Kolb-Archive.digest.vol-eu
February 07, 2004 - February 20, 2004
whole
wing structure, yet SOP is to drill them full of unnecessary 1/8" rivet
holes all down their top & bottom surface to secure the fabric, (when they
could be just as easily rib stitched, and probably with less weight) then
>>>>snip
I can vividly remember the day I pondered this same question...not about a
Kolb of course...but of the Idea of riveting fabric to ribs...vs rib
stitching.
now...he may not have been right...but the instructor went into a long
speech about which is better...when you do..when you dont...an so on...
but basically here it is....a round top or tubing rib should never be
ribstitched ... to keep from "puckering" or "dimpleing" the fabric...and
when heat shrink type fabric is used...just about never.
A flat top or cap'ed rib should/may be rib-stitched..
Still....all them holes just cant help...I'lll betcha if Homer didn't have
to pay Dennis and John them danged high wages, he probably could have
afforded a big ole press with some nice rib forming dies and we would have
Kolbs with nice stamped ribs in em today!!!!
(...grin....!)
Don Gherardini
FireFly 098
http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <tophera(at)centurytel.net> |
| Subject: | re: mo' n mo' wing |
John, you're an old rotor head....remember precession? Swash plate input
90deg before
reaction. Should be the same with a prop. If you feed it more air at the
top the reaction
should be to turn left or right depending on rotation. Shoot me down if
I'm wrong.
Well that won't be necessary but...
Precession refers to a gyroscope that reacts 90 degrees off from any input
moment. What we are talking about here is where the center of force on the
prop disk is. The rotor heads might remember that as you speed up from
hover the advancing blade starts making more lift then the retreating blade
rolling you to the retreating blade side so you have to move the collective
to the advancing bade side.
Similarly p factor is when you are nose up the right side of the prop has a
reduced AOA and less speed and the left side has an increased aoa and has
more speed. The left blade makes more lift and yaws you to the right.
If the top of a prop is making more lift it will indeed pitch the nose down.
How it is hooked to the plane is not important. If the rotor disk of a
ridged rotor helicopter couldn't move its center of lift and use the
horizontal moment arm to generate a moment then the pilot could not control
it. Flapped rotors work more like a weight shift trike, tilting the rotor
disk and generating a side force with a vertical moment arm to the cg, with
the same results.
I think I am meandering way off topic... oops
Topher
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <tophera(at)centurytel.net> |
Well I would put a couple of stops on your saw horses/work table right
now... that was the first thing I did, so I had to ding my spar the old
fashioned way, by dropping tools on it.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Andrew Gassmann <a1929gassmann(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Fabric attachment |
This was mentioned many moons ago, using the HIPEC system:
No stitching or rivets..read more:
http://www.sirius-aviation.com/hipec.html
Andy
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | enclosure question |
i'm new to the list, so forgive me if i do not get this just right. i just
bought a one-owner 95 kold firestar in mint condition w 90 hrs. 503, single
card. i am a ga pilot and have had two ul in the past. two questions..1.. has
anyone enclosed an older firestar before with lexan? at least back to the
bulk-head, right before the 5 gal. tank? 2. has anyone every placed a small
extra tank right behind the seat, i.e., a 3 gal tank? would this change the cg
to
do so, or is that right on the mark?
alan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Denny Rowe" <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
Paul wrote:
Surprisingly there was only one small dent in each end.
> So here is the question of the day. Can I fix the ding and move on? My
thoughts say yes. I'm thinking about cutting a plug, if you will, out of
3/4" plywood and bevel it ever so slightly and drive it in the end. Or get
my machinist buddy to machine a piece of steel pipe with a slight taper to
resize the end. The root end dent will come out when I rivet the steel ring
into place.
Paul,
I would feel comfortable with working the dents out and using the spar,
being they are on the ends, they should not be under much load, especially
the tip end, and as you said the ring takes care of the root end.
See what others think, but I say its probably fine.
The spars and tail boom are the same tubing.
Denny Rowe, Mk-3, PA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rwpike(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wing Mod Weights |
Good point, riveting the fabric has to look a lot better than putting a
knot on top of an already round rib. (Which is why I tied my knots off to
one side of the rib - minimize the visual damage).
But the question is not appearance but rib strength.(If you can tolerate
"Homer Bumps" on the trailing edges, rib stitch bumps might seem less awful)
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>brother Pike
>
>a post you made caused me to think of a time WAAAYYY back,,,,back at Spartan
>when I was in the Airframe classes...
>
>
>snip<<<whole
>wing structure, yet SOP is to drill them full of unnecessary 1/8" rivet
>holes all down their top & bottom surface to secure the fabric, (when they
>could be just as easily rib stitched, and probably with less weight) then
> >>>>snip
>
>I can vividly remember the day I pondered this same question...not about a
>Kolb of course...but of the Idea of riveting fabric to ribs...vs rib
>stitching.
>now...he may not have been right...but the instructor went into a long
>speech about which is better...when you do..when you dont...an so on...
>
>but basically here it is....a round top or tubing rib should never be
>ribstitched ... to keep from "puckering" or "dimpleing" the fabric...and
>when heat shrink type fabric is used...just about never.
>
>A flat top or cap'ed rib should/may be rib-stitched..
>
>Still....all them holes just cant help...I'lll betcha if Homer didn't have
>to pay Dennis and John them danged high wages, he probably could have
>afforded a big ole press with some nice rib forming dies and we would have
>Kolbs with nice stamped ribs in em today!!!!
>(...grin....!)
>
>Don Gherardini
>FireFly 098
>http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jimmy @ Jo Ann Hill" <hillstw(at)jhill.biz> |
Having just bought a Firestar with a 9 year old BRS Canister, I am wondering how
absolutely necessary it is to have a pricey repack job done??
Any experience out there on this?
Thanks.
Jimmy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steven Green" <kolbdriver(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Silencer box |
Who is up for a SWAG. ( newbys SWAG stands for Scientific Wild Ass Guess.)
If you put a hole in your nice finished box right in front of the current
outlet you would have a short path and a long path.
The differences in length are equal to a time when you devide by the speed
of sound. ~1000 feet per second. If that distance is equal to n+0.5 ( n=0
or any positive integer ) wave lengths at the frequency that you want to
squash then you will get the canceling effect that you are looking for.
So if you want to squash say 11000hz (5500 rpm times two cylinders sucking)
then you have (~1000ft/sec)/(11000/sec)= .091 feet (1.1 inches) peek to
peek.
Topher,
5500 RPM times two is 11,000 cycles per minute. Divide 11,000 by 60 to get
Hz. It would be about 183 Hz. wouldn't it?
Steven Green
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <tophera(at)centurytel.net> |
What a stupid mistake. Only off by a factor of 60... oh well! I thought
that seamed like a fairly short wave length, more like a wavelength for
light then sound.
At 180hz (~1000ft/sec)/(180/sec)= 5.55 feet (66 inches) peek to
peek. 33" is the first half wave...no wonder there are always long
tailpipes.
Topher
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Steven Green
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Silencer box
Who is up for a SWAG. ( newbys SWAG stands for Scientific Wild Ass Guess.)
If you put a hole in your nice finished box right in front of the current
outlet you would have a short path and a long path.
The differences in length are equal to a time when you devide by the speed
of sound. ~1000 feet per second. If that distance is equal to n+0.5 ( n=0
or any positive integer ) wave lengths at the frequency that you want to
squash then you will get the canceling effect that you are looking for.
So if you want to squash say 11000hz (5500 rpm times two cylinders sucking)
then you have (~1000ft/sec)/(11000/sec)= .091 feet (1.1 inches) peek to
peek.
Topher,
5500 RPM times two is 11,000 cycles per minute. Divide 11,000 by 60 to get
Hz. It would be about 183 Hz. wouldn't it?
Steven Green
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Terry <tkrolfe(at)usadatanet.net> |
Toper, Steve,
Thanks for the input on the math of noise canceling silencers. I
appreciate knowing how the wave lengths are calculated. Now I have to
see if I have the where withal to fashion something that will work.
Terry - FireFly #95
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Clay Stuart" <tcstuart(at)adelphia.net> |
Here is another link to this covering system:
http://musclebiplane.org/htmlfile/hipec.html
Sounds good. It is approved for certified aircraft they claim. Archives
show some conversation about this several years ago. Maybe the skeptics
will have a different opinion since there is more history now.
Clay Stuart
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: oopps - Dropped/dented Six Inch Tubes |
> Well I would put a couple of stops on your saw horses/work table right
> now... that was the first thing I did, so I had to ding my spar the old
> fashioned way, by dropping tools on it. Topher
Topher/Gang:
I had forgotten about the main spar rolling off the saw horses. Yes, I have
been there too. Had the same bend, only in one end. A rubber mallet will
convinve the 6 inch tube to return to its former shape. Make sure,
especially when riveting to the inboard steel ring, to wedge or otherwise,
convince the tube to make contact with the inside of the steel ring before
drilling and riveting. This aluminum stuff is pretty easy to work with.
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fabric attachment |
> This was mentioned many moons ago, using the HIPEC system:
>
> No stitching or rivets..read more:
>
> http://www.sirius-aviation.com/hipec.html
>
> Andy
Hi Andy/All:
As far as I know, there has never been a rib failure on a Kolb aircraft
because of drilled tube for fabric attachment.
I, personally, like the mechanical means of attaching fabric with rivets.
The failure of both wings on my Fire Star was not the result of, nor did it
have anything to do with weakening of the ribs by drilling holes in them. I
do not think all strength is lost because of drilling when the hole is
filled back up with a rivet. Sure it is going to loose a little, how much,
I do not know.
I do know, I would not want to rely on an adhesive to secure fabric to the
ribs, especially a 5/16" tube with little contact surface.
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: BRS Canister Repack |
> Having just bought a Firestar with a 9 year old BRS Canister, I am
wondering how absolutely necessary it is to have a pricey repack job done??
> Any experience out there on this?
> Thanks.
> Jimmy
Hi Jim/All:
What kind of price do you put on your butt?
What is the reason for carrying all that extra weight in the first place?
Recommend following instructions published by BRS if you intend to rely on
the BRS to save you, should you need it.
john h
PS: Survivor of to catastrophic failures in flight. Reason for failures is
not important at that moment. Reliability of recovery system is.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jimmy @ Jo Ann Hill" <hillstw(at)jhill.biz> |
| Subject: | Re: BRS Canister Repack |
While I appreciate your willingness to respond, I was hoping to hear from
someone with experience, not just opinions and philosophy.
In other words, do any of you know of a canister that has been fired after
6, 8, or 10 years?
Thanks.
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: BRS Canister Repack
>
> > Having just bought a Firestar with a 9 year old BRS Canister, I am
> wondering how absolutely necessary it is to have a pricey repack job
done??
> > Any experience out there on this?
> > Thanks.
> > Jimmy
>
> Hi Jim/All:
>
> What kind of price do you put on your butt?
>
> What is the reason for carrying all that extra weight in the first place?
>
> Recommend following instructions published by BRS if you intend to rely on
> the BRS to save you, should you need it.
>
> john h
>
> PS: Survivor of to catastrophic failures in flight. Reason for failures
is
> not important at that moment. Reliability of recovery system is.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: enclosure question |
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com |
Alan,
I don't have full enclosure, but a long partial one. I also carry two 3
gallon tanks behind the seat on a small bench that I built that go over
the control cables. I have been carrying these tanks for years and it
does not affect the flight performance that much. Yes, the Firestar is
nose heavy and I have to hold back stick a little, but it's not a
problem.
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/ul15rhb@juno.com/
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/ul15rhb@juno.com.12.10.2001/
Ralph Burlingame
Original Firestar
17 years flying it
>
> i'm new to the list, so forgive me if i do not get this just right.
> i just
> bought a one-owner 95 kold firestar in mint condition w 90 hrs. 503,
> single
> card. i am a ga pilot and have had two ul in the past. two
> questions..1.. has
> anyone enclosed an older firestar before with lexan? at least back
> to the
> bulk-head, right before the 5 gal. tank? 2. has anyone every
> placed a small
> extra tank right behind the seat, i.e., a 3 gal tank? would this
> change the cg to
> do so, or is that right on the mark?
>
> alan
>
>
>
=
>
=
>
=
> ==============================================================
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: BRS Canister Repack |
> While I appreciate your willingness to respond, I was hoping to hear from
> someone with experience, not just opinions and philosophy.
> In other words, do any of you know of a canister that has been fired after
> 6, 8, or 10 years? Jimmy
Hi Jim:
I do speak from experience. Not necessarily BRS. I did not have the luxury
of a balistic system. Mine was hand deployed.
There have been several very old systems fired, not necessarily in an actual
emergency situation and save.
My recommendation remains. If you plan on using your outdated BRS Recovery
System, comply with BRS instructions for inspection and repack. There are
more considerations to a balistic recovery system than whether the rocket
will fire or not.
Even though it is an expensive system, it is still cheap insurance when the
need arises.
Take care,
john h
PS: Ask Dennis Souder about parachutes. He used an old Jim Handbury Hand
Deployed Parachute. When the time comes, if it comes, you will not hesitate
to shell out all that money. By then, it is too late. :-)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Thom Riddle" <jtriddle(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: enclosure question |
The early, single seat, 377 powered FS I fly has permanent enclosure back to rear
of seat and a clear vinyl, Velcro attached removable enclosure from there back
to the bulkhead in front of the main 5 gal tank. No heat but there is no air
leaks either. It also has a 5 gal. Jerry can shaped aux. tank behind the sling
seat with an electric aux.. pump for transferring its fuel into main tank,
from which the engine gets it nutrition.
Thom in Buffalo
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "bryan green" <lgreen1(at)sc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: enclosure question |
Hi Alan I am reworking my original Firestar adding an enclosure and a 10 gal
tank among other things. Although I am fabricating my enclosure from photos
the nice folks at TNK has an enclosure kit for a reasonable cost.
If you want I have photos of a lot of the guys enclosures if ya need to
see some.
Bryan Green Elgin SC
Firestar I 19LBG 377 BRS
----- Original Message -----
From: <ZackGSD(at)aol.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: enclosure question
>
> i'm new to the list, so forgive me if i do not get this just right. i
just
> bought a one-owner 95 kold firestar in mint condition w 90 hrs. 503,
single
> card. i am a ga pilot and have had two ul in the past. two
questions..1.. has
> anyone enclosed an older firestar before with lexan? at least back to the
> bulk-head, right before the 5 gal. tank? 2. has anyone every placed a
small
> extra tank right behind the seat, i.e., a 3 gal tank? would this change
the cg to
> do so, or is that right on the mark?
>
> alan
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "bryan green" <lgreen1(at)sc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: BRS Canister Repack |
If I was not going to repack I would throw it away and save weight. Fly safe
and have fun.
Bryan Green Elgin SC
Firestar I 19LBG 377 BRS
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jimmy @ Jo Ann Hill" <hillstw(at)jhill.biz>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: BRS Canister Repack
>
> While I appreciate your willingness to respond, I was hoping to hear from
> someone with experience, not just opinions and philosophy.
> In other words, do any of you know of a canister that has been fired after
> 6, 8, or 10 years?
>
> Thanks.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com>
> To:
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: BRS Canister Repack
>
>
> >
> > > Having just bought a Firestar with a 9 year old BRS Canister, I am
> > wondering how absolutely necessary it is to have a pricey repack job
> done??
> > > Any experience out there on this?
> > > Thanks.
> > > Jimmy
> >
> > Hi Jim/All:
> >
> > What kind of price do you put on your butt?
> >
> > What is the reason for carrying all that extra weight in the first
place?
> >
> > Recommend following instructions published by BRS if you intend to rely
on
> > the BRS to save you, should you need it.
> >
> > john h
> >
> > PS: Survivor of to catastrophic failures in flight. Reason for
failures
> is
> > not important at that moment. Reliability of recovery system is.
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Clay Stuart" <tcstuart(at)adelphia.net> |
Uncle Craig and Kolb drivers,
How is the engine cowling testing going? I don't believe you have a BRS, do
you? Would there be room in front of the intake for the parachute?
Hasn't someone mounted the BRS underneath to fire downward? Any reason not
to have this configuration?
Clay Stuart
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dale Sellers" <dsel1(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Fuel tank outlets |
Kolbers,
I have an Ultra Star I rebuilt (see photoshare) I used a 5 gal plastic gas can
for a tank instead of the original two plastic tanks that fit under your knees.
I placed the tank high above the engine, very close to the center of gravity.
For a fuel outlet and an outlet at the top of the tank for a clear tube gage, I
used the rubber grommets that push in a whole and the fittings push into them
which holds the whole arrangement in the tank. LEAF sells them and others I'm
sure. I had trouble with them leaking, not bad but alittle seapage. I tried
taking them out and putting some aviation permatex on it before putting it back
in. It held for awhile then leaked again.
I solved the problem bu going to my auto parts store and buying Mag Wheel valve
stems, They are made of brass and chrome plated.
They go in the wheel from the inside and have a machined flange and a neopreme
gasket that fits in the hole and under the flange. On the outside is a cupped
washer and a hex nut that tightens down squeezing the rubber gasket tight against
the hole in the wheel. I installed it in the hole in the bottom of my plastic
gas can by feeding a piece of safety wire through the filler neck and down
through the hole in the botton, then slid the valve stem down the wire. It
went straight into the hole.
Oh yes, I removed the valve core and drilled the inside of the valve stem out to
3/16" before installing it.
It works great, just slip your 1/4" fuel line over the stem and clamp. It is very
sturdy and I don't worry about it coming out. I've had no more leaking.
It will work on any tank, plastic or metal. And if you need to remove the tank
with fuel in it, remove the clamp, slide the hose off and install a valve cap.
Good idea I thought. Dale Sellers
Georgia Ultra Star.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | BRS Mounting and Deployment |
> Hasn't someone mounted the BRS underneath to fire downward? Any reason
not
> to have this configuration?
>
> Clay Stuart
Clay/All:
Probably a better question would be, "Has anyone ever tested a BRS mounted
to fire downward?"
Any reason not to have this configuration? I don't know.
No one knows what attitude the aircraft will be in when the system is
deployed. No one can predict what the aircraft is going to be doing when
the pilot pulls the "red handle". It could be flying straight and level, it
could be tumbling, it could be spinning, rolling, completely out of control.
I can tell you, from going through actual in flight failures and parachute
deployments, things to keep in mind, things to practice prior to the event,
so one does not have to think about them prior to making a decision. When
the time comes, there may not be time to dilly dally around. Every fraction
of a second saved could me whether you live or die. Period!!!
The two times I used a hand deployed parachute recovery system, the aircraft
was flying straight and level the first time, and the aircraft was in an
uncontrolled vertical dive on the second deployment. Much easier to perform
under these conditions, rather than in a tumbling or spinning attitude.
Airspeed is actually your friend should you have to deploy the system at low
level.
Engine should be shut down, or at least pulled back to idle power. Don't
want to get the parachute bridal into the prop, especially prior to
deployment. In this case a Warp Drive solid carbon fiber prop with a steel
leading edge would be worse case because of the possible ability of the prop
to cut or fowl the parachute.
Deployment handle should be in a location that is easy to find without
looking for it. Better yet to be able to get to it with either hand, in
case one hand is injured, etc. Best located for the most natural pull of
the handle.
Practice in the cockpit finding the red handle, while going through your
procedure for deployment, which should include shutting down engine, if you
can get to the switch, or at least closing throttle.
Have faith and confidence that the recovery system will work.
Do not hesitate to pull that handle, once you have determined that you are
not longer in control of the aircraft.
Do not forget that you have a recovery system on board.
Forget about tearing up your airplane, even though this will probably go
through your mind if that time comes.
If I have forgotten something, let me know. I probably have.
My parachute is mounted in the center section over my head (center of the
center section), to fire upward. It is a BRS 1050 softpack, completely
weather sealed under a frangible haircell plastic sheet riveted to the
center section and sealed with silicone seal. By getting the parachute
inside, I extend the repack time from two years to 6 years. I think the
rocket is a 10 year item. Will check with BRS when the time comes to do the
first repack.
What is the wings fail upward on Miss P'fer? Guess I am SOL, hehehe.
Seriously, I think that would be the last two things to fail on my airplane.
There was a failure of a wire braced UL at Disney World that resulted in a
fatality because the parachute fowled in the wings and wires. I can tell
you that on both my experiences, the left wing ended up on top of the right
wing, because I automatically failed the left lift strut when I threw the
parachute deployment bag out. I don't think the wing folded over on the
last accident until I went down through the trees though. I have a video of
the entire flight until the aircraft disappears in the trees. I believe
both wings are sticking straight out.
Anyhow, recovery systems are a good subject. Shoving it under the table or
back in the closet will not take the necessity for a recovery system away,
no matter how strong your airplane is. May never need it, but when you do,
there is no more comforting feeling knowing you were smart enough to spend
the bucks to get one, install, and train to use.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary r. voigt" <johndeereantique(at)qwest.net> |
| Subject: | Re: BRS Canister Repack |
Yes, i bought my kit from someone that had started a build and then had
health problems.....it is a 1991 kxp model and model 4 BRS sat in the box
for 10 years and since i only live about 35 minutes away from BRS i decided
to take it down and ask them what i should do
(loaded question that i will never question) of course they recommended that
i get an update to a BRS 5 and a repack to the tune of 1269.00...yep!!! and
i paid it and have felt very good about the decision ever since...i know
it's gonna go if i ever need to pull!!! and to answer your
question....yes...they did test mine and it took off like a rocket....and
that goes with out saying....yours may or may not work, please don't take
the chance...i want to see you around awhile flying that nice kolb.
thanks,
Gary r. voigt
KXP 447
----- Original Message -----
From: "bryan green" <lgreen1(at)sc.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: BRS Canister Repack
>
> If I was not going to repack I would throw it away and save weight. Fly
safe
> and have fun.
> Bryan Green Elgin SC
> Firestar I 19LBG 377 BRS
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jimmy @ Jo Ann Hill" <hillstw(at)jhill.biz>
> To:
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: BRS Canister Repack
>
>
> >
> > While I appreciate your willingness to respond, I was hoping to hear
from
> > someone with experience, not just opinions and philosophy.
> > In other words, do any of you know of a canister that has been fired
after
> > 6, 8, or 10 years?
> >
> > Thanks.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com>
> > To:
> > Subject: Re: Kolb-List: BRS Canister Repack
> >
> >
> > >
> > > > Having just bought a Firestar with a 9 year old BRS Canister, I am
> > > wondering how absolutely necessary it is to have a pricey repack job
> > done??
> > > > Any experience out there on this?
> > > > Thanks.
> > > > Jimmy
> > >
> > > Hi Jim/All:
> > >
> > > What kind of price do you put on your butt?
> > >
> > > What is the reason for carrying all that extra weight in the first
> place?
> > >
> > > Recommend following instructions published by BRS if you intend to
rely
> on
> > > the BRS to save you, should you need it.
> > >
> > > john h
> > >
> > > PS: Survivor of to catastrophic failures in flight. Reason for
> failures
> > is
> > > not important at that moment. Reliability of recovery system is.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
In a message dated 2/7/04 11:46:12 AM Eastern Standard Time,
tophera(at)centurytel.net writes:
> Of course
> it could backfire and my plane might suck!
>
> Topher
>
Topher!!! ....you are a real trip!!
I MUST admit your dialog was very difficult for ME to follow, because I
don't even know what is meant by the most important word in your
dialog....wing "efficiency" If I had that explanation, I may have followed it better.
Please don't HATE me....just tryin to understand....
George Randolph
firestar driver...harumph....don't I wish.....with me in the villages and my
plane in Ohio
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fabric attachment |
In a message dated 2/7/04 9:21:55 PM Eastern Standard Time,
a1929gassmann(at)earthlink.net writes:
> a1929gassmann(at)earthlink.net>
>
> This was mentioned many moons ago, using the HIPEC system:
>
> No stitching or rivets..read more:
>
> http://www.sirius-aviation.com/hipec.html
>
> Andy
>
Andy....I went there and if I'm not mistaken it sounded like hipec is a gluey
substance that does not require riveting or stitching to achieve the same
strength!! Is this what Wittman used??...or misused? er....sumpin??
George Randolph
Firestar driver
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rwpike(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel tank outlets |
Dale, that is exactly what I am using as an oil outlet on my oil injection
tank. (Great minds think alike, eh?) Unfortunately, I had a piston seizure
when the outlet got blocked by a spider web, go figure. That is probably
something you won't have to worry about, but if you want a fuel strainer in
the tank to fit over your outlet, go to a store that sells kitchen goodies,
and get a tea strainer, cost you about a buck. They are a fine stainless
mesh ball about as big as a golf ball and they open up into two halves.
Poke a hole in one half and stick your fitting through, then put the rubber
gasket back on, close the strainer up and replace it in the tank, and no
Evil Leaves, Grass Stems, Bugs, Boogers, etc will ever block your outlet.
Since my filler opening was too small for the strainer ball to fit through,
I had to take the mesh off the circular frame and sew it into a sort of
filter sock with some fine wire, and then it fit ok, you may not need to do
that.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>Kolbers,
>I have an Ultra Star I rebuilt (see photoshare) I used a 5 gal plastic gas
>can for a tank instead of the original two plastic tanks that fit under
>your knees. I placed the tank high above the engine, very close to the
>center of gravity.
>For a fuel outlet and an outlet at the top of the tank for a clear tube
>gage, I used the rubber grommets that push in a whole and the fittings
>push into them which holds the whole arrangement in the tank. LEAF sells
>them and others I'm sure. I had trouble with them leaking, not bad but
>alittle seapage. I tried taking them out and putting some aviation
>permatex on it before putting it back in. It held for awhile then leaked
>again.
>I solved the problem bu going to my auto parts store and buying Mag Wheel
>valve stems, They are made of brass and chrome plated.
>They go in the wheel from the inside and have a machined flange and a
>neopreme gasket that fits in the hole and under the flange. On the
>outside is a cupped washer and a hex nut that tightens down squeezing the
>rubber gasket tight against the hole in the wheel. I installed it in the
>hole in the bottom of my plastic gas can by feeding a piece of safety wire
>through the filler neck and down through the hole in the botton, then slid
>the valve stem down the wire. It went straight into the hole.
>Oh yes, I removed the valve core and drilled the inside of the valve stem
>out to 3/16" before installing it.
>It works great, just slip your 1/4" fuel line over the stem and clamp. It
>is very sturdy and I don't worry about it coming out. I've had no more
>leaking. It will work on any tank, plastic or metal. And if you need to
>remove the tank with fuel in it, remove the clamp, slide the hose off and
>install a valve cap.
>
>Good idea I thought. Dale Sellers
>Georgia Ultra Star.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rwpike(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fabric attachment |
No. Steve Whitman was from the old school that used regular thinned
aircraft dope soaked through cotton fabric or linen to attach the fabric to
a plywood substrate. What you did was apply several coats of nitrate dope
to the plywood, lay the cotton covering over it, shrink it, and then brush
the thinner into the surface until the dope came up through the fabric. The
problem is that Dacron does not have all the little fuzzy micro fibers that
cotton or linen does, Dacron has to be encapsulated by the glue, or it is
not properly attached. Trying to attach Stits to plywood just by painting
Polybrush onto the plywood and then soaking the Polybrush up through the
fabric by using thinner (which is apparently what he did) won't get it, you
end up with a partial adhesion that is mostly just on one side of the
fabric. He should have used Polytac instead, applied directly to the
plywood to attach it properly.
No matter how much you know, you don't know it all; read the directions on
the can, or call Jim & Dondi.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>Andy....I went there and if I'm not mistaken it sounded like hipec is a gluey
>substance that does not require riveting or stitching to achieve the same
>strength!! Is this what Wittman used??...or misused? er....sumpin??
>
>George Randolph
>Firestar driver
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <tophera(at)centurytel.net> |
Stiffer wings are subjected to higher loads when they are hit by gusts, or
sudden pilot inputs. The flexible wings tend to give and don't get subject
to the high short duration spike in load that a stiff wing does. Think of
jumping on a trampoline versus a concrete floor. One is much harder on the
knees.
Flexwings, like most trikes and ladder construction sailcloth covered
ultralights are designed to have the fabric held in place by the pressure of
the wind. The battens just hold it in rough shape and keep it from flapping
so much. The wind actually holds it in position. A ridged wing like a kolb
holds the fabric in the shape using ribs or other structure.
Neither is stronger, or stiffer just because of it type. You could have a
bomb proof flex wing and a real week ridged wing. Some wings are stiff
spanwise but flexible chordwise. Underload these don't just bend but twist,
reducing AOA and relieving load by reducing lift as they twist. Most swept
wings do this.
Not a structures guy so a little out of my knowledge area.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | [ Mike Pierzina ] : New Email List Photo Share Available! |
| From: | Email List Photo Shares <pictures(at)matronics.com> |
A new Email List Photo Share is available:
Poster: Mike Pierzina
Subject: Vent/overflow
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/planecrazzzy@lycos.com.02.08.2004/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: | Re: enclosure question |
In a message dated 2/8/2004 4:45:16 PM Central Standard Time,
jtriddle(at)adelphia.net writes:
>
> The early, single seat, 377 powered FS I fly has permanent enclosure back to
> rear of seat and a clear vinyl, Velcro attached removable enclosure from
> there back to the bulkhead in front of the main 5 gal tank. No heat but there
is
> no air leaks either. It also has a 5 gal. Jerry can shaped aux. tank behind
> the sling seat with an electric aux.. pump for transferring its fuel into
> main tank, from which the engine gets it nutrition.
>
> Thom in Buffalo
Thanks, Thom. Any photos by any chance? So, no problems with the CG putting
in the extra 5 gal behind the seat then. Sounds great.
Alan
N. Richland Hills, TX
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: enclosure question |
In a message dated 2/8/2004 2:46:09 PM Central Standard Time,
ul15rhb(at)juno.com writes:
> Subj: Re: Kolb-List: enclosure question
> Date: 2/8/2004 2:46:09 PM Central Standard Time
> From: ul15rhb(at)juno.com
> Reply-to: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent from the Internet
>
>
>
>
> Alan,
>
> I don't have full enclosure, but a long partial one. I also carry two 3
> gallon tanks behind the seat on a small bench that I built that go over
> the control cables. I have been carrying these tanks for years and it
> does not affect the flight performance that much. Yes, the Firestar is
> nose heavy and I have to hold back stick a little, but it's not a
> problem.
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/ul15rhb@juno.com/
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/ul15rhb@juno.com.12.10.2001/
>
>
> Ralph Burlingame
> Original Firestar
> 17 years flying it
Thanks, Ralph. Any photo's per chance. Alan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <tophera(at)centurytel.net> |
I MUST admit your dialog was very difficult for ME to follow, because I
don't even know what is meant by the most important word in your
dialog....wing "efficiency" If I had that explanation, I may have followed
it better.
wing efficiency is lift to drag ratio. A sailplane is very efficient at
making lift with a L/D of over 40. you can lift 40 pounds with one only
pound of thrust to overcome drag. Kolbs have L/D somewhere between 6 to 10
depending on airspeed. They tend to be optimized for lower speed flight,
having a better lift to drag at lower speed then at the high end. They tend
to hit a brick wall at some airspeed.
The changes I made should shift the plane very slightly to higher speed. If
I wanted to shift it even more I would tilt the tail boom down from its High
angle, change to a lower lift airfoil, and lower the wing incidence even
more. But I do want a very short field capable plane, so I only changed it
a bit.
If something I say isn't clear, don't worry about it because not much of
what I say is worth trying to figuring out anyway!
topher
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | possums <possums(at)mindspring.com> (by way of Matt Dralle <nospam(at)matronics.com>) |
Dralle )
>
>
>Wish I had had those aluminum angles on my old Firestar. :-)
>
>Take care,
>
>john h
So did Aubrey Radford.
I go them on mine - at least the front ones.
10668113.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Airgriff2(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: BRS Canister Repack |
>
> >>
>> >> I am
>> > wondering how absolutely necessary it is to have a pricey repack
>> job
>> done??
>>
>
>
> >> While I appreciate your willingness to respond, I was hoping to hear from
>> someone with experience, not just opinions and philosophy.
>>
> Jimmy, it is not "absolutely necessary" to do anything to your reserve
system, but if you want to follow imput from someone with experience I would follow
the published BRS recommendations on service and maintenance. I would guess
that they have the most experience with the product. I,m sure that someone
on "the list" knows of a pilot who has deployed a system that old without ever
having done a repack but I don't think they are going to recommend to anyone
to do the same.
