Kolb-Archive.digest.vol-fj
April 20, 2005 - May 27, 2005
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flykolb" <flykolb(at)carolina.rr.com> |
Fellow Kolbers,
I took the liberty of sending your comments on to EAA. I deleted your names and
email address. I will let you know when (and if) I get any response.
Jim
Mark III
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Giovanni Day" <gde01(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | kolb titan exhaust |
Hello all,
I have FS the kolb version of the titan exhaust FS. I use d it for about
15-20 hours. $485 Please email me off list.
Giovanni
MKIII 80566
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Flycrazy8(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: firefly Tires |
Band of Brothers,
Thanks for the information on the Firefly tires...Just what I needed..
I especially am thankful for Brother Beauford sharing his experience with
the Firefly " Nose Stand " .......LOL........Glad to know that I am not the
only one to not LQQK so Kool with a crowd pleasing but embarrassing
predicament.....It's really easy to do on grass with them small tires....
.What is the best way to get out of that situation ?? ..
Does it help to carry a broom handle with you in the cockpit to push
yourself back up ??.. Hey ! Chuck Yeager carried one with him when he broke the
sound barrier .....lol
Stephen
Bama Firefly
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Monument Valley |
Thanks, Gary. That raft ride is a real pleasure, and a nice way to spend a
morning. You're coming a long way......will you be grouping up with
John W., Dave and Will ?? Lar. Do not
Archive.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Building Kolb Mk III
N78LB Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: <ghaley(at)wt.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: Monument Valley
>
> Larry,
>
> Thanks for the narrative on Monument Valley and the
> surrounding areas.
> I am flying my Kolb Mark III to MV and will arrive on
> Thursday May 19th if all goes as planned. My wife will be
> joining me on Friday and staying until Monday AM.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DAquaNut(at)AOL.com |
In a message dated 4/20/2005 6:03:10 P.M. Central Standard Time,
splitess@suscom-maine.net writes:
EAA was not associated with Sun and Fun this year. The organizers gave them
the boot last fall. That is why things were screwed up and costs were jacked
up.
D. Steven Schlieper
They were jacked up three years ago. It didn't happen overnight!
Ed
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "skyrider2" <skyrider2(at)earthlink.net> |
Beauford,
Sorry I missed seeing you at Lakeland this year. Bonnie and I only had
Thursday afternoon to take in the "show". I too was disappointed with the
price to gain admission. The $4.00 lemonades are kinda high, but sure taste
good on a hot afternoon. At any rate, I don't think we'll be coming back to
Sun N Fun anytime soon. $50.00 bucks to get the two of us in for just about
5 hours of "droolin' " time.
I noticed another aircraft (besides Kolbs) while I was there. It's a neat
little glass plane that's being imported by one of my old hang gliding
buddies, Tom Peghiny. It's named the CT and they demo'd it from the
Ultralight grass strip. Nice little plane, but when I asked 'em how much
$$$, they said $85,000.00 plus options. And the wings don't even fold or
remove easily. It just doesn't seem like the old days of ultralighting at
that price. Maybe the aircraft have to cost more because of the greed of
the show operators. And partially the exchange rate of the dollar.
I still want a MkIII x. Value, Convenience, Safety, and FUN !!! Wife says I
have to sell the other 2 planes first.
Ya'll Fly Safely,
Doug Lawton
NE Georgia & Whitwell TN
Matthews Field & Gliderport
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <tophera(at)centurytel.net> |
Not one to miss a chance to pontificate at will (and we will...and will...
and will), here's what most impressed us this week -- and what didn't. AND
when all this noise is said and done, we're FINALLY going to drop THE bomb
on everyone... with a MAJOR announcement that is the result of many year's
observation of Lakeland and dozens or other fly-in and airshows... Stay
tuned... this one is gonna be a doozie.
Above from ANN newsletter today. Should be interesting to here Jim
Campbell's rant on this one. He has had a serious bad blood feud with the
sun n fun people for years, so this should be no holds bared!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | FlyColt45(at)aol.com |
For all of you that will be making the trip to Homer's on Father's Day,
he'll have some new things to show you around the farm. (I spent Monday
afternoon with him & he showed me a few of his newest projects :) The guy just
doesn't stop! I've know Homer, like a lot of us and the old Kolb company for
many
years, (& live 5 minutes from him - when I'm in PA), but this was the first
time I ever saw his 4 engine Kolb : } && from what he was telling me -
someday when he's caught up on his projects - he will do another iteration using
modern tech and lessons learned. It's a funny looking little creature with
4 small props. He was telling me about it and how it flew, that it weighs
less than a pilot. He now has it suspended in his hanger/museum, along with
5-6 other earlier designs.
Anyway, I just wanted to convey his & his wife's greetings to all. He asked
if I monitored this site, (he's been too busy to), and asked to be caught up
on the recent topics. And for those who may want to know - he takes his
fire star up whenever he gets the chance. Monday in PA was a beautiful, still,
late afternoon to fly - but for Homer, there were tractors, mills, pond,
cabins and other things to work on : )
Jim Pa/Fl
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Monument Valley |
Right now I'm planning to join up for the trip to the Alvord
Desert with the John's. From there it's up in the air. I
had originally planned to come down through California but I
would also like to be home for Memorial Day.
I think I'll take the old Kolb up, turn it loose and see
which way it goes.
Gary
>
>
> Thanks, Gary. That raft ride is a real pleasure, and a
> nice way to spend a morning. You're coming a long
> way......will you be grouping up with John W., Dave and
> Will ?? Lar. Do not
> Archive.
>
> Larry Bourne
> Palm Springs, CA
> Building Kolb Mk III
> N78LB Vamoose
> www.gogittum.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <ghaley(at)wt.net>
> To:
> Subject: Kolb-List: Monument Valley
>
>
> >
> > Larry,
> >
> > Thanks for the narrative on Monument Valley and the
> > surrounding areas.
> > I am flying my Kolb Mark III to MV and will arrive on
> > Thursday May 19th if all goes as planned. My wife will
> > be joining me on Friday and staying until Monday AM.
>
>
> ====
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James, Ken" <KDJames(at)berkscareer.com> |
http://www.aero-news.net/
current up-to-date new on all aviation items
Ken
James
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Sharp <kolbdriver(at)mlsharp.com> |
Changeing the subject from SNF.
Is anyone going to SWRFI this year? I know there are several Kolbers in Texas,
perhaps we can have a meet and greet in Hondo?
Mike
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "H MITCHELL" <mitchmnd(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Flight test report (confession) |
'Morning Guys,
It has been said (many, many times) that confession is good for the soul, well
here goes.
I took 7078A out for some landing configuration tests Mon AM. Standard day, calm
and clear. The grass was long so I used the hard runway. Made two good touch-and-goes.
The first was without flaps, 55 mph on high final, 40-45 mph touchdown,
scored a good "8". Climb-out indicated 1200 FPM. The second was with one
notch of flaps, same final and touchdown speeds and scoring another "8" and 1,000'/min
climbout.
I continued around the pattern with the one notch of flaps and set up final as
usual. I planned to test her at a slower touchdown speed this time (a la soft
field landing). I didn't think we were too far off the asphalt when she settled
in but I'll be replacing the left main gear this afternoon. It is not pretzel-bent
but I prefer to have them straight.
Keep Your Airspeed !
Duane the plane Mitchell, Mk3 912, ~29 Hrs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert Laird" <rlaird(at)cavediver.com> |
FYI: Weather permitting, of course, I hope to fly over from Houston... probably
fly in Saturday morning and leave late Saturday afternoon.
-- Robert
-------- Original Message --------
> From: Michael Sharp <kolbdriver(at)mlsharp.com>
> Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 8:03 AM
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Kolb-List: SWRFI
>
>
> Changeing the subject from SNF.
>
> Is anyone going to SWRFI this year? I know there are several Kolbers in Texas,
perhaps we can have a meet and greet in Hondo?
>
> Mike
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob and Jenn B" <tabberdd(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Weatherstripping |
Where can I get the weatherstripping used around the front of the canopy
that slides onto the lexan and seals against the nose cone? Tried Home
Depot but they didn't carry it.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bryan green <lgreen1(at)sc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Weatherstripping |
Aircraft Spruce
Bob and Jenn B wrote:
>
>Where can I get the weatherstripping used around the front of the canopy
>that slides onto the lexan and seals against the nose cone? Tried Home
>Depot but they didn't carry it.
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | FyrFlyr0V5(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Weatherstripping |
I used rubber channel from Aircraft Spruce part #1 P/N 05--1300 page 126 2002
catalog, 88 cents/foot, 12 foot lengths.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bruce McElhoe <mcelhoe(at)cvip.net> |
| Subject: | Re: firefly Tires |
Steven,
I have 6-in nylon wheels and some nice, big tires that I am very happy with.
I scrounged around the airport asking all the Cub and Aeronca pilots for
worn-out 6.00- 6 tires. I picked two of the lightest (most worn) 2-ply
tires. We have puncture vines on the field so I use tubes. With only 5
psi, these tires give a nice soft landing. They are thick enough to survive
puncture vines, yet still light enough to keep our FF legal at 253 lbs. Of
course, the load rating is way beyond what we need.
Regards,
Bruce McElhoe FireFly #88
Reedley, California
>> Hi You' all Kolbers,
>> I was wanting to get some bigger tires for my Firefly than the small
>> Azura
>> tires that is presently on it...... Does anyone have any experience with
>> what
>> works best ??... I have heel brakes on the Firefly I have and would also
>> like
>> to put some wheel pants on tooo..... Thanking you in advance for your
>> help.....
>>
>> Stephen
>> Bama Firefly
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | VAL COM 760 XNSVR WITH HARNESS |
Hi Gang:
Anyone out there own a VAL COM 760 XNSVR WITH HARNESS?
My hearing is getting so bad I can not understand what is being
transmitted with my little ICOM A3, which I operate at max volume. I
believe I could do a better job of communicating if I had a radio that
would put out more audio power. The VAL and ICOM put out 5W audio,
but the VAL is about $120.00 cheaper than the ICOM.
Another route might be Active Noise Reduction headset. Was reading an
ad from Lightspeed. They said by removing a lot of the noise one
would have a better chance of hearing what was being communicated
rather than all the racket. Anyone have any experience with ANR and
small hand held VHF rigs like my ICOM A3?
My primary problem is when I fly with other Kolbs and small
experimentals and ULs. Talking to ATC facilities and GA aircraft with
powerful radios is not a problem for me to hear and understand.
Thanks,
john h
MKIII
________________________________________________________________________________
HI men and welcome back from the land of Sun'n'Fun. Hope all who went made
it back safe and sound.
My question for all is has anyone ever seen a Kolb with droop tips such as
on a TEAM or Titan?...any expieriences here?
As I was sitting here study'n the tips of my FireFly on a cold and rainy
day, It occured to me that of its diminutive 22 ft span, it really does not
have 22 ft of good airfoil due to the taper of the top surface for the
outboard 18 inchs. This of course is the signature look of a Kolb wing we
have all come so accustomed to.
I began to wonder just how much more lift a Kolb wing might have if it were
of a consistant thickness out to the tip with a nice glass drooptip on it.
Numbers in my head came and It appears at the first consideration that if a
FireFly with its 100 sq ft of wing just had 1 foot more on each wing...that
10 square ft of lifting surface 10% more lift might be available , without
really extending the wingspan. That would come in pretty handy for that
extra large gas tank I have been hauling around and all the other stuff I
always want to take with me, and would be double handy when landing with a
near full load of fuel. Might even pay back the investment if it kept me
from bending another gear leg someday.
Share you thought with me on this gents, what do you think???
...and I will offer apolgy to Dennis S. and Homer for again considering
screwing up a perfectly good airplane!!!
Don Gherardini
FireFly 098
http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: VAL COM 760 XNSVR WITH HARNESS |
John Hauck wrote:
>
>Hi Gang:
>
>Anyone out there own a VAL COM 760 XNSVR WITH HARNESS?
>
>My hearing is getting so bad I can not understand what is being
>transmitted with my little ICOM A3, which I operate at max volume. I
>believe I could do a better job of communicating if I had a radio that
>would put out more audio power. The VAL and ICOM put out 5W audio,
>but the VAL is about $120.00 cheaper than the ICOM.
>
>Another route might be Active Noise Reduction headset. Was reading an
>ad from Lightspeed. They said by removing a lot of the noise one
>would have a better chance of hearing what was being communicated
>rather than all the racket. Anyone have any experience with ANR and
>small hand held VHF rigs like my ICOM A3?
>
>My primary problem is when I fly with other Kolbs and small
>experimentals and ULs. Talking to ATC facilities and GA aircraft with
>powerful radios is not a problem for me to hear and understand.
>
>Thanks,
>
>john h
>MKIII
>
Have you considered just using a small audio amplifier between the icom
& your headset? If you're handy with a soldering iron it's not too
difficult. An inexpensive car stereo booster amp would raise the volume
quite a bit. Using one with an a/c radio isn't going to be 'plug & play'
but I'd be happy to walk you through installing one if you are
interested. ANR headsets are great for low frequency noise & I like my
Lightspeeds, but don't expect much (meaning nothing more than a passive
headset) for mid/high freqs like wind noise.
Charlie
(just back from a half-hour ride in the back seat of a Robinson R44
Raven, the ultimate 4 seat, 1/4million$ ultralite)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | russ kinne <kinnepix(at)earthlink.net> |
Are there any Kolbers in the Seattle area who'd have time for little
gab-fest this Friday (4/29) or over the weekend?
Russ Kinne
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Edward Chmielewski" <edchmiel(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: VAL COM 760 XNSVR WITH HARNESS |
Hi John & All,
I know what you mean about hearing loss! My upper register is about gone.
I use ANR headsets in most of the
aircraft I fly, and can highly recommend the Headsets, Inc., add-on ANR system.
It's about $160, takes a short evening
to put in, is very durable, and works as well as the $1K Bose/Dave Clarks/Sennheisers
I use in corporate turboprops. I
know Miss P'fer may be noisy, but sit in a Merlin IIIB with 2 howling Garretts
4 feet away and you'll find they can be
pretty noisy too. Turning the ANR on is akin to placing a large pillow over each
ear. Truly remarkable. The radio
volume jumps 50% too, due to the noise isolation. Use the silicone earseals also,
as they seal around glasses and allow
the ANR to work to its best.
Good Luck,
Ed in JXN (MI!)
MkII/503
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: VAL COM 760 XNSVR WITH HARNESS
>
> Hi Gang:
>
> Anyone out there own a VAL COM 760 XNSVR WITH HARNESS?
>
> My hearing is getting so bad I can not understand what is being
> transmitted with my little ICOM A3, which I operate at max volume. I
> believe I could do a better job of communicating if I had a radio that
> would put out more audio power. The VAL and ICOM put out 5W audio,
> but the VAL is about $120.00 cheaper than the ICOM.
>
> Another route might be Active Noise Reduction headset. Was reading an
> ad from Lightspeed. They said by removing a lot of the noise one
> would have a better chance of hearing what was being communicated
> rather than all the racket. Anyone have any experience with ANR and
> small hand held VHF rigs like my ICOM A3?
>
> My primary problem is when I fly with other Kolbs and small
> experimentals and ULs. Talking to ATC facilities and GA aircraft with
> powerful radios is not a problem for me to hear and understand.
>
> Thanks,
>
> john h
> MKIII
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
Thanks to all who responded to my request for info.
I will try out a Lightspeed ANR and someone is sending me. Then make
a decision to buy and upgrade my DC 10-13.4 headset for $160.00.
From what I understand, the ANR will shut down enough noise to help me
hear voice communications better.
Thanks again,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
There was a thread on droop tips a few years ago - probably in the archives
- and seems I remember somebody - Dennis? - don't remember - saying that
Old Kolb tried droop tips and the present shape worked better.
I suggest you go for the Porcupine Effect. We have played with the vortex
generators on the FSII for the last two weeks and concluded that they
improve climb rate by 200' a minute and lower the stall speed by 5 mph.
They also change the handling qualities of the airplane so that at three or
four mph above it's current +-30 mph stall speed, the airplane feels like
it is flying 50 mph in terms of solid handling. If they do that for the
FSII, they ought to do something similar for the Firefly.
Something I have noticed with the VG's is that it is now possible to land
dragging the tailwheel into the grass well before the mains touch down,
which suggests that the wing is working longer and harder into the stall
and flare. Perhaps that extra lift would accomplish what you are looking
for with your higher wing loading? Without changing the way the load is
distributed across the length of the wing, and thereby giving a better
margin of safety? I would prefer a normal sized wing that works harder and
hangs on longer at a higher angle of attack to a longer wing that applies
stress in new areas that I am unqualified to appraise for stress loading.
Since it was windy and rainy all day, we spent the day removing the VG's
from their taped on temporary position, cleaning off the tape goo, and
preparing them for permanent attachment. We have come up with a very novel
method of spacing them out on the wing which makes establishing the ideal
location completely fool proof. Should have pictures posted by next weekend.
PS - There is no way our's will look as good as yours - keep up the good work!
Richard Pike
Firestar II N582EF (Ed's 582 Firestar)
>
>HI men and welcome back from the land of Sun'n'Fun. Hope all who went made
>it back safe and sound.
>My question for all is has anyone ever seen a Kolb with droop tips such as
>on a TEAM or Titan?...any expieriences here?
>
>As I was sitting here study'n the tips of my FireFly on a cold and rainy
>day, It occured to me that of its diminutive 22 ft span, it really does not
>have 22 ft of good airfoil due to the taper of the top surface for the
>outboard 18 inchs. This of course is the signature look of a Kolb wing we
>have all come so accustomed to.
>I began to wonder just how much more lift a Kolb wing might have if it were
>of a consistant thickness out to the tip with a nice glass drooptip on it.
>Numbers in my head came and It appears at the first consideration that if a
>FireFly with its 100 sq ft of wing just had 1 foot more on each wing...that
>10 square ft of lifting surface 10% more lift might be available , without
>really extending the wingspan. That would come in pretty handy for that
>extra large gas tank I have been hauling around and all the other stuff I
>always want to take with me, and would be double handy when landing with a
>near full load of fuel. Might even pay back the investment if it kept me
>from bending another gear leg someday.
>
>Share you thought with me on this gents, what do you think???
>
>...and I will offer apolgy to Dennis S. and Homer for again considering
>screwing up a perfectly good airplane!!!
>
>Don Gherardini
>FireFly 098
>http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DonMorrisey(at)netscape.net |
| Subject: | MK III versus Challenger; CGS Hawk Arrow???? |
Hello list members. I joined several weeks ago and have been soaking up the info.
Lot's of good advice. I've made the decision to build my own airplane and
am leaning toward the Kolb MK III. I have also looked into the Challenger
and CGS Hawk Arrow. I know I might be asking this question to an audience that
has a special interest (since you all built and fly Kolb aircraft) but I am
sure that each of you went thorugh the same process that I'm going through right
now. What made you decide on a Kolb? In your opinion what were the most important
characteristics of the Kolb when comparing it to competitors? Any info
and insight would be greatly appreciated by this novice would-be builder.
As a point of information I am a licensed pilot with 150+ hours in primarily piper
warriors and cessna 172's. Thanks so much. Don...
Switch to Netscape Internet Service.
As low as $9.95 a month -- Sign up today at http://isp.netscape.com/register
Netscape. Just the Net You Need.
New! Netscape Toolbar for Internet Explorer
Search from anywhere on the Web and block those annoying pop-ups.
Download now at http://channels.netscape.com/ns/search/install.jsp
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rusty" <13brv3c(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | VAL COM 760 XNSVR WITH HARNESS |
Hi John,
I've had the VAL COM radios in two planes, and have found them to be just
dandy for the price. They've got a couple annoying points, but overall,
they transmit and receive just fine.
I also am a big fan of Lightspeed headsets. Unfortunately, I've found that
they don't like high noise environments. In my current rotary engine RV-3,
I had trouble in the beginning with my latest 30-3G model. It would pop and
crackle, when the ANR was on. LS got it back twice, and could only assume
that my cockpit was too loud. They added the old XL style ear foams, and it
was much better. It was much better after that, but the popping and
crackling didn't completely go away until I made some changes to the exhaust
on the plane.
"Who cares about your silly rotary engine" you ask :-) Well, these same
headsets were completely unusable in the 912S powered SS that I flew home
from MS. I actually had to turn off the ANR feature, and just let them be
passive, so it would seem the noise level was much higher than with my
rotary RV-3.
I hope they work for you, but I'm glad you're borrowing a pair to try first.
It's possible that other brands, such as the add-on version will tolerate
high noise better. I just don't have any experience with anything but the
Lightspeed.
Cheers,
Rusty (RV-3 flying again, so I might finally get around to the single rotor
SS)
________________________________________________________________________________
Brother Pike,
Thx for the kind words, I am not deserved.
I do have VGs on my fly...and it did the same thing for me...about 4 or 5
mph on the stall....
On the firefly..I generally bring it in over the fence at 50...then level
off slowly at about 45...then pull the throttle sloooowly back,,,still...the
sink rate gets fast below 45....so at my home airfield which is plenty
long...I usually let it touch down at 40 to 45 ...especially if anybody is
watching....if I try and get it slower than that...I usually bounce it. This
come from being kinda heavy I believe.....
The droop tips are only a thought that upon rumination I believed might
generate some discussion and possibly be worth starting a topic.
It would be alot of trouble to make them thats for sure...need another
outboard rib to attach em to...and it would likely need be a stamped style
rib instead of the tubing style for a good mateing ...also all the trouble
making 2 plugs...then 2 molds...and so on.....
I remember how much they helped the airbike....and although I have never
piloted any of the MAX series...(V-max, z-max, eros etc.)...I do envy their
apparant low speed handleing when I watch them.
Don Gherardini
FireFly 098
http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | WhiskeyVictor36(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | New engine from Diamond? |
Courtesy AOPA ePilot Vol 7, Issue 16 April 22, 2005
DIAMOND GOES INTO ENGINE BUSINESS, PLANS NEW PLANT
Diamond Aircraft President and CEO Christian Dries dropped some bombs this
week at a trade show in Germany. He said that his company is going into the
engine manufacturing business with two 101-horsepower mounts, one that runs on
avgas and the other on diesel, intended for retrofit on the Diamond Katana and
Dimona models.
Diamond is producing smaller engines for the ultralight business as well.
Dries also said the company is expanding into the simulator business for the
DA40 or DA42 equipped with the Garmin G1000 avionics package, and that Diamond
is establishing a big new manufacturing plant near Beijing, China. For more
on this story and other news from AERO Friedrichshafen, see AOPA Online.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Denny Rowe" <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
| Subject: | Re: VAL COM 760 XNSVR WITH HARNESS |
> Another route might be Active Noise Reduction headset. Was reading an
> ad from Lightspeed. They said by removing a lot of the noise one
> would have a better chance of hearing what was being communicated
> rather than all the racket. Anyone have any experience with ANR and
> small hand held VHF rigs like my ICOM A3?
>
> My primary problem is when I fly with other Kolbs and small
> experimentals and ULs. Talking to ATC facilities and GA aircraft with
> powerful radios is not a problem for me to hear and understand.
>
> Thanks,
>
> john h
> MKIII
>
> John,
I have rode in a 582 powered Buckeye PPC with a friend that used the Lynx
headets linked to the tiny Icom radio with no nav.
The ANR system in the Lynx was far beyond any other system I have ever
tried. It basically took all the engine noise out of the equation and was
pretty much like talking on the back porch swing, and I live in the woods.
:-)
Its pricey, but like the 912, it is the very best if you can swing it.
Denny Rowe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Pat Lavigne" <pjl53(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Kolb Fire Star II For Sale..Reduced price |
FOR SALE Kolb Firestar
Rotax 447 with 42 Hrs. total time on engine and airframe
Ivo 3 blade ground adjustable prop
EIS
Icom IC-A4 radio w/ headset and helmet
Lowrance GPS
Lexan wing gap seal
full encloser plus semi-shorty wind shield, and shorty windshield
drum brakes
many,many extra's
Check barnstormer's for pictures.....click on experimental.........click on
Kolb..
Priced Reduced for Faster Sale
$10,500
contact:
Pat LaVigne
Rochester,N.Y.
(585)426-5463
e-mail:pjl53(at)hotmail.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Raeburn <raeburn(at)direcway.com> |
| Subject: | Door handles for Kolb Mk III |
I'm replacing the Lexan on the doors of my Mk III. At the moment the
door handles consist of pieces of aluminum bent in the shape of a "Z".
Has any one come up with some door handles that are on the market that
can be used on a Mk III that look good?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | FyrFlyr0V5(at)aol.com |
go to www.razorama.com. Since I have red stripes on my wings, I got the red
wheels. Couldn't find black ones anywhere. I upgraded the bearings to the
"high speed" roller blade bearings and bought those at Sports Authority, but I
would think that any sporting goods store would carry the bearing..maybe even
the Razor Scooter wheels. I cut the axle tube off the tailwheel asembly where
the horizontal tube was welded to the vertical tube, drilled a 1/4" hole
through the vertical tube and inserted an AN5 bolt, placed a thin bushing around
the bolt to keep it from wobbling, placed a washer on each side of the wheel
bearing and tightened a Nylok. Work great for me!
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: MK III versus Challenger; CGS Hawk Arrow???? |
In a message dated 4/24/2005 12:17:58 AM Eastern Standard Time,
pelletier(at)cableone.net writes:
> In your opinion what were the most important characteristics of the Kolb
> when comparing it to competitors? Any info and insight would be greatly
> appreciated by this novice would-be builder.
To me, the first thing was can I get in & get out without too much trouble
[I'm big, old, & fat]? I could. And will it haul a 270 lb. guy? It will [and
outclimbs most othe UL's at our field]. Yeah, probably the strongest wing [&
everything else] on the market.
Find a Challenger judge for yourself. Same
for the rudder.
Also, there is some kind of yaw problem the the Challenger has; the
Challenger drivers at our field say you get used to it...............
Most Challengers do seem to be about 10 mph faster than a Firestar II.
Howard Shackleford
FS II
SC
________________________________________________________________________________
In a message dated 4/24/2005 5:51:30 PM Eastern Standard Time,
FyrFlyr0V5(at)aol.com writes:
I cut the axle tube off the tailwheel asembly where
the horizontal tube was welded to the vertical tube, drilled a 1/4" hole
through the vertical tube and inserted an AN5 bolt, placed a thin bushing
around
the bolt to keep it from wobbling, placed a washer on each side of the wheel
I pretty much did the same thing, but the bolt should be an 8 mm. I had my
bolt welded in
Doesn,t have to be "Razor"; almost any brand will do.
There are 100 mm & 120 mm dia. wheels; you'll want the 120's. The ones I
have look like a little "mag" wheel.
I got mine at Walmart; usually caome two to the pak for about $10.
Howard Shackleford
FS II
SC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjungjr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: VAL COM 760 XNSVR WITH HARNESS |
John and Group,
If you are considering an ANR headset, you may want to consider the
DRE-6000. it is only $300., and from what I've read, it has been rated
with the most expensive.
Mine ships on Monday. I have been using DRE headsets and intercom for 6
years, but not ANR. I recently learned of there reasonably priced
DRE-6000. My reason for changing now is that I am tired of listening to
prop noise. And changing props and/or gearboxes can be even more
expensive. I'll report to the group about it's effectiveness after I
start using it.
John Jung
Firestar II
Surprise, Az
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "woody" <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
| Subject: | Re: MK III versus Challenger; CGS Hawk Arrow???? |
I bought my first Kolb when I saw a line drawing of it in Sport Pilot. I
thought it looked great. That was the original Kolb Flyer. I have since
owned a Kolb Twinstar and a Mk111. I have actively participated in the
construction of 6 Kolbs. My scariest moment in an airplane was last winter
in a Challenger. I was asked to test fly it. I figured flying a Kolb was
good enough practice. Take off was good but a bit less than my Mk111. I
turned right to go around the pattern and stayed in that turn for probably
10 minutes It felt like hour. I was seriously giving thought to the last
minutes of my life. At the very least it was going to hurt bad. Nothing I
did would straighten it up. I finally really kicked the rudder pedal and it
straightened up. Aileron alone will not straighten up a Challenger and the
one I was flying had very very stiff rudder pedals.Lesson learned. After I
got things flying straight I had difficulty keeping the nose going straight.
It kept wandering. Not a pleasant flying experience. When I got down I
reported my feelings to the owner. A friend of his asked me to try his
Challenger. Rudder pedals were not as stiff but the nose still wandered.
Challenger is an apt named aircraft in my opinion.
>
> Hello list members. I joined several weeks ago and have been soaking up
the info. Lot's of good advice. I've made the decision to build my own
airplane and am leaning toward the Kolb MK III. I have also looked into the
Challenger and CGS Hawk Arrow. I know I might be asking this question to an
audience that has a special interest (since you all built and fly Kolb
aircraft) but I am sure that each of you went thorugh the same process that
I'm going through right now. What made you decide on a Kolb? In your
opinion what were the most important characteristics of the Kolb when
comparing it to competitors? Any info and insight would be greatly
appreciated by this novice would-be builder. As a point of information I am
a licensed pilot with 150+ hours in primarily piper warriors and cessna
172's. Thanks so much. Don...
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <tophera(at)centurytel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: VAL COM 760 XNSVR WITH HARNESS |
I have the DRE headsets with ANR and really like them. (I have been working
around rotary powered aircraft for about 8 years and they are about as loud
as anything.) The thing that I think is most important is that it will not
only let your hear your communications but it will keep you from loosing any
more hearing due to the incredible noise levels of these planes. Bumping up
the volume of the radio just adds more damage to your ears, you gotta stop
the noise or before you know it you won't be able to hear no matter what
volume you have on the headsets. Once the ears are gone your outa luck.
Get the best headsets you can find, and where hearing protectors for every
other loud activities you do, lawn mowing, chainsawing, riding the dirt
bike, whatever. Time to start that is when you're a kid but even us middle
aged and older guys starting now will really make a big difference in what
we can hear 10 or 20 years from now.
Topher
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Jung
Subject: Kolb-List: Re: VAL COM 760 XNSVR WITH HARNESS
John and Group,
If you are considering an ANR headset, you may want to consider the
DRE-6000. it is only $300., and from what I've read, it has been rated
with the most expensive.
Mine ships on Monday. I have been using DRE headsets and intercom for 6
years, but not ANR. I recently learned of there reasonably priced
DRE-6000. My reason for changing now is that I am tired of listening to
prop noise. And changing props and/or gearboxes can be even more
expensive. I'll report to the group about it's effectiveness after I
start using it.
John Jung
Firestar II
Surprise, Az
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jerry Curtin" <jcurtin(at)cableone.net> |
Hello Don and All,
I totally understand about what you are talking about when it comes to
landing a plane. I consider myself a pretty good pilot and have flown many
different types, but the toughest by far was my lancair. Fast, unforgiving,
and a very short wheel base. Add those up and there was very little room for
error when it came to landing. I like most pilots would pull the throttle to
slow down, just like driving a car. A friend of mine (F-15 pilot) taught me
a different way to approach to landing. Pitch controls speed, and throttle
controls decent. This was opposite to what I was used to but I listened,
learned the technique and was able to control the lancair like a pet. It
takes some getting used to changing our habits but once you master this
technique there will be no more bounces and shorter roll outs. Hope to be of
some help, Jerry
----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Gherardini" <donghe@one-eleven.net>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Droop tips
>
> Brother Pike,
>
> Thx for the kind words, I am not deserved.
>
> I do have VGs on my fly...and it did the same thing for me...about 4 or 5
> mph on the stall....
>
> On the firefly..I generally bring it in over the fence at 50...then level
> off slowly at about 45...then pull the throttle sloooowly
back,,,still...the
> sink rate gets fast below 45....so at my home airfield which is plenty
> long...I usually let it touch down at 40 to 45 ...especially if anybody is
> watching....if I try and get it slower than that...I usually bounce it.
This
> come from being kinda heavy I believe.....
> The droop tips are only a thought that upon rumination I believed might
> generate some discussion and possibly be worth starting a topic.
> It would be alot of trouble to make them thats for sure...need another
> outboard rib to attach em to...and it would likely need be a stamped style
> rib instead of the tubing style for a good mateing ...also all the trouble
> making 2 plugs...then 2 molds...and so on.....
>
> I remember how much they helped the airbike....and although I have never
> piloted any of the MAX series...(V-max, z-max, eros etc.)...I do envy
their
> apparant low speed handleing when I watch them.
>
> Don Gherardini
> FireFly 098
> http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David L. Bigelow" <dlbigelow(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: firestar 2 trim help |
A simple adjustable pitch trim for your firestar can be made with a length of bungee
cord, a small pulley, and a small marine jam cleat:
Attach the bungee cord to the top elevator cable attachment point on the front
of the turnbuckle where it pins to the stick. Attach the pulley to the stub where
the front of the rudder pedal springs attach. Rivet the jam cleat to the
floor pan between your legs a few inches in front of the stick.
Run the bungee forward along the floor pan between the rudder pedals through the
pulley, and then back through the jam cleat. The tighter you pull the bungee
through the jam cleat, the more nose down trim you get.
Works well for me.
