Kolb-Archive.digest.vol-fp
September 29, 2005 - November 18, 2005
One of these has worked well for me this summer as well, charging two 12
volt in parallel batteries in my garage.
Penguin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard & Martha Neilsen" <NeilsenRM05(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Battery Life & Size |
I use a 12 AMP motorcycle battery in my 2180cc VW and it starts it quite
well. I placed the battery in the nose cone to offset the weight of the VW.
Originally the battery would last only one year. I thought it was because I
was drawing too much juice from it and shortening its life. Three years ago
I bought a battery maintainer (float type battery charger) and I plug it in
after every flight. It has allowed the battery to live for three years so
far. At Oshkosh this summer I even flooded the engine and it started the
engine after quite a bit of cranking. I think my airplane sits too long
between flights especially in the winter. The float charger seems to solve
the battery life issue for me.
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIIIc
> Get a small car battery and install it in the nose. I do not believe the
> extra weight justifies ignoring this possibility when compared to gell
> cells
> or other low amp batterys from a cost perspective. If you are installing
> it
> in a classic your CG is probably towards the rear so the extra weight in
> the
> nose will be a benefit. >>
>> What size, make and model battery should I get for my recently purchased
> TNK starter? I've used motorcycle batteries in the past (in motorcycles)
> and they only seemed to last a year. They were lead acid and I assume
> that
> I will need a sealed battery.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | broken Titan exhaust system |
| From: | Erich_Weaver(at)URSCorp.com |
09/29/2005 02:54:02 PM
Denny:
Naw, I dont have the skills to build that exhaust. I found it on the web,
and after talking to Rick Thomason went ahead and ordered it. He was great
about checking up on me to see how it was working out.. I think most of
these are actually used on Pulsars (tractors instead of pushers), where the
cowling is a tight fit over the engine. I believe I was actually the first
to use it on a pusher, but I have no regrets. I think John H.s analysis
about its advantages is on the money. Okay, it does sound different than
the Titan. If he was wearing a decent headset, he wouldnt notice : )
Not that I really needed it, but I believe Im getting a little more power
than with the Titan system, as after installation, my max RPM went up a
little and I had to adjust the prop pitch to take a slightly bigger bite.
Erich Weaver
This e-mail and any attachments are confidential. If you receive this
message in error or are not the intended recipient, you should not retain,
distribute, disclose or use any of this information and you should destroy
the e-mail and any attachments or copies.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "jdmurr(at)juno.com" <jdmurr(at)juno.com> |
| Subject: | Battery for 503 Purchased Today |
Thank you to all for your input and suggestions. Today I went to my local battery
dealer and purchased this battery. They recommended this battery for my Rotax
503. It's rated at 300 cca, but it showed almost 400cca when tested.
http://www.bb-battery.com/productpages/HR/HR22-12.pdf
John Murr
1987 Firestar
Thank you to all for your input and suggestions. Today I went to my local battery
dealer and purchased this battery.They recommended this battery for my Rotax
503.It's rated at 300 cca, but it showed almost 400cca when tested.
http://www.bb-battery.com/productpages/HR/HR22-12.pdf
John Murr
1987 Firestar
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Pierzina <planecrazzzy(at)yahoo.com> |
Hey Guys,
I think I got this Battery site from John.....
http://www.gotbatteries.com/items.asp?params=sealedlead/SLA/3/all/5/12
Send'er to the archives......
Gotta Fly...
Mike in MN
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...
---------------------------------
Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ted Cowan <trc1917(at)direcway.com> |
Here goes the mouth again. I need to comment on anyone using liquid
lead/acid bats in their plane. You gotta be kidding! The last post was
correct. There is very corrosive gases coming out no matter what they say
about porting. I had one explode in my face. Not a pleasant feeling. I
was lucky. Crank your engine kinda hard with the mags off and then feel the
bat. It will be warm to hot. This liquid oxygenates when used either by
charging or discharging. It can sulfite on you (rotten eggs smell) and then
it can explode. In any case, you can loose a cell real easy.
Another thing. Having been in the RC industry for forty years, gotta tell
you this: The charge rate of a normal bat. is approximately 10 percent high
charge and only (now, listen carefully) 1 percent on low charge or trickle.
Now, I am referring to AMPS, not Volts. I have found trickle charging
(float charging) usually works best at even lower. You dont charge the bat,
you merely keep it from discharging. You cannot keep a liquid type bat on
much of any charge for any period of time. It is kinda like a man staying
excited (you know who you are) for a month. The specific gravity of the
liquid goes crazy with so much oxygen and WILL burn it out. Now, I suppose
there are going to be a bunch of people who will tell me I am wrong so do
what you want. It might possibly be that a solar charging unit does not
have much amp charge and that is what you are looking at. You want the 12
volts but only about 1 percent of the TOTAL capacity of the bat Amp level
for float. I still think you will burn out a liquid or gel cell before its
time. Of course, if you are not using it much, it may seem better to charge
it like that than to let it go flat. Your choice, do the research. Just
cause someone who sells you a bat charger says you can, doesnt mean you
should. There are a bunch of those supposed 'float chargers' out there and I
will give you the two I have for RV and storage bats. Guaranteed to waste
your bat. good luck. I will use gel cells. If you want them to last the
longest, disconnect them when you are not using them. No current drain.
Ted Cowan, Alabama.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery for 503 Starter? |
| I dont have to keep it charged and the time between flights doesn`t
seem to
| make any difference.
| Pat
Patrick/Gang:
How's aerial restarts? Work pretty good?
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "b young" <by0ung(at)brigham.net> |
What size, make and model battery should I get for my recently purchased TNK starter?
I've used motorcycle batteries in the past (in motorcycles) and they
only seemed to last a year.
--------------------------
for my mkIII I went to harbor freight and bought one of the "jump starts".....
it had a 17 amp hour sealed battery in it. the price of this was on sale for around
30.00 and has lasted for 2 years now and my first battery that I had used
was the same type and I got it used from an old ups (uninteruptable power supply)
... lasted 3 years. when I priced this type of battery from a supplier it
was 75.00 to 80.00 bucks..... I put my old battery in the jump start and it
works the air compressor and light.... it wont turn over a starter any more. also
the jump start had a battery charger in it that works for the battery it will
charge it till full then shut itself off.... you could remove it, and install
it in a project box.
lots of options for a small price.
boyd
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Lanny Fetterman <donaho(at)csrlink.net> |
| Subject: | 503 electric start |
Hi all, John you nailed it! I also like to be in the aircraft when it fires
up.( Not enough room in the FSII with a full enclosure to pull the little
white string). I saw what happens when you pull start with the throttle
open, and you are standing outside the airplane, at the flightfarm in Ny. A
Kolb really climbs with no pilot, But the cross country ability is only
about 150 yards. Really felt bad for that pilot. Have a Great day to all.
Lanny FSII A10LRF
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard & Martha Neilsen" <NeilsenRM05(at)comcast.net> |
Ted
I have a device called a Schumacher 1.5 amp automatic battery maintainer
with float mode monitoring. It has a indicator (led) that tells me when it
is charging the battery. This charger/maintainer has been connected to my
airplane battery continually (except for when the plane isn't in the hanger)
for three years and it hasn't destroyed my battery. After a short flight I
will plug in the maintainer and it will charge for around 15 minutes and it
will turn off. As the battery discharges it will occasionally cycle on to
maintain the charge. I have a master disconnect switch on the plane but as
most batteries do it will discharge on its own. The motorcycle style
batteries have a vent line that I run to the out side. I will consider
replacing the battery with a gel cell when this battery finally gives up but
for now I'm more concerned with the 10-17 gallons of fuel I carry. Besides
abusing the battery with something like a dead short or jumping the battery
with the crossed polarity I don't know of any battery ever exploding. No I
appreciate the warning but there is a danger in getting out of bed every
day, life has risks.
Also Pat I had a similar device on my direct drive VW. I would go to the
back of the plane and spin this wood fan blade. But it was inconvenient
having to tie the plane down and I worried about the prop biting me.
My $ .02 worth
Richard Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIIIc
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ted Cowan" <trc1917(at)direcway.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: batteries
>
> Here goes the mouth again. I need to comment on anyone using liquid
> lead/acid bats in their plane. You gotta be kidding! The last post was
> correct. There is very corrosive gases coming out no matter what they say
> about porting. I had one explode in my face. Not a pleasant feeling. I
> was lucky. Crank your engine kinda hard with the mags off and then feel
> the
> bat. It will be warm to hot. This liquid oxygenates when used either by
> charging or discharging. It can sulfite on you (rotten eggs smell) and
> then
> it can explode. In any case, you can loose a cell real easy.
>
> Another thing. Having been in the RC industry for forty years, gotta
> tell
> you this: The charge rate of a normal bat. is approximately 10 percent
> high
> charge and only (now, listen carefully) 1 percent on low charge or
> trickle.
> Now, I am referring to AMPS, not Volts. I have found trickle charging
> (float charging) usually works best at even lower. You dont charge the
> bat,
> you merely keep it from discharging. You cannot keep a liquid type bat on
> much of any charge for any period of time. It is kinda like a man staying
> excited (you know who you are) for a month. The specific gravity of the
> liquid goes crazy with so much oxygen and WILL burn it out. Now, I
> suppose
> there are going to be a bunch of people who will tell me I am wrong so do
> what you want. It might possibly be that a solar charging unit does not
> have much amp charge and that is what you are looking at. You want the 12
> volts but only about 1 percent of the TOTAL capacity of the bat Amp level
> for float. I still think you will burn out a liquid or gel cell before
> its
> time. Of course, if you are not using it much, it may seem better to
> charge
> it like that than to let it go flat. Your choice, do the research. Just
> cause someone who sells you a bat charger says you can, doesnt mean you
> should. There are a bunch of those supposed 'float chargers' out there and
> I
> will give you the two I have for RV and storage bats. Guaranteed to waste
> your bat. good luck. I will use gel cells. If you want them to last
> the
> longest, disconnect them when you are not using them. No current drain.
> Ted Cowan, Alabama.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)telepath.com> |
> You cannot keep a liquid type bat on much of any charge for any
period
> of time. It is kinda like a man staying excited (you know who you
> are) for a month. The specific gravity of the liquid goes crazy with
> so much oxygen and WILL burn it out. Now, I suppose there are
going
> to be a bunch of people who will tell me I am wrong so do what you
> want.
Dang! Somebody ought to tell this to all the TelCos out there who
have massive battery rooms and batteries on charge continuously.
Guess they didn't know.....
Jim Baker
580.788.2779
'71 SV, 492TC
Elmore City, OK
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)telepath.com> |
| Subject: | Re: kolb battery |
> for my mkIII I went to harbor freight and bought one of the "jump
> starts"..... it had a 17 amp hour sealed battery in it. the price of
> this was on sale for around 30.00 and has lasted for 2 years
> I priced this type of battery from a supplier it was 75.00 to 80.00
> bucks
$48 or so for a 17.5 AH unit from Mouser electronics. 26 AH
available for about $10 more. Look for PowerSonic, "sealed" SLA
units...but be careful they don't explode or smell like rotten eggs.
Jim Baker
580.788.2779
'71 SV, 492TC
Elmore City, OK
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: kolb battery |
b young wrote:
>
>
>What size, make and model battery should I get for my recently purchased TNK
starter?
>I've used motorcycle batteries in the past (in motorcycles) and they
>only seemed to last a year.
>--------------------------
>
>for my mkIII I went to harbor freight and bought one of the "jump starts".....
it had a 17 amp hour sealed battery in it. the price of this was on sale for
around 30.00 and has lasted for 2 years now and my first battery that I had used
was the same type and I got it used from an old ups (uninteruptable power supply)
... lasted 3 years. when I priced this type of battery from a supplier
it was 75.00 to 80.00 bucks..... I put my old battery in the jump start and it
works the air compressor and light.... it wont turn over a starter any more.
also the jump start had a battery charger in it that works for the battery it
will charge it till full then shut itself off.... you could remove it, and install
it in a project box.
>
>lots of options for a small price.