Over my years of flying experience, which includes, hang gliding, powered
parachutes, Cessnas, Cubs, and Kolbs, the most important thing I have ever
learned is this: I have control over the amount of risk that I expose myself to
in many situations. Doing required maintenance on equipment would fall into
that catagory.
Fly Safe
Bob Griffin
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: enclosure question |
DAng..I like that tank....where can I get one just like it?
Don Gherardini
Sales / Engineering dept.
American Honda Engines
Power Equipment Company
CortLand, Illinois
800-626-7326
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "bryan green" <lgreen1(at)sc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | 10 gal fuel tank |
Sorry to cause all the confusion. Don and I were talking about the tank I bought
for my plane and did not change the subject line. The dimensions are 18" tall
to top of cap x 14" deep x 12" wide. With a little work it will fit where the
old one does. If you want the pics contact me off list. I got it from
John Davis ( Carolina Sport Flying ) E-mail patches11us(at)yahoo.com Phone 803-484-4958
Bryan Green Elgin SC
Firestar I 19LBG 377 BRS
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Swiderski" <swiderski(at)rocketjet.net> |
| Subject: | BRS Canister Repack |
Jimmy,
FWIW, I talked with a guy who tested the rockets (that we use
for parachutes) for the military. He told me He never tested one that
didn't fire, even those that had been years past their rec shelf life.
Mildew &/or deterioration of the chute fabric is probably the biggest
worry. If your can have a rigger repack it, it would seem reasonable to
extend a factory repack by a lot. ....Richard Swiderski
> In other words, do any of you know of a canister that has been fired
after
> 6, 8, or 10 years? Jimmy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Swiderski" <swiderski(at)rocketjet.net> |
"garvelink"
I flew an UltraStar hard & fast & sometimes heavy for about
350hrs. No aerobatics, if you don't count wingovers. Twice I went
through some violent wing flutter (before I got rid of the control
linkage slop & pin attatchment slop & inboard spar flex). It remained a
faithful & dependable friend. The only structural failures that I know
of were from impacting mother earth with not enough finesse. ...Richard
Swiderski
Don,
What about the Ultrastar? do you know if there have been any structural
failures?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: BRS Canister Repack |
>FWIW, I talked with a guy who tested the rockets (that we use
> for parachutes) for the military. He told me He never tested one that
> didn't fire, even those that had been years past their rec shelf life.
> Mildew &/or deterioration of the chute fabric is probably the biggest
> worry. If your can have a rigger repack it, it would seem reasonable to
> extend a factory repack by a lot. ....Richard Swiderski
Richard/Gang:
That sounds great.
How long can I extend the repack on my BRS?
john h
PS: Of course, you are volunteering to be the test dummy for these extended
inspection and repack times???
PSS: We need to be very careful giving advice to folks based on speculation
that might mean the difference of life or death. There are a lot of very
serious aspects to our sport of building and flying Kolb aircraft. Let's
have fun, but be careful. None of us are immune to gravity, or exempt from
"Murphy". If I was going to give someone advice on whether they should
extend the inspection and repack cycle of their BRS Balistic Recovery
System, it would be to follow the directives. If there are any questions,
direct them to the professionals at BRS.
PSSS: What does the Navy use the BRS rocket for?
________________________________________________________________________________
Garvelink...Pard..I know nuttin bout an ultrastar...only seen a couple in my
life....
And I oughtta say this...the only wing failures I have ever heard of on a
kolb have been since I have joined this list...and have been exposed to the
huge amount of Kolb experience here....and so far..for all those who have
missed the posts,,,. Neither fellas who busted their Kolbs...Blamed it on
the airplane. And they are still flyin Kolbs!
Just thought that oughtta be said!
Just so some a ya's dont get the wrong idea...AS I have said it
before....This FireFly I built last winter is my first Kolb....and the first
time I ever even got a ride in one..was the day after OshKosh last year.
Thanks to a gracious member here..I never really paid them much attention in
all mthe years past...thought they were too small in the cockpit...looked
funny..I dunno...They just never tripped my trigger as a bird I thought I
would like...I bought a Kit and built it because I could see they built
easy..and I got a good price on a Kit someone had barely started....The Love
affair started after I flew it.....
Don Gherardini
FireFly 098
http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: : Kolb-List:Aileron Flutter and Counter Balance Weights |
> John,
> What action should be taken on the US with the onset of aileron flutter?
I
> have 7 hours on mine and I haven't had any that I know of.
>
> Dale Sellers
Hi Dale/Gang:
Shut your eyes and scream!!!
Seriously, if you get into flutter, chop the power, try and grab the stick
and get the nose up to bleed off airspeed.
High airspeed is usually present when flutter occurs, but not always.
On my Ultrastar, flutter came on, usually, very, very slowly. Sort of a
slight shuffle in the slack in the aileron control system. If not noticed,
or ignored, it can get ugly.
Some Kolbs never experience aileron flutter. The old Kolb Factory MK III
was put in and out of all kinds of attitudes, in smooth and rough air, and
air speeds. Never know of it even thinking about flutter. A point to
consider is, Old Kold used very little dope and paint on their airplanes
they took to S&F and OSH. The heavier the aileron, the more out of balance
it is, and the more supcetible to flutter.
The thing to do is install a set of aileron counter balance weights on your
ailerons and forget about flutter from now on, no matter how sloppy your
aileron controls and hardware get.
They are simple to install after the aircraft is covered and painted. In
fact, that is the way I prefer to do mine. Finish the wing through paint,
then install. I don't do any prep prior to that, like cutting out the
fabric from the end of the leading edge of the aileron tube.
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: : Kolb-List:Aileron Flutter and Counter Balance Weights |
> Seriously, if you get into flutter, chop the power, try and grab the
stick
> and get the nose up to bleed off airspeed.
Hi Ya'll:
Something I forgot.
You should also try to put pressure either left or right stick. If the
ailerons get loaded, they'll stop fluttering. That is used in conjunction
with chopping throttle, getting nose up, bleeding off airspeed.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DAquaNut(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Firefly Weight and Balance |
List,
I think I almost have my plane finnished. I really wish I had someone In the
Houston area to scrutinize my building, that has built a Kolb themselves. Any
takers?
Are there any Firefly builder/owners that built per plans that had to
alter anything or add weight anywhere to get there Firefly to fall into the
correct limits. Seems I heard someone say a w/b is not necessary if I followed
the
plans exactly. I did. Should I worry about it? I still need to break in the
engine. Any thing I need to watch out for other than making sure I have the
tail secure..
Ed ( In Houston)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Denny Rowe" <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Firefly Weight and Balance |
>
>
> List,
> I think I almost have my plane finnished. I really wish I had someone In
the
> Houston area to scrutinize my building, that has built a Kolb themselves.
Any
> takers?
> Are there any Firefly builder/owners that built per plans that had to
> alter anything or add weight anywhere to get there Firefly to fall into
the
> correct limits. Seems I heard someone say a w/b is not necessary if I
followed the
> plans exactly. I did. Should I worry about it? I still need to break in
the
> engine. Any thing I need to watch out for other than making sure I have
the
> tail secure..
>
> Ed ( In Houston)
>
> Ed,
Congratulations on completion of your bird!
Definitly do the W&B, its not hard and if you use blocks to keep things
level you can do it with one decent bathroom scale, just move it around to
all three points and shuffle blocks where you need em to keep the bird in
the needed attitude.
Definitly tie the tail off well, and I suggest having a spotter stand in
front of the plane during engine tests who can see if the neighbors dog is
headed toward the prop. When sitting in a pusher, you can't keep an eye on
the prop arc area.
Keep us posted, can't wait to hear the flight reports.
Dennis Rowe, Mk-3, PA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "ronnie wehba" <rwehba(at)wtxs.net> |
what did you do about the slop in the linkage, as mine has some not much but
some?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Swiderski" <swiderski(at)rocketjet.net>
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: mod weight
>
>
> "garvelink"
>
> I flew an UltraStar hard & fast & sometimes heavy for about
> 350hrs. No aerobatics, if you don't count wingovers. Twice I went
> through some violent wing flutter (before I got rid of the control
> linkage slop & pin attatchment slop & inboard spar flex). It remained a
> faithful & dependable friend. The only structural failures that I know
> of were from impacting mother earth with not enough finesse. ...Richard
> Swiderski
>
> Don,
>
> What about the Ultrastar? do you know if there have been any structural
> failures?
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | modification, deviation, who do you trust anymore? |
| From: | Jim Gerken <gerken(at)us.ibm.com> |
02/10/2004 10:27:46 AM
(from john h)...
>PS: Of course, you are volunteering to be the test dummy for these
extended
>inspection and repack times???
>PSS: We need to be very careful giving advice to folks based on
speculation
>that might mean the difference of life or death. There are a lot of very
>serious aspects to our sport of building and flying Kolb aircraft. Let's
>have fun, but be careful. None of us are immune to gravity, or exempt
from
>"Murphy". If I was going to give someone advice on whether they should
>extend the inspection and repack cycle of their BRS Balistic Recovery
>System, it would be to follow the directives.
John and gang,
To me, chute maintenance schedule deviation seems a LOT like structural
modifications which deviate from Kolb's plans. We freely share our ideas
for modifying the Kolbs, but aren't we worried about the day one of the
wings modified by our recommendations comes apart? Just a wild guess on my
part but, to me, Richard's observations of the dependability of rockets was
less likely to cause harm than encouraging others to drill holes in
critical wing rib components and add weight in an unproven manner. John's
own good luck and hours of experience cannot alone be taken as proof of the
concept, as I understood Topher and then Dennis to add a couple days ago.
Another way of thinking about it is that John's experience may only
indicate that Homer's wing was strong enough in its original design to
survive even the modifications. John, I am not trying to pick on you, but
I am questioning the logic of drawing a line at the parachute maintenance
schedule mods, while encouraging structure mods. What about the guys that
do the structural mods but don't buy a parachute?
I agree with John on this part: be careful guys. Careful flying, careful
reading, careful building/modifying. A lot of what you read here is
opinion, not necessarily fact. Including this note.
Jim
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack & Louise Hart <jbhart(at)ldd.net> |
| Subject: | FireFly Engine Break In Experience. |
>
................
>plans exactly. I did. Should I worry about it? I still need to break in the
>engine. Any thing I need to watch out for other than making sure I have the
>tail secure..
>
Ed,
I tied my FireFly to a post and broke the engine in with the FireFly facing a two
car garage. See:
http://www.thirdshift.com/jack/firefly/firefly07.html
The garage doors were closed, and so when I ran the engine the air had to
come in sideways to the front of the garage and turn and flow back through
the propeller. I thought I had everything under control and things went
quite well until the engine rpms had to be increased and I realized that I
had to put more pitch into the prop. After re pitching the prop I decided I
was thirsty and I drank most of a soda. I placed the soda can upright on
edge of the concrete even with the right wing tip and back at the tail. I
started the engine got back in the seat and started the breaking in process
again. Finally getting to the higher rpms, I saw something flash by my
head. After I got done with the breaking in process, I discovered my soda
pop can was gone. I found it spit open and down the hill behind the fence.
I put the first nick in a zero time prop. I couldn't believe the flow
pattern could pick up the can, so I put another empty one out in the same
position. I stood by the cockpit so I could watch it, slowly advanced the
throttle and sure enough, there was enough back flow to tip the soda can
over, and then it began to roll toward the front to of the FireFly on the
cement surface.
I should have not put light on the ground, and I should have faced FireFly
away from a closed wall.
Still snow bound.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Jackson, MO
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart(at)ldd.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerb <ulflyer(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Firefly Weight and Balance |
Ed,
What kind of prop you running?
If an Ivo you may have to increase pitch during the break-in run. Also you
may find that you will have some temps issues - and need to richen the
mixture during the run to reduce temps. Make sure you have you tank full
and have some more on hand ready to go. It will burn most of the fuel. I
can't recall if we had to refuel during the run. Last do it in an area
that will not drive the locals crazy - listening to the scream of the Rotax
at high RPM will get to people in not to long. Have your break in run on a
paper for each RPM step and in between reduced power steps. Check them off
as you complete each of them. It like 70 minutes of run time. I suggest
some ear plugs for you and your helper.
jerb
>
>
> >
> >
> > List,
> > I think I almost have my plane finnished. I really wish I had someone In
>the
> > Houston area to scrutinize my building, that has built a Kolb themselves.
>Any
> > takers?
> > Are there any Firefly builder/owners that built per plans that had to
> > alter anything or add weight anywhere to get there Firefly to fall into
>the
> > correct limits. Seems I heard someone say a w/b is not necessary if I
>followed the
> > plans exactly. I did. Should I worry about it? I still need to break in
>the
> > engine. Any thing I need to watch out for other than making sure I have
>the
> > tail secure..
> >
> > Ed ( In Houston)
> >
> > Ed,
>Congratulations on completion of your bird!
>Definitly do the W&B, its not hard and if you use blocks to keep things
>level you can do it with one decent bathroom scale, just move it around to
>all three points and shuffle blocks where you need em to keep the bird in
>the needed attitude.
>Definitly tie the tail off well, and I suggest having a spotter stand in
>front of the plane during engine tests who can see if the neighbors dog is
>headed toward the prop. When sitting in a pusher, you can't keep an eye on
>the prop arc area.
>Keep us posted, can't wait to hear the flight reports.
>
>Dennis Rowe, Mk-3, PA
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <tophera(at)centurytel.net> |
Most of BRS chutes are pressure packed using a hydraulic ram. Normal
parachute riggers can't re-rig them. The non-High Density softpacks can be
rerigged by any qualified rigger. BRS is erring on the conservative side
because a chute is a product that is worse then useless if it fails. They
got a lot of bad publicity when the units on the certified cirrus aircraft
didn't fire due to bad cable routing. If you want a chute that you can
count on when you need it you should do what they recommend. If you don't,
you should fly like you don't have a chute as a backup, cause you can't be
sure that it is going to work. If you fly even a tiny bit more riskily
because you feel you can always just use the chute, then you probably
shouldn't have it at all, but if you do you better have one that is as
reliable as it can possibly be.
Topher
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Most of BRS chutes are pressure packed using a hydraulic ram.
Normal
| parachute riggers can't re-rig them. The non-High Density softpacks
can be
| rerigged by any qualified rigger. | Topher
Topher/Gang:
The above is true. However, the BRS 1050 soft packs and larger
systems are also hydraulically pressure packed in order to get them a
little smaller in their pack trays. They have to be returned to BRS
for inspection and repack unless the qualified rigger has the
appropriate hydraulic press to do the job.
But, when you install the system inside the airframe out of the
weather the repack is extended from 2 to 6 years.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Clayton <jspc78(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Stitching the fabric, or riveting |
I changed the subject line to suit....
Richard/Don/All,
I have the same concerns about riveting, and have been
warned about stitching to a round rib. Do you, or
anyone else have comments on special techniques to
stitch the wings without puckering the fabric? If it
can be done successfully, I prefer stitching, mostly
because of all the holes, and partially because I
worked so hard to master the knots during the covering
class I took ;-)
-Jim
Jim Clayton
California
Mark-3X, Building
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf
Of Richard Pike
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Wing Mod Weights
Good point, riveting the fabric has to look a lot
better than putting a
knot on top of an already round rib. (Which is why I
tied my knots off to
one side of the rib - minimize the visual damage).
But the question is not appearance but rib
strength.(If you can tolerate
"Homer Bumps" on the trailing edges, rib stitch bumps
might seem less awful)
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
<donghe@one-eleven.net>
>
>brother Pike
>
>a post you made caused me to think of a time WAAAYYY
back,,,,back at Spartan
>when I was in the Airframe classes...
>
>
>snip<<<whole
>wing structure, yet SOP is to drill them full of
unnecessary 1/8" rivet
>holes all down their top & bottom surface to secure
the fabric, (when they
>could be just as easily rib stitched, and probably
with less weight) then
> >>>>snip
>
>I can vividly remember the day I pondered this same
question...not about a
>Kolb of course...but of the Idea of riveting fabric
to ribs...vs rib
>stitching.
>now...he may not have been right...but the instructor
went into a long
>speech about which is better...when you do..when you
dont...an so on...
>
>but basically here it is....a round top or tubing rib
should never be
>ribstitched ... to keep from "puckering" or
"dimpleing" the fabric...and
>when heat shrink type fabric is used...just about
never.
>
>A flat top or cap'ed rib should/may be
rib-stitched..
>
>Still....all them holes just cant help...I'lll betcha
if Homer didn't have
>to pay Dennis and John them danged high wages, he
probably could have
>afforded a big ole press with some nice rib forming
dies and we would have
>Kolbs with nice stamped ribs in em today!!!!
>(...grin....!)
>
>Don Gherardini
>FireFly 098
>http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: mod weight/Wonderful World of Kolbs. |
John, and gang
I think you said it well here pard....
snip>>Once I was in the seat and strapped in and flying, my Ultrastar
cockpit was
very similar to sitting in any aircraft I had every flown. I felt secure
and the the airplane was a part of me, and I was a part of it<< snip
While Im sitting here being all nostalgic and romantic...probably cause my
Fly is in the shed all toredown for some refitting..and I havent got to fly
it since xmas when I brought it home...I am considering all the years I have
been flying and all the types I have logged hours in...I got my PPL way back
in the 75..in a fleet C150 at Spartan School of Aero....where I logged time
in old cubs...an Apache and several different Beech 18's..got my
ag-application ticket and spent a whole summer puttin paraquat on beans in
Texas in a Grumman and a Cessna ag-plane....I even have a little over an
hour of dual instructed in a Lockheed F-5/P-38 lighting. ...From Weedhoppers
and Quicks...lots of other single engine Cessnas....to the P-38 I guess,
although I dont consider myself a particularly high-time Pilot.
I can easily say ..that NONE of the previously operated birds effected me
quite like this FireFly. None of them really made me feel like, as John put
it so accurately...""I felt secure and the the airplane was a part of me,
and I was a part of it"" Looking back...all the others were pretty well
..just a ride...even the Ultralites...although they can be easily considered
the most fun...
Those old Cubs...from Eagle Aviation in Tulsa....they were like riding a 10
speed stuck in high gear....always had to watch the attitude because of the
lack of power...The Beech 18's were more like driving a Roadgrader. After
you got them off the ground that is...taxiing was alot like rideing a hog on
a frozen pond. That P-38 was actually my second choice of the planes avail
from Eagle aviation, where I worked part time while I was in college. They
had a P-51 with a second seat that I wanted very badly to learn to fly..but
the operator Just said "No...not yet. ( I was about 21 and just then
working on my multi-rating at Spartan)..."you are not ready son" And he
suggested the Lockheed since I needed the time in a twin..and it was real
easy to handle.
I still remember it cost me 180.00 in 1976....about 3 weeks pay for a
college boy...and that was just for Fuel, as he didnt charge me for the
instructors fee and let me work that out on the ramp. So about a year
later..when I thought I was ready...they sold the mustang before I got to
get time in it...I still remember thinking...Jeez....Sold for 35
grand....who in the world would pay that much for that old
bird!......hehe...boy have things changed huh!
Still, it was more of a job flying the Lockheed than a pleasure.
OF all of them..Flying an empty Ag-cat back to the loading spot was probably
the closest...down low...fairly nimble...but still...not quite.
I described Flying the FireFly to my brother as like a "Dirt Bike" in its
response and manuverability, But alot less physical on an old man.. It just
does what ever you want it to...and it does not make you "pull G's" to do
it...."like Nothing I have ever flown" I said...and that is true....nothing.
It is obviously not the blinding speed....the power of zillions of
horses....That makes a Kolb such a joy...but as John says...It makes you
feel like its a part of you. That is just what it does..I dont know how...
.
I have spent this much of you fellas time with this dissertation because I
am afraid that some of you who have not yet completed your Kolb...or are
considering building one and lurking here...Might get the wrong Idea that
because of all the "Modifying " we have been discussing lately...that those
Kolbs must be no good....or that some of us might not be happy with the
product.
This is surely not the case..but the "condition" of a Home-Builder...trying
to make something better...piddleing with it....fooling around..
If you ever look at that cartoon in the back of KitPlanes every month..it is
alway a sarcasm of this condition....that is what alot of homebuilders
do....mostly because a fella who will take on the task of building his own
airplane is just a fella who wants to build something. A hands-on guy...it
is more of an affliction than an attribute. The Best thing this kind of
Homebuilder can have is another Airplane to build as soon as he gets one
done...That way he wont be so tempted to mess around with a perfectly good
flyable aircraft!!!...( I fit into this category I'm afraid)
SO all of you fellas who are building....get with it...Time is
awasting...spring will be here soon, and you really NEED to Fly the Kolb you
are building...cause you are gonna LUV it!
Don Gherardini
FireFly 098
http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Stitching the fabric, or riveting |
| Richard/Don/All,
|
| I have the same concerns about riveting, and have been
| warned about stitching to a round rib. | -Jim
Jim C/All:
What are your concerns about fabric riveting in Kolb ribs?
I know of more rib stich failures on Kolb wings than I do of a rib
failure because it had a hole drilled in it. The holes are not
drilled where the rib is most likely to fail anyhow.
Think about this for a minute. The entire aircraft is loaded with
thousands of holes, but they are all filled up by rivets.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: mod weight/Wonderful World of Kolbs. |
| I have spent this much of you fellas time with this dissertation
because I
| am afraid that some of you who have not yet completed your Kolb...or
are
| considering building one and lurking here...Might get the wrong Idea
that
| because of all the "Modifying " we have been discussing
lately...that those
| Kolbs must be no good....or that some of us might not be happy with
the
| product.
|| Don Gherardini
Don/All:
Good post. I enjoyed and understand it completely.
If I did not have faith in and confidence of the airplanes I build, I
would never have spent the last 20 years build and flying them.
I have made changes to get the airplanes to suit me, fit me, perform
for me, over all those years. Not because they were of weak design or
flew poorly for "normal" folks. I build them to suit me, perform
reliably for my purposes and no one else's.
BTW: I have only built and flown Kolb airplanes. I do not build weak
airplanes. I may make some parts that wear out, i.e., failed gear
leg/axle socket, Muncho Lake, BC, 1 July 2000, because of many, many
landings over a very long period of air time. But I have never had
any others fail and not perform to the desired design specs that Bro
Jim and I came up with.
In addition, most all the mods done to my MK III were approved by
Homer Kolb. He cares about my safety. :-)
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gherkins Tim-rp3420 <rp3420(at)motorola.com> |
| Subject: | Rotax 503 throttle question |
503 owners,
I'm about to weld an adjustable throttle stop on my cage at the throttle stick
area. For a quick reference, what is the travel of the stick from idle to full
throttle on a Rotax 503 dcdi?
Tim
w/ Firestar II
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Hauck" <jimh474(at)earthlink.net> |
Y'all;
If you weld a throttle stop on the cage, I would make it adjustable as the length
of the throttle cables will stretch over a period of time.
Just a thought!
Jim Hauck
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Swiderski" <swiderski(at)rocketjet.net> |
| Subject: | BRS Canister Repack |
Hey John,
If you read my post below more closely you'll notice that I
didn't give advice. I did repeat 1st hand info & give my opinion. A lot
of wise responses were given to this post, most of which I agree with.
However, economics is a factor to be included in any decision of safety.
At what price are we willing to pay or shall we say can we afford to
stack the deck in our favor. There is no absolute guarantee of safety,
therefore some degree of sanity must be applied at some point. One's
degree of safety is therefore related to one's financial resources, not
to mention one's fear of death, and of course, one's comfort zone of
risk taking. Some would think it unreasonable to fly at all. In the
end, our safety is both arbitrary and based on a logical assessment of
risk. My opinion is that if a chute can be professionally repacked &
the rocket is five years past its recommended shelf life, I would feel
responsible in using it. I believe it is a defendable opinion,
certainly it is not an infallible truth, but I assume all on this list
realize I am not God! (If somebody out there does, send me your bank
account numbers & I will make sure you are properly rewarded.)
opinion as well. Hopefully all on this list are responsibly sifting
thru all information offered here, especially mine.
...Richard Swiderski
>FWIW, I talked with a guy who tested the rockets (that we use
> for parachutes) for the military. He told me He never tested one that
didn't fire, even those that had been years past their rec shelf life.
> Mildew &/or deterioration of the chute fabric is probably the biggest
> worry. If your can have a rigger repack it, it would seem reasonable
to
> extend a factory repack by a lot. ....Richard Swiderski
Richard/Gang:
That sounds great.
How long can I extend the repack on my BRS?
john h
PS: Of course, you are volunteering to be the test dummy for these
extended
inspection and repack times???
PSS: We need to be very careful giving advice to folks based on
speculation
that might mean the difference of life or death. There are a lot of
very
serious aspects to our sport of building and flying Kolb aircraft.
Let's
have fun, but be careful. None of us are immune to gravity, or exempt
from
"Murphy". If I was going to give someone advice on whether they should
extend the inspection and repack cycle of their BRS Balistic Recovery
System, it would be to follow the directives. If there are any
questions,
direct them to the professionals at BRS.
PSSS: What does the Navy use the BRS rocket for?
==
==
==
==
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Stitching the fabric, or riveting |
Jim...
I gave this alot of thought before I did mine..and I decided to go with the
flow..and did it according to plans..rivits....Looking back...I wasted alot
of good thinking time..
I dont know of any way to get a good stitch job on a round tube rib...just
aint hardly possible I dont think...and then you would likely be in danger
of a fabric failure...which is just as bad...maybe worse than a rib
failure...or at the best....a funny looking wing with a bunch of dimples in
it..
Right this minute..I am recovering the rear half of my cage....I am going to
try to cover the whole cage in the rear for less drag...
anyway...I have of course been peeling the fabric off the cage...no rivits
here ya know...just glue...JEEZ.....its a real pain....there are some places
I was tempted to get the handgrinder after it ...soaked it in MEK.....and
soaked it some more......ARGHHHH......
After doing this...I might be tempted to just glue the fabric down on a wing
and forget all mechanical attachments!!!!..Well...not really....but that
glue works awful good.
NAW......Best to do what has been proven here Jim.....A Kolb might fly with
a bent or busted rib.....but it dang sure wont fly with no fabric on the
wing!
Don Gherardini
FireFly 098
http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Swiderski" <swiderski(at)rocketjet.net> |
Ronnie,
Give me a call, 352-307-9009 drive. There were a lot of little
things that made a big difference in handling. ...Richard Swiderski
what did you do about the slop in the linkage, as mine has some not much
but
some?
>
> "garvelink"
>
> I flew an UltraStar hard & fast & sometimes heavy for about
> 350hrs. No aerobatics, if you don't count wingovers. Twice I went
> through some violent wing flutter (before I got rid of the control
> linkage slop & pin attatchment slop & inboard spar flex). It remained
a
> faithful & dependable friend. The only structural failures that I
know
> of were from impacting mother earth with not enough finesse.
...Richard
> Swiderski
>
> Don,
>
> What about the Ultrastar? do you know if there have been any
structural
> failures?
>
>
==
==
==
==
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: BRS Canister Repack |
If your can have a rigger repack it, it would seem reasonable to
| extend a factory repack by a lot. ....Richard Swiderski
Hi Richard/Gang:
I'm sorry.
The above sounds a lot like a recommendation to me. For others, as
slow as I am, it might be accepted as a recommendation also.
I personally do not think money should fall into the decision making
process of time/life of a ballistic recovery system.
I personally do not think their established directives on inspection
and repack should be ignored.
Like Bro Jim stated earlier, there are man made items essential for
successful operation of the system that are highly effected by UV.
Kevlar is one of them. No matter how good the rocket and the rest of
the parachute are, it i worthless when the bridal fails.
Too many "if's" involved to rely on an outdated system. The line has
to be draw somewhere. How far can you go beyond that line and still
survive? Are you willing to gamble on that? Some people will push it
and die.
BTW: Even the new systems and factory maintained systems are not fail
safe. I had a friend that pulled the wings off an original Firestar
about two months after I did. He had a ballistic recovery system.
When he quit flying at about 300 feet AGL, he popped the chute. Got a
good canopy, but the kevlar line was cut by the sharp edge of the
engine mount. He died. He knew how I flew. He knew what happened to
me, but failed to learn from my mistake. Paid the ultimate price for
that.
Another thing to remember is, when that time comes, if it comes, one
must keep enough composure to remember that he has a recovery system
on board. We read to often of those that died without pulling the red
handle. That is a shame.
I am not a parachute rigger like Bro Jim, but made my living jumping
out of airplanes in the Army before I started flying helicopters. I
know parachutes work when we are trained to use them correctly and
rely on them.
On the other hand I never wore a parachute flying a helicopter. They
were not provided in the Army. The Army felt we flew at such low
altitudes, most of the time, we would not have time to deploy one.
History proved them wrong during Lam Son 719 in VN when the NVA were
shooting our helicopters out of the sky with heat seeking missles, and
radar guided 37mm AAA. A lot of helicopter crew would still be around
today had they had parachutes in those situations.
I guess I have a very different attitude about recovery systems and
Kolb aircraft. I can not express in words what it feels like when one
tranforms from pilot to passenger of a brick. When all control feel
is gone, the aircraft turns nose down, and the only thing between
pilot and those trees down there is a little bag of nylon. One has a
very different appreciation for that little rag.
Until you have been there, you will never know. Ask Dennis Souder.
Gravity is not impartial or predudice.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Stitching the fabric, or riveting |
| Right this minute..I am recovering the rear half of my cage....I am
going to
| try to cover the whole cage in the rear for less drag...
| anyway...I have of course been peeling the fabric off the cage...no
rivits
| here ya know...just glue...JEEZ.....its a real pain....there are
some places
| I was tempted to get the handgrinder after it ...soaked it in
MEK.....and
| soaked it some more......ARGHHHH......
| | Don Gherardini
Don G/Gang:
While covering my fuselage aft, I discovered I had some concave areas
that would get beaten to death by the prop in short order is not
mechanically fastened to the longeron. Sometime when ya'll get to
look at old Miss P'fer, check her out. There is a lot of rib
stitching on the aft fuselage. My first experience with rib
stitching, although not a rib, same same difference. To make matters
worse, I had to learn to to blind rib stitching because I could not
get behind some longerons because of the close proximity to the fuel
tank. That was fun. :-) My fingers bore the scars of rib lacing
cuts for a long time afterwards. I might add, some of the rib
stitching did come loose. Might have been bad rib stitching, or it
could have happened from cargo rubbing and knocking them during
loading and unloading, and during flight. I do not know.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Swiderski" <swiderski(at)rocketjet.net> |
| Subject: | BRS Canister Repack |
(sent this earlier but???, this is 2nd try)
Hey John,
If you read my post below more closely you'll notice that I
didn't give advice. I did repeat 1st hand info & give my opinion. A lot
of wise responses were given to this post, most of which I agree with.
However, economics is a factor to be included in any decision of safety.
At what price are we willing to pay or shall we say can we afford to
stack the deck in our favor. There is no absolute guarantee of safety,
therefore some degree of sanity must be applied at some point. One's
degree of safety is therefore related to one's financial resources, not
to mention one's fear of death, and of course, one's comfort zone of
risk taking. Some would think it unreasonable to fly at all. In the
end, our safety is both arbitrary and based on a logical assessment of
risk. My opinion is that if a chute can be professionally repacked &
the rocket is five years past its recommended shelf life, I would feel
responsible in using it. I believe it is a defendable opinion,
certainly it is not an infallible truth, but I assume all on this list
realize I am not God! (If somebody out there does, send me your bank
account numbers & I will make sure you are properly rewarded.)
opinion as well. Hopefully all on this list are responsibly sifting
thru all information offered here, especially mine.
...Richard Swiderski
>FWIW, I talked with a guy who tested the rockets (that we use for
>parachutes) for the military. He told me He never tested one that
didn't fire, even those that had been years past their rec shelf life.
> Mildew &/or deterioration of the chute fabric is probably the biggest
> worry. If your can have a rigger repack it, it would seem reasonable
> to extend a factory repack by a lot. ....Richard Swiderski
Richard/Gang:
That sounds great.
How long can I extend the repack on my BRS?
john h
PS: Of course, you are volunteering to be the test dummy for these
extended inspection and repack times???