Dave Bigelow
Firestar 2
Kamuela, Hawaii
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Don Martin" <kolbdriver(at)hotmail.com> |
Hi Russ,
Sorry that I won't be able to get the chance to meet you. Will be gone for
a couple of days. Don't know of any kolbers on the net around here but
here's the name of an older guy who's not on the net. Good man, built a
Firestar and had couple hundred flights on it. Sold it and built a Firefly.
George Daum (360) 389-1520
250 N Goodrich Dr
Camano Island.
Camano island is about 30 miles NW of Seattle.
Enjoy your stay in the Northwest. Blue Skies!
Don
>From: russ kinne <kinnepix(at)earthlink.net>
>Reply-To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Kolb-List: q
>Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 17:47:16 -0400
>
>
>Are there any Kolbers in the Seattle area who'd have time for little
>gab-fest this Friday (4/29) or over the weekend?
>Russ Kinne
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Laird <rlaird(at)cavediver.com> |
| Subject: | Re: VAL COM 760 XNSVR WITH HARNESS |
John --
I've been using the Lightspeed Cross Country ANR for about 2 years... they
are the least expensive ANRs out there (by a name-brand), and they are very
effective. My brother and friends have Dave Clarks (non-ANR) and they all
prefer my Lightspeed when they fly in my plane. In their GA planes, they
prefer the DCs. I think it's because the Lightspeed have a better passive
reduction, but also thrown in some of the ANR reduction, so it works out
quite well for my open-cockpit plane with 912ULS engine.
I've been very tempted to try the Panther in-ear type of "headsets" but
they are awfully expensive. I noticed that Lightspeed just came out with
an in-ear headset and since I've had such good luck with the Cross
Countrys, I will probably buy a pair of the new in-ear type when they
become widely available.
-- Robert
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Erich_Weaver(at)URSCorp.com |
04/25/2005 01:15:54 PM
One additional note regarding noise reduction.
I know that not everyone wants to fly with a helmet, but I always have. I
had recently taken my David Clark ANR headset out of the helmet to lend to
a GA pilot. Anyway, when I got them back, I got lazy and didnt install
them back in the helmet, and went off flying with just the headset. The
noise was substantially louder without the helmet - certainly more of a
difference than the ANR makes. So, for more noise reduction, consider the
helmet as well. I have the David Clark helmet as well, and dont find it
uncomfortable at all. Kind of missed it when I went without it.
regards
Erich Weaver
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Erich_Weaver(at)URSCorp.com |
04/25/2005 08:24:59 PM
Some time ago I mentioned in a post to the list that I had a vague
recollection of a write-up somewhere saying that many ELTs were going to be
obsolete in the not to distant future. At that time, I was unable to
recall the details, and I dont remember seeing anybody chiming in with the
full story.
Today I came across a reference to it on the RV list. To cut to the chase,
take a look at the following:
| http://www.sarsat.noaa.gov/emerbcns.html |
It seems that monitoring of the 121.5 MHz frequency will end in 2009, to be
replaced by 406 MHz, along with many substantial improvements. For now,
it looks like the cost for a 406 beacon is relatively high however
Something to keep in mind. What really bugs me are the severe limitations
of the 121.5 system. Very poor with respect to locating your position, for
starters.
regards
Erich Weaver
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Paule" <dpaule(at)frii.com> |
| Subject: | Re: MK III versus Challenger; CGS Hawk Arrow???? |
Oh, this one's easy.
1. Unsurpassed short take-off distance.
2. Unsurpassed climb angle.
3. Design longevity, with periodic improvements.
4. This email forum, with years of wisdom, all about Kolbs.
5. Excellent service from the company.
6. Relative safety of the craft, as determined by the...
a) Low numbers of accidents, and
b) Much lower percentage of fatalities.
7. Ease of folding the plane to fit in small areas.
8. Excellent visibility.
I could go on, but this is enough. I have about 1,800 hours in heavier
planes and also own a Cessna 180 Skywagon. My Firestar fits easily behind
the Skywagon's wing and adjacent to the tail, in a small tee-hangar.
Dave Paule
Boulder, CO
FS II
> Hello list members. I joined several weeks ago and have been soaking up
> the info. Lot's of good advice. I've made the decision to build my own
> airplane and am leaning toward the Kolb MK III. I have also looked into
> the Challenger and CGS Hawk Arrow. I know I might be asking this question
> to an audience that has a special interest (since you all built and fly
> Kolb aircraft) but I am sure that each of you went thorugh the same
> process that I'm going through right now. What made you decide on a Kolb?
> In your opinion what were the most important characteristics of the Kolb
> when comparing it to competitors? Any info and insight would be greatly
> appreciated by this novice would-be builder. As a point of information I
> am a licensed pilot with 150+ hours in primarily piper warriors and cessna
> 172's. Thanks so much. Don...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DAquaNut(at)AOL.com |
| Subject: | Re: : Kolb-List:447 break in |
List,
In prep for breaking in my 447, I see recommendations to put oil in the
gas along with oil in the injector tank on engines that have oil injectors on
them, for the break-in process. Sounds like double oil for the first tank to
me. Any one use double or extra oil to break in a 447 that does not have
oil injection. I will be using Air Cooled Pennzoil but the manual doesn't say
to increase the oil mixture any stronger than 50/ 1. Comments?
Ed (in Hou waiting for the rain to stop.)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Denny Rowe" <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
| Subject: | Re: : Kolb-List:447 break in |
Ed,
I would just go with the normal 50 to 1, however I recall my old Pterodactyl
manual recomended extra oil for the break in period.
Maybe 30 or 40 to 1 for the first couple gallons if you are so inclined.
The only reason you do it with the injected engines is you may have air
pockets in the injector pump and lines.
Denny
----- Original Message -----
From: <DAquaNut(at)AOL.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List:447 break in
>
>
> List,
>
>
> In prep for breaking in my 447, I see recommendations to put oil in the
> gas along with oil in the injector tank on engines that have oil injectors
> on
> them, for the break-in process. Sounds like double oil for the first
> tank to
> me. Any one use double or extra oil to break in a 447 that does not
> have
> oil injection. I will be using Air Cooled Pennzoil but the manual doesn't
> say
> to increase the oil mixture any stronger than 50/ 1. Comments?
>
> Ed (in Hou waiting for the rain to stop.)
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Edward Steuber" <esteuber(at)rochester.rr.com> |
Hey ,
Got a question for the very experienced drivers in the group !
I have been flying Ultrastars , both modified with center line sticks and
higher gear legs, and I have noticed a wiggle in the tail when I get in rough
air. I tend to fly in rougher air and wind than most UL's due to our limited
flying conditions here in Western NY and the time demands of my job. Both machines
have good tight boom connections to the frame fore and aft.....nothing loose
! The tail brace wires are also tight ! The new machine has a much longer
gear and the wiggle seems to be worse and am wondering if it can be related .
The wiggle is a sway left and right , not vertical... only when I get turbulence....I
do have a good size windshield that may be affecting airflow to the tail.
One other feature is that this Ultrastar is cruising much faster than it was
intended...75 MPH....80 if I run the Cuyuna at 5800RPM ...... at slower speeds
I do not get the problem.
The question is , have any of you experienced this in any of the Kolbs besides
the Ultrastar. I noticed in similar boom type aircraft ( Rans S-18 ) there
are extra brace wires between the wing tips and the vertical fin that would
eliminate this problem.
I have some pictures of the modified Ultrastar in the Photo share Archives
if anybody is interested.....couple years back
Ed in Western NY
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Edward Steuber" <esteuber(at)rochester.rr.com> |
OOPS....the date on the photo share is Sept 18 2004 ... Edward Steuber...for the
photo share pictures...
Ed in Western NY
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dwight.Kottke(at)hti.htch.com |
04/26/2005 07:06:01 AM,
Serialize complete at 04/26/2005 07:06:02 AM,
Serialize by Router on HUTMail1/HUT/HTI(Release 6.5.3|September 14, 2004)
at
04/26/2005 07:06:02 AM,
Itemize by SMTP Server on HUDOMGW1/HTI(Release 6.5.3|September 14, 2004)
at
04/26/2005 07:06:39 AM,
Serialize by Router on HUDOMGW1/HTI(Release 6.5.3|September 14, 2004) at
04/26/2005
07:06:43 AM,
Serialize complete at 04/26/2005 07:06:43 AM
Hey comrades of the wild blue yonder. What is the recommended type of
welder to use for welding 4130 chrome moly? A stick welder would not be a
very good choice, so how about TIG, wire feed, or gas. What's the best
one to use?
The Flying Farmer (with broken gear sockets)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | FSII vortex generators |
| From: | "Rex Rodebush" <rrodebush(at)tema.net> |
Richard,
Now I'm really confused!
Take a look at the Cubcrafters web site and look under mods and parts.
They show VG's on a supercub with the VG's located forward towards the
L.E. out on the tips in front of the ailerons. They say that is to make
sure the root stalls first & that you have aileron control through the
stall. You have located them just the opposite.
I assumed that at a high angel of attack you would want the VG's located
closer to the L.E. in front of the ailerons so that they would start
working before separation. The air would already separate ahead of the
VG's at the root.
Am I thinking about this wrong? Can any of the aerodynamic guys explain
this??
Rex Rodebush
"From: Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org>
Subject: Kolb-List: FSII vortex generators
Got the pictures on the web page of the vg placement on the FSII."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <tophera(at)centurytel.net> |
| Subject: | FSII vortex generators |
The cubcrafters website seams correct to me. I am curious to hear the
reasoning behind the pattern used by the high powered FSII guys. Your
thoughts below track mine exactly, the farther forward you put the VGs the
more they should work to delay separation (stall).
Since the Kolbs have a fairly low aspect ratio, untapered wing, they don't
have a tendency to drop a tip, so I would just place all the VGs at the
optimum location to get the aero benefits from them. If there is a pattern
it must be to make the inboard VGs less effective to make sure that the
inboard end stalls first. If you do use any staggered pattern, I think it
is something that you should thoroughly understand and carefully test, since
the pattern could very easily make the wing much worse (Like only putting
VGs inboard... that could be a disaster, which is why having VGs fall off is
actually kinda dangerous. If only a couple on one outboard wing panel came
off, you would have an auto spin machine.) It would be a shame to take the
docile Kolb stall and turn it into a stall and spinner!
Topher
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rex Rodebush
Subject: Kolb-List: FSII vortex generators
Richard,
Now I'm really confused!
Take a look at the Cubcrafters web site and look under mods and parts.
They show VG's on a supercub with the VG's located forward towards the
L.E. out on the tips in front of the ailerons. They say that is to make
sure the root stalls first & that you have aileron control through the
stall. You have located them just the opposite.
I assumed that at a high angel of attack you would want the VG's located
closer to the L.E. in front of the ailerons so that they would start
working before separation. The air would already separate ahead of the
VG's at the root.
Am I thinking about this wrong? Can any of the aerodynamic guys explain
this??
Rex Rodebush
"From: Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org>
Subject: Kolb-List: FSII vortex generators
Got the pictures on the web page of the vg placement on the FSII."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerb <ulflyer(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: : Kolb-List:447 break in |
Ed,
I've had a couple of the Rotax 447's. Use the normal oil mix of
50:1. That equates to 2.56 oz of oil per gallon. (How that number is
arrived there is 128 oz in a gallon, divide the 128 by the ratio of 50
parts fuel to 1 part oil (128/50) = 2.56 oz per gallon.) Don't put to much
extra oil in or you risk gumming up the rings, you want the rings to wear
and seat into the cylinder. Use mineral based oil like Pennzoil for the
first 20 hours, it has taken about that long on both our engines to develop
full power. Had to adjust the prop pitch on our IVO 2-3 times during that
first 20 hours.
The reason they put extra oil in the oil injection engines like the 503 and
582 for the first couple hours is only for a safety measure until it can be
determined that the oil injection is properly working.
During the break in especially during the high RPM runs you will fine it
may be difficult to keep EGT's in normal range. We found temporarily
hooking up the enricher (choke) beneficial to lower the EGT's. If your
using a ground adjustable prop like an IVO, you may find you have to
increase the pitch as the break-in progresses to reduce and limit the full
throttle RPM and keep the EGT's RPM down in normal operating range. Only
takes a couple of minutes and your back running.
You'll need something to keep track of time with a seconds hand or
digits. I also suggest you have a helper while doing this. You'll need to
tie the tail of the aircraft down with some good rope. Also ear plugs are
a must. Don't do the break-in right next to your hangar neighbors, go off
some where to a more isolated area. On some other guy on our field who
didn't use good judgement I've actually seen tempers raise to the point of
actually came to blows due to the loud piercing noise . It really works on
peoples nerves over time while running at or near full throttle.
Jerb
>
>
>List,
>
>
> In prep for breaking in my 447, I see recommendations to put oil in the
>gas along with oil in the injector tank on engines that have oil
>injectors on
>them, for the break-in process. Sounds like double oil for the first
>tank to
>me. Any one use double or extra oil to break in a 447 that does not have
>oil injection. I will be using Air Cooled Pennzoil but the manual doesn't
>say
>to increase the oil mixture any stronger than 50/ 1. Comments?
>
> Ed (in Hou waiting for the rain to stop.)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | FSII vortex generators |
Here is the thinking (if such it be...) the Kolb wing reacts best (imo)
when the vg's are around 11.5 inches back from the leading edge. When I was
seeking the absolute lowest stall speed on my MKIII, I got a better
response and a slower stall speed at that distance rather than farther
forward.
That is why the inboard ones are further forward, because that gave a
higher stall speed than when the vg's were further aft, yet they do seem to
help the climb rate. Vg's help the climb rate even when you climbing
notably faster than stall.
I completely agree with your thinking, and I understand the concept that
you need to get the vg's forward and into non separated air in order to
make them work correctly and maintain an unseparated airflow across the
wing at high angles of attack, yet the testing we did does not really bear
this out. The aft mounted vg's hang on longer at slow flight and stall
later than the more forward ones, and improve the handling at slow flight
speeds. It is "common knowledge" that the Kolb airfoil is sort of unique in
how it behaves, I assume this is why?
If you think that we are really making a serious mistake, or even worse -
that we might be giving out dangerous advice, perhaps leading someone else
to make a mistake that will get them hurt, then I bow to your professional
opinion, and we will remove the 7 forward/in line vg's from the inboard
sections.
(For those of you new to the list, Topher does aerodynamics for a living...)
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldPoops)
>
>
>The cubcrafters website seams correct to me. I am curious to hear the
>reasoning behind the pattern used by the high powered FSII guys. Your
>thoughts below track mine exactly, the farther forward you put the VGs the
>more they should work to delay separation (stall).
>
>Since the Kolbs have a fairly low aspect ratio, untapered wing, they don't
>have a tendency to drop a tip, so I would just place all the VGs at the
>optimum location to get the aero benefits from them. If there is a pattern
>it must be to make the inboard VGs less effective to make sure that the
>inboard end stalls first. If you do use any staggered pattern, I think it
>is something that you should thoroughly understand and carefully test, since
>the pattern could very easily make the wing much worse (Like only putting
>VGs inboard... that could be a disaster, which is why having VGs fall off is
>actually kinda dangerous. If only a couple on one outboard wing panel came
>off, you would have an auto spin machine.) It would be a shame to take the
>docile Kolb stall and turn it into a stall and spinner!
>
>Topher
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rex Rodebush
>To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Kolb-List: FSII vortex generators
>
>
>Richard,
>
>Now I'm really confused!
>
>Take a look at the Cubcrafters web site and look under mods and parts.
>They show VG's on a supercub with the VG's located forward towards the
>L.E. out on the tips in front of the ailerons. They say that is to make
>sure the root stalls first & that you have aileron control through the
>stall. You have located them just the opposite.
>
>I assumed that at a high angel of attack you would want the VG's located
>closer to the L.E. in front of the ailerons so that they would start
>working before separation. The air would already separate ahead of the
>VG's at the root.
>
>Am I thinking about this wrong? Can any of the aerodynamic guys explain
>this??
>
>Rex Rodebush
>
>"From: Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org>
>Subject: Kolb-List: FSII vortex generators
>
>Got the pictures on the web page of the vg placement on the FSII."
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | FSII vortex generators |
Follow up on my previous post - forgot to mention earlier - the FSII wing
is not a constant chord, it has more chord toward the tips because of the
ailerons, and less at the root, no ailerons there. Since conventional
wisdom has vg's at 10% of the chord, I suspected that we were getting
better results in front of the ailerons because the vg's at that point were
at about 10% of the chord, and the ones further inboard are also at about
10% of the chord, even though they were further forward.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>Here is the thinking (if such it be...) the Kolb wing reacts best (imo)
>when the vg's are around 11.5 inches back from the leading edge. When I was
>seeking the absolute lowest stall speed on my MKIII, I got a better
>response and a slower stall speed at that distance rather than farther
>forward.
>
>That is why the inboard ones are further forward, because that gave a
>higher stall speed than when the vg's were further aft, yet they do seem to
>help the climb rate. Vg's help the climb rate even when you climbing
>notably faster than stall.
>
>I completely agree with your thinking, and I understand the concept that
>you need to get the vg's forward and into non separated air in order to
>make them work correctly and maintain an unseparated airflow across the
>wing at high angles of attack, yet the testing we did does not really bear
>this out. The aft mounted vg's hang on longer at slow flight and stall
>later than the more forward ones, and improve the handling at slow flight
>speeds. It is "common knowledge" that the Kolb airfoil is sort of unique in
>how it behaves, I assume this is why?
>
>If you think that we are really making a serious mistake, or even worse -
>that we might be giving out dangerous advice, perhaps leading someone else
>to make a mistake that will get them hurt, then I bow to your professional
>opinion, and we will remove the 7 forward/in line vg's from the inboard
>sections.
>
>(For those of you new to the list, Topher does aerodynamics for a living...)
>
>Richard Pike
>MKIII N420P (42oldPoops)
>
>
>
> >
> >
> >The cubcrafters website seams correct to me. I am curious to hear the
> >reasoning behind the pattern used by the high powered FSII guys. Your
> >thoughts below track mine exactly, the farther forward you put the VGs the
> >more they should work to delay separation (stall).
> >
> >Since the Kolbs have a fairly low aspect ratio, untapered wing, they don't
> >have a tendency to drop a tip, so I would just place all the VGs at the
> >optimum location to get the aero benefits from them. If there is a pattern
> >it must be to make the inboard VGs less effective to make sure that the
> >inboard end stalls first. If you do use any staggered pattern, I think it
> >is something that you should thoroughly understand and carefully test, since
> >the pattern could very easily make the wing much worse (Like only putting
> >VGs inboard... that could be a disaster, which is why having VGs fall off is
> >actually kinda dangerous. If only a couple on one outboard wing panel came
> >off, you would have an auto spin machine.) It would be a shame to take the
> >docile Kolb stall and turn it into a stall and spinner!
> >
> >Topher
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
> >[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rex Rodebush
> >To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> >Subject: Kolb-List: FSII vortex generators
> >
> >
> >Richard,
> >
> >Now I'm really confused!
> >
> >Take a look at the Cubcrafters web site and look under mods and parts.
> >They show VG's on a supercub with the VG's located forward towards the
> >L.E. out on the tips in front of the ailerons. They say that is to make
> >sure the root stalls first & that you have aileron control through the
> >stall. You have located them just the opposite.
> >
> >I assumed that at a high angel of attack you would want the VG's located
> >closer to the L.E. in front of the ailerons so that they would start
> >working before separation. The air would already separate ahead of the
> >VG's at the root.
> >
> >Am I thinking about this wrong? Can any of the aerodynamic guys explain
> >this??
> >
> >Rex Rodebush
> >
> >"From: Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org>
> >Subject: Kolb-List: FSII vortex generators
> >
> >Got the pictures on the web page of the vg placement on the FSII."
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <tophera(at)centurytel.net> |
| Subject: | FSII vortex generators |
That is a good observation... I have nearly full span ailerons on mine so I
forgot about the hitch in the wing. I think that since the airfoil is the
same inboard and outboard the tacked on aileron doesn't really change things
much. If you actually had an airfoil that changed I would be more willing
to agree that moving aft made sense.
I don't think your giving advice, bad or good, but are giving information
and that is always good. All the information collected by careful flight
testing is great. I found it super interesting. Until you test something
you don't know... you just have a guess, educated or otherwise.
The only thing I wanted to point out is that even things that seem like
little changes require careful and complete testing. VGs put on in a
pattern could result in dangerous stall behavior, but if you get up to safe
altitude and test it, doing stalls in turns with sloppy rudder inputs to
cover the whole range of bad spin entry potential you will know how your
modification effects the plane. And when you pass on to us the results then
we all benefit.
Thanks for the data
Topher
-----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: FSII vortex generators
Follow up on my previous post - forgot to mention earlier - the FSII wing
is not a constant chord, it has more chord toward the tips because of the
ailerons, and less at the root, no ailerons there. Since conventional
wisdom has vg's at 10% of the chord, I suspected that we were getting
better results in front of the ailerons because the vg's at that point were
at about 10% of the chord, and the ones further inboard are also at about
10% of the chord, even though they were further forward.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>Here is the thinking (if such it be...) the Kolb wing reacts best (imo)
>when the vg's are around 11.5 inches back from the leading edge. When I was
>seeking the absolute lowest stall speed on my MKIII, I got a better
>response and a slower stall speed at that distance rather than farther
>forward.
>
>That is why the inboard ones are further forward, because that gave a
>higher stall speed than when the vg's were further aft, yet they do seem to
>help the climb rate. Vg's help the climb rate even when you climbing
>notably faster than stall.
>
>I completely agree with your thinking, and I understand the concept that
>you need to get the vg's forward and into non separated air in order to
>make them work correctly and maintain an unseparated airflow across the
>wing at high angles of attack, yet the testing we did does not really bear
>this out. The aft mounted vg's hang on longer at slow flight and stall
>later than the more forward ones, and improve the handling at slow flight
>speeds. It is "common knowledge" that the Kolb airfoil is sort of unique in
>how it behaves, I assume this is why?
>
>If you think that we are really making a serious mistake, or even worse -
>that we might be giving out dangerous advice, perhaps leading someone else
>to make a mistake that will get them hurt, then I bow to your professional
>opinion, and we will remove the 7 forward/in line vg's from the inboard
>sections.
>
>(For those of you new to the list, Topher does aerodynamics for a
living...)
>
>Richard Pike
>MKIII N420P (42oldPoops)
>
>
>
> >
> >
> >The cubcrafters website seams correct to me. I am curious to hear the
> >reasoning behind the pattern used by the high powered FSII guys. Your
> >thoughts below track mine exactly, the farther forward you put the VGs
the
> >more they should work to delay separation (stall).
> >
> >Since the Kolbs have a fairly low aspect ratio, untapered wing, they
don't
> >have a tendency to drop a tip, so I would just place all the VGs at the
> >optimum location to get the aero benefits from them. If there is a
pattern
> >it must be to make the inboard VGs less effective to make sure that the
> >inboard end stalls first. If you do use any staggered pattern, I think
it
> >is something that you should thoroughly understand and carefully test,
since
> >the pattern could very easily make the wing much worse (Like only putting
> >VGs inboard... that could be a disaster, which is why having VGs fall off
is
> >actually kinda dangerous. If only a couple on one outboard wing panel
came
> >off, you would have an auto spin machine.) It would be a shame to take
the
> >docile Kolb stall and turn it into a stall and spinner!
> >
> >Topher
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
> >[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rex Rodebush
> >To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> >Subject: Kolb-List: FSII vortex generators
> >
> >
> >Richard,
> >
> >Now I'm really confused!
> >
> >Take a look at the Cubcrafters web site and look under mods and parts.
> >They show VG's on a supercub with the VG's located forward towards the
> >L.E. out on the tips in front of the ailerons. They say that is to make
> >sure the root stalls first & that you have aileron control through the
> >stall. You have located them just the opposite.
> >
> >I assumed that at a high angel of attack you would want the VG's located
> >closer to the L.E. in front of the ailerons so that they would start
> >working before separation. The air would already separate ahead of the
> >VG's at the root.
> >
> >Am I thinking about this wrong? Can any of the aerodynamic guys explain
> >this??
> >
> >Rex Rodebush
> >
> >"From: Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org>
> >Subject: Kolb-List: FSII vortex generators
> >
> >Got the pictures on the web page of the vg placement on the FSII."
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rusty" <13brv3c(at)bellsouth.net> |
Greetings Welding Farmer :-)
I'm by no means a welding expert, but I would be glad to play one on TV if
there's money in it, maybe Junkyard Wars will come back on the air :-)
It's my understanding that the historically accepted method to weld 4130 is
with gas. That's still a great way to do it, particularly if that's all you
have access to. Gas welding equipment is cheap, and easy to find. It's
supposed to be easy to use as well, but I found TIG much easier personally.
MIG (higher form of wire feed) is good for professionals, but not so good
for amateurs. From what I understand, it's easy to make a nice looking
weld, that isn't strong at all, so it take a professional to do it right.
BTW, this is what they were using at the old Kolb, down in the dungeon :-)
TIG is an excellent method, and is also great for aluminum. Since I need to
weld aluminum more often than steel, I bought a TIG machine. The downside
is the cost of the equipment, and consumables. There are also those who say
you need to need to "normalize" steel with a torch after TIG or MIG welding,
to "relieve the stress". This is highly debatable, and I don't personally
believe it. Probably does more harm than good IMHO.
Cheers,
Rusty (Slingshot still sitting naked in the garage)
----------------
Hey comrades of the wild blue yonder. What is the recommended type of
welder to use for welding 4130 chrome moly? A stick welder would not be a
very good choice, so how about TIG, wire feed, or gas. What's the best
one to use?
The Flying Farmer (with broken gear sockets)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve Garvelink" <link(at)cdc.net> |
Ed,
After looking at your pictures on the list would like to know how you
make the cover piece between the wings. It looks like aluminum.
Steve Garvelink
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Edward
Steuber
Subject: Kolb-List: wiggles
OOPS....the date on the photo share is Sept 18 2004 ... Edward
Steuber...for the photo share pictures...
Ed in Western NY
________________________________________________________________________________
In a message dated 4/26/2005 8:08:12 AM Eastern Standard Time,
Dwight.Kottke(at)hti.htch.com writes:
Hey comrades of the wild blue yonder. What is the recommended type of
welder to use for welding 4130 chrome moly? A stick welder would not be a
very good choice, so how about TIG, wire feed, or gas. What's the best
one to use?
The Flying Farmer (with broken gear sockets)
TIG. No sparks [hardley]; won't burn the covering on your cage. Don't
remember; did you check if you have the new longer gear legs??
Howard Shackleford
FS II
SC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DAquaNut(at)aol.com |
Dwight,
I would tell you how long Ive been welding, But that would make me sound
like a smart - _ _ _ _. It is my experience That Tig is the purest and
strongest form of welding if it is done properly. You just need to have the
proper filler rod. Lincoln can tell you the best rods to use there are at least
3
that are acceptable. The new kolb would probably be glad to tell you. Mig
would be an acceptable 2nd choice. If I had my way It would all be tig It
just takes more time. Hope this helps.
Ed ( in houston).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DAquaNut(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: : Kolb-List:447 break in |
In a message dated 4/26/2005 9:28:32 A.M. Central Standard Time,
ulflyer(at)verizon.net writes:
The reason they put extra oil in the oil injection engines like the 503 and
582 for the first couple hours is only for a safety measure until it can be
determined that the oil injection is properly working.
Jerb,
Thanks for your reply. I realize the reason why injected engines put 50/1
in their fuel the first tank, But if the injector is working properly that
equates to 25/1. My thinking is that if it that wont hurt a injected engine
the first tank, how would it hurt a non-injected 447?
Ed (in Hou)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerb <ulflyer(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: : Kolb-List:447 break in |
You want some friction to get the rings to seat - too much oil may slow
that process down. You could go a little more oil but it shouldn't be
necessary. In the case of oil injection you need to run it enough to
verify that the oil injection is working - it only serves as a safe guard
in the event it proves not to be working, sometimes on initial installs
bubbles or kinked tubing can hamper oil flow. In the case of the 447,
that's not the case. Also keep in mind that only at more extreme throttle
settings would larger amounts of oil be injected and then at that higher
RPM it should blow out most of the excess oil.
jerb
>
>
>In a message dated 4/26/2005 9:28:32 A.M. Central Standard Time,
>ulflyer(at)verizon.net writes:
>
>
>The reason they put extra oil in the oil injection engines like the 503 and
>582 for the first couple hours is only for a safety measure until it can be
>determined that the oil injection is properly working.
>
>
>Jerb,
> Thanks for your reply. I realize the reason why injected engines put
> 50/1
>in their fuel the first tank, But if the injector is working properly that
>equates to 25/1. My thinking is that if it that wont hurt a injected engine
>the first tank, how would it hurt a non-injected 447?
>
> Ed (in Hou)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerb <ulflyer(at)verizon.net> |
Miller makes a small 120VAC powered unit that works well for chrome moly
tubing. It works well for this function and is nice unit being its is
small and light weight 13.7# making it very portable. Very handy unit. It
outputs DC only so does not accommodate welding aluminum. Cost is around
$1000 bucks or less, check the internet prices.
jerb
>
>In a message dated 4/26/2005 8:08:12 AM Eastern Standard Time,
>Dwight.Kottke(at)hti.htch.com writes:
>Hey comrades of the wild blue yonder. What is the recommended type of
>welder to use for welding 4130 chrome moly? A stick welder would not be a
>very good choice, so how about TIG, wire feed, or gas. What's the best
>one to use?
>
>
>The Flying Farmer (with broken gear sockets)
>
>
>TIG. No sparks [hardley]; won't burn the covering on your cage. Don't
>remember; did you check if you have the new longer gear legs??
>
>Howard Shackleford
>FS II
>SC
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerb <ulflyer(at)verizon.net> |
Rusty,
I surprised that if you have been around welding you don't accept
normalizing the weld area with a torch after welding steel (chrome moly)
after TIG or MIG welding. This is a standard practice for aircraft
especially high stress areas like engine mounts or cluster joints.
jerb
>
>Greetings Welding Farmer :-)
>
>I'm by no means a welding expert, but I would be glad to play one on TV if
>there's money in it, maybe Junkyard Wars will come back on the air :-)
>
>It's my understanding that the historically accepted method to weld 4130 is
>with gas. That's still a great way to do it, particularly if that's all you
>have access to. Gas welding equipment is cheap, and easy to find. It's
>supposed to be easy to use as well, but I found TIG much easier personally.
>
>
>MIG (higher form of wire feed) is good for professionals, but not so good
>for amateurs. From what I understand, it's easy to make a nice looking
>weld, that isn't strong at all, so it take a professional to do it right.
>BTW, this is what they were using at the old Kolb, down in the dungeon :-)
>
>TIG is an excellent method, and is also great for aluminum. Since I need to
>weld aluminum more often than steel, I bought a TIG machine. The downside
>is the cost of the equipment, and consumables. There are also those who say
>you need to need to "normalize" steel with a torch after TIG or MIG welding,
>to "relieve the stress". This is highly debatable, and I don't personally
>believe it. Probably does more harm than good IMHO.
>
>Cheers,
>Rusty (Slingshot still sitting naked in the garage)
>
>
>----------------
>Hey comrades of the wild blue yonder. What is the recommended type of
>welder to use for welding 4130 chrome moly? A stick welder would not be a
>very good choice, so how about TIG, wire feed, or gas. What's the best
>one to use?
>
>
>The Flying Farmer (with broken gear sockets)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Edward Steuber" <esteuber(at)rochester.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Ultrastar wing gap seal |
Steve,
The gap seal consists of a narrow .020 aluminum leading edge scewed to
tinted .060 Lexan that is dzus fastened to receptacles attached to welded tabs
on the butt ribs. Removal is quick and there are two pieces to store that are
rather large and hard to handle. The good thing is visibility up and back is
terrific....If you do this, make the bottom lexan clear because 2 layers gets
pretty dark....I will change it when I can find a piece of clear....a new full
4x8 lexan is pricey to say the least....
ED in Western NY
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerb <ulflyer(at)verizon.net> |
Yea, I still recall being taught that and the point driven home on about my
second lesson (effects of controls) by an ex military instructor. He
demonstrated it very well, throttle controls altitude, trim controlled the
speed. Yep, still works for me yet today.
jerb
>
>Hello Don and All,
>I totally understand about what you are talking about when it comes to
>landing a plane. I consider myself a pretty good pilot and have flown many
>different types, but the toughest by far was my lancair. Fast, unforgiving,
>and a very short wheel base. Add those up and there was very little room for
>error when it came to landing. I like most pilots would pull the throttle to
>slow down, just like driving a car. A friend of mine (F-15 pilot) taught me
>a different way to approach to landing. Pitch controls speed, and throttle
>controls decent. This was opposite to what I was used to but I listened,
>learned the technique and was able to control the lancair like a pet. It
>takes some getting used to changing our habits but once you master this
>technique there will be no more bounces and shorter roll outs. Hope to be of
>some help, Jerry
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Don Gherardini" <donghe@one-eleven.net>
>To:
>Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Droop tips
>
>
> >
> > Brother Pike,
> >
> > Thx for the kind words, I am not deserved.
> >
> > I do have VGs on my fly...and it did the same thing for me...about 4 or 5
> > mph on the stall....
> >
> > On the firefly..I generally bring it in over the fence at 50...then level
> > off slowly at about 45...then pull the throttle sloooowly
>back,,,still...the
> > sink rate gets fast below 45....so at my home airfield which is plenty
> > long...I usually let it touch down at 40 to 45 ...especially if anybody is
> > watching....if I try and get it slower than that...I usually bounce it.