>
>boyd
>
I'd 2nd that advice. A 17 AH sealed lead acid (SLA) battery will start a
360 cu in aircraft engine without any problem. One nice thing about SLA
batteries is that the 'self discharge' rate (losing charge while sitting
idle) is much slower than typical flooded cell batteries. If an SLA
battery is going down over just a few weeks of idle time, there might be
a slow current drain on the battery. You can get a cheap digital volt
meter with current measuring ability & put it in series with one lead of
the battery. With the switch off, there should be 0 amps showing on the
meter.
If you are ordering from a battery vendor instead of just buying a 'jump
start' pack, check for the internal impedance (should be around 10
milliohms or less) & be sure the terminals are the thick tabs with screw
holes. There are some SLA's that have the same AH rating but are
intended for much slower discharge rates than needed for engine starting
& the terminals (often just 1/4" push tabs) won't stand up to the
current required to start an engine.
For the 'gold standard' among big a/c engine users, google 'Odyssey
PC680' or PC625. (Just about any other brand will work fine & most will
be cheaper.)
Hope this helps...
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ted Cowan <trc1917(at)direcway.com> |
I believe a pulse type charger as was mentioned by Neilsen is probably a
good one. Only charges to the (probably preset) peak and then shuts down.
Recharges occasionally to keep peak. There is a point in bat life where it
is a normal 'high' and then there is a 'peak' charge that is referred to a
surface charge. That surface charge is the one that burns off by itself
fairly quickly. You do not want to keep your bat in the state of 'peak'.
That is where it is a dangerous animal. I use pulse chargers a lot. They
do just as they sound, charge and shut down, charge and shut down. Still
gotta be careful at what amp rate we use. This info is basically meant for
the novice who has no clue or requires a little more knowledge of what he is
doing. The other, "I am an engineer and I know everything" type person,
please disregard because you rewrite your own safety rules.
If nothing else gets to you just think of being down, hit nose first,
unfortunate damage to your feet (first thing that hits the ground), ankles,
legs, open wounds and then having bat acid poured on the wounds. Yummy,
sounds like something I would like. That stuff will eat through your skin
really fast and it hurts like crazy when you have a hangnail and work with
it so I wouldnt want it poured over a wound. Your choice. Be smart. There
is a reason why the FAA doesnt like liquid bats. Okay, the real smart guys
can now tell me how wrong I am. I have big shoulders, go ahead, take your
punch. Ted Cowan.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 503 DCDI Question |
I got to thinking about this after I sent it, and on-on couldn't work. If
center terminal goes to ground, flipping the toggle one way *could* complete
the ignition circuit, the other way *could* ground the mags, BUT when 1 side
is closed, the other would have to be open. Try disconnecting the switch,
then testing it. Lar. Do not
Archive.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Building Kolb Mk III
N78LB Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: 503 DCDI Question
>
> I'm not familiar with your specific application, but generally with an
> on-off toggle switch, having the toggle one way will open the points, the
> other will close them. There ARE on-on switches made, and
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David L. Bigelow" <dlbigelow(at)verizon.net> |
"I guess it's because of the heavier 503 hanging on the back.
FWIW, the plane weighs 253.889 lbs. ;-)
John Murr
1987 Firestar"
John,
I believe you should be concerned about your total empty weight being accurate.
If it's not accurate, the CG position is probably not correct.
I don't think you can build a Firestar with a 503 that light - even a 5 rib wing
version. The Firefly (designed to make part 103 limit) with a 447 and minimum
instruments just makes the 255 lb. figure.
Are you putting us on?
Dave Bigelow
Kamuela, HI
FS2, 503 DCDI
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "jdmurr(at)juno.com" <jdmurr(at)juno.com> |
Of course I was. It's 358 dry. (don't tell the Feds!!)
-- "David L. Bigelow" wrote:
"I guess it's because of the heavier 503 hanging on the back.
FWIW, the plane weighs 253.889 lbs. ;-)
John Murr
1987 Firestar"
John,
I believe you should be concerned about your total empty weight being accurate.
If it's not accurate, the CG position is probably not correct.
I don't think you can build a Firestar with a 503 that light - even a 5 rib wing
version. The Firefly (designed to make part 103 limit) with a 447 and minimum
instruments just makes the 255 lb. figure.
Are you putting us on?
Dave Bigelow
Kamuela, HI
FS2, 503 DCDI
Of course I was. It's 358 dry. (don't tell the Feds!!)
--"DavidL.Bigelow"dlbigelow(at)verizon.netwrote:
--Kolb-Listmessagepostedby:"DavidL.Bigelow"dlbigelow(at)verizon.net
"Iguessit'sbecauseoftheheavier503hangingontheback.
FWIW,theplaneweighs253.889lbs.;-)
JohnMurr
1987Firestar"
John,
Ibelieveyoushouldbeconcernedaboutyourtotalemptyweightbeingaccurate.Ifit'snotaccurate,theCGpositionisprobablynotcorrect.
Idon'tthinkyoucanbuildaFirestarwitha503thatlight-evena5ribwingversion.TheFirefly(d
esignedtomakepart103limit)witha447andminimuminstrumentsjustmakesthe255lb.figure.
Areyouputtinguson?
DaveBigelow
Kamuela,HI
FS2,503DCDI
nbsp;
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack B. Hart" <jbhart(at)onlyinternet.net> |
| Subject: | Exhaust Gas Temperature Probe Placement Question |
Kolbers,
Since the Victor 1+ tear down and rebuild due to the loss of the flywheel
vibration damper, I have been having problems with unstable exhaust gas
temperatures. What happens is as the throttle is advanced everything is
fine until the engine hits 5,200 rpm. At this point the temperature will
start to spike. I can push the throttle on forward to get into the main jet
region and the temperature will come back down to 1,150 to 1,200 degrees F.
But in between I have seen temps as high as 1,400 degrees F.
At first I thought I had a cracked exhaust system, but it is ok. I have
tightened the exhaust system clamp and sealed the joints with high temp
silicone and no change. Then I got to thinking about my booster bottle
experiments and the use of a stronger Bing throttle slide spring. I took
the throttle slide out of the Bing and sure enough it showed wear and
polish patterns due to vibration. Called Bing and found out they have three
springs, light, medium and heavy. I asked them to send me a heavy spring.
After installing the spring the EGTs did not change, but I found fuel
consumption rates per flight showed much less variation than before.
The engine was showing indications that it was running much to rich at low
speed and did not want to idle even with the air screw four turns out. No
one listed a smaller idle jet, so called Bing and found they made one
smaller size. Installing this has improved idle and no dead stick landings,
with the air screw set at two turns out. This seemed to increase low speed
EGT's but did not influence the spiking problem. Next I started to lean out
the engine as the plugs were black. I have gone through 11K2, 11H2, and am
currently using 11G2 needle trying to lean out the low speed side. The
last needle was too lean and I had to increase the needle jet from 2.78 to
2.80 and it may have to be increased some more. Before the needle changes
and the leaning, the Victor was consistently burning less than 2.2 gph. At
this point the engine is consistently burning less than 2.0 gph, and the
plugs have gone from black to grey. With all this change, I can see no
difference in the EGT spike rpm region or run readings. So I continue to
fly at 5,200 rpm or less. On take off I push the throttle forward to get
into the main jet region and climb out at 6,400 rpm. When I throttle back
the EGT spike starts at 6,200 rpm.
I have become suspicious that the EGT probe position on the Victor 1+ is too
close to the piston. It looks like it is two inches or less from the side of
the piston. Simonini reports much lower EGT's than what I have been seeing
and this would seem to me that moving the EGT down stream would be closer to
what they have reported. I have ordered a dual EGT indicator and a hose clamp
style EGT probe so that I can mount a second EGT probe down stream from the
first one. When I talked to the Westach rep and asked where to mount the probe,
he said four to eight inches down stream from the piston.
This engine has 112 hours on it, and I don't want to burn it up. But I
would like to use the engine in the region between 5,200 and 6,200 rpm.
The best way to keep from burning it up is to have a functional EGT indicator.
The new probe should come in a couple of days so, what is the theory for
placing EGT probes on two cycle engines? Is it piston diameters down stream?
Thank you for suffering through all of this.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Winchester, IN
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "George E. Myers Jr." <gmyers(at)corridor.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Exhaust Gas Temperature Probe Placement Question |
Jack,
You could try the following link & download the part #11 & part #12 .pdf
files. They give the best explanation of the relationship of the between the
various parts of a bing carb & the engine I have seen. A lot of other good
info also.
http://www.theultralightplace.com/troubleshooting.htm
George
>Kolbers,
>Since the Victor 1+ tear down and rebuild due to the loss of the flywheel
>vibration damper, I have been having problems with unstable exhaust gas
George E. Myers Jr.
1500 IH 35 S
San Marcos, TX 78666
512-353-4860
http://www.geohome.sytes.net/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "kfackler" <kfackler(at)ameritech.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Michigan Thumb Tour photos |
Due to the number of "remarks" about download times, I've resized all the
images of the Thumb Tour.
-Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chuck S" <cstonex(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Michigan Thumb Tour photos |
Ken, I think you forgot the add a new link so we can see them.
Chuck
----- Original Message -----
From: "kfackler" <kfackler(at)ameritech.net>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Michigan Thumb Tour photos
>
> Due to the number of "remarks" about download times, I've resized all the
> images of the Thumb Tour.
>
> -Ken
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack B. Hart" <jbhart(at)onlyinternet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Exhaust Gas Temperature Probe Placement Question |
KOlbers, George, Robert & Jim,
Thank you for spinning me around a little. In the unpacked moving cartons,
I found my Bing book and reviewed the chart of needles. Basically the 11H2
needle taper does not start until the throttle is over 30% open, and the
engine is running most of the time below 30% due to an oversized carburetor.
The peaky area is between 20% and 30%. This region is influenced mostly by
the throttle valve cutaway and to with the pilot valve showing decreasing
influence and the needle and needle jet showing increasing influence. The
diagram shows that the needle and jet influence can start as low as 12.5%
open throttle. If this is so then I should be able to re profile the 11H2
needle and to richen the mixture.
Since I have a throttle position indicator, I can return the throttle to the
position where the peakiness starts and by removing the main jet, measure
the distance up to the bottom of the needle. Then by measurement of the
distance from the same surface to the top of the needle jet orifice, I
should be able to locate the area from which to remove material from the
needle. Reassemble and fly and check to see if the start of the peakiness
starts at a higher rpm.
Probably if I had not leaned out the idle, I would not have this problem,
but a reed valve engine does not like to run rich. I was having problems
with the engine spooling up from a closed throttle and the engine wanting to
quit on final after the throttle was closed. I have removed the carburetor
inlet bib that was used to prevent fuel dripping onto the wing. Since
installing the heavy throttle slide spring and the smaller pilot jet the bib
does not seem to be required.
Until I try to re profile the 11H2 needle, I am going to hold off on
installing a second EGT probe. It will take a while to do. Sowing lawns,
and will be travelling this weekend.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Winchester, IN
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bryan green <lgreen1(at)sc.rr.com> |
coming soon.]
| Subject: | [Fwd: [carolinasportflyers] Carolina Sport Flyers Annual Fall |
fly-in
coming soon.]
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)telepath.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Exhaust Gas Temperature Probe Placement Question |
> The peaky area is between 20% and 30%.
You're hitting 5200 at 20 to 30% throttle? Thought this was a 60 to
80% problem..........Ah, well.....
> I should be
> able to re profile the 11H2 needle and to richen the mixture.
May I suggest jewelers rouge, white or red. You won't want to take
off very much......
Jim Baker
580.788.2779
'71 SV, 492TC
Elmore City, OK
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Cottrell" <lcottrel(at)kfalls.net> |
Just got back recently form our annual unofficial fly-in at the Alvord Desert.
Weather for the most part was good although we did have a day of rain that translated
to snow on the top of the Mountain.( 10,000 ft) Roger Hankins had given
me 10 VG's made from Lexan and I wanted to try them on the false ribs this
time. The originals were put on the ribs (14 of them). My original stall was at
46 mph and with the original installation it lowered the stall to 36 mph solo
and 46 double. OK this time remembering Mr. Pikes missive I decided to install
the new ones with the back even with the front of the old ones. (Original placement
was 11 inches back from the leading edge measured over the curve) On
testing I found that the stall was further reduced to 32 MPH solo and 36 with
a 160 lb passenger. Joa, from "Land Shorter" (sells VG's and tundra tires) was
at the fly-in and I asked where he recommended placing the VG;s and he said
that they placed them at the CG of the wing. Being very satisfied with the results
I did no further testing, just did a lot of flying.