PSS: We need to be very careful giving advice to folks based on
speculation that might mean the difference of life or death. There are
a lot of very serious aspects to our sport of building and flying Kolb
aircraft. Let's have fun, but be careful. None of us are immune to
gravity, or exempt from "Murphy". If I was going to give someone advice
on whether they should extend the inspection and repack cycle of their
BRS Balistic Recovery System, it would be to follow the directives. If
there are any questions, direct them to the professionals at BRS.
PSSS: What does the Navy use the BRS rocket for?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Swiderski" <swiderski(at)rocketjet.net> |
Hey Paul,
If its any comfort, I went thru a similar questioning. Because I
put flaperons on my old UltraStar, I wanted to be able to control them
at all points of the landing. The stick was on the right & the throttle
was on the left, the stick would have required major surgery, so I had
to move the throttle. In addition, I also needed to control the
throttle at all times. Well the only option was to put the throttle on
the stick as on a Harley Davidson. I wondered if I could get used to it
& even more wondered if I could unlearn the old way. After a few hours
of crow hopping, (oh boy, I hope that word doesn't start another endless
thread) I was right at home with it. I have converted every plane I've
had to this since. It allows the use of a free hand that is otherwise
tied up most of the time.
Richard Swiderski
From: "Paul Petty" <Lynnp@c-gate.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: throllte
>
> Kolbers,
> I know I am ahead of myself here but this has come to mind several
times
when I think of my next step,kit 2. When I fly the Cessna 150 in
training, I
always hold the throttle control in with my right hand during climb
out,
(because my CFI has beaten that into my head from day one). Even with
the
control lock pretty tight he still insist that I do this. I understand
why
this is protocol but believe me if that sucker dropped 2 rpm my hand
would
shove that throttle forward even if it were tied behind my back! I have
not
yet flown a Kolb with control of the throttle, only control of the stick
and
rudder in both a Mark3Xtra and the Kolbra. This being said, I ponder
this.... With all my time training in the Cessna, how well do you think
I
will adapt to having the stick in my right hand and throttle in my left?
Seems sorta backwards to me<>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "ronnie wehba" <rwehba(at)wtxs.net> |
maybe I missed sumtim' but how did pull the wings off?
I had a friend that pulled the wings off an original Firestar
about two months after I did.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Bean <slyck(at)frontiernet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Stitching the fabric, or riveting |
Jim Clayton wrote:
>
>I changed the subject line to suit....
>
>Richard/Don/All,
>
>I have the same concerns about riveting, and have been
>warned about stitching to a round rib. Do you, or
>anyone else have comments on special techniques to
>stitch the wings without puckering the fabric? If it
>can be done successfully, I prefer stitching, mostly
>because of all the holes, and partially because I
>worked so hard to master the knots during the covering
>class I took ;-)
>
>-Jim
>
>Jim, those aluminum fabric rivets work real well, BUT
>
seems to me you could epoxy some flat strips to the ribs with little half-
rounds on the rib side. Then you wouldn't have any pucker. -BB do not
archive
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DAquaNut(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: FireFly Engine Break In Experience. |
In a message dated 2/10/04 11:36:34 AM Central Standard Time, jbhart(at)ldd.net
writes:
<<
I should have not put light on the ground, and I should have faced FireFly
away from a closed wall.
Still snow bound.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Jackson, MO
>>
Thanks Jack,
I think I will tie off to a tree.
Ed ( In Houston) Three more days of RAIN !!!!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron or Mary Payne" <whyme(at)vci.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Stitching the fabric, or riveting |
I went to two fabric schools before I covered my
FireStar. Aircraft Spruce and Jim and Dondi Miller. Both said not to
rib stitch on round tubes. Both said not to rely on gluing fabric to the
ribs.
Jim Miller put on a good demonstration why you should not use glue only.
Polytac
has great strength in shear loading but very little in tension. Jim glued
two strips
of fabric together overlapping them then had two large men try to pull them
apart by
pulling on each end. This would be in shear. They could not pull the
strips
apart. Jim then took hold of one end of one of the strips and pulled up
putting the
glue joint in tension. The glue joint failed. As to rib stitching, both
schools said that
the round tube has only line contact with the fabric. The stitches will be
in an area
has no contact with the round rib. This will stress the fabric in that area
and could fail.
No gluing and no stitching means fabric rivets as per the Kolb instructions.
Ron Payne
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "boyd young" <by0ung(at)brigham.net> |
: He has reduced his drag by frontal area reduction,
--------------------------------
i have been told by a long easy builder that the drag is more affected in how you
close the area rather than how much area is opened. ie. streemed line
struts... fairings.... wheel pants etc.
boyd
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Stitching the fabric, or riveting |
Brother Pike...
oh Man...now I really feel bad...I certainly didnt mean to slander your
creation..for I have admired it from afar...
.I surely did not mean to Forsake you.or your beautiful airplane... Your
troubled distress will surely be overcome when you simply educate me...
IF you have figured out a way to ribstick a round top
rib....WONDERFUL....share with me this Knowledge brother..show me the light
that I might Learn your secrets and become enlightened.
All I know for sure about airplane building...is that I dont know
everything.....and I have yet to see it all.... But I too have hope!
I have going to attempt to stitch the fabric on the upper rear of my
cage...and sure could use a refresher on technique!
Don Gherardini
Sales / Engineering dept.
American Honda Engines
Power Equipment Company
CortLand, Illinois
800-626-7326
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Stitching the fabric, or riveting |
Brother Pike...
oh Man...now I really feel bad...I certainly didnt mean to slander your
creation..for I have admired it from afar...
.I surely did not mean to Forsake you.or your beautiful airplane... Your
troubled distress will surely be overcome when you simply educate me...
IF you have figured out a way to ribstick a round top
rib....WONDERFUL....share with me this Knowledge brother..show me the light
that I might Learn your secrets and become enlightened.
All I know for sure about airplane building...is that I dont know
everything.....and I have yet to see it all.... But I too have hope!
I have going to attempt to stitch the fabric on the upper rear of my
cage...and sure could use a refresher on technique!
Don Gherardini
Sales / Engineering dept.
American Honda Engines
Power Equipment Company
CortLand, Illinois
800-626-7326
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Clay Stuart" <tcstuart(at)adelphia.net> |
Looking through my California Power Systems Catalog (CPS) of 2001 and
noticed this about the Warp Drive props:
Standard and High Aspect ratio blades. "Warp drive has a series of new high
aspect blade designs. Constant speed performance is achieved with fixed
pitch position blades (still ground adjustable) without using any type of
mechanism. The design itself provides the performance." It says to contact
CPS for more info on the "constant speed design".
The prices are about 20% higher than the standard aspect blade. The props
also have an option of the precision CNC center hub, a machined aluminum
center hub.
I know that there was a discussion recently about the P-tip Prince prop and
the Warp drive, but I don't think this high aspect prop was discussed.
Thanks,
Clay Stuart
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <tophera(at)centurytel.net> |
The helicopter setup always made perfect sense to me; raising the collective
required an increase in power and vice versa, so having those two controls
in the same hand made things easier not harder. When you have a directional
control in your hand and you add a power control that moves in a way that
would seam to swing your nose left and right was very confusing. Sure you
could get used to it and fly fine, but it was not intuitive. When the shit
hits the fan and a crosswind gust points your nose off the runway I am
willing to bet that 5 out of 10 people would twist that throttle trying to
turn the nose back to the runway, cutting the power instead and making a bad
situation worse. Intuitiveness of controls is very important under stress.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "boyd young" <by0ung(at)brigham.net> |
| Subject: | thortle position |
.... With all my time training
in the Cessna, how well do you think I will adapt to having the stick in my
right hand and throttle in my left? Seems sorta backwards to me.
-----------------------
see if the cfi will let you fly right seat... so your left hand is on the throttle
and the yoke in the right.
boyd
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| I know that there was a discussion recently about the P-tip Prince
prop and
| the Warp drive, but I don't think this high aspect prop was
discussed.
|
| Thanks,
| Clay Stuart
Clay/Gang:
I think they are referring to the fast tape blade that a lot of us
have been using for some time now, and the HP or high performance hub.
The best person to contact and get the corrrect information is Daryl
at Warp Drive, 1-800-833-9357. He is the man that answers the phone
and runs the place.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Modification,Deviation, Who do you trust anymore? |
Folks:
I have tried to correspond with Jim Gerken, by email, to correct the
original post he made comparing me and my mods to maintenance on BRS
systems. That was 24 hours ago. No response from him on my last
request. I guess I have my answer.
Here is a post to the Kolb List I wrote yesterday in response to his
original post on the subject above. I held it for a day to see if
things could get sorted out, with no sucess.
john h
********************************************************
Hi Jim G/Gang:
I like your subject line. :-)
However, I think you made a serious mistake trying to make me look
bad to the rest of the Kolb List, comparing ballistic recovery
inspections/repack schedules to what I have done to/with my Kolb
airplanes
over the years. Your information and the examples you use are totally
incorrect and misrepresented. Your purpose is very obvious to me,
whether it is to anyone else on this List or not.
| To me, chute maintenance schedule deviation seems a LOT like
structural
| modifications which deviate from Kolb's plans. We freely share our
ideas
| for modifying the Kolbs, but aren't we worried about the day one of
the
| wings modified by our recommendations comes apart?
I don't believe I have ever recommended to anyone deviation from
plans and building instructions for Kolb aircraft. I share what I
have done to my airplane and try to qualify why I do what I do. If
someone wants to do the same thing, they do it on their own and not
because I encouraged them to do it. I don't know about you, but I am
not worried in the least about wings modified by my recommendations,
because I do not recommend "do diddly squat".
The only modification that has failed, on one of my three Kolb
aircraft over the past 20 years, was a gear leg/axle socket. It
failed after many, many landings of all sorts and descriptions. It
failed because it was a part that had worn out. That proved it would
not last forever. Needed to be improved and updated. We did that.
Have been flying with the update for the last three years. Made that
last successful flight from Alabama to Barrow, Alaska, to Oroville,
WA, to Oshkosh, and back to Alabama, on gear leg/axle sockets designed
and built by Brother Jim. I might note, the way we have the gear
leg/axle socket made up now is the way Jim wanted to do them in 1991,
but I convinved him to do it my way. Had we gone Jim's way back then,
I may have made Barrow in 2000, and precluded a 10,000 mile recovery
trip in the old Dodge to bring Miss P'fer home.
| "Just a wild guess on my part" but, to me, Richard's observations of
the dependability of rockets was
| less likely to cause harm than encouraging others to drill holes in
| critical wing rib components and add weight in an unproven manner.
John's
| own good luck and hours of experience cannot alone be taken as proof
of the
| concept, as I understood Topher and then Dennis to add a couple days
ago.
"John's own good luck" is not what has kept me building and flying
Kolb aircraft for the past 20 years. My own foresight in the need for
a parachute recovery
system, prior experience with parachutes in the military and the fact
that I know they work and save lives, and the fact that I had one
strapped on my chest and to the airframe of the old Ultrastar in 1985
and again in 1990, is the reason I am still here. The failure of the
aileron bell crank on the Ultrastar was a design flaw that failed in
flight, not a Hauck Mod. Kolbs do not fly when aileron control is
lost. The wing failure in 1990 was my fault. I flew the Firestar
well outside the design envelope of the aircraft for 755 hours.
I think you misrepresented what Topher and Dennis were saying. I
think
you have intentionally misrepresented me.
| Another way of thinking about it is that John's experience may only
| indicate that Homer's wing was strong enough in its original design
to
| survive even the modifications.
How about explaining the above. I am too old and too dumb to
understand WTF you are trying to say. Thanks.
Jim G, you need to get your "wild guesses" straight. The Firestar
wings that failed me were strictly stock, built to plans and Kolb
instructions. No mods of any type by me or anyone else. It was not a
modification that caused the failure. Strictly pilot error.
I beefed up the MK III wing when I built them, based on the failure
mode of the Firestar wing and the anticipated environment the MKIII
would be flying during its life time. I have said time and again, if
Kolbs are built and flown as directed, within their design flight
envelope, they will probably last forever. My type flying does not
always adhere to normal, "around the patch a time or two" type flying.
My airplanes work much harder than the average Kolb. Therefore, the
mods that Brother Jim Hauck and I have come up with over the years.
Many of which are on the Kolbs that you and other Kolb people fly
today. Those mods started showing up on factory kits 13 years ago
this month. Whether you like it or not, Jim and John Hauck have been
a positive influence in the design and construction of your Kolb. The
mistakes I have made, the aircraft I have destroyed, the
repairs/upgrades we came up with, are all alive and well in your Kolb
airplanes. Many of you all are out there today trying to solve
problems we encountered and solved 20 years ago. I think they call
that, "Reinventing the wheel." Have at it. Have
the satisfaction of doing it your way. Will not bother me in the
least.
BTW: Do you know what the failure mode was on both wings of my
original Firestar? Did you have any idea how they were built before
you wrote this post? Do you know anything about the upgrade
Dennis Souder made to the outboard rib of the Firestar wing? Do you
know why he did that? He just explained to the List a couple days
ago. Did you know the failure mode and reason for the loss of my
Ultrastar? I just explained that one above.
The wing rib modification was designed and implemented by Old Kolb
Aircraft many years ago. Had to have been prior to 1991, when I built
my MKIII wings. It was recommended to increase the strength of the
outboard rib, which was getting damaged when folks would have hard
landings, failed gear legs and torn up the outboard end of the wings.
It worked. Even after drilling "all those holes" in them. It also
works on the first four outboard ribs and the noses of all main ribs
on my
MK III, with the exception of the inboard rib. The nose of the
inboard rib is 4130 chromoly steel, same as the rest of that rib.
The wings on my MKIII have somehow stayed together for nearly 2,000
hours and more than 12 years. Been to the Arctic/North Slope two and
a half times (almost got there in 2000). I can assure every one they
have been
thoroughly tested in flight environments that few others will ever
encounter in a MKIII. The left wing survived a serious accident with
limited damage, primarily because of the increased strength of the
ribs. I have proven to myself what I have done works. I have no need
to prove that to anyone else. And again, I DO NOT RECOMMEND AND
ENCOURAGE ANYONE TO DO ANYTHING!!!
| John, I am not trying to pick on you, but I am questioning the logic
of drawing a line at the parachute maintenance
| schedule mods, while encouraging structure mods. What about the
guys that
| do the structural mods but don't buy a parachute?
Jim, once again: I DO NOT ENCOURAGE FOLKS TO DO ANYTHING TO THEIR
AIRPLANES!!!
Guys that do any mods, do them on their own,......... period!!!
Whether a person does nor does not buy a parachute is none of my
business. I have always used a parachute and always will. I also
highly recommend others to use ballistic recovery systems that are
properly installed and maintained.
What I do with my airplane has absolutely nothing to do with the
parameters for inspection and repack of ballistic recovery systems.
There is a lot more critical criteria with parachutes and ballistic
recovery systems than meets the eye, especially someone ignorant of
parachute recovery systems.
I maintain my phylosophy that "hinting" to others that it is
reasonable to think a ballistic recovery system is ok to use because
"some guy in the Navy never saw a rocket failure of a rocket similar
to what is used in a ballistic recovery system" is stupid, foolish,
and could get someone "else" killed.
| I agree with John on this part: be careful guys. Careful flying,
careful
| reading, careful building/modifying. A lot of what you read here is
| opinion, not necessarily fact. Including this note.
You got that right.
What I write here is pretty much proven. If it is not, I always make
a notation that that is exactly what it is, on my part, opinion.
Take care and get your stuff straight before you jump me again.
If the Kolb List feels I am out of line in my response, so be it. I
got dumped on pretty hard and heavy by a few Listers last December,
without justification. When members left the List they blamed their
departure on me. I am slow and still trying to figure that one out.
I think it all started because I made some comment about not flying in
front of a Corvair engine as a joke, and some took it serious. If
that is the way the majority of the Kolb List feels, I would be more
than happy to leave the List. Easier for me to leave that a bunch of
other folks.
BTW: A few of those that made hasty departures from the Kolb List,
blaming me for their exits, have reappeared. Reckon they have
forgiven me for what ever I was supposed to have done, or they got
lonesome and missed us. My Mama used to tell me not to slam the door
on the way out. I might want to come back sometime. :-)
Ya'll take care,
john h
PS: There is one thing about having accomplished things
with these little airplanes that others have not. Once you have done
it, it
can not be taken away from you, no matter how hard others wish or try.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | William George <wgeorge(at)mountainmeadowranch.com> |
Thanks Jim for a very informative post on the subject of 'chutes. Only
problem was that such a post should be in the archives.
Bill George
Hawaii
Kolb Mk-3 Verner 1400 Powerfin
On Feb 10, 2004, at 9:56 PM, Kolb-List Digest Server wrote:
>
> Folks;
>
> Being a Parachute Rigger for the past 45 years and have packed
> everything
> from a home made handkerchief parachute to Martin/Baker ejection
> seats. I
> feel I have a tad of knowledge of parachute maintenance.........
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Stitching the fabric, or riveting |
| I wonder if using 3 inch fabric tape, polytac, and on the inside
over the
| tube equally on both sides would work in this situation verses
stitching?
| Kirk
Snuffy/Gang:
For the top longeron or fabric brace, wrapping around the tube is
enough to hole it. To keep fabric from drumming from the pusher prop,
some areas, like concave, need to be treated just like a wing rib,
with reinforcing tape, rib stitch, and finishing tape. Mine has held
up well over the last couple thousand hours of getting beat up.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Stitching the fabric, or riveting |
| I wonder if using 3 inch wide finishing tape and polytac on the
inside of
| and over the cage tubes would work in this instance? Kirk
Snuf/Gang:
I don't know about that. Never used that idea before.
Rib stitching works good and is really easy to do, if you do not have
to blind stitch. Blind stitching requires fabricating a curved needle
and a lot of stuff I learned and have since forgotten since I did mine
in 1991.
It might work, and again, it might pull loose in time. I do know that
the rear area of the fuselage fabric on Kolbs, especially higher hp
ones, get a hell of a beating continuously when that prop is making
power. The paint cracks first from constant bending created by the
drumming, then the fabric will eventually go. Plus it looks bad.
Sheet metal back there makes a lot more sense for durability.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Stitching the fabric, or riveting |
| (And now we could ask - is the reinforcing tape going to still be
as
| bulletproof with a 1/8" hole through it, or is it better off with
rib
| stitching cord over it? But we won't do that)
| I used 1/4" Stits reinforcing tape, and it does pull down the fabric
a bit
| where the stitch secures it. This pull down would not have occurred
with a
| rivet. The pull down of the fabric is covered with the finishing
tape and
| is not readily apparent.
| Richard Pike
Richard/All:
We use 1/2 reinforcing tape when we use fabric rivets. Provides twice
as much area as 1/4" reinforcing tape. I don't think burning an 1/8"
hole in the center of it is going to make much difference in total
strength reduction in 1/2" tape, but wouldn't want to do that with
1/4".
Have you run the "rib stiching vs fabric rivet" thing on Kolb aircraft
5/16" round tube ribs past Jim Miller yet? He may be some help to
enlighten all us dummies?
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Stitching the fabric, or riveting |
| I've thought of doing that also. What would you do then? Rivet the
sheet
| metal ( I assume you'd use aluminum) to the cage tubes? Would the
aluminum
| also crack at the rivets because of drumming? Kirk
Snuf/Gang:
The end cap on my fuselage was originally fabric and aerodynamic,
rather than chopped off square the way the factory designed them.
That fabric lasted 100 hours and disentegrated. I replaced that with
some .020" alum about 1,800 hours ago. It is doing a good job and
does not drum enough to cause stress cracks and failure.
Sheet metal on the sides of the rear of the fuselage would have to be
attached with close spacing to keep it from vibrating and getting beat
up with prop drumming. If I was going to go that route, I would rivet
to welded tabs on the longerons and fabric braces.
Gentleman down in Panacea, FL, covered his fuselage with sheet metal.
Haven't heard how he is doing with it. He is in Duane Mitchell's AO.
Maybe Duane can give us an update on his progress.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James, Ken" <KDJames(at)berkscareer.com> |
| Subject: | throttle position |
Funny all the chat on throttle location, The drifter I flew had the throttle
under the seat on the left side, and I'm very comfortable flying that way, I
plan to mount mine on the left side just seems natural, and when the *&
hit
the fan go with what is natural to you.
Ken
-----Original Message-----
From: boyd young [mailto:by0ung(at)brigham.net]
Subject: Kolb-List: thortle position
.... With all my time training
in the Cessna, how well do you think I will adapt to having the stick in my
right hand and throttle in my left? Seems sorta backwards to me.
-----------------------
see if the cfi will let you fly right seat... so your left hand is on the
throttle and the yoke in the right.
boyd
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron or Mary Payne" <whyme(at)vci.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Stitching the fabric, or riveting |
I would strongly recommend that anyone concerned about rib stitching verses
fabric rivets call Jim or Dondi Miller. What ever they tell you, you can
take it to the bank.
Ron Payne
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Clay Stuart" <tcstuart(at)adelphia.net> |
I just received a few rivnuts from Aircraft Spruce to mess around with. Any
advice on using them. I think I will try to use them instead of rivets in
areas that I might want to disassemble occasionally (rear Lexan windows, for
example). I got the converter tool for my rivet gun (about $10). Can you
use them with the pneumatic rivet gun or limit their use to the hand
riveter? I only have the 6-32 size, which is about the size of a 1/8"
rivet. Would you use a lock washer of some sort (star), or Locktite on the
screw?
Clay Stuart
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Clayton <jspc78(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Modification, Deviation, Who do you trust anymore?--some |
thoughts
John H/All
Good post. I would like to add a few comments to the
mix:
I spent about 7 months researching and learning
everything I could about kit planes before I Chose a
Kolb, and since, I have continued to learn everything
I can. I have some varied flight and
mechanical/engineering experience and so I had a very
specific mission in mind for my plane. To this end I
have been asking this list for specific information on
every imaginable sort of modification and change, then
sitting down with my local advisors (a motley crew of
A&P's, aviation engineers and other builders) and
sorting through what makes sense for my mission. This
project is an opportunity to build something for me,
my way, and my way is to look at every aspect of the
plane and see what I might change to suit me. This
can be tiresome and boring for others; my friends
sometimes ask if I am building a space shuttle, or a
plane ;-)
But it suits me.
I think TNK, Kolb aircraft and our community of
builders are the most impressive lot I have come
across and am proud to be a part of it. I also think
the airframe is remarkably well designed and perfectly
matched to it's intended use, and through the efforts
of us builders and TNK, has improved over time. By
sharing our ideas on the list, we subject them to peer
review, and that is the best way to improve a mature
product. For peer review to work, we must each
consider a new idea carefully before knee-jerk
criticizing it because "I didn't do it that way", or
"I've never heard of that". I try to consider what
effect some change could make, often asking people
with experience in that area. I also try to never
guess blindly; it just upsets people that know more
than I do about something. Professionally, I am paid
to find problems and devise solutions; I'm having fun
doing it for myself, instead of for my employer. Just
because I question everything, isn't to be inferred as
some kind of insult toward Kolbs or anyone's building
style.
John H. and many, many others have suffered my
questions cheerfully and helpfully. NO ONE has ever
"told me" how I should build my plane, quite the
opposite: I ask "I want to do that, how did you do
it?" and the answer usually starts something like "for
my situation I did...." or "not sure if this is the
best way, but I....".
So my message to John H., and many others is: please
keep answering the questions asked in spite of a
minority who chose to view it as an insult when we
propose to experiment with our experimental airplanes.
Jim Clayton
California
Mark-3X, Building
Subject: Kolb-List: Modification, Deviation, Who do
you trust anymore?
once again: I DO NOT ENCOURAGE FOLKS TO DO ANYTHING
TO THEIR
AIRPLANES!!!
Guys that do any mods, do them on their own,.........
period!!!
Whether a person does nor does not buy a parachute is
none of my
business. I have always used a parachute and always
will. I also
highly recommend others to use ballistic recovery
systems that are
properly installed and maintained.
If the Kolb List feels I am out of line in my
response, so be it. I
got dumped on pretty hard and heavy by a few Listers
last December,
without justification. When members left the List
they blamed their
departure on me. I am slow and still trying to figure
that one out.
I think it all started because I made some comment
about not flying in
front of a Corvair engine as a joke, and some took it
serious. If
that is the way the majority of the Kolb List feels, I
would be more
than happy to leave the List. Easier for me to leave
that a bunch of
other folks.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Swiderski" <swiderski(at)rocketjet.net> |
Don,
Yes, I mounted a motorcycle throttle on the joy stick. I've not
encountered any of Topher's concerns of unwanted secondary input into
the control system. I've done extensive competition flying with that
setup & encountered numerous emergency situations over the 15+ years of
use & never had a thought of going back conventional. On my setup, I
installed an adjustable tension device that allows the throttle to
retract with the force of the throttle return spring, or at the other
extreme, it locks the throttle tight. I adjust it to hold the throttle
snugly in what ever position it is in if I were to take my hand off the
stick. So, in effect, I can control the stick with one finger if I
choose, & the throttle setting remains the same. Perhaps this is why I
experience no secondary input. AS I said before, I like it so much that
I converted every plane I've had since. When used in conjuction with
flaperons it allows me to vary the lift of the wings, the power of the
engine, and the three axis of direction, all simultaneously. Some might
consider this suicidal & accuse me of leading this list astray, so for
those of you who are not thinking adults, please realize, this is not
God speaking. [[And as I said on my previous reply (which by the way,
hasn't appeared on the List after 2 attempts-- Conspiracy?--) to some
misconstrued "advice" I supposedly gave on parachutes, "If anyone does
believe I am God, send me your bank account info & I'll properly reward
you."]] Anyway, back to the topic, I do not experience all that control
as overload. It gives me more control in the moment when I most need it.
Richard Swiderski
--Still Grounded Working Sometimes On Turbo Geo-Metro Engine So I Might
Fly My SlingShot Again
<donghe@one-eleven.net>
Richard!.....,
throttle on the stick?...like a harley?..do you mean a twist grip
motorcycle
type deal?
sounds very interesting!!!
Don Gherardini
SlingShot again
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Swiderski" <swiderski(at)rocketjet.net> |
| Subject: | BRS Canister Repack (3rd try) |
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Swiderski [mailto:swiderski(at)rocketjet.net]
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: BRS Canister Repack
This is my 3rd attempt to post this response. For some reason, I
haven't seen the 1st 2 attempts? Other posts went no problem.
Hey John,
If you read my post below more closely you'll notice that I
didn't give advice. I did repeat 1st hand info & give my opinion. A lot
of wise responses were given to this post, most of which I agree with.
However, economics is a factor to be included in any decision of safety.
At what price are we willing to pay or shall we say can we afford to
stack the deck in our favor. There is no absolute guarantee of safety,
therefore some degree of sanity must be applied at some point. One's
degree of safety is therefore related to one's financial resources, not
to mention one's fear of death, and of course, one's comfort zone of
risk taking. Some would think it unreasonable to fly at all. In the
end, our safety is both arbitrary and based on a logical assessment of
risk. My opinion is that if a chute can be professionally repacked &
the rocket is five years past its recommended shelf life, I would feel
responsible in using it. I believe it is a defendable opinion,
certainly it is not an infallible truth, but I assume all on this list
realize I am not God! (If somebody out there does, send me your bank
account numbers & I will make sure you are properly rewarded.)
opinion as well. Hopefully all on this list are responsibly sifting
thru all information offered here, especially mine.
...Richard Swiderski
>FWIW, I talked with a guy who tested the rockets (that we use
> for parachutes) for the military. He told me He never tested one that
didn't fire, even those that had been years past their rec shelf life.
> Mildew &/or deterioration of the chute fabric is probably the biggest
> worry. If your can have a rigger repack it, it would seem reasonable
to
> extend a factory repack by a lot. ....Richard Swiderski
Richard/Gang:
That sounds great.
How long can I extend the repack on my BRS?
john h
PS: Of course, you are volunteering to be the test dummy for these
extended
inspection and repack times???
PSS: We need to be very careful giving advice to folks based on
speculation
that might mean the difference of life or death. There are a lot of
very
serious aspects to our sport of building and flying Kolb aircraft.
Let's
have fun, but be careful. None of us are immune to gravity, or exempt
from
"Murphy". If I was going to give someone advice on whether they should
extend the inspection and repack cycle of their BRS Balistic Recovery
System, it would be to follow the directives. If there are any
questions,
direct them to the professionals at BRS.
PSSS: What does the Navy use the BRS rocket for?
==
==
==
==
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: BRS Canister Repack (3rd try) |
| This is my 3rd attempt to post this response. For some reason, I
| haven't seen the 1st 2 attempts? Other posts went no problem.
Hey Richard:
All your msgs are coming in loud and clear.
| Hey John,
| If you read my post below more closely you'll notice that I
| didn't give advice. | ...Richard Swiderski
Again, since you have sent all your msgs three different times, I will
have to say, based on the satement you made on your original msg,
which is referenced below, sure sounds like you are telling this guy
that it is ok "to extend a factory repack by a lot."
| If your can have a rigger repack it, it would seem reasonable
| to
| extend a factory repack by a lot. ....Richard Swiderski
Correct me if I am wrong, but that isn't that the way you wrote it.
Take care and don't get your panties in a wad,
john h (cold and wet at hauck's holler, alabama)
PS: Trying to get this sorted out is like trying to get a bunch of
lawyers to agree on something. hehehehe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Denny Rowe" <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
Guys,
Ians' recent post mentioning 912S powered Slingshots got me thinking that I have
not seen any posts from the Woods brothers from Georgia in a long time.
Bill I beleive and I forget his brothers name. They had their beutiful prize winning
Mk-3 and Slingshot, both powered with 912s, at the 2000 TNK fly-in.
The level of finish on those two aircraft was breathtaking and they were extreamely
generous with their time explaining some of the ideas they incorporated into
their birds.
Has anyone kept in touch with them? And if so, how are they doing?
I would like to thank them belatedly for the advice they offered me at TNK and
wish that they were active here on the list, they have a lot of technical knowhow
that would be a benefit to all Kolbers.
Later,
Denny Rowe, MK-3, PA
________________________________________________________________________________
gentlemen...just recenlty i am getting a vibration on the left strut..enough
to cause the tube to sing/vibrate on the speed strut cover. the engine purrs
and i have never had this happen before. i have tried re adjusting the carb
but it stays right there. it does stop once you give it a little throttle. any
ideas?
alan
firestar
n. richland hills, tx.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ian Heritch" <iheritch(at)satx.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Woods brothers? |
I know that at the least they sold the Slingshot, if I remember correctly,
Bill purchased, or was going to purchase, a certified aerobatic aircraft
like a Citabria/Decathlon. The Woods brothers were indeed generous with
their time, I could not have finished my Slingshot without their help.
If anyone would like the email address for Bill Woods please email me BC.
Ian Heritch
Slingshot, 912
San Antonio, TX
----- Original Message -----
From: "Denny Rowe" <rowedl(at)highstream.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: Woods brothers?
>
> Guys,
> Ians' recent post mentioning 912S powered Slingshots got me thinking that
I have not seen any posts from the Woods brothers from Georgia in a long
time.
> Bill I beleive and I forget his brothers name. They had their beutiful
prize winning Mk-3 and Slingshot, both powered with 912s, at the 2000 TNK
fly-in.
> The level of finish on those two aircraft was breathtaking and they were
extreamely generous with their time explaining some of the ideas they
incorporated into their birds.
> Has anyone kept in touch with them? And if so, how are they doing?
> I would like to thank them belatedly for the advice they offered me at TNK
and wish that they were active here on the list, they have a lot of
technical knowhow that would be a benefit to all Kolbers.
>
> Later,
> Denny Rowe, MK-3, PA
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Strut Flutter |
| i have tried re adjusting the carb
| but it stays right there. it does stop once you give it a little
throttle. any
| ideas?
|
| alan
Hi Alan/All:
Sounds like resonance.
Aircraft, fixed and rotary wing, sometimes have certain rpm ranges
that create resonance. Best not operate in those rpm areas. If it
was me, I would fly a little above or a little below out of the range
it occurs.
The Hughes TH-55 primary trainer could get in ground resonance if the
engine was held in a yellow arc area too long. Result was complete
destruction of the aircraft. It would get into ground resonance with
skids on the ground.