>This
> > come from being kinda heavy I believe.....
> > The droop tips are only a thought that upon rumination I believed might
> > generate some discussion and possibly be worth starting a topic.
> > It would be alot of trouble to make them thats for sure...need another
> > outboard rib to attach em to...and it would likely need be a stamped style
> > rib instead of the tubing style for a good mateing ...also all the trouble
> > making 2 plugs...then 2 molds...and so on.....
> >
> > I remember how much they helped the airbike....and although I have never
> > piloted any of the MAX series...(V-max, z-max, eros etc.)...I do envy
>their
> > apparant low speed handleing when I watch them.
> >
> > Don Gherardini
> > FireFly 098
> > http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "c b" <seedeebee(at)hotmail.com> |
Hi All,
I bought Frank Reynen's amphib Mark III C on Monday. I absolutely love it.
Frank is really great too and did an excellent job.
I am thinking of switching it to conventional gear until I get my SES
rating, so that I can get insurance on it in the meantime.
I called Kolb this morning and they want (roughly) $500 for the landing gear
legs and $900 for the O'Brien brakes.
Can anyone tell me if there is a less expensive way to go? How necessary are
brakes anyway...?
Anyone know where I might find a used set of steel gear legs/brakes?
Anyway, I look forward to talking with and meeting you guys.
Happy flying!
Chris Banys
Kolb Mk III C on Amphib. Floats
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | curtis groote <cgroote1(at)yahoo.com> |
Yesterday a fellow suggested that I look seriously at
the HKS four cycle engine for my Firestar II that I'm
building. I scanned the entries in the archives ( two
thousand five listed under engines) but could only see
two entries re HKS and those being in September, 1999.
Any comments, please? Thanks.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Swiderwski" <rswiderski(at)earthlink.net> |
Jerb,
I held your opinion & would have bet the farm on it too. But at Sun
& Fun & went to a welding chrome moly forum & was amazed to find out that it
is virtually a useless thing to do & worse, it almost always produces more
warping. Microscopic photos of the metal structures were shown along with
research results of several big studies. I just was amazed by it all. The
consensus was that TIG is the best & easiest over all. Another "myth" I
would have bet the farm on is that you can use regular steal welding sticks
when doing chrome moly tube joints because the weld is so big that it
doesn't matter, ie, it won't break at the weld. Well they said it does
matter & to use the appropriate rod (which they said are available at Home
Depot?!) Well I never had any of my gas welded joints using mild steel rods
break so it probably is a picking at knats issue. But I sure messed up a
bunch of times by annealing the joints only to find that no matter how
careful I was, the warps just got worse. So I will not be annealing my work
anymore (I can write it easy enough, but I still can't imagine actually not
doing it!) & when my supply of mild steel runs out, I will buy the
recommended numbers (I don't remember them but they are in my notes).
Richard Swiderski
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of jerb
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Welder
Rusty,
I surprised that if you have been around welding you don't accept
normalizing the weld area with a torch after welding steel (chrome moly)
after TIG or MIG welding. This is a standard practice for aircraft
especially high stress areas like engine mounts or cluster joints.
jerb
>
>Greetings Welding Farmer :-)
>
>I'm by no means a welding expert, but I would be glad to play one on TV if
>there's money in it, maybe Junkyard Wars will come back on the air :-)
>
>It's my understanding that the historically accepted method to weld 4130 is
>with gas. That's still a great way to do it, particularly if that's all
you
>have access to. Gas welding equipment is cheap, and easy to find. It's
>supposed to be easy to use as well, but I found TIG much easier personally.
>
>
>MIG (higher form of wire feed) is good for professionals, but not so good
>for amateurs. From what I understand, it's easy to make a nice looking
>weld, that isn't strong at all, so it take a professional to do it right.
>BTW, this is what they were using at the old Kolb, down in the dungeon :-)
>
>TIG is an excellent method, and is also great for aluminum. Since I need to
>weld aluminum more often than steel, I bought a TIG machine. The downside
>is the cost of the equipment, and consumables. There are also those who
say
>you need to need to "normalize" steel with a torch after TIG or MIG
welding,
>to "relieve the stress". This is highly debatable, and I don't personally
>believe it. Probably does more harm than good IMHO.
>
>Cheers,
>Rusty (Slingshot still sitting naked in the garage)
>
>
>----------------
>Hey comrades of the wild blue yonder. What is the recommended type of
>welder to use for welding 4130 chrome moly? A stick welder would not be a
>very good choice, so how about TIG, wire feed, or gas. What's the best
>one to use?
>
>
>The Flying Farmer (with broken gear sockets)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Denny Rowe" <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
>> Yesterday a fellow suggested that I look seriously at
>> the HKS four cycle engine for my Firestar II that I'm
>> building. I scanned the entries in the archives ( two
>> thousand five listed under engines) but could only see
>> two entries re HKS and those being in September, 1999.
>> Any comments, please? Thanks.
>>
>>
>
> If you decide to try the HKS, you might want to go through Tom Olenick at
> Olenick Aviation, he has a lot of experience with that engine.
Denny Rowe
Mk-3 PA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kolbdriver" <Kolbdriver(at)bellsouth.net> |
Welcome Chris,
It sounds like you priced the new steel legs. The aluminum legs are about
$60 ea. but you would still need axle fittings, wheels etc. Didn't Frank
have the gear for it?
Steven Green
MK3
----- Original Message -----
From: "c b" <seedeebee(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: New Kolber
>
> Hi All,
>
> I bought Frank Reynen's amphib Mark III C on Monday. I absolutely love it.
> Frank is really great too and did an excellent job.
>
> I am thinking of switching it to conventional gear until I get my SES
> rating, so that I can get insurance on it in the meantime.
>
> I called Kolb this morning and they want (roughly) $500 for the landing
gear
> legs and $900 for the O'Brien brakes.
>
> Can anyone tell me if there is a less expensive way to go? How necessary
are
> brakes anyway...?
>
> Anyone know where I might find a used set of steel gear legs/brakes?
>
> Anyway, I look forward to talking with and meeting you guys.
>
> Happy flying!
>
> Chris Banys
> Kolb Mk III C on Amphib. Floats
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
I'm envious. Frank took me for a ride in that plane about 6 or 7 years ago,
and it was great. Seems a shame to pay that much for landing gear if you
intend to go back to amphibs. Would it be possible to make an arrangement
with the insurance company to limit yourself to land only operations for a
specific period, or until you have X hours dual on floats ?? Might be worth
checking on some such or getting creative in some other way. IMHO, brakes
are a highly desirable, but not absolutely necessary option. It would
depend to some extent on how and where you'll be flying it.
Lar.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Building Kolb Mk III
N78LB Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "c b" <seedeebee(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: New Kolber
>
> Hi All,
>
> I bought Frank Reynen's amphib Mark III C on Monday. I absolutely love it.
> Frank is really great too and did an excellent job.
>
> I am thinking of switching it to conventional gear until I get my SES
> rating, so that I can get insurance on it in the meantime.
>
> I called Kolb this morning and they want (roughly) $500 for the landing
> gear
> legs and $900 for the O'Brien brakes.
>
> Can anyone tell me if there is a less expensive way to go? How necessary
> are
> brakes anyway...?
>
> Anyone know where I might find a used set of steel gear legs/brakes?
>
> Anyway, I look forward to talking with and meeting you guys.
>
> Happy flying!
>
> Chris Banys
> Kolb Mk III C on Amphib. Floats
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Airgriff2(at)aol.com |
Hi Curtis, A great number of the Flight Star Aircraft are being sold with the
HKS engines. I have not heard of any problems at all. Not the same power as
the 582 but if that's not a concern, they run very smooth and quiet.
fly safe
Bob Griffin
Albany NY
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ted Cowan <trc1917(at)direcway.com> |
I guess you can take this for what it is worth but I have been gas welding
since I was a bean sprout and found out that something red means 'hot'. I
have repaired quite a few ultralights so far and I have discovered that
normalizing the metal does make warping a problem. Even if you put it in a
jig fixture, it is going to warp. The light weight material and tubing we
use can be difficult to multi joint and even worse to normalize. I still
try to give it a little heat to line up the crystals but you gotta be real
careful. I have found the best method is to make sure it is slow cooled, no
drafts, fans or blowing air of any kind for a spell. I would like to
mention to anyone that has not welded with gas rod meant for 4130, you are
in for a rude surprise. This is difficult stuff to handle and meld with the
tubing. It flows at higher temp (so it seems) than the metal you are
melding. You will burn away a lot of tubing before you catch on. I have
been to a special class for aircraft tube welding and they recommended the
use of mild steel rod for ease and heat displacement. The worse thing you
can do is overheat the tube. If you make a nice clean puddle melted nicely
with all parts, it is about as strong as it can get. One big problem with
the harder wire, the shrink rate of the crome moly rod seems to be a great
deal worse than mild steel so you must 'hammer' to to stretch it back while
it is hot. I know I am going to have a bunch of people jump on me for my
technique but we all have out way and I do what works for me. I have never
had a weld break to this point. I used to bragg I could weld a zipper on a
cat's butt without burning the hair but now I am older and just tape his
butt shut. I think if you look real hard you will find that most use mild
steel, except for those who have too much money and think they need special
gadgets to do a job rather than SKILL. My two cents. Ted Cowan, Alabama,
ready to take the "Heat".
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rex Rodebush" <rrodebush(at)tema.net> |
Last year I took a "SportAir Workshop" on gas welding to get myself back
up to speed. The instructor was Earl Luce (He's the guy who resurrected
Steve Whitman's "Buttercup" and sells plans and prewelded fuselages,
etc.)
The question came up about rods and Earl's choice was to use mild steel
rods. He talked about the area thing and also that 4130 is an air
hardable alloy. If you use high alloy rod the weld will be stronger but
less ductile which means more prone to crack propagation.
Look at the wall thickness of your tubing. You probably have at least 3
to 4 times as much weld thickness. If the mild steel is 60% of the
yield strength of the tubing so what! I guarantee that with only an
average weld that joint will not fail at the weld. Plus you minimize
the chance of having hard, crack prone areas in your weld if it happened
to cool too fast.
I do agree about the normalizing. Normalizing is just air cooling in
still air. After you finish a weld it is just doing that. No need to
reheat it again.
There have been thousands of planes gas welded with mild steel with no
problems. You can certainly produce a very good weld with alloy rod and
that's fine. I'll stick with the mild steel.
Rex Rodebush
From: "Richard Swiderwski" <rswiderski(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Welder
"Jerb,
............I held your opinion & would have bet the farm on it too.
But at Sun
& Fun & went to a welding chrome moly forum & was amazed to find out
that it
is virtually a useless thing to do & worse, it almost always produces
more
warping. Microscopic photos of the metal structures were shown along
with
research results of several big studies. I just was amazed by it all.
The
consensus was that TIG is the best & easiest over all. Another "myth" I
would have bet the farm on is that you can use regular steal welding
sticks
when doing chrome moly tube joints because the weld is so big that it
doesn't matter, ie, it won't break at the weld. Well they said it does
matter & to use the appropriate rod..............."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DAquaNut(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: 6 inch nylon azusa wheels |
Group,
Please disregard my plea for 6 inch wheels, I was fortunate enough to
find a pair on ebay.
Thanks,
Ed (in Hou)
Do Not Archive
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Cottrell" <lcottrel(at)kfalls.net> |
I tried to renew my membership to EAA today. Unfortunately I decided that while
I wanted to support EAA, I did not wish to pay the price of a subscription
to a magazine that did not have enough material about my interest in the sport
to keep me busy for more than five minutes. Well that isn't possible! You either
take the mags or you don't belong. Unfortunately I have a history of stumbling
over principals and being unable to compromise. So I did not renew. It is
really a shame, and I am saddened by this stubbornness on both our parts.
Larry, Oregon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "skyrider2" <skyrider2(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Welding Chromoly? |
Richard,
If you happen to run across your notes on the proper welding rods for
chromoly, please post them on the list. I'd be interested in what the
recommended type were.
Thanks in advance,
Doug Lawton
NE Georgia & Whitwell TN
Matthews Field and Gliderport
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjungjr(at)yahoo.com> |
Curtis and Group,
I have a Firestar II with a 503. I would rather have an HKS. But the
cost of moving up is too great. Now, if I were looking at the cost of a
new 503, I would go for the HKS.
I not saying that everyone should choose the HKS. The 503 is great for
what the Firestar was designed to do. But I would like to do more
traveling with mine. Plus, I now live in Arizona, where airports are
far apart and the terrain is roughed.
When old Kolb tested the HKS, they determined that it would not
out-climb the 503, so they decided not to offer it. Where I think the
HKS could improve the Firestar is in lower fuel burn (more range) and
in reliability. I am not aware of any Firestars using the HKS, so I'm
not sure what the fuel burn would be, but it would have to be better
that the 503. My 503 burns about 3.8 gph at 65 mph. When I'm trying to
get somewhere, I'd like to cruise at 75 mph, but then the fuel burn
goes 5 gph or more. This would not be as much as a problem if my
Firestar carried more than 10 gallons, but it doesn't.
John Jung
>
> Yesterday a fellow suggested that I look seriously at
> the HKS four cycle engine for my Firestar II that I'm
> building. I scanned the entries in the archives ( two
> thousand five listed under engines) but could only see
> two entries re HKS and those being in September, 1999.
> Any comments, please? Thanks.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jon Croke" <jon(at)joncroke.com> |
| Subject: | Rotax 2 cycle DVDs |
>
> Co-incidentally to Larry Cottrell's post, I was reading the new June '05
> issue of Private Pilot magazine this morning and came across an ad on page
> 11 that may interest some of you. It's a 3 CD set about installing,
> maintaining and servicing Rotax engines on aircraft.
Larry, I know you are not a big Rotax user yourself, but others on the list
are (me too!) I wanted to let everyone know that about a month ago we
upgraded OUR Rotax 2 cycle maintenance & disassembly videos to over 4 hrs of
playtime (now 2 DVDs) and now include detailed info on both the water and
air cooled models, (also the carbs, recoil starter repair, etc, etc) . We
sold a bunch back when they were just one DVD and now have an 'almost free'
upgrade for existing customers to get the 2nd DVD! Details at
www.HomebuiltHELP.com
Sorry for the 'commercial' but thought it was relevant to our listers here.
Jon
near Green Bay
FSII / CH701
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
We don't have any good solid numbers yet, so this is subject to revision,
but so far the 582 on the FSII looks like 60-65 mph at 4800 rpm, which is
giving us gph rates around 3.5 or less. Might turn out to be a fairly
efficient way to fly. Still would probably not compare to the HKS in the
long run though. Next project is to see if those 6 gallon tanks we got last
month will fit in the FSII properly.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>
>When old Kolb tested the HKS, they determined that it would not
>out-climb the 503, so they decided not to offer it. Where I think the
>HKS could improve the Firestar is in lower fuel burn (more range) and
>in reliability. I am not aware of any Firestars using the HKS, so I'm
>not sure what the fuel burn would be, but it would have to be better
>that the 503. My 503 burns about 3.8 gph at 65 mph. When I'm trying to
>get somewhere, I'd like to cruise at 75 mph, but then the fuel burn
>goes 5 gph or more. This would not be as much as a problem if my
>Firestar carried more than 10 gallons, but it doesn't.
>
>John Jung
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "woody" <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
Tig may be the way to go but for all the aircraft tube welding you will
ever do it is not practical. To a back yard mechanic a set of tanks will be
priceless. Treat your self to some Henrob or Dillon torches too. Check ebay.
> Tig weld it is the best way, make sure you have the correct wire and
> shielding gas for the 4130 tubing
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rusty" <13brv3c(at)bellsouth.net> |
Define "practical". Sounds like you mean cost effective. If all you ever
imagine welding is steel, then gas works, and it's nice and cheap. If you
think you'll need to weld aluminum, then TIG becomes real practical. I'll
agree that it's not cheap.
BTW, one of the gas welding rigs and Henrob torches you've seen on Ebay was
mine, after I got the TIG :-)
Rusty
Tig may be the way to go but for all the aircraft tube welding you will
ever do it is not practical. To a back yard mechanic a set of tanks will be
priceless. Treat your self to some Henrob or Dillon torches too. Check ebay.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Swiderwski" <rswiderski(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Welding Chromoly? |
Doug,
ER-80SD2 was 1st choice & ER-7056 was 2nd choice
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of skyrider2
Subject: Kolb-List: Welding Chromoly?
Richard,
If you happen to run across your notes on the proper welding rods for
chromoly, please post them on the list. I'd be interested in what the
recommended type were.
Thanks in advance,
Doug Lawton
NE Georgia & Whitwell TN
Matthews Field and Gliderport
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "woody" <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
Practical.... Most cost effective and most useable in a hobbiests garage.
Multi purpose, cut, weld, heat..... Practical.
For most people welding is an occasional requirement to git er done. If
you are a professional welder or do a lot of welding yes go for the best
equipment. The average hobbiest can get by quite well with a set of tanks
and even weld aluminum with the Henrob. wish I had seen your ad before I
bought mine :)
> Define "practical". Sounds like you mean cost effective. If all you ever
> imagine welding is steel, then gas works, and it's nice and cheap. If you
> think you'll need to weld aluminum, then TIG becomes real practical. I'll
> agree that it's not cheap.
>
> BTW, one of the gas welding rigs and Henrob torches you've seen on Ebay
was
> mine, after I got the TIG :-)
>
> Rusty
>
>
> Tig may be the way to go but for all the aircraft tube welding you will
> ever do it is not practical. To a back yard mechanic a set of tanks will
be
> priceless. Treat your self to some Henrob or Dillon torches too. Check
ebay.
>
>
> --
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rusty" <13brv3c(at)bellsouth.net> |
Sorry, but the "average" welder ain't gonna weld aluminum with gas, even
with a Henrob. That advertising ploy is what suckered me into buying one
:-) Then when it seemed impossible, I got the Tin Man videos, and flux, and
lenses, and, and,... Still couldn't do it, but my Miller Dynasty 200DX sure
does.
Cheers,
Rusty
-----
The average hobbiest can get by quite well with a set of tanks and even weld
aluminum with the Henrob. wish I had seen your ad before I bought mine :)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerb <ulflyer(at)verizon.net> |
Larry,
EAA used to accept no magazine memberships, they didn't advertise it or
make it well known for oblivious reasons, but they have done it in the
past. Interesting thing is I've facing the same decision this month. I
take the normal Sport Aviation and what was the Experimenter, but have been
considering dropping at the new Sport Pilot rag and maybe both. The low
attendance at Sun & Fun the last two years is starting to say something,
but not sure anyones home to hear the noise. We'll just have to see how
this all plays out.
jerb
>
> I tried to renew my membership to EAA today. Unfortunately I decided
> that while I wanted to support EAA, I did not wish to pay the price of a
> subscription to a magazine that did not have enough material about my
> interest in the sport to keep me busy for more than five minutes. Well
> that isn't possible! You either take the mags or you don't belong.
> Unfortunately I have a history of stumbling over principals and being
> unable to compromise. So I did not renew. It is really a shame, and I am
> saddened by this stubbornness on both our parts.
>Larry, Oregon
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack & Louise Hart <jbhart(at)ldd.net> |
| Subject: | FSII vortex generators |
>
>The cubcrafters website seams correct to me. I am curious to hear the
>reasoning behind the pattern used by the high powered FSII guys. Your
>thoughts below track mine exactly, the farther forward you put the VGs the
>more they should work to delay separation (stall).
>
>
Topher,
I believe it has to do with vortex energy dissipation over a thick high
camber wing. The FSII and the FF cruise at or below the stall speeds of
most aircraft. As a result there is less energy in the vortex cast off by
the VG. If you place it close to the leading edge on FSII or FF wing the
vortex will dissipate before it gets to the flow separation area and you
will notice little improvement in performance or aileron effectiveness.
I do not believe one needs to worry about placing them further forward in
the midsection to cause the center of the wing to stall first. The Kolb
pusher configuration maintains good airflow over the mid section of the
wing. But if one is going to use VG's as a reason to make slower landing
approaches or to fly slow or establish high climb rates close to the ground,
I wish you luck.
You are correct in recommending that if one is going to add VG's it is
important to test them at altitude. My FireFly is very docile and will not
break into a clean stall. It will mush with no tendency to drop a wing.
You can stand it on the prop, and apply a little aileron and it will rotate
without dropping a wing. Low speed aileron effectiveness is improved, and
this helps during cross wind take offs and landings. Increased low speed
lift helps with getting off tall wet grass fields with out a nose over.
As of June this year I will have been flying with VG's five years. They are
fixed to the fabric with thin Scotch double sided tape. To prevent leading
edge lift up, vinyl electricians tape was placed over the top of the VG and
forward onto the fabric. Up to this point I have not lost one.
..............
I went up to K02 to clean out the hangar and to get the FireFly ready to
ferry to I22. I discovered two bays down is the home for a new Murphy Moose
- no paint and the aluminum is not polished. The more I looked at it I
realized the wing has much in common with the Kolb designs. I got out the
tape measure and found the chord is 60 inches and the max thickness is a
little over 8 inches.
The chord compares well to the FireFly but the thickness is about two inches
greater and the airfoil is not as flat on the bottom or the camber is less
than the FireFly's. I measured from the leading edge back to the line on
which the VG's were located and it came out to be 8 inches. Dropping and
inch to compensate for surface distance, the VG chord location is 11%. The
Moose VG's were made from a thin "T" aluminum extrusion where the leg of the
"T" was about .25 inches long. My VG's are located at about 16% chord and
are .375 inches tall.
Also, there were VG's on the bottom of the Moose horizontal stabilizer and
on each side of the vertical stabilizer. If I put VG's on the vertical fin,
it may let the FireFly slip a little better.
I am moving the last load of STUFF to Indiana tomorrow. When I come back to
get the FireFly, I will get some photos of the VG's on the Moose.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Jackson, MO - tomorrow - Winchester, IN
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart(at)ldd.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "woody" <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
I saw the Henrob at Osh and told the guy if he could teach me to weld
aluminum I would buy his torch. 10 minutes later I owned a Henrob. Personal
instruction must have made the difference.
>
> Sorry, but the "average" welder ain't gonna weld aluminum with gas, even
> with a Henrob. That advertising ploy is what suckered me into buying one
> :-) Then when it seemed impossible, I got the Tin Man videos, and flux,
and
> lenses, and, and,... Still couldn't do it, but my Miller Dynasty 200DX
sure
> does.
>
> Cheers,
> Rusty
>
>
> -----
> The average hobbiest can get by quite well with a set of tanks and even
weld
> aluminum with the Henrob. wish I had seen your ad before I bought mine :)
>
>
> --
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rusty" <13brv3c(at)bellsouth.net> |
You could also be above average, or perhaps I'm below :-)
Glad it works for you.
Rusty (anyone want a Sonerai-II with 2180 engine cheap)
I saw the Henrob at Osh and told the guy if he could teach me to weld
aluminum I would buy his torch. 10 minutes later I owned a Henrob. Personal
instruction must have made the difference.
>
> Sorry, but the "average" welder ain't gonna weld aluminum with gas,
> even with a Henrob. That advertising ploy is what suckered me into
> buying one
> :-) Then when it seemed impossible, I got the Tin Man videos, and flux,
and
> lenses, and, and,... Still couldn't do it, but my Miller Dynasty
> 200DX
sure
> does.
>
> Cheers,
> Rusty
>
>
> -----
> The average hobbiest can get by quite well with a set of tanks and
> even
weld
> aluminum with the Henrob. wish I had seen your ad before I bought mine
> :)
>
>
> --
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | possums <possums(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | FSII vortex generators |
>
>I went up to K02 to clean out the hangar and to get the FireFly ready to
>ferry to I22. I discovered two bays down is the home for a new Murphy Moose
>- no paint and the aluminum is not polished. The more I looked at it I
>realized the wing has much in common with the Kolb designs. I got out the
>tape measure and found the chord is 60 inches and the max thickness is a
>little over 8 inches.
>
>The chord compares well to the FireFly but the thickness is about two inches
>greater and the airfoil is not as flat on the bottom or the camber is less
>than the FireFly's. I measured from the leading edge back to the line on
>which the VG's were located and it came out to be 8 inches. Dropping and
>inch to compensate for surface distance, the VG chord location is 11%. The
>Moose VG's were made from a thin "T" aluminum extrusion where the leg of the
>"T" was about .25 inches long. My VG's are located at about 16% chord and
>are .375 inches tall.
-----------------------------------
The instructions say put them on 10 to 12% of the wing cord (including the
ailerons)
back from the leading edge. Too far forward and they will slow down the cruise
speed, too far back and they become ineffective.
I put mine about 11% or 6 1/2 inches back from the leading edge as measured
through the middle of the cord of the wing.
http://www.landshorter.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David L. Bigelow" <dlbigelow(at)verizon.net> |
I did some checking on the HKS when before I purchased a 503 for my Firestar.
The biggest issue I could see (besides cost) was mounting. The crankcase is quite
a bit lower than the mounts, and it looked to me like the engine would have
to be mounted higher with a resulting higher thrust line. I know that "Old
Kolb" tried it, but have not seen any pictures.
Dave Bigelow
FS2
Kamuela, Hawaii
"I have a Firestar II with a 503. I would rather have an HKS. But the
cost of moving up is too great. Now, if I were looking at the cost of a
new 503, I would go for the HKS."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerb <ulflyer(at)verizon.net> |
Try approaching Tracy O'Brien direct. That sounds a bit high to
me. Several sets of these have been installed on CGS Hawks with very
positive results and feedback. By the way they were a snap to install,
hardest part was bleeding the air out of the master cylinder and that is
more technique used. Last I knew the kit for a single place hawk was
around $300 - included two caliper & disc sets and single handle stick
mounted Hegar master cylinder. Part of the cost difference may be the
aircraft's weight and brake size required to handle it. Drill down through
the site until you get to the different brake kit offerings.
http://www.tracyobrien.com/
jerb
>
>Hi All,
>
>I bought Frank Reynen's amphib Mark III C on Monday. I absolutely love it.
>Frank is really great too and did an excellent job.
>
>I am thinking of switching it to conventional gear until I get my SES
>rating, so that I can get insurance on it in the meantime.
>
>I called Kolb this morning and they want (roughly) $500 for the landing gear
>legs and $900 for the O'Brien brakes.
>
>Can anyone tell me if there is a less expensive way to go? How necessary are
>brakes anyway...?
>
>Anyone know where I might find a used set of steel gear legs/brakes?
>
>Anyway, I look forward to talking with and meeting you guys.
>
>Happy flying!
>
>Chris Banys
>Kolb Mk III C on Amphib. Floats
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Pierzina <planecrazzzy(at)yahoo.com> |
Hey Guys,
Here's my 37 yrs welding $02. ( I'm 49 )
When I was with a Top Fuel Dragster ( 767 "Blair's Fugowie" ) I learned that
the Chrome moly tubing was "only" supposed to be welded with TIG.....NHRA rules.
I have talked to alot of people about my next airplane (Steve Witman - Tailwind)
and the perferd way is to Torch weld it......but if you TIG it (tack with
MIG- faster) you should aneal the tubing afterwards.
Now, I hear some people don't think anealing is nesassery....well, if your IN
& OUTA their like you should be then you should aneal it.....But if your DICKIN
AROUND with it , your probly already anealing it with the TIG.....
Now..... What "I've" done with MY cage is...I preheat the area with a quick
start propane torch and I MIG weld it with hard wire/ CO2
Kolb MIG welded my Firestar Cage , but they didn't preheat before each weld
and alot of the welds started out with "Cold lap" , as you guys with the expensive
powder coat jobs with the RUST leaking down from the joints can testify....
I spent over 40 hrs on my cage cleaning and repairing the welds and if I need
any repairs I'll fix it the same way .....
Gotta Fly...
Mike in MN N381PM
My Web Site:
http://www.geocities.com/planecrazzzy/Planecrazzzy.html
Sometimes you just have to take the leap and build your wings on the way down...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjungjr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | FSII vortex generators |
Jack,
Please explain your statement below. It sounds like you are suggesting
that VG's won't help much with slower landing speeds. Am I not
understanding you?
John Jung
> But if one is going to use VG's as a reason to make slower landing
> approaches or to fly slow or establish high climb rates close to the
> ground,
> I wish you luck.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kirk Smith" <snuffy(at)usol.com> |
http://www.hciaviation.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Judy or Larry Gitt" <gittj(at)earthlink.net> |
I got a pair of Tracy OBrien brake left over from my Kolbra There for sell
$250.oo and here a your for the taking Larry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David L. Bigelow" <dlbigelow(at)verizon.net> |
A few months ago, the Kolb 10,000 foot club was recognized on the Kolb List. Today
was a beautiful day here on the Big Island of Hawaii, and just for the heck
of it, I decided to see how high my Rotax 503 powered Firestar 2 would go.
The engine has dual carbs with the high altitude compensation kit installed.
The prop is a 60 inch two blade Powerfin driven by a 2.58 B box.
I bundled up in a snowmobile suit, put on some heavy gloves, and took of from my
pasture strip at the 4,000 foot level on the Mauna Kea west slope. I climbed
at 6400 rpm and topped out at 16,000 feet. The FS was still climbing at about
150 fpm, but the cold and lack of supplemental oxygen made me decide to quit
there. I think it would have topped out at about 18,000. Over here, we don't
have positive controlled airspace above us, so there were no hassles with ATC.
EGT ranged from 990 at the start of climb to 940 at the top of climb. It
took about 40 minutes to get up there. The whole flight was 1:25 and used 5
gallons of gas.
Never thought I'd get a stock ultralight that high.
Dave Bigelow
FS2
Kamuela, Hawaii
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JACK HART <jbhart(at)ldd.net> |
| Subject: | FSII vortex generators |
John,
No, landing speed will be reduced if one holds the plane off as speed falls after
the landing flare. I feel that no one should fly an ultra light close to the
ground at any other speed than slightly below cruise speed or higher. Low
mass and dragy aircraft will bite you quicker that the heavier ga types. And
so you must be quicker in your response to stay ahead of the ultra light. If
you run out of wind, loose lift or engine at low speed close to the ground, VG's
are not going to keep you from bending your landing gear, the cage, or your
self. During slow flight altitude is your friend. When in the landing pattern
speed is your friend as it reduces the chances of dropping or stalling a wing
and spinning in. The FireFly slips very well so one can make high approaches
at speed to keep control function crisp right up to the flare into ground effect.
Then hold it off and let the VG's do their thing.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Winchester, IN
-----Original Message-----
From: John Jung <jrjungjr(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: FSII vortex generators
Jack,
Please explain your statement below. It sounds like you are suggesting
that VG's won't help much with slower landing speeds. Am I not
understanding you?
John Jung
> But if one is going to use VG's as a reason to make slower landing
> approaches or to fly slow or establish high climb rates close to the
> ground,
> I wish you luck.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve Garvelink" <link(at)cdc.net> |
New Club,
16,000 foot club?
There you go always tryin to get to the front of the line.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Larry Bourne
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Brrrr....!
Thought they were all beautiful days in Hawaii........?? Nice going.
Brrrrrr for me, too. Lar. Do not
Archive.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Building Kolb Mk III
N78LB Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "David L. Bigelow" <dlbigelow(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: Brrrr....!
>
>
> A few months ago, the Kolb 10,000 foot club was recognized on the Kolb
> List. Today was a beautiful day here on the Big Island of Hawaii, and
> just for the heck of it, I decided to see how high my Rotax 503
powered
> Firestar 2 would go. The engine has dual carbs with the high altitude
> compensation kit installed. The prop is a 60 inch two blade Powerfin
> driven by a 2.58 B box.
>
> I bundled up in a snowmobile suit, put on some heavy gloves, and took
of
> from my pasture strip at the 4,000 foot level on the Mauna Kea west
slope.
> I climbed at 6400 rpm and topped out at 16,000 feet. The FS was still
> climbing at about 150 fpm, but the cold and lack of supplemental
oxygen
> made me decide to quit there. I think it would have topped out at
about
> 18,000. Over here, we don't have positive controlled airspace above
us,
> so there were no hassles with ATC. EGT ranged from 990 at the start
of
> climb to 940 at the top of climb. It took about 40 minutes to get up
> there. The whole flight was 1:25 and used 5 gallons of gas.
>
> Never thought I'd get a stock ultralight that high.
>
> Dave Bigelow
> FS2
> Kamuela, Hawaii
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave & Eve Pelletier" <pelletier(at)cableone.net> |
Hey guys,
In case anyone wants to get aholt of us, George Thompson and I are heading
out in about an hour for the Czech Republic and won't be back until a couple of
days before MV. See ya there - MV I mean.
AzDave
Co Not Archive
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "jimmy and jo ann" <hillstw(at)jhill.biz> |
Have the same problem this spring with my 503. It starts fine when cold, but not
at all when hot. Believe it is some ignition problem.
Need advice.
Jimmy
FSII
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "H MITCHELL" <mitchmnd(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Mark3/912 load testing |
I took 7078A for a test ride last week to see how she handles while hauling seventy
pounds of dead weight strapped in on the right seat. The wind on the ground
was ~10 MPH so I expected some manageable bumps but I was not prepared for
the rough air I found at 500' and up. I had to hang on to fly the plane and was
glad to be back when I got down to ground effect. When I returned to my hangar
I sat there for a while trying to determine if it was rough air or the extra
70 Lbs that made her buck like that.
The next morning I was taxiing out at about 8 AM to see how she did in calmer air.