Larry, Oregon
________________________________________________________________________________
In a message dated 10/5/2005 7:55:20 PM Eastern Standard Time,
lcottrel(at)kfalls.net writes:
Just got back recently form our annual unofficial fly-in at the Alvord
Desert. Weather for the most part was good although we did have a day of rain that
translated to snow on the top of the Mountain.( 10,000 ft) Roger Hankins had
given me 10 VG's made from Lexan and I wanted to try them on the false ribs
this time. The originals were put on the ribs (14 of them). My original stall was
at 46 mph and with the original installation it lowered the stall to 36 mph
solo and 46 double. OK this time remembering Mr. Pikes missive I decided to
install the new ones with the back even with the front of the old ones. (Original
placement was 11 inches back from the leading edge measured over the curve)
On testing I found that the stall was further reduced to 32 MPH solo and 36
with a 160 lb passenger. Joa, from "Land Shorter" (sells VG's and tundra tires)
was at the fly-in and I asked where he recommended placing the VG;s and he
said that they placed them at the CG of the wing. Being!
very satisfied with the results I did no further testing, just did a lot of
flying.
Larry, Oregon
I hope that all you guys who are installing way more than 7 [pairs] of VG's
per wing will be very careful in approaching your new, low stall speed. The
recovery from the new lower stall may be very different from the previous stall
with only 7 VG's.
My FS II's original stall speed [sans VG's] was 42 mph with a nice smooth
recovery- nose just drops a little & she starts flying again.
After installing the 7 VG's of my own design on each main rib of both wings,
stall dropped to 36 mph with the same smooth recovery.
Great!! If 7 is great, then 20- something should be fantastic!! I added a
VG at every false rib at the same distance back. Stall was now only 32 mph,
but now, when she did stall, everything quit flying & the plane just fell!! It
dropped a wing & acted like it wanted to spin. Scared me............
If I had been within 50 ft. AGL when she stalled I would have been in
trouble. I quickly removed the VG's from the false ribs; the 4 mph lowering of
stall
was not worth it to me.
Howard Shackleford
FS II
SC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | sada <phoenix(at)ja2.so-net.ne.jp> |
| Subject: | What and Where the word " Tailfeather" |
Hello sir.
I'm now reading the book of covering.
Just teach me the word " tailfeather" typed in that book.
No listed such word on dictionaries , nor WEB translation english to
japanese.
So, where it "tailfeather" located(indicated) and what is the similar
word in English.
I hope any person to reply this enquiry,
thanks.
sada, near Centrair airport (NGO) japan
Most recently Wright brothers invented replica glider hanged on top
ceiling in NGO.
With the name of WILBA and ORVIL Approach Final FIX points, brothers
maybe delightful.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Cottrell" <lcottrel(at)kfalls.net> |
----- Original Message -----
From: <HShack(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: VG's Again
>
> In a message dated 10/5/2005 7:55:20 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> lcottrel(at)kfalls.net writes:
> Just got back recently form our annual unofficial fly-in at the Alvord
> Desert. Weather for the most part was good although we did have a day of
> rain that
> translated to snow on the top of the Mountain.( 10,000 ft) Roger Hankins
> had
> given me 10 VG's made from Lexan and I wanted to try them on the false
> ribs
> this time. The originals were put on the ribs (14 of them). My original
> stall was
> at 46 mph and with the original installation it lowered the stall to 36
> mph
> solo and 46 double. OK this time remembering Mr. Pikes missive I decided
> to
> install the new ones with the back even with the front of the old ones.
> (Original
> placement was 11 inches back from the leading edge measured over the
> curve)
> On testing I found that the stall was further reduced to 32 MPH solo and
> 36
> with a 160 lb passenger. Joa, from "Land Shorter" (sells VG's and tundra
> tires)
> was at the fly-in and I asked where he recommended placing the VG;s and
> he
> said that they placed them at the CG of the wing. Being!
> very satisfied with the results I did no further testing, just did a lot
> of
> flying.
>
> Larry, Oregon
>
>
> I hope that all you guys who are installing way more than 7 [pairs] of
> VG's
> per wing will be very careful in approaching your new, low stall speed.
> The
> recovery from the new lower stall may be very different from the previous
> stall
> with only 7 VG's.
>
> My FS II's original stall speed [sans VG's] was 42 mph with a nice smooth
> recovery- nose just drops a little & she starts flying again.
>
> After installing the 7 VG's of my own design on each main rib of both
> wings,
> stall dropped to 36 mph with the same smooth recovery.
>
> Great!! If 7 is great, then 20- something should be fantastic!! I added
> a
> VG at every false rib at the same distance back. Stall was now only 32
> mph,
> but now, when she did stall, everything quit flying & the plane just
> fell!! It
> dropped a wing & acted like it wanted to spin. Scared me............
>
> If I had been within 50 ft. AGL when she stalled I would have been in
> trouble. I quickly removed the VG's from the false ribs; the 4 mph
> lowering of stall
> was not worth it to me.
>
>
> Howard Shackleford
> FS II
> SC
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Cottrell" <lcottrel(at)kfalls.net> |
>
> I hope that all you guys who are installing way more than 7 [pairs] of
> VG's
> per wing will be very careful in approaching your new, low stall speed.
> The
> recovery from the new lower stall may be very different from the previous
> stall
> with only 7 VG's.
> Great!! If 7 is great, then 20- something should be fantastic!! I added
> a
> VG at every false rib at the same distance back. Stall was now only 32
> mph,
> but now, when she did stall, everything quit flying & the plane just
> fell!! It
> dropped a wing & acted like it wanted to spin. Scared me............
Howard and gang
Not sure what happened to your plane, but mine had no such tendency at
all. In fact the stall was even more docile. The nose just dropped a bit and
when I stopped pulling back on the stick began flying immediately. Actually
it seemed even more docile than it had been without the addition. There was
no tendency to drop either wing, just straight forward. One difference
between the two planes is that my additions to the false ribs were set
forward of the other ones on the full ribs. ?????? Could that make a
difference?
Larry, Oregon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | sada <phoenix(at)ja2.so-net.ne.jp> |
| Subject: | Re: What and Where the word " Tailfeather" |
wrong pusher
right tractor
sorry.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Silver Fern Microlights Ltd" <kiwimick(at)sfmicro.fsnet.co.uk> |
All,
We have fitted VG's to both of our Xtra's there 98 in total per aircraft.
We have found that the pre stall buffet is much more noticeable , the low
speed handling is much better, T/O and landing distances reduced, the stall
is not much different except much slower but as it occurs from a higher
angle of attack it looks different.
The PFA & CAA were so impressed they approved then on all Kolbs in the UK.
Regards
Mike
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Cottrell" <lcottrel(at)kfalls.net>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: VG's Again
>
>
>>
>> I hope that all you guys who are installing way more than 7 [pairs] of
>> VG's
>> per wing will be very careful in approaching your new, low stall speed.
>> The
>> recovery from the new lower stall may be very different from the previous
>> stall
>> with only 7 VG's.
>
>> Great!! If 7 is great, then 20- something should be fantastic!! I added
>> a
>> VG at every false rib at the same distance back. Stall was now only 32
>> mph,
>> but now, when she did stall, everything quit flying & the plane just
>> fell!! It
>> dropped a wing & acted like it wanted to spin. Scared me............
>
>
> Howard and gang
> Not sure what happened to your plane, but mine had no such tendency at
> all. In fact the stall was even more docile. The nose just dropped a bit
> and
> when I stopped pulling back on the stick began flying immediately.
> Actually
> it seemed even more docile than it had been without the addition. There
> was
> no tendency to drop either wing, just straight forward. One difference
> between the two planes is that my additions to the false ribs were set
> forward of the other ones on the full ribs. ?????? Could that make a
> difference?
>
> Larry, Oregon
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | possums <possums(at)mindspring.com> |
At 01:48 AM 10/6/2005, you wrote:
>
>Howard and gang
> Not sure what happened to your plane, but mine had no such tendency at
>all. In fact the stall was even more docile. The nose just dropped a bit and
>when I stopped pulling back on the stick began flying immediately. Actually
>it seemed even more docile than it had been without the addition. There was
>no tendency to drop either wing, just straight forward. One difference
>between the two planes is that my additions to the false ribs were set
>forward of the other ones on the full ribs. ?????? Could that make a
>difference?
>
>Larry, Oregon
Mine didn't pick up any bad tendencies either. Just a lower stall
speed. A lot more control a just above stall. I used the little lexan
"Landshorter" ones - about 42 + per wing, used the pattern they
sent for the layout. They're even hard to see unless you look close.
It takes two of these to make one of the homemade ones.
URL: http://sos.photosite.com/Album1/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rex Rodebush" <rrodebush(at)tema.net> |
>
.....All,
.....We have fitted VG's to both of our Xtra's there 98 in total per
aircraft.
What are your locations, distances, etc.?
Thanks,
Rex Rodebush
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Silver Fern Microlights Ltd" <kiwimick(at)sfmicro.fsnet.co.uk> |
Rex,
They are 3" pitch spacing placed at 10% of chord, the 3" pitch pairs are
placed between each rib in the 'valley'.
total weight is 98gms.
Mike
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rex Rodebush" <rrodebush(at)tema.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: VG's Again
>
> 200510061820.j96IKQFe008870(at)mail.matronics.com> >
>
> ....All,
> ....We have fitted VG's to both of our Xtra's there 98 in total per
> aircraft.
>
> What are your locations, distances, etc.?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Rex Rodebush
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: free of the tether |
Yah, but Bob's done it, and Big Lar's still puffing. :-) Do not
Archive.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Building Kolb Mk III
N78LB Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jack B. Hart" <jbhart(at)onlyinternet.net>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: free of the tether
>
>>
>
> Bob,
>
> This has to be a milestone event. By that I mean it is the equivalent to
> a
> birth, death, graduation or a wedding. It is tough enough to get a plane
> to
> fly well as it was originally designed with a prescribed engine and engine
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Pierzina <planecrazzzy(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Plan the Flight - Fly the Plan |
Well,
Today was the day....I did 3 fast taxis....First one - I flew the tail
.....Second one was a little faster and it lifted off
the ground slightly.....the third one I planned to lift off aprox 10 ft off the
ground....Check it for Trim ....if trim was too
bad , I'd put it back on the ground .....If trim was OK , I'd give it throttle
and fly it.....Trim was PERFECT !!!
Through out my short , 15 min flight ( planned ) my trim was just perfect and
it flew like I hoped it would !
I went about 2000 ft AGL and I checked the stall speed ( not FULL stall ) and
then I brought
it in and made a VERY GOOD LANDING....
Tesa ( my Daughter ) took some pictures of my first flight.....I told her to wait
a little to see the landing
gear off the ground.....She did a good job.... I'll post some later, it's been
a LONG day....If you would like to
see some of the pic's before they get posted.......E-Mail me..I already sent some
directly to some of the Kolb guys,
I couldn't wait to show Big Lar that "I BEAT HIM IN THE AIR"
Now if I can only get this stupid GRIN off my face....
Gotta Fly...
Mike
PS a guy at the airport asked if somebody already flew the plane before me.....No......he
said " That's Crazy"
I said No, "That's Planecrazzzy"
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: | "pat ladd" <pj.ladd(at)btinternet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Plan the Flight - Fly the Plan |
Congratulaton Mike.
Pat
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph" <ul15rhb(at)juno.com> |
| Subject: | yesterday's flight pics |
Here are some pics of our local flights.
http://frogflyers.com/phpbb/album.php
Ralph
Original Firestar
18 years flying it
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard & Martha Neilsen" <NeilsenRM05(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Plan the Flight - Fly the Plan |
Mike
Congratulations there is noting like the first flight in a plane you built.