Here is a good example of what one type of resonance can do to a
helicopter:
http://www.fwcvhpa.org/fw/ground.htm
Ground resonance is probably not a good example/comparison of the type
resonance/vibration you may be experiencing. I'll just hang loose and
let the experts explain what may be happening and how to prevent it.
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Earl & Mim Zimmerman <emzi(at)supernet.com> |
Hey Guys,
Has anyone had any experience with the clutch system for the 582 C
gearbox? I'm looking for a way to reduce or eliminate most of the
vibration at idle without having to raise the idle speed too high.
Anyone had a clutch slip or fail? The only drawback that I see is if
your starter would fail you would not have the ability to prop. start as
a backup. Which brings to mind another question. Has anyone had a clutch
installed on an engine without electric start? I know that it is very
hard to pull the engine over without the prop installed, and assume it
would be the same with the clutch system. -- Earl
________________________________________________________________________________
In a message dated 2/11/04 11:03:40 AM Eastern Standard Time,
tophera(at)centurytel.net writes:
> . When you have a directional
> control in your hand and you add a power control that moves in a way that
> would seam to swing your nose left and right was very confusing. Sure you
> could get used to it and fly fine, but it was not intuitive. When the shit
> hits the fan and a crosswind gust points your nose off the runway I am
> willing to bet that 5 out of 10 people would twist that throttle trying to
> turn the nose back to the runway, cutting the power instead and making a bad
> situation worse. Intuitiveness of controls is very important under stress.
>
>
I have microsoft flight simulator for WWII fighters and, indeed, the rudder
control is twisting the stick....(no foot control)....and throttle is separate
hand. It is second nature to me now that I have shot down 2141 planes.....just
teasin. Of course I was shot down 2141 times myself....er....almost.
George Randolph
Firestar KX driver from the villages
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob, Kathleen, & Kory Brocious" <bbrocious(at)hotmail.com> |
Denny, the slingshot is listed for sale on Ebay.
>From: "Denny Rowe" <rowedl(at)highstream.net>
>Reply-To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: Kolb-List: Woods brothers?
>Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 20:45:04 -0500
>
>
>Guys,
>Ians' recent post mentioning 912S powered Slingshots got me thinking that I
>have not seen any posts from the Woods brothers from Georgia in a long
>time.
>Bill I beleive and I forget his brothers name. They had their beutiful
>prize winning Mk-3 and Slingshot, both powered with 912s, at the 2000 TNK
>fly-in.
>The level of finish on those two aircraft was breathtaking and they were
>extreamely generous with their time explaining some of the ideas they
>incorporated into their birds.
>Has anyone kept in touch with them? And if so, how are they doing?
>I would like to thank them belatedly for the advice they offered me at TNK
>and wish that they were active here on the list, they have a lot of
>technical knowhow that would be a benefit to all Kolbers.
>
>Later,
>Denny Rowe, MK-3, PA
>
>
Bob, Kathleen, and Kory Brocious
Tenacity Farm
Campbellsburg, Kentucky
Keep up with high-tech trends here at "Hook'd on Technology."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <tophera(at)centurytel.net> |
I use a Sidewinder stick for my simulations as well... and the stick
twisting is very intuitive for yaw control. That's how the Space shuttle
works also. Throttle control as a twist grip is not intuitive ( and I ride
motorcycles!). I am sure you can get used to it and have it be very
comfortable but it is not intuitive. The control should move in the
direction that the plane responds. The overhead stick in the Rally was very
weird. When you pushed the stick forward it twisted on the plane in a nose
up direction. You felt like pushing the stick should be nose up pitch
control. Once you got used to it you were fine but it was not intuitive.
Topher
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Engine Oil Thermostat |
| designed to be rather fail safe. When the oil is cold it allows app
50% of
| the oil to bypass the oil cooler and returns it to the engine. |
Rick Neilsen
| Redrive VW powered MKIIIc
Rick/All:
I dug out a little info on this thermostat. Supposed to bleed 10% of
the oil through the cooler at all times. It has a 180F rating. When
it reaches 180F it directs all oil through the cooler.
I am going to put this particular system on hold until I can get more
user info on it. Installation own my 912 would mean some oil line
redirecting, probably new directional fittings, etc. Also, something
else to go wrong.
The gaffers tape on the coolant radiator works good. Brings up
cylinder head temps as well as oil temps to their recommended range.
I may stay with the primative, however, reliable system.
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <bwr000(at)yahoo.com> |
Hi Clay,
I suspect many Warp owners might have the high aspect plan form blades
and CNC aluminum hub and simply do not distinguish from the "standard"
versions. I would see little reason to buy Warp "standard", because
the higher performance seems to be advertised for the high aspect
blades, not so much so for the standard. So, perhaps what's missing
from past discussion is whether the standard models do anything
special.
In earlier discussions here, I feel I've forgotten to mention that I
personally think the "constant speed" description applied to these
props gets overused. For example, when I point the plane up or down
without touching the throttle, the engine rpm changes, perhaps just as
much as my "non constant speed" Powerfin, or at least similar enf that
no difference is noticable. That being said, I also believe the Warp
provides excellent performance, probably among the best available.
-Ben Ransom
447 Firestar KXP
--- Clay Stuart wrote:
>
>
> Looking through my California Power Systems Catalog (CPS) of 2001 and
> noticed this about the Warp Drive props:
>
> Standard and High Aspect ratio blades. "Warp drive has a series of
> new high
> aspect blade designs. Constant speed performance is achieved with
> fixed
> pitch position blades (still ground adjustable) without using any
> type of
> mechanism. The design itself provides the performance." It says to
> contact
> CPS for more info on the "constant speed design".
>
> The prices are about 20% higher than the standard aspect blade. The
> props
> also have an option of the precision CNC center hub, a machined
> aluminum
> center hub.
>
> I know that there was a discussion recently about the P-tip Prince
> prop and
> the Warp drive, but I don't think this high aspect prop was
> discussed.
>
> Thanks,
> Clay Stuart
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
__________________________________
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <tophera(at)centurytel.net> |
When people on this list start trying to tell each other what to say, or
that their ideas are dangerous we loose the best part of this list. Flying
is dangerous. Every idea on this list is dangerous. Ultralights and light
planes should be banned they are so dangerous. Screw that. Let people have
their say without attacking them personally. If you think they are wrong
put in your opinion and why with out adding any of these "and you're a dumb
guy nah nah nah nah" crap along with it.
No one enjoys these arguments. No one is trying to make anyone else look
bad. No one knows everything. If somebody puts out a really bad idea
usually ten people weight in and the list is well informed that the average
of the list with all its experience advises against that, usually including
the original poster. How is adding personal insults helpful to that
process? (Hint: if you think of anything but "its not" you are wrong.)
Arguing with people till they give up and leave the list is unbelievable
arrogant. I have been overly opinionated on occasion and I am sorry for
that.
Once again I am dismayed by the capability of humans to behave in such
counterproductive ways.
Topher
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James, Ken" <KDJames(at)berkscareer.com> |
Guy's give it a break, and us
-----Original Message-----
From: John Hauck [mailto:jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com]
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: "To John"
Jim Gereken/All:
I'll accept your apology, whether you are sincere or not.
However, let's get the facts/references correct, especially what I
said. I feel you have not accurately represented me in your post, as
usual. Your doctored copy of my response to you is not accurate and
bends the truth to your point of view, again, as usual. I think it
appropriate to post my reply here, verbatim, so we do not have any
misunderstandings:
********************************************************
|
====
|
====
|
|
|
|
|
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Strut Flutter |
In a message dated 2/11/2004 8:53:57 PM Central Standard Time,
jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com writes:
> Subj: Re: Kolb-List: Strut Flutter
> Date: 2/11/2004 8:53:57 PM Central Standard Time
> From: jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com
> Reply-to: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent from the Internet
>
>
>
>
> | i have tried re adjusting the carb
> | but it stays right there. it does stop once you give it a little
> throttle. any
> | ideas?
> |
> | alan
>
> Hi Alan/All:
>
> Sounds like resonance.
>
> Aircraft, fixed and rotary wing, sometimes have certain rpm ranges
> that create resonance. Best not operate in those rpm areas. If it
> was me, I would fly a little above or a little below out of the range
> it occurs.
>
> The Hughes TH-55 primary trainer could get in ground resonance if the
> engine was held in a yellow arc area too long. Result was complete
> destruction of the aircraft. It would get into ground resonance with
> skids on the ground.
>
> Here is a good example of what one type of resonance can do to a
> helicopter:
>
> http://www.fwcvhpa.org/fw/ground.htm
>
> Ground resonance is probably not a good example/comparison of the type
> resonance/vibration you may be experiencing. I'll just hang loose and
> let the experts explain what may be happening and how to prevent it.
>
> Take care,
>
> john h
John, this is while at idle on the ground, not in the air. It just started
out of the clear blue sky as they say. Prop and carb are dialed in or at least
they seem to be to several of us. Alan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <bwr000(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | parachute repack |
Hi all,
I'm an on-again/off-again lurker by now, and saw the little controversy
embedded somewhere regarding the possible alternative of getting chutes
repacked less expensively than the recommended BRS TBO. Richard, I'm
curious how sure you are that the military test guy is in fact testing
the same rocket that BRS factory uses. I would not at all doubt the
claim that they have a very very very .....very high firing rate.
A related comment, anyone using a chute past the manufacturer's
recommended TBO is *obviously* doing so at their own risk, and I'm not
sure it warrants the description "extremely dangerous". I too have
heard that possible mildew is the biggest risk factor, and that
overall, BRS assumes chutes have been out in the weather when they make
their TBO interval recommendation. I know I am taking some added risk
in using my BRS beyond it's TBO. On the other hand, it has never seen
a drop of rain, and I fly with an assumption of say 96% likelihood it
would fire if I were so unfortunate to need it. This compared to what
I might assume to be 99% likelihood when it was within TBO. Both my
numbers are guesses, probably conservative (toward safety), and again,
just as much my responsibility as any other flying decision I make. I
spose what I'm saying is that I felt 96% was substantially better than
leaving the thing in a box in my garage, and the additional money to
repack, or more likely be "forced" to buy a new model was not worth it
to me. If I continue to fly this plane, I may eventually take the BRS
out entirely, and if I ever want to do light aerobatics (i doubt it),
just get a certified parachute for my own hide.
-Ben Ransom
__________________________________
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dale Sellers" <dsel1(at)bellsouth.net> |
I second the motion.
Dale Sellers
----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Armstrong" <tophera(at)centurytel.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: list usage.
>
> When people on this list start trying to tell each other what to say, or
> that their ideas are dangerous we loose the best part of this list.
Flying
> is dangerous. Every idea on this list is dangerous. Ultralights and
light
> planes should be banned they are so dangerous. Screw that. Let people
have
> their say without attacking them personally. If you think they are wrong
> put in your opinion and why with out adding any of these "and you're a
dumb
> guy nah nah nah nah" crap along with it.
>
> No one enjoys these arguments. No one is trying to make anyone else look
> bad. No one knows everything. If somebody puts out a really bad idea
> usually ten people weight in and the list is well informed that the
average
> of the list with all its experience advises against that, usually
including
> the original poster. How is adding personal insults helpful to that
> process? (Hint: if you think of anything but "its not" you are wrong.)
>
> Arguing with people till they give up and leave the list is unbelievable
> arrogant. I have been overly opinionated on occasion and I am sorry for
> that.
>
> Once again I am dismayed by the capability of humans to behave in such
> counterproductive ways.
>
> Topher
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron or Mary Payne" <whyme(at)vci.net> |
I left this list some time back as I got tired of being attacked by one
individual when I was only trying to contribute some things that I had
experienced. I feel that I contributed some value to other builders. I also
learned a great deal by reading the posts of other builders. It is a shame
when someone gets the feeling that they are the chosen leader and starts to
put everyone else down. I hope that that has come to an end as I would like
to rejoin this group as a poster and not just a lurker. I know in the few
year that I have been involved with Kolb, I have seen many good and
knowledgeable Kolb builders leave this list due to the the arrogant attitude
of one member. I hope this is taken in the context that I intend. I have
seen several good lists go down the drain when the type of controversy I see
here takes control. I don't want that to happen here.
Ron Payne
-------Original Message-------
From: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Date: 02/12/04 11:31:42 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: list usage.
I second the motion.
Dale Sellers
----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Armstrong" <tophera(at)centurytel.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: list usage.
>
> When people on this list start trying to tell each other what to say, or
> that their ideas are dangerous we loose the best part of this list.
Flying
> is dangerous. Every idea on this list is dangerous. Ultralights and
light
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | TAILDRAGGER503(at)aol.com |
WELL SAID
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dale Sellers" <dsel1(at)bellsouth.net> |
I agree whole heartly and I think that brother John Hauk needs to either
town down his attacks or leave the list. I, too, have been one of his
victims.
Dale Sellers
Georgia
----- Original Message -----
From: <TAILDRAGGER503(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: list usage.
>
> WELL SAID
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | TAILDRAGGER503(at)aol.com |
I am now done building my FSII and am going to build a Bearhawk from
scratch.I am also leaving this list for good.Thanks for all the help and good luck
with your planes and future planes.
Dave Snyder
Built 2001 FSII
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
Ron:
Please tell us who you are referring to so we will not have to guess
and make the wrong decision.
Thanks,
john h
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ron or Mary Payne" <whyme(at)vci.net>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: list usage.
|
| I left this list some time back as I got tired of being attacked by
one
| individual when I was only trying to contribute some things that I
had
| experienced. I feel that I contributed some value to other builders.
I also
| learned a great deal by reading the posts of other builders. It is a
shame
| when someone gets the feeling that they are the chosen leader and
starts to
| put everyone else down. I hope that that has come to an end as I
would like
| to rejoin this group as a poster and not just a lurker. I know in
the few
| year that I have been involved with Kolb, I have seen many good and
| knowledgeable Kolb builders leave this list due to the the arrogant
attitude
| of one member. I hope this is taken in the context that I intend. I
have
| seen several good lists go down the drain when the type of
controversy I see
| here takes control. I don't want that to happen here.
|
| Ron Payne
|
| -------Original Message-------
|
| From: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
| Date: 02/12/04 11:31:42 AM
| To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
| Subject: Re: Kolb-List: list usage.
|
|
| I second the motion.
|
| Dale Sellers
| ----- Original Message -----
| From: "Christopher Armstrong" <tophera(at)centurytel.net>
| To:
| Subject: Kolb-List: list usage.
|
|
|
| >
| > When people on this list start trying to tell each other what to
say, or
| > that their ideas are dangerous we loose the best part of this
list.
| Flying
| > is dangerous. Every idea on this list is dangerous. Ultralights
and
| light
|
|
|
====
|
====
|
====
|
====
|
|
|
|
|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Hauck" <jimh474(at)earthlink.net> |
Y'all;
I agree this list is like a lot of list on the internet. Members are from all walks
of life, some so "edumacated" that they have constant smart head aches and
those like me that are too dumb to pour Pee from a boot with the directions
stamped on the bottom of the heel. You have members that are forward, naive,
plain blunt and the ones that are always politically correct that talks in circles
and skates the real issues.. ( Aka Klintonistas) So, this list is no different
than the make up of life in general.
Internet lists have little cliques that BC back and forth and then one member finally
get's pumped up enough to snidely slam someone, never using their name,
but with very strong insinuations directed at a particular individual. Also
it seems that "Newbies" to a list always want to shout to the high heavens of
how great they are and when they get their feathers trimmed, they sulk and pout
and want to pick up their toys and run off and hide or snidely get back a someone.
Then there is the ones that lurk about and get their "Jollies" by always
trying to put some one down and in the process, make themselves look big.
I guess that is human nature in it's worst form.
The PC is a wonderful item, it allows research communication, video?audio, but
it doesn't have the ability to reflect a persons feelings, voice reflections and
emotions. as would occur face to face in a normal conversation. The worst thing
about the PC it causes whimps to become total "Joe Billy Bad A- -es". Have
you ever noticed what a person seems to look and act like in real life compared
of the image you had in your mind of what you thought they were from chatting
on the PC? Shocking, isn't it.
This list is going to get a lot of queries from persons just getting started in
aviation and Kolbs. To the old hands, these queries may sound completely stupid,
but the person asking it is very sincere. We all need to think before we advise
someone to do something that we would do, as it may be lethal to the person
asking for advice. It is best to refer them to an expert in that field and/or
the manufacturer, rather than giving a reply of what we think we would do.
There is a huge experience factor on this list from the early days of Experimental,
ultra-light, military and GA aviation. What applies to one may not necessarily
apply to another, then again it may well apply.
I feel that all phases of building and operating a Kolb should be discussed here
not just technical items. If you don't want to read a post, use the Delete key
that Al Gore invented for us.
I get a lot of queries from individuals BC that are just starting out building
a Kolb,as they don't want to be embarrassed by asking a stupid sounding question
on the list and be ridiculed. Yep! This happens.
We all need to take a step back and look at ourselves and see if we aren't guilty
of these things. The list is too good of a list for information for Kolb builders
to screw it up with personalities and inflated egos.
Always look at the end of a comment, you may see a smiley face that indicates a
person is joking. :<) Could save a lot a frustration for all involved.
An example of a post that I felt that shouldn't have been posted as it was advocating
making a safety harness using pop rivets instead of stitching. I don't
have any idea who posted the post as it has been a long time ago and BELIEVE ME
I AM NOT POINTING A FINGER AT ANYONE as I truly have no idea who posted it.
This kind of post to a naive person could well cause them to be injured or killed
as they may accept it as a common and proven method of doing something. These
are the things we need to steer away from.
Jim Hauck
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Clayton <jspc78(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: list usage--What is really going on here? |
Hi Dale S./Ron P./All,
I understand you are upset about something, and you
want to be heard. So let's take a look at the
situation for a moment, shall we?
Looking back through the archives the last year I find
the timing of these repeated attacks interesting:
Several times I have asked the list specific
questions, often because I want to see if I can change
something to suit me (and no one else), and John H.
and others have stepped up to the plate and explained
how they look at it. Then, like clockwork, I see the
same couple of posters chime in and ask John why he is
"telling people what to do", when if you follow the
thread back to the source, there I (and others) am,
asking yet another question to understand something
better. Is the tone or content of my questioning
offensive to anyone? If so, please e-mail me directly
so I can understand how to present myself in a more
constructive way.
So by my reckoning Gentlemen, you should be upset at
me for asking, not John H. for answering.
My thanks to the vast majority of the list members
tired of the personal attacks on this list that have
had to waste time reading this post, but I watch lists
all day at work, and have over and over seen this sort
of turmoil cause a list to be only populated with mean
spirited whiners because the sane have long left town!
I don't want that to happen here.
Going forward, Dale S., and others so mad about this,
I invite you to e-mail me directly @ jspc78(at)yahoo.com
and that way you can vent your anger on the guy you
are really mad at.
-Jim
Jim Clayton
California
Mark-3X
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf
Of Dale Sellers
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: list usage.
I agree whole heartly and I think that brother John
Hauk needs to either
town down his attacks or leave the list. I, too, have
been one of his
victims.
Dale Sellers
Georgia
----- Original Message -----
From: <TAILDRAGGER503(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: list usage.
TAILDRAGGER503(at)aol.com
>
> WELL SAID
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dale Sellers" <dsel1(at)bellsouth.net> |
John,
I been in aviation as long as you have and built as many airplanes as you
have. Preaching is for the pulpit on Sunday morning, not this list. You
don't seem to get the message so I will spell it out for ya. (And I don't
have a smile on my face) You don't seem to realize that you are the problem
with this list. I can't speak for everyone else, but I'm tired of your
malicious attacks, hearing about helicopters, the war, the Alaska trips and
how much experience you have and what all you've done. It is my
understanding that this list is for the discussion of Kolb
aircraft.....period! Not trips to monument valley or where ever.
You are so stuck on yourself that you can't think you could possibly be the
cause of the problem.
My delete button will be getting plenty of use if you stay on the list
because I won't let you run me off.
Dale Sellers
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Hauck" <jimh474(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: Kolb List
>
> Y'all;
>
> I agree this list is like a lot of list on the internet. Members are from
all walks of life, some so "edumacated" that they have constant smart head
aches and those like me that are too dumb to pour Pee from a boot with the
directions stamped on the bottom of the heel. You have members that are
forward, naive, plain blunt and the ones that are always politically
correct that talks in circles and skates the real issues.. ( Aka
Klintonistas) So, this list is no different than the make up of life in
general.
>
> Internet lists have little cliques that BC back and forth and then one
member finally get's pumped up enough to snidely slam someone, never using
their name, but with very strong insinuations directed at a particular
individual. Also it seems that "Newbies" to a list always want to shout to
the high heavens of how great they are and when they get their feathers
trimmed, they sulk and pout and want to pick up their toys and run off and
hide or snidely get back a someone. Then there is the ones that lurk about
and get their "Jollies" by always trying to put some one down and in the
process, make themselves look big. I guess that is human nature in it's
worst form.
>
> The PC is a wonderful item, it allows research communication, video?audio,
but it doesn't have the ability to reflect a persons feelings, voice
reflections and emotions. as would occur face to face in a normal
conversation. The worst thing about the PC it causes whimps to become total
"Joe Billy Bad A- -es". Have you ever noticed what a person seems to look
and act like in real life compared of the image you had in your mind of what
you thought they were from chatting on the PC? Shocking, isn't it.
>
> This list is going to get a lot of queries from persons just getting
started in aviation and Kolbs. To the old hands, these queries may sound
completely stupid, but the person asking it is very sincere. We all need to
think before we advise someone to do something that we would do, as it may
be lethal to the person asking for advice. It is best to refer them to an
expert in that field and/or the manufacturer, rather than giving a reply of
what we think we would do.
>
> There is a huge experience factor on this list from the early days of
Experimental, ultra-light, military and GA aviation. What applies to one may
not necessarily apply to another, then again it may well apply.
>
> I feel that all phases of building and operating a Kolb should be
discussed here not just technical items. If you don't want to read a post,
use the Delete key that Al Gore invented for us.
>
> I get a lot of queries from individuals BC that are just starting out
building a Kolb,as they don't want to be embarrassed by asking a stupid
sounding question on the list and be ridiculed. Yep! This happens.
>
> We all need to take a step back and look at ourselves and see if we aren't
guilty of these things. The list is too good of a list for information for
Kolb builders to screw it up with personalities and inflated egos.
>
> Always look at the end of a comment, you may see a smiley face that
indicates a person is joking. :<) Could save a lot a frustration for all
involved.
>
> An example of a post that I felt that shouldn't have been posted as it was
advocating making a safety harness using pop rivets instead of stitching. I
don't have any idea who posted the post as it has been a long time ago and
BELIEVE ME I AM NOT POINTING A FINGER AT ANYONE as I truly have no idea who
posted it. This kind of post to a naive person could well cause them to be
injured or killed as they may accept it as a common and proven method of
doing something. These are the things we need to steer away from.
>
>
> Jim Hauck
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Ok guys, I think I have a good idea for new builders and maybe some that are at
the same stage or maybe even farther ahead than me. So here it goes..
I have had to reorder 5 front nose false ribs to get a good one. And this one is
going to need fixing but at least I can fix it. TNK has been very good at sending
them to me at no charge. However, waiting on the replacements can make your
building time add up.My recommendation is that you not only check everything
in but check the items closely for proper fit and construction.
After the 2 that came with the kit and the 2 replacements and the 1 I'm holding
in my hand now, I can say no 2 are alike.
And the differences in them range from the tubing being either to short or the
angles cut wrong,or the upper arc of the tubing was the wrong wall thickness,
or in the case of this last one the brace that extends aft from the center upper
gusset down to the steel root has the hole drilled 1/2 way into the tubing
and 1/2 not. And it's riveted in that way! I plan to go back and inspect every
factory supplied part for these type of errors.
I'm not blasting the factory because I know how hard quality control can be in
production. And just as I constantly remind my customers to "Inspect" the part
before installing it, I share the same advise with you guys. Just because you
bought it from a factory, does not mean it's perfect or correct. Heck the factory
are humans too. There is a lot of angles and repetition in this process.
It is easy to see where these common mistakes could be made when you have a person
making components that have never installed them. I have some photos available
upon request of what to look for.
Take care, Blue skies!!!!
Paul Petty
Building Ms. Dixie
Kolbra/912UL/Warp
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dale Sellers" <dsel1(at)bellsouth.net> |
Sorry to see you go Dave. good luck and safe flying.
Dale Sellers
----- Original Message -----
From: <TAILDRAGGER503(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: list usage.
>
> I am now done building my FSII and am going to build a Bearhawk from
> scratch.I am also leaving this list for good.Thanks for all the help and
good luck
> with your planes and future planes.
>
> Dave Snyder
> Built 2001 FSII
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com |
writes:
> I feel that all phases of building and operating a Kolb should be
> discussed here not just technical items. If you don't want to read a
> post, use the Delete key that Al Gore invented for us.
> Jim Hauck
Jim/Gang,
You got it all wrong, Al Gore invented the internet :) Just having fun
with you :)
Getting to the root of the problem if there is one: The internet is a
great communication tool as you have stated, BUT there is one BIG problem
with lists like these in that feelings get hurt easily if something is
taken out of context. This is because we don't know the other person's
intentions when it was written. Unless we have met the author face to
face, we don't know this person and sometimes it's difficult to judge
what they are saying in black and white.
I've been on this list since its early beginnings even before brother
John was on. I can remember when he accused me of being drunk when I made
a post about my flying activities. I was a little taken back at the time,
but I understood what John was saying. He has since apologized for
something he was kidding me about while I took it as a slam against my
flying.
The way I see it, I'm just happy that I'm able to make comments to a
group of guys that fly the kind of plane that is my first love. I've been
flying this little aircraft (air-vehicle) for 17 years. Does this make me
a "better" pilot than any of you? Hardly. Brother John and others have
made trips that most of us can only dream about, me included. I don't
know what it's like to do this and can only imagine. I guess if I were in
his shoes, I would have boasting rights too. But I haven't been there and
may never be there. I can only learn from guys like him and continue to
dream on. I feel fortunate that I am flying a Kolb and am healthy enough
to do this kind of flying. I run into all kinds of wannabies every day
that wish they were in my shoes. Maybe this entitles me to some boasting
rights too :) Well, I don't think so. I'm just doing what I love to do.
Most of you have heard of the aviation hierarchy where astronauts and
military pilots are at the top of the list. Where does that put "us"
guys? You got it ......... low and slow but having the most fun!
When a pilot stops learning about flying, the end is near. Life is too
short to argue about petty things.
Let's go fly instead ......
Ralph Burlingame
Original Firestar
17 years flying it
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Swiderski" <swiderski(at)rocketjet.net> |
| Subject: | parachute repack |
Hi Ben,
Your question below, is an intriguing one. If the guy was
giving me a story, or if I wasn't listening closely, and you decided to
extend the recommended life of a rocket that was in fact at the end of
its reliability, and you ended up pulling the red handle, then you might
be dead. And instead of saving money, you would have wasted it on the
cheap repack that you never got to use because the rocket would not pull
it out. The decisions & assumptions we make can be paralyzing in their
consequences. The smallest detail can be overlooked, mistaken or
underestimated with enormous consequences. Flying can be deadly to our
health. (I missed death by inches once when a cast iron skillet went
whizzing by my head because I went flying instead of mowing the lawn!)
So Ben, regarding your question, I'm not sure how sure I am as
to whether he was testing the exact same rockets as BRS uses. He at
least implied they were essentially the same. I also asked a BRS guy,
if he knew of any of the rockets failing that they got back for
repacking. (They test fire all of them.) He said no, they all fired. So
my whole hearted recommendation to the List is this: "If you use a
rocket that is 15 years past expiration date in your chute, IT WOULD BE
ABSOLUTELY PERFECTLY SAFE to say you will die if you pulled the red
handle while standing in front of the rocket.
Ben, I found your post below refreshing and intelligently
written with a life perspective I relate to. I am not intending to mock
your input. My tongue in cheek response is an attempt to bring some
commonsense and humor back to the List. Safety must be either religious
or political, because it seems to evoke the same responses.
...Richard Swiderski
Hi all,
I'm an on-again/off-again lurker by now, and saw the little controversy
embedded somewhere regarding the possible alternative of getting chutes
repacked less expensively than the recommended BRS TBO. >>>>>Richard,
I'm curious how sure you are that the military test guy is in fact
testing the same rocket that BRS factory uses.<<<<<<< I would not at all
doubt the claim that they have a very very very .....very high firing
rate.
A related comment, anyone using a chute past the manufacturer's
recommended TBO is *obviously* doing so at their own risk, and I'm not
sure it warrants the description "extremely dangerous". I too have
heard that possible mildew is the biggest risk factor, and that overall,
BRS assumes chutes have been out in the weather when they make their TBO
interval recommendation. I know I am taking some added risk in using my
BRS beyond it's TBO. On the other hand, it has never seen a drop of
rain, and I fly with an assumption of say 96% likelihood it would fire
if I were so unfortunate to need it. This compared to what I might
assume to be 99% likelihood when it was within TBO. Both my numbers are
guesses, probably conservative (toward safety), and again, just as much
my responsibility as any other flying decision I make. I spose what I'm
saying is that I felt 96% was substantially better than leaving the
thing in a box in my garage, and the additional money to repack, or more
likely be "forced" to buy a new model was not worth it to me. If I
continue to fly this plane, I may eventually take the BRS out entirely,
and if I ever want to do light aerobatics (i doubt it), just get a
certified parachute for my own hide. -Ben Ransom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Hauck" <jimh474(at)earthlink.net> |
Dale:
You on the sauce? Hee Hee! John didn't write that post you replied to.
I got a big grin on my face.
Jim Hauck
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Cooper" <kcooper(at)ptd.net> |
Hey, I wish someone would come up to PA and kick me in the seat of the pants to
get me started on my SS. I'm hung up on the crooked inboard wing rib tang thiing
still. Any SS builders with some close up wing rib pictures? Does TNK sell
materials such as 0.032 sheeting and maybe an 11" chunk of 3/4X.058? Thanks...Dan
C, shivering in PA.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| I been in aviation as long as you have and built as many airplanes
as you
| have. Preaching is for the pulpit on Sunday morning, not this list.
You
| don't seem to get the message so I will spell it out for ya. (And I
don't
| have a smile on my face) You don't seem to realize that you are the
problem
| with this list. I can't speak for everyone else, but I'm tired of
your
| malicious attacks, hearing about helicopters, the war, the Alaska
trips and
| how much experience you have and what all you've done. It is my
| understanding that this list is for the discussion of Kolb
| aircraft.....period! Not trips to monument valley or where ever.
| You are so stuck on yourself that you can't think you could possibly
be the
| cause of the problem.
|
| My delete button will be getting plenty of use if you stay on the
list
| because I won't let you run me off.
|
| Dale Sellers
Dale/All:
I left your whole message up there so I could check it out as I reply.
You sure have a way with words, accusations, etc.
Everyone is entitled to interpret what I write the way they want to.
Undoubtedly, you got your special way comprending what I write.
On a List, as large as this one, it is very difficult not to repeat
one's self as time goes on. What I told Ralph Burlingame when I came
on the List 6 years ago has be repeated and he has heard the same old
thing over and over. But the new guys that come on this List every
day have not.
Having done something and talking about it is not boasting. It is a
way to share with new people (Listers) that do not know what the
capabilities of our aircraft are. Building is a small part of this
List. The largest part is people. Real people, just like you and me.
People with feelings. People with experience. People with no
experience. We learn from each other, unless we are so jealous of
others we can not glean any good from it, only hate, disgust, and a
closed mind.
You continuosly accuse me of malicious attacks on you and others.
However, you only make false accusations. You don't back anything up
with facts, only your feelings. Where are these posts that include my
attacks on any one on this List???
You are so busy trying to cut me down, change my ways (as you perceive
them) and "invite me off the List", that you can not see reality in
the least.
If you are going to accuse me, give me some facts, give me some names,
show me some posts to the Kolb List where I have attacked a single
member. If you can't, then shut the F--K UP about it and get a life.
I am sick and tired of your accusations, Ron Payne's, Jack Hart's, Jim
Gerken's, and any other member who happens to not particularly care
for me and the way I present myself to this List.
I know of no appointment by Matt Dralle of a peer judgment committee
to judge the performance of other Kolb Listers. If you have a real
case against me, can back it up, then go to Matt and see what needs to
be done about this guy you dislike.
