on a 582 is mounted and driven off that end
of the rotary valve shaft.
The 582 mounted on my MK III turning 5,800 rpm at
cruise, 80 mph, burned 5 to 5.5 gph. Wonder what
a 100 horses would drink in an hour?
Another consideration with high horsepower two
strokes is ring coking and piston siezures, which
are a problem with the high horsepower outboard
motor folks. They say it is a fuel problem. No
matter what, it is an expensive proposition,
especially when we throw in altitude and gravity.
john h
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Cargo Compartment And Other Stuff |
Gang:
A shot of my cargo compartment. To me this makes
more sense than the large open area on a standard
built MK III, up top. But to each his own.
Everyone does not fly or have the same tastes
Brother Jim and I have.
http://home.sw.rr.com/jhauck/Fuel%20pump.JPG
In top of the cargo compartment is the bottom of
my 25 gal (useable) fuel tank. Mounted at the
lowest point is the outlet with finger strainer
and Facet electronic fuel pump. Also notice my
fuel shutoff valve made by Briggs and Stratton (or
sold under their name). They are cheap ($3.50
aprx) and realiable. Have been using them since
Miss P'fer was new, March 1992. Fuel comes out of
the tank, loops down under the tail boom, and back
up to the fuel pump. At the bottom of the loop is
a "T". A sump/drain line runs forward from the
"T" to the midpoint of fuselage (between the main
gear truss) to another nylon fuel valve, then a 90
deg fitting with short piece of fuel line to drain
fuel/water that collects in the sump/drain line.
A home engineered and fabricated gascolator that
costs practically nothing and works great, but
only when I drain fuel into a clear glass
container to see what I get. I back this up with
an inspection of each float bowl about once a
month. If a drop of water collects in the "pot
metal" fuel bowl, is allowed to remain their for a
couple two or three months or so.........., it
will start corroding and eating holes in the float
bowl. The fuel tank vent line is routed from the
top of the tank down to the same area as fuel
drain to exit the fuselage.
http://home.sw.rr.com/jhauck/Fuel%20pump%202.jpg
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 1997 Sea Doo 787 XP Parts Finder |
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
3/12/03 8:11FRED2319(at)aol.com
> Capt Ron Best you do a lot of thinking how you will cool that beauty.
================
Unless I can determine if I can get a water pump that will bolt right onto
this thing (I am thinking a Skidoo probably has the same motor in it, and
hence water cooling). I am back to a Hirth, Jabi, VW, Simonini, or a jets.
:-)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
Morning Gang:
For many years I had to tie down by wrapping rope
around the lift strut fitting. Landing at an
airport that used hooks and chains for tie down
was tough on my little airplanes tender skin.
When we were fabricating Miss P'fers fuselage at
the Old Kolb Factory, in the basement of a couple
hundred year old barn on Homer Kolb's farm, I had
time to do a lot of thinking about how I wanted my
new MK III to turn out. One of the improvements
was the tie down rings:
http://home.sw.rr.com/jhauck/Tie%20point.JPG
The rings are rope guides for the starter rope on
the Firestar. Jim welded a ring to the end of the
short lift strut tang. In this shot notice the
upside down bolts and an inspection plate just aft
of the drag strut attach point to the main spar.
The lift strut tang hole has a nice bushing welded
into it. I use no clevis pins. The fittings are
snugged down with bolts. This prevent inevitable
wear from vibration which quickly elongates the
lift strut attach point holes. Also the main spar
attach points:
http://home.sw.rr.com/jhauck/Tie%20point%202.jpg
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
> Thanks, to all of you for their concerns. Don't know what caused the bang.
> John
John/Gang:
On our Kolb aircraft, usually when we get a big
bang, something has gone through the prop. It is
not uncommon for FOD to hit the prop which in turn
slams it into the bottom of the wing, aileron,
flap, or tail boom.
Ask me how I know. :-)
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | 912/912S Engine Mount |
Hi Gang:
More pics, courtesy of John Cooley, who lives in
ear shot of Ronnie Smith's airstrip in Lucedale,
Mississippi.