I was glad to see her lift off at barely above the normal rotation speed and
climb at ~1,000'/Min. She behaved very well in steep turns and stalled at 40
MPH, clean. One of my fellow birdmen said he had a similar rough air experience
on the previous day. My conclusion is that I would do well to test the additional
sandbags only in calm air and tighten up on my rough air skills later.
Duane the plane Mitchell, Tallahassee, FL Mark 3c 912, 30.1 Hrs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard & Martha Neilsen" <NeilsenRM05(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Redrive VW powered MKIIIc Update |
Yesterday I flew my VW powered MKIIIc for the first time since my forced landing
flying back form Oshkosh. I did a once around the pattern and promptly landed.
I'm taking it slow and checking for cracks in my new engine mount after every
flight. I have the blessing from the FAA for the engine mount and the change
to a redrive engine (figured I better get all my documentation in order). They
have me restricted to my test area for 5 hours then I'm OK with the FAA.
The flight went well and it appears that I can fly with one less notch of pitch
trim since lowering the engine. The new engine appears to be much smoother than
to old one. I don't know if it is from the new engine mount or the new engine
but I like the change.
Sorry Larry I beat you getting Vamoose into the air again. Be prepared for a motivational
session at Monument Valley. I also need to get over to Kirk Smith's
place to get him going on his airplane.
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIIIc
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard & Martha Neilsen" <NeilsenRM05(at)comcast.net> |
Chris
This may be a bit late but......
The new steel landing gear legs made by the New Kolb appear to be the best
thing going. Make sure
that they are long enough so that they can be shoved way up into the landing
gear sockets. If they only go half way up the sockets a bad landing could
bend the cage. A number of our group have made their own gear legs because
Kolb didn't make the legs they are selling now.
As for the O'Brien brakes, seems like most people prefer the Matco brakes
due to better stopping power. What do you guys think?
As for needing brakes if you land on grass you don't NEED them. They sure
are nice to have. If you have to land on pavement you could be in trouble. I
suppose you could switch off the engine and head for the side of the runway.
Most Kolbs will taxi fairly fast at idle.
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIIIc
>>Hi All,
>>
>>I bought Frank Reynen's amphib Mark III C on Monday. I absolutely love it.
>>Frank is really great too and did an excellent job.
>>
>>I am thinking of switching it to conventional gear until I get my SES
>>rating, so that I can get insurance on it in the meantime.
>>
>>I called Kolb this morning and they want (roughly) $500 for the landing
>>gear
>>legs and $900 for the O'Brien brakes.
>>
>>Can anyone tell me if there is a less expensive way to go? How necessary
>>are
>>brakes anyway...?
>>
>>Anyone know where I might find a used set of steel gear legs/brakes?
>>
>>Anyway, I look forward to talking with and meeting you guys.
>>
>>Happy flying!
>>
>>Chris Banys
>>Kolb Mk III C on Amphib. Floats
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark Murphy" <mbmurphy(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Mark III Twinstar for sale |
I have listed my Mark III for sale on ebay. you can see it here:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1,1&item=4547198878&sspagename=STRK%3AMESE%3AIT
Let me know if any of you are interested.
Thanks, Murf
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | [ Lloyd McFarlane ] : New Email List Photo Share Available! |
| From: | Email List Photo Shares <pictures(at)matronics.com> |
A new Email List Photo Share is available:
Poster: Lloyd McFarlane
Lists: Kolb-List,Ultralight-List
Subject: Kolb FireStar II
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/lrmcf@ix.netcom.com.05.02.2005/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: | [ 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
Lists: Kolb-List,Ultralight-List
Subject: 21 ft airplane on 10 ft trailer...
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/planecrazzzy@yahoo.com.05.02.2005/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: | [ Ellery Batchelder Jr ] : New Email List Photo Share Available! |
| From: | Email List Photo Shares <pictures(at)matronics.com> |
A new Email List Photo Share is available:
Poster: Ellery Batchelder Jr
Lists: Kolb-List,Ultralist-List
Subject: Original Firestar MODS
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/ElleryWeld@aol.com.05.02.2005/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: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
A little bit ago I posted to the list the placement of the vortex
generators on the FSII, and a link to the web page. Got several quizzical
inquiries concerning the placement of the vg's, and some good constructive
criticism. Took it to heart and thought it over, removed the 14 inboard vg's.
Flew without the inboard vg's, moved them back, flew some more, moved them
around, flew some more, and then duplicated the pattern of the vg's on the
outboard half of the wing. Ka-ching!
Thanks guys, especially Topher, your criticism was well intentioned and
timely. It now stalls 1 mph slower, stall is now more straight ahead and
gentle than before, less likely to roll off to either wing, and slow flight
is even better.
Here is a link to the page with the new placement,
http://www.bcchapel.org/pages/0003/kolb.htm
Click on FSII vg's.
Moral to the story - as it says in Proverbs 11:14,
"Where there is no advice, the people fall,
but in the multitude of counsellors, there is safety."
Hmmm... - Wonder how King Solomon knew about the Kolb list...?
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charles & Meredith Blackwell <wozani(at)optonline.net> |
| Subject: | ultralight to sportpilot |
Found for sale on the EAA website a conversion kit for ultralights to transition to exp. LSA thanks to the Ultraflight Radio Show. Link is http://www.sportpilot.org/news/050405_elsa.html
Looks like when the time comes this is an easy way to go, has all the paperwork
in one place along with instructions. My local FAA guy is still telling me unofficially
to wait a few months for people to settle into the idea and iron out
the bumps and for some DARs to come up to speed.
If anyone is going through this process already with a plane they did not build,
please share the process.
Charlie, MKII in NJ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Lanny Fetterman <donaho(at)csrlink.net> |
| Subject: | ultralight to sport pilot |
I read that EAA , USUA and ASC are asking for revisions to part 103,
mostly increasing the 254 lb. weight limit. At this time I am waiting to
see what happens with that. Is anyone else on the list in a holding
pattern? Any thoughts why this may be a mistake? Lanny
Fetterman FSII flown as a single place aircraft.
Do not
archive
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjungjr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | ANR Headset in a Firestar |
Group,
I promised to give report on the use of a $299. DRE 6000 headset in my
Firestar. This is it.
My new headset was delivered last night, and today I took a 170 mile
trip with a couple other planes with radios. I started out with the DRE
2000 that i had been using. It has very good passive noise reduction,
but no active. After getting accustomed to the sound, I changed to the
new 6000 set. The passive part seemed just like the 2000. Then I pushed
the ON switch.
Wow!
It was every bit as impressive as any demo that I had heard. After 2.5
hours of flying with it, I am very pleased. It did what I wanted, which
was to reduce the prop noise and make flying more comfortable for my
ears. But it did more than that. It made it much easier to make out
what others were saying.
If I had known that an ANR headset would work as well in my plane as
the simulated demos they do, I would have owned on a long time ago. But
I had heard that they don't work well with Rotax engine sounds. I can't
speak for others, but I have a 503 with a 68 inch, 2 blade IVO, and the
DRE 6000 does a very good job in my plane.
Oh, if anyone wants to borrow the new DRE to do there own test, come to
Monument Valley on the 20th. I'll be there with my plane and the new
headset.
John Jung
Firestar II
Surprise, AZ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark Murphy" <mbmurphy(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: ANR Headset in a Firestar |
I always wore my Lightspeed 3G-twenty headset in my J-3 Kitten with a Rotax
503 and 3 blade warp drive prop. The noise was deafening without it and
barely audible with it. I will never fly without an ANR headset again.
On another note, does anyone have any thoughts on the Rotax 618 engine?
Thanks, Murf
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Jung" <jrjungjr(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: ANR Headset in a Firestar
>
> Group,
>
> I promised to give report on the use of a $299. DRE 6000 headset in my
> Firestar. This is it.
>
> My new headset was delivered last night, and today I took a 170 mile
> trip with a couple other planes with radios. I started out with the DRE
> 2000 that i had been using. It has very good passive noise reduction,
> but no active. After getting accustomed to the sound, I changed to the
> new 6000 set. The passive part seemed just like the 2000. Then I pushed
> the ON switch.
>
> Wow!
>
> It was every bit as impressive as any demo that I had heard. After 2.5
> hours of flying with it, I am very pleased. It did what I wanted, which
> was to reduce the prop noise and make flying more comfortable for my
> ears. But it did more than that. It made it much easier to make out
> what others were saying.
>
> If I had known that an ANR headset would work as well in my plane as
> the simulated demos they do, I would have owned on a long time ago. But
> I had heard that they don't work well with Rotax engine sounds. I can't
> speak for others, but I have a 503 with a 68 inch, 2 blade IVO, and the
> DRE 6000 does a very good job in my plane.
>
> Oh, if anyone wants to borrow the new DRE to do there own test, come to
> Monument Valley on the 20th. I'll be there with my plane and the new
> headset.
>
> John Jung
> Firestar II
> Surprise, AZ
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "H MITCHELL" <mitchmnd(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Mk3c/912, Sentimental Journey |
Rolled 7078A out of the hangar at sunrise this AM, did a thorough preflight and
headed West for Doyle Langford's strip near Malone, Alabama. The air was smooth
as silk and and there was only a few stringy clouds wa-a-ay up there. It was
chilly at 3,000' and I was glad I had my long underwear on. Approaching the
area I called Doyle on a pre-arranged frequency and told him where I was. He replied
that he and some others were there at the strip and waiting for my arrival.
A few minutes later he said "look down you are over the field". From 2500'
feet I saw one very narrow looking strip among surrounding farm fields and dropped
down for a low pass. Sure enough, there it was with power lines at the
South end just as he had described. "We are all here watching" he announced. I
did my best to concentrate on my approach but I could not help notice the folks
standing by the strip. This was one of my better touchdowns and I had plenty
of runway left. I turned around and taxied back to where the little group was
standing and shut down the engine. "You've done that before" Doyle called. There
were handshakes and intros all around and could see they were all eager to
get a close look at my bird.
Tom Replogle, the new owner, was happy to have the plane at it's new location and
we had a long chat about the way she likes to fly. After we rolled her to the
new hangar, chocked her in place and had a chance to cover about everything
there is to talk about while waiting for my wife to pick me up. Tom has a private
ticket and has been flying a two-place powered parachute for the last few
years. He is going to keep the P'chute while he takes some Kolb transition training
in the Kolb. As personable as he is, he will be welcome member of the group.
I gave him the site address for this list and he will be joining us soon.
When my wife arrived I felt like Cowboy Bob saying goodbye to "Old Paint".
P.S.
When I talked to Tom for the first time I learned that he was one of my son's playmates
when we lived on Merritt Island and I worked at the Space Center 30+
years ago. 'Small world and getting smaller.
Duane the plane Mitchell, Nothing to fly.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David L. Bigelow" <dlbigelow(at)verizon.net> |
I am surprised at all the interest in my FS2 16,000 foot flight. I'm in the process
of putting Vortex Generators on the wing, and also making a more efficient
gap cover. I'll have to try it again some time after those mods are in place
and see if it makes any difference.
I made the flight over the saddle area of the Big Island between Mauna Kea and
Mauna Loa, two very big rocks nearly 14,000 feet high. The weather conditions
were very clear with about 100 miles visibility. The wind was light and variable
on the surface, and from the west about 25 mph at the tops of the mountains.
That area of the saddle contains the Pohakuloa Military Training Area, a
live fire artillery range. There is a restricted area R-3103 surrounding the
training area, which was not active that day. When active, the area is closed
from the surface to 30,000 feet. I figured I could accomplish something while
humming along to altitude, that being fly the boundary of the restricted area
and get it on my GPS map for future avoidance of the area.
The air was very smooth all the way up. Ground speed on the west bound leg was
about 25 mph near the top of climb. Best climb speed with my Firestar seems
to be about 45-47 mph indicated. I should have taken my camera - will next time.
Lots of volcanic haze (vog) at the lower altitudes, but could see Haleakala
(10,000 feet) on Maui sticking up through the vog.
Several years back, I flew a DG-400 sailplane to 27,000 over Oahu in mountain wave
lift. That time I could see all the islands. That's a story for another
day.
Dave Bigelow
FS2
Kamuela, Hawaii
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Mk3c/912, Sentimental Journey |
In a message dated 5/3/2005 8:11:45 PM Eastern Standard Time,
mitchmnd(at)msn.com writes:
> Duane the plane Mitchell, Nothing to fly.
>
>
Don't worry Duane, if you don't mind gettin your feet wet you can fly Old 007
anytime.
Steve
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Swiderwski" <rswiderski(at)earthlink.net> |
Richard,
So how did the location of the end result differ from your original
placement? ...Richard swiderski
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Richard Pike
Subject: Kolb-List: FSII VG update
A little bit ago I posted to the list the placement of the vortex
generators on the FSII, and a link to the web page. Got several quizzical
inquiries concerning the placement of the vg's, and some good constructive
criticism. Took it to heart and thought it over, removed the 14 inboard
vg's.
Flew without the inboard vg's, moved them back, flew some more, moved them
around, flew some more, and then duplicated the pattern of the vg's on the
outboard half of the wing. Ka-ching!
Thanks guys, especially Topher, your criticism was well intentioned and
timely. It now stalls 1 mph slower, stall is now more straight ahead and
gentle than before, less likely to roll off to either wing, and slow flight
is even better.
Here is a link to the page with the new placement,
http://www.bcchapel.org/pages/0003/kolb.htm
Click on FSII vg's.
Moral to the story - as it says in Proverbs 11:14,
"Where there is no advice, the people fall,
but in the multitude of counsellors, there is safety."
Hmmm... - Wonder how King Solomon knew about the Kolb list...?
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DAquaNut(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: ultralight to sport pilot |
In a message dated 5/3/2005 5:24:37 P.M. Central Standard Time,
donaho(at)csrlink.net writes:
I read that EAA , USUA and ASC are asking for revisions to part 103,
mostly increasing the 254 lb. weight limit. At this time I am waiting to
see what happens with that. Is anyone else on the list in a holding
pattern? Any thoughts why this may be a mistake? Lanny
Fetterman FSII flown as a single place aircraft.
Does that equate to more regulation like the Sport Pilot created?
Ed
Do not archive
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
The original placement had the seven inboard vg's all in a line, and a bit
forward of the rest. My thinking was that since the FSII wing has a deeper
chord including the ailerons toward the tip, that it would be better to
maintain a vg placement of 10% of the chord. So the inboard vg's were at
10%, which made them a bit forward of the outboard vg's.
That proved to be erroneous, Topher argued that the ailerons don't affect
the airfoil that much, and should not affect the chord placement of the
vg's. I thought about it, and decided that he was probably right. So we
removed the inboard vg's that were forward, flew the airplane, and the
stall was at a slightly higher airspeed, but more straight ahead and
predictable. So we moved the inboard vg's around, tried various options,
finally staggered them, and got both a slower stall and a more predictable
stall. Also a stall that is less inclined to drop a wing. Much better
overall. (Thanks, Topher)
By the way, I am not convinced that a stagger of the vg's is the best
method by any means, I suspect that there is one ideal spot that would be
better than a staggered placement. But my health has not been the best
lately, I have not been up for flying through extensive testing, and the
owner is hot to fly to Lumberton in two weeks, so I "shotgunned" a
solution, hedging my bets by spreading the vg's out via a stagger, and it
works. Is it the best possible solution? Probably not, but it still works a
lot better than no vg's at all, (reducing stall speed & slow flight speed
by 5-7 mph is cool no matter if a bit of compromise is involved) and so far
has no adverse characteristics that we could find. The owner is happy, so I
quit while I was ahead.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>
>Richard,
> So how did the location of the end result differ from your original
>placement? ...Richard swiderski
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Richard Pike
>To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Kolb-List: FSII VG update
>
>
>A little bit ago I posted to the list the placement of the vortex
>generators on the FSII, and a link to the web page. Got several quizzical
>inquiries concerning the placement of the vg's, and some good constructive
>criticism. Took it to heart and thought it over, removed the 14 inboard
>vg's.
>
>Flew without the inboard vg's, moved them back, flew some more, moved them
>around, flew some more, and then duplicated the pattern of the vg's on the
>outboard half of the wing. Ka-ching!
>
>Thanks guys, especially Topher, your criticism was well intentioned and
>timely. It now stalls 1 mph slower, stall is now more straight ahead and
>gentle than before, less likely to roll off to either wing, and slow flight
>is even better.
>
>Here is a link to the page with the new placement,
>http://www.bcchapel.org/pages/0003/kolb.htm
>Click on FSII vg's.
>
>Moral to the story - as it says in Proverbs 11:14,
>"Where there is no advice, the people fall,
>but in the multitude of counsellors, there is safety."
>
>Hmmm... - Wonder how King Solomon knew about the Kolb list...?
>
>Richard Pike
>MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DAquaNut(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: : Kolb-List: |
List,
Finally got my 6" plastic azusa wheels. Any body have any experience
with brakes on this particular wheel? Any pictures of the factory brakes
for a firefly and the 6'' plastic wheels on a Firefly?.
Ed (in Hou.)
Do not archive
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Airgriff2(at)AOL.com |
| Subject: | Re: ANR Headset in a FirestarANR Headset in a Firestar |
>
> >> On another note, does anyone have any thoughts on the Rotax 618 engine?
>>
>> Thanks, Murf
>>
>
Hi Murf, I have flown my MK3 with the 618 for 10 yrs now. It is as dependable
as the 582. About the same time as the 618 came out, Rotax came out with the
80 hp 912. People either bought the 65 hp (582) or the 80 hp(912) and the was
no demand for the 75 hp (618), so it was discontinued. I have been very
pleased with my 618 and as a note, Rotax recommends Penzoil premium outboard motor
oil for use in the 618 only.
Fly Safe
Bob Griffin
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Quick on floats |
Sorry I missed you at SnF. I was there every day except Sun and Mon. My
Firefly was there also except for the same days. It is rare for EP to miss any
flying, but ocean water is as vicious as cat piss. It is amazing how the
quicksilver handles it.
steve
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <mbmurphy(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: ANR Headset in a FirestarANR Headset in a Firestar |
Hi Bob, thanks for the note. That supports what I believe.
Fly safe, Murf
From: Airgriff2(at)aol.com
Date: Wed May 04 06:10:57 CDT 2005
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: ANR Headset in a FirestarANR Headset in a Firestar
>
> >> On another note, does anyone have any thoughts on the Rotax 618 engine?
>>
>> Thanks, Murf
>>
>
Hi Murf, I have flown my MK3 with the 618 for 10 yrs now. It is as dependable
as the 582. About the same time as the 618 came out, Rotax came out with the
80 hp 912. People either bought the 65 hp (582) or the 80 hp(912) and the was
no demand for the 75 hp (618), so it was discontinued. I have been very
pleased with my 618 and as a note, Rotax recommends Penzoil premium outboard motor
oil for use in the 618 only.
Fly Safe
Bob Griffin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: ANR Headset in a Firestar |
| OK guys,
| How does this "wonder set" work with other systems. Do you need
other
| patch cords to use with a Icom a3 and a sig. intercom? Or will they
all
| work. I currently have a Sig S 40 headset.
|
| Larry, Oregon
Larry/Gang:
I have an ICOM A3 and a 400SN Sigtronics Intercom. My David Clark and
Sigtronics headsets work well with that setup. Well, the DC did until
the mike decided not to get along with the A3 transmitter.
There is one small cord that plugs into the combination battery box,
which holds two 9V bats, and the controller. About the size of a pack
of smokes.
I haven't decided what I am going to do with the control box. Maybe
velcro to my shoulder harness or lay it in the left seat.
Hope to get out and test fly with it soon.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Rotax gearbox ID |
HEY men.....
I picked up a 447 with a gearbox for the FlagFly.....but I need to change
the gearset in the box....it is a 2.24...and of course..I need a 2.58
I am not sure if it is a "B' box or an A...can anybody tell me how to ID it?
also...anyone have a spare set of 2.58 gears I can purchase?
Don Gherardini
OEM.Sales / Engineering dept.
American Honda Engines
Power Equipment Company
CortLand, Illinois
800-626-7326
P.S......Which one of you guys was it that told me I would switch out this
Cuyuna someday with a rotax?
You were right
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DAquaNut(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax gearbox ID |
In a message dated 5/4/2005 9:19:02 A.M. Central Standard Time,
donghe@one-eleven.net writes:
P.S......Which one of you guys was it that told me I would switch out this
Cuyuna someday with a rotax?
You were right
Don,
Why are you replacing it?
Ed (In Hou.)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bil R" <bilrags(at)intergate.com> |
| Subject: | ultralight to LSA conversion kit |
The May 2005 issue of EAA's Sport Pilot has an articleoffering a conversion
kit. The item reads:
EAA's new E-LSA Conversion Kit has everything you need to convert an
ultralight to the new experimental light-sport aircraft category, including
a I5-page Step-By-Step Conversion Guide that walks you through the process.
"We want to make sure the transition process is easy and affordable for
owners who decide to transition their ultralights into E-LSAs," said EAA
Aviation Services Director Charlie Becker.
The step-by-step guide makes the paperwork process as simple and easy to
understand as possible. It explains the FAA aircraft registration (N-number)
process, including how to get a custom N number, and it contains all the
necessary FAA forms.
The guide also explains how to prepare for and undergo the airworthiness
inspection, right down to where to install the EXPERIMENTAL sticker and
fireproof dataplate. EAA's E-LSA Conversion Kit even includes the sticker,
the dataplate, and a sheet of decals for required placards.
EAA members can get the kit for $12.99 plus shipping. For nonmembers, the
price is $19.99 plus shipping. To order, call EAA Membership Services at
800/JOIN EAA (564-6322).
I ordered mine and already reserved the N number
Bil Ragsdale Mk III N213K sn 213
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjungjr(at)yahoo.com> |
Group,
It occurred to me, that in my DRE 6000 report, I didn't mention an
important part of my ear protection. While flying, I wear expanding
foam ear plugs in addition to the headset. For me, Remington's are the
best, but any of them help a lot. One might expect them to make the
radio more difficult to hear, but it is just the opposite. The
prop/engine noise is reduced and the volume on the radio is just turned
up some.
John Jung
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax gearbox ID |
ED
MORE power!!!
Don
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Airgriff2(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Pleased with 618 |
Hi Richard & gang, My 618 will run at the same rpm all day long. As far as
the fuel burn, I run up there around 5800 rpm in cruise and figure my rate
around 5gph. But to be honest I have never calculated it exactely. My mk3 is
built heavy (like John H.'s) . I usually see 1000 to 1200' fpm climb and cruise
at
65 mph.
fly safe
Bob Griffin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjungjr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Kolb-List DRE6000 Headsets |
Doug,
My first headset/helmet/intercom system when I got a two place was
Ultracom. I could barely talk to my passenger. When I changed to DRE
2000's and a DRE intercom and Ultracom's Pro helmet, it was an
improvement. Then I could talk to my passenger and anyone else who
broadcasts fairly clean. Even with the 6000, if another plane has a
poor system or just too much noise, it can be difficult. I still like
the Ultracom Pro helmets.
You would need a different patch cord for any standard headset/intercom.
John Jung
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjungjr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Changing mics on headsets |
Boyd and Group,
This may be a problem on other headsets, too. Even my DRE 2000's had to
used different mics in the high noise on my Kolb. Before I switched
mics, nobody could understand me with the engine running. I got them 5
years ago, though. My 6000 set works fine with the mic that came with
it.
John Jung
> on b oth sets of headsets i have use i have had to make changes to the
> mikes
> inorder to lower the noise level so that the intercom was opperated at
> a
> level within it capabilities..... on the pilot pa 60's i called
> the
> company and they sent new mikes that were designed for a higher noise
> envirment..... on the sigtronics enc headsets i was instructed in
> how to
> decrease the mike gain control,,, both headsets were greatly
> improved
> with the lower mike levels.
>
> boyd
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Wheet" <wheet(at)metrocast.net> |
Though I would jump in and say I was a kitfox driver but sold it today
SOON to be a kolb driver
Buying a Firestar II
I understand they go up hill better than a fox!
Bill
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Pitot location |
In a message dated 4/20/2005 6:42:17 AM Eastern Standard Time,
dlbigelow(at)verizon.net writes:
>
> I put the pitot tube on my FS2 at the very front of the nose cone as per the
> plans. That seems to be a reasonable place to catch an undisturbed airflow.
> Most airspeed errors are related to static port position. You need two
> ports, one on each side of the fuselage, and in an area as perpendicular to the
> airflow as possible. Having one on each side cancels out the effects of yaw.
>
> I bought a pair of static ports from Aircraft Spruce and Specialty, and
> installed them low down and as far to the rear of the nose cone as possible.
I
> did the test flights with a Hall Wind meter mounted out the side of the
> cockpit to cross check the indicated air speeds. The two are right together
in the
> lower speed ranges, but the indicated air speed is slightly lower than the
> Hall meter at 45 mph and above.
>
> Having no static ports and just using the static pressure inside the cockpit
> works, but will never be very accurate.
>
> Dave Bigelow
> Kamuela, Hawaii
> FS2
>
I did EXACTLY what Dave did, someone came along and broke my pitot out the
front, so I use my "test" hall meter all the time..............so....I have=20an
extra ASI in the cockpit that isn't even hooked up. I just use the Hall meter
all time, which is pretty darned good I would say ....except if a spider
decides he wants to make love to my movable wafer.....or.... if I read the meter
when I am doing an outside loop and the mass of the wafer competes with the=20air
flow...... Oh well, we live in a more interesting REAL world instead of that
virtual or ideal one.
BTW..... Beauford.... I wish I could have spoken so eloquently about the
"cost" of the Sun n Fun. You hit it right on.....isn't there something else=20we
could go to around here somewhere? I really don't need to pay for an air show
put on by professionals....actually I didn't even see this year's airshow anyway
cause I got sick and the atmosphere was too cold and windy....Kolbers...
George Randolph
Firestar driver from The Villages....er...almost anyway
Stand by for a minor rant...
Concur with Bob and Ed... Costs of attending SnF are wildly out of control.
Some examples...=A0 After noting last year that they had been removed, my
buddies and I made a point of looking all day to see how many water
fountains we could find.. saw a grand total of four remaining in the whole
place, all in a row at one location between the vendor sheds.=A0 There may be
more, but we sure couldn't find them. There used to be many more scattered
around the crowd areas....=A0 Instead, the place is now infested up with
stands selling bottled water for nearly $3 a small .5 liter bottle and $4
lemonade.=A0 I Paid $25.50 for lunch for two people; it was two sandwiches,
two orders of fries, and two small cokes at a "carney" booth (the only place
to get chow in the ultralight area)....=A0 I won't even get started about the
$25 a head to get in.=A0 It's not just the money... It certainly costs a good
bit to put on a show like this, and they are entitled to a fair return... It
is the idea that these people have gone far past that and are gleefully,
unashamedly and unapologetically screwing the clientelle...
I sure do like little airplanes... especially slow little wooden and ragwing
"poorboy" airplanes that sell for less than the price of a house... but by
my observation, there is a sharp and noticible decline in the number of such
little airplanes showing up at this event over the past few years and that,
too, is eating away at my incentive for going....=A0 The numbers of little
airplanes aside, I guess I am unhappiest over the recurring feeling that I
am somehow being taken advantage of because I like slow little airplanes and
want to go where they are aggregated... That said, there are finite limits
to how bad a taste in my mouth I can tolerate when I drive away after a day
out there being bent over a barrel.=A0 I don't mind paying for what I get... I
will get out there and spread my meager plastic around with the best of them
when I get fair value for the buck, but I have a stubborn streak about
getting aired-out by perfect strangers while being held in a semi-captive
environment.... and not getting kissed (that I can recall) all day long.
The only thing missing out there was pay toilets. Stand-by for next year.
It appears obvious to me that EAA is now vigorously engaged in trying to put
major P.R. daylight between themselves and the present event at Lakeland...
The EAA is engaging in public hand-wringing and blaming forces totally out
of their control over what has happened to what used to be "their" show.
Well, whatever happened to S'nF did not happen with masked men holding
pistols on Poberezny and the EAA board of directors in the middle of the
night...=A0=A0 Documents had to be signed conveying the rights to the SnF name
and formal contracts agreed to....=A0=A0 and do you suppose that the EAA "gave
it away" for nothing...???=A0 Right.=A0=A0 It looks to me (as well as to
numerous other people I talked to out there) that this Lakeland operation
has undergone a fundamental shift in the past five or six years from a
gathering of enthusiasts with a common love for aviation, to a cash cow for
some unnamed persons or interests.=A0 All I know is that not too long ago,
this was an EAA show and they were very proud of it...whatever has happened,
the EAA had to have signed up and allowed it to happen, and I personally
find their protests of disassociation from what is taking place now to be
disingenuous and disgusting.=A0 The good 'ol EAA has pretty well outgrown me
and the sort of aviation which initially drew me to it by evolving into a
culture which worships 300 horsepower plastic airplanes with $150K
instrument panels and guys in monogrammed polyester jumpsuits...
My airline retired-pilot buddy who usually flies in to attend S'nF with me
put it about as well as I can as he was getting on the airliner to fly back
to Kansas on Saturday... "The EAA has gotten their last dollar of my money,
and so have the people who have taken over Lakeland..."=A0=A0 I have to agree
with him... I live 20 miles from it, but I likely won't be back.
Blatently Bitter Beauford in Brandon
FF#076
No plastic.
----- Original Message -----
From: <Airgriff2(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Sun
>
> Ed Writes
>>
>> >> Bob,
>>>
>>>=A0 Last time I went to S N F they charged a whole week of camping
>>> even if
>>>=A0=A0 you just wanted to camp for 2 nights.=A0 They would not refund the
>>> difference.
>>>=A0=A0 That is not fair.=A0 At least at Oshkosh they will refund=20the days
>>> you
>>> don't use.
>>>
>>>=A0=A0 Do you know if that is still the way they operate? If so I may
>>> never
>>> go back!
>>>
>>>=A0 Yes, Ed, I arrived 2 days early, paid an extra $40 plus the full=20week
>>> of
>>> camping regardless of how many nights I stayed. The show itself was
>>> great
>>> as usual but the main campground was a bit less.=A0 Their rules say roping
>>> off
>>> areas to save them ahead of time isn't allowed. As you ride around
>>> looking
>>> for a spot you see roped areas all over and nothing is said.=A0 Also they
>>> say
>>> no tents around the rim of the pond. I bet you could count 30 or 40 of
>>> them?
>>> The vending and camp stores used to be run by local organizations from
>>> Lakeland trying to raise money, such as boys & girls clubs.=A0 Now they
>>> are all
>>> commercial and carnival type venders.=A0 Only food available in the main
>>> campground, other than the corn roast, was from the "Cinnamon bun"unit
>>> which got $5
>>> + for a roll. Neither one of the camp stores ever opened up at all. I
>>> was
>>> in a tent only area which is supposed to be quiet with no generators.
>>> Near by
>>> was a refrigerated trailer unit running 24/7. Sorry to go on with the
>>> little gripes, but don't blame the EAA.=A0 The local paper explained that
>>> Sun & Fun
>>> has dropped "EAA" from it's logo because they want people to realize
>>> that
>>> the show is owned and operated by "Sun & Fun Inc.", not the EAA.
>
> Fly Safe
> Bob Griffin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob N." <ronoy(at)shentel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Pitot location |
Regarding the breakage of pitot tubes: Mine has a short, maybe one inch
pc of plastic tubing between the short pc of hard line jutting from nose
cone. This connects to a 4" pc. of hard line. At fly-ins, little
boys...and big stupid ones, too, can bend the hard line without breaking
the whole dang thing. Thinking of wiring an old Ford spark coil to the
end piece, just to see 'em dance!
Bob N.
http://www.angelfire.com/rpg/ronoy/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob Pongracz" <pongoflyer(at)myway.com> |
Attention PA/NJ Kolbers - There will be a Fly-In Breakfast on Sat. June 4th (rain
date June 5th) at Flying M Aerodrome (P91), which is NW of Allentown, PA.
This airport used to be known for great family fly-in breakfasts dinners in years
past, but has been pretty quite recently due to a change of ownership. They're
trying to bring things back to the way they were. It may take a while, but
they've got to start somewhere. Unfortunately, this is the same weekend as
the WWII event at Reading Airport, but you could always do both. Besides, I don't
think there'll be too many Kolbs sharing the pattern with P-47's B-17's.The
airport is a 2400' East-West grass runway. The cost is $5 - all you can eat.
The time is 8am to Noon. The place has been a ghost-town over recent years,
but it's starting to come back - slowly. It breaks my heart. I used to instruct
tow gliders there. It was a great scenic place with a ton of potential. We'll
see what happens. My Firefly will
be there in pieces. The build process (or re-build as it were) is moving along
slowly. Sure would be nice to see some local Kolbs show up!!Bob PongraczFogelsville,
PAFirefly project
No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding.
Make My Way your home on the Web - http://dell.myway.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flykolb" <flykolb(at)carolina.rr.com> |
Kolbers,
Has anyone on the list considered putting fuel tanks in the wings of a Mark III
instead of behind the seats? Pros and cons please.