I could care less whether you like or dislike me. But stop making
accusations that are not true. Try to understand my point of view. I
spend a great deal of time trying to help people not make the same
mistakes I have made with Kolb aircraft. To discover a better way to
do it. Quit trying to tear me down.
I am not trying to run anyone off the Kolb List. Because I may
disagree with a persons comments does not mean I am attacking them.
This is a real world and a serious hobby. Make a mistake, let your
ego get in the way and you will die. I tried it and lost. Gravity
wins every time.
Instead of trying your damnedest to tear me down, why not try and help
me get some good ideas across that might help me prevent someone from
getting hurt. You have been in aviation as long as I have and have
built as many airplanes as I have. Why not share some of that
expertise with the Kolb List and not be so dead set on "inviting me to
leave."
Take a look at yourselves, all you who are bound and determined that
John Hauck is the root of all the problems of the Kolb List. Take a
real deep look, an inventory of what is inside you, before you come
making false judgements of me.
Your attacks on me are not helping this List one iota. Your attacks
on me are tearing this List down. For once, try to think "principals
before personalities". You all can not get "personality" out of your
thoughts long enough to think reality.
Now, if you jump me I am going to jump back. I will not roll over and
play dead. I am a fighter for what I believe in. If I am wrong, I
will readily admit it to God, to myself, and to this List. If you
will think back a little you may remember I readily share the mistakes
I have made for the past 20 years building and flying Kolb aircraft.
If you do not want to share the experiences I have to share with the
List, when you see my name appear, hit the delete key. No one is
obligated to read what I write. Don't worry. I won't attack you. I
never have and I never will, unless you provoke me into it.
Take care, it is time for supper,
john h
PS: Thought I might add this little tid bit in for your information.
A lot of you know I don't do drugs or alcohol. Haven't in more than
22 years now. So when you read something I write, you can take it to
the bank as coming from my heart, and not my dizzy head. I do not
play silly games. Good night.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Russ Kinne <kinnepix(at)earthlink.net> |
For my 2 cents worth -- I sincerely hope John Hauck does NOT leave the list
-- his WIDE experience is valuable, even invaluable, and can or could save
someone's life at some point and is enormously helpful to all who "haven't
been there yet".
Granted, he's outspoken and perhaps should keep quiet more than he does --
but his overall input is a good contribution to solving many of Kolbers'
problems
FWIW
Russ Kinne
Not=yet=Kolber
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Duncan McBride" <duncanmcbride(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: new builders |
Wow, I was halfway through your note before I realized you were talking
about the prefabbed rib option. I didn't order those - I drilled and
riveted up every rib. Afterwards I thought I was an idiot for not getting
the ribs already made, but now I'm feeling pretty virtuous. I still wish
I'd gotten the frame powdercoated, though.
You have a real good attitude, Paul. Lots of things are going to need some
customization and fitting, and plain fixing, before you have an airplane.
The Kolb is a genuine rag and tube airplane, and the kit isn't popped out of
CNC molds to within a millimicron tolerance. Thinking back there were a lot
of things I changed or fixed or replaced as the construction went along.
Taking responsibility for everything that went into the plane made it easier
to deal with variations in the plans or parts from time to time. And for
sure, the folks at TNK took care of everything I ever asked them for.
Duncan McBride
319DM
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Petty" <Lynnp@c-gate.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: new builders
>
> Ok guys, I think I have a good idea for new builders and maybe some that
are at the same stage or maybe even farther ahead than me. So here it goes..
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Denny Rowe" <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
>
> Hey, I wish someone would come up to PA and kick me in the seat of the
pants to get me started on my SS. I'm hung up on the crooked inboard wing
rib tang thiing still. Any SS builders with some close up wing rib pictures?
Does TNK sell materials such as 0.032 sheeting and maybe an 11" chunk of
3/4X.058? Thanks...Dan C, shivering in PA.
>
>
Dan,
Where are you at in PA?
I am 40 moles north east of Pittsburgh and probably have the tubing and
sheeting you need sitting in my garage, if not my local metal supplier would
have it.
Let me know where you are at and maybe I can help you figure out your
crooked inboard wing rib tang thing. :-) My Mk-3 plans may show things
clearer.
Sincerely,
Dennis Rowe, Mk-3, Leechburg, PA.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dale Sellers" <dsel1(at)bellsouth.net> |
DELETE!!!!!!
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Kolb List
>
> | I been in aviation as long as you have and built as many airplanes
> as you
> | have. Preaching is for the pulpit on Sunday morning, not this list.
> You
> | don't seem to get the message so I will spell it out for ya. (And I
> don't
> | have a smile on my face) You don't seem to realize that you are the
> problem
> | with this list. I can't speak for everyone else, but I'm tired of
> your
> | malicious attacks, hearing about helicopters, the war, the Alaska
> trips and
> | how much experience you have and what all you've done. It is my
> | understanding that this list is for the discussion of Kolb
> | aircraft.....period! Not trips to monument valley or where ever.
> | You are so stuck on yourself that you can't think you could possibly
> be the
> | cause of the problem.
> |
> | My delete button will be getting plenty of use if you stay on the
> list
> | because I won't let you run me off.
> |
> | Dale Sellers
>
> Dale/All:
>
> I left your whole message up there so I could check it out as I reply.
> You sure have a way with words, accusations, etc.
>
> Everyone is entitled to interpret what I write the way they want to.
> Undoubtedly, you got your special way comprending what I write.
>
> On a List, as large as this one, it is very difficult not to repeat
> one's self as time goes on. What I told Ralph Burlingame when I came
> on the List 6 years ago has be repeated and he has heard the same old
> thing over and over. But the new guys that come on this List every
> day have not.
>
> Having done something and talking about it is not boasting. It is a
> way to share with new people (Listers) that do not know what the
> capabilities of our aircraft are. Building is a small part of this
> List. The largest part is people. Real people, just like you and me.
> People with feelings. People with experience. People with no
> experience. We learn from each other, unless we are so jealous of
> others we can not glean any good from it, only hate, disgust, and a
> closed mind.
>
> You continuosly accuse me of malicious attacks on you and others.
> However, you only make false accusations. You don't back anything up
> with facts, only your feelings. Where are these posts that include my
> attacks on any one on this List???
>
> You are so busy trying to cut me down, change my ways (as you perceive
> them) and "invite me off the List", that you can not see reality in
> the least.
>
> If you are going to accuse me, give me some facts, give me some names,
> show me some posts to the Kolb List where I have attacked a single
> member. If you can't, then shut the F--K UP about it and get a life.
> I am sick and tired of your accusations, Ron Payne's, Jack Hart's, Jim
> Gerken's, and any other member who happens to not particularly care
> for me and the way I present myself to this List.
>
> I know of no appointment by Matt Dralle of a peer judgment committee
> to judge the performance of other Kolb Listers. If you have a real
> case against me, can back it up, then go to Matt and see what needs to
> be done about this guy you dislike.
>
> I could care less whether you like or dislike me. But stop making
> accusations that are not true. Try to understand my point of view. I
> spend a great deal of time trying to help people not make the same
> mistakes I have made with Kolb aircraft. To discover a better way to
> do it. Quit trying to tear me down.
>
> I am not trying to run anyone off the Kolb List. Because I may
> disagree with a persons comments does not mean I am attacking them.
> This is a real world and a serious hobby. Make a mistake, let your
> ego get in the way and you will die. I tried it and lost. Gravity
> wins every time.
>
> Instead of trying your damnedest to tear me down, why not try and help
> me get some good ideas across that might help me prevent someone from
> getting hurt. You have been in aviation as long as I have and have
> built as many airplanes as I have. Why not share some of that
> expertise with the Kolb List and not be so dead set on "inviting me to
> leave."
>
> Take a look at yourselves, all you who are bound and determined that
> John Hauck is the root of all the problems of the Kolb List. Take a
> real deep look, an inventory of what is inside you, before you come
> making false judgements of me.
>
> Your attacks on me are not helping this List one iota. Your attacks
> on me are tearing this List down. For once, try to think "principals
> before personalities". You all can not get "personality" out of your
> thoughts long enough to think reality.
>
> Now, if you jump me I am going to jump back. I will not roll over and
> play dead. I am a fighter for what I believe in. If I am wrong, I
> will readily admit it to God, to myself, and to this List. If you
> will think back a little you may remember I readily share the mistakes
> I have made for the past 20 years building and flying Kolb aircraft.
>
> If you do not want to share the experiences I have to share with the
> List, when you see my name appear, hit the delete key. No one is
> obligated to read what I write. Don't worry. I won't attack you. I
> never have and I never will, unless you provoke me into it.
>
> Take care, it is time for supper,
>
> john h
>
> PS: Thought I might add this little tid bit in for your information.
> A lot of you know I don't do drugs or alcohol. Haven't in more than
> 22 years now. So when you read something I write, you can take it to
> the bank as coming from my heart, and not my dizzy head. I do not
> play silly games. Good night.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
My experience with rivnuts is fairly extensive, and mostly aggravating. If
the threads in either the rivnut or on the bolt are even a little rough, or,
if maybe you tighten them a little too much, or, especially if they rust or
corrode a little, the pressure of trying to turn the bolt will spin the
rivnut..............then just try to get the things back apart. If you can
get at the back side of the things, you can grip the nut and get them
apart - usually - but if it's a blind hole, then holding the nut while
gently drilling with progressively larger, very sharp bits will often get
them out. A uni-bit works particularly well, but it's gotta be very sharp,
& a very light touch is called for. I've expended a fair amount of fairly
creative language and strong emotion on the things, and will no longer use
them. Lar.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Building Kolb Mk III
N78LB Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Clay Stuart" <tcstuart(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: rivnuts
>
> I just received a few rivnuts from Aircraft Spruce to mess around with.
Any
> advice on using them. I think I will try to use them instead of rivets in
> areas that I might want to disassemble occasionally (rear Lexan windows,
for
> example). I got the converter tool for my rivet gun (about $10). Can you
> use them with the pneumatic rivet gun or limit their use to the hand
> riveter? I only have the 6-32 size, which is about the size of a 1/8"
> rivet. Would you use a lock washer of some sort (star), or Locktite on
the
> screw?
>
> Clay Stuart
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Duncan McBride" <duncanmcbride(at)comcast.net> |
Oh shut up. You're acting like some twelve year old, playing that stupid,
"I touched you last" game. Everything positive you've ever contributed to
this list is going to be lost in the memory of this latest stupidity. Stop.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dale Sellers" <dsel1(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Kolb List
>
> DELETE!!!!!!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron or Mary Payne" <whyme(at)vci.net> |
Well said Dale
-------Original Message-------
From: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Date: 02/12/04 04:30:35 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Kolb List
John,
I been in aviation as long as you have and built as many airplanes as you
have. Preaching is for the pulpit on Sunday morning, not this list. You
don't seem to get the message so I will spell it out for ya. (And I don't
have a smile on my face) You don't seem to realize that you are the problem
with this list. I can't speak for everyone else, but I'm tired of your
malicious attacks, hearing about helicopters, the war, the Alaska trips and
how much experience you have and what all you've done. It is my
understanding that this list is for the discussion of Kolb
aircraft.....period! Not trips to monument valley or where ever.
You are so stuck on yourself that you can't think you could possibly be the
cause of the problem.
My delete button will be getting plenty of use if you stay on the list
because I won't let you run me off.
Dale Sellers
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "bryan green" <lgreen1(at)sc.rr.com> |
It looks like I am going to be using my 377 for a while longer. I intend to do
some cross country flying this spring and summer ( 100-200 miles probably a leg
for some of you guys). I pulled the heads off because it had a broken head
stud and can see cross hatch marks in cylinders and readings someone wrote on
top of cyl. when rebuilt.
If any of you guys with more experience with this engine ( which is probably
most of ya ) then I could share problems you've had things to look out for and
such it will be appreciated.
Bryan Green Elgin SC
Firestar I 19LBG 377 BRS
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kirby Dennis Contr ASC/TM <Dennis.Kirby(at)kirtland.af.mil> |
| Subject: | Hans's BMW in 'Experimenter' |
Kolb Friends -
I just received my Feb issue of EAA Experimenter magazine, and I was
facinated to read in the Engine Q&A section a very detailed article
submitted by our List's own Hans van Alphen on the details of his BMW
installation in his Mark-III Extra. The article offers many details of
Hans's pioneering work on his R100 engine project (many details of which he
shared with us on the List over the past year), and includes several photos
of his BMW engine on his beautifully finished Extra.
Congratulations, Hans, on a first-rate installation project! You'll likely
get lots of inquiries from interested folks based on your article.
Dennis Kirby
Mark-III with the "other" 4-stroke boxer engine in
Cedar Crest, NM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kirby Dennis Contr ASC/TM <Dennis.Kirby(at)kirtland.af.mil> |
| Subject: | BRS that Shoots Downward |
Clay Stuart asked: << Hasn't someone mounted the BRS underneath to fire
downward? Any reason not to have this configuration? >>
Clay, and Kolbers -
I mounted my BRS-1050 Softpack inside the cabin, behind the passenger seat
and underneath the fuel tank. It's completely out of the slipstream and out
of the weather & elements. It is designed to fire out the right side of the
aircraft, right thru the fabric. Installation was approved by BRS after I
sent them drawings & photos. Am happy to share details with anyone who is
interested.
Dennis Kirby
Mark-III, Verner-1400, in
New Mexico
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hans vanAlphen" <hva(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: BMW and Mr. Hauck |
Mr. John Hauck,
Once again you did a huge disservice to the experimental aviation community
by bashing the BMW engine with words like "unproven BMW", "radical", "not
been tested" and "nor proven for flight".
In your jealous attack on a member of the list you also attack the very
fundamental purpose of the experimental aviation community. As "moderator of
this list" you especially should support innovation and experimentation,
failing that, rename the Kolb List to the
"John Hauck's-912-Warp List".
For your information there many BMW's flying all over the world.
Mary Jones , editor of the EAA magazine Experimenter, asked me a couple of
months ago to write a short article about my experience with the BMW
conversion I did and was flying successfully.
The article appeared in this February issue of Experimenter under Engines
Q&A.
The response to the article has been overwhelming, not just from people
interested in the BMW conversion but also of people that are actually flying
a BMW successfully in many different airplanes from tractors to pushers and
trikes.
The BMW is a very viable alternative engine.
Hans van Alphen
Mark III Xtra
BMW R100 - 122 hours
Ivo inflight adjustable prop.
> From: "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com>
> snip
> Also, be careful making all those changes to mount an unproven BMW
> powerplant on a previously 582 powered MK III. Yes, that is pretty
> radical, and a lot of the new members of the Kolb List may think it is
> completely safe to follow suit in what you are doing. After all, it
> has not been tested nor has it been proven safe for flight.
>
> Take care,
>
> john h
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Sandy Hegyi" <sandyh(at)dccnet.com> |
Does anyone have any instructions on how to fit an electric start on to a
532? Will the starter off a 503 work?
Thanks
Sandy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dale Sellers" <dsel1(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: BMW and Mr. Hauck |
HERE, HERE!!!!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hans vanAlphen" <hva(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: Re: BMW and Mr. Hauck
>
> Mr. John Hauck,
> Once again you did a huge disservice to the experimental aviation
community
> by bashing the BMW engine with words like "unproven BMW", "radical", "not
> been tested" and "nor proven for flight".
>
> In your jealous attack on a member of the list you also attack the very
> fundamental purpose of the experimental aviation community. As "moderator
of
> this list" you especially should support innovation and experimentation,
> failing that, rename the Kolb List to the
> "John Hauck's-912-Warp List".
>
> For your information there many BMW's flying all over the world.
> Mary Jones , editor of the EAA magazine Experimenter, asked me a couple of
> months ago to write a short article about my experience with the BMW
> conversion I did and was flying successfully.
> The article appeared in this February issue of Experimenter under Engines
> Q&A.
> The response to the article has been overwhelming, not just from people
> interested in the BMW conversion but also of people that are actually
flying
> a BMW successfully in many different airplanes from tractors to pushers
and
> trikes.
> The BMW is a very viable alternative engine.
>
> Hans van Alphen
> Mark III Xtra
> BMW R100 - 122 hours
> Ivo inflight adjustable prop.
>
> > From: "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com>
> > snip
> > Also, be careful making all those changes to mount an unproven BMW
> > powerplant on a previously 582 powered MK III. Yes, that is pretty
> > radical, and a lot of the new members of the Kolb List may think it is
> > completely safe to follow suit in what you are doing. After all, it
> > has not been tested nor has it been proven safe for flight.
> >
> > Take care,
> >
> > john h
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard & Martha Neilsen" <NeilsenRM(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: BMW and Mr. Hauck |
Hans
Please drop it. John was just pulling the guys chain. If you have ever met
the guy you would know he didn't mean to malign the BMW engine. I also
support a non Rotax view and engine. I have flown with John W and John H
that is three different engines and He never once criticized my VW or John
W's Jabaru except maybe to get us going. I have also referred to his Rotax
as a rich boys toy, neither one of us were offended.
We need to return the Kolb list to a builders and fun exchange of ideas.
Please don't add any more fuel to it. If you feel it necessary to comment
further. Take it off the list PLEASE.
This is also off the list.
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIIIc
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hans vanAlphen" <hva(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: Re: BMW and Mr. Hauck
>
> Mr. John Hauck,
> Once again you did a huge disservice to the experimental aviation
community
> by bashing the BMW engine with words like "unproven BMW", "radical", "not
> been tested" and "nor proven for flight".
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Clayton <jspc78(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: BMW and Mr. Hauck |
.................................................
Mr. John Hauck,
Once again you did a huge disservice to the
experimental aviation community
by bashing the BMW engine with words like "unproven
BMW", "radical", "not
been tested" and "nor proven for flight".
.............................................
.............................................
Hi Hans/All,
Perhaps you could take a minute and read the entire
post you cut from: It believe you took it out of
context. The way I read it at the time John was
speaking tongue firmly-in-cheek!
I know John can speak for himself, but I thought this
should come from someone besides him.
On the topic of Kolb stuff: Congrats on the article
in Experimenter, I am looking forward to reading it!
Jim Clayton
California
Mark-3X, Building
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com |
writes:
>
> Guys n Gals, (assuming Sandy is a Gal):-)
> I'm not trying to be a smart a__ here so don't take this wrong. I
> really want to know the real answer to this. What would be the
> requirements to test or say an engine is "proven". Is there a
> standard? A set number of hours?
>
> pp
Paul,
Take it for what it's worth, but I would say any engine is never "proven"
simply because it's a mechanical device. Four strokes seem to be more
reliable than a 2-stroke, but there have been a few 912's that have
failed. Case and point: A friend took off from our strip in a 912 powered
Titan that had well over 50 hours on the engine. It failed 200' in the
air and came down hard and wrecked the plane, but pilot and passenger
walked away. It wasn't the engine's fault. It was a tiny fuel filter that
clogged up. This can happen to any engine 2 or 4 stroke, it doesn't
matter.
I have well over 400 hours on this 447 2-stroke (never been overhauled),
and I *think* that it's reliable, but last October it let me down when I
forgot to clear the engine on a long decent from a 1000'. Most Rotax
2-strokes will want to quit when brought from cruise rpm to idle quickly
if they are not properly adjusted when it gets cold outside. I came down
hard because it took me off guard. I could have totalled the plane and
me, had I not reacted as I was only 40' up and not prepared to land
(horsing around .... after all these years one would think I knew
better).
No John, I wasn't drunk :) ...... and I had to re-learn another lesson.
After that, I'm happy that I still have a plane to fly.
Ralph
Original Firestar
17 years flying it
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <bwr000(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: BRS that Shoots Downward |
I missed this question from Clay...
My info on BRS mount location may be out of date, but...
When I bought mine, BRS wanted the chutes mounted to fire somewhat aft
and downward, this based on the assumption that the most likely need
for the chute is in a positive G load wing failure. i.e., The wings
failing and folding upward, the chute then having a clear path out and
down-ish. IMO, this could be a little dated reasoning, back to the
early days when many ultralight wings were sometimes made out of God
only knows what.
So, this easily invites the question: Do you think your wings are more
likely to fail in a positive G or a negative G "incident"? I talked
with Dennis about this in 1992-ish. His opinion was something along
the lines that, if you're flying within the design limits of the plane,
the answer is that the most likely situation you could need the chute
is perhaps having an engine failure over terrible terrain, and a top
mounted chute would allow you to glide down to the least worst spot,
pop the chute, and minimize the landing distance and damage. In other
words, Dennis felt no way the wings are going to fail, and I totally
believe him. On the other hand, you are probably buying the BRS in the
first place to allow for something *anyone* someday overlooks, and IMO,
this has got to include the designer as well as me the builder and
pilot. Short story long: Yes, Dennis presents a good reason for
mounting the chute on top, pointing upward. I did mine per BRS
recommendation, because at that time I still felt that I might be doing
one of those self-serving justifications that bite you later if I
mounted it on top. To each his own.
However, I feel I ended up with a better situation anyway, by mounting
mine inside the aft cabin of the Firestar to keep it out of the
weather, and also, to lower the aerodynamic and visual clutter from
outside the plane. In my first version, I had a pregnant bulge in the
fabric, but after the rebuild, I messed around with the BRS clamping
alot, resulting in the chute pointing sideways instead of aft. I
thought this would allow the chute to fit inside with no bulge in the
fabric at all, but in shrinking, the fabric goes concave just a tad,
and I do have a very small bump on each side where the chute ends touch
the fabric. (Fabric is protected from wear by a piece of plastic from
a milk container.)
-Ben Ransom
--- Kirby Dennis Contr ASC/TM wrote:
>
>
> Clay Stuart asked: << Hasn't someone mounted the BRS underneath to
> fire
> downward? Any reason not to have this configuration? >>
>
> Clay, and Kolbers -
>
> I mounted my BRS-1050 Softpack inside the cabin, behind the passenger
> seat
> and underneath the fuel tank. It's completely out of the slipstream
> and out
> of the weather & elements. It is designed to fire out the right side
> of the
> aircraft, right thru the fabric. Installation was approved by BRS
> after I
> sent them drawings & photos. Am happy to share details with anyone
> who is
> interested.
>
> Dennis Kirby
> Mark-III, Verner-1400, in
> New Mexico
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
=====
http://mae.ucdavis.edu/~ransom
__________________________________
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rwpike(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: electric start |
Sandy, according to a CPS catalog, the Rotax electric starter fits all the
different Rotax engines, the difference is in an adapter/spacer that fits
between the starter gear and the flywheel.
The 277FA, 377, 447, and 532 all use the same spacer except that the 532 is
only for serial #'s before 3549852. Those all use Rotax part # 852-370,
which is 1" high.
For 532's after serial # 3549852 and 582's w/o the liquid dampener, use
Rotax spacer # 852-374, which is 7/8" high.
For 582's with the liquid dampener, use Rotax adapter #852-378 which is
3/4" high.
Hope this helps.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>Does anyone have any instructions on how to fit an electric start on to a
>532? Will the starter off a 503 work?
>
>Thanks
>
>Sandy
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
To all Kolb List Members:
A short note and a sincere apology to every single member of this List
for me being so short sighted, so selfish, attempting to defend myself
and my reputation on the List. It was a very serious mistake on my
part. I take full responsibility for it. If I had been the majority
of List members not intimately involved, I would have been the first
to voice my opinion to get off the List and do it bc where it belongs.
Anyone having a problem with me personally, please contact me bc or my
telephone: 334-567-6280 or come by hauck's holler, alabama, and have a
cup of coffee with me and let's discuss the problem. If not, please
do not bore the rest of the List with your tripe.
I look forward to you bc comments.
Again, I am truly sorry for my selfish attitude the past few days. I
was so wrapped up in my own problem I failed to realize the full scope
of the situation. I sincerely apologize to those whose time I have so
selfishly wasted.
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Spinning Rivets |
Dave/All:
First, stay out of the bushes.
Second, do not forget to use a pulled mandrel to knock the old mandrel
out of the rivet you are drilling.
Third, get yourself a drill doctor drill sharpener ( I just got one
but have not taken time to learn to use it yet) and keep those bits
shrapened, 1/8" bits, that is.
Be patient. Take your time. Kinda wallow the drill slightly until it
cuts off the head of the rivet.
You can do it. I did it three years ago. I had counted all those
rivets, more than yours, cause I had doubled up on hinge length.
Shoulda put on tiny little short hinges if I had know I was going to
have to drill them all out. That or zippers. hehehe
Was thinking about you this morning when I was typing about MV.
Looking forward to seeing you and Eve in May.
Take care,
john h
| A big thanks to you John H. for your hacksaw idea on how to
stop the spinning. | Thanks again
| AzDave
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kirby Dennis Contr ASC/TM <Dennis.Kirby(at)kirtland.af.mil> |
| Subject: | Stitching the Fabric |
<< dont know of any way to get a good stitch job on a round tube rib...just
aint hardly possible I dont think...and then you would likely be in danger
of a fabric failure...which is just as bad...maybe worse than a rib
failure...or at the best....a funny looking wing with a bunch of dimples in
it..Don Gherardini >>
Don G, -
I hafta disagree with ya, amigo.
I rib stitched the fabric to the wings on my Mark-3, and it turned out
beautifully. No dimples visible after covering with the 2-inch wide
finishing tape along the length of each rib. Done properly, the knots are
pulled down below the fabric level, so all that's visible is a quarter-inch
long bit of lace on top of the rib at 4 inch intervals (the spacing I used).
Dondi Miller sent me narrower rib reinforcing tape to use for rib stitching,
to substitute for what was originally supplied in the covering kit. (1/4"
instead of 1/2" wide) Very smooth finish.
And ... I really enjoyed the process. Rib stitching was one of the more fun
parts of my construction process. After the first couple of ribs, I was
averaging a half-hour per rib. I also like to think that removing stitched
fabric from a wing will be easier than drilling out hundreds of rivits, if
(when) I ever need to replace my wing fabric.
Hopefully, the Old Poop will get his pictures posted soon for all to see
what smooth results can be had from rib stitching.
Dennis Kirby
with a thousand unused alum wide-flange rivets if anyone wants 'em, in
Cedar Crest, NM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Johann" <johann(at)gi.is> |
Hello Earl.
I do not know if you had any reply to your question, but I just wanted
to tell you that I helped a friend install a clutch in a C box on his
582 trike.
We removed the E box for the C box so we needed to move the starter in
front of the engine. There wasnt any space for the Rotax starter on the
front of the engine, behind the seat.
The solution was to install the GPL starter which sticks straight out to
the side,and it worked out perfectly.
We tried the pull start before installing the electric starter.
The pull was very light and easy to start. The electric starter also
turned the engine easy and the engine wasnt turning the prop until
around 2400 rpm. Smooth idle. It made me jelous:-) I only have the hand
pull starting on my Kolb.
I do agree that it is a drawback if the battery or starter will go bad.
Then the solution would be to leave the pull starter on.
If I had the money to spend on more toys, I would install the C box with
the clutch. Be careful not to install the 3,00:1 with the three blade
prop. You will get harmonic vibration.
Best wishes,
Johann G.
Iceland.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Earl & Mim
Zimmerman
Subject: Kolb-List: Clutch System?
Hey Guys,
Has anyone had any experience with the clutch system for the 582 C
gearbox? I'm looking for a way to reduce or eliminate most of the
vibration at idle without having to raise the idle speed too high.
Anyone had a clutch slip or fail? The only drawback that I see is if
your starter would fail you would not have the ability to prop. start as
a backup. Which brings to mind another question. Has anyone had a clutch
installed on an engine without electric start? I know that it is very
hard to pull the engine over without the prop installed, and assume it
would be the same with the clutch system. -- Earl
==
==
==
==
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <tophera(at)centurytel.net> |
| Subject: | Throttle Position |
With all my time training in the Cessna, how well do you think I will
adapt to having the stick in my right hand and throttle in my left? Seems
sorta backwards to me. >>
You might want to use a simulator to get used to the Idea. Most computer
joysticks that are designed for flight simulation have the stick for the
right (or both) hands with a throttle mounted on the base for the left ( or
both) hands. Fire up your relatively cheap flight simulator of choice and
fly a bunch of crosswind landings or what ever. Next time you get in that
Cessna you will think "who's stupid idea was this steering wheel thing...
and flying left handed, duh"
Topher
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob N." <ronoy(at)shentel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Spinning Rivets |
Although I haven't (sooo faar) had to drill out any of the big-headed
fabric rivets, I have drilled out at least a coupla thousand 3s, 4s, and
5s solid rivets. John H's clever v-shaped hacksaw rivet holder is good.
And there's a trick to drilling solid rivets: after you get a teeny way
into the head, going straight in (not wallowing) you can stop the drill,
or almost stop it, and give a slight off-center movement (rocking) of
the bit. If it's at the right depth into the head, the cocking of the
bit will neatly crack off the head without going clear through the
rivet--and maybe making the hole in the sheets bigger, or at least egg shaped.
Bob N.
http://www.angelfire.com/rpg/ronoy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob N." <ronoy(at)shentel.net> |
While rivnuts are OK in many places, I favor anchor nuts--even though
you have to "anchor" the nut thing-y, either with 3/32 rivets, or
machine screws. They will work on composite materials where the rivnut
will spin after a couple of tightenings. Aircraft Spruce has a page on them.
Bob N.
http://www.angelfire.com/rpg/ronoy
________________________________________________________________________________
Fellow Kolbers,
I must confess, I posted an interest in the BMW engine and was out of line to say
I might sell my 912UL. Sorry... I am impressed with this BMW set up. And might
build a R100 and fly one some day. But for now I'm sticking to my plans for
the Rotax 912. I attended the Rotax level one school and received a good education
of what an aircraft engine has to go through before a company can offer
an engine and sell it as an aircraft engine. I have no doubt the BMW is a good
reliable power plant however, There are many that have stuck their necks out
on the line here. Rotax aircraft engines are both FAA certified and have the
UL versions. The only differences between the two are the recorded serial numbers
of certain parts. In the spirit of experimental aviation I say explore all
engine options, however if one wants to build a stock Kolb aircraft, Install
the recommended power plants, follow the recommended engines for these airplanes.
Otherwise you are a test pilot. I for one do not care to be a test pilot.
Heck I have not yet completed my PPL training! I am in no position to offer advise.
Just my opinion.Heck I'm tha guy that wants to fly a Harley remember? The
more I get into this, the more I learn. It is the spirit of the Wright bros.that
started this whole thing right?.......
Paul Petty
Building Ms. Dixie
Kolbra/912UL/Warp
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Stitching the Fabric |
Dennis...
Thanks pard....You and Brother Pike and John H have got me convinced..other
than a few minor repairs....I have not done any serious rib stiching since
re-covering a air-knocker back in the 70's with grade-A...But I am going to
do it on this rear cage cover-up deal...If I can remember how.
Expand on this for me... Did you use the 1/4 inch reinforcing tape so you
could get the stiching string on the sides of it?...in other words dont run
the needle thru the re-inforcing tape but adjacent to it? The last time I
did this on that airknocker I dont think I put the needle thru the
tape...but I cant remember for sure...it was a flat rib...jeez...A fella
forgets how much you can forget!
And John H....I have made a alum "ducktail" for the rear of my cage..one
formed rib on the top and bottom (like caps) and one in the center.I have
welded some small tabs to attach it to...trying now to decide if I should
put it on and cover over it....or cover the cage first and then install the
"ducktail" . It may not matter here...but what are you guys thoughts about
this..I cant seem to forsee any great difference here...but then..I have not
done it yet!
About all I can think of is if the need arises to take it off some
day...covering over it would make that harder.
The reasoning for covering over the ducktail is so the Poly-Tone would stick
better than to just the bare alum...and match better than a different paint
on the alum...
...Am I missing anything else I should weigh ?
I have been gone for a few days at service shools...and have an awful lot of
emails I have just spent a long time going thru...man..no one can say this
is not an active list! Forgive me if I avoid any of the previous few days
posts....
I may or may not take any one of you turds thoughts and use em...but I sure
would like to hear it anyhow! And any thoughts you might like to offer up in
expansion of this subject!....just for discussions sake of course!
Like my ol granny used to say..."You dont know what I dont know...so just
tell me everything...I will decide if I knew it or not!"
Thx men
Don Gherardini
FireFly 098
http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rwpike(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: - Test pilots? |
In spite of our best efforts, even if we build a stock Kolb aircraft,
even if we install the recommended power plants,
no matter how well we follow the factory's instructions,
we are still test pilots.