Do Not Archive
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW Powered MKIIIc
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Pierzina" <planecrazzzy(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: Plan the Flight - Fly the Plan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: bridge story |
Thought that was only if you lost 'em ?? :-) Actually, I've heard it so
many ways........is there really a "correct" saying ?? Are you flying
a Kolb over there, Juan ?? Lar. Do not
Archive.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Building Kolb Mk III
N78LB Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Juan Puerto/Aeroservei" <aerotecnik(at)terra.es>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: bridge story
>
>
> Hi Kolbers,
>
> Ok, the correct expression in spanish is
>
> Vaya huevos !!
>
> -Juan Puerto
> EC-ZCU
> Barcelona ( Spain)
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Juan Puerto/Aeroservei" <aerotecnik(at)terra.es> |
| Subject: | Re: bridge story |
You can say also cojones instead of huevos but it is more crude (in fact
both are crude expressions). In English you say "nuts".
Im flying a RANS Coyote but I have always known someday I will fly a Kolb.
-Juan Puerto
EC-ZCU
Barcelona (Spain)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: bridge story
>
> Thought that was only if you lost 'em ?? :-) Actually, I've heard it so
> many ways........is there really a "correct" saying ?? Are you
> flying
> a Kolb over there, Juan ?? Lar. Do not
> Archive.
>
> Larry Bourne
> Palm Springs, CA
> Building Kolb Mk III
> N78LB Vamoose
> www.gogittum.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Juan Puerto/Aeroservei" <aerotecnik(at)terra.es>
> To:
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: bridge story
>
>
>>
>>
>> Hi Kolbers,
>>
>> Ok, the correct expression in spanish is
>>
>> Vaya huevos !!
>>
>> -Juan Puerto
>> EC-ZCU
>> Barcelona ( Spain)
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerb <ulflyer(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Hanger Update |
At 08:16 AM 9/13/2005, you wrote:
>
>In a message dated 9/13/05 9:52:25 AM Central Daylight Time,
>tnfirestar2(at)yahoo.com writes:
>
> > My question, mine was bought with no front wall. Leaves the finish up to
> > the owner. I want a roll up door, but would like to have one that would
> > accommodate the wingspan of a Firestar. What type door did you
> install? Do you roll
> > out the plane or scoot it sideways on some type of dolly? I have looked at
> > several options, vertical and horizontal folding doors, roll up doors...
> > interested to know what has worked well for others out there. Do
> you have any pics?
> >
> >
Many around here are putting on accordion doors - the panel section
has a frame with smoked corrugated fiberglass panels and rides on a
top and bottom track. This makes them light and easy to move. They
seem to be tough and hold up.
jerb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Comcast <davis207(at)comcast.net> |
*New Information On Ultralight Plane Crash*
*Ultralight Plane Crashes in Elmore County*
Check All | Clear All
*More on the Web*
Southern Flyers Ultralight Association
U. S. Ultralight Association
*News* *more>>* <http://www.wsfa.com/Global/category.asp?C=1190>
*Dothan police search for alleged robber*
<http://www.wsfa.com/Global/story.asp?S=3964230>
*2005 WSFA 12 Hurricane Center*
<http://www.wsfa.com/Global/category.asp?C=66360>
Bad news from John's back yard: Looks like a trike crashed with 2
fatalities.
Any news, John?
Chuck
Firefly 028
Malvern, PA
(Raised in AL with family in Montgomery)
http://www.wsfa.com/
http://www.wsfa.com/Global/story.asp?S=3965216
In case they update the website, here is a cut / pate of one of the
articles:
Authorities in Elmore County say two brothers from Autauga County were
killed when their ultralight plane crashed Monday evening around
dusk just off Mercer Road in the town of Elmore.
52-year-old John Brashears and his brother 49-year-old Paul were
identified as the victims. WSFA's Bryan Henry says he's been told one
of the two men aboard the aircraft was an "experienced pilot."
The plane took off from the Wetumpka Airport shortly after 5 p.m. Monday.
It flew for about 2 miles when something went terribly wrong and
investigators still don't know why.
Jessica Lewis didn't see the plane, but her husband did. According to
Mrs. Lewis, her husband said "that they saw it in the air. It flew
over. They saw it when it flew over and it was fine. Just a second
after that, they heard a wierd noise and looked up and saw the aircraft
just falling down, a nose dive, and they actually heard it hit. It
sounded like something broke. That's the noise they heard. You just
never think...that something is going to happen like this."
Light planes fly out of the Wetumpka Airport all the time, sometimes 3-4
times a week. The FAA does not require pilots to pass a written or
flight test before taking to the sky in an ultralight.
However, most manufacturers and sellers offerand require buyers to
undergo aminimum training.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
The wreckage has been recovered and the airport manager said that one of the
leading edges was broken. Witnesses on the ground reported hearing a loud
bang. That would have been the leading edge breaking. That's the same sound we
heard when John's Hauck's FireStar went in at Addison. Why it broke, we'll
probably never know.
I didn't know John very well, had only met him a few of times. But he
appeared to be a competent pilot. Appeared to be the typical ultralight pilot,
always smiling. The trike was an old one. He had bought it new.
Wish I had gotten to know him better. We'd talked about setting my trike up
and flying it. He'll be missed by everyone at the airport even if they didn't
know him. The fact that he had his brother with him makes it doubly bad.
Ya'll be careful.
Bill Griffin
Montgomery, AL
________________________________________________________________________________
The trike was an old one. He had bought it new.
My bad. Meant to say that it wasn't an old one.
Bill
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ken Richter" <susan203(at)centurytel.net> |
| Subject: | weight and balance |
Does anyone have the specs and procedure for weight and balance for a kolb mk2
(most forward and most rearward CG) I am in the process of n numbering my mk2
but I do not have any of this info,
Thanks Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charles Blackwell <wozani(at)optonline.net> |
| Subject: | Mk2 weight and balance |
Ken,
I've got it as: "Enclosed is a sample weight and balance sheet
(non existent). This shows how to do the computations. The average wing
chord is 64" and the airplane will be safe to fly if the center of gravity
of the airplane is between 20% and 40% of the wing chord as measured from
the leading edge. Thus 20% = 12.8 inches aft of the leading edge of the
wing; 40% = 25.6 inches. Thus the airplane is (sic) balance if the C.G. is
between 12.8" and 25.6" from the leading edge of the wing. For reference
the mounting tab for the main spar is 18" aft of the leading edge. The most
critical loading condition is a very light pilot flying alone with a heavy
load of fuel, in which case the C.G. will shift aft. Two heavy people will
result in a much further forward C.G."
Unfortunately I've misplace my most recent weight and balance information,
but the booklet put the empty weight at 320# and gross at 750#. I think I
was really at 342# but may be wrong. With 200# pilot and 12 gal. of fuel I
was fine. With 400# of people it was still within the range. I figured
that my 120# wife could not fly without fuel... Hope your numbers fit.
Charlie, MkII in NJ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave & Eve Pelletier" <pelletier(at)cableone.net> |
I'm starting the process of "N" numbering my MK III and I'll need an ELT. I remember
reading something about an AK450 but can't find anymore about it or any
others. Any suggestions? I want to keep the $$$s as low as possible.
AzDave
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Laird <rlaird(at)cavediver.com> |
Worked well for me. I mean, there's not much to it. The ELT just
sits there unless you need it. I got my AK450 from Chief Aircraft.
Batteries are "D" cells, so I can't imagine you'd find a less
expensive ELT solution.
-- Robert
On 10/13/05, Dave & Eve Pelletier wrote:
>
> I'm starting the process of "N" numbering my MK III and I'll need an ELT. I
remember reading something about an AK450 but can't find anymore about it or any
others. Any suggestions? I want to keep the $$$s as low as possible.
>
> AzDave
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
Ditto on the batteries - cheap and easy. Aircraft Spruce lists them as
well - Ameri-King AK-450. Vamoose has one, too. Lar.
Do not Archive.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Building Kolb Mk III
N78LB Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Laird" <rlaird(at)cavediver.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: ELT
>
> Worked well for me. I mean, there's not much to it. The ELT just
> sits there unless you need it. I got my AK450 from Chief Aircraft.
> Batteries are "D" cells, so I can't imagine you'd find a less
> expensive ELT solution.
>
> -- Robert
>
>
> On 10/13/05, Dave & Eve Pelletier wrote:
>>
>>
>> I'm starting the process of "N" numbering my MK III and I'll need an ELT.
>> I remember reading something about an AK450 but can't find anymore about
>> it or any others. Any suggestions? I want to keep the $$$s as low as
>> possible.
>>
>> AzDave
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eugene Zimmerman <eugenezimmerman(at)dejazzd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Mk2 weight and balance |
>>> I figured that my 120# wife could not fly without fuel... <<<
Are you trying to tell us that she is no
angel ????????????????????????????
:-)
On Oct 13, 2005, at 3:11 PM, Charles Blackwell wrote:
>
>
> Ken,
>
> I've got it as: "Enclosed is a sample weight and
> balance sheet
> (non existent). This shows how to do the computations. The
> average wing
> chord is 64" and the airplane will be safe to fly if the center of
> gravity
> of the airplane is between 20% and 40% of the wing chord as
> measured from
> the leading edge. Thus 20% = 12.8 inches aft of the leading edge
> of the
> wing; 40% = 25.6 inches. Thus the airplane is (sic) balance if the
> C.G. is
> between 12.8" and 25.6" from the leading edge of the wing. For
> reference
> the mounting tab for the main spar is 18" aft of the leading edge.
> The most
> critical loading condition is a very light pilot flying alone with
> a heavy
> load of fuel, in which case the C.G. will shift aft. Two heavy
> people will
> result in a much further forward C.G."
>
> Unfortunately I've misplace my most recent weight and balance
> information,
> but the booklet put the empty weight at 320# and gross at 750#. I
> think I
> was really at 342# but may be wrong. With 200# pilot and 12 gal.
> of fuel I
> was fine. With 400# of people it was still within the range. I
> figured
> that my 120# wife could not fly without fuel... Hope your numbers
> fit.
>
>
> Charlie, MkII in NJ
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | possums <possums(at)mindspring.com> |
At 07:33 PM 10/12/2005, you wrote:
>
>I agree with Ray and John on the importance of practicing the necessary
>moves for the ultimate "Worst Case Scenario". Flight training is 10% flying
>and 90% what to do in case of everything else, it's why we practice all
>those "what if" things for as long as we fly.
>
>What really puzzles me more than those individuals that for whatever reason,
>didn't "Pull the Handle" - snip-
I can answer part of that question - Been in that situation several times.
I, however, have never "pulled the red handle". Maybe I never should have.
Not because I had any time to think about it or "not think about it"
I do practice pulling the handle before every takeoff - and I mean
"every takeoff"..
Here's the problem ...It is amazing even after you have gotten
yourself into a situation where you think "I WOULD PULL
THE RED HANDLE" - you don't.
You don't EVEN REMEMBER YOU HAVE A CHUTE.
Things happen so fast, that the next thing you know, you're on the
ground, or in the water, or in the trees - your hands are shaking
and you think - "I had a chute!"
I was going to stall it into the trees and pull the chute - right???
Belive it or not - you most likely will not even remember it's there.
Like John H. says - "you got to beat it into your head".
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
Are you on your second set of batteries?
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>Ditto on the batteries - cheap and easy. Aircraft Spruce lists them as
>well - Ameri-King AK-450. Vamoose has one, too. Lar.
>Do not Archive.
>
>Larry Bourne
>Palm Springs, CA
>Building Kolb Mk III
>N78LB Vamoose
>www.gogittum.com
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Robert Laird" <rlaird(at)cavediver.com>
>To:
>Subject: Re: Kolb-List: ELT
>
>
> >
> > Worked well for me. I mean, there's not much to it. The ELT just
> > sits there unless you need it. I got my AK450 from Chief Aircraft.
> > Batteries are "D" cells, so I can't imagine you'd find a less
> > expensive ELT solution.
> >
> > -- Robert
> >
> >
> > On 10/13/05, Dave & Eve Pelletier wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> I'm starting the process of "N" numbering my MK III and I'll need an ELT.
> >> I remember reading something about an AK450 but can't find anymore about
> >> it or any others. Any suggestions? I want to keep the $$$s as low as
> >> possible.