This one is of the engine mount. Can also see a
little of the way we hung radiator and oil
cooler. Also notice that I went to 3/8" thick
aluminum angle instead of the original 1/4" thick
aluminum I used with the 912. I went through
three sets of 1/4" engine mounts with the 912 in
1,135 hours. John Russell fabricated his engine
mounts from 3/8" stock and was kind enough to give
me a set when I was in the process of mounting my
912S. I think these will survive much longer than
the 1/4":
http://home.sw.rr.com/jhauck/Mount.JPG
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax-787 100hp question |
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
3/12/03 5:39Vincehallam(at)aol.com
> Wow ...
> Do you really mean rotary like Gnome Rhone where the cylinders
> rotate and yhe crankshaft stands still or just some ornery rotary valve
> disced 2 stroke?? 1
> 100 hp 2 stroke still sounds interesting ..Weight Fuel
> consumption????
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 1997 Sea Doo 787 XP Parts Finder |
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
3/12/03 8:51John Hauck
> No view of exhaust side of engine where the water
> pump on a 582 is mounted and driven off that end
> of the rotary valve shaft.
======================
If someone has photo's of a stripped 582 from all sides, and a fully dressed
one, and emails them to me. Next time up in Tucson I'll go and compare them
with what they have. I still have some time before lack of engine turns into
a show stopper so I have time to do some researching.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 1997 Sea Doo 787 XP Parts Finder |
> If someone has photo's of a stripped 582 from all sides, and a fully dressed
> one, and emails them to me. Next time up in Tucson I'll go and compare them
> with what they have. Ron
Ron/Gang:
Why don't you do a Google search or go to Kodiak
Research and get parts blow ups of a 582? They
are free on the internet..................
http://www.kodiakbs.com/index.htm
http://www.rotec.com/
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Main Gear Truss And Main Gear |
Gang:
A better view of the main gear truss that carries
what you see on the outside of the fuselage:
http://home.sw.rr.com/jhauck/Inner%20bracing.JPG
Note a common seat belt attach point inboard. To
the left is the Elt. Behind the ELT is the
battery and master solenoid. Two springs for nose
up trim. Do not need any nose down trim. Under
ELT is my Marvel Mystery Oil. Does it work? I
think so and use it religiously in every thing I
own and some things I don't own. Wrapped up in
black beside the MMO is my tool kit. You can see
my two pink colored brake lines. Also pitot and
static pressure lines. The 1/4" alum tubes are
for disconnecting the lines to remove right wing.
PT17 pitot/static system is mounted to right lift
strut. I also us the static pressure connector to
calibrate my airspeed indicator. I drill a hole
graduating from 1/64 by 64ths up. Keep flying
reverse courses at same indicated airspeed and
changing connectors until I get the right one that
matches up ground speed and airspeed. I need to
do that now. My airspeed at 90 indicated is
actually 84 mph. Why does it change once
calibrated. I don't know, but it does over a
period of time. Sometimes 6 months, sometime a
year or longer between calibrations. Feels good
to constantly see 90 mph at cruise even though I
know it is really 84 mph. :-) I think it is
pretty much in error across the board. Yesterday,
solo, I was stalling at about 45 indicated clean
and 40 mph full flaps. After calibration should
get it down to 40 and 35 true.
This pic shows my trim wheel and my Chillie Vest
Digital Thermostat control just below it. The
loose wire plugs into my vest. Thermostat control
with wire is velcroed on an alum plate. It is
removed in warm weather. Comes out this morning.
:-) Copilot's head set sockets are below. The
bungee is some left aileron trim when I need it.
Lately have not had to use it.
http://home.sw.rr.com/jhauck/Seat%20rails%202.jpg
Main gear legs and outside mounts. The Hauck heat
treated 4130 legs work great. Our entire
modification weighs about the same as the standard
Kolb alum legs. That is the black neoprene fuel
tank vent tube sticking down from the lowest point
of the fuselage.
http://home.sw.rr.com/jhauck/Pfer%20legs.JPG
When I get caught out after dark, this landing
light system works great. I could not detect any
difference in cruise speed with or without it.