It's just that the road is better traveled, hopefully with fewer potholes.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
> In the spirit of experimental aviation I say explore all engine options,
> however if one wants to build a stock Kolb aircraft, Install the
> recommended power plants, follow the recommended engines for these
> airplanes. Otherwise you are a test pilot. I for one do not care to be a
> test pilot.
>
>Paul Petty
>Building Ms. Dixie
>Kolbra/912UL/Warp
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rwpike(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Stitching the Fabric |
I'm gonna poke the responses in at what appears to be the right places -
>
>Dennis...
>
>Thanks pard....You and Brother Pike and John H have got me convinced..other
>than a few minor repairs....I have not done any serious rib stiching since
>re-covering a air-knocker back in the 70's with grade-A...But I am going to
>do it on this rear cage cover-up deal...If I can remember how.
>
>Expand on this for me... Did you use the 1/4 inch reinforcing tape so you
>could get the stiching string on the sides of it?...in other words dont run
>the needle thru the re-inforcing tape but adjacent to it? The last time I
>did this on that airknocker I dont think I put the needle thru the
>tape...but I cant remember for sure...it was a flat rib...jeez...A fella
>forgets how much you can forget!
You want the needle to go around the outside edge of the reinforcing tape.
I used 1/4" reinforcing tape anywhere there was a small OD tube under it,
so that the fabric would not be pulled in around the tube and make a dimple
or a weak spot where ever the stitching was tied.
>And John H....I have made a alum "ducktail" for the rear of my cage..one
>formed rib on the top and bottom (like caps) and one in the center.I have
>welded some small tabs to attach it to...trying now to decide if I should
>put it on and cover over it....or cover the cage first and then install the
>"ducktail" . It may not matter here...but what are you guys thoughts about
>this..I cant seem to forsee any great difference here...but then..I have not
>done it yet!
> About all I can think of is if the need arises to take it off some
>day...covering over it would make that harder.
>The reasoning for covering over the ducktail is so the Poly-Tone would stick
>better than to just the bare alum...and match better than a different paint
>on the alum...
>...Am I missing anything else I should weigh ?
Why not cover your ducktail separately with fabric, and then
screw it on later? Only a little more work, but then you can use Poly-Tone
on everything. I fabric covered my boom tube just so I could use all the
same paint.
(And it also works out to run your tail nav light wires under the fabric,
that way
nobody ever sees them, and they are protected. Mine are at the 7:30 o'clock
position
relative to the boom tube. That way they are out of sight, and also don't
get cut
if I drag the boom across something)
>Don Gherardini
>FireFly 098
>http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Finishing the Tail Cone |
| And John H....I have made a alum "ducktail" for the rear of my
cage..one
| formed rib on the top and bottom (like caps) and one in the center.I
have
| welded some small tabs to attach it to...trying now to decide if I
should
| put it on and cover over it....or cover the cage first and then
install the
| "ducktail" .
| Don Gherardini
Don/Gang:
Personally, I prefer to cover first, then mount the sheet metal. You
can get some tiny neoprene "C" channel to stick on the edges of the
sheet metal to give it a nice clean, finished look.
As for painting the sheet metal. Phosphoric acid etch, alodine,
primer, coat or two of white, then the color coat. If you ust that
coat of white on both fabric and sheet metal, Jim and Dondi should
have some enamel to paint that sheet metal to come out looking pretty
close.
I have also discovered that matching paint from one part to another
perfectly is not necessary to get good results. Usually, close is
good enough, once the aircraft gets outside in the sunshine.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "bryan green" <lgreen1(at)sc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Ducktail and tank |
I have made a alum "ducktail" for the rear of my cage..one
formed rib on the top and bottom (like caps) and one in the center.I have
welded some small tabs to attach it to...trying now to decide if I should
put it on and cover over it....or cover the cage first and then install the
"ducktail" .
I must have missed somtin here Don ya want to expand on this ducktail thingy
for me. On my tank I decided to make a pan like the old one turn the tank sideways
and put it up top so the bottom could be used for storage. I'll send a
pic BC later.
Bryan Green Elgin SC
Firestar I 19LBG 377 BRS
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jimmy and Jo Ann Hill" <hillstw(at)jhill.biz> |
Hello:
As an oldtimer in aviation, but newby to Kolbs, I need information on the advisibility
of aileron spades on Kolbs. I like the light control forces they provide.
Am wondering what actual experience and knowledge is out there concerning
the safety and effectiveness of spades.?? (as related to Kolbs)
Thanks.
Jimmy
FirestarII
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Thom Riddle" <jtriddle(at)adelphia.net> |
I don't know how much your Firestar II flies like the early FS but if it is anything
like the early FS no spades are required. All controls are very nice, light
and responsive. I did not really know how nice until I flew a Challenger about
a week ago....the ailerons on that bird were heavier than any GA airplane
I've flown!
Thom in Buffalo
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack & Louise Hart <jbhart(at)ldd.net> |
| Subject: | Re: - Test pilots? |
From: "Richard Pike" <rwpike(at)charter.net>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: - Test pilots?
>
> In spite of our best efforts, even if we build a stock Kolb aircraft,
> even if we install the recommended power plants,
> no matter how well we follow the factory's instructions,
> we are still test pilots.
> It's just that the road is better traveled, hopefully with fewer potholes.
>
Richard,
I agree. For me, part of the excitement is trying to get the FireFly to
perform just a bit better than it did before. It has been a just about two
years since I put the Victor 1+ on the Firefly. I have been pleased with
the reduced fuel flow rate but not with the cruise speed. Since I have been
lowering and off setting the thrust line to get better yaw and pitch trim,
good things have been happening. With improved trim, it is slipping through
the air at a little faster rate. But cutting the prop and pushing up the
pitch has made a tremendous difference. As of a couple of days ago, the
FireFly is flying faster with the Victor 1+ than the Rotax 447. Part of this
could be due to drag reduction but I am happy to see this because I have
been worried that maybe Simonini had over rated their engine, but now I
believe that is not the case.
Because of advice posted to this list that a longer propeller is better, I
have been attempting to run as long a propeller as possible. I have not had
much luck. For the pitch I had to set them to load the engine properly, I
calculated the forward tip speeds and discovered that they were not much
faster than the plane was going. Then I realized that if the plane is going
50 mph and the forward tip speed calculates out to 55 mph the change in
momentum is influenced by a five mile per hour difference. That long prop
soaks up a lot of torque just to spin it at speed and you are getting very
little thrust out of it at 50 mph. As I see it, due to the aircraft passing
through the air, the effective pitch to produce thrust is greatly
reduced.
By cutting the prop, one reduces the propeller drag component and torque
requirement. This lets you increase propeller pitch to get a higher
momentum difference across the propeller at speed and this lets the plane
fly faster. Some one told me that every plane, engine, and propeller
combination has its own sweet spot, and I believe I have come close to it.
If I had to do it over again, I would start with a two blade IVO (weight
restriction) and pitch it to optimum engine performance and fly it and
record the prop size, prop pitch, and max air speed. Then I would cut an
inch off the prop and repeat the process and record the same data. Then I
would subtract the previous max airspeed from the latest to see what the
difference is. Then repeat the process until difference becomes quite
small. I believe this should give a good cruise propeller.
Enough ramblings, it looks like it is going to be warm enough to fly today.
I have over pitched the 56 inch propeller and so I need to take some out
and fly to see what happens. Another test flight.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Jackson, MO
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart(at)ldd.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <tophera(at)centurytel.net> |
I have thought that they might be a good idea my modified Kolb due to the
oversized Flaperons. I certainly won't put them on unless I absolutely need
them. There has been some previous discussion on the subject. Check the
Archives. I have considered mounting them on the aileron balance weight
arm, but trying to deal with the wing tip vortex out there would complicate
things. If I mounted the balance weight sticking at about 30 degrees
downward instead of aligned with the wing I might get low enough that I
could get clean air... If I feel like my ailerons are heavy I will first try
the reduced moment arm trick by moving the pushrods inboard on the belcrank.
Then I will try spades if they are not giving me the response I want.
Mounting spades in the typical mid aileron span location would certainly
work, just remember if you try this you are going to have to do a full
flutter flight test on each configuration you try and slowly clear the
entire flight envelope. Spades are tricky powerful little bits!
Topher
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jimmy and Jo Ann
Hill
Subject: Kolb-List: spades
Hello:
As an oldtimer in aviation, but newby to Kolbs, I need information on the
advisibility of aileron spades on Kolbs. I like the light control forces
they provide. Am wondering what actual experience and knowledge is out
there concerning the safety and effectiveness of spades.?? (as related to
Kolbs)
Thanks.
Jimmy
FirestarII
________________________________________________________________________________
gentlemen....i own a 1995 firestar w a 503 sc. it has the streamlined wing
struts installed and it appears mine is the model (just bought 1 month ago)
where the tubing (strut) goes all the way through. maybe they all do but i am new
to this. recenlty, there is a vibration/rattle where the tube is vibrating
inside and against the speed strut cover and making a noise at idle. once you
give it gas even slightly, it quits. it did not do this when i first
purchased the plane. the local kolb guys have adjusted the carb and the prop appears
to be right on the mark. any ideas or help would be appreceiated.
alan
kolb firestar
n. richland hills, tx
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerb <ulflyer(at)verizon.net> |
Jimmy,
Do a search on the archives for this subject. There has been some good
discussion on this topic in the past. If you not familiar with the
searching the archives, not the links that are appended to the bottom of
each message. Click on the one for searching and just follow the simple
instructions.
jerb
>
>Hello:
>As an oldtimer in aviation, but newby to Kolbs, I need information on the
>advisibility of aileron spades on Kolbs. I like the light control forces
>they provide. Am wondering what actual experience and knowledge is out
>there concerning the safety and effectiveness of spades.?? (as related to
>Kolbs)
>
>Thanks.
>
>Jimmy
>FirestarII
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Vincent <emailbill(at)chartermi.net> |
| Subject: | Flight Simulator 2004 |
Hi Kolb Builders and Flyers:
For Christmas I received the Microsoft Flight Simulator 2004, just been
too busy to download it until now.
Anyone have any recommendation on what is the best Joystick to use with
this program ?
Thank you,
Bill Vincent
Firestar II
Cold ... Upper Peninsula of Michigan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Clay Stuart" <tcstuart(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | gross weight etc |
Will the BRS1050 handle the heaviest of the the MarkIII/Xtras? I have a
feeling mine is going to be on the heavy side. I don't want to plan on the
softpack and then need the 1200 which doesn't come in the softpack version.
I would think that I would be in big trouble if I were to exceed 1000 pounds
anyway. What is the max weight John Hauck has flown with?
Another unrelated question: has anyone made the 1/2 wheel fairings that fit
just behind the tire and do not cover the tire? As I believe Boyd just
mentioned recently, it is more how you close the airstream than disrupt it.
On rivnuts, seems like installing them in tubing would keep them from
spinning if they are pulled tight and deformed to the inner wall of the
tube. They come in keyed versions for flat surfaces.
Finally, I wish everyone would lighten up and quit feuding. I don't want
this list damaged and diminish its value. I heard from another list that I
am on from another lister on another board about the nasty comments and
fights that went on about "growing-the-largest-pumpkins". If they can't
agree about vegetables, is it no wonder we have our spats.
Clay Stuart
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
I never thought about putting them in tubing, but it sounds like it might
work better than in flat stock. Then, if it started to turn, you could just
squeeze the tubing a little. My experience with them has been in
commercial restaurant equipment, and believe me, they're a major PIA. Seems
like sooner or later they'll bind a bit, and at that point you'd best be
very careful, or you'll have a spinner. I've tried putting washers and a
bolt in them to try and squeeze them back tight, and even - using an
improvised bucking bar - tried tapping them to kinda rivet 'em tighter, and
that was a major mistake. I guess if you kept them lightly lubricated with
anti-sieze, and run a tap thru them if you felt a binding..............???
Someone else mentioned using the anchor nuts like the AN366F or similar, and
those are what I put on Vamoose to hold the nose cone all those years ago.
Lar.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Building Kolb Mk III
N78LB Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Clay Stuart" <tcstuart(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: gross weight etc
>it.
>
> On rivnuts, seems like installing them in tubing would keep them from
> spinning if they are pulled tight and deformed to the inner wall of the
> tube. They come in keyed versions for flat surfaces.
>
> Clay Stuart
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | [ Terry Davis ] : New Email List Photo Share Available! |
| From: | Email List Photo Shares <pictures(at)matronics.com> |
A new Email List Photo Share is available:
Poster: Terry Davis
Subject: New Model Firestar Controls
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/davistcs@eoni.com.02.14.2004/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 Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Kolbers,
| What are "Spades"?
|
| Paul Petty
Paul/All:
If Aubrey Radford were alive, he would tell you. Unfortunately,
Aubrey died about two months after I pulled the wings off my Original
Firestar. He knew about my failure and parachute save. That did not
influence his style of flying which was more aggressive than mine
was. I might add, his Original Firestar has recently been equipped
with spades. I shared his accident and death with the Kolb List a few
days or a week or so ago. Aubrey was a close friend of Possum. Part
of the old Atlanta gang back in the 80's and a short time in 1990.
The Kolbs are not designed for light ailerons at higher speeds, except
the Sling Shot, which has much smaller ailerons and shorter wings. On
my MKIII, which has slightly less aileron area than the plans call
for, at speeds below 70 mph I have light ailerons that can be operated
almost lock to lock. However, at higher speeds they load up. A
gentle nudge is all it takes to get the airplane to do your bidding.
I am not going to put spades on my airplane. Have never used them
before. I will share that I was in the planning stages of spades for
the old Firestar just prior to its final flight, 15 March 1990. Not
trying to sound dramatic. It was also very nearly my last flight.
Sometimes folks do not want to accept facts. Gues that is up to the
individual.
No recommendations here folks. Just Hauck's opinions from what little
bit I have learned from my Kolbs over the years.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rwpike(at)charter.net> |
Jimmy, several years ago I considered spades for my MKIII as it had heavy
ailerons. I was thinking of putting them on the counterbalance rods, but
Dennis said the company tried that years ago, and the vortexes rolling out
under the wing made them unsatisfactory. I considered adding them to the
ailerons at midpoint, however an experienced local homebuilder who has them
on both his Citabria & his Pitts (and flies it in serious aerobatic
competitions) cautioned me to be very careful and make sure the ballistic
parachute was working well before I did any serious testing. He said that
spades can be good, but if you don't know what you are doing, they could
cause a lot of trouble.
I ended up changing the leverage ratio to the ailerons by shortening the
bellcrank arm to the ailerons and it has proven very satisfactory. Ailerons
are now light and pleasant. Probably not quite as ideal as a perfectly
designed spade setup, but also without the risk of an amateur (me) trying
to reinvent the wheel and destroying his airplane in the process.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>Hello:
>As an oldtimer in aviation, but newby to Kolbs, I need information on the
>advisibility of aileron spades on Kolbs. I like the light control forces
>they provide. Am wondering what actual experience and knowledge is out
>there concerning the safety and effectiveness of spades.?? (as related to
>Kolbs)
>
>Thanks.
>
>Jimmy
>FirestarII
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Those AN366F anchor have got to be good stuff, they already lasted 10 years
on Vamoose. Huh Lar.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Riv-nuts
>
> I never thought about putting them in tubing, but it sounds like it might
> work better than in flat stock. Then, if it started to turn, you could
just
> squeeze the tubing a little. My experience with them has been in
> commercial restaurant equipment, and believe me, they're a major PIA.
Seems
> like sooner or later they'll bind a bit, and at that point you'd best be
> very careful, or you'll have a spinner. I've tried putting washers and a
> bolt in them to try and squeeze them back tight, and even - using an
> improvised bucking bar - tried tapping them to kinda rivet 'em tighter,
and
> that was a major mistake. I guess if you kept them lightly lubricated
with
> anti-sieze, and run a tap thru them if you felt a binding..............???
> Someone else mentioned using the anchor nuts like the AN366F or similar,
and
> those are what I put on Vamoose to hold the nose cone all those years ago.
> Lar.
>
> Larry Bourne
> Palm Springs, CA
> Building Kolb Mk III
> N78LB Vamoose
> www.gogittum.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Clay Stuart" <tcstuart(at)adelphia.net>
> To:
> Subject: Kolb-List: gross weight etc
>
>
> >it.
> >
> > On rivnuts, seems like installing them in tubing would keep them from
> > spinning if they are pulled tight and deformed to the inner wall of the
> > tube. They come in keyed versions for flat surfaces.
> >
> > Clay Stuart
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: BRS that Shoots Downward |
In a message dated 2/13/04 11:49:21 AM Eastern Standard Time,
Dennis.Kirby(at)kirtland.af.mil writes:
>
> Clay Stuart asked: < downward? Any reason not to have this configuration? >>
>
> Clay, and Kolbers -
>
> I mounted my BRS-1050 Softpack inside the cabin, behind the passenger seat
> and underneath the fuel tank. It's completely out of the slipstream and out
> of the weather &elements. It is designed to fire out the right side of the
> aircraft, right thru the fabric. Installation was approved by BRS after I
> sent them drawings &photos. Am happy to share details with anyone who is
> interested.
>
> Dennis Kirby
> Mark-III, Verner-1400, in
> New Mexico
>
> I did the same thing to my Firestar KX except i am not firing through the
fabric, mine is below the tube firing just behind the right wing and slightly
down out a door I made in a 1/8" polyfoam housing fabricated with light wood at
the corners and glue. Works for me since '93.
George Randolph
firestar driver from the Villages in Fl
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "bryan green" <lgreen1(at)sc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: BRS that Shoots Downward |
My BRS-5 was mounted like Dennis, but I contacted BRS and am moving it in
front of engine and firing up and aft. I am doing this to open the space
under the tank up for storage and prevent having to redo fabric on repack.
Bryan Green Elgin SC
Firestar I 19LBG 377 BRS
----- Original Message -----
From: <GeoR38(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: BRS that Shoots Downward
>
> In a message dated 2/13/04 11:49:21 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> Dennis.Kirby(at)kirtland.af.mil writes:
>
> >
> > Clay Stuart asked: < > downward? Any reason not to have this configuration? >>
> >
> > Clay, and Kolbers -
> >
> > I mounted my BRS-1050 Softpack inside the cabin, behind the passenger
seat
> > and underneath the fuel tank. It's completely out of the slipstream and
out
> > of the weather &elements. It is designed to fire out the right side of
the
> > aircraft, right thru the fabric. Installation was approved by BRS after
I
> > sent them drawings &photos. Am happy to share details with anyone who
is
> > interested.
> >
> > Dennis Kirby
> > Mark-III, Verner-1400, in
> > New Mexico
> >
> > I did the same thing to my Firestar KX except i am not firing through
the
> fabric, mine is below the tube firing just behind the right wing and
slightly
> down out a door I made in a 1/8" polyfoam housing fabricated with light
wood at
> the corners and glue. Works for me since '93.
>
> George Randolph
> firestar driver from the Villages in Fl
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jimmy and Jo Ann Hill" <hillstw(at)jhill.biz> |
Thanks to all who responded concerning spades; I consider your experience
very helpful.
Now one more newby question: how good/bad, useful/useless
necessary/un-necessary is having a gascolator in the fuel system?
Thanks again.
Jimmy
Firestar II
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Pike" <rwpike(at)charter.net>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: spades
>
> Jimmy, several years ago I considered spades for my MKIII as it had heavy
> ailerons. I was thinking of putting them on the counterbalance rods, but
> Dennis said the company tried that years ago, and the vortexes rolling out
> under the wing made them unsatisfactory. I considered adding them to the
> ailerons at midpoint, however an experienced local homebuilder who has
them
> on both his Citabria & his Pitts (and flies it in serious aerobatic
> competitions) cautioned me to be very careful and make sure the ballistic
> parachute was working well before I did any serious testing. He said that
> spades can be good, but if you don't know what you are doing, they could
> cause a lot of trouble.
>
> I ended up changing the leverage ratio to the ailerons by shortening the
> bellcrank arm to the ailerons and it has proven very satisfactory.
Ailerons
> are now light and pleasant. Probably not quite as ideal as a perfectly
> designed spade setup, but also without the risk of an amateur (me) trying
> to reinvent the wheel and destroying his airplane in the process.
>
> Richard Pike
> MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>
> >
> >Hello:
> >As an oldtimer in aviation, but newby to Kolbs, I need information on the
> >advisibility of aileron spades on Kolbs. I like the light control forces
> >they provide. Am wondering what actual experience and knowledge is out
> >there concerning the safety and effectiveness of spades.?? (as related to
> >Kolbs)
> >
> >Thanks.
> >
> >Jimmy
> >FirestarII
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | WhiskeyVictor36(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Stitching the Fabric |
In a message dated 2/13/04 10:06:39 PM Eastern Standard Time,
donghe@one-eleven.net writes:
> ...trying now to decide if I should
> put it on and cover over it....or cover the cage first and then install the
> "ducktail" . It may not matter here...but what are you guys thoughts about
> this..I cant seem to forsee any great difference here...but then..I have not
> done it yet!
> About all I can think of is if the need arises to take it off some
> day...covering over it would make that harder.
> The reasoning for covering over the ducktail is so the Poly-Tone would stick
> better than to just the bare alum...and match better than a different paint
> on the alum...
>
Don Gherardini
What do you think about covering the ducktail with fabric separate from the
cage. Then you would be able to remove it, if the need arose, and the paint
would stick on and match better than on the bare alum.
Bill Varnes
Kolb FireStar
Audubon, NJ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <rwpike(at)charter.net> |
Depends on how well your engine will run on water.
I consider it a necessity. However I have never had any water show up in mine.
That doesn't make any difference, it is like a ballistic parachute.
It only has to do it's job once to pay for itself.
My gas tank is designed with the fuel pickup 2.5" above the lowest point of
the tank, so
I can get a 1/2 pint of water in the tank before it gets to the fuel
pickup, and so far I have had none.
But like I said, that means nothing, because none of us can afford any.
If you are wondering if you should $75 on an aircraft gascolator, I have
directions for how to build a complete gascolator for under $12 on my web
page,
http://www.bcchapel.org/pages/0003/kolb.htm
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>Now one more newby question: how good/bad, useful/useless
>necessary/un-necessary is having a gascolator in the fuel system?
>
>Thanks again.
>
>Jimmy
>Firestar II
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack & Louise Hart <jbhart(at)ldd.net> |
>Now one more newby question: how good/bad, useful/useless
>necessary/un-necessary is having a gascolator in the fuel system?
>
>Thanks again.
>
Jimmy,
There are two sources for water in the tank. If you do not top up your tank
after every flight the warm moist air that is over the fuel in the tank will
cool. When it does some of the moisture in the air will condense out and
fall to the bottom of the tank. The other source of water is from the fuel
source.
If you top up your tank after every flight, you minimize the amount of water
condensation in your tank. If you do your own refueling you can minimize
water transfer by never pouring the last bit of fuel and water from your
cans.
It is very easy to detect water build up in the translucent five gallon
tanks. After a fairly long flight were most of the fuel is used, just look
in the tank through the open bung. One can do the same for the fuel
transfer gas cans.
I take my tank out once a year and clean the tank. The most water volume I
have ever removed from the tank is about equal to a quarter (25 cents). I
have found much more water in my transfer cans, because they do set around
in the hangar partially full or at home completely empty. Some of this
comes from sweating, but I believe most of it comes from where I fill up the
cans.
A couple of other precautions, remove the carburetor float bowl once in a while
to
check for water in the bottom. When refuelling from other than your own cans,
refuel through a fine mesh screened funnel.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Jackson, MO
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart(at)ldd.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Lloyd McFarlane" <lrmcf(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Streamlined Struts |
I filled the space between the streamlined and round strut with expanding foam
applied at each end of the strut. It solve the vibation problem.
Lloyd McFarlane
Fullerton, CA
From: ZackGSD(at)aol.com
Subject: Kolb-List: vibration
gentlemen....i own a 1995 firestar w a 503 sc. it has the streamlined wing
struts installed and it appears mine is the model (just bought 1 month ago)
where the tubing (strut) goes all the way through. maybe they all do but i am new
to this. recenlty, there is a vibration/rattle where the tube is vibrating
inside and against the speed strut cover and making a noise at idle. once you
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <tophera(at)centurytel.net> |
Like john says spades can be real dangerous, that's why I said if you put
them on you need to run a complete envelope clearing test flight program.
If you don't know what I mean by that you should not even consider it.
Spades do add some drag but they generate lift (one up and one down on
ailerons) to reduce the control forces of the control surface in question.
If you make them too big they actually over drive the controls and you have
to hold the controls back to keep them from going to full deflection. That
is really bad. If you make the controls too light then you give the pilot
complete responsibility for not deflecting the controls too far and ripping
the aircraft structure apart.
Transport (FAR part 23 certified) aircraft have to be able to deflect the
pitch and roll controls to full deflection throughout the flight envelope
without causing a structural failure, but not the Yaw controls. That is why
the vertical stabilizer came off the airbus over long Island right after
9/11 when the copilot started dancing on the rudder. He deflected the rudder
full stop one way then the other then back again and popped the vertical
tail right off the plane.
Guess what, our little planes don't follow FAR part 23. If you deflect any
of the controls too much you might be able to rip parts off the plane.
Stable controls always get heavier with airspeed, making it harder for the
pilot to over deflect them and overstress the plane. If you reduce the
stability of a control surface by adding area in front of the hinge line ( a
spade or leading edge extension) the control forces are reduced and the
pilot can now over stress the plane with the flick of a finger. That is
bad. Adding spades is a very advanced modification of an airplane and
should not be done without complete mastery of the subject.
In other words, as with any modification to an airplane, if you don't know
what your doing don't be doing it. Learn first, do second.
Doing first results in what is universally known as "learning the hard way",
which in airplanes is often accompanied by death. This is known as "lessons
learned too late." I have no doubt that the airbus copilot knew exactly why
his airplane was tumbling to the ground after he snapped his rudder off.
Topher
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | [ Mike Pierzina ] : New Email List Photo Share Available! |
| From: | Email List Photo Shares <pictures(at)matronics.com> |
A new Email List Photo Share is available:
Poster: Mike Pierzina
Subject: New & Old
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/planecrazzzy@lycos.com.02.15.2004/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 Herren ] : 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 Herren
Subject: Statue of Big Lar
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/wmdherren@hotmail.com.02.15.2004/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: | Ted Cowan <tcowan1917(at)direcway.com> |
| Subject: | inhouse bickering. |
My personal opinion is the whole bunch of you guys have GRAVITY FEVER. You
need to get out and up. This is what I hated about living in the North (if
there is such a thing), bickering. After three or four months of solitude
from snow, cold, etc., everyone got so bitchy you could not live with
anyone. You just gotta crank up the ole Kolbie and go for it. You only get
just so cold then it turns numb and you get warm anyway. Get off the
ground. You will feel better, live better and get along with everyone
better.
The List if for us, to speak of aviation or whatever. I like the planning,
the goofying around and such. Makes us sound and act more like buddies.
So, quit taking things to stressful. Get it back together and have some fun
helping and joking around. That is what life is about. Live. ted cowan,
alabama.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: warpdrive repair |
Joe, I don't know what your repair might be. I had a small chip in mine a
while back, had no idea what to do. I called Warp, talked to them, explained
my problem and was given the solution over the phone and did the repair my
self.
>
> Anyone have any experience repairing or having a Warpdrive prop. repaired.
>
> I've searched the archives and can't find much.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: warpdrive repair |
| Anyone have any experience repairing or having a Warpdrive prop.
repaired.
|
| I've searched the archives and can't find much.
|
|
| Thanks,
|
|
| Joe SS 582 VA
|
Joe/All:
I have.
john h
DON NOT ARCHIVE
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <tophera(at)centurytel.net> |
| Subject: | Flight Simulator 2004 |
I use a Microsoft sidewinder and like it a lot. If you want force feedback
they make one with that too.
Topher
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Vincent
Subject: Kolb-List: Flight Simulator 2004
Hi Kolb Builders and Flyers:
For Christmas I received the Microsoft Flight Simulator 2004, just been
too busy to download it until now.
Anyone have any recommendation on what is the best Joystick to use with
this program ?
Thank you,
Bill Vincent
Firestar II
Cold ... Upper Peninsula of Michigan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Russ Kinne <kinnepix(at)earthlink.net> |
Just FYI, in repairing small dings in most anything -- West Products sells
"microballoons" -- tiny glass bubbles; not beads, they're hollow -- that you
mix with any good epoxy. Terribly strong, but the mix is about 80% air so
it's very light. But DO wear a face mask. The m-b's are so light they float
around like smoke, and would NOT do your lungs any good.
When I'm finished I usually cover the repair with Scotch tape to keep it
smooth -- it doesn't need any air to cure. Then peel off the tape & you have
a nice smooth surface.
I never tried baking soda & can't see any advantage.
Happy flying,
Russ Kinne
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ActionCrane(at)aol.com |
I have an " Air Drive Service" (?) starter on a 377 on an original Firestar.
It is my first ultra light. The starter does not want to engage,
especially when the engine is cold. Has anyone else had this problem? Do you
know
how to cure it?
I have been a lurker for several weeks and this looks like an excellent
source of information. I have learned alot already. I appreciate everyone's good
input.
Steve Henry
Nampa, ID
Firestar KXP 377
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary r. voigt" <johndeereantique(at)qwest.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Starter Trouble |
Steve, i do not have a starter on my kxp with 447 but make sure all
connections are tight. it seems to me that if it is harder to start when it
is colder then it may be your bendix spring or the shaft it is sliding on,
make sure the spring has enough tension to allow it to engauge starter gear
on the flywheel. i'am sure you will get some good advice on this one. also
if you have the KXP model firestar... that is not the original
firestar...before the KXP they had the KX and then the original firestar
(1985) the KXP has 7 rib wing and the year is about 1991 when it came out i
believe.
thanks,
Gary r. voigt
KXP/447
----- Original Message -----
From: <ActionCrane(at)aol.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: Starter Trouble
>
> I have an " Air Drive Service" (?) starter on a 377 on an original
Firestar.
> It is my first ultra light. The starter does not want to engage,
> especially when the engine is cold. Has anyone else had this problem?
Do you know
> how to cure it?
>
> I have been a lurker for several weeks and this looks like an excellent
> source of information. I have learned alot already. I appreciate
everyone's good
> input.
>
> Steve Henry
> Nampa, ID
> Firestar KXP 377
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Starter Trouble |
not being there to look at it first hand, this is just a thought.
is the bendix full of old oil that is getting think, or grease like.
I had this problem with an old lawnmower.
mark
twinstar
minnseota
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "jam'n" <jghunter(at)nol.net> |
| Subject: | Starter Trouble/master switch |
also consider temps as bats are less efficient in colder weather. i have a
110-v aux bat from auto part store. i open bat box and add not more votage
but reserve amps... then lots amps to turn over and full volts to fire
plugs...
bat should be on a floater charger... keeps full...
and be sure bendix is serviced timely as to lube etc.
if a hand prop back and forth (not on compression) suggests recip parts
operationally smooth and start hard or a bit sluggish prob elec related.
bat connections must be tight.
any one know of a good sourde to obtain a BAT MASTER switch kit?
thanks
jg
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary r. voigt" <johndeereantique(at)qwest.net>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Starter Trouble
>
> Steve, i do not have a starter on my kxp with 447 but make sure all
> connections are tight. it seems to me that if it is harder to start when
it
> is colder then it may be your bendix spring or the shaft it is sliding on,
> make sure the spring has enough tension to allow it to engauge starter
gear
> on the flywheel. i'am sure you will get some good advice on this one. also
> if you have the KXP model firestar... that is not the original
> firestar...before the KXP they had the KX and then the original firestar
> (1985) the KXP has 7 rib wing and the year is about 1991 when it came out
i
> believe.
>
> thanks,
> Gary r. voigt
> KXP/447
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <ActionCrane(at)aol.com>
> To:
> Subject: Kolb-List: Starter Trouble
>
>
> >
> > I have an " Air Drive Service" (?) starter on a 377 on an original
> Firestar.
> > It is my first ultra light. The starter does not want to engage,
> > especially when the engine is cold. Has anyone else had this problem?
> Do you know
> > how to cure it?