> >>
> >> AzDave
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Noyer <ronoy(at)shentel.net> |
Ck Trade-A-Plane...always have ads fer the Ak, new. Good unit, uses
common D-cells.
regards,
Bob N.
ronoy(at)shentel.net
http://www.angelfire.com/rpg/ronoy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Cottrell" <lcottrel(at)kfalls.net> |
| Subject: | fuel sender dificulties |
Hi,
I have two 'Westach" fuel guages with the capacitance senders. Recently
one of them began to be a little unsure as to how much gas was actually in
the tank. I of course attempted to fiddle with it and then the other one
went belly up. Seems to work just fine with the motor off but shows full
with the engine running. Any guess's or actual knowledge would be
appreciated.
Larry, Oregon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Vince Nicely" <vincenic(at)xtn.net> |
| Subject: | Firestar Glide ratios with and without power |
Hi Gang,
The has been some discussion recently about how the Kolb airplanes glide
with engine at idle compared to glide with the engine off. Thinking this an
interesting subject, I decided to test my Firestar II, 503 DCDI engine with
72" two-blade Ivo prop. The airplane was at a gross weight of about 650
pounds and the glides were at 45-50 mph calibrated airspeed which is about
the speed for best best glide ratio. I glided for an altitude loss of 2000
ft and measured the distance traveled by the GPS. What I found is that the
glide ratio is 7.8 with the engine off and the prop stopped and the glide
ratio is 7.6 with the engine at idle and the prop is turning about 3200 rpm.
I only did each test once, so within the accuracy of my measurements, there
is no real difference.
Comments or your experience are welcome.
Vince Nicely
Firestar II N8233G with 390 hours
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Pearce" <rap(at)isp.com> |
| Subject: | Second fuel pump 912S |
I noticed at the Kolb home coming that most of the Mark 3's were running a electric
boast pump. Is it req'd or will the std fuel pump pick up fuel from the
tanks behind the seat. I am pulling my fuel off of the top of the tanks with
tube that go to the lowest point in the tanks. I think it was Steve I was talking
to and he said he only used his on take off and landing.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Denny Rowe" <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Second fuel pump 912S |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rick Pearce" <rap(at)isp.com>
>
> I noticed at the Kolb home coming that most of the Mark 3's were running
> a electric boast pump. Is it req'd or will the std fuel pump pick up fuel
> from the tanks behind the seat. I am pulling my fuel off of the top of the
> tanks with tube that go to the lowest point in the tanks. I think it was
> Steve I was talking to and he said he only used his on take off and
> landing.
>
>
> Rick,
It is common practice in aircraft that have an engine driven fuel pump to
also have an electric back up pump in the event the engine driven pump
fails.
Also most folks only use the boost pump in the pattern and at low altitudes
where if the primary fails there is no time to turn on the back up.
Denny Rowe,
Mk-3 with two fuel pumps, PA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Second fuel pump 912S |
I use a Facet electric fuel pump in addition to the standard pump. I have a
pressure gauge between the Facet and the regular pump to tell me if the
Facet is working. As part of the runup, I turn the Facet off and make sure
the engine will run normally on the regular pump. Once I know that, I turn
the Facet back on (which pops the fuel pressure gauge back up to around 3
pounds) and leave it on for the whole flight.
I feel that not using the electric fuel pump all the time is sort of like
folks who don't turn on their headlights in the rain, but only use their
parking lights. Why? I don't save my headlights for just night time, and I
don't save my fuel pump for just takeoff and landing, I want maximum
reliability all the time. Maybe I am just getting too old for that "sudden
silence" adrenalin rush...
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
> I noticed at the Kolb home coming that most of the Mark 3's were
> running a electric boast pump. Is it req'd or will the std fuel pump pick
> up fuel from the tanks behind the seat. I am pulling my fuel off of the
> top of the tanks with tube that go to the lowest point in the tanks. I
> think it was Steve I was talking to and he said he only used his on take
> off and landing.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjungjr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Firestar Glide ratios with and without power |
Vince,
How much time expired on each test? I am interested in the sink rate.
Your plane is similar to mine. I have a 68" two blade IVO.
John Jung
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Noyer <ronoy(at)shentel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Mk2 weight and balance |
My wife won't fly with me, either! She says there's no fuel like an
old fuel.
on approach to 83
regards,
Bob N.
ronoy(at)shentel.net
http://www.angelfire.com/rpg/ronoy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DCulver701(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Titan Exhaust System For Sale |
Hi John, did you change your web address? I've tried to get on your site to
look at your pictures with no luck. Really enjoyed them! Also, does the
factory still have those pictures available for viewing, that they posted right
after the homecoming? Tia, best regards. Dave Culver
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Domenic Perez" <perezmdomenic(at)plateautel.net> |
| Subject: | 72" Prop on Firestar II |
Vince Nicely,
How did you get a 72" prop to fit on a Firestar II with 503? Was it as simple
as putting big spacers somewhere? How much higher than standard is your thrustline?
Since your's is an Ivo, does the standard Ivo 4" (?) hub spacer work,
or does it take a longer one for such long blades to leave the trailing edge
unchopped? What is your gear ratio? Finally, is the high thrust line any big deal
when flying?
Thanks,
M. Domenic Perez
FS II, 503 DCDI, Ivo 66" two blade (and no way would a 72" fit on mine without
jacking up the engine a lot), 2.58 B gearbox
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flykolb" <flykolb(at)carolina.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Mark III for sale |
2.32 DATE_IN_FUTURE_12_24 Date: is 12 to 24 hours after Received: date
My Mark III is listed for sale on barnstormers.
Jim
Charlotte, NC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kolbdriver" <Kolbdriver(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Second fuel pump 912S |
Rick,
I use the electric pump only to fill the carb bowls then it is back off. I
have a fuel pressure alarm programed into my EIS. Should the fuel pressure
go low I will turn the electric pump on. I also turn the electric pump on
when the fuel level is below 4 gallons in the tanks. (this should be very
seldom) This satisfies my desire for a comfort level. My reasoning for not
running the electric pump during take off and landing is that those are the
most likely times for accidents and I would not want the electric pump
running and possibly pump fuel out in the event of an accident. My plans
are to install an inertia switch to open the main power solenoid then I
would be more comfortable running the electric pump on take off and landing.
This are only a hillbillies opinion so take it for what it's worth.
Steven G.
>
> I noticed at the Kolb home coming that most of the Mark 3's were
running a electric boast pump. Is it req'd or will the std fuel pump pick up
fuel from the tanks behind the seat. I am pulling my fuel off of the top of
the tanks with tube that go to the lowest point in the tanks. I think it was
Steve I was talking to and he said he only used his on take off and landing.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Vince Nicely" <vincenic(at)xtn.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Firestar Glide ratios with and without power |
Hi John,
The time for the 2000 ft decent was 3 minutes and 15 seconds for a sink rate
of 615 ft/min at idle and the sink rate was estimated at 584 ft/min with the
engine off.
My plane has the 68" IVO, too. I made an error on the previous post.
Vince Nicely
>
>
> Vince,
>
> How much time expired on each test? I am interested in the sink rate.
> Your plane is similar to mine. I have a 68" two blade IVO.
>
> John Jung
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Vince Nicely" <vincenic(at)xtn.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 72" Prop on Firestar II |
Dominic,
Sorry, my error. It is a 68" prop.
Vince Nicely
----- Original Message -----
From: "Domenic Perez" <perezmdomenic(at)plateautel.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: 72" Prop on Firestar II
>
>
> Vince Nicely,
> How did you get a 72" prop to fit on a Firestar II with 503? Was it as
> simple as putting big spacers somewhere? How much higher than standard is
> your thrustline? Since your's is an Ivo, does the standard Ivo 4" (?) hub
> spacer work, or does it take a longer one for such long blades to leave
> the trailing edge unchopped? What is your gear ratio? Finally, is the high
> thrust line any big deal when flying?
>
> Thanks,
>
> M. Domenic Perez
> FS II, 503 DCDI, Ivo 66" two blade (and no way would a 72" fit on mine
> without jacking up the engine a lot), 2.58 B gearbox
> >
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Second fuel pump 912S (and electrical security) |
| The check valves
| in the Facet fuel pump CAN go bad (ask me how I know) so that's a
good
| example where a piece of "safety equipment" can cause problems.
| -- Robert
|
| P.S. I would also strongly suggest you cap off anything that could
| cause an electrical arc if gasoline comes in contact with it... like
| the connections on the starter motor, for one. I used liquid
plastic
| and coated them heavily.
Hi Robert L/Gang:
Would you please expand on the "Facet fuel pump CAN go bad" please.
What goes bad? How does it affect the rest of the fuel system?
Also would like to learn more about sealing connections on the starter
motor with liquid plastic. Why do you do this?
Thanks,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Laird <rlaird(at)cavediver.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Second fuel pump 912S (and electrical security) |
> Hi Robert L/Gang:
Hi John....
Ok, you don't know it but you're asking me to bare my soul... so, here goes...
> Would you please expand on the "Facet fuel pump CAN go bad" please.
> What goes bad? How does it affect the rest of the fuel system?
One day I took off from my field and I was at about 200 feet when the
engine died... (this was my first, and only (so far), engine out). I
shoved the nose forward immediately, aimed straight at the ground,
then flared at the last second and came to a smooth landing a few
moments later. Lucky for me, the area beyond the end of the runway
was without trees or any obstacles, and the grass wasn't too high. As
soon as I landed, I started the engine right up, then taxi'd back to
the runway proper. After another pre-flight and lot of
head-scratching, I decided to try the takeoff again, and this time it
was without event.
But... as I flew around later that day, I noticed on the fuel flow
meter that my flow rate was only just slightly above what I normally
need for flow during cruise. This was much lower than normal -- and
not enough for sustained high RPMS, as during a takeoff -- but high
enough for mid- to low-cruise sustained flight. It's been a while
since this happened, so I don't have the numbers handy, and I could go
into excruciating detail, but I don't want to bore anyone.
The point is, my fuel flow meter was basically telling me that I had
some kind of restriction in my fuel line, between the tank and the
carbs. It took me a full day of diagnosing everything that it could
be to turn up the culprit: the Facet fuel pump. A little more
investigating and I determined that when the Facet pump was NOT turned
on, it restricted the flow to a fair degree. If I turned it on, the
fuel would flow just fine. (At this point in my flying career, I
hadn't yet convinced myself to use the Facet for anything except
emergencies. It was only after this episode that I started using it
religiously on takeoffs and landings, and sometimes for entire
flights. Someone told me that, if you leave a Facet on all the time,
it's MTBF is 12 years or something like that.)
So, the checks valves in the Facet were causing the problem. I
replaced the Facet with another new one, and the problem was solved.
So, a Facet can cause problems, but I'd like to think of my incident
as rare, particularly since I hadn't heard of anyone else ever having
this problem.
> Also would like to learn more about sealing connections on the starter
> motor with liquid plastic. Why do you do this?
Because I once had a splash of gasoline -- from a pin-hole in a
plastic line that looked good -- hit the starter motor once while
starting the engine, and, well, you never saw me move so fast to get
the extinguisher out! It was this experience that convinced me to use
Gates fuel line and to "cap" off any possible elements that could
cause a spark. Of course, if gas got INTO the starter motor, it would
probably ignite, so my use of liquid plastic on the electrical
connectors was probably just symbolic, but I certainly felt better
after doing it. Using the Gates fuel line is the real solution to
this possibility, since it mostly eliminates the possibility.
-- Robert
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)telepath.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Second fuel pump 912S (and electrical security) |
> Someone told me that, if you leave a Facet on all the time,
> it's MTBF is 12 years or something like that.)
Probably true. Conelec, a Purolator/Facet competitor that went out of
business long ago, had similar electronic pumps running for well
over four years, continuously.
> So, the checks valves in the Facet were causing the problem. I
> replaced the Facet with another new one, and the problem was
solved.
Now, just to be certain, was the Facet part number the same for the
replacement as the failed unit? A Facet is not a Facet is not a Facet.
Some come with and without Quiet Valves (68db or so), check
valves, and positive shutoff valves. This is not to dispute your
analysis but rather to make others aware that there are differences
not limited to pressure ratings.
As an aside, Facet also makes a really nice integral filter fuel pump
but the pressures run max/min at 11/9. Sure is a nice unit tho.