So, I don't think I am being penalized for having
it handy hanging out in the breeze. I got the
light from Summit Racing. It is a KC Off Road
Running Light. Can not remember wattage, but
think it is 50 or 60. Uses replaceable halogen
bulb rather than sealed beam tungsten element at
100w. Is as effective at the old GE 100w sealed
beam landing light and lasts many times longer.
With only one light to depend on, don't use sealed
beam with their extremely short life span. Will
get you in trouble with no back up.
http://home.sw.rr.com/jhauck/Pfer%20legs%202.jpg
john h
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 6 inch tubes |
> Has anybody got the cut off pieces of the 6 inch diameter wing spars laying
around that they'd want to part with? Kirk
Kirk/Gang:
New Kolb Co has a large "uh oh" pile of 6" tubing
stacked up next to the main building. About half
of what they receive can not be sent out in kits.
I have some but am going to hold on them them. I
use them when I break things. A short piece will
come in handy building new upper vertical
stabilizer next week.
john h
PS: Got to fly to Wetumpka Airport and give Miss
P'fer her first bath since last September. Six
months already. If I am careful, will not have to
wash her until after I return from Lakeland or
Monument Valley. :-)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Cooley" <johnc(at)datasync.com> |
| Subject: | Tail wire bracing |
Hi Gang,
Would like to hear some opinions and thoughts on additional tail wire
bracing for the Mark III. After seeing the leading edge of the upper
vertical stabilizer break on John's plane I reinforced this area on mine
with a one foot long sleeve inside of the leading edge tube (with ends cut
at an angle-thanks to this list). I also planned on putting additional wire
bracing on mine and started looking at some of the pictures that I have of
other planes. There are several different configurations. Seems to me that
the best set-up would be to have bracing from the midpoint of the upper
vertical stab (area that broke on John's plane) to the center of the leading
edge tubing on the horizontal stabs and then for simplicity sake back to the
point that the factory design attaches at the bottom of the tail post. I
would also add the inner sleeves to the leading edge of the horizontal stabs
of course.
I notice that the Slingshot models have the standard setup of the Mark
III, Firestar and Firefly and then has additional support wires from the top
of the rudder mount post to the leading edge tube of the horizontal stabs
and then back to the bottom of the rudder tail post. It doesn't have
additional support in the leading edge tube of the upper vertical stab.
Maybe it uses thicker wall material and is not needed.
I doubt that I would ever put the 1700 hours or so that John has put on
Ms. Pfer on my plane, but it would be nice to have the extra bracing there
just in case. I have noticed the tail of my Firestar on several occasions
when the engine hits a certain point and with the air blasting over it, that
it looks like a blur and have thought that additional bracing would not be
such a bad thing, at least to my simple mind. I welcome any and all thoughts
on this.
Thanks,
John Cooley
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 1997 Sea Doo 787 XP Parts Finder |
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
Been to that site. It looks pretty much the same. I would think that if
Olnik gets motivated he can make a lot of money by making available as a kit
the parts that we need to attach to the Rotax 787. I can't think of anyone
who is more into this stuff than him, come on Tom get motivated.
You got no liability if all you do is sell the missing parts, if they fit??
:-)
Hey Olnik you out there?
=========================
> Ron/Gang:
>
> Why don't you do a Google search or go to Kodiak
> Research and get parts blow ups of a 582? They
> are free on the internet..................
>
> http://www.kodiakbs.com/index.htm
>
> http://www.rotec.com/
>
> john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Tail wire bracing |
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
3/12/03 11:15John Cooley
>
> Hi Gang,
>
> Would like to hear some opinions and thoughts on additional tail wire
> bracing for the Mark III.
>
=============================
I would just go to a 2024 t3 tube, Aircraft Spruce has them. They are very
strong, it may just solve that problem. They are stiffer than 6066 and less
prone to vibrate, if you can, also go one size up in wall thickness.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Tail wire bracing |
> I would just go to a 2024 t3 tube, Aircraft Spruce has them. They are > stiffer
than 6066 and less
> prone to vibrate, if you can, also go one size up in wall thickness. ron
Ron/Gang:
My MK III tailsection, as I have stated recently,
was overbuilt to begin with. I had an idea that
all that "stuff" back there took a really tough
beating, so I built with .058" instead of .035".