> >
> > I have been a lurker for several weeks and this looks like an excellent
> > source of information. I have learned alot already. I appreciate
> everyone's good
> > input.
> >
> > Steve Henry
> > Nampa, ID
> > Firestar KXP 377
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Starter Trouble |
| I have an " Air Drive Service" (?) starter on a 377 on an original
Firestar.
| It is my first ultra light. The starter does not want to engage,
| especially when the engine is cold. Has anyone else had this
problem? Do you know
| how to cure it?
| Steve Henry
Steve/All:
If the airplane is in Idaho it is probably frozen.
Seriously, I know nothing of the Air Drive Service starter, but I bet
it uses a bendix spring to engage the starter. If the starter motor
is running and nothing is happening, check out the bendix. Take it
apart, take it to a lawn mower, small motor repair shop and see if you
can match the parts. A lot of small starters use like parts. An
alternator/starter shop might be able to help.
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Russ Kinne <kinnepix(at)earthlink.net> |
The recent posts in re drainpipe-in-the-wings, for storing long objects
(like struts), amused me. Sounds like a good idea. I once flew four big
adults, 4 pr skiis (in the tailcone), 4 pair skiboots, 4 sets skipoles, and
4 medium-sized duffelbags, in my 170. Great plane; if the doors would shut,
she'd fly. Also flew with an 11' surf-casting rod strapped to the gear leg &
step, all outside.
But Experimental category is great in letting you DO things like that,
legally.
However I'd try to find some thinwall rigid plastic tubes instead of
aluminum downspouts
Russ Kinne
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Sounds good for most dings, But Prop Nicks ?
| Mike in MN
Mike/All:
Bob, who used to work at Warp, fixed my prop at Arlington, WA, in
1994, with JB Weld. We did it in the field with avgas to clean, a
plastic picnic knife to spread it on. Next morning I took a piece of
wet dry sand paper and sanded it to match the rest of the blade.
Works great. Still use the same process if necessary.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Judy or Larry Gitt" <gittj(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Small Radior 1" openings |
What the best radiator to use with a 582 , In series with the other radiators
with a 1" openings. this radiator would be used for Cabin heater, the most
i found that are 6"by 7 " they have a 5/8 opening or 5/8 " and 3/4"
opening on then . I need 1 " openings. and small radiator . It for my Kolbra
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Lanny Fetterman <donaho(at)csrlink.net> |
| Subject: | Air Drive Starter |
Steve and All, I have never taken my starter apart, But I think there is a
ratcheting bearing, in the starter bearing housing that may be going bad. I
asked my local auto parts store guy one time if he
ever heard of a ratcheting bearing and he said sure have. And if it`s
got a number on it," I can get it for you." Hope this
helps.
Lanny Fetterman FSII ASC # A10LRF
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Bean <slyck(at)frontiernet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Starter Trouble/master switch |
I used a battery master switch from pep boys, hidden under the pass seat.
It looks like a big truck type but made of some kind of modern version
of bakelite (plastic). Comes with two big plastic keys so old guys can't
easily misplace them. -BB
jam'n wrote:
>
>also consider temps as bats are less efficient in colder weather. i have a
>110-v aux bat from auto part store. i open bat box and add not more votage
>but reserve amps... then lots amps to turn over and full volts to fire
>plugs...
>
>bat should be on a floater charger... keeps full...
>
>and be sure bendix is serviced timely as to lube etc.
>
>if a hand prop back and forth (not on compression) suggests recip parts
>operationally smooth and start hard or a bit sluggish prob elec related.
>
>bat connections must be tight.
>
>any one know of a good sourde to obtain a BAT MASTER switch kit?
>
>thanks
>
>jg
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Gary r. voigt" <johndeereantique(at)qwest.net>
>To:
>Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Starter Trouble
>
>
>
>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>> Steve, i do not have a starter on my kxp with 447 but make sure all
>>connections are tight. it seems to me that if it is harder to start when
>>
>>
>it
>
>
>>is colder then it may be your bendix spring or the shaft it is sliding on,
>>make sure the spring has enough tension to allow it to engauge starter
>>
>>
>gear
>
>
>>on the flywheel. i'am sure you will get some good advice on this one. also
>>if you have the KXP model firestar... that is not the original
>>firestar...before the KXP they had the KX and then the original firestar
>>(1985) the KXP has 7 rib wing and the year is about 1991 when it came out
>>
>>
>i
>
>
>>believe.
>>
>> thanks,
>> Gary r. voigt
>> KXP/447
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: <ActionCrane(at)aol.com>
>>To:
>>Subject: Kolb-List: Starter Trouble
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>I have an " Air Drive Service" (?) starter on a 377 on an original
>>>
>>>
>>Firestar.
>>
>>
>>> It is my first ultra light. The starter does not want to engage,
>>>especially when the engine is cold. Has anyone else had this problem?
>>>
>>>
>>Do you know
>>
>>
>>>how to cure it?
>>>
>>>I have been a lurker for several weeks and this looks like an excellent
>>>source of information. I have learned alot already. I appreciate
>>>
>>>
>>everyone's good
>>
>>
>>>input.
>>>
>>>Steve Henry
>>>Nampa, ID
>>>Firestar KXP 377
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ActionCrane(at)aol.com |
I just started flying Nov 03 so I'm still new at all this. In the last 2
months I'v put 50 hrs. on my firestar/377 and my CHT always runs 400 to 440
when I run 5600 to 6000 RPM. Seems a little high to me but it just keeps running
good. We went way up on the main jet but that didn't seem to make any
difference. Do some gauges/senders read high. I was pretty worried about it at
first
but it is starting to seem normal now.
My firestar is the early 5 panel wing. I have no idea what the gross
weight is. I have the original plans but there are no specs like gr wt,VNE, stall
speed etc. Be some really good stuff for me to know.
Steve Henry
Nampa Idaho
Firestar/377
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Air Drive Starter |
| Steve and All, I have never taken my starter apart, But I think
there is a
| ratcheting bearing, in the starter bearing housing that may be going
bad. | Lanny Fetterman
Lanny/All:
Sounds like the sprague clutch in the 912 starter system.
Same system is used in helicopter transmissions in case a transmission
locks up. Drives one way and slips the other.
Not actually a bearing, but looks very similar. We took one apart
during 912 School.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ActionCrane(at)aol.com |
I have taken my starter apart and there are a bunch of little roller
bearings that roll up these little ramps and squeeze the shaft to start the
engine. When it starts the shaft turns faster than the starter was turning it and
it
outruns the roller bearings. When I took it apart the only way I could see
to keep all those bearings in place to put it back together, was to stick them
in place with grease. I wonder if the grease is too heavy to let the rollers
move like they need to.
Steve Henry
Nampa, Idaho
Firestar/377
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: (no subject) |
Steve..
That is a tad high
Do you have an adjustable prop?..if so..you might load the engine a tad more
with a bit more pitch...What are you highest attainable rpms in flight?
400 aint bad...but 440 is high...and a piston will burn a hole in it at 475
or so pretty quick...so..if you gauge is off...reading low by 25 degrees or
so...well...you know what Could happen!
check an see if the needle is all the way out of the main jet nozzle tube at
Wide open throttle...if it is not...change the needle height to get it all
the way.
Don Gherardini
FireFly 098
http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: (no subject) |
| That is a tad high
| Do you have an adjustable prop?..if so..you might load the engine a
tad more
| with a bit more pitch...What are you highest attainable rpms in
flight?
| Don Gherardini
Don G/All:
Did he say anything about EGT?
Won't loading the prop with a high CHT tend to increase load and
CHT?
Just wondering.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DAquaNut(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Prop pitch for engine break-in |
Duane,
Thanks for the advice on prop degrees I put it in favorites so i wont
forget it.
You need to update the list on the progress or flights of your Mark 111. I
miss your post on flights you have made. I have been spending a lot of time
taking care of my elderly Mom and have made little progress on the fly. Hope to
make it back to Fla. , in the future, but under the conditions, I dont know
when. Thanks for your help in the past.
Regards,
Ed Diebel
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eugene Zimmerman <eugenezimmerman(at)dejazzd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Starter Trouble |
Steve,
It has been a while since I rebuilt mine but here is what I remember.
Your starter probably has three or four separate sprag bearings running
on a 1" shaft. Any bearing store should be able to get replacements. One
thing to make certain of is that the bearings are all tight in their
housing and do not rotate at their outside diameter. I used Lock Tite on
mine but extreme care must be used to not get any Lock Tite in the
sprags. The rotational orientation of the sprag bearings in the
crankshaft must be opposite the ones in the pulley to make them engage
when the starter spins. Get new seals and use light grease in the
sprags. Also on rare occasions the belt will be the problem.
Gene,
PS I wish I had another Air Drive starter for the Firestar II I'm
rebuilding.
ActionCrane(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> I have an " Air Drive Service" (?) starter on a 377 on an original Firestar.
> It is my first ultra light. The starter does not want to engage,
> especially when the engine is cold. Has anyone else had this problem? Do you
know
> how to cure it?
>
> I have been a lurker for several weeks and this looks like an excellent
> source of information. I have learned alot already. I appreciate everyone's
good
> input.
>
> Steve Henry
> Nampa, ID
> Firestar KXP 377
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: (no subject) |
John...and Steve...
Boy...someone needs to watch me all the time...I shoulda proof-read that
post I made too!
Of course John, you are right..some how a whole paragraph I was thinking or
cutting an past'in didnt get in that post...too late at nite I reckon!
Steve..I was atempting to give you some way to test your CHT guages to see
if they responded correctly..Just to see if the insturment was really the
culprit.
1st...since I you didnt mention that you had an EGT...I assumed that you did
not...but I shouldnt do that either.
Anyway..What I like to do it set the throttle a static test to a level below
max...so we stay out of the danger zone.
then run it all warmed up and record the CHT.
Next shut it off and increase the load on the engine..
start it all up and go back to the same rpm level.
Record new CHT at the same rpm level.
If the guage is correct....the CHT will be HIGHER. Due to Higher BMEP needed
to achieve the same rpm level.
IF the CHT is the same...I might redo the test at a different level...just
to make sure...but usually..I will just replace the insturment.
A worksheet on this test might look like this:
stage 1
Rpm= 5000
load/pitch= 11 deg.
CHT = 325
stage 2
RPM=5000
Load/pitch =12 deg
CHT= 350
This simple test should always go this way ( the numbers were just for
example)
I should mention that you will likely see a higher lever throttle position
for stage 2...this is normal.
I also would recommend if you dont have EGT monitering insturments..that you
should and preform these same tests..if for nothing else than to see and
learn the relationship of CHT and EGT to an engine and its loads.
I had a instructor once who always said....Fly with the CHT and watch
it...adjust the carb with the EGT...then unhook it!
WELL...I dunno if I completely agree with that..as he was talking about GA
aircraft engines....This was before we ever thought of putting a snowmobile
2 stroke behind a prop!
but...what he really meant was EGT'S are different according to prob placeme
nts and weather conditions and exhaust systems and a whole lot of other
things, and they dont always signal weather your CHT will soon follow,
because they dont always follow infact. IN some instances of a change of
load on your engine...the EGT will go up and the CHT will soon respond by
going down...which will be confusing if you dont understand zactly what is
going on ..CHT on the other hand will always go up with an increase in
engine load at any given rpm we set it at..unless the engine is WAY out of
mixture adjustment..
.but Still...I cant hardly operate my riding tractor without cht and egt
insturments...cause I get to thinking about what is going on in my engine
and then run over the tulips while i'm dreaming!
Thanks John.....I told ya someone needs to keep an eye on me pard!
Back from 3 days at the American Motorcycle Assoc show...and beat....ya know
them Pennzoil girls get younger and wear less cloths every year...WHEW!
Don Gherardini
Sales / Engineering dept.
American Honda Engines
Power Equipment Company
CortLand, Illinois
800-626-7326
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: (no subject) |
Can I go with you next time ?? :-) Lar. Do not
Archive.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Building Kolb Mk III
N78LB Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Gherardini" <donghe@one-eleven.net>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: (no subject)
>
>
> Back from 3 days at the American Motorcycle Assoc show...and beat....ya
know
> them Pennzoil girls get younger and wear less cloths every year...WHEW!
>
> Don Gherardini
> Sales / Engineering dept.
> American Honda Engines
> Power Equipment Company
> CortLand, Illinois
> 800-626-7326
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Thom Riddle" <jtriddle(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Location of Kolbers |
I was wondering if anyone on the list has created a database or map of where Kolbers
are located. This sort of thing would be handy for anyone traveling and
wishing to meet up with other Kolbers enroute. I know most of your long-time Kolbers
know where each other are located but some of us newer guys don't know.
I think perhaps the location of home airport (airport code if available or nearest
one with a code and what they are flying/building) would be an easy way
to do this. If I were a computer guru I would volunteer to do this, but alas,
I am not.
If this sort of thing has already been done and I just haven't seen it, please
direct me to the info. Or perhaps it is way out of date. If not....any takers?
Thom in Buffalo
Clarence Aerodrome (D51)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
Don/All:
High CHTs in fan cooled two strokes are usually caused by broken or
slipping belts, air passages clogged, i.e., inadequate airflow.
Remember way back when a mod came out to add an air dam in the cowling
of the Rotax's to divert more air to the mag cylinder.
Best to take the cowling off and make sure the dirt daubers haven't
taken up residence, spider webs, grass, debris, etc.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack & Louise Hart <jbhart(at)ldd.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Location of Kolbers |
>
>
>If this sort of thing has already been done and I just haven't seen it, please
direct me to the info. Or perhaps it is way out of date. If not....any takers?
>
Thom
Try:
http://www.springeraviation.net/database.html
Jack B. Hart FF004
Jackson, MO
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart(at)ldd.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Location of Kolbers |
Tom...There is a Kolb database..maintained by springer aviation..here is the
url....send him a note if you are not on there...
http://www.springeraviation.net/database.html
Don Gherardini
Sales / Engineering dept.
American Honda Engines
Power Equipment Company
CortLand, Illinois
800-626-7326
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ul15rhb(at)juno.com |
John and others,
I don't believe later engines have that air dam in the cowling. What did Rotax
do to improve the air flow?
While on this subject, I might let others know that I have never run my engine
with those brown spark plug caps that have the air gasket around them. Mine are
the black NGK snowmobiles plug caps with no gasket. There is a lot of air that
escapes around the plugs. I have never had a CHT gauge, so I have no idea what
temps I'm running. Mike Jacober used to call the CHT, "The fan belt meter".
It just tells you if the fan is working or not. I have always thought the EGT
was a better indicator of engine temperature because by the time the CHT gets
too high, the engine will probably be seized up.
The plugs are very normal light tan. EGT's are 1100F.
Ralph
Original Firestar
17 years flying it
-- "John Hauck" wrote:
Don/All:
High CHTs in fan cooled two strokes are usually caused by broken or
slipping belts, air passages clogged, i.e., inadequate airflow.
Remember way back when a mod came out to add an air dam in the cowling
of the Rotax's to divert more air to the mag cylinder.
Best to take the cowling off and make sure the dirt daubers haven't
taken up residence, spider webs, grass, debris, etc.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "jam'n" <jghunter(at)nol.net> |
| Subject: | master switch kit |
can anyone refer me to a supplier that offers an elec master switch with
solenoid at bat?
thanks
jg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: master switch kit |
| can anyone refer me to a supplier that offers an elec master switch
with
| solenoid at bat?
|
| thanks
| jg
JG/All:
I get mine at RV Shops. Much cheaper and equal or better quality.
Make sure you get a name brand like Tekonsha and not a no-name
Chinamanese model.
If I had it to do over again, I would do like Bob Bean. Buy a
mechanical/manual master switch. All solenoid continuous duty master
switches use a lot of 12VDC power to operate. After a short while of
operation, place your hand on it and burn your fingers. When I first
started using one on my MKIII I though I had a bad solenoid and bought
another aircraft grade master solenoid from an aircraft supplier.
Cost twice what an RV shop charges. Was surprised to find out this
new one did the same thing the old one did. Got very hot. Cost about
.5 to .75 VDC for this fancy piece of gear.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <bwr000(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: prop efficiency (was 'test pilot') |
Don't want any theory BS? -- skip to my last paragraph. -Ben
> Because of advice posted to this list that a longer propeller is
> better, I
> have been attempting to run as long a propeller as possible. I have
> not had
> much luck. For the pitch I had to set them to load the engine
> properly, I
> calculated the forward tip speeds and discovered that they were not
> much
> faster than the plane was going. Then I realized that if the plane
> is going
> 50 mph and the forward tip speed calculates out to 55 mph the change
> in
> momentum is influenced by a five mile per hour difference. That long
> prop
> soaks up a lot of torque just to spin it at speed and you are getting
> very
> little thrust out of it at 50 mph. As I see it, due to the aircraft
> passing
> through the air, the effective pitch to produce thrust is greatly
> reduced.
>
> By cutting the prop, one reduces the propeller drag component and
> torque
> requirement. This lets you increase propeller pitch to get a higher
> momentum difference across the propeller at speed and this lets the
> plane
> fly faster. Some one told me that every plane, engine, and propeller
>
> combination has its own sweet spot, and I believe I have come close
> to it.
Jack,
Your message has inspired further thinking wrt prop efficiency, so
thank you. I'm thinking things are different than what you've
suggested above, altho I am just an armchair aerodynamic buff. A few
points from my conception of this:
1. I've generally heard of prop tip rotational speed more than
"forward tip speed" wrt prop efficiency. Forward tip speed does seem
useful in picturing thrust made by the propellor disk, but that is also
easily measured with a spring scale and tether in a static ground test.
The trade-off here is a small disk (or air column) being moved at a
high velocity relative to airplane speed versus a large disk/column
being moved at a smaller (but still positive) speed relative to the
airplane.
In every case I've ever heard of, a larger disk generates more thrust.
However, this too must have some upper limit as the airplane's speed
increases, because, as the disk (prop diameter) gets bigger, at some
point the prop pitch angle must be reduced or the engine will not have
enf torque to spin fast enf to generate full power, and as well, one
could reach the point of prop pitch flat enf that even at full or
cruise power rpm, the pitch and prop's lift would be inadequate to
increase airplane speed -- even if the plane itself had zero drag.
2. Generally, prop efficiency includes a consideration of rotational
tip speed, and as I recall, Mach .75 - .80 is close to ideal. As you
reduce prop diameter, you reduce rotational tip speed. I ran a quick
spreadsheet last night at home and it shows our props are well under
Mach .75. I think 5200rpm, 60" prop diam, and 2.58 reduction ratio is
something like Mach 0.5. (I can send the spreadsheet on the off chance
that someone wants it, altho it is simple to generate anyway.) So,
another way to get more efficient would be to reduce the reduction
ratio, thereby speeding up the prop -- the engine HP and torque
requirement is not changed. Down side is greater prop noise
--especially as one approaches Mach 1, and greater sensitivy to prop
imbalance issues, not to mention lesser availability of different ratio
redrives. Still, I've often wondered what it would be like to fly
something closer to a 2.2 reduction ratio. :)
3. Cutting the prop diameter doesn't necessarily reduce prop drag. It
reduces wetted area, but generally, shorter wings (or props) have a
lower lift/drag ratio. This is because induced drag is, in part, due
to tip losses (vortexes), which are a smaller percentage of total drag
as the wing gets longer (higher aspect ratio, like a glider). Induced
drag also increases with pitch angle (and lift), so the smaller
diameter prop with higher pitch (aka angle of attack), could very well
have higher drag than a larger diameter prop. I think it is the higher
thrust of large diameter props, more than drag per se, that requires
more engine torque.
4. Increased prop diameter (and/or mass) increases the angular momentum
of the prop, but that doesn't have any real bearing on horsepower or
torque requirement. In this issue, forget about the aerodynamics --
assume lift and drag are zero -- i.e. Mars. A half HP engine could
spin the prop at 5000rpm, even direct drive. ...might take it a while
to spin up (or slow down) but it would get there. :)
One of the practical considerations advertised in this area is that
Powerfin is very proud of their low propellor mass, and further, that
it is concentrated nearer the inside of the prop blades. Both of these
result in low angular momentum of the prop. Advantage? Less inertia
transmitted back through the gearbox. They at least used to make this
comparison to the Warp props, which, as solid carbon fiber, have
comparatively high mass and more of it further out the blade radii. Of
course in doing this, Warp is able structurally to have a very narrow
chord, high aspect ratio, high lift prop. :)
Back to flying ----
I changed from my Powerfin 60" back to my Warp 66" on Saturday. My
Powerfin had been pitched about 10deg,20min, and I pitched the Warp a
little flatter -- 10deg,10min. I only flew an abbreviated test due to
rain starting, and clowning around with a surprise motor glider
companion. But, it appears that I was getting equal or nearly equal
climb rate, and 5-6mph better cruise as compared to the same conditions
and cruise rpm on the Powerfin. More testing is required to confirm
this.
Open to comments -- I'm sure I've botched some of this.
-Ben Ransom
=====
http://mae.ucdavis.edu/~ransom
__________________________________
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Briggs in the air |
Dennis..and gang...
No Dennis..that is not the new briggs Vanguard. I called the briggs eastern
rep last week, and she told me it is not here yet!(the new 898cc
engine)..although they expect a container soon. The main prob is...the OEMS
are quickly speaking up for all that will be on it for test samples and she
wasnt sure if there would be any avail for the re-power market, which is
industry lingo for resale to consumers.
It looks to me like that engine on that MiniMax is an old version that that
german fella sold and promoted. It is not anywhere near 38 horse power. In
its stock form it is 18 and 20...and from all I have heard..they might be
making 30 now. But they do say its durable..which I believe entirely.
BTW..the new one will weigh 123 lbs and be rated at 28 hp @3600, and a
liquid cooled Vanguard will soon be following rated at 33hp..also 123 lbs.
both 898cc's
Are you getting close on that FireFly rebuild job Dennis? IF you are...I
might loan ya a 670L to test out on it..I was thinking about it on my
Fly..but lost my nerve!
BTW....I wonder if you might go to my website and check out the pics I put
up a few minutes ago.They are pics of my single strut adaptation I have
tack-welded together for the FireFly. Any comments you might have or
thoughts I would certainly like to hear. Particularly since at this stage it
is still just tacked up for fit!
here is a link to the strut page..
http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/strut_mod.htm
Also I posted pics of my wing gap on the mods page for any who need more
headroom....if anybody wants to see how I got some.
Any and all comments from the readers here are certainly welcome....no
matter what ya think..I want to hear.
I assure you all..I wont cuss ya..argue or debate anything anyone
says....But I might change something if someone makes a good case!
(and if I dont..and I crash ..you will have the satisfaction of knowing that
my thoughts as I was decending were.."I should have done what you
suggested!)
I also might add..that I have a rear soft enclosure as supplied by the old
Kolb company..and I like it an awful lot...any who dont know what they look
like can see it on the enclosure page.
Thx men...dont hold back now~!
Don Gherardini
FireFly 098
http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Be careful what you click on |
Yah, I got one, too, have NOT opened it, cause it's got spam type wording in
it, and the .exe attachment. I just emailed the address it came from,
asking about it. Be careful, guys. Lar. Do
not Archive.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Building Kolb Mk III
N78LB Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Pike" <rwpike(at)charter.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: Be careful what you click on
>
> Semi-Kolb related heads up -
>
> Just a few minutes ago I got two e-mails from two of our listers - but not
> really.
>
> Somebody on the list that has CaptainRon & the Grey Baron in their address
> books has a virus, because I just got a purported message from each of
them >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <tophera(at)centurytel.net> |
| Subject: | fly over Forest lake mn |
Somebody did a fly over of forest lake around 5:00 pm Tuesday. It was a
beautiful yellow plane with dark checkerboard wing tips. Gave me a smile to
see whoever it was having some fun.
Topher
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Denny Rowe" <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
Geek Humor
In his book, Sled Driver, SR-71 Blackbird pilot Brian Shul writes: "I'll
always remember a certain radio exchange that occurred one day as Walt (my
back-seater) and I were screaming across Southern California 13 miles
high. We were monitoring various radio transmissions from other aircraft as
we entered Los Angeles airspace. Though they didn't really control us,
they did monitor our movement across their scope..
I heard a Cessna ask for a readout of its ground speed.
"90 knots" Center replied.
Moments later, a Twin Beech required the same. "120 knots," Center answered.
We weren't the only ones proud of our ground speed that day as almost
instantly an F-18 smugly transmitted, 'Ah, Center, Dusty 52 requests
ground speed readout."
There was a slight pause, then the response, "525 knots on the ground,
Dusty."
Another silent pause. As I was thinking to myself how ripe a situation this
was, I heard a familiar click of a radio transmission coming from my
back-seat. "Center, Aspen 20, you got a ground speed readout for us?"
There was a longer than normal pause . . . . "Aspen, I show 1,742 knots"
No further inquiries were heard on that frequency.
In another famous SR-71 story, Los Angeles Center reported receiving a
request for clearance to FL 60 (60,000 ft). The incredulous controller,
with some disdain in his voice, asked, "How do you plan to get up to 60,000
feet?"
The pilot (obviously a sled driver), respoded, "We don't plan to go up to
it, we plan to go down to it." He was cleared.
The pilot was sitting in his seat and pulled out a .38 revolver. He placed
it on top of the instrument panel, and then asked the navigator, "Do you
know what I use this for?"
The navigator replied timidly, "No, what's it for?"
The pilot responded, "I use this on navigators who get me lost!"
The navigator proceeded to pull out a .45 and place it on his chart table.
The pilot asked, "What's that for?"
"To be honest sir," the navigator replied, "I'll know we're lost before you
will."
More tower chatter:
Tower: "Delta 351, you have traffic at 10 o'clock, 6 miles!"
Delta 351: "Give us another hint! We have digital watches!"
One day the pilot of a Cherokee 180 was told by the tower to hold short of
the runway while an MD80
landed. The MD80 landed, rolled out, turned around, and taxied back past the
Cherokee.
Some quick-witted comedian in the MD80 crew got on the radio and said, "What
a cute little plane. Did
you make it all by yourself?"
Our hero, the Cherokee pilot, shot back with: "I made it out of MD80 parts.
Another landing like that
and I'll have enough parts for another one."
There's a story about the military pilot calling for a priority landing
because his single-engine jet
fighter was running "a bit peaked."
Air Traffic Control told the fighter jock that he was number two behind a
B-52 that had one engine shut down.
"Ah," the pilot remarked, "the dreaded seven-engine approach."
A student became lost during a solo cross-country flight. While attempting
to locate the aircraft on
radar, ATC asked, "What was your last known position?"
Student: "When I was number one for takeoff."
Taxiing down the tarmac, the 757 abruptly stopped, turned around and
returned to the gate. After an
hour-long wait, it finally took off.
A concerned passenger asked the flight attendant, "What was the problem?"
"The pilot was bothered by a noise he heard in the engine," explained the
flight attendant, "and it took us a while to find a new pilot."
"Flight 2341, for noise abatement turn right 45 degrees."
"But Center, we are at 35,000 feet. How much noise can we make up here?"
"Sir, have you ever heard the noise a 747 makes when it hits a 727?"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | artdog1512 <nazz57(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | yes john h. ....... |
From: "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Briggs in the air
Dennis/All:
That was the question I had for Paul P. Wondered how
much it weighed.
Also wonder if the builders may be stretching those
horses a little.
john h
yes john, they're stretching it.. very much. ... tim
__________________________________
http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jo and Larry" <joandlp(at)starband.net> |
| Subject: | Transition Time? |
I am a low time ultralight pilot and my experience is in Quicks and the
like. A friend and I bought a Kolb Firestar II and it is about ready to fly.
I am having trouble finding transition training. Two question. 1. Anyone
know of any transition training available in the Dallas Ft Worth or
surronding areas? 2. If I can't find any what should I watch for and how
hard will the transition be? Any advise, pointers, etc greatly appriciated.
Thanks,
Larry
"Contrary to published reports... . the buck never stops"
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack & Louise Hart <jbhart(at)ldd.net> |
| Subject: | Re: prop efficiency (was 'test pilot') |
Ben,
I agree with everything you have written. I believe all of these statements
have been made or developed on the concept of infinite availability of horse
power or torque. If one fixes the horsepower or torque that can be
generated at some given rpm, then other considerations come into play. Also
one has to consider what is happening at flight speeds.
I will finish installing an elevator position indicator today so that I can
evaluate the effect of different thrust line positions on pitch trim. I want to
see what change there will be to elevator position between level flight normal
and wide open cruise speeds with the thrust line at its present level and then
raising it about eight inches. When this study is complete, I will rotate
the Victor 1+ belt reducer to the straight up position, and run the 56 inch
IVO, with the engine set to max out at 6,000 rpm in flight and EGT running
at 1,200 degrees F or slightly above. I will take up and down wind speed
data by GPS with the throttle set for 5,200 and 6,000 rpm. Then I will
mount a 72 inch IVO and make the same speed runs.
It will take a while to get this done, but it is on my short list.
For your consideration, I have added some comments below.
>
>
>1. I've generally heard of prop tip rotational speed more than
>"forward tip speed" wrt prop efficiency. Forward tip speed does seem
>useful in picturing thrust made by the propellor disk, but that is also
>easily measured with a spring scale and tether in a static ground test.
> The trade-off here is a small disk (or air column) being moved at a
>high velocity relative to airplane speed versus a large disk/column
>being moved at a smaller (but still positive) speed relative to the
>airplane.
>
The reason I like propeller forward tip speed is that if, there was no drag
presented by the FireFly, this is the maximum speed it could go. If one
assumes some propeller efficiency, then one can have an idea of what the
total Firefly drag is at a given speed.
Static thrust is more a measure of engine hp and torque than of how fast the
aircraft will fly.
>
>In every case I've ever heard of, a larger disk generates more thrust.
>However, this too must have some upper limit as the airplane's speed
>increases, because, as the disk (prop diameter) gets bigger, at some
>point the prop pitch angle must be reduced or the engine will not have
>enf torque to spin fast enf to generate full power, and as well, one
>could reach the point of prop pitch flat enf that even at full or
>cruise power rpm, the pitch and prop's lift would be inadequate to
>increase airplane speed -- even if the plane itself had zero drag.
>
This is my basic point. If you pitch a long propeller to let the engine run
6,000 rpm and the propeller tip forward advance speed comes out to 55 mph
and the propeller is operating at 86 percent efficiency, the best possible
is a little over 47 mph and this does not take into account aircraft drag.
Now if you shorten the propeller so that you increase the pitch to absorb
the same amount of power, the forward advance tip speed may come out to 60
mph. Propeller efficiency would have to drop to 7 percent to equalize the
above performance, but assuming that propeller efficiency drops just half
way to 82.5 percent. This means that you will be able to top out at 47.5
mph.
>
>3. Cutting the prop diameter doesn't necessarily reduce prop drag. It
>reduces wetted area, but generally, shorter wings (or props) have a
>lower lift/drag ratio. This is because induced drag is, in part, due
>to tip losses (vortexes), which are a smaller percentage of total drag
>as the wing gets longer (higher aspect ratio, like a glider). Induced
>drag also increases with pitch angle (and lift), so the smaller
>diameter prop with higher pitch (aka angle of attack), could very well
>have higher drag than a larger diameter prop. I think it is the higher
>thrust of large diameter props, more than drag per se, that requires
>more engine torque.
The propeller tips move at higher velocity than those portions closer to the
hub. The drag associated with the rotation at the tips is proportional to
velocity squared, so as one cuts the propeller the drag drops rapidly and
you are cutting off that portion of the propeller that adds the most to the
total torque. This lets one re pitch the propeller until the total
drag/torque is the same and get a higher tip forward advance velocity.
I like to think of it as a conservation of momentum where the volume flow rate
of air passing through the propeller is constant. If we use a big
propeller, the velocity is going to be low, and if we use a smaller
propeller, the pitch has to be higher to move the same amount of air. And
the end result is the air velocity will be higher too.
All these thoughts may indicate what is happening, but in reality, I believe
the best way to find out what is best for your aircraft is to mount the longest
ground adjustable propeller, set the pitch to give optimum engine operating
conditions and see what you get. Then cut the propeller a little, and
repeat the process until your max cruise does not increase or you are
reaching a rate of climb that you find unacceptable. Then you have found
your sweet spot for your aircraft.