Jim
Mark III
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: ultralight to sport pilot |
In a message dated 5/3/2005 6:24:37 PM Eastern Standard Time,
donaho(at)csrlink.net writes:
>
> I read that EAA , USUA and ASC are asking for revisions to part 103,
> mostly increasing the 254 lb. weight limit. At this time I am waiting to
> see what happens with that. Is anyone else on the list in a holding
> pattern? Any thoughts why this may be a mistake? Lanny
> Fetterman FSII flown as a single place aircraft.
> Do not
> archive
>
Don,
Rich Swiderski and I both have axes to grind on the LSA business and
therefore went to several seminars at SnF. After about 3 of these, it became pretty
obvious to me, at least, that definitions still need to be worked on so that
aircraft can be put into proper slots, such that confusion can be minimized. For
instance....Rich wants an "in flight adjustable prop" and is fussing over
whether to get an experimental or LSA rating for his Sling Shot. After much dialog
with an "expert" there it came down to whether the in flight puppy was
considered "complex" or not, just as retractable gear is considered "complex"
Anyway, I don't worry about such chicanery, so, I only gleaned enough to tell
myself ....there is a period of a coupla years of mulling that the FAA is
going to grace us with, sooooo .... it is an opportunity to let things settle
down......it appears that we now find ourselves in a confusing, over-ruled-
department store of legalities that need to be honed to a fine finish of simpler
conclusions. Maybe we need to get rid of experimental.....after all, there is
little experimental about experimental these days......I only throw that
statment out in a fit of frustration (just a lil weee fit) to convey the "choices
of
catagory" that are now runing rampant.
If you think this dialog was hard to follow, just imagine my frustration at
forgetting Rich's shirt off his back that he lent me to share one of the
seminars with him. I left it on the chair next to mine as the tent was tooooo hot!!
George Randolph
Firestar driver from The Villages
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Headset DRE-6000 |
Morning All:
Finally got to fly with my new DRE-6000 ANR head set. Had a little
problem prior to actually flying though. Could not make the mic work.
DC and Sigtronics head set worked great, but the DRE-6000 mic would
not work. The speakers in the head set are super. Get a lot of
volume and clear quality voice reception on the ground.
After some trouble shooting, decided to put a new mic jack in the
MKIII. That didn't help either. Finally, got the omh meter and the
wiring diagram out. Immediately discovered I had the ring and pin
terminal wires reversed on the mic jack. Interesting to note the mic
worked on the passive DC and Sig headsets, but not the DRE ANR.
The DRE eliminates a lot of noise in flight, but I have a problem with
noise leak in the rear of the ear cup seals. DRE uses temper foam
seals that are leaking some prop noise on the lower rear edges. If I
put my hand on the ear cups, apply more pressure in that area, the
noise stops.
Could be caused by several problems. One is the placement of the mics
in each each cup. They face forward to accomodate tractor engines.
Possibly I need to have the mics facing the rear for a pusher
configuration. I can test this theory today by flying with the
headset placed on my head backwards. Won't be able to use the mic,
but radio communications are not required at Gantt International
Airport, all 750' of it. If the noise goes away that now seems to be
leaking through the rear of the ear cup seals, next step is contact
the DRE factory and get them to configure my head set for pusher
aircraft. Unfortunately, I will not have a chance to do that prior to
departure for MV.
The other experiment would be use some velcro tape to connect the ear
cups around the rear of my head, putting a little more pressure on the
lower rear ear cup seals.
I will also try some David Clark liquid gel ear seals to compare
performance between them and the DRE temper foam seals.
To me, the DRE-6000 that is not working 100% is more annoying than a
David Clark passive set that is.
I haven't tried the my DC or Sigtronics headsets since I got the
wiring correct on the pilot's mic jack. I had to stop using the DC
head set because of mic squeal while transmitting. Now I know that
was probably caused by the wiring reversed on the mic jac. I am going
to check that out also.
Increased hearing loss makes understanding voice transmissions
extremely hard for me to understand correctly. I can hear the sound,
but can not interpret what is being said correctly, or not at all.
Very uncomfortable having this problem while flying with others and
receiving instructions from air traffic control folks.
Will let ya'll know what the outcome is.
john h
MKIII/912S
Titus, Alabama
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
I looked long and hard for some way to build wing tanks, but had no useful
luck. I did find a small outfit in Oregon that makes (or made ?? This was
5 or 6 years ago) wing tanks for Kit Foxes, but he wasn't willing to try
making a different size. I thought about lengths of 4" or 5" aluminum
tubing that would fit in next to the spar, but, as I recall, braces, etc
ruled that out. Also, with a long, thin tank, sloshing of fuel could become
a problem in turns. The biggest thing to my mind was proper venting of such
tanks, with the wings folded and in flying position. Prob'ly a simple
solution out there, but I finally walked away from it.
Lar.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Building Kolb Mk III
N78LB Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "flykolb" <flykolb(at)carolina.rr.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: Fuel tanks
>
> Kolbers,
>
> Has anyone on the list considered putting fuel tanks in the wings of a
> Mark III instead of behind the seats? Pros and cons please.
>
> Jim
>
> Mark III
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <tophera(at)centurytel.net> |
| Subject: | Headset DRE-6000 |
I can test this theory today by flying with the
headset placed on my head backwards. Won't be able to use the mic,
but radio communications are not required at Gantt International
Airport, all 750' of it
John, the microphone boom on my DRE-6000's is ambidextrous, so people can
wear it right or left handed... if yours is like mine, go ahead and flip the
headset around and the mic boom will pivot out to the front from the other
side. I don't think that the direction the internal mics are pointing will
end up mattering... but it is an interesting experiment.
If you don't have a good seal you won't have good noise canceling... no
matter what the electronics are doing, so adjust the frame till it fits your
head. Use the thumbscrews to start... but just go ahead and bend the thing
a bit if your have to! I have a fairly small head ( I know, small brains)
so I had to crank mine a very tiny bit. I also got some gell ear seals to
try but have not tried them yet.
Topher
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob and Jenn B" <tabberdd(at)hotmail.com> |
That's a bummer, June 4 is the same day as the AOPA open-house fly-in in
Frederick, Md.
Did someone else buy Flying M or does Pete M still run it?
Bob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
Thought about it, but I think the gap seal also works.
http://www.bcchapel.org/pages/0003/pg1.htm
If I had it to do over, might do the wings instead.
Course it would be a major pain to fix a leak...
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>Kolbers,
>
>Has anyone on the list considered putting fuel tanks in the wings of a
>Mark III instead of behind the seats? Pros and cons please.
>
>Jim
>
>Mark III
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| >Has anyone on the list considered putting fuel tanks in the wings
of a
| >Mark III instead of behind the seats? Pros and cons please.
| >
| >Jim
Jim/Gang:
I have had remarkable luck with my 25 gal 5052 aluminum fuel tank.
Constructed of .050" sheet. 25 gal ultimate. Cross baffled. Mounted
in the big vacant area behind the bulk head. The only thing remaining
in the area where the normal two each factory plastic jugs were
mounted is the forward part of the tail boom. Fueled from the top of
the gap seal with an Atwood Marine nylon flip top fuel cap. Fuel is
supplied through the lowest portion of the bottom of the tank. A
finger strainer is installed in the outlet. Fuel is pushed to the
engine driven pump by a little electronic fuel pump, which acts as a
normal aircraft boost pump. After take off and upon reaching normal
cruise altitude, the boost pump is turned off. The tank was sloshed
four times, once a day for four straight days, with Randolph Fuel Tank
Slosh for Aviation and Auto Fuel. The tank has been in service since
March 1992, has more than 2,200 flight hours without nary a leak. It
has survived one crash that totaled the aircraft, another crash when I
got behind the aircraft and mush/stalled from aprx'ly 30', and a minor
crash when the gear leg/axle socket failed 5 years ago.
The reason I mounted the fuel tank in the open area was because it
was good valuable space that was not being utilized. Homer designed
it that way so the pilot could observe behind the aircraft. I have no
reason to look back there, therefore I covered the area with fabric
once the fuel tank was in place. Two braces on the left top rear of
the fuselage were cut, plates welded two each end, in addition to
plates on the fuselage, drilled and bolted with 3/16' aircraft bolts.
The tank has never been removed from the aircraft.
I do not remember how much the tank weighed empty, but probably 25 or
so pounds. It holds another 150 lbs of fuel. I do not have an aft CG
problem. Nor am I inviting anyone to discuss aft cg. My MKIII flies
great. I like it. That is why I am still flying it. I would like to
have the climb and cruise of the Kolbra with 912S, but the MKIII lacks
in climb and cruise, it makes up for in great storage capacity and
having the left seat available for stuff I need and like to have handy
when flying.
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| I have had remarkable luck with my 25 gal 5052 aluminum fuel tank.
| john h
Gang:
As an add on:
I also had an 18 gal aluminum fuel tank in my original Firestar. You
guessed it. Configured on the same lines and location at the MKIII,
top rear half of the fuselage. Only headache with this first tank off
the hauck's holler assembly line was a couple nagging leaks in an area
that was not easily accessible. Lesson learned was even after
extensive pressure and water testing, slosh the tank four days in a
row with Randolph Tank Slosh for Av/Mogas.
By mounting the tank in the upper rear of the cage, this opened up the
area of the bottom rear half for my cargo. Was really nice to get
every thing inside the aircraft. Prior to this make over, I had to
sling load my sleeping bag under the fuselage just behind the main
gear.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Earl & Mim Zimmerman <emzi(at)supernet.com> |
Anybody feel up to trying one of these engines on a kolb? :-) ~ Earl
http://www.aircraftinternational.com/catalog/motors/3w684i_b4/3w684b4_top_front.jpg
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Earl & Mim Zimmerman <emzi(at)supernet.com> |
Anybody feel up to trying one of these engines on a kolb? :-) ~ Earl
http://www.aircraftinternational.com/catalog/motors/3w684i_b4/3w684b4_top_front.jpg
Sorry should have send this link. It took me a while to figure ouy how
to copy it.
Pretty impressive power to weight ratio! Pretty pricey too!
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Earl & Mim Zimmerman <emzi(at)supernet.com> |
Anybody feel up to trying one of these engines on a kolb? :-) ~ Earl
http://www.aircraftinternational.com/catalog/motors/3w684i_b4/3w684b4_top_front.jpg
Sorry should have send this link. It took me a while to figure ouy how
to copy it.
Pretty impressive power to weight ratio! Pretty pricey too!
Third time is the charm ;-(
http://www.aircraftinternational.com/catalog/motors/3w684i_b4/3w684b4
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "J.D. Stewart" <jstewart(at)inebraska.com> |
| Subject: | Headset DRE-6000 |
When I talked to the guys at DRE, they said the headsets are no longer
position for tractor engines and that the manual needs updating on that
area. They're supposed to be the same for tractor/pusher aircraft now.
25 gusting to 40 all weekend. Another week goes by without being able
to
test mine out. :>(
J.D. Stewart
UltraFun AirSports, LLC
www.ultrafunairsports.com
>
> Morning All:
>
> Finally got to fly with my new DRE-6000 ANR head set. Had a little
> problem prior to actually flying though. Could not make the mic work.
> DC and Sigtronics head set worked great, but the DRE-6000 mic would
> not work. The speakers in the head set are super. Get a lot of
> volume and clear quality voice reception on the ground.
>
> After some trouble shooting, decided to put a new mic jack in the
> MKIII. That didn't help either. Finally, got the omh meter and the
> wiring diagram out. Immediately discovered I had the ring and pin
> terminal wires reversed on the mic jack. Interesting to note the mic
> worked on the passive DC and Sig headsets, but not the DRE ANR.
>
> The DRE eliminates a lot of noise in flight, but I have a problem with
> noise leak in the rear of the ear cup seals. DRE uses temper foam
> seals that are leaking some prop noise on the lower rear edges. If I
> put my hand on the ear cups, apply more pressure in that area, the
> noise stops.
>
> Could be caused by several problems. One is the placement of the mics
> in each each cup. They face forward to accomodate tractor engines.
> Possibly I need to have the mics facing the rear for a pusher
> configuration. I can test this theory today by flying with the
> headset placed on my head backwards. Won't be able to use the mic,
> but radio communications are not required at Gantt International
> Airport, all 750' of it. If the noise goes away that now seems to be
> leaking through the rear of the ear cup seals, next step is contact
> the DRE factory and get them to configure my head set for pusher
> aircraft. Unfortunately, I will not have a chance to do that prior to
> departure for MV.
>
> The other experiment would be use some velcro tape to connect the ear
> cups around the rear of my head, putting a little more pressure on the
> lower rear ear cup seals.
>
> I will also try some David Clark liquid gel ear seals to compare
> performance between them and the DRE temper foam seals.
>
> To me, the DRE-6000 that is not working 100% is more annoying than a
> David Clark passive set that is.
>
> I haven't tried the my DC or Sigtronics headsets since I got the
> wiring correct on the pilot's mic jack. I had to stop using the DC
> head set because of mic squeal while transmitting. Now I know that
> was probably caused by the wiring reversed on the mic jac. I am going
> to check that out also.
>
> Increased hearing loss makes understanding voice transmissions
> extremely hard for me to understand correctly. I can hear the sound,
> but can not interpret what is being said correctly, or not at all.
> Very uncomfortable having this problem while flying with others and
> receiving instructions from air traffic control folks.
>
> Will let ya'll know what the outcome is.
>
> john h
> MKIII/912S
> Titus, Alabama
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | possums <possums(at)mindspring.com> |
At 09:20 PM 5/8/2005, you wrote:
>Anybody feel up to trying one of these engines on a kolb? :-) ~ Earl
Power Rating 60.0 HP 43.8 kW
-
Weight 32.3 lbs
----------------
Yeah - I'll take a dozen of them
How many they got that work??
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjungjr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Headset DRE-6000 |
John and Group,
I have been using Oregon ear seals on my DRE 2000's since new. When I
tested the 6000, I left the original ear seals on it. It worked good
but I plan to change to the Oregon seals anyway. My point is that even
though DRE makes good headsets, better ear seals are available.
I also read about the position of the mics in the 6000's, but not 'till
after my first flight. Next time, I will have them on with the mic boom
on the right.
Even with the best ear seals, I have to be careful what sunglasses I
wear. Glasses that have thick frames and/or don't fit close to my head
will cause a leak that degrades the protection.
John Jung
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <tophera(at)centurytel.net> |
That would be at 60 hp 7500 rpm... might want a reduction drive... a
muffler... Bet the fuel burn is up there.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of possums
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Engines ?
At 09:20 PM 5/8/2005, you wrote:
>Anybody feel up to trying one of these engines on a kolb? :-) ~ Earl
Power Rating 60.0 HP 43.8 kW
-
Weight 32.3 lbs
----------------
Yeah - I'll take a dozen of them
How many they got that work??
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel-Proof Sealer |
Dennis/Gang:
Check out this thread sealer:
http://www.permatex.com/auto/autouh.asp?automotive=yes&f_call=get_item&item_no=56521
john h
| I am installing fuel fittings on a gascolator, and need to seal the
threads
| with an appropriate sealing goop. | Dennis Kirby
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob N." <ronoy(at)shentel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel-Proof Sealer |
I usta use Parker SeaLube...years ago. Don't have source but maybe
Google does.
Bob N.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob Pongracz" <pongoflyer(at)myway.com> |
"Did someone else buy Flying M or does Pete M still run it?" Pete still owns it
- but lives out of state is not around it much. Someone else takes care of
the place. Bob PongraczFogelsville, PAFirefly project
No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding.
Make My Way your home on the Web - http://dell.myway.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob N." <ronoy(at)shentel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel-Proof Sealer |
Parker Sealube (6PE) still available at Aircraft Spruce.
Bob N.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David L. Bigelow" <dlbigelow(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel-Proof Sealer |
Dennis,
Whatever product you decide to use, be sure and seal a couple of pieces of gasket
together and put it in a jar of gas for a week or so. Inspect it afterwards
for pieces sloughing off or softness. My bad choice of gasket sealer was responsible
for the only in-flight engine failure I've ever had.
I rebuilt a fuel pump and used the sealer on the gaskets. Pieces of the sealer
came off and went into the carb bowl and plugged up the jets. I was over a park
with an area of freshly planted grass that was just pushing through some very
soft ground. It was only about 150 feet long, and was real muddy. Stopping
was very rapid right up to the concrete barriers at the edge of the parking
lot next to the new grass. I had my nephew haul the trailer to the park, and
we disassembled the plane and were out of there pretty rapidly. I've always
wondered what the park maintenance crew thought when they saw those wheel tracks
starting out in the middle of nowhere, progressively getting deeper into their
newly planted grass.
Dave Bigelow
FS2
Kamuela, Hawaii
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel, Etc...... |
Possum/Gang:
I use a sight gauge. Never fails. Unless I get down to less than 3
gal. Then, if I screw up and get myself into that situation, I have
no idea when the prop will stop, probably 30 or 40 minutes.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | possums <possums(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel, Etc...... |
At 09:21 PM 5/10/2005, you wrote:
>
>Possum/Gang:
>
>I use a sight gauge. Never fails. Unless I get down to less than 3
>gal. Then, if I screw up and get myself into that situation, I have
>no idea when the prop will stop, probably 30 or 40 minutes.
>
>john h
Yeah - I know you always had at least an 18 gallon tank- smart move.
I never had more than a 10 gallon tank, so the prop would stop
a lot sooner than your's and a 30 or 40 minutes reserve would seen
like forever to me.
Lakeland .....it used to be an adventure just to get
there - never mind getting back home.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerb <ulflyer(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel, Etc...... |
I have the fuel flow option on my EIS, it works good. Tells me what I have
remaining and the endurance based upon present flow rate. I compare that
with ETE (estimated time enroute) from my GPS to base decisions. Keep in
mind that you can arrive at a closed field is some blows a landing and they
have the field closed. Leave yourself a way out.
jerb
>
>Possum/Gang:
>
>I use a sight gauge. Never fails. Unless I get down to less than 3
>gal. Then, if I screw up and get myself into that situation, I have
>no idea when the prop will stop, probably 30 or 40 minutes.
>
>john h
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ted Cowan <trc1917(at)direcway.com> |
For all you fellers out there that cannot make the MV trip, as I , I have an
ulternative. How about joining in the "Festival of Wings" up in Tennessee.
Go go: http://www.mtug.us/ . From what I have been told, it is a great
place to fly and camp and enjoy the company of other flyers. Will see you
there maybe. Ted Cowan, Alabama, Slingshot driver. Bunch of the guys from
Florida are flying up.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Lee.Creech(at)ky.gov |
My Firestar II has a "Micro 1000 Digital Tach and Hourmeter" , installed by
the previous owner around 1996, that shows signs of giving up the ghost.
Does anyone know if the battery in this thing is replaceable, or am I going
to have to buy a new one?
Lee
Message
My
Firestar II has a "Micro 1000 Digital Tach and Hourmeter" , installed by the
previous owner around 1996, that shows signs of giving up the ghost. Does
anyone know if the battery in this thing is replaceable, or am I going to have
to buy a new one?
Lee
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DAquaNut(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: SWRFI-Hondo, TX |
In a message dated 5/11/2005 12:15:18 P.M. Central Standard Time,
kolbrapilot(at)comcast.net writes:
I will be at Hondo on Friday for lunch. I'm just flying down in the morning
and back home in the afternoon.
John Williamson
Arlington, TX
Hi John,
Im sure we will see you cause there aren't to many Kolbras in Texas . We
will get there Thurs and stay thru Sat.
Fly Safe,
Ed
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Digital Tach |
| From: | Herb Gayheart <herbgh(at)juno.com> |
Lee
The tiny tach that I have apart uses a 3 volt lithium cell. Ray o
Vac BR2325. I took it apart because one of the solder tabs on the
cell had come loose. Herb
>
> My Firestar II has a "Micro 1000 Digital Tach and Hourmeter" ,
> installed by
> the previous owner around 1996, that shows signs of giving up the
> ghost.
> Does anyone know if the battery in this thing is replaceable, or am
> I going
> to have to buy a new one?
>
>
> Lee
>
>
> Message
>
>
>
>
>
> My
> Firestar II has a "Micro 1000 Digital Tach and Hourmeter" ,
> installed by the
> previous owner around 1996, that shows signs of giving up the ghost.
> Does
> anyone know if the battery in this thing is replaceable, or am I
> going to have
> to buy a new one?
>
>
> Lee
>
>
> size=5>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| I sure hate to send this email.
| Larry Bourne
Larry B/Gang:
Always next year.
Gonna miss ya. And..............I had an empty left seat too! ;-)
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "PATRICK LADD" <pj.ladd(at)btinternet.com> |
Today I went round and round with the bosses at work, and they flat refuse
to give me the time off >
Hard luck Lar,
sounds as though it is time to try the ploy of the guy who called in sick so
many times they finally refused to give him time off.
So he called in `dead`.
Cheers
Pat
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "W Boyter" <boyter(at)mcsi.net> |
I will will fill that empty left seat?
Wayne
kolb mark 111
400 hrs.
Roseburg, OR
P.S. I will be plane less.
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: MV
>
> | I sure hate to send this email.
> | Larry Bourne
>
> Larry B/Gang:
>
> Always next year.
>
> Gonna miss ya. And..............I had an empty left seat too! ;-)
>
> john h
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David L. Bigelow" <dlbigelow(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Firestar 2 Vortex Generator Tests |
Just finished a morning's test flying with a set of Harrison Designs VG's installed
on my Firestar. They definitely work - the stall speed is noticeably reduced.
I installed them at 3 inch intervals at the 11% chord position (6 5/8 inches from
LE). It took a total of 48 for each wing.
The aircraft with VG's can be flown precisely right up to the stall. The stall
speed without VG's was 35 mph, and with VG's is 30 mph. The Firestar wing without
VG's doesn't really have a pronounced break at the stall. It ends up in
a mush mode, and you run out of back stick trying to hold the nose up. It flies
pretty sloppy near the stall, and is pretty "bullet proof" as to inadvertently
entering a spin.
With VG's, the stall is more conventional, and has a pronounced break - much like
laminar flow airfoil sailplanes. I did straight ahead and 30 degree banked
stalls, power on and off. With power on, there is a bit of prop burbling just
before the stall. Power off does not have any warning. When it reaches the
stall speed, it just breaks. Straight ahead stalls break cleanly without any
tendency to fall off on a wing. When banked (left or right), and the break occurs,
there is a mild rolloff in the direction opposite to the original bank.
I got the distinct impression that you could get it to spin pretty easily, but
did not explore that realm of flight.
The overall handling with VG's is improved. The aircraft feels more stable and
solid. I was able to do controlled slow flight at 32 mph with gentle turns.
I have not previously been able to fly precisely that near the stall with my
Firestar. At cruise speed near 50 mph, it appears to take an extra 100-200 rpm
from the Rotax 503 compared to without the VG's. That's not much difference,
but guess you can't get something for nothing.
Take off distance is very little changed, but that is because the angle of attack
is geometry limited by the main gear length and tail wheel height. I didn't
notice much difference in climb rate, but did not measure it before and after
VG's precisely. I did notice a positive difference on approach and landing.
The air was still, and I flew approach at 40 mph. On flare, it appears to float
more, and I believe the "Kolb Kuit (quit)" is much reduced. Also, the Firestar
with VG's is easier to control precisely during the landing. You are able
to touch down with the tailwheel first if you hold it off just above the runway.
My overall impression is a plus, and I'm going to leave the VG's on the wings.
I'd recommend that low time pilots not install VG's on the Firestar until getting
50 or 100 hours of time in the aircraft. After installation, do a lot of
slow flight and stalls. Realize that you will have to pay closer attention to
your airspeed in the traffic pattern than before. A Firestar with VG's is not
as forgiving as the stock airplane.
Hope this is helpful to Firestar drivers,
Dave Bigelow
FS2
Kamuela, HI
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kirby Dennis Contr MDA/AL <Dennis.Kirby(at)kirtland.af.mil> |
| Subject: | Verner Bites the Dust |
> Kolb Friends -
>
> I've made the decision to install a different engine in my Mark-III. I
> purchased a Rotax 912UL.
>
> Most of you might recall: I originally built my Kolb with a Verner-1400,
> a 2 cylinder 4-stroke engine. Because of reliability issues with the
> Verner, 25 hours is all I've accumulated in the 2 years since my Mark-III
> was finished. It has been a frustrating 2 years.
>
> The ironic thing is, the Verner engine itself runs fine - it's the
> reduction drive that has been plagued with problems. I've seen the same
> redrive component fail FOUR times in 25 hours of run time. In each case,
> I discovered the failing part during the postflight inspection, and in
> each case, it was apparent that had I continued flying for even just one
> more hour, complete & catastrophic failure of the redrive hub would have
> occured, causing the prop to part company with the engine. Unacceptable.
>
>
> Although the US distributor from whom I purchased this engine has put
> forth exceptional effort in working with me, replacing the broken parts
> and trying to help me solve the problem, we have been getting zero support
> or help from the factory in Czech Republic.
>
> So, I'm done with this engine. The Verner distributor has agreed to buy
> it back for about 2/3 of what I paid for it in 2001. Yeah, I'm losing
> some money on the deal overall, but I'm just glad I'm able to make this
> decision without having suffered a disaster yet. The most frustrating
> part has been the down time. With 340 flyable days in New Mexico per
> year, I should have at least a hundred hours accumulated on my Kolb by
> now!
>
> I have been monitoring Barnstormers for the past several months, and
> finally came across a 912UL that was being parted out from an Aventura
> amphibian. Only 35 hours on the engine. And it arrived just yesterday.
> I've already ordered the 912 installation kit from New Kolb - I'm ready to
> begin transplant surgery on my Mark-III. Hopefully, I can still beat Big
> Lar back into the air!
>
> If there is a lesson here that I can share with you all, it's this: "You
> get what you pay for." In the 1980s, you could go out and buy a Yugo for
> HALF the price of any other economy car. But in the end, you only had ...
> a Yugo. At the time, I thought that I was getting a real bargain in
> buying the Verner, as it was only three-fourths the cost of a new 912 for
> the same horsepower. Well, friends, there is a reason why Verners
> worldwide number in the hundreds, while Rotax has sold hundreds of
> THOUSANDS of aircraft engines in the past 20 years. Go with what's
> reputable - you'll be better off in the long run!
>
> As I embark down this new 912 path, I'm sure I will be bugging all you
> other 912 Kolbers for installation and operation advice. Sorry for the
> long-winded post - but if even just one Kolb owner benefits from the
> lesson I learned, then sharing it was worthwhile.
>
> Dennis Kirby
> Mark-III, engineless (temporarily), but soon to be 912-powered in
> Cedar Crest, NM
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David L. Bigelow" <dlbigelow(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Firestar 2 Vortex Generator Tests |
Richard,
Interesting that the stall speed is increased on your Firestar. Like you, I find
the handling improvement to be the biggest benefit. Before VG's I found the
FS to handle in a somewhat "sloppy" manner. My remarks about new pilots getting
some time in the Firestar before installing VG's is because of the difference
in stall characteristics. In an unmodified Kolb, if you get slow in the
base turn, the nose just sort of drops a bit and the sink increases until you
relax back pressure - not too likely to be fatal. With VG's, when it stalls,
the nose drops to at least 20 degrees nose down, and a definite recovery is needed.
This could ruin your whole day when close to the ground.
One thing else I forgot to mention is a small change in trim. With VG's (at the
same airspeed as without VG's) the aircraft is a bit more nose heavy. It would
appear that the VG's cause the center of lift of the wing to move aft. This
is good for me - even with a some aileron droop rigged, I ended up putting
6 pounds of lead weights in the nose cone.
Dave Bigelow
FS2
Kamuela, HI
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Firestar 2 Vortex Generator Tests |
I guess I phrased it wrong - our stall speed did not increase 5 mph, it is
just that because our airplane is heavy, it stalls 5 mph faster than yours,
but still slower than before we added the vg's.
And instead of putting lead weights in the nose - we raised the front
stabilizer mount attach point about 3/4"
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>Richard,
>
>Interesting that the stall speed is increased on your Firestar. Like you,
>I find the handling improvement to be the biggest benefit. Before VG's I
>found the FS to handle in a somewhat "sloppy" manner. My remarks about
>new pilots getting some time in the Firestar before installing VG's is
>because of the difference in stall characteristics. In an unmodified
>Kolb, if you get slow in the base turn, the nose just sort of drops a bit
>and the sink increases until you relax back pressure - not too likely to
>be fatal. With VG's, when it stalls, the nose drops to at least 20
>degrees nose down, and a definite recovery is needed. This could ruin
>your whole day when close to the ground.
>
>One thing else I forgot to mention is a small change in trim. With VG's
>(at the same airspeed as without VG's) the aircraft is a bit more nose
>heavy. It would appear that the VG's cause the center of lift of the wing
>to move aft. This is good for me - even with a some aileron droop rigged,
>I ended up putting 6 pounds of lead weights in the nose cone.
>
>Dave Bigelow
>FS2
>Kamuela, HI
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | skyrider2(at)earthlink.net |
| Subject: | Transparenz ist das Mindeste |
Lese selbst:
http://www.npd.de/npd_info/deutschland/2005/d0405-39.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David L. Bigelow" <dlbigelow(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Firestar 2 Vortex Generator Tests |
Richard,
I think raising the LE of the horizontal stabilizer is a better solution than adding
weight to the nose. How did you handle the hardware aspects of that modification?
I looked at the brackets, and couldn't see an easy way to do it.
Also, the stock Firestar is almost neutral in pitch stability. Did you notice
any difference in pitch stability after the modification?
Dave Bigelow
FS2
Kamuela, Hawaii
"And instead of putting lead weights in the nose - we raised the front
stabilizer mount attach point about 3/4"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | by0ung(at)brigham.net |
| Subject: | Gegen das Vergessen |
In den fruehen Abendstunden des 13. Februar 1945 gegen 21:41 Uhr
heulten die Sirenen der Lazarettstadt Dresden das erste mal auf. Die Bewohner der
Elbmetropole machten sich zu der Zeit noch keine Sorgen, da Dresden als Stadt
ohne Bewaffnung und ohne militaerischen Nutzen bekannt war und von ca. 1,2
Millionen Frauen, Kindern und Greisen bewohnt wurde.
Gegen 22:09 Uhr gab der Rundfunk durch, da die alliierten Bomberverbaende ihren
Kurs geaendert haben und nun auf Dresden zufliegen. Kurz darauf befanden sich
244 britische Bomber am Himmel der deutschen Kulturstadt. Drei Stunden nach dieser
ersten Angriffswelle - es befanden sich bereits alle verfuegbaren Rettungsmannschaften,
Sanitaeter und Feuerwehmaenner in Dresden - verdunkelten weitere
500 Bomber den Himmel.
Am naechsten Tag folgte die letzte Angriffswelle mit erneut 300 US-B-17-Bombern.
Zwischen 12:12 Uhr und 12:21 Uhr warfen diese 783 Tonnen Bomben ab. - Das entspricht
mehr als 85 Tonnen pro Minute. Nach dem Abwerfen setzten die US-Bomber
zum Tiefflug an und beschossen Fluechtende mit ihren Bordwaffen. In diesen drei
Angriffsschlaegen, die insgesamt 14 Stunden andauerten, warfen die "Befreier"
650.000 Brandbomben und 200.000 Sprengbomben ab, welche einen Feuersturm von
ueber 1000 Grad in der Stadt erzeugten. Obwohl Dresden weder Flugabwehr, noch
Ruestungsindustrie oder aehnliche kriegswichtige Ziele besass wurden weit mehr
als 350.000 unschuldige deutsche Zivilisten in diesen zwei Tagen kaltbluetig
ermordet.
Keiner der schuldigen Alliierten wurde jemals fuer dieses brutale Kriegsverbrechen
auch nur angeklagt und die Massenmedien und die bundesdeutsche Regierung schweigen
diese Taten tot und sehen es nicht als noetig an den Opfern zu gedenken.!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Airgriff2(at)AOL.com |
| Subject: | up or down pressure on tail? |
I was wondering , in straight & level flight, is the pressure up on the
horizontal stabilizer or pushing down? I was interested in knowing if the upper
or
lower flying cables handles the most strain.
Fly Safe
Bob Griffin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | eugenezimmerman(at)dejazzd.com |
| Subject: | Blutige Selbstjustiz |
Polizeiexperten warnen: Ethnisch abgeschottete Mafia-Clans sind kaum noch zu durchdringen.
Die Gerichte tragen Mitschuld.
Weiter auf:
http://www.libasoli.de/2004/ethnoclans%20spiegel50_04.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: up or down pressure on tail? |
Pushing down.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Building Kolb Mk III
N78LB Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: <Airgriff2(at)aol.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: up or down pressure on tail?
>
> I was wondering , in straight & level flight, is the pressure up on the
> horizontal stabilizer or pushing down? I was interested in knowing if the
> upper or
> lower flying cables handles the most strain.
> Fly Safe
> Bob Griffin
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Lese selbst:
http://www.kommunisten-online.de/blackchanel/dresden3.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Gegen das Vergessen |
I dunno, Will. There's another one on there now from rrhoyt(at)ieee.org. to
the Kolb List. Don't sound familiar to me, and it's about Dresden 1945.
Don't think I'll open it. I do know the spammers have a way of sending
their trash and showing it to be from my own address, so there's no way to
block them. This might be the same type of thing. What a pain.