I think I have mentioned, but in case I have not,
I went ahead and planned for wire bracing on the
leading edges of the horizontal stabs. Slipped
the sleeves inside each one and drilled it for a
3/16 bolt. These sleeves may have prevented the
horizontal stabilizer leading edge tubes from
failing due to fatigue/stress. I knew from
watching the leading edges of the factory MK III
in flight that something needed to be done to keep
them from vibrating so much. I never got around
to the additional wire bracing and have had no
problems with horz stabs. Neither have I had a
problem with the upper tail post which also has a
sleeve for wire bracing.
I never considered putting a sleeve in the leading
edge of the upper vertical stab, so I did not.
During rebuild, I will add that sleeve. Whether I
will put additional wire bracing on the vert stab
leading edge or not, I am undecided at this time.
I will go ahead and drill the leading edge and
sleeve to accept wire bracing, just in case I
change my mind.
I have found through a lot of use that 6061T6 is
much more fatigue resistant than 2024 alum. Quite
simply, 2024 will split and crack from vibration
and fatigue much quicker than 6061. Do not
recommend using 2024 for building anything on the
Kolb aircraft, in the way of tubing or sheet.
I once built a gap seal out of 2024 sheet. Cost a
fortune that I did not have. In a remarkably
short time the cap seal disintegrated from
vibration. Rebuilt out of hardware store aluminum
valley material. Lasted as long as the aircraft
did.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SGreenpg(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Fwd: Trailer/Dolly |
In a message dated 3/12/03 6:52:57 AM Eastern Standard Time,
gtalexander(at)att.net writes:
>
> Steve:
> Those pictures are still on my website if you want to refer people to
> them.
> Hope all is well with you.
> George Alexander
> http://gtalexander.home.att.net
>
George,
Thanks
Steven
(Authid: gtalexander(at)att.net);
From: "G. T. Alexander, Jr." <gtalexander(at)att.net>
Subject: Trailer/Dolly
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 06:53:05 -0500
Steve:
Those pictures are still on my website if you want to refer people to them.
Hope all is well with you.
George Alexander
http://gtalexander.home.att.net
Steve:
Those pictures are still on my website if you want
to refer people to them.
Hope all is well with you.
George Alexander
http://gtalexander.home.att.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Tail wire bracing |
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
Well John I somewhat disagree.
From my experience I have yet to see 2024 crack or split. The leading edge
of my vertical stab is 2024 t3. The wing tip bow (of one wing) is also 2024
t3 (run out of tubing and ordered 2024 instead). It has yet to fly though!
so take my recommendation with that in mind. I do have an airplane that gets
beat up by 200hp 160 mph on regular basis, and in nearly 7000 hrs it has yet
to show any cracks. :-)
2024 will crack if its not deburred, or constructed with the grain in
mind.
I certainly would have liked to see what cracked or split in your usage. Its
a lot cheaper to make airplanes out of 6061 but none are, all certified
aircraft are 2024 with some high stress parts out of 7075.
==============
3/12/03 14:57John Hauck
> I have found through a lot of use that 6061T6 is
> much more fatigue resistant than 2024 alum. Quite
> simply, 2024 will split and crack from vibration
> and fatigue much quicker than 6061.
=====
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 1997 Sea Doo 787 XP Parts Finder |
Ron...before you go to far on thet new 787...check and see what rpm the peak
hp is...might be awful fast for the redrives we have available to us.. I
keep looking around also at all the new engines and their very hight hp
ratings with lust...particularl;y motorsusle and snowmobiles....but usually
find that they are double (or more) the rpms we are used too!....
http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm
Don Gherardini-
FireFly 098
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 1997 Sea Doo 787 XP Parts Finder |
| From: | CaptainRon <CaptainRon(at)theriver.com> |
3/12/03 17:52Don Gherardini
> might be awful fast for the redrives we have available to us.. I
> keep looking around also at all the new engines and their very hight hp
> ratings with lust...particularl;y motorsusle and snowmobiles....but usually
> find that they are double (or more) the rpms we are used too!....
======================
February 27, 2003 - March 12, 2003
Kolb-Archive.digest.vol-ee