Jim Baker
580.788.2779
'71 SV, 492TC
Elmore City, OK
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Laird <rlaird(at)cavediver.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Second fuel pump 912S (and electrical security) |
>
> > So, the checks valves in the Facet were causing the problem. I
> > replaced the Facet with another new one, and the problem was
> solved.
>
> Now, just to be certain, was the Facet part number the same for the
> replacement as the failed unit? A Facet is not a Facet is not a Facet.
> Some come with and without Quiet Valves (68db or so), check
> valves, and positive shutoff valves. This is not to dispute your
> analysis but rather to make others aware that there are differences
> not limited to pressure ratings.
Yes. I can't tell you the exact type, but I do remember ordering the
new one by reading the part number off the old one. (And the one that
failed worked flawlessly for over two years before it (semi)failed...
and I had the fuel flow meter on the plane for about a year before the
pump failed, so I was very familiar with what they nominal readings
were. If it wasn't for the fuel flow meter, I doubt I could have
figured it out in one day.)
-- Robert
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Edward Steuber" <esteuber(at)rochester.rr.com> |
| Subject: | 2nd fuel pump 912s(and electrical security) |
Some of the Cassutt racer guys use the squeeze bulb fuel pumps that we all have
in our main fuel lines as an air pump to pressurize the fuel tank. Put a tee
in the gas tank vent line and a check valve in the atmosphere end and you can
pump up a couple pounds of pressure,,,,,3 pounds max for the tank but just get
a low pressure gauge 0-10#....You only need 1/2 pound for normal ops......some
of the guys use a tube they blow in for pressuring the tank on takeoff with
another check valve in that line........Cassutts have fuel flow problems in climb
attitude and no electric to save weight.....
Any simple way you can get the job done works for me.....you don't
really want to complicate these machines do you ? Pretty soon we'll all be flying
GA again.... YYYYYUUUUUUCH ! ( don't suck on that line or you'll be
saying the same thing)
ED in Western
NY
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Transceiver advice?/KX-99 |
| It's disadvantage is its charge
| circuit, it is a tickle charge only and depending upon the amount of
| radio traffic, the audio can place more draw on power than the
tickle
| charge provides thus the unit can slowly run down.
| jerb
jerb/Gang:
Bought a KX99 in 1989. First flight to Fayetteville, AR, from Titus,
AL, the radio started to go belly up on me. Battery was getting low
despite the fact I had it hard wired to the aircraft electrical
system. I turned off the radio to save what power was left in case I
had to land at a controlled field. An hour or so later I turned it
back on to make a landing. Was surprised to find that the battery had
been somewhat recharged. A little further research turned up the fact
that the KX99 was wired to charge bats from an outside source only in
the off position. Could not get anyone to modify it for me, including
King, because it was an STC'd radio.
I now use the one of the cheapest radios ICOM offers, the A3. Works
great. Got me to Barrow, Alaska, and a lot of other places all over
Canada and the US without any problems. It is my only avionics.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "pat ladd" <pj.ladd(at)btinternet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Firefly over Camp David? |
We interviewed the pilot and he was unaware that he had
wandered into restricted airspace," Secret Service spokesman Eric
Zahren told the Frederick News-Post >>
Hi,
At least there was some sort of risk, he might have been carrying an atom
bomb.
Makes a change from the Defence of the Homeland people arresting 75 year old
Vietnam vets in wheel chairs.
Cheers
Pat
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Swiderski" <rswiderski(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Ultrastar gap seal needed |
Dave,
Go to an auto upholstery shop, get some clear vinyl used for
convertible windows, sew Velcro along its edges, glue mating surface on wing
& you're done! Role it on & role it off, works great. -Richard Swiderski
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of David Kulp
Subject: Kolb-List: Ultrastar gap seal needed
Does anyone have an Ultrastar gap seal they'd be willing to sell?
Dave Kulp
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Flycrazy8(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Find the Airplane |
Hey Mike
" I Ain't Skeered of No Ghost" " No Hank going run me off "
Only the quite sound of a STOPPED Rotax in flight .
Thanks ! Happy Halloween !
Stephen
Do Not Archive
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)telepath.com> |
| Subject: | Re: circuit breaker sizes |
> What size circuit breaker is required for the facet fuel pump?
What
> size circuit beaker is required for the alternator on the 912s or is
> one required? Every plane I have flow has one but I can't find any
> info in the Rotax owners manual. What type sender is required for
a
> low fuel pressure sender for the EIS? What size is everone using
for
> the main circuit breaker? What size is every one using for the
> radios? I will be running hand held,GPS & intercon.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list/
For anyone diving into the elctrical realm, check out the above two
sites, especially the latter. If, after searching the e-mail archives, you
still have a question, post it to the group..very helpful folks on the list.
As for the breaker on the alternator, you'll want to aprise yourself of
over-volt (OV) protection as well. The archives above will help.
Jim Baker
580.788.2779
'71 SV, 492TC
Elmore City, OK
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Pierzina <planecrazzzy(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Firestar II - Preflight Checklist |
Hey Guys,
I just finished typing up my Checklist from the notes that I took
last weekend....
If it can help you......Good , If you see somthing I should add......Let me
know.
Here it is :
Firestar II - Preflight Checklist
Pitot tube - extended / clear
Static Port - clear
Lift Strut (lower)- pinned / safety clip
Wheel - brakes / nut & cotter pin / axle bolts
Lift Strut (top)- pinned / safety clip
Leading Edge - check for dents
Wing Tip - aileron counter weight secure
Aileron - hinge pins/cotter pins
Aileron Control Rod - Pinned / safety clip / bottom bolt & nut
Gap Seal - secured
Wing Swivels - Bolts / nuts / cotter pins
Wing "Main" Pins - pinned / safety clip
Exhaust - muffler bolts / springs / safety wire
Prop - secure / nicks / spinner / leading edge tape
Tailboom - main bolt / nut / check for dents
Horizontal Stabilizer - front bolt / nut / cotter pin
Guide Wires - good tension
Elevator Hinges - pins / cotter pins / bolt / nut
Elevator Control Cables - clevis's / bolts / nuts / cotter pins
Rudder Control Cables - clevis's / bolts / nuts / cotter pins
Rudder Hinges - pins / cotter pins
Tailwheel - springs / bolts /nuts / cotter pin
Guide Wire - bolt / castle nut / safety clip
Elevator Hinges - pins / cotter pins / bolt / nut
Guide Wires - good tension
Horizontal Stabilizer - front bolt / nut / cotter pin
Tailboom - main bolt / nut / check for dents
Aileron Control Rod - Pinned / safety clip / bottom bolt & nut
Gap Seal - secured
Fuel Pump - fuel lines / pulse line / secured
Spark Plug Wires - secured
Carburetors - secure / filters secure / safety wire / fuel lines
Oil Injection - tank/ pump/ site guage / cap secured / safety wire
Throttle Cables - secured
Lord Mounts - bolts/ nuts / mounting plate
Aileron - hinge pins/cotter pins
Wing Tip - aileron counter weight secure
Leading Edge - check for dents
Lift Strut (top)- pinned / safety clip
Lift Strut (lower)- pinned / safety clip
Wheel - brakes / nut & cotter pin / axle bolts
Fuel Tanks - FULL / squeeze bulb/ valve open / velcro cover secured
Gotta Fly...
Mike in MN / FSII - 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: | Cat36Fly(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | New Mk lll is Born |
N615RT received her "Experimental" airworthiness certificate today. As soon
as the weather here in Delaware gets half decent she will try out her wings.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Pierzina <planecrazzzy(at)yahoo.com> |
Hey Guys,
I had "shortened" the travel on my aileron control horn.....mostly
because I've heard people on
the "list" did it to "lighten" the controls......
Sometimes , while I was flying in winds 5-10 , I would have to correct a gust
with "FULL" right or left.....
My controls feel "Light enough" that I moved the aileron rod "Back" to the "stock"
position on the control horn.
After I moved it my "Wing Fold Bracket" had to be changed ( just the Top part
).....I know there's been a few
people interested in this area......So , here's some pictures of the New Transport
Bracket....
http://www.wingsforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=3002
The top bracket keeps the wings from hitting the aircraft.....the bottom bracket
keeps the wings from flopping
outward while transporting it on my open trailer....
Gotta Fly...
Mike in
MN
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: | Robert Noyer <ronoy(at)shentel.net> |
In a clip from Flying Tales... the following is noted:
In 1933 it was proposed to have an Amateur pilots license, about
midway between Student and Private. Sound familiar? An ad for Bader
Field (Atlantic City) touted the Hotel Chelsea at $28/wk including
meals. Not quite the same, except the hotel is gone as well as the
prices. Cowl flaps were the latest thing in 1934.
regards,
Bob N.
ronoy(at)shentel.net
http://www.angelfire.com/rpg/ronoy
do not arhive
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Denny Rowe" <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
| Subject: | Re: New Mk lll is Born |
Congrats, keep us posted!
----- Original Message -----
From: <Cat36Fly(at)aol.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: New Mk lll is Born
>
> N615RT received her "Experimental" airworthiness certificate today. As
> soon
> as the weather here in Delaware gets half decent she will try out her
> wings.
>
>
> --
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kolbdriver" <Kolbdriver(at)bellsouth.net> |
Paul,
I'm not sure what sensors they are using but my EGT certainly does not have
30 - 60 seconds delay. I use EIS and the probes were bought from Grand
Rapids also. When flying at cruise speed and reduce throttle the EGT
reading responds almost immediently. I have experienced one 2 stroke engine
failure that was not detected by EIS either but I wouldn't expect it to
catch a rod bearing failure. EGT is only one indicator.
Steven
> Michael (great guy) said "We have had in our club alone 7 engine outs
(can't remember the time frame) and not one was detected by the EIS in terms
of EGT" Please don't quote me on that but you get the jest as to why I paid
attention.
> He further explained why. The EIS lags the actual readings of the EGT's by
30 seconds to 1 minute. He also added that the problem is not the EIS unit
it's self but the probes that send the EIS this info. Interesting? I think
so. John Hawk added (In true "Hawk" fashion) "you can add all the bells and
whistles you want to.. I like my gauges..." Old geezer HA gotta love that
guy!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjungjr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | EIS delay? Formerly Ronnies |
Paul and Group,
I can tell you that my own experience with an EIS does seem very
different that what you reported. If I fly at a steady speed and
attitude, so that the EGT is steady, and then push the stick forward to
unload the prop, the EGT will show the change almost immediately
(within a few seconds). Also, I have not noticed any delay in the red
light coming on. I can watch the EGT's exceed my limit and there is no
noticeable delay.
Maybe Michael would be willing to give us his source of information.
John Jung
Firestar II 503 (Flying with an EIS the last 5 years)
On Oct 22, 2005, at 11:56 PM, Kolb-List Digest Server wrote:
> Michael Highsmith brought up an interesting point concerning
> the EIS that many of us use or are planning to use. And I noticed a
> post of this
> topic on today's list of e-mail traffic.
> Michael (great guy) said "We have had in our club alone 7 engine outs
> (can't remember
> the time frame) and not one was detected by the EIS in terms of EGT"
> Please
> don't quote me on that but you get the jest as to why I paid attention.
> He further explained why. The EIS lags the actual readings of the
> EGT's by 30 seconds
> to 1 minute. He also added that the problem is not the EIS unit it's
> self
> but the probes that send the EIS this info. Interesting? I think so.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | [ Eugene Zimmerman ] : New Email List Photo Share Available! |
| From: | Email List Photo Shares <pictures(at)matronics.com> |
A new Email List Photo Share is available:
Poster: Eugene Zimmerman
Lists: Kolb-List
Subject: Formation Flying Under the Bridge
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/eugenezimmerman@dejazzd.com.10.23.2005/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: First Flight in my Kolb - Firestar II
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/planecrazzzy@yahoo.com.10.23.2005/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: | "Denny Rowe" <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
Put me down as an EIS advocate, I love mine and also see very rapid
updates of CHTs and EGTs.
Denny Rowe, Mk-3
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "b young" <by0ung(at)brigham.net> |
> What size circuit breaker is required for the facet fuel pump?