When are you leaving for MV ?? I'm not giving up quite yet........if I can
get just next Sunday off, I'll zoom up for 1 day. Another pain.
Lar.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Building Kolb Mk III
N78LB Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: <WillUribe(at)aol.com>
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Gegen das Vergessen
>
> It's just propaganda, looks like someone is trying to rewrite history.
> It's a
> good think I watch the history channel.
> http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/0,1518,341230,00.html
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Larry Bourne
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Transparenz ist das Mindeste
>
>
> 3 of these this morning ?? What's going on ?? Do not
> Archive.
>
> Larry Bourne
> Palm Springs, CA
> Building Kolb Mk III
> N78LB Vamoose
> www.gogittum.com
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "George Bass" <gtb(at)commspeed.net> |
| Subject: | Re: up or down pressure on tail? |
One of the most descriptive images of this can be
found by viewing a profile of a Zenair CH 701.
The "lift" is created on the UNDER-side of the
horizontal stabilizer.
George
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Firestar 2 Vortex Generator Tests |
Your question prodded me to add another page to the FSII Tweaks and Hints page,
here are some pictures of how we modded the front brackets to raise the stab.
http://www.bcchapel.org/pages/0003/FSIIelevatorbracket.html
Pitch stability? Firestars have pitch stability? Wow...
Yes, it still has some stability. Some.
With the extra dihedral it has, it will fly hands off no problem.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>Richard,
>
>I think raising the LE of the horizontal stabilizer is a better solution
>than adding weight to the nose. How did you handle the hardware aspects
>of that modification? I looked at the brackets, and couldn't see an easy
>way to do it.
>
>Also, the stock Firestar is almost neutral in pitch stability. Did you
>notice any difference in pitch stability after the modification?
>
>Dave Bigelow
>FS2
>Kamuela, Hawaii
>
>"And instead of putting lead weights in the nose - we raised the front
>stabilizer mount attach point about 3/4"
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "b young" <by0ung(at)brigham.net> |
| Subject: | message not from me |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "b young"
i dont know what is happening...... but this message was not from me.
boyd
do not archive
-------------------
--> Kolb-List message posted by: by0ung(at)brigham.net
In den fruehen Abendstunden des 13. Februar 1945 gegen 21:41 Uhr
heulten die Sirenen der Lazarettstadt Dresden das erste mal auf. Die Bewohner der
Elbmetropole machten sich zu der Zeit noch keine Sorgen, da Dresden als Stadt
ohne Bewaffnung und ohne militaerischen Nutzen bekannt war und von ca. 1,2
Millionen Frauen, Kindern und Greisen bewohnt wurde.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: message not from me |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck"
me.
|
| boyd
| do not archive
| -------------------
|
|
| --> Kolb-List message posted by: by0ung(at)brigham.net
|
| In den fruehen Abendstunden des 13. Februar 1945 gegen 21:41 Uhr
Morning Boyd/All:
Same here. Sounds like some German critter has abscounded with the
email list from Matronics, then executed a mass mailing.
I got four msgs from some operation saying my msgs to the Kolb List
could not be sent. I did not send any.
Checked my computers for virus, but came out clean.
john h
DO NOT ARCHIVE
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: message not from me |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: N27SB(at)aol.com
in addition to getting the German emails I also got one from my friend at
Nextel. Called him today and he has a bunch on German ones. He is not on the Kolb
list. Either I am the source from him or he is getting this stuff from me
via the List.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "kevin-jones" <kevin-jones(at)snet.net> |
| Subject: | Firefly spinning beahavior |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "kevin-jones"
At long last I have a Kolb aircraft. It is a firefly which I bought from Ed
Reilly. I am going to give it a try soon. When I take a plane up for the first
time it is my practice to try a few stalls. Usually I have plenty of people
to ask but this time I don't. So I go to the source. How does the Firefly stall?
Does it try to spin? Is there any difficulty getting it out of a spin? What
should I know?
Kevin Jones
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Beauford" <beauford(at)tampabay.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Firefly spinning beahavior |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Beauford"
Brother Jones...
Re: your spin fetish...
All I can address is my own machine... FF #076...
Yessir, it will certainly spin with great gusto if pushed... I tried it in
both directions, just for curiosity's sake... that little machine will wrap
right up if left to its' own devices...
Recovery for my kite was conventional ... release back pressure and apply
opposite rudder....
It stopped rotation in one half of one turn and resumed normal aviation in a
second or two...
My amateur observations: I had to force it to spin... it did not have a
proclivity for spinning, but had to be enticed to do so... It quit the
business immediately when offered an opportunity.
My curiosity was fully satisfied...
I wish you well in your experimentation drills... Keep track of the surface,
sir.... it tends to be spectacularly unforgiving of miscalculation...
As far as the remainder of what you should know.... buy low... sell high...
Worth what you paid for it...
Best Regards,
Beauford of Brandon, FL
FF# 076
Do Not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "kevin-jones" <kevin-jones(at)snet.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: Firefly spinning beahavior
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "kevin-jones"
>
> At long last I have a Kolb aircraft. It is a firefly which I bought
> from Ed Reilly. I am going to give it a try soon. When I take a plane up
> for the first time it is my practice to try a few stalls. Usually I have
> plenty of people to ask but this time I don't. So I go to the source. How
> does the Firefly stall? Does it try to spin? Is there any difficulty
> getting it out of a spin? What should I know?
> Kevin Jones
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne T. McCullough" <blackbird754(at)alltel.net> |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Wayne T. McCullough"
Gentlemen,
On the subject of strut covers ......the streamlined ones ...should they be
lined up with the horizontal stabilizer....
We just did a Hawk and that was what the factory recommended....
Any Mark 3 guys out there or anyone who has done this...
Thanks,
Wayne McCullough
Kolbra # 4
----- Original Message -----
From: "Beauford" <beauford(at)tampabay.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firefly spinning beahavior
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Beauford"
>
> Brother Jones...
> Re: your spin fetish...
>
> All I can address is my own machine... FF #076...
> Yessir, it will certainly spin with great gusto if pushed... I tried it in
> both directions, just for curiosity's sake... that little machine will
> wrap
> right up if left to its' own devices...
>
> Recovery for my kite was conventional ... release back pressure and apply
> opposite rudder....
> It stopped rotation in one half of one turn and resumed normal aviation in
> a
> second or two...
> My amateur observations: I had to force it to spin... it did not have a
> proclivity for spinning, but had to be enticed to do so... It quit the
> business immediately when offered an opportunity.
>
> My curiosity was fully satisfied...
>
> I wish you well in your experimentation drills... Keep track of the
> surface,
> sir.... it tends to be spectacularly unforgiving of miscalculation...
>
> As far as the remainder of what you should know.... buy low... sell
> high...
>
> Worth what you paid for it...
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Beauford of Brandon, FL
> FF# 076
> Do Not archive
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "kevin-jones" <kevin-jones(at)snet.net>
> To:
> Subject: Kolb-List: Firefly spinning beahavior
>
>
>> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "kevin-jones"
>>
>> At long last I have a Kolb aircraft. It is a firefly which I bought
>> from Ed Reilly. I am going to give it a try soon. When I take a plane up
>> for the first time it is my practice to try a few stalls. Usually I have
>> plenty of people to ask but this time I don't. So I go to the source. How
>> does the Firefly stall? Does it try to spin? Is there any difficulty
>> getting it out of a spin? What should I know?
>> Kevin Jones
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob N." <ronoy(at)shentel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Firefly spinning be(a)havior |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Bob N."
Friend Johns,
My Great Silver Bird, FireFly #070, does not spin without provocation.
When provoked enough, it will spin nicely, and after 5-6 turns, settles
down to just spinning without going flat or other nastiness. Conversely,
it will quit/recover with the usual stick stab fwd and rudder stab. Or,
just let the horse have its head by getting off the controls, and she'll
come out by herself...given enough more alt.
This a great little bug, almost a Pocket Rocket. If you don't like a FF,
get a PPC!
Bob N.
http://www.angelfire.com/rpg/ronoy/
do not archive
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | The Kuffels <kuffel(at)cyberport.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Kolbra strut covers |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: The Kuffels
Wayne,
<>
Not an expert on this so I'd ask the people who have covers which can
rotate around the tube struts where they fair in cruse.
Lacking an answer my logic would say: The bottom of a Kolb wing at
cruse is at several degrees to the relative wind. Thus for the covers
to be parallel to the relative wind their trailing edges must be up
(relative to the bottom of the wing) by the same several degrees. The
tail may be about the same correct angle because even though it is at a
negative angle of attack to generate its balancing downforce it is
flying in the downwash of the main wing. Still, I'd use the bottom of
the wing for reference, it's easier to measure.
Tom Kuffel
Whitefish, MT
Building Original FireStar
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Firefly spinning beahavior |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Larry Bourne"
Gotta chuckle. After meeting you, I really have trouble merging Beauford
and Bill Tuton in my alleged mind. Thanks for the ongoing grins, amigo.
Sad ol' Lar...........still beating my head against the wall trying to
decide what to do this weekend - MV or not to MV. For 1 day ?? 600 - 700
miles, each way ?? To see or not to see everyone after all the
anticipation. Aaaaaarrrrgghh ! ! ! Do
not Archive.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Building Kolb Mk III
N78LB Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Beauford" <beauford(at)tampabay.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firefly spinning beahavior
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Beauford"
>
> Brother Jones...
> Re: your spin fetish...
>
> All I can address is my own machine... FF #076...
> Yessir, it will certainly spin with great gusto if pushed... I tried it in
> both directions, just for curiosity's sake... that little machine will
> wrap
> right up if left to its' own devices...
>
> Recovery for my kite was conventional ... release back pressure and apply
> opposite rudder....
> It stopped rotation in one half of one turn and resumed normal aviation in
> a
> second or two...
> My amateur observations: I had to force it to spin... it did not have a
> proclivity for spinning, but had to be enticed to do so... It quit the
> business immediately when offered an opportunity.
>
> My curiosity was fully satisfied...
>
> I wish you well in your experimentation drills... Keep track of the
> surface,
> sir.... it tends to be spectacularly unforgiving of miscalculation...
>
> As far as the remainder of what you should know.... buy low... sell
> high...
>
> Worth what you paid for it...
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Beauford of Brandon, FL
> FF# 076
> Do Not archive
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "kevin-jones" <kevin-jones(at)snet.net>
> To:
> Subject: Kolb-List: Firefly spinning beahavior
>
>
>> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "kevin-jones"
>>
>> At long last I have a Kolb aircraft. It is a firefly which I bought
>> from Ed Reilly. I am going to give it a try soon. When I take a plane up
>> for the first time it is my practice to try a few stalls. Usually I have
>> plenty of people to ask but this time I don't. So I go to the source. How
>> does the Firefly stall? Does it try to spin? Is there any difficulty
>> getting it out of a spin? What should I know?
>> Kevin Jones
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David L. Bigelow" <dlbigelow(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Firestar 2 Vortex Generator Tests |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "David L. Bigelow"
Richard,
I added some extra dihedral to my Firestar too. With the stock dihedral, there
is almost no yaw/roll coupling, and the aircraft has spiral instability (once
banked, the bank continues to increase unless control input is made). I also
put small bendable aluminun trim tabs on one aileron and the rudder. It will
now fly hands off, and rudder inputs (hands off the stick) will eventually translate
to roll in the same direction. There may be some reduction in roll rate
because of the added dihedral, but not enough to be significant.
Nice job on the web page - lot of good hints. I think I'll do the stablizer bracket
mod and remove the lead weights from the nose. No sense flying around with
6 lb of extra weight
Dave Bigelow
FS2
Kamuela, Hawaii
"Pitch stability? Firestars have pitch stability? Wow...
Yes, it still has some stability. Some.
With the extra dihedral it has, it will fly hands off no problem."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | robert bean <slyck(at)frontiernet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Firestar 2 Vortex Generator Tests |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: robert bean
Dave and lift strut builders, that will be my next project (when I
again muster up the
ambition). I miss using rudder input for minor wing leveling too.
Annoying to
have to wiggle the butter churn constantly in slight thermal conditions.
And a steep turn should require only back pressure once your angle is
set.
From the heft of my struts, I imagine I should shed about 5 lbs with a
set of
welded up streamline steel.
-BB do not archive
On 17, May 2005, at 4:35 AM, David L. Bigelow wrote:
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "David L. Bigelow"
>
>
> Richard,
>
> I added some extra dihedral to my Firestar too. With the stock
> dihedral, there is almost no yaw/roll coupling, and the aircraft has
> spiral instability (once banked, the bank continues to increase unless
> control input is made). I also put small bendable aluminun trim tabs
> on one aileron and the rudder. It will now fly hands off, and rudder
> inputs (hands off the stick) will eventually translate to roll in the
> same direction. There may be some reduction in roll rate because of
> the added dihedral, but not enough to be significant.
>
> Nice job on the web page - lot of good hints. I think I'll do the
> stablizer bracket mod and remove the lead weights from the nose. No
> sense flying around with 6 lb of extra weight
>
> Dave Bigelow
> FS2
> Kamuela, Hawaii
>
> "Pitch stability? Firestars have pitch stability? Wow...
> Yes, it still has some stability. Some.
> With the extra dihedral it has, it will fly hands off no problem."
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck"
Morning Gang:
Still working on the first cup of coffee.
Packed and ready to go. Will go back through some bags to toss out
stuff I do not need, and insure I have everything I do need. It is so
easy to over pack. In a little airplane, that ain't good.
Weather looks great for today. May even luck out and get a little
tail wind. Hope to make Love County Airport, Marietta, OK, this
evening, around 636 miles. Will make for a good day's flying. If I
get off here at 0900, I'll have 12 hours of day light to fly today.
At 75 mph ground speed will take 8+30 flight time, but we are going to
get a little help from the wind, soooooo we can probably guess at 8 or
less hours today.
Tomorrow will be another story, but only 7 hours flight time. Winds
will be topping out at 24 mph out of the south and then the west.
Will be trying to make Sandia East Air Park on the east side of Sandia
Mountain, from Albuquerque, NM. Always seem to have a head wind
coming into the Albuquerque area from Santa Rosa, along the
Interstate. Have to look over and watch the 18 wheelers outrun me
while my ASI is indicating 85 mph. Oh well, I don't have to look over
there. ;-)
Thursday, will be a short day, 2+30, unless I do not make good time
Wednesday. Winds are supposed to be favorable to get me into MV.
Looking forward to seeing everybody.
Take care,
john h
334-315-2621 cell
PS: Looking for my first Navajo Taco when I get to Goulding's, and a
pot of coffee to go with it. ;-)
DO NOT ARCHIVE
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "b young" <by0ung(at)brigham.net> |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "b young"
Still, I'd use the bottom of
the wing for reference, it's easier to measure.
Tom Kuffel
Whitefish, MT
Building Original FireStar
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
i am with tom
i used the wing for mine.... my thinking was along the lines of ( i think
it was the builder of the balanka ) he thought that every drag producing item
on the aircraft should produce lift if at all possible..... so by installing
the streemlined covers at the same angle of attack as the bottom of the wing....
and if they would create even enough lift to cary their weight, so much
the better.
boyd
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | neilsenrm05(at)comcast.net |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: neilsenrm05(at)comcast.net
Morning All
I'm in Mesa, Az seeing my parents. I plan to drive up to MV on Friday and back
on Sunday. I have my camping gear and will be camping with the gang. Is there
anyone in the area that would like to share the ride with me. Contact me off
the list or call my parents number here at 480-984-7991
Also I tried to call Craig Nelson at the number on the Kolb data base so that I
could get a first hand look at his airplane and the cowling on his MKIIIx but
the number is not in service. If you are out there and wouldn't mind brief visit
please get back with me
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIIIc
-------------- Original message --------------
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck"
>
> Morning Gang:
>
> Still working on the first cup of coffee.
>
Morning All
I'm in Mesa, Az seeing my parents. I plan to drive up to MV on Friday and back
on Sunday. I have my camping gear and will be camping with the gang. Is there
anyone in thearea that would like to share the ride with me. Contact me off the
list or call my parents number here at 480-984-7991
Also I tried to call Craig Nelson at the number on the Kolb data base so that I
could get a first hand look at his airplane and the cowling on his MKIIIx but
the number is not in service. If you are out there and wouldn't mind brief visit
please get back with me
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIIIc
-------------- Original message --------------
-- Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck"
Morning Gang:
Still working on the first cup of coffee.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjungjr(at)yahoo.com> |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: John Jung
MV Group,
My Firestar is fueled, oiled, packed, and inspected. I
plan to take off from Buckeye Muni Thursday morning
and arrive at MV sometime in the afternoon. I will be
stopping at Wickenburg to top off with fuel, then on
to Valle for fuel, a rest and a vist to their aviation
museum. After that, I'll stop at Tuba City to top off
and them on to Monument Valley. Total miles is 316.
That's not far for some, but it will be my longest
cross-country. Plus, it is over some very remote and
rugged country. I'm looking forward to the flight as
well the weekend of visiting and flying.
John Jung
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gherkins Tim-rp3420 <rp3420(at)freescale.com> |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Gherkins Tim-rp3420
Rick,
Uncle Craig is out of town at this moment, and won't be getting in til late sat.
night. I'll be glad to meet with you and show you his Xtra. We are in Gilbert-
Lindsey & Guadalupe area. I'll give you a call at your parents home.
Tim Gherkins
FSII/Xtra
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of neilsenrm05(at)comcast.net
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: MV
--> Kolb-List message posted by: neilsenrm05(at)comcast.net
Morning All
I'm in Mesa, Az seeing my parents. I plan to drive up to MV on Friday and back
on Sunday. I have my camping gear and will be camping with the gang. Is there
anyone in the area that would like to share the ride with me. Contact me off
the list or call my parents number here at 480-984-7991
Also I tried to call Craig Nelson at the number on the Kolb data base so that I
could get a first hand look at his airplane and the cowling on his MKIIIx but
the number is not in service. If you are out there and wouldn't mind brief visit
please get back with me
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIIIc
-------------- Original message --------------
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck"
>
> Morning Gang:
>
> Still working on the first cup of coffee.
>
Morning All
I'm in Mesa, Az seeing my parents. I plan to drive up to MV on Friday and back
on Sunday. I have my camping gear and will be camping with the gang. Is there
anyone in thearea that would like to share the ride with me. Contact me off the
list or call my parents number here at 480-984-7991
Also I tried to call Craig Nelson at the number on the Kolb data base so that I
could get a first hand look at his airplane and the cowling on his MKIIIx but
the number is not in service. If you are out there and wouldn't mind brief visit
please get back with me
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIIIc
-------------- Original message --------------
-- Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck"
Morning Gang:
Still working on the first cup of coffee.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob N." <ronoy(at)shentel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: strut covers |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Bob N."
Although this is not Kolb-list specific, I've had some experience in
strut coverings. On my Cessna Cardinal, in the process of cleaning up a
lot of drag, I installed new gear leg covers. Tufted the originals and
found they were almost completely stalled at cruising! Made new covers,
much wider, tufted them, and adjusted. At the angle of min. drag (smooth
tufts) they were about same angle as bottom of wing.
Bob N.
http://www.angelfire.com/rpg/ronoy/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Larry Bourne"
Can't stand it. That durned ol' John Hauck hadta go and mention those Navajo Tacos,
and my mouth started watering. If'n you've never tried one, you're missing
a real treat. 'Sides, I promised Jim Hefner a look at a couple of photo books
I have, and can't back out on that, now can I ?? Not to mention seeing the
rest of the crew up there, and maybe bumming a ride or 3. Truck's all dieseled
up and camper's already loaded with everything but perishables and personals,
so I'll leave Palm Springs on Thursday afternoon, (my Friday) and camp partway;
prob'ly in Kingman, AZ, then be in MV by noon Friday. Leave there on
Sat afternoon around 3 or 4 PM, and camp in Flagstaff or Kingman, and be home
in time for work on Sunday aft at 3:30 PM. Like I just told Tim off List - when
you gotta go, you gotta go. It's only about a 1500 mile round trip. Nuffing
to it. Long Legged Lar. Do not Archive.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Building Kolb Mk III
N78LB Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "b young" <by0ung(at)brigham.net> |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "b young"
i just got an email from jim heffner, he has arrived at monument valley
early and found that the tiedown cables have been removed..... you will
need to bring your own tiedowns and anchors....... jim will try and see
if he can get the management to get something installed before we arrive but
is not sure it will happen.... he also mentioned that the ground is
extreemely hard after all the moisture recieved there this winter.....
i am leaving tomorrow ( wed ) morning, eric weaver has had van trouble
but has gone on to plan 2 and pulling his trailor with another truck.... i
hope to see as many there as possib le.
boyd
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeremy Casey" <n79rt(at)kilocharlie.us> |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Jeremy Casey"
The "why" for this question is kinda long, but I would like to know a
couple of measurements from a Firefly. First would be the distance from
the bolt at the fuselage H-section to the rear end of the tube. Second
would be the distance from the inboard face of the inboard steel rib to
the H-section bolt. Also what is the actual end-end length of the wing?
(Figuring approx. 10'2.)
Thanks a ton.
Jeremy Casey
KiloCharlie Drafting, Inc.
jeremy(at)kilocharlie.us
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Firefly guys... |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: N27SB(at)aol.com
In a message dated 5/18/2005 12:58:52 PM Eastern Standard Time,
n79rt(at)kilocharlie.us writes:
>
> The "why" for this question is kinda long, but I would like to know a
> couple of measurements from a Firefly. First would be the distance from
> the bolt at the fuselage H-section to the rear end of the tube. Second
> would be the distance from the inboard face of the inboard steel rib to
> the H-section bolt. Also what is the actual end-end length of the wing?
> (Figuring approx. 10'2.)
>
> Thanks a ton.
>
> Jeremy Casey
>
First would be the distance from
the bolt at the fuselage H-section to the rear end of the tube. 114.5"
Second
would be the distance from the inboard face of the inboard steel rib to
the H-section bolt. 44" (inboard face to CL of bolt) Note, The Firefly
does not have a wing H-section ala Firestar or MK III. but I used the mount bolt
of the Aft strut.
Also what is the actual end-end length of the wing?
(Figuring approx. 10'2.) 123" (inboard face of rib to wing tip)
Steve Boetto
FF #007 Old Kolb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Comcast <davis207(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Fatal crash near Mobile, AL |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Comcast
Talking to my dad In Mobile, Al, today, and he mentioned a crash in St
Elmo, south west of Mobile. I know there are some Kolber's in the area,
but it looks like a canard type aircraft. (Based on a different web site)
On another note, I am closing next week on a house in Malvern, PA, next
to Phoenixville. Should anyone desire a place to sleep while attending
the Kolb Home Coming at Homer's drop me a line off list.
Chuck Davis
FF 028
*****************************************
From WKRG.Com
Authorities have indentified the pilot killed in a plane crash in St.
Elmo Monday afternoon.
He's 57 year old Paul Conner of Grand Bay.
Mobile County Sheriff's Deputies got a call right before 4:00 of a
paought ne crash west of R.P.Crigler, Senior Aeroplex in St. Elmo.
Christina Bowersox with the Mobile County Sheriff's Department says, "An
experimental aircraft upon takeoff crashed into a heavy wooded area."
Deputies brought in a county pbulic works crew to get to the scene.
Bowersox says, "They brought in some equipment like little machetes and
little chainsaws and a chipper and cleared a path to the site."
The pilot, 57 year old Paul Conner, was killed.
Deputies say he was an experienced pilot who retired from the Army and
owned the plane.
Other pilots at the airport didn't want to talk.
People who live in the area came to the crash site to offer their help.
Darryl Vonsahlo of Grand Bay says, "We just came to offer to use a
"bobcat" with a brush cutter to go in and brush cut to them, but they
got some help already so they don't need it."
June McLendon lives in a trailer home with her grandmother near the
crash on the west side of the airport.
She says her grandmother has worried about planes taking off and landing
at the airport.
McLendon says, "She's scared of those planes, she's so worried that
they're going to come over the trailer one day and hit."
Investigators don't know what caused the crash.
Officials with the National Transportation Safety Board and the Federal
Aviation Administration have been on the scene investigating.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "jimmy and jo ann" <hillstw(at)jhill.biz> |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "jimmy and jo ann"
Will try this again; my last try evidently did not go out. Have any of you tried
spades on the kolb ailerons? I have changed the leverage on my bellcrank on
FSII, but ailerons still seem heavy--and not very responsive.
If so, what improvement do you get, and what is the consensus on structural integrity
of our ailerons with spades?
Thanks.
Jimmy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Larry Bourne"
Sometimes it pays to be Mr. Good Guy after all. Once in a while. In spite of
the old "good guys finish last" mantra. Today at lunch, I mentioned to the other
guys that I'm going to MV in spite of everything, and will be back on Sun.
for my regular swing shift. One of the others finished up his lunch and about
5 minutes later said, "you know, for years, every time there's a holiday, you
worked for us so we could be with our families, and if we needed a day off you
always covered us..........so now it's my turn. Let me call my wife and see
if we can cancel our plans on Sunday night." (I work swing shift on Sundays
and Mondays) He did, she OK'ed it, and so I'll work the following Sat for him
and give him a long weekend. In return, I'll be able to spend an extra day
at MV. Now, THAT makes me feel good. :-) Boss kinda hung his head, and said
that I could leave early tomorrow if I like. Yah, I like. HeeeCom..........!
! ! Ecstatic Lar. Do not Archive.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Building Kolb Mk III
N78LB Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rusty" <13brv3c(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Fatal crash near Mobile, AL |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Rusty" <13brv3c(at)bellsouth.net>
Talking to my dad In Mobile, Al, today, and he mentioned a crash in St
Elmo, south west of Mobile. I know there are some Kolber's in the area,
but it looks like a canard type aircraft. (Based on a different web site)
---------------
The aircraft was a Mazda 13B powered SQ2000, built and flown by Paul Conner.
He was a regular on the rotary list, and a hell of a nice guy. I almost
flew over to surprise him with another visit last Saturday, but didn't. I
figured I'd have plenty of opportunities... I was wrong :-(
Rusty
Mazda 13B rotary powered RV-3 (flying)
Kolb Slingshot (Mazda single rotor project)
Do not archive
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: aileron spades |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Richard Pike
Before you go to the trouble of spades - try leading into your turns with a
lot more rudder. The FSII likes that and seems to respond quicker if you
treat it as a rudder first airplane. Once you lead with rudder and then
follow with the ailerons, it becomes a lot more responsive.
As far as using spades - something I have noticed is that the inboard half
of the aileron tube torques when you try and use a lot of aileron. Next
time you fly, watch one of the ailerons while you cram the stick over as
far as it will go. The aileron hardly moves - the tube is twisting. So if
you decide to try spades, be careful. I am not sure the aileron tubes are
up to what might happen if the spades decided they wanted to run the show.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>--> Kolb-List message posted by: "jimmy and jo ann"
>
>Will try this again; my last try evidently did not go out. Have any of
>you tried spades on the kolb ailerons? I have changed the leverage on my
>bellcrank on FSII, but ailerons still seem heavy--and not very responsive.
>If so, what improvement do you get, and what is the consensus on
>structural integrity of our ailerons with spades?
>
>Thanks.
>
>Jimmy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Cottrell" <lcottrel(at)kfalls.net> |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Larry Cottrell"
Good for you Larry, they say "even a blind hog finds an acorn every once and
a while" Enjoy!
Larry, Oregon
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: MV Update
do not archive
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Larry Bourne"
See ya there. :-) Do not Archive.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Building Kolb Mk III
N78LB Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Cottrell" <lcottrel(at)kfalls.net>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: MV Update
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Larry Cottrell"
>
> Good for you Larry, they say "even a blind hog finds an acorn every once
> and
> a while" Enjoy!
> Larry, Oregon
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com>
> To:
> Subject: Kolb-List: MV Update
>
> do not archive
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eugene Zimmerman <eugenezimmerman(at)dejazzd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: aileron spades |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Eugene Zimmerman
Rich,
But shouldn't spades minimize the twist on the tube from the torque
since the force would be divided between the spade and the control horn?
Richard Pike wrote:
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: Richard Pike
>
> Before you go to the trouble of spades - try leading into your turns with a
> lot more rudder. The FSII likes that and seems to respond quicker if you
> treat it as a rudder first airplane. Once you lead with rudder and then
> follow with the ailerons, it becomes a lot more responsive.
>
> As far as using spades - something I have noticed is that the inboard half
> of the aileron tube torques when you try and use a lot of aileron. Next
> time you fly, watch one of the ailerons while you cram the stick over as
> far as it will go. The aileron hardly moves - the tube is twisting. So if
> you decide to try spades, be careful. I am not sure the aileron tubes are
> up to what might happen if the spades decided they wanted to run the show.
>
> Richard Pike
> MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>
>
>
>>--> Kolb-List message posted by: "jimmy and jo ann"
>>
>>Will try this again; my last try evidently did not go out. Have any of
>>you tried spades on the kolb ailerons? I have changed the leverage on my
>>bellcrank on FSII, but ailerons still seem heavy--and not very responsive.
>>If so, what improvement do you get, and what is the consensus on
>>structural integrity of our ailerons with spades?
>>
>>Thanks.
>>
>>Jimmy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "PATRICK LADD" <pj.ladd(at)btinternet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: aileron spades |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "PATRICK LADD"
Have any of you tried spades on the kolb ailerons? >>
Hi,
I haven`t got into the air yet with my Kolb but certaibnly on my trial
flight I found the ailerons exttremely heavy. I didn`t have the opportunity
to experiment but I get the feeling that it will be similar to my
Challenger.
In that case the answer is a heavy bootfull of rudder.
The trouble is that many ultrlight pilots trained on GA a/c which use hardly
any rudder. If you trained in gliders you will apply rudder automatically.
Certainly in the Challenger is almost impossible to suddenly reverse a bank
with aileron only. Give her full rudder and she will surge over.
I should try that before adding spades which may strain the aileron tubes.
Good luck
Pat
do not archive
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: aileron spades |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Richard Pike
Yes, absolutely. But in my case, that assumes that I know what I am doing
and make the spades the right size, and put them in the right place. I
think spades might be a great idea. I actually have the mounts I made up
for spades lying in with some other unused steel tubing, they are already
primered, but I decided not to install them. If you have seen my web page,
you know I like to try different ideas, but I suspect spades might be one
of those areas where I know just enough to really screw things up. Maybe
someone else will solve the spade equation, that would be good. In the
meantime, the MKIII with repositioned push rods flies great without spades,
and the FSII with slightly repositioned push rods flies great if you lead
with a good dose of rudder, so I'm quitting while I'm ahead.
PS: If anybody does add spades, don't forget to readjust your aileron
counter balances.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>--> Kolb-List message posted by: Eugene Zimmerman
>
>
>Rich,
>But shouldn't spades minimize the twist on the tube from the torque
>since the force would be divided between the spade and the control horn?
>
>
>Richard Pike wrote:
> > --> Kolb-List message posted by: Richard Pike
> >
> > Before you go to the trouble of spades - try leading into your turns
> with a
> > lot more rudder. The FSII likes that and seems to respond quicker if you
> > treat it as a rudder first airplane. Once you lead with rudder and then
> > follow with the ailerons, it becomes a lot more responsive.
> >
> > As far as using spades - something I have noticed is that the inboard half
> > of the aileron tube torques when you try and use a lot of aileron. Next
> > time you fly, watch one of the ailerons while you cram the stick over as
> > far as it will go. The aileron hardly moves - the tube is twisting. So if
> > you decide to try spades, be careful. I am not sure the aileron tubes are
> > up to what might happen if the spades decided they wanted to run the show.
> >
> > Richard Pike
> > MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>--> Kolb-List message posted by: "jimmy and jo ann"
> >>
> >>Will try this again; my last try evidently did not go out. Have any of
> >>you tried spades on the kolb ailerons? I have changed the leverage on my
> >>bellcrank on FSII, but ailerons still seem heavy--and not very responsive.
> >>If so, what improvement do you get, and what is the consensus on
> >>structural integrity of our ailerons with spades?
> >>
> >>Thanks.
> >>
> >>Jimmy
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeremy Casey" <n79rt(at)kilocharlie.us> |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Jeremy Casey"
Thanks Steve...owe you one...
Jeremy
-----Original Message-----
From: N27SB(at)aol.com [mailto:N27SB(at)aol.com]
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firefly guys...
--> Kolb-List message posted by: N27SB(at)aol.com
In a message dated 5/18/2005 12:58:52 PM Eastern Standard Time,
n79rt(at)kilocharlie.us writes:
>
> The "why" for this question is kinda long, but I would like to know a
> couple of measurements from a Firefly. First would be the distance
from
> the bolt at the fuselage H-section to the rear end of the tube.
Second
> would be the distance from the inboard face of the inboard steel rib
to
> the H-section bolt. Also what is the actual end-end length of the
wing?
> (Figuring approx. 10'2.)
>
> Thanks a ton.
>
> Jeremy Casey
>
First would be the distance from
the bolt at the fuselage H-section to the rear end of the tube. 114.5"
Second
would be the distance from the inboard face of the inboard steel rib to
the H-section bolt. 44" (inboard face to CL of bolt) Note, The
Firefly
does not have a wing H-section ala Firestar or MK III. but I used the
mount bolt
of the Aft strut.
Also what is the actual end-end length of the wing?