Warm enough to head for the airport to work on the elevator position indicator.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Jackson, MO
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart(at)ldd.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Ransom <bwr000(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: prop efficiency |
Jack,
Your posts here have really helped me with a basic concept that I had
never paid enf attention to, and that is the issue of forward speed of
the prop tips. Also, after my lengthy post yesterday, I had
afterthoughts about my statement that increasing prop rotational speed,
e.g. with a different gearbox, might help things. I've never heard of
anyone in small aircraft trying to do that -- in fact most try to slow
the prop down and get to a bigger diameter prop. I asked an expert
about this yesterday (I work in the Mechanical & Aeronautical
Engineering department at UC Davis.) He said that there were probably
diminishing returns due to other factors (such as drag, as you suggest)
that likely come into play before that ideal tip rotational velocity is
reached. Anyway, no need for me to add anything further. Have fun
with your experiments. I'll post more about my own prop comparisons
when I get there too.
-Ben
Can't help but to throw in a footnote: I find it interesting that we
Rotax drivers use 2.58 reduction drives for a 6600 rpm max rated
engine, and the Subaru EJ folks like to use around 2.2 reduction drives
for 5650 rpm max rated engines. Both yield the same prop rpm.
--- Jack & Louise Hart wrote:
>
> Ben,
>
> I agree with everything you have written. I believe all of these
> statements
> have been made or developed on the concept of infinite availability
> of horse
> power or torque. If one fixes the horsepower or torque that can be
> generated at some given rpm, then other considerations come into
> play. Also
> one has to consider what is happening at flight speeds.
>
> I will finish installing an elevator position indicator today so that
> I can
> evaluate the effect of different thrust line positions on pitch trim.
> I want to
> see what change there will be to elevator position between level
> flight normal
> and wide open cruise speeds with the thrust line at its present level
> and then
> raising it about eight inches. When this study is complete, I will
> rotate
> the Victor 1+ belt reducer to the straight up position, and run the
> 56 inch
> IVO, with the engine set to max out at 6,000 rpm in flight and EGT
> running
> at 1,200 degrees F or slightly above. I will take up and down wind
> speed
> data by GPS with the throttle set for 5,200 and 6,000 rpm. Then I
> will
> mount a 72 inch IVO and make the same speed runs.
>
> It will take a while to get this done, but it is on my short list.
>
> For your consideration, I have added some comments below.
>
> >
> >
> >1. I've generally heard of prop tip rotational speed more than
> >"forward tip speed" wrt prop efficiency. Forward tip speed does
> seem
> >useful in picturing thrust made by the propellor disk, but that is
> also
> >easily measured with a spring scale and tether in a static ground
> test.
> > The trade-off here is a small disk (or air column) being moved at a
> >high velocity relative to airplane speed versus a large disk/column
> >being moved at a smaller (but still positive) speed relative to the
> >airplane.
> >
>
> The reason I like propeller forward tip speed is that if, there was
> no drag
> presented by the FireFly, this is the maximum speed it could go. If
> one
> assumes some propeller efficiency, then one can have an idea of what
> the
> total Firefly drag is at a given speed.
>
> Static thrust is more a measure of engine hp and torque than of how
> fast the
> aircraft will fly.
>
> >
> >In every case I've ever heard of, a larger disk generates more
> thrust.
> >However, this too must have some upper limit as the airplane's speed
> >increases, because, as the disk (prop diameter) gets bigger, at some
> >point the prop pitch angle must be reduced or the engine will not
> have
> >enf torque to spin fast enf to generate full power, and as well, one
> >could reach the point of prop pitch flat enf that even at full or
> >cruise power rpm, the pitch and prop's lift would be inadequate to
> >increase airplane speed -- even if the plane itself had zero drag.
> >
>
> This is my basic point. If you pitch a long propeller to let the
> engine run
> 6,000 rpm and the propeller tip forward advance speed comes out to 55
> mph
> and the propeller is operating at 86 percent efficiency, the best
> possible
> is a little over 47 mph and this does not take into account aircraft
> drag.
> Now if you shorten the propeller so that you increase the pitch to
> absorb
> the same amount of power, the forward advance tip speed may come out
> to 60
> mph. Propeller efficiency would have to drop to 7 percent to
> equalize the
> above performance, but assuming that propeller efficiency drops just
> half
> way to 82.5 percent. This means that you will be able to top out at
> 47.5
> mph.
>
> >
> >3. Cutting the prop diameter doesn't necessarily reduce prop drag.
> It
> >reduces wetted area, but generally, shorter wings (or props) have a
> >lower lift/drag ratio. This is because induced drag is, in part,
> due
> >to tip losses (vortexes), which are a smaller percentage of total
> drag
> >as the wing gets longer (higher aspect ratio, like a glider).
> Induced
> >drag also increases with pitch angle (and lift), so the smaller
> >diameter prop with higher pitch (aka angle of attack), could very
> well
> >have higher drag than a larger diameter prop. I think it is the
> higher
> >thrust of large diameter props, more than drag per se, that requires
> >more engine torque.
>
> The propeller tips move at higher velocity than those portions closer
> to the
> hub. The drag associated with the rotation at the tips is
> proportional to
> velocity squared, so as one cuts the propeller the drag drops rapidly
> and
> you are cutting off that portion of the propeller that adds the most
> to the
> total torque. This lets one re pitch the propeller until the total
> drag/torque is the same and get a higher tip forward advance
> velocity.
>
> I like to think of it as a conservation of momentum where the volume
> flow rate
> of air passing through the propeller is constant. If we use a big
> propeller, the velocity is going to be low, and if we use a smaller
> propeller, the pitch has to be higher to move the same amount of air.
> And
> the end result is the air velocity will be higher too.
>
> All these thoughts may indicate what is happening, but in reality, I
> believe
> the best way to find out what is best for your aircraft is to mount
> the longest
> ground adjustable propeller, set the pitch to give optimum engine
> operating
> conditions and see what you get. Then cut the propeller a little,
> and
> repeat the process until your max cruise does not increase or you are
>
> reaching a rate of climb that you find unacceptable. Then you have
> found
> your sweet spot for your aircraft.
>
> Warm enough to head for the airport to work on the elevator position
> indicator.
>
> Jack B. Hart FF004
> Jackson, MO
>
>
> Jack & Louise Hart
> jbhart(at)ldd.net
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
__________________________________
http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dale Sellers" <dsel1(at)bellsouth.net> |
I am relative new to two cycle engines except for my weed eater and chain saw.
What I don't understand is how manufactorers of snowmobiles, ski-dos, airboats
and other applications can put the same engines we are using, in those machines
and sell them to the public, off the floor and tell them to mix the gas and
oil together, put some in the tank and go and have fun. We, on the otherhand,
have to constantly worry and check to see if we are jetted correctly for temp
changes, humidity changes and altitude change.
The other folks using the same engines just run them.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "jam'n" <jghunter(at)nol.net> |
chuckles.... thanks :)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Denny Rowe" <rowedl(at)highstream.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: Aviation
>
>
> Geek Humor
>
> In his book, Sled Driver, SR-71 Blackbird pilot Brian Shul writes:
"I'll
> always remember a certain radio exchange that occurred one day as Walt
(my
> back-seater) and I were screaming across Southern California 13 miles
> high. We were monitoring various radio transmissions from other aircraft
as
> we entered Los Angeles airspace. Though they didn't really control us,
> they did monitor our movement across their scope..
>
> I heard a Cessna ask for a readout of its ground speed.
>
> "90 knots" Center replied.
>
> Moments later, a Twin Beech required the same. "120 knots," Center
answered.
>
> We weren't the only ones proud of our ground speed that day as almost
> instantly an F-18 smugly transmitted, 'Ah, Center, Dusty 52 requests
> ground speed readout."
>
> There was a slight pause, then the response, "525 knots on the ground,
> Dusty."
>
> Another silent pause. As I was thinking to myself how ripe a situation
this
> was, I heard a familiar click of a radio transmission coming from my
> back-seat. "Center, Aspen 20, you got a ground speed readout for us?"
>
> There was a longer than normal pause . . . . "Aspen, I show 1,742
knots"
>
> No further inquiries were heard on that frequency.
> In another famous SR-71 story, Los Angeles Center reported receiving a
> request for clearance to FL 60 (60,000 ft). The incredulous controller,
> with some disdain in his voice, asked, "How do you plan to get up to
60,000
> feet?"
>
> The pilot (obviously a sled driver), respoded, "We don't plan to go up
to
> it, we plan to go down to it." He was cleared.
> The pilot was sitting in his seat and pulled out a .38 revolver. He
placed
> it on top of the instrument panel, and then asked the navigator, "Do you
> know what I use this for?"
>
> The navigator replied timidly, "No, what's it for?"
>
> The pilot responded, "I use this on navigators who get me lost!"
>
> The navigator proceeded to pull out a .45 and place it on his chart
table.
> The pilot asked, "What's that for?"
>
> "To be honest sir," the navigator replied, "I'll know we're lost before
you
> will."
> More tower chatter:
>
> Tower: "Delta 351, you have traffic at 10 o'clock, 6 miles!"
>
> Delta 351: "Give us another hint! We have digital watches!"
> One day the pilot of a Cherokee 180 was told by the tower to hold short
of
> the runway while an MD80
> landed. The MD80 landed, rolled out, turned around, and taxied back past
the
> Cherokee.
>
> Some quick-witted comedian in the MD80 crew got on the radio and said,
"What
> a cute little plane. Did
> you make it all by yourself?"
>
> Our hero, the Cherokee pilot, shot back with: "I made it out of MD80
parts.
> Another landing like that
> and I'll have enough parts for another one."
> There's a story about the military pilot calling for a priority landing
> because his single-engine jet
> fighter was running "a bit peaked."
>
> Air Traffic Control told the fighter jock that he was number two behind
a
> B-52 that had one engine shut down.
>
> "Ah," the pilot remarked, "the dreaded seven-engine approach."
> A student became lost during a solo cross-country flight. While
attempting
> to locate the aircraft on
> radar, ATC asked, "What was your last known position?"
>
> Student: "When I was number one for takeoff."
> Taxiing down the tarmac, the 757 abruptly stopped, turned around and
> returned to the gate. After an
> hour-long wait, it finally took off.
>
> A concerned passenger asked the flight attendant, "What was the
problem?"
>
> "The pilot was bothered by a noise he heard in the engine," explained
the
> flight attendant, "and it took us a while to find a new pilot."
> "Flight 2341, for noise abatement turn right 45 degrees."
>
> "But Center, we are at 35,000 feet. How much noise can we make up here?"
>
> "Sir, have you ever heard the noise a 747 makes when it hits a 727?"
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Denny Rowe" <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 2-cycle engines |
>
> I am relative new to two cycle engines except for my weed eater and chain
saw. What I don't understand is how manufactorers of snowmobiles, ski-dos,
airboats and other applications can put the same engines we are using, in
those machines and sell them to the public, off the floor and tell them to
mix the gas and oil together, put some in the tank and go and have fun. We,
on the otherhand, have to constantly worry and check to see if we are jetted
correctly for temp changes, humidity changes and altitude change.
> The other folks using the same engines just run them.
Dale,
All the other machines you mention are usually sent out on the rich side
(safe side) of the jetting specs. They do not require that the operator get
the maximum performance. Every motocross bike I ever bought required leaning
of the jetting to get peak performance.
In our aircraft we run at much higher power settings that tend to be more
demanding on the engines. Think about how little time weed wackers, sleds
or seadoos spend above 3/4 throttle. Our aircraft engines spend almost all
their time above 3/4 throttle.
Also we experience greater elevation changes in operation than anyone other
than cross country snowmobilers.
Hope this helps,
Denny Rowe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 2-cycle engines |
| All the other machines you mention are usually sent out on the rich
side
| (safe side) of the jetting specs. They do not require that the
operator get
| the maximum performance. | Denny Rowe
Denny/All:
I think you have described why we have two stroke problems on
ultralights and not so much on weed eaters, outboard motors, see doos,
ski doos, and I even saw a two stroke thing for making Margaritas.
Rotax engines are designed, built, and tuned, at the factory to run
right out of the box, just like the other two "stuff". One major
difference, we have to tune the prop to the engine and aircraft
correctly. The recommended way to do that is WOT, straight and level
flight, bump the rpm redline. This accomplishes several things:
1. It loads the prop correctly.
2. Puts the EGT in the green arc.
3. Provides the best combination climb and cruise.
4. Prevents seizures, head scratching, cursing, throwing and breaking
stuff.
Engines are designed to perform at specified rating for continuous
duty. Trying to get more power results in reducing reliability.
These engines are detuned from their land and water bound relatives.
Add an in flight adjustable prop into the two stroke equation and then
you really have your hands full.
I don't know why people have the "need" to squeeze more out of the two
stroke aircraft engine than design limits. I did the same thing as
soon as I got my first engine, a Cuyuna ULII02. First thing I did was
buy Mike Stratman's inflight adjustable main jet. Was cause of my
first engine out and bent Ultrastar.
I have a lot of two stroke engines: 25 hp Evinrude OB, weed eater,
chainsaw, leaf blower. Never do anything to them but abuse them, feed
them old fuel and Wal*Mart two stroke oil that I bought for my 582 in
1991. Still have 6 gal after giving away several gal to my neighbors.
Spark plug has never been out of the chainsaw, weed eater, or leaf
blower. Forgot what decade I bought them.
I think we, the ultralight two stroke engine
owner/operator/maintainer/tinkerer are our own worst enemies.
Actually, continuous duty operation may be easier and prolong life of
a two stroke more than on again, off again full power toying around.
The other category two strokes also have their share of failures. If
you doubt my word, go to the nearest marine and small engine repair
facility. See what you find there. Lots of crankshafts, main
bearings, pistons, etc., that died of the dreaded two stroke disease.
Take care,
john h
PS: Coffee break is over. Back to my "rat killing". New brakes and
drums on the 5th wheel from backing plates out. Rather be flying.
:-)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flykolb" <flykolb(at)carolina.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 2-cycle engines |
The result of engine frailure is more extreme when flying then in these
other areas. We can not just pull over and stop if the engine fails!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dale Sellers" <dsel1(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: 2-cycle engines
>
> I am relative new to two cycle engines except for my weed eater and chain
saw. What I don't understand is how manufactorers of snowmobiles, ski-dos,
airboats and other applications can put the same engines we are using, in
those machines and sell them to the public, off the floor and tell them to
mix the gas and oil together, put some in the tank and go and have fun. We,
on the otherhand, have to constantly worry and check to see if we are jetted
correctly for temp changes, humidity changes and altitude change.
> The other folks using the same engines just run them.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dale Sellers" <dsel1(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 2-cycle engines |
Denny,
Thanks, I wondered what the difference was.
Dale
----- Original Message -----
From: "Denny Rowe" <rowedl(at)highstream.net>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: 2-cycle engines
>
>
> >
> > I am relative new to two cycle engines except for my weed eater and
chain
> saw. What I don't understand is how manufactorers of snowmobiles,
ski-dos,
> airboats and other applications can put the same engines we are using, in
> those machines and sell them to the public, off the floor and tell them to
> mix the gas and oil together, put some in the tank and go and have fun.
We,
> on the otherhand, have to constantly worry and check to see if we are
jetted
> correctly for temp changes, humidity changes and altitude change.
> > The other folks using the same engines just run them.
>
> Dale,
> All the other machines you mention are usually sent out on the rich side
> (safe side) of the jetting specs. They do not require that the operator
get
> the maximum performance. Every motocross bike I ever bought required
leaning
> of the jetting to get peak performance.
> In our aircraft we run at much higher power settings that tend to be more
> demanding on the engines. Think about how little time weed wackers, sleds
> or seadoos spend above 3/4 throttle. Our aircraft engines spend almost all
> their time above 3/4 throttle.
> Also we experience greater elevation changes in operation than anyone
other
> than cross country snowmobilers.
> Hope this helps,
>
> Denny Rowe
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Laird <rlaird(at)cavediver.com> |
At 05:11 PM 2/18/2004, you wrote:
>Ever wonder how the youngsters will make out in the future? First they
>couldnt quite get the hang of tying their shoes, so along came Velcro.
>Then they couldnt figure out the Velcro, so they walk around with shoes
>untied. OK so far. Next came telling time. Trouble with big hands vs
>little hands, and what they meant. Digital watches cured that lack of
>cranial activity. Everythings OK until the controller calls traffic at
>two oclock. Or directions say turn control in a clockwise direction.
>Metric hammers next?
Not to mention, they'll wonder why you DIAL a telephone. :-)
-- R
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Denny Rowe" <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 2-cycle engines |
John H. wrote:
:
I even saw a two stroke thing for making Margaritas.
John,
That sounds like my kind of machine
Two stroke engines and Margaritas are two of my favorite things in this
world, just not a good idea to use em both at the same time. :-)
Dennis Rowe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "garvelink" <link(at)cdc.net> |
Safety of the kolb ultrastar. or better name the red headed stepchild of kolb....
I am about to purchase a kolb ultrastar with trailor. I would like to find out
as much as possible about this aircraft. seems that some of the people on the
list think that this plane is due for the scrap heep. thank goodness they didnt
think about piper cubs that way. I need all information about making a buying
decision the trouble spots to look for how to tell if it has all the latest
mods that will make it safe. how to look for damage in the wing how to determine
the safety of the welds. Hell I know that this is a dangerous sport just
need info to make an informed discission. by the way how many of you guys
have ultrastars and how many are still flying. does anyone know of an inflight
breakup? I have heard that homer is a little worried about them. please
any info you could give me would be great.
Cordially
SRGLINK
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Kolb Ultrastar |
| Safety of the kolb ultrastar. or better name the red headed
stepchild of kolb....
|
| I am about to purchase a kolb ultrastar with trailor. I would like
to find out as much as possible about this aircraft. seems that some
of the people on the list think that this plane is due for the scrap
heep. thank goodness they didnt think about piper cubs that way. |
SRGLINK
Hi Ed/Gang:
Ed called me last night and asked my help.
I gave him some things to consider, to inspect, before he made the big
decision.
Don't believe the Ultrastar is "the red headed stepchild of kolb". It
was the best ultralight available during its time, about 20 years ago.
That is why I chose it as my first ultralight to build and fly.
The Firestar was a serious improvement to a new model from the
Ultrastar. In my opinion, a much better airplane overall.
I think you should be very cautious shopping for and purchasing an old
Kolb or any other brand of UL. I imagine most of them were built by
people like me, first time amateur builders with a lot to learn about
the hobby. How it was built, maintained, stored, and flown are
extremely important to me. Looking inside those wings to see if all
the lateral bracing and other critical components are there and in
good shape. How do you know how the wing is built and what shape it
is in if you don't look for yourself?
There are Ultrastars out there flying today in good shape. There are
also a lot of Ultrastars out there that are not airworthy and probably
should be scrapped. Some people would love to see you one of them,
cheap. I have seen tailbooms spliced, something I would not do. On
top of that, the splice would have been incorrectly done, even on a
small non critical item.
Be careful, take your time. I know you have Eipper Quicksilver
experience, so you should probably try to get up to speed on 4130
steel fuselages like the ones on Cubs. Be sure and take a careful
look at cables and nicopress sleeves. Initially, I did all my US
cables the wrong way. My Brother took one look at them and knew they
were hazardous and incorrectly squeezed. I would have busted my butt
had they not been corrected. Again, on cables: Some nicopress
sleeves look correct but would not pass the go/no go test. Too loose
and they will pull will little effort.
Take care and good luck.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Sandy Hegyi" <sandyh(at)dccnet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: electric start |
Hi Richard
Thanks for your response but my CPS catalog shows the 377,477,503 needing a
.886 inch spacer and the 53d2 needing a 1.017 inch spacer. They also
mention a square relief hole to allow for the bendix drive gear. and
instructions would be provided in the kit. Anyone have those instructions?
Thanks
Sandy
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Pike" <rwpike(at)charter.net>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: electric start
>
> Sandy, according to a CPS catalog, the Rotax electric starter fits all the
> different Rotax engines, the difference is in an adapter/spacer that fits
> between the starter gear and the flywheel.
>
> The 277FA, 377, 447, and 532 all use the same spacer except that the 532
is
> only for serial #'s before 3549852. Those all use Rotax part # 852-370,
> which is 1" high.
>
> For 532's after serial # 3549852 and 582's w/o the liquid dampener, use
> Rotax spacer # 852-374, which is 7/8" high.
>
> For 582's with the liquid dampener, use Rotax adapter #852-378 which is
> 3/4" high.
>
> Hope this helps.
> Richard Pike
> MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>
> >
> >Does anyone have any instructions on how to fit an electric start on to a
> >532? Will the starter off a 503 work?
> >
> >Thanks
> >
> >Sandy
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack & Louise Hart <jbhart(at)ldd.net> |
| Subject: | FireFly Elevator Position Indicator |
FireFlyers and List,
Finished installing it today. Too windy to fly. Checked everything over and
found a cracked radiator support. So no flying for a few days.
The reason for the elevator position indicator is to put a number on where the
stick is positioned rather than trying to remember did it feel lighter or heavier.
This has been brought about by experimenting with pitch trim due to throttle
setting and by raising or lowering the propeller thrust line. Also, it will
be helpful to tell me if I am running out of elevator when using flaperons.
If you would like, it can be seen at:
http://www.thirdshift.com/jack/firefly/firefly102.html
Unbelievable temperatures today, the snow is just about gone.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Jackson, MO
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart(at)ldd.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "garvelink" <link(at)cdc.net> |
Thanks for the info the other night on the kolb us I have to travel to richmond
virginia to pick it up and want to know what to look for before I make the final
purchase. It is a nice looking plane. It is true that I have about 100 hrs
in a quicksilver weight shift. what an interesting plane. remember riding
it up in a thermal to 6000 feet then shut off the motor and flew for 25 minutes
to the ground at about 20 mph. I went on to get my ga license private single
engine land and private glider rating. The kolb us has facinated me ever since
I read about it. I would like to get a set of the plans that have all the
fixes and mod updates so I can eventually apply them to this plane. Again John
Thanks for the advice.
Srglink
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dennis Souder" <flykolb(at)pa.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Kolb Ultrastar |
Hi Ed,
One more thing to keep in mind. The belt reduction drive have been out of
production for a long time and if repairs, belts, etc are needed - it may
be a challenge.
Most other parts could be fabricated if necessary. If you are a machinist,
then not to worry about the re-drive. Also another perspective to keep in
mind: If you can buy it cheap enough, you could plan on doing a tear down
and thorough inspection and recover, etc. Still could be a good deal. Or
do the same with a FS and have the such niceties as large dia prop (with
lots of ground clearance), enclosure and spring gear.
The US was and still is a great flying AC, but the FS is nicer to live with,
esp when it gets colder.
Good luck,
Dennis
> | Safety of the kolb ultrastar. or better name the red headed
> stepchild of kolb....
> |
> | I am about to purchase a kolb ultrastar with trailor. I would like
> to find out as much as possible about this aircraft. seems that some
> of the people on the list think that this plane is due for the scrap
> heep. thank goodness they didnt think about piper cubs that way. |
> SRGLINK
>
> Hi Ed/Gang:
>
> Ed called me last night and asked my help ...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob N." <ronoy(at)shentel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Craftsman Tools |
John,
Had the exact same problem--both with wrench, and Sears. I did a kinda
halfassed recalibration by comparing my readings with an in-calibration
wrench. Bored/tapped six holes in half-in steel plate. Used dry cad
plated bolts with two split washers. The "good" wrench pulled down three
bolts, as did mine. Turned plate over and used nuts with two washers.
Then using no washers. Both wrenches were the same within abt 5 In-#.
Mine says to Always reset to zero when not in use. Friend in nearby
hangar didn't reset, and his was way off--reckon the spring in handle
took a set.
Things that made variences are: new vs old bolts/nuts; plating; oil!!!;
and sneaking up on a reading vs a big pull that almost clicks.
Yer mileage will vary. Not intended as instruction. Waiting for the ice
to go out.
Bob N.
________________________________________________________________________________
http://www.matronics.com/subscription
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mid-State Sandblasting" <plane(at)rtmc.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Kolb Ultrastar |
I put over three hundred hours on one with a Subaru car engine on it, I
say go for it if the price is right. It would make a good first plane,
Randy Still miss the old Soobydoo
----- Original Message -----
From: "garvelink" <link(at)cdc.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: Kolb Ultrastar
>
> Safety of the kolb ultrastar. or better name the red headed stepchild of
kolb....
>
> I am about to purchase a kolb ultrastar with trailor. I would like to
find out as much as possible about this aircraft. seems that some of the
people on the list think that this plane is due for the scrap heep. thank
goodness they didnt think about piper cubs that way. I need all information
about making a buying decision the trouble spots to look for how to tell if
it has all the latest mods that will make it safe. how to look for damage
in the wing how to determine the safety of the welds. Hell I know that this
is a dangerous sport just need info to make an informed discission. by the
way how many of you guys have ultrastars and how many are still flying.
does anyone know of an inflight breakup? I have heard that homer is a
little worried about them. please any info you could give me would be
great.
>
>
> Cordially
>
> SRGLINK
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Facet Fuel Pump |
Giovanni..
I am using a mikuni up close to the engine...with a facet down below the
tank...all in one line...I start it after letting the facet run fer a
bit...then turn it off...make sure the Mikunin is working, then usually turn
on the Facet during takeoffs and landings...and generally not running it
while cruiseing....Uhh..unless I forget to turn it off after takeoff and
climbout!!!!
Don Gherardini
FireFly 098
http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Denny Rowe" <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Facet Fuel Pump |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Gherardini" <donghe@one-eleven.net>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Facet Fuel Pump
>
> Giovanni..
>
> I am using a mikuni up close to the engine...with a facet down below the
> tank...all in one line...I start it after letting the facet run fer a
> bit...then turn it off...make sure the Mikunin is working, then usually
turn
> on the Facet during takeoffs and landings...and generally not running it
> while cruiseing....Uhh..unless I forget to turn it off after takeoff and
> climbout!!!!
>
> Don Gherardini
> FireFly 098
> http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm
>
> Giovanni, Don, others,
I have the same set up as Don on my Mk-3 and operate it the same way.
Just make sure you get the lowest pressure Facet pump, they have several
differant ones.
Fly safe,
Denny Rowe
Mk-3, 2SI 690L-70, PA.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Terry <tkrolfe(at)usadatanet.net> |
Jack,
I'm always fascinated by the devices you come up with to check on your
modifications. I'm thinking I could have used your indicator when I
was messing with changing my angle of incidence of the horizontal stab
on my FireFly. I was and am still going by feel and performance of
the plane. At least now I don't have to hold forward on the stick at
cruise or have my flaperons deflected to compensate. You indicator
would have helped to document the change.
Good work,
Terry - FireFly #95
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Bean <slyck(at)frontiernet.net> |
If you want a good package deal , Great Plains ac has a good package here.
No brains required and hey maybe with some kolb wings????????
http://search.netscape.com/ns/boomframe.jsp?query=vw+aircraft+engines&page=1&offset=1&result_url=redir?src=websearch&requestId=c9703bfd7cb31e45&clickedItemRank=1&userQuery=vw+aircraft+engines&clickedItemURN=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.greatplainsas.com%2F&invocationType=-&fromPage=NSCPResults&remove_url=http://www.greatplainsas.com/
<http://search.netscape.com/ns/boomframe.jsp?query=vw+aircraft+engines&page=1&offset=1&result_url=redir%3Fsrc%3Dwebsearch%26amp%3BrequestId%3Dc9703bfd7cb31e45%26amp%3BclickedItemRank%3D1%26amp%3BuserQuery%3Dvw%2Baircraft%2Bengines%26amp%3BclickedItemURN%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.greatplainsas.com%252F%26amp%3BinvocationType%3D-%26amp%3BfromPage%3DNSCPResults&remove_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.greatplainsas.com%2F>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Pat Lavigne" <pjl53(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | transition training |
It's worth the trip to the New Kolb factory in London, KY.
to get transition training in their Kolbra. It's basically the same
configuration as the Firestar.
I am a GA pilot and went from flying a Grumman TR2 with a 160hp engine to a
firestar with a 447 Rotax. 40hp. I wouldn't attempt to fly the Firestar
without the training.
Just contact the New Kolb Aircraft Co. and try and set something up.
There GREAT people to work with.
Regards,
Pat LaVigne FS driver in Rochester,N.Y.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
Huh ?? Do they have batteries for EVerything ?? :-) I'll
take'n a look at'm. Thanks Lar. Do not
Archive.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Building Kolb Mk III
N78LB Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Harris" <rharris@magnolia-net.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Batteries
<rharris@magnolia-net.com>
>
> Lar, Take a look at. batteries4everything.com They have Batteries for
> everything...go figure
>
> Richard
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com>
> To:
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Batteries
>
>
> >
> > This was for a different need, Ed. That little 4 ah gel cell is still
> going
> > strong, and is handy for long term powering of my camera, as well as the
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steven Green" <kolbdriver(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Facet Fuel Pump |
I am using a mikuni up close to the engine...with a facet down below the
tank...all in one line...I start it after letting the facet run fer a
bit...then turn it off...make sure the Mikunin is working, then usually turn
on the Facet during takeoffs and landings...and generally not running it
while cruiseing....Uhh..unless I forget to turn it off after takeoff and
climbout!!!!
Don Gherardini
FireFly 098
Don and all,
I have my facet plumbed parallel to the pulse pump as recommended by Rotax
and use it to fill the carbs before the initial start of the day. ( I empty
the float bowls post flight unless I know I will be flying within a week or
two.) I do not run my facet pump at all after that. The most probable time
for an accident is during take-off or landing. I don't like the thought of
being in a damaged aircraft with an electric fuel pump running and squirting
fuel everywhere. I plan to install an inertia switch (one that fits a 96
Taurus will work well) in the electric pump circuit to open the circuit to
the pump in the event of an accident, then I will run the pump on take-off
and landing. BTW I have a fuel pressure indication and alarm on my EIS so I
should get an alarm a few seconds before the engine quits from a failed
pulse pump.
Steven G.
Mk III 582
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Scott Olendorf" <solendor(at)nycap.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Starter trouble |
I was thinking that maybe next time you can stick them in place with some
melted wax. Then when the engine gets hot the wax will melt away.
What do you guys think about this idea? If it sounds this simple there must
be something wrong with it.
Scott Olendorf
Firestar, Rotax 447 and Powerfin prop.
Schenectady, NY
http://home.nycap.rr.com/firestar
> I have taken my starter apart and there are a bunch of little roller
>bearings that roll up these little ramps and squeeze the shaft to start the
>engine. When it starts the shaft turns faster than the starter was turning
it and
>it
>outruns the roller bearings. When I took it apart the only way I could see
>to keep all those bearings in place to put it back together, was to stick
them
>
>in place with grease. I wonder if the grease is too heavy to let the
rollers
>move like they need to.
>
> Steve Henry
> Nampa, Idaho
> Firestar/377
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Starter trouble |
Steve, Back in the old Dirt Bike days, we use-ta put wrist pin bearings up
with Vaseline, quick as a little heat got to it, it was gone...Everything
else still in place...
My 3 cents worth...
Richard
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Olendorf" <solendor(at)nycap.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Starter trouble
>
> I was thinking that maybe next time you can stick them in place with some
> melted wax. Then when the engine gets hot the wax will melt away.
>
> What do you guys think about this idea? If it sounds this simple there
must
> be something wrong with it.
>
> Scott Olendorf
> Firestar, Rotax 447 and Powerfin prop.
> Schenectady, NY
> http://home.nycap.rr.com/firestar
>
>
> > I have taken my starter apart and there are a bunch of little roller
> >bearings that roll up these little ramps and squeeze the shaft to start
the
> >engine. When it starts the shaft turns faster than the starter was
turning
> it and
> >it
> >outruns the roller bearings. When I took it apart the only way I could
see
> >to keep all those bearings in place to put it back together, was to
stick
> them
> >
> >in place with grease. I wonder if the grease is too heavy to let the
> rollers
> >move like they need to.
> >
> > Steve Henry
> > Nampa, Idaho
> > Firestar/377
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ActionCrane(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Starter trouble |
I appreciate all the input. I got my starter fixed and went flying today and
it works perfectly. It needed a new $12 one way clutch bearing. when the
bearing is not all worn out all those little roller bearing don't even try to fall
out. thanks again.
February 07, 2004 - February 20, 2004
Kolb-Archive.digest.vol-eu