What
> size circuit beaker is required for the alternator on the 912s or is
> one required? Every plane I have flow has one but I can't find any
> info in the Rotax owners manual. What type sender is required for
a
> low fuel pressure sender for the EIS? What size is everone using
for
> the main circuit breaker? What size is every one using for the
> radios? I will be running hand held,GPS & intercon.
this has been MY rule of thumb
I try to put my electrical loads between 50 % and 75 % of the fuse rating....
example 1: a 3 amp fuse"
3 x .5 1.5
3 x .75 2.25
the protected circut should be between 1.5 and 2.25 amps.
Example 2: starting with a circut that uses 2.75 amps
2.75 / .5 5.5
2.75 / .75 3.67
fuse for 2.75 amp load should be between 3.67 and 5.5 amps. I would use a 5 amp....
Example 3: fuse for an altinator that produces 60 watts.
since watts amps x volts.... devide 60 watts by 12 volts and you have 5 amps
max output.....
5 / .5 10
5 / .75 6.67
the fuse should be between 6.67 and 10
putting a fuse on a radio is exactly the same only different
a radio will show 2 amp ratings.... 1 for listening, and 1 for transmitting......
the fuse has to be large enough to handle the transmitting loads.
maybe someone elce has a different idea.... and if the manufacture of a device
makes a recomendation, follow it.
1 more item that i could cover:
some devices have an inrush current that is different than the steady state amp
draw...
the best way to protect these devices is to put in a "slow blow" fuse... these
fuses will usually allow double the rated amp for 1 to 2 seconds before they
blow.... anything more than double the rating will blow it instantly and and
anything over the rating for longer than a couple of seconds will blow it...
boyd
do archive
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cat36Fly(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Smiling Weather Gods |
Jim;
Funny you should ask! My HS leading edge is just above the center of the
boom tube as shown in the plans. I have the new brackets to change the location
but wanted to see how it fly's prior to any changes. Today I adjusted the
alienors a bit and am waiting for good weather again. Now that I know what to
expect from the bird I will fly in less than ideal conditions (a little breeze,
3 miles, and 1000 ft +/-)
I will probably need a trim tab also even though I put the battery to the
right side. Once I get lateral stability (or close) I'll work on the pitch (a
bit nose high right now). How was your original pitch attitude (first flight)
and what corrections were needed?
I used you prop setting numbers and set mine at 10 degrees. It seems good
for now and saved me some time. THANKS!
Larry Tasker
615RT
Xtra/582/3 blade Warp (Taper Tip)
________________________________________________________________________________
required 4.6, BAYES_40 -0.00, HTML_50_60 0.10, HTML_MESSAGE 0.25)
Thanks to all for the info. Seams one needs to ask around about these things. I
plan on a EIS for Ms. Dixie. After I posted the remarks about the lag I did a
little checking with club members. All responded with the same answer as you
guys.
I only have a couple of more panels to make then it's instrument panel time! I'm
rather proud of how the fuel access door worked out and here are a few photos
if any care to look.
Thanks again take care
Paul
http://www.c-gate.net/~ppetty/photos/PA230005.JPG
http://www.c-gate.net/~ppetty/photos/PA230013.JPG
http://www.c-gate.net/~ppetty/photos/PA230014.JPG
http://www.c-gate.net/~ppetty/photos/PA230024.JPG
http://www.c-gate.net/~ppetty/photos/PA230023.JPG
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeremy Casey" <n79rt(at)kilocharlie.us> |
I'll add my $.02 on the EIS...don't intend to own another plane without
one...
Originally used it cause the panel was so small and it saved
space...later I learned that it was an INCREDIBLE piece of instrument.
Take this for what it's worth...I was told dozens of times at fly-ins
that "I can't stand those digital things...I want a needle to look at,
etc. etc." In every case I asked, "How long you flown behind one?"
Almost every time the answer was "NEVER" A few times the answer was "1
flight" or something like that. I will admit it takes a few hours to
get comfortable with it, but what new piece of equipment doesn't?
People seem to like to belittle things they know nothing about...
As for Grand Rapids, the company...I have to put them in the top 1% of
companies I've ever dealt with. While installing the first one I flew
with, I mistakenly touched 12 volts to something I shouldn't have. I
called them up and was upfront and honest with them about what I did and
asked what it would cost to fix it. To paraphrase what they said, If
you can figure out a way to fry it, we want to see it to see how you did
it and fix it so it want do it again. That is called product
improvement folks. I put it in a box and next day shipped it to them,
they fixed it same day and they next day shipped it back to me...on
their dime! The cost for that repair??? Zilch...
And if you passed your color matching test in kindergarten you can
install it...
Jeremy Casey
Kitfox builder...(couldn't help it, got an unstarted complete kit for a
song...)
Paul,
I talked with Sandy at Grand Rapids today and found out the EIS updates
the
screen 2 times per SECOND. Those are good folks at Grand Rapids, I have
talked with them several times. I put them right up there with Travis,
Dondi, and Jim.
The beauty of the EIS is the alarm feature. After you set the alarm
limits
for min and max on all parameters the EIS will flash a red light if any
thing gets out of limits. In the event of an alarm the screen changes
to
display that parameter. "Scanning the gauges" with an EIS consists of
looking at the red light.
Steven
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mitty <benny_bee_01(at)yahoo.com> |
Looks pretty dang nice I tell ya!
Paul your da man...I don't care what tehy say ;)
M
--- Paul Petty <lynnp@c-gate.net> wrote:
> <lynnp@c-gate.net>
>
> Thanks to all for the info. Seams one needs to ask
> around about these things. I plan on a EIS for Ms.
> Dixie. After I posted the remarks about the lag I
> did a little checking with club members. All
> responded with the same answer as you guys.
> I only have a couple of more panels to make then
> it's instrument panel time! I'm rather proud of how
> the fuel access door worked out and here are a few
> photos if any care to look.
>
> Thanks again take care
>
> Paul
>
> http://www.c-gate.net/~ppetty/photos/PA230005.JPG
>
> http://www.c-gate.net/~ppetty/photos/PA230013.JPG
>
> http://www.c-gate.net/~ppetty/photos/PA230014.JPG
>
> http://www.c-gate.net/~ppetty/photos/PA230024.JPG
>
> http://www.c-gate.net/~ppetty/photos/PA230023.JPG
>
>
>
> browse
> Subscriptions page,
> FAQ,
>
>
>
>
>
>
__________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "skyrider2" <skyrider2(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Matt, Why Am I Blocked? |
Your message to: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
was blocked by our Spam Firewall. The email you sent with the following subject
has NOT BEEN DELIVERED:
Subject: This Weekend?
by barracuda.matronics.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id CD8A58408
by pop-siberian.atl.sa.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #10)
From: "skyrider2" <skyrider2(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: This Weekend?
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 17:06:57 -0400
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "b young" <by0ung(at)brigham.net> |
it seems that matronics striped out all of my ( equal ) signs...... so i
will try again
boyd
----------------------
this has been MY rule of thumb
I try to put my electrical loads between 50 % and 75 % of the fuse
rating....
example 1: a 3 amp fuse"
3 times .5 equals 1.5
3 times .75 equals 2.25
the protected circut should be between 1.5 and 2.25 amps.
Example 2: starting with a circut that uses 2.75 amps
2.75 devided by .5 equals 5.5
2.75 devided by .75 equals 3.67
fuse for 2.75 amp load should be between 3.67 and 5.5 amps. I would use a
5 amp....
Example 3: fuse for an altinator that produces 60 watts.
since watts equals amps times volts.... devide 60 watts by 12 volts and
you have 5 amps
max output.....
5 devided by .5 equals 10
5 devided by .75 equals 6.67
the fuse should be between 6.67 and 10
putting a fuse on a radio is exactly the same only different
a radio will show 2 amp ratings.... 1 for listening, and 1 for
transmitting......
the fuse has to be large enough to handle the transmitting loads.
maybe someone elce has a different idea.... and if the manufacture of a
device
makes a recomendation, follow it.
1 more item that i could cover:
some devices have an inrush current that is different than the steady state
amp
draw...
the best way to protect these devices is to put in a "slow blow" fuse...
these
fuses will usually allow double the rated amp for 1 to 2 seconds before they
blow.... anything more than double the rating will blow it instantly and
and
anything over the rating for longer than a couple of seconds will blow it...
boyd
do archive
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
After I posted the remarks about the lag I did a little checking with
club members. All responded with the same answer as you guys.
| Paul
Paul P/Gang:
We were talking about pilot reaction, not necessarily instrument.
Steam gauges and EIS respond rapidly to temperature changes in the
engine. In the case of EGT, usually the engine has seized by the time
the pilot responds to the high temp situation. That is what Mike
Highsmith and I were discussing at Lucedale, MS, this weekend.
I don't think one type is any better or worse than the other. Some of
us like steam gauges and some like EIS. I have been fortunate to put
time in the air behind both systems. I, personally, still prefer the
old fashioned system. John W, on the other hand, who has many hours
flying glass cockpits, likes the EIS.
I did have an engine seizure twice on the same 582 with in 30 minutes.
Never did catch up with the Dual EGTs. Can not tell you if they told
me before the engine seized or not. Too late now. ;-)
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Laird <rlaird(at)cavediver.com> |
On 10/25/05, John Hauck wrote:
> We were talking about pilot reaction, not necessarily instrument.
John --
Just wild chatter, but... what would you think about an EIS that
would actually shut down the engine if a threshold was exceeded...
the theory being, the EIS would "know" about it long before you could
react, and, if the problem continued, you'd lose the engine anyway, so
having it shut down still resulted in an engine out, but at least the
engine was saved (you know, so the surviving spouse can recoup some of
her money ;-)
-- Robert
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christopher Armstrong" <tophera(at)centurytel.net> |
If the EIS had control of the mixture then you could have it control the
engines temps directly... like every car on the road today. But then to ask
as much of our aircraft engines as we get in our cars is apparently too much
for the pilots to expect. It is really stupid to have a needle that you
have to notice while enjoying a flight and navigating and flying the
aircraft and then move a lever a bit and see how the plane responds to that
and then move the lever a bit more. Just let a computer look at the values
and move the lever a hundred times a second for the whole flight.
Steam gauges are unreliable and inaccurate ( relative to a computer) and
require constant monitoring by the guy who is supposed to by flying the
plane and watching out for traffic and having fun, not watching a little
dial on the dash. The pilot should not ever need to know what the egt, cht
oil temp water temp water pressure oil pressure or any other useless
information about the engine like ignition timing mixture setting alternator
voltage unless they are not what they are supposed to be. Then the pilot
should be presented with that information as a time history graph so he can
see what the engine has been up to for the last 10 seconds 10 minutes or 10
hours.... but usually should not need to know any of this stuff. A one
hundred dollar computer can do all of this for a bout a 5th the cost of the
steam gauges, take up less panel space, less weight and more reliable.
Being used to the old steam gages certainly counts for a lot, and allows a
skilled pilot to know what the engine is up to... actually I have always
felt you get more from your ear and your butt then you do from the gages
when it comes to engine performance... but if you actually want a system
that has potential to save the pilot from experiencing a power failure in
the first place let a computer monitor AND control the engine.
One emergency landing I enjoyed was about a mile out in the ocean due to a
bad wire on a CHT. Pilot noticed a pegged cht and decided to land
immediately instead of risk a torched engine. We sat there on the floats
for about 15 minutes while the mechanic jet skied out to us and the Pilot
and the Mechanic had a conversation... I pointed out that the EGT's were
fine at the time and maybe we should fly back to the beach while monitoring
EGT... bad wire was found on the cht after we flew back to the beach. In
this case a history of the cht brought up on the screen would show an
instant change in temps from normal to pegged or maybe back and forth a few
times and then pegged and would be obvious to the pilot that the problem was
a measurement error not an actual temp problem... not sure if it would be
obvious to a computer, so sensor failure handling by a computer is real
important to get right.
I don't think you should let the computer just turn the motor off though!!!
Maybe leave that choice up to the pilot!
Topher
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: EIS lag/FADEC controls |
It seems so very unfortunate that we dont have available thru our engine
manufacurers the kind of engine controls that virtually every other engine
industry already has. The complete control of timing and fuel
mapping(mixture) to make small aircraft engines as reliable as they can be.
There is a division of Delco in indy that markets fuel and ignition
controls systems that offers this, and probably many more.
I have several customers that use them for their applications. Here is a
description of one example.
Company buys Nissan 6 cyl long blocks in OEM packageing (8 units per crate).
These engines have no ignition or fuel delivery system..but otherwise are
complete.
They have a couple of different horsepower and torque curve requirements for
different products they manufacture. (Generators and high volume blowers).
Some of their gensets require 1800rpm and some 3600 rpms. The Blowers
require another rpm level (not sure what).
They have this vendor create a complete fuel map and ignition program for
each application and buy the entire deal and simply bolt it on. This
customer told me that after the cost of the fuelmap and program was
amoritized out, the cost is less than a carb and distributor per unit.
The initial programming cost is 50,000.00 for delco to create these system
programs for each different application.
The different capabilities of these systems are amazing, for instance they
have what they call a "Green period". This is a break-in period in which the
program runs the engine at a richer, cooler and limited hp for a prescribed
number of hours...then when the clock ticks off...the engine runs at full
power and max fuel efficiency according to load applied.
ALso avail are auto shutdown of any particular cylinders fuel and ingnition
when parameters approaching destruction show up, (mechanical failure of a
component) and of course individual temp control thru mixture and ignition
timing that prevents this from happening unless something breaks..like a
rocker or a valve etc.
IN a nutshell, you simply tell them what you want the computer to do ..and
they program it accordingly.
This service is available to any manufacturer who wants it. They have been
doing it for several years, steadily growing as more and more markets
demand dependability in they applications.
I also know that 2SI was involved with them and in the middle of developing
this system for their 3 cyl liquid cooled engines ..even showed off a
prototype at Sun-n-fun 3 years ago, but dropped the whole deal when Nick
finally had enough of the lawsuits and abandoned the aircraft market.
I thought it really a shame, because I think if just one manufacturer
offered it, others would soon be influenced by the market to offer it also,
as I have seen in so many other engine markets.
Don Gherardini
OEM.Sales / Engineering dept.
American Honda Engines
Power Equipment Company
CortLand, Illinois
800-626-7326
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James, Ken" <KDJames(at)berkscareer.com> |
| Subject: | EIS lag/FADEC controls |
I agree where is fuel injection for the 582? How long will it take?
Ken
-----Original Message-----
From: Don Gherardini [mailto:donghe@one-eleven.net]
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: EIS lag/FADEC controls
It seems so very unfortunate that we dont have available thru our engine
manufacurers the kind of engine controls that virtually every other engine
industry already has. The complete control of timing and fuel
mapping(mixture) to make small aircraft engines as reliable as they can be.
=20There is a division of Delco in indy that markets fuel and ignition
controls systems that offers this, and probably many more.
=20I have several customers that use them for their applications. Here is a
description of one example.
Company buys Nissan 6 cyl long blocks in OEM packageing (8 units per crate).
These engines have no ignition or fuel delivery system..but otherwise are
complete.
They have a couple of different horsepower and torque curve requirements for
different products they manufacture. (Generators and high volume blowers).
Some of their gensets require 1800rpm and some 3600 rpms. The Blowers
require another rpm level (not sure what).
They have this vendor create a complete fuel map and ignition program for
each application and buy the entire deal and simply bolt it on. This
customer told me that after the cost of the fuelmap and program was
amoritized out, the cost is less than a carb and distributor per unit.
=20The initial programming cost is 50,000.00 for delco to create these system
programs for each different application.
The different capabilities of these systems are amazing, for instance they
have what they call a "Green period". This is a break-in period in which the
program runs the engine at a richer, cooler and limited hp for a prescribed
number of hours...then when the clock ticks off...the engine runs at full
power and max fuel efficiency according to load applied.
ALso avail are auto shutdown of any particular cylinders fuel and ingnition
when parameters approaching destruction show up, (mechanical failure of a
component) and of course individual temp control thru mixture and ignition
timing that prevents this from happening unless something breaks..like a
rocker or a valve etc.
IN a nutshell, you simply tell them what you want the computer to do ..and
they program it accordingly.
This service is available to any manufacturer who wants it. They have been
doing it for several years, steadily growing as more and more markets
demand dependability in they applications.
I also know that 2SI was involved with them and in the middle of developing
this system for their 3 cyl liquid cooled engines ..even showed off a
prototype at Sun-n-fun 3 years ago, but dropped the whole deal when Nick
finally had enough of the lawsuits and abandoned the aircraft market.
I thought it really a shame, because I think if just one manufacturer
offered it, others would soon be influenced by the market to offer it also,
as I have seen in so many other engine markets.
Don Gherardini
OEM.Sales / Engineering dept.
American Honda Engines
Power Equipment Company
CortLand, Illinois
800-626-7326
IMPORTANT/CONFIDENTIAL: This communication is intended solely for the use of the
individual or entity to which it is addressed. This e-mail contains information
from the Berks Career & Technology Center that may be privileged, confidential,
and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this communication
is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately
and permanently delete this message including all attachments.
Thank you.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: EIS lag/Comparing Digital and Analog Instruments |
Hi Topher/All:
Thought I would share my thoughts on your thoughts. ;-)
| It is really stupid to have a needle that you
| have to notice while enjoying a flight and navigating and flying the
| aircraft
Some of us don't think analog gauges are "stupid". With experience,
one finds that it takes a split second to scan engine and flight
instruments. It is called a cross check. I learned from flying in
the Army that all gauges (old fashioned steamers) pointed in the same
direction during normal cruise flight. A very quick glance informed
me if everything was okie dokie in the engine and transmission
department as long as all the little needles were pointing the same
general direction. Don't have nearly as many gauges in my little
MKIII as we did in the Army aircraft.
| Steam gauges are unreliable and inaccurate ( relative to a computer)
and
| require constant monitoring by the guy who is supposed to by flying
the
| plane and watching out for traffic and having fun, not watching a
little
| dial on the dash.
Those of us that still fly with analog gauges don't find it necessary
to stare at them. We occassionally get to look outside to see what is
going on. I haven't missed too much flying my Kolbs over the past 21
years. Yes, I have flown quite a bit with EIS too, so I do have some
time in the air to compare both systems. I still prefer my old
fashioned gauges. Guess I am old fashioned. I have had a problem or
two with some electric guages, primarily a ground problem. Got that
sorted out recently, and now my little round gauges are working their
little asses off keeping me accurately informed of how hot the
912ULS's oil is, how hot the cylinder head is, and how much pressure
that tiny little oil pump is pumping. I never have used an EGT with
either of my 912 engines. If I prop them correctly and keep them
tuned like they came out of the box, they perform extremely well. I
have also heard of some problems with the computer controlled digital
instruments too. ;-)
A one
| hundred dollar computer can do all of this for a bout a 5th the cost
of the
| steam gauges, take up less panel space, less weight and more
reliable.
Last time I looked I didn't have that much invested in gauges. I'm
not talking about ASI, ALT, VSI, and mag compass. Probably about
$50.00 for eng instruments. I usually buy VDO marine gauges. They
hold up well and are extremely cheap on the internet.
| Being used to the old steam gages certainly counts for a lot, and
allows a
| skilled pilot to know what the engine is up to... actually I have
always
| felt you get more from your ear and your butt then you do from the
gages
| when it comes to engine performance...
Reckon old Topher has a calibrated, calulating ear and seat of pants.
I for one have a hard time knowing what the oil pressure is, or the
CHT, or the oil temp, by getting info from my ear and butt. I know
pretty much where cruise RPM is without looking at the tach, I know
when the aircraft is climbing or decending, rolling left or right, but
I still need the little round gauges to know what the engine is up to.
| One emergency landing I enjoyed was about a mile out in the ocean
due to a
| bad wire on a CHT. Topher
If I get a high CHT reading while operating a four stroke, I also
monitor the oil pressure and temp. If the CHT sky rockets and oil
press and temp remain in the green with no noticeable rise, then I am
pretty sure I have a bad CHT gauge. If the CHT tops out and the oil
temp starts climbing and the oil pressure starts dropping, then it
probably is not the instrument, but the engine. Most folks that have
been around recip engines in aircraft know that though.
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| It seems to me the better, at the moment, is still the large
warning light, flashing. I believe better yet would be the loud, very
loud Klaxon type horn like on some stall warnings. Silent flashing
lights or other moving signals can get lost in other distractions.
| Ray Anderson
Hi Ray A/All:
We were flying with both audio and visual warning in Army helicopters
way back in the sixties. Both systems worked to get out attention
when things were going bad and our day was quickly falling apart.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
Point taken as well... flashy lights can become
| commonplace, an annoying horn gets your attention.
|
| Jeremy Casey
Hi Jeremy C/All:
The "Master Caution Light" in Army helicopters never failed to get my
immediate attention. Never did become common place. ;-)
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: EIS lag/FADEC controls |
| It seems so very unfortunate that we dont have available thru our
engine
| manufacurers the kind of engine controls that virtually every other
engine
| industry already has.
|
| Don Gherardini
Hi Don G/Gang:
Don't say I said it, but I heard a rumor last weekend that there was a
fuel injected 912 series engine in the very near future of Rotax.
Problem Rotax has had with carburetors, ignition systems, fuel
injection, etc., is liability suits if they are associated with
ultralight and experimental light aircraft. Maybe they can get around
it this time. Would be great to have a FI 912ULS.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)telepath.com> |
| Subject: | Re: EIS lag/FADEC controls |
> Don't say I said it, but I heard a rumor last weekend that there was
a
> fuel injected 912 series engine in the very near future of Rotax.
Well, this is the sort of thing we *could* have......(from Bombardier
sales back-grounder....)
__________________________________
ROTAX 1000 SERIES DIRECT INJECTION ENGINE PLATFORM
All it takes is one short ride on our Sea-Doo 3D DI to understand
that the 130 HP direct injection engine has plenty to offer the
performance minded watercraft enthusiasts. The Orbital Direct
Injection technology found on the 3D DI model delivers chokeless,
instant start-up, instant throttle response, smooth idle control, Sea-
Doo Learning Key and automatic altitude adjustment with no loss
in performance. The Rotax 1000 Series Direct Injection engine offers
the Sea-Doo 3D DI another choice of power for the worlds most
versatile recreational product.
and
Sea-Doo Learning Key Its easy to get the hang of riding a Sea-
Doo watercraft, thanks to our exclusive Sea-Doo Learning Key. This
substitute lanyard system, standard on all our four-stroke models
and the 3D DI, is preprogrammed to limit engine RPMs, keeping top
speed down to about 35 mph. Since we first introduced this
technology in 2000, thousands of novice and less-experienced riders
have used it to learn to ride with greater confidence and control.
A preview into possibilities from the same folks who would have you
believe it's too hard to do for aviation markets. Well, not economical,
anyway.....
Jim Baker
580.788.2779
'71 SV, 492TC
Elmore City, OK
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "woody" <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
> That would work, but why would you want to do that?
> Bryan Green Elgin SC
>
>
Because it is to nice a car to become a burned out hulk. Because there is
a tendancy to short out and cause a fire. I think adding extra fuses farther
down the line may interupt the electrical flow before it becomes a major
fire. That is my hope and intention anyway.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Pierzina <planecrazzzy(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | RE:Two or three questions |
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
I've considered is a flow meter which could be installed inline which would
accurately record the amount of fuel which was drawn past. I'd appreciate any
feedback from all.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I went with the miZer..........Fuel Flow , Fuel Gauge ....in Aircraft Spruce Catolog
( $300 bucks )
Gotta Fly...
Mike in
MN
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: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: EIS EGT lag? |
Back on Saturday I sent an email to Greg Toman of Grand Rapids Technologies
asking him about the EIS/EGT situation. Figured that instead of acting like
a bunch of aborigines sitting around the campfire, wondering how the Great
Iron Bird actually flew, why not go ask the Bwana himself? Here is my
question, and his reply.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Pike" <richard(at)bcchapel.org>
Subject: EIS EGT lag?
I have an EIS/EGT question prompted by a remark made today on the Kolb
e-mail list:
"Michael (great guy) said "We have had in our club alone 7 engine outs
(can't remember the time frame) and not one was detected by the EIS in
terms of EGT" Please don't quote me on that but you get the jest as to why
I paid attention. He further explained why. The EIS lags the actual
readings of the EGT's by 30 seconds to 