(Figuring approx. 10'2.) 123" (inboard face of rib to wing tip)
Steve Boetto
FF #007 Old Kolb
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Firefly guys... |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: N27SB(at)aol.com
In a message dated 5/19/05 8:04:58 AM Central Daylight Time,
n79rt(at)kilocharlie.us writes:
> Thanks Steve...owe you one...
>
>
No problem, mine sits here right at the house. I alo have a kit that I
started on so itis easy to measure.
Steve
do not archive
ff#007
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack & Louise Hart <jbhart(at)ldd.net> |
| Subject: | Returned to the Web & Kolb List |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Jack & Louise Hart
Kolbers,
It has been about three weeks off the Web and the List. Just got hooked
back up today. I checked my emails over the web by use of borrowed
computers etc. But it is great to have my machine up and running.
The FireFly is still at K02. The wife has two more weeks to work and then I
can go get it. I have been picking rocks, leveling and seeding lawns, etc.,
etc., & etc. It has been agonizing to live two miles from an airport,
working out side, and hearing the planes take off, and to think that could
have been me.
Noticed in the accident/incident data that a two place Kolb hit the ground
at Lima, Ohio. Tried to find out something from the newspapers but was
unable to do so. Anyone hear what happened?
Jack B. Hart FF004
Winchester, IN
do not archive
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart(at)ldd.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | robert bean <slyck(at)frontiernet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Returned to the Web & Kolb List |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: robert bean
Jack, not a clue, however I notice it not being registered.
-BB do not archive
On 19, May 2005, at 8:05 PM, Jack & Louise Hart wrote:
> Noticed in the accident/incident data that a two place Kolb hit the
> ground
> at Lima, Ohio. Tried to find out something from the newspapers but was
> unable to do so. Anyone hear what happened?
>
> Jack B. Hart FF004
> Winchester, IN
>
> do not archive
>
>
> Jack & Louise Hart
> jbhart(at)ldd.net
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jimmy" <jhankin(at)planters.net> |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Jimmy"
Just checking
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | robert bean <slyck(at)frontiernet.net> |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: robert bean
kolbers, I shall be experimenting with the Richard Pike aileron fix.
I drilled new holes in the crank arms, only half the distance he did,
but I want to see what it feels like. My problem is the old rods were
constructed with insufficient adjustment even for that. I have
new tubes and inserts and want to weld instead of rivet them as I
hear is the current factory way. Can someone email me a pic
of theirs? (closeup of joint) I would like to see the method.
-thanx, BB
do not archive
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Richard Pike
First thing tomorrow -
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
do not archive
>--> Kolb-List message posted by: robert bean
>
>kolbers, I shall be experimenting with the Richard Pike aileron fix.
>I drilled new holes in the crank arms, only half the distance he did,
>but I want to see what it feels like. My problem is the old rods were
>constructed with insufficient adjustment even for that. I have
>new tubes and inserts and want to weld instead of rivet them as I
>hear is the current factory way. Can someone email me a pic
>of theirs? (closeup of joint) I would like to see the method.
>-thanx, BB
>do not archive
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
--> Kolb-List message posted by: N27SB(at)aol.com
In a message dated 5/20/2005 10:33:43 PM Eastern Standard Time,
slyck(at)frontiernet.net writes:
> Can someone email me a pic
> of theirs? (closeup of joint) I would like to see the method.
> -thanx, BB
> do not archive
>
Robert,
Just got up early to beat the WX. I just got a new set from TNK yesterday.
They are unpainted so you can see the weld. I will try to send later today.
Steve
FF#007 do not archive
________________________________________________________________________________
--> Kolb-List message posted by: N27SB(at)aol.com
Robert, photos on the way. The length of the tubing for a Firefly is 27",
add 1" of thread on each end.
BTW, Flew the Firefly on floats this morning. Nice morning,What Fun.
steve
FF #007
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DAquaNut(at)aol.com |
Group:
I would like to have an inexpensive way to verify that my tach is
reading correctly when I go to break in my 447. I have the tiny tach, but I
would like to have a backup. Any suggestions? Also, I dont want to start a gas
war here Buuuuutttttt !!!!!!!! Are there any particular brands of gas I
should stay away from. Any proven brands with a good record? SeemsI saw where
someone on the list preferred Amoco. I cant find that brand in south Texas.
I
just want to feed my rotax good stuff from the start.
Ed in (Hou Beautiful flying weather, but just not quite ready
yet)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjungjr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Firestar cross-country |
Group,
This weekend, I solved one of my problems with cross countries and got
a good test on the other:
About a year ago, I put a new seat in my Firestar because I got very
uncomfortable after 1.5 to 2 hours. The new seat has two inches of
memory foam. Other than that it is just like my original seat. Now, I
can fly at least 6 hours in comfort. Problem solved.
The other problem that I've had in the past, was having to land
somewhere, even before needing gas, to relieve myself. In parts of
Arizona there are no places to land safely, and diverting to an
airstrip could cause me to not have enough gas to make it to an airport
that sells gas. I didn't think it would be possible to use a relief
bottle in-flight. But I found myself about a hour from my next stop,
with no place for a landing, and needing to go bad. I had a Gatorade
bottle mostly full with water. My Firestar is fully enclosed so I
poured the water out one of the vents. Then I used the bottle. Not only
is it possible, it wasn't all that difficult. Sure wish that I knew
that years ago.
John Jung
Firestar II N6163J
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjungjr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Density-altitude |
Group,
Yesterday, I returned from Monument Valley in my Firestar. It was 640
miles round trip, plus some local flying while there.
On the trip, I learned that density-altitude really does matter.
It caused a surprising loss of performance and increased fuel burn.
I originally learned about density-altitude while working on my private
in a Cessna 150. The runway altitude was 800 feet, it was in Wisconsin
where it is easy to avoid flying in hot temperatures, and the runway
was long enough for jet traffic. So, it was "book learning" and didn't
really seem important. Also, a Kolb has so much extra performance that
it is easy to not consider density-altitude. This weekend, we had 90
degree temperatures at a 5,200 foot elevating runway, giving a
density-altitude of over 8,000 feet. I'm used to flying from 1,200 feet
elevation. I also had to cruise at 8,000 feet in 70 degree temperatures
just to not fly close to the ground. That gave me about 10,500 feet
density altitude. I also took off from a 6,000 foot runway at 90
degrees, giving me about 9,500 feet density altitude. In addition to
that, I was carrying extra gas and camping gear, so I was heavier than
normal. The biggest difference was the loss of performance. Not a
problem if it is expected and planned for. But I kept being surprised
at how long it took to get off a runway and climb out. Fuel burn was
about a half gallon per hour higher also. This was probably because I
was not jetted for altitude. But contributing to that was the fact that
I was flying about 5 mph faster than usual because of airspeed error
caused by density-altitude. Density-altitude can also change the
feeling of a landing. Stall speeds are increased and airspeed error
compensates so that indicated airspeed stays the same. But landings
look and really are faster, making me feel like pulling off power too
soon. I didn't, I trusted my airspeed, but I did have to resist the
feeling of wanting to slow down. It was like doing a downwind landing.
John Jung
Firestar II 503 DCDI
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Density-altitude |
Good stuff, John. How was the trip home ?? Several of us discussed what
you were likely to run into, and I'd be curious as to what the flight really
was like. I would guess that you hit a lot of wind, so how did your fuel
capacity work out ?? Lar. Do not
Archive.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Building Kolb Mk III
N78LB Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Jung" <jrjungjr(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: Density-altitude
>
> Group,
>
> Yesterday, I returned from Monument Valley in my Firestar. It was 640
> miles round trip, plus some local flying while there.
>
> On the trip, I learned that density-altitude really does matter.
>
> It caused a surprising loss of performance and increased fuel burn.
> I originally learned about density-altitude while working on my private
> in a Cessna 150. The runway altitude was
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjungjr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Cross Country cruise RPM |
Bill and Group,
I cruised at 5,800 on this trip. That gave me an indicated airspeed up
to 60-65 mph, and a true airspeed of 64-69. The average altitude on
this trip was about 7,000 and density altitude went as high as 10,500.
A lot of the state was setting record high temperatures on the day of
my return. So the numbers are not really normal.
John Jung
Firestar II 503 DCDI
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Cross Country cruise RPM |
For comparison, Ed & I went airstrip hopping for a couple hours Saturday,
me in the 582 poweredMKIII, and he was flying the 582 powered FSII, both of
us using 2 blade, 68" Ivo's. Both of us were running about the same, 52 -
5,300 rpm and about 62 mph. Altitude typically 2,500 msl, temp low 70's.
That gave us both a fuel burn of 6 gallons for 1.8 hours, or about 3.2 gph.
And on a somewhat related note, while we were at the Lumberton Fly-in May
14th, spent about an hour talking to the owner of D & F Aviation, Rotax
dealer in Goldsboro, and he mentioned that Rotax was considering coming out
with a revised overhaul schedule for 582's and 503's which are normally
operated at less than 75% power, or less than 5,500 rpm. The new time
between overhaul would be every 450 hours instead of 300 hours. If there is
any way of verifying this, and if it is true, that drastically reduces the
cost of operating a Rotax 2-stroke.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (42oldPoops)
>
>Bill and Group,
>
>I cruised at 5,800 on this trip. That gave me an indicated airspeed up
>to 60-65 mph, and a true airspeed of 64-69. The average altitude on
>this trip was about 7,000 and density altitude went as high as 10,500.
>A lot of the state was setting record high temperatures on the day of
>my return. So the numbers are not really normal.
>
>John Jung
>Firestar II 503 DCDI
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Erich_Weaver(at)URSCorp.com |
05/24/2005 01:42:39 PM
Craig and others at MV expressed some interest in the muffler for the 912
engine.
Here is the web site for it:
http://www.rick-thomason.com/ste_002.htm
regards
Erich Weaver
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjungjr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Firestar cross-country |
Mike and Group,
>was that 2" of Memory Foam on the seat and back or just seat??
I used memory foam on just the seat. The backrest has the Kolb mesh and
open cell foam, shaped for some arch support.
John Jung
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjungjr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | RE: Density-altitude |
Larry and Group,
>How was the trip home ?? Several of us discussed what
you were likely to run into, and I'd be curious as to what the flight
really was like. I would guess that you hit a lot of wind, so how did
your fuel capacity work out ??
I averaged 5 mph head winds. Not bad, but it caused me to make an
extra stop to pour in 3 gallons of fuel from the tank in the back seat.
The only problem was that the thermals continued to grow as the day
went on. By noon they were as violent as any I have ever flown in. I
kind of decided that I am done with middle of the day flying until
things cool of next fall.
John Jung
Firestar II 503 DCDI
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjungjr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | 8.00 X 6.00 tire costs? |
Group,
After seeing the Kolbs that flew into MV, I get ideas of how I'd like
to change my Firestar. One is tires. I have 6.00 X 6.00s and they do
the job fine but the 8.00 X 6.00s look better. So I checked into them
and they seem to cost about $100 each for the tires plus more for the
tubes. That's more than double what the 6 X 6's cost. Is that just it,
or am I just not finding the best source?
John Jung
Firestar II
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ellery Batchelder <elleryweld(at)aol.com> |
Ellery Batchelder has invited you to join hi5. By joining hi5, you will be connected
to Ellery and all of Ellery's friends.
hi5 is the place where friends meet. You can use hi5 for the following purposes:
* Find old friends
* Meet new people
* Browse photos
Join Ellery, meet Ellery's friends, and meet people that share your interests now!
Click here:
http://www.hi5.com/register/OU8CQ?inviteId=441I38ZS2722458946k0
This invitation was sent to kolb-list(at)matronics.com on behalf of Ellery Batchelder
(elleryweld(at)aol.com).
If you do not wish to receive invitations from hi5 members, click on the link below:
http://www.hi5.com/friend/displayBlockInvite.do?inviteId=441I38ZS2722458946k0
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjungjr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Capacitance fuel senders |
Group,
I learned another thing last weekend. 100LL and auto fuel do not
indicate the same with a capacitance fuel sender. With my tank full of
100LL, the EIS indicates 4.9 gallons. When full with auto gas, it reads
5.2 gallons. Not a big error, but just another thing to be aware of.
John Jung
Firestar II N6163J
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "George E. Thompson" <eagle1(at)commspeed.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Monument Valley |
I stayed with Az Dave and wife in his BAM. I drove up to MV because I had to
get back to attend to business.Dave and I with his wife had just returned
from a trip to the Czech Republic. Why would anyone go to the Czech Republic
you may ask. Well it turned out that My 16th Armored Division under General
George S.Patton was the very first Allied troupes and tanks into Plisen the
second largest city in the area. So this all happened 60 years ago in 1945,
The Czech Government invited all us old Vets to come back and help celebrate
the 60th university of there Liberation. Unfortunately only 15 from our
Division were able to make the trip. Fortunately I was one of them. Anyway,
we each got a nice 60th Liberation medal from the President himself. Also
went on over to Prague where the Mayor gave each of us a Gold medal. There
you have it in a nutshell.
Boring to some, interesting to others.
Az. Bald Eagle
From: "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: Monument Valley
>
> Where is everybody ?? I know the whole Kolb List wasn't at MV. :-)
>
> I think John W. told me he'd logged 26 people by Saturday afternoon. He
> and several
> others - John H., Boyd Young and Jim Hefner - are up in Canyonlands, near
> Moab, Utah now, and from there will be going to the Alvord Desert in
> Southern Oregon to meet Larry Cottrell, so we won't be hearing from them
> for a while. I didn't do a real count of the planes there, but for sure
> there were a Mooney, Dave Rains' Cessna C175, and about 12 - 15 Kolbs. It
> was quite a flight line. A very nice group, and it was relaxing, but
> intense. A lot of activity in a short time. Flying started nearly at
> dawn for some, while others of us eased into breakfast at the excellent
> restaurant at Goulding's before taking to the air. By about 10:00 AM the
> wind came up, the sun got hot, and everyone hid under the awnings of the
> RV's, and under airplane wings............and put on their hip boots.
> Late in the afternoon, the wind pretty much died down, and flying started
> again. This time, more flights were made up to the Mexican Hat area and
> the horseshoes of the San Juan River, about 20 !
> miles north of MV. Previously, most flights went east, over Monument
> Valley. The 2 areas are a world apart in scenery, and both spectacular.
> I arrived at MV at around 11:00 AM Friday, and was surprised to see that
> many folks were already there. It got an early start this year, but ended
> a bit early, too, with most leaving Sunday, instead of Monday, as last
> year. What a great way to spend a weekend. (All that in only a weekend
> ?? Amazing ! ! ! ) In a while, I'll post some pictures.......possibly
> even today. :-) It was quite a shock yesterday, coming from ~80 deg.
> weather there, to 111 deg here in the desert. Oh well..........back to
> reality today. Big Lar. Do not
> Archive.
>
> Larry Bourne
> Palm Springs, CA
> Building Kolb Mk III
> N78LB Vamoose
> www.gogittum.com
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Edward Steuber" <esteuber(at)rochester.rr.com> |
I had a problem starting my Cuyuna UL202 and found it had low compression
on both cylinders . It only had 30 hours since the cylinders had been rehoned
because they were too tight with the pistons. The clearance before was .003(too
tight) and after .007(correct) but the paperwork from the shop does not say
anything about cleaning or inspecting the ring lands. I was told that many
of the original Cuyuna's were sent from the factory with incorrect tight piston
clearance that caused many failures . This engine had already been repaired
once because it has the .010 pistons . Upon dissassembly I found both rings on
one piston were stuck and one on the other. I believe they were overlooked and
reassembled. But there is one question I need answering.... The pistons are
.010 Wiseco's that are different from the standard Cuyuna pistons in that they
have much thinner rings.........could these sticking rings have been caused in
such a short time by this ring-piston combination ? The thinner rings have to
run hotter...I have been using the same 2cycle Pennzoil air-cooled oil and Mobil
premium fuel with similar temps as the last Cuyuna UL 202 that I operated
on another Ultrastar I flew for 100 hours with no trouble. I use a 40 to 1 oil
mix as the book says and my egt temps were about 1150 with the lower compression
cylinder (pto) running about 30 degrees hotter...I was told by a parts supplier
that the Wiseco piston is an after-market alternative and not as good as
the originals because they run hotter.
Any of you experienced Cuyuna drivers have any info on this problem ?
Since cleaning the carbon out and reassembly this engine has really good compression
now ...I am looking forward to flying it with the new found power...it
has to make a difference. What can I expect from these pistons in the future ?
I know there may be some on the list that might have poor opinions of
the Cuyuna's.... but all comments will be appreciated...
carboned-up ED in Western NY
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | robert bean <slyck(at)frontiernet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 8.00 X 6.00 tire costs? |
Try Desser Tire, starting on page 21:
http://shop.desser.com/iwwidb.pvx?;multi_item_submit
-BB, MkIIIc, N3851E, a good tire is one that holds air
On 24, May 2005, at 3:14 PM, John Jung wrote:
>
> Group,
>
> After seeing the Kolbs that flew into MV, I get ideas of how I'd like
> to change my Firestar. One is tires. I have 6.00 X 6.00s and they do
> the job fine but the 8.00 X 6.00s look better. So I checked into them
> and they seem to cost about $100 each for the tires plus more for the
> tubes. That's more than double what the 6 X 6's cost. Is that just it,
> or am I just not finding the best source?
>
> John Jung
> Firestar II
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "b young" <by0ung(at)brigham.net> |
| Subject: | Re: boyd has landed |
kolbers
boyd has landed from the trip to mv... ( sunday nigit) ..... after
getting a bit sunburnt saturday..... i decided not to hang around moab /
canyonlands. instead i fuled up and headed for home so i did not have to
stand around in the heat...... sorry john, john, and jim.... the trip
home was about 5 1/2 hours of flight time according to the gps....... with
fuel stops it added another hour or so.... the air was a lot smother than
last year, and to avoid the heat and bumps, i went up to 9500 ft since i
had flown the route low to the deck on multiple other trips.
boyd
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 8.00 X 6.00 tire costs? |
In a message dated 5/24/2005 10:05:27 PM Eastern Standard Time,
jrjungjr(at)yahoo.com writes:
After seeing the Kolbs that flew into MV, I get ideas of how I'd like
to change my Firestar. One is tires. I have 6.00 X 6.00s and they do
the job fine but the 8.00 X 6.00s look better. So I checked into them
and they seem to cost about $100 each for the tires plus more for the
tubes. That's more than double what the 6 X 6's cost. Is that just it,
or am I just not finding the best source?
Check out the California Power Systems catalogue.
We just bought a couple "bush plane " tires & tubes from them. Don't have
the cat. in front of me, but seems they were 8.00 X 6 at about $54 ea. plus
about $20 for the tube.
If you want, I can look up the part #'s tomorrow.
Howard Shackleford
FS II
SC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjungjr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Density-altitude |
Larry and Group,
>How was the trip home ?? Several of us discussed what
you were likely to run into, and I'd be curious as to what the flight
really
was like. I would guess that you hit a lot of wind, so how did your
fuel
capacity work out ??
I averaged 5 mph head winds. Not bad, but it caused me to make an
extra stop to pour in 3 gallons of fuel from the tank in the back seat.
The only problem was that the thermals continued to grow as the day
went on. By noon they were as violent as any I have ever flown in. I
kind of decided that I am done with middle of the day flying until
things cool of next fall.
John Jung
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Denny Rowe" <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 8.00 X 6.00 tire costs? |
John,
I use Carlisle 8.00 X 6.00 Turf Glide tires I bought from a local tire
dealer (he ordered em), they where less than $25 each, Olenick aviation also
sells them for a little more than that if you can't locate them locally.
Also, John H swears by Aero Trainers by McCreary (At least I think thats the
ones) Aircraft spruce lists the 6.00X 6 for $34 each, but I don't see 8.00
listed, maybe I have the wrong name here? Anyway, the turf glides shake a
little after lift off, but the price is right and they look great, also can
handle plenty of weight as I see them on many much heavier planes than my
Mk-3, such as Rans, and Zenairs. Also the tubes from my local guy were $6
each, pretty good prices for such beefy tires and tubes.
Denny Rowe
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Jung" <jrjungjr(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: 8.00 X 6.00 tire costs?
>
> Group,
>
> After seeing the Kolbs that flew into MV, I get ideas of how I'd like
> to change my Firestar. One is tires. I have 6.00 X 6.00s and they do
> the job fine but the 8.00 X 6.00s look better. So I checked into them
> and they seem to cost about $100 each for the tires plus more for the
> tubes. That's more than double what the 6 X 6's cost. Is that just it,
> or am I just not finding the best source?
>
> John Jung
> Firestar II
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David L. Bigelow" <dlbigelow(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | High Altitude Compensating Carbs |
Interesting reading about John Jung's experiences at high density altitudes. I
installed HAC carbs on my 503 powered FS2, and have not been sorry for the expense
once. Here on the Big Island of Hawaii, it is not unusual to range from
sea level to 10,000 feet during a single flight. This past Sunday I took off
from my pasture strip, (density altitude of 5,500 feet) flew across the saddle
between Mauna Loa and Mauna Kea at 8,000 feet, flew down the east coast at 500
feet, shot some landings at a near sea level strip, and then back home.
Although there is quite a performance difference between sea level and the higher
altitudes, the EGT varies very little (at the same RPM) with altitude. This
tells me the automatic mixture compensation is working as advertised. My little
ship seems happy cruising at about 50 mph IAS, which takes about 4,900 rpm
near sea level, and 5,100 rpm at 5,000 feet. A two hour flight with some climbs
and descents burns 6 - 7 gallons.
Dave Bigelow
FS2
Kamuela, Hawaii
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjungjr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Firestar cross-country |
Mike and Group,
>was that 2" of Memory Foam on the seat and back or just seat??
I used memory foam on just the seat. The backrest has the Kolb mesh and
open cell foam, shaped for some arch support.
John Jung
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Airgriff2(at)aol.com |
Hi Ed, an inexpensive way to verify your mini tach is to buy a digital prop
tach, ($49 Sky Sports). Multiply your reading by the gear ratio for engine rpm.
Fly Safe
Bob Griffin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeremy Casey" <n79rt(at)kilocharlie.us> |
I stayed with Az Dave and wife in his BAM. I drove up to MV because I
had to
get back to attend to business.Dave and I with his wife had just
returned
from a trip to the Czech Republic. Why would anyone go to the Czech
Republic
you may ask. Well it turned out that My 16th Armored Division under
General
George S.Patton was the very first Allied troupes and tanks into Plisen
the
second largest city in the area. So this all happened 60 years ago in
1945,
The Czech Government invited all us old Vets to come back and help
celebrate
the 60th university of there Liberation. Unfortunately only 15 from our
Division were able to make the trip. Fortunately I was one of them.
Anyway,
we each got a nice 60th Liberation medal from the President himself.
Also
went on over to Prague where the Mayor gave each of us a Gold medal.
There
you have it in a nutshell.
Boring to some, interesting to others.
Az. Bald Eagle
Very good job...60 years ago and going back to get help remember it as
well...good job.
Jeremy Casey
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rusty" <13brv3c(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Slingshot engine thrust angle? |
Greetings,
I'm in the process of making the motor mount to put the single rotor Mazda
on my current SS, and I'm trying to recall the thrust angle details. I know
there is usually about a 1" shim under the rear of the engine, but I'm not
sure exactly why it's there. It certainly gives more prop clearance, but
I'm presuming it's main purpose is to lower the thrust angle.
I guess the real question is what the current "best" thrust angle is thought
to be, so I can just start with that. Also, I have to wonder if Kolb has
raised the rear mount on current frames, rather than having people add
shims. If not, I wonder if they even approve of the shims. I took a quick
look at the plans and manual, and didn't see any mention of shimming the
rear of the engine, though I think it's pretty common, and could swear it
was recommended by Kolb.
If anyone can enlighten me on the reason and amount to shim the engine, I'd
appreciate it. If power matters, figure on 100 hp.
Thanks,
Rusty (finally getting back to the SS)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <tophera(at)centurytel.net> |
Thanks for risking your life 60 years ago. The world would be a much
different place if you and your fellows were not as brave as you were.
Christopher Armstrong
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack & Louise Hart <jbhart(at)ldd.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Density-altitude |
>
John,
Your experience reminded me of my last trip to the Cape Girardeau Airshow.
It was held in the second week in July, and it was very hot. I got there
early, and as the morning passed large cumulus clouds began forming and you
could see little localized thunder bumpers passing by to the south. As the
morning wore on the clouds grew in size and the localized showers to the
south began moving north toward the airport. Just before the airshow as to
start, I called the tower on my cell phone to get permission to leave.
I taxied out and took off. I was heavy and like you I was surprised how
long it took to get the FireFly off the ground. My initial mistake was not
worrying about air density. My second mistake was trying to be too helpful
and clearing the runway too soon. I lost the runway thermal and I was out
over the grass. If I had not had a vertical climb indicator, I would have
put it back on the ground. But I could just make a positive climb of about
50 fpm. Also, I could not run the engine wide open because coolant
temperature would exceed the upper limit. There I was out over the
Mississippi River bottoms south of Cape Girardeau in massive sink and I had
to pass over Cape Girardeau to get back to Perryville. I turned and flew
over I55 that passes north and south through Cape and picked up the traffic
and pavement heat. This pushed the climb rate up to 100 fpm. On the north
side of Cape, the FireFly finally reached 600 feet and away from the moist
air over the river bottoms and the climb rate went up to 550 fpm. The rest
of the trip was uneventful except for a few sprinkles.
One other experience with massive sink. In the early days of my FireFly my
wife's cousin wanted to see it. I flew FireFly down to East Prairie,
Missouri on a hot mid July day. East Prairie is a little town located in
the boot heel of Missouri and on the Mississippi River bottom. At this time
the FireFly was powered by the 447. On the way I flew at 2,000 agl and as I
passed over the edge of the town the bottom fell out. With the throttle
wide open I was still losing 200 fpm. I had flown over a little green
town in the middle of the surrounding farm land. I turned and flew back out
into the country and everything returned to normal.
After the airspeed indicator, I believe the vertical airspeed indicator is
the next most important instrument.
Enough of the ramblings of someone whose FireFly is 300 miles away. The
wife's last official day was yesterday, and so she will be here today.
Hopefully we can go retrieve the FireFly next week.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Winchester, IN
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart(at)ldd.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeremy Casey" <n79rt(at)kilocharlie.us> |
OOOPPPPSS!!! Meant to say "TO HELP" not "to GET help" I guess you knew
what I meant...
Like said by someone else...good to see some remembering the sacrifices
that were made...not nearly enough in my opinion.
Jeremy
Very good job...60 years ago and going back to get help remember it as
well...good job.
Jeremy Casey
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeremy Casey" <n79rt(at)kilocharlie.us> |
| Subject: | Slingshot engine thrust angle? |
Hey Rusty,
Ted Cowan (on this list) did a lot of tinkering with his thrust angle
and seems to have nailed it down. Ted you out there?
Jeremy
<13brv3c(at)bellsouth.net>
Greetings,
I'm in the process of making the motor mount to put the single rotor
Mazda
on my current SS, and I'm trying to recall the thrust angle details. I
know
there is usually about a 1" shim under the rear of the engine, but I'm
not
sure exactly why it's there. It certainly gives more prop clearance,
but
I'm presuming it's main purpose is to lower the thrust angle.
I guess the real question is what the current "best" thrust angle is
thought
to be, so I can just start with that. Also, I have to wonder if Kolb
has
raised the rear mount on current frames, rather than having people add
shims. If not, I wonder if they even approve of the shims. I took a
quick
look at the plans and manual, and didn't see any mention of shimming the
rear of the engine, though I think it's pretty common, and could swear
it
was recommended by Kolb.
If anyone can enlighten me on the reason and amount to shim the engine,
I'd
appreciate it. If power matters, figure on 100 hp.
Thanks,
Rusty (finally getting back to the SS)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Paule" <dpaule(at)frii.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 8.00 X 6.00 tire costs? |
Thanks for the many helpful suggestions and information you've posted over
the years about the Kolbs. They greatly aided my decision to buy one last
year.
I also have a Cessna 180 Skywagon, 230 hp, taildragger. Its gross weight is
2,550 pounds.
It's got the 6:00-6 tires on it. I calculated the ground contact pressures
and found that at my gross weight, these tires give about the same contact
stress on the ground as the biggest 8:50-6 tires on the heavier Cessna 185,
which if memory is right, grosses at 3,600 pounds.
I've landed on sandy mesas, grass fields, and even a beach once, down in
Baja, with the waves crashing and a brisk crosswind. The only time I've felt
that my tires were too small, it was my tailwheel tire, a stock 8" tire. I
really should change that to a 10" tire sometime. Don't ask for my opinion
of the inky-dinky tiny tailwheel tire that came with the Firestar!
As the tire sizes get bigger, each main-gear tire size change slows the
Skywagon down 2 mph per size. They also make landings and take-offs slightly
more difficult, due to the increased sideward flexibility. I can really feel
the additional rolling inertia as larger tires spin up, landing.
On the Kolb, larger tires shouldn't really be necessary. But I doubt they'll
hurt. They will improve the static angle of incidence in the 3-point
attitude.
For price, one thing to check is whether you can find used tires somewhere.
They'll be lighter and that's a benefit. Can't imagine you'll put any wear
on them. There's another potential benefit: smooth tires, slicks, are easier
to land with on pavement, because they slide sideways easier. I've been
running slicks on the Skywagon for about 15 years now, and wouldn't have
anything else.
I'd like to put the 6:00-6 tires on my Firestar II. Do they fit the wheels?
Hate to admit it, but I don't know what size wheels they are, except that
they're stock.
Dave Paule
Boulder, CO
FS II
Cessna 180 Skywagon
>
After seeing the Kolbs that flew into MV, I get ideas of how I'd like
to change my Firestar. One is tires. I have 6.00 X 6.00s and they do
the job fine but the 8.00 X 6.00s look better. So I checked into them
and they seem to cost about $100 each for the tires plus more for the
tubes. That's more than double what the 6 X 6's cost. Is that just it,
or am I just not finding the best source?
John Jung
Firestar II
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerb <ulflyer(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 8.00 X 6.00 tire costs? |
Sounds like your looking at GA style tires, there probably going to be
heavy. I think you need to wonder over to Lockwood, Aircraft Spruce, or
even Wicks and you may fine some other alternatives that are not so
heavy. The CGS Hawks use a nice looking wide tire on there mains.
jerb
>
>Try Desser Tire, starting on page 21:
>
>http://shop.desser.com/iwwidb.pvx?;multi_item_submit
>
>-BB, MkIIIc, N3851E, a good tire is one that holds air
>On 24, May 2005, at 3:14 PM, John Jung wrote:
>
> >
> > Group,
> >
> > After seeing the Kolbs that flew into MV, I get ideas of how I'd like
> > to change my Firestar. One is tires. I have 6.00 X 6.00s and they do
> > the job fine but the 8.00 X 6.00s look better. So I checked into them
> > and they seem to cost about $100 each for the tires plus more for the
> > tubes. That's more than double what the 6 X 6's cost. Is that just it,
> > or am I just not finding the best source?
> >
> > John Jung
> > Firestar II
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Density-altitude |
| From: | tohara(at)alphagraphics.com |
> Being a KOLB owner of 2 days (I bought Dick Neitzel's Mark III
Classic-Rotax 582)I guess I can now through in my 0.02. Yea, the Big
Muddy is a HUGE sink-- I was flying a hot air balloon over it several
years ago and was at equilibrium at 2000 feet. Wham, went over the
river and had to go to both burners to pull out of the sink (25MM BTU's
of power). Ended up pulling out at around 150 feet. All of the other
balloons experienced the same sink. Had we not been able to pull out--
it would not have been a pleasant experience as the water was really
tubulent and certainly would have tipped the baskets and dragged the
envelope under.
RE: Density altitude-- automated asos stations now report density altitude
during the summer months so there is no need to calculate with your trusty
E6B. One can find the asos number in the airport directories.
>
>>
> John,
>
> Your experience reminded me of my last trip to the Cape Girardeau Airshow.
> It was held in the second week in July, and it was very hot. I got there
> early, and as the morning passed large cumulus clouds began forming and
> you
> could see little localized thunder bumpers passing by to the south. As
> the
> morning wore on the clouds grew in size and the localized showers to the
> south began moving north toward the airport. Just before the airshow as
> to
> start, I called the tower on my cell phone to get permission to leave.
>
> I taxied out and took off. I was heavy and like you I was surprised how
> long it took to get the FireFly off the ground. My initial mistake was
> not
> worrying about air density. My second mistake was trying to be too
> helpful
> and clearing the runway too soon. I lost the runway thermal and I was out
> over the grass. If I had not had a vertical climb indicator, I would have
> put it back on the ground. But I could just make a positive climb of
> about
> 50 fpm. Also, I could not run the engine wide open because coolant
> temperature would exceed the upper limit. There I was out over the
> Mississippi River bottoms south of Cape Girardeau in massive sink and I
> had
> to pass over Cape Girardeau to get back to Perryville. I turned and flew
> over I55 that passes north and south through Cape and picked up the
> traffic
> and pavement heat. This pushed the climb rate up to 100 fpm. On the
> north
> side of Cape, the FireFly finally reached 600 feet and away from the moist
> air over the river bottoms and the climb rate went up to 550 fpm. The
> rest
> of the trip was uneventful except for a few sprinkles.
>
> One other experience with massive sink. In the early days of my FireFly
> my
> wife's cousin wanted to see it. I flew FireFly down to East Prairie,
> Missouri on a hot mid July day. East Prairie is a little town located in
> the boot heel of Missouri and on the Mississippi River bottom. At this
> time
> the FireFly was powered by the 447. On the way I flew at 2,000 agl and as
> I
> passed over the edge of the town the bottom fell out. With the throttle
> wide open I was still losing 200 fpm. I had flown over a little green
> town in the middle of the surrounding farm land. I turned and flew back
> out
> into the country and everything returned to normal.
>
> After the airspeed indicator, I believe the vertical airspeed indicator is
> the next most important instrument.
>
> Enough of the ramblings of someone whose FireFly is 300 miles away. The
> wife's last official day was yesterday, and so she will be here today.
> Hopefully we can go retrieve the FireFly next week.
>
> Jack B. Hart FF004
> Winchester, IN
>
>
> Jack & Louise Hart
> jbhart(at)ldd.net
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Swiderwski" <rswiderski(at)earthlink.net> |
My buddy, an ex-Cuyuna repairman, unsuccessfully tried a pair of Wiseco
pistons in his Cuyuna. They did not hold up either, he steered me away from
them.
Richard Swiderski
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Edward Steuber
Subject: Kolb-List: Stuck rings
I had a problem starting my Cuyuna UL202 and found it had low
compression on both cylinders . It only had 30 hours since the cylinders had
been rehoned because they were too tight with the pistons. The clearance
before was .003(too tight) and after .007(correct) but the paperwork from
the shop does not say anything about cleaning or inspecting the ring lands.
I was told that many of the original Cuyuna's were sent from the factory
with incorrect tight piston clearance that caused many failures . This
engine had already been repaired once because it has the .010 pistons . Upon
dissassembly I found both rings on one piston were stuck and one on the
other. I believe they were overlooked and reassembled. But there is one
question I need answering.... The pistons are .010 Wiseco's that are
different from the standard Cuyuna pistons in that they have much thinner
rings.........could these sticking rings have been caused in such a short
time by this ring-piston combination !
? The thinner rings have to run hotter...I have been using the same 2cycle
Pennzoil air-cooled oil and Mobil premium fuel with similar temps as the
last Cuyuna UL 202 that I operated on another Ultrastar I flew for 100 hours
with no trouble. I use a 40 to 1 oil mix as the book says and my egt temps
were about 1150 with the lower compression cylinder (pto) running about 30
degrees hotter...I was told by a parts supplier that the Wiseco piston is an
after-market alternative and not as good as the originals because they run
hotter.
Any of you experienced Cuyuna drivers have any info on this problem
? Since cleaning the carbon out and reassembly this engine has really good
compression now ...I am looking forward to flying it with the new found
power...it has to make a difference. What can I expect from these pistons in
the future ?
I know there may be some on the list that might have poor opinions
of the Cuyuna's.... but all comments will be appreciated...
carboned-up ED in Western NY
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "nmatthew" <nmatthew(at)qwest.net> |
I have a Firefly; the top tube of the fuselage is stamped UL 029, and I
checked the fuel consumption this weekend, its almost 5 GPH. After
reading about the fellow in Hawaii getting two hours on 6-7 gallons I've
been thinking my wing might be too small. I am 220#, and have the rotax
447. The plane was wrecked when I bought it, so I built a new fuselage
that is about 4" taller than stock to accommodate my height. It is
heavy.
How much fuel consumption do other Firefly pilots get?
I looked at the Firestar plans and they appear to have an identical wing
section to the Fly. Has anyone ever tried the firestar wing on a
firefly?
Thanks in advance for any feedback.
Matt North- Tucson, AZ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerb <ulflyer(at)verizon.net> |
How much heavier?
We used to figure about 3.3 GPH on ours. My partner was around 260# and I
was at one point topping 290#. Cruise on the step was about 70 with
enclosure. Sounds like you don't have it quite propped right. Where are
your CHT and EGT's running. What is full throttle RPM on climb out? On 5
gallon tank we wanted to be on the ground within 1 hour 20 min, 1-30 tops.
jerb
>
>I have a Firefly; the top tube of the fuselage is stamped UL 029, and I
>checked the fuel consumption this weekend, its almost 5 GPH. After
>reading about the fellow in Hawaii getting two hours on 6-7 gallons I've
>been thinking my wing might be too small. I am 220#, and have the rotax
>447. The plane was wrecked when I bought it, so I built a new fuselage
>that is about 4" taller than stock to accommodate my height. It is
>heavy.
>
>How much fuel consumption do other Firefly pilots get?
>
>I looked at the Firestar plans and they appear to have an identical wing
>section to the Fly. Has anyone ever tried the firestar wing on a
>firefly?
>
>Thanks in advance for any feedback.
>
>Matt North- Tucson, AZ
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack & Louise Hart <jbhart(at)ldd.net> |
>
..................
>
>How much fuel consumption do other Firefly pilots get?
>
Matt,
I checked my flight log. With the Rotax 447 mounted, I make nine 108 mile
round trips point to point to my EAA Chapter meetings. The fuel consumption
ranged from 2.6 to 3.4 gph with an average of 3.06 gph. Average ground
speed was 58 mph. I tried to run the EGT's between 1,150 and 1,200 degrees
F.
I have made the same trip eight times with the Simmonini Victor 1+. Fuel
consumption ranged from 2.0 to 2.9 gph with an average of 2.2 gph. Average
ground speed was 49 mph.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Winchester, IN
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart(at)ldd.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ted Cowan <trc1917(at)direcway.com> |
| Subject: | thrust angle of SS |
Well, I guess I have been prompted to answer this. We have two SlingShots
in our group and both of us had to modify the motor mount system. I use
high risers on mine to better occomodate the wing fold. I guess if you dont
have a 582 with the muffler hanging over the side, you would not mount the
engine higher. In my case, I rase the rear mounts 3/4 of a inch. I also
put two thrust washers under the left front (looking at it from the rear of
the engine) One washer under each the right front and rear left and
basically no extra washers under the rear right. This makes the ole bugger
tract straight no hands. With my electric ele. trim, you can let go the
handle at speeds and not nose dive to the left. I am happy with mine. I am
going to change my ail. radial rods this morning to relext the ails up so at
speeds I will not have the tendacy to dive so much. I think it will level
flight better. Hope this helps. By the way, I think my plane is about a
hundred pounds heavier than the other one but the pilot is a LOT heavier
than I am, about seventy pounds and TALL. I dont think he has done a W&B so
I dont know what his center is. That's alls I knows. Other than the fact
that this plane is a hoot. Ted Cowan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerb <ulflyer(at)verizon.net> |
Jack,
Are you cruising the same speed with both engines or is the cruise with the
Victor slower than with Rotax?
jerb
>
> >
>..................
> >
> >How much fuel consumption do other Firefly pilots get?
> >
>
>Matt,
>
>I checked my flight log. With the Rotax 447 mounted, I make nine 108 mile
>round trips point to point to my EAA Chapter meetings. The fuel consumption
>ranged from 2.6 to 3.4 gph with an average of 3.06 gph. Average ground
>speed was 58 mph. I tried to run the EGT's between 1,150 and 1,200 degrees
>F.
>
>I have made the same trip eight times with the Simmonini Victor 1+. Fuel
>consumption ranged from 2.0 to 2.9 gph with an average of 2.2 gph. Average
>ground speed was 49 mph.
>
>Jack B. Hart FF004
>Winchester, IN
>
>
>Jack & Louise Hart
>jbhart(at)ldd.net
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Edward Steuber" <esteuber(at)rochester.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Carboned up UL202 |
I just got back from flying the Ultrastar after cleaning the ring land
grooves on the Wiseco pistons...started on second pull and flew with lower EGT's
and was much smoother. Problem solved..... but will be watching carefully to
see if the carbon buildup returns....maybe a little Sea Foam ?
I'll keep you all informed as to how it goes and what I find. Thanks to
all who responded...
Test Pilot ED in Western NY
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "b young" <by0ung(at)brigham.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Kolb-List Digest: 18 Msgs - 05/25/05 |
Hi Ed, an inexpensive way to verify your mini tach is to buy a digital prop
tach, ($49 Sky Sports). Multiply your reading by the gear ratio for engine
rpm.
Fly Safe
Bob Griffin
or you could go to a model airplane flying field and see if one of the
pilots has a tach they use for model aircraft..... he might be willing to
come and help you for the fun of it......
boyd
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack & Louise Hart <jbhart(at)ldd.net> |
>
>Jack,
>Are you cruising the same speed with both engines or is the cruise with the
>Victor slower than with Rotax?
>jerb
>
Jerb,
No, I am not cruising at the same speeds. I could never get the 447 engine
to cruise at a stable 50 mphi. The engine did not like to run at this
speed. With my head sticking out in the breeze, the fastest I like to fly
is 50 - 55 mphi. The bugs & rain do not hurt so bad in this speed range.
Also, I do not have a sore neck the next day after an EAA Chapter flight if
I cruise in the 50 - 55 mphi range. The Victor 1+ holds a stable rpm at any
throttle position.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Winchester, IN
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart(at)ldd.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rusty" <13brv3c(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | thrust angle of SS |
Thanks for the comments Ted, and others, on and off list. I also just
talked to TNK about it, and from all sources, it doesn't sound like it makes
much difference whether you shim up the rear of the engine or not. Some
have shimmed, and some haven't, and they all fly fine.
The biggest reason, as you pointed out, is for clearance of either the prop,
or the wing folding.
The other day, I couldn't find anything on my searches of the archives, but
I almost accidentally stumbled on a great post by Jack Hart a few minutes
ago.
http://tinyurl.com/aghwd
He measured the angle of attack of a Firefly wing in flight, and found it to
be about 7 degrees. With that knowledge, it's much easier to make an
informed decision about the engine mount angle. That's very much Jack!
Cheers,
Rusty (noticed the Laser II on Kolb's page)
Mazda 13B rotary powered RV-3 (flying)
Kolb Slingshot (Mazda single rotor project)
________________________________________________________________________________
"Sswear1"
--A magician worked on a cruise ship. The audience was different each week so
the magician did the same tricks over and over again. There was only one
problem: the captain's parrot saw the shows each week and began to understand
how the magician did every trick.
Once he understood, he started shouting in the middle of the show.
"Look,it's not the same hat!" or "Look, he's hiding the flowers under the
table!"or "Hey, why are all the cards the ace of spades?"
The magician was furious but couldn't do anything. It was, after all,
thecaptain's parrot.
Then one stormy night on the Pacific, the ship unfortunately sank,
drowningalmost all who were on board. The magician luckily found himself on
apieceof wood floating in the middle of the sea with, and as fate would have
it,
the parrot. They stared at each other with hatred but did not utter a
word.
This went on for a day... and then 2 days...and then 3 days. Finally on
the4th day, the parrot could not hold back any longer and said......
"OK, I give up. Where's the f...ing ship?"
Open WebMail Project (http://openwebmail.org)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard & Martha Neilsen" <NeilsenRM05(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Fw: Annual Kolb Flyin at Monument valley |
Hey Guys
I wrote a E-Mail to THOSE PEOPLE at EAA Sport Pilot asking if they might be willing
to publish a article about the Kolb Flyin at Monument Valley. Well surprise
surprise they said they would be willing (see the following) so...
Does anyone have a place were we can put all the photos we shot at Monument Valley?
I have a bunch, I know Larry Borne has a bunch and others will have great
ones too. Lets put together the good ones and let the group pick the best of
the best.
Also I will be willing to write some words and send it to the list and or put it
in the same area as the photos so that the group can correct, edit. add to,
what ever. I know we have some writers out there that could turn this into something
that we would all be proud of.
What do you think?
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIIIc
----- Original Message -----
From: Mary Jones
Subject: FW: Annual Kolb Flyin at Monument valley
Hi Richard,
You bet!!!
I'm definitely interested in such an article. (In fact, you may be interested
to know that we're going to be doing a 2-3 page story on Steve Boetto's Firefly
on floats in the July issue. I just finished discussing the final details of
that with him a few minutes ago.)
So...how many photos/words??? Realistically, I'd probably use this article in
the September (or later) issue ... about 3 pages maximum ... so I'd say send me
a selection of about 12-15 photos and no more than 1,500 words ... less words
is acceptable, too.
And, I apologize greatly for not responding to your message sent on April 28.
It's been a wild month-plus for me ... but I still have your e-mail and still
had every intention to respond to you. Just FYI ... from Sun 'n Fun I went to
Germany to the Aero 2005 show for a week and then came home and got bronchitis
... so I'm definitely behind on responding to e-mails ... 'cause I have to give
priority to getting a magazine... albeit one that doesn't contain everything
readers would like ... out the door. Anyway, so much for my sad but true life
story.
I fully understand how you and others may feel that we've abandoned low-priced
airplanes. The problem I've been trying to balance is to provide as much information
as possible about the new rule ... we felt EAA had responsibility to do
as much educating as possible about it ... with a variety of coverage of a variety
of machines ... fixed-wings, trikes, ppcs ... and planes of various cost
ranges. And, at the same time, we like to be as on top of the news as other
aviation magazines, otherwise they "eat our shorts" (if you will) in that regard.
And, frankly, some of those expensive planes are what's been making the news.
So, now, what does that mean for the future. Well, starting with the June issue,
you'll start seeing more features about more affordable airplanes.(M-Squared
in June; Hawk Ultra ultralight in July)...some of the space we could have given
to that earlier went to educating about the rule. You'll start to see more
articles about people who built and fly their own machines ... a Sonex in July
... a RANS S-7 later this fall, for example, and I'm actively seeking an article
about a Piet builder/owner (or something along that plans-built line) for
a future issue, too. (Sometimes finding the good stories with good photos ain't
as easy as it might seem.)
No, I would never say there's nothing to write about with regard to aircraft like
your 1/2-VW-powered Kolb. In fact, I'd love a story about such an airplane.
I've written Scott Casler about doing a 1/2 VW feature ...but I think the e-mail
got lost in never-never land during his move from Ohio to Arizona, so I need
to contact him again.
As for John Williamson ... well, I've been feeling guilty about not getting that
story written for a couple of years. Believe me, he's still on my list and
unless he rejects the idea of us doing a story about him, one will be done. I
just have to figure out when I have time to write it. That's the honest to gosh
truth, but my "plan/hope" is to get written and in the magazine before this
calendar year is out. (Now, of course, I'm going to have to start to balance
how much coverage I give to Kolb aircraft as compared to other models 'cause,
believe me, some other group of builders of another line of aircraft will wave
the flag if I write about Kolb "too many times."
Anyway, I hope that helps explains "where we've been coming from" a bit. There
is not and won't be a conspiracy to only write about expensive airplanes from
here on out (for the reasons I mentioned above) ... at least not as long as I
have a reasonable amount of influence on the magazine's content. Will there still
be stories about those "expensive" LSAs? Yes, there will ... but I'm telling
you that it'll be balanced by stories about affordable airplanes. You can
hold my feet to the fire on that promise.
Richard, thanks for taking the time(s) to write and vent your frustration. I honestly
do appreciate it ... here's hoping you'll be a happier reader shortly
in months to come.
Sincerely
Mary Jones
Editor - EAA Sport Pilot & Light-Sport Aircraft magazine
www.sportpilot.org
920/426-6516
Make your plans now to attend EAA AirVenture Oshkosh 2005, Monday through Sunday,
July 25-31,2005
-----Original Message-----
From: Joe Norris
Subject: FW: Annual Kolb Flyin at Monument valley
Hey MJ,
Over to you!
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard & Martha Neilsen [mailto:NeilsenRM05(at)comcast.net]
Subject: Annual Kolb Flyin at Monument valley
I just returned from the annual Monument Valley Flyin and would like to see coverage
of this event in the Sport Pilot Magazine. I would be happy to do a write
up of the event and supply some pictures. You appear to have banned any articles
on Kolbs and any other under $100,000 airplane so I'm asking before I go
to the bother of writing anything. If by chance you allow this and by greater
chance respond to my E-mail please let me know how many words and how many photos.
Richard Neilsen
EAA # 0156743
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "nmatthew" <nmatthew(at)qwest.net> |
The total weight of me, fuel and gear is 562#. (I am 220) Full throttle
RPM is 6200 RPM. I can't hold that because the CHT approaches 400. I
cruse at about 65MPH and 5800 RPM. I've never verified the accuracy of
the tach, but I'll do it this weekend. No enclosure or windshield, nose
cone only. The longest I've flown on 5 gal is 1hr 5 min, I might have
had 10 minutes left but I doubt it.
I will also check the temps accurately this weekend, I only use them to
avoid overheating, so I don't know where they run.
I have a two blade adjustable prop. Any suggestions on adjusting it?
Matthew North
Tucson, AZ
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of jerb
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firefly
How much heavier?
We used to figure about 3.3 GPH on ours. My partner was around 260# and
I
was at one point topping 290#. Cruise on the step was about 70 with
enclosure. Sounds like you don't have it quite propped right. Where
are
your CHT and EGT's running. What is full throttle RPM on climb out? On
5
gallon tank we wanted to be on the ground within 1 hour 20 min, 1-30
tops.
jerb
>
>I have a Firefly; the top tube of the fuselage is stamped UL 029, and I
>checked the fuel consumption this weekend, its almost 5 GPH. After
>reading about the fellow in Hawaii getting two hours on 6-7 gallons
I've
>been thinking my wing might be too small. I am 220#, and have the rotax
>447. The plane was wrecked when I bought it, so I built a new fuselage
>that is about 4" taller than stock to accommodate my height. It is
>heavy.
>
>How much fuel consumption do other Firefly pilots get?
>
>I looked at the Firestar plans and they appear to have an identical
wing
>section to the Fly. Has anyone ever tried the firestar wing on a
>firefly?
>
>Thanks in advance for any feedback.
>
>Matt North- Tucson, AZ
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fw: Annual Kolb Flyin at Monument valley |
Wait till you guys see Jim Hefner's pictures. Wow ! ! ! I'm sure there's
going to be others I haven't seen yet. I'm ready to publish a short
webpage on this year's trip, but had problems with Homestead last night.
Soon. It was good to meet you after all this time, Rick. It
was a good trip this year.......again. Lar. Do
not Archive.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Building Kolb Mk III
N78LB Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard & Martha Neilsen" <NeilsenRM05(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: Fw: Annual Kolb Flyin at Monument valley
>
>
> Hey Guys
>
> I wrote a E-Mail to THOSE PEOPLE at EAA Sport Pilot asking if they might
> be willing to publish a article about the Kolb Flyin at Monument Valley.
> Well surprise surprise they said they would be willing (see the following)
> so...
>
> Does anyone have a place were we can put all the photos we shot at
> Monument Valley? I have a bunch, I know Larry Borne has a bunch and others
> will have great ones too. Lets put together the good ones and let the
> group pick the best of the best.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
I went ahead and built a webpage last night on this year's MV trip. It published
fine, but I can't seem to get the link from the "Traveling" page to publish.
Soooo.............go direct to it, if you like, at:
http://www.webpictures.homestead.com/monument05.html
It's a short page (for me) and I'm not real happy about the quality of some of
the pictures, but so be it. Most of them published much lighter than my originals.
Also, I need to talk to someone who was there who remembers names, to help me finish
off a couple of the pages. Lar. Do
not Archive.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Building Kolb Mk III
N78LB Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Kolb-List Digest: 18 Msgs - 05/25/05 |
b young wrote:
>
>
>Hi Ed, an inexpensive way to verify your mini tach is to buy a digital prop
>tach, ($49 Sky Sports). Multiply your reading by the gear ratio for engine
>rpm.
>Fly Safe
>Bob Griffin
>
>
>or you could go to a model airplane flying field and see if one of the
>pilots has a tach they use for model aircraft..... he might be willing to
>come and help you for the fun of it......
>
>boyd
>
Read the label carefully before investing in a model a/c tach. The ones
I researched had a tolerance listed at 200-300 rpm. That's a pretty big
error for a digital instrument.
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "woody" <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
| Subject: | Re: thrust angle of SS |
Working on Waynes Sling shot we found we could change the engine angle by
installing the rubber motor mounts inverted on one end and shim with washers
to get near the 3/4 rise that was recomended.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Edward Chmielewski" <edchmiel(at)mindspring.com> |
(Note: Subject changed to reflect topic)
Charlie/All,
Just curious, which tach had that big an error? All the ones I've used
had 1/2% error, at most. Dynamite,
Globee, etc. These were digital, not analog. I even used one to check a Merlin
IIIB turboprop when I had a
tach-generator going bad. Was right on the money.
I highly recommend the RC airplane tachs. They seem to be the same technology,
just less costly.
Ed in JXN
MkII/503
----- Original Message -----
From: "Charlie England" <ceengland(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Kolb-List Digest: 18 Msgs - 05/25/05
>
> Read the label carefully before investing in a model a/c tach. The ones
> I researched had a tolerance listed at 200-300 rpm. That's a pretty big
> error for a digital instrument.
>
> Charlie
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "JIM HEFNER" <hefner_jim(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Monument Valley and More, plus Density Altitude experience |
from Bryce Canyon
Gang, after returning home from a 2 week trip yesterday morning, I just finished
sorting through over 900 pictures and put 150 on my website. I organized the
pictures into folders of the different places I visited and flew. I pulled
my trailer and Firefly over 1700 miles, starting in Tucson on May 12th. My log
book is at the airport so I don't know the total hours of flight logged over
that period, but I'm sure it was somewhere around 12-15hrs and that is just local
flying, since I trailered the plane between locations. I flew Sedona, AZ,
Page, AZ (West end of Lake Powell), Bryce Canyon, Monument Valley and Moab (Canyonlands
and Arches National Parks).
Here is my website: http://jhefner.photosite.com>
Click on the folder you want to see and then launch the slideshow to see full screen
pictures. Hit Back to Home Page to go back to the folders view to look
at other folders.
My Firefly (#022) performed flawlessly during the entire trip, but I certainly
underestimated the effects of density altitude while flying Bryce Canyon and was
lucky to get away with a case of bad judgment without harm to me or my plane.
The elevation at Bryce Canyon Airport is 7590 ft and the runway is 7400 ft
long... almost a mile and a half!! I have a 2 blade 66" IVO on the 447 and I
have been flying it for 3 years with the prop set for cruise, flying from a field
elevation of 3275 ft. On take off, I generally see no more than 5700 - 5800
rpms at WOT. I typically lift off in 300-400 ft on my home strip. I had
flown Monument Valley before a couple times and density altitude there was never
a factor. Page airport is at 4300 ft elevation, Sedona is 4800 ft and Canyonlands
field in Moab is 4550 ft. I had never flown from an airport at an elevation
like Bryce Canyon and I knew the plane performance would be much less than
normal, but I never dreamed it would be affected as much as it was! I didn't
want to taxi a mile and a half so I taxied to the A3 turnoff point and decided
to take the short end of the runway since I would be headed right for Bryce
Canyon after lifting off. I went out on the runway the night before to check
it out since the wind didn't die, so I had time on my hands. I stepped it
off at a little over 1700' to the short end. I figured my FF would get off the
ground in 2-3 times the normal distance. That was where the bad judgment started!
I should never have considered that for my first takeoff, given I had
not flown at that altitude before. The other thing that contributed to even worse
performance was that the runway was uphill toward the short end! So there
were lots of things going against takeoff performance in this case. To make
a long story short, the plane lifted off just barely at around 1600' and I was
white knuckled seeing the runway lights coming up fast and I'm not lifting off.
It lifted off just as I was coming to the last big white stripes at the end.
After!
it lift
ed off it was pretty mushy at first but finally smoothed out and I was able to
climb, although not a very high climb rate. I climbed to around 9000' with no
problem and was able to pull power back to 4800 and cruise without loosing altitude.
Landing was also no problem, but I was definitely going a lot faster
(ground speed) than I normally land at lower altitudes, but I just kept the ASI
at it's normal 50 with engine at idle and full flaperons. It flared like normal
and I greased it as good as I ever have with a 3 point landing. Before my
next trip to high altitude airports, I will take a degree or two of pitch out
of the prop to give me more margin for density altitude and I will never be
tempted to do short end takeoff's like I did at Bryce... really dumb... learned
my lesson and got away with it!! Others take heed when flying at high density
altitude. I know there has been quite a bit of discussion on the topic so
thought I would throw in my recent experience with it so others won't make the
same mistake I did. A friend of mine estimates that my 447 was putting out about
25 hp out of the normal 40, due to thin air affecting fuel mixture... richer
than normal, prop bites less air density, wings generate less lift and in
this case I was going up hill to boot! I dodged a bullet for sure!! That could
have ruined an otherwise wonderful trip! Maybe my vortex generators helped
it get off when it did.... ??
I use a Fuji 3800 3.2M digital camera. I have a short windshield on the Firefly
so it is otherwise open for unobstructed photos. I wear a helmet and comm headset
with a full face shield for wind protection so I can't look through the
viewfinder... I just point and shoot, even when zooming. I've gotten pretty
good at it over the last 3 years. I use the normal auto mode on the camera and
get pretty sharp pictures. I could use the sport setting and get faster shutter
speeds, which helps prevent blurring, but I usually never remember to change
it.
Enjoy the pictures, I sure enjoyed flying these spectacular places and shooting
them. It was great to see many familiar faces again this year in Monument Valley,
plus many new faces. Hope to see even more of you there next year, plane
or no plane.
Jim Hefner
Tucson, AZ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "JIM HEFNER" <hefner_jim(at)msn.com> |
Matthew, I burn 2.75 to 3 gal/hr in my 447 on Firefly #022 after 200 hrs. 5 gal
per hour seems high for a 447. That's more like 503 burn rates that I have
heard others talk about. I have a 2 blade IVO set for cruise and run lower than
normal rpm's, but I don't think it matters much, since fuel burn rate doesn't
seem to change much with rpm changes.
How much fuel consumption do other Firefly pilots get?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "JIM HEFNER" <hefner_jim(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Monument Valley and More, plus Density Altitude experience |
The website link seemed to have a problem after I saw it posted to the list so
here it is again:
http://jhefner.photosite.com/>
Jim Hefner
Tucson, AZ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don Reese <skypix(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Kolb-List Digest: 23 Msgs - 05/26/05 |
Hey Big Lar::
Great pix of the MV Flyin; as luck would have it Delight & I were on a
wander. Met a few of the early birds at Gouldings
and stayed in Mexican Hat on the 18th. (Named for a natural sombrero
east of town) Drove up the corkscrew overlooking
the San Juan Goosenecks the next day. Your photos are now in my trip
album, thanks.
Don Reese (Kolb wannabe-all I have is the Full Lotus amphib monofloat
to go under my invisilble Kolb)
Hampstead, NH
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rusty" <13brv3c(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | thrust angle of SS |
Working on Waynes Sling shot we found we could change the engine angle by
installing the rubber motor mounts inverted on one end and shim with washers
to get near the 3/4 rise that was recomended.
----------------------
What a neat idea Woody. Thanks! I just took a look at the mounts, and it
looks like you get almost an inch difference in height when you turn one
over, but keep the flange on the top side of the steel mounting frame. I
can't see why this would hurt the mount, but I would certainly make sure
there was a large washer (2") on the bottom to keep the assembly captive in
case the mount failed internally.
I measured the angles of the wing and mount in it's normal 3pt stance
yesterday. The wing bottom is at 10 degrees, and the mount is at 13
degrees. If Jack's measurement for the Firefly translates to the Slingshot,
then the wing flies at an angle of attack of 7 degrees. Raising the tail to
flying angle would mean reducing the angle of the wing and engine mount 3
degrees. That leaves the engine still 10 degrees positive angle in level
flight.
I figured it would take a 1.75" spacer to remove the 10 degrees of angle
from the engine mount, but that seems like double what most have tried.
Perhaps it would be wiser to start with the 1" that I get from inverting the
rear mounts. The two problems I see are overall height of the engine to
clear my garage door, and clearance for my 72" prop from the tail boom tube.
I don't think either will be a big deal though. Within a couple weeks, I
should have a dummy engine block in place on the plane, and can get a better
idea of what I need for clearances.
Cheers,
Rusty
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerb <ulflyer(at)verizon.net> |
5800 RPM for cruise seems high - you may need to add more pitch to the prop
- see below. We found the adjustment below produces about the best over
all performance, climb and cruise. With the enclosure we would run
5200-5400 RPM with 60+-70 MPH cruise. I forgot what difference we observed
after adding, but it did improve the cruise speed.
With the tail tied down adjust your prop to produce a full throttle RPM of
around 5900 RPM - this should give you around 5900-6100 RPM on takeoff
climb out. I have a EIS with the fuel flow transducer option on my Hawk
which also has a Rotax 447. I found that prop adjustment can significantly
influence fuel consumption rate. We had to do some just change on the carb
but found we had to watch the EGT's in the throttle mid range ~4000
RPM. Some one posted a change of the needle jet that was suppose to cure
that but we never tried it.
We didn't run our FireFly long with just wind screen, quickly added the
full enclosure as the air blast in the FireFly isn't like ridding a motor
cycle unless you slow it down. I understand Jack Harts comment regarding
strain on his neck. We installed only the front portion of the enclosure
kit, never installed the rear clear vinyl portion.and found that cured the
wind issue and provided adequate protection for comfortable flights down to
45-50 degrees. (Were soft here in Texas - used to 100 degrees in the shade
during the summer.)
jerb
>
>The total weight of me, fuel and gear is 562#. (I am 220) Full throttle
>RPM is 6200 RPM. I can't hold that because the CHT approaches 400. I
>cruse at about 65MPH and 5800 RPM. I've never verified the accuracy of
>the tach, but I'll do it this weekend. No enclosure or windshield, nose
>cone only. The longest I've flown on 5 gal is 1hr 5 min, I might have
>had 10 minutes left but I doubt it.
>
>I will also check the temps accurately this weekend, I only use them to
>avoid overheating, so I don't know where they run.
>
>I have a two blade adjustable prop. Any suggestions on adjusting it?
>
>Matthew North
>Tucson, AZ
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of jerb
>To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firefly
>
>
>How much heavier?
>We used to figure about 3.3 GPH on ours. My partner was around 260# and
>I
>was at one point topping 290#. Cruise on the step was about 70 with
>enclosure. Sounds like you don't have it quite propped right. Where
>are
>your CHT and EGT's running. What is full throttle RPM on climb out? On
>5
>gallon tank we wanted to be on the ground within 1 hour 20 min, 1-30
>tops.
>jerb
>
>
> >
> >I have a Firefly; the top tube of the fuselage is stamped UL 029, and I
> >checked the fuel consumption this weekend, its almost 5 GPH. After
> >reading about the fellow in Hawaii getting two hours on 6-7 gallons
>I've
> >been thinking my wing might be too small. I am 220#, and have the rotax
> >447. The plane was wrecked when I bought it, so I built a new fuselage
> >that is about 4" taller than stock to accommodate my height. It is
> >heavy.
> >
> >How much fuel consumption do other Firefly pilots get?
> >
> >I looked at the Firestar plans and they appear to have an identical
>wing
> >section to the Fly. Has anyone ever tried the firestar wing on a
> >firefly?
> >
> >Thanks in advance for any feedback.
> >
> >Matt North- Tucson, AZ
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerb <ulflyer(at)verizon.net> |
The first time I read your post I didn't catch you weren't running with at
least with a wind screen, you may want to install one. It not that
hard. Use the blue low stick masking tape sold in the paint department at
Lowe's or Home Depot. Clamp the side of the Lexan down - mark your cut
lines with the tape, top, bottom, & sides. Use the tape to make the needed
cut lines, makes it easy. You can cut the Lexan with tin snips. I think
you'll see some difference just from that alone. Over coming drag requires
more power, this equates to more RPM and higher fuel consumption. Still
think you need to adjust your prop's pitch. AFTER ADJUSTING THE PROP
ALWAYS DO A STATIC TEST WITH TAIL TIED DOWN BEFORE FLYING - watch the EGT's
- stop if they are too high >1050 degrees, indicates you may not be loading
the engine enough causing the EGT temps to rise.
jerb
>
>The total weight of me, fuel and gear is 562#. (I am 220) Full throttle
>RPM is 6200 RPM. I can't hold that because the CHT approaches 400. I
>cruse at about 65MPH and 5800 RPM. I've never verified the accuracy of
>the tach, but I'll do it this weekend. No enclosure or windshield, nose
>cone only. The longest I've flown on 5 gal is 1hr 5 min, I might have
>had 10 minutes left but I doubt it.
>
>I will also check the temps accurately this weekend, I only use them to
>avoid overheating, so I don't know where they run.
>
>I have a two blade adjustable prop. Any suggestions on adjusting it?
>
>Matthew North
>Tucson, AZ
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of jerb
>To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firefly
>
>
>How much heavier?
>We used to figure about 3.3 GPH on ours. My partner was around 260# and
>I
>was at one point topping 290#. Cruise on the step was about 70 with
>enclosure. Sounds like you don't have it quite propped right. Where
>are
>your CHT and EGT's running. What is full throttle RPM on climb out? On
>5
>gallon tank we wanted to be on the ground within 1 hour 20 min, 1-30
>tops.
>jerb
>
>
April 20, 2005 - May 27, 2005
Kolb-Archive.digest.vol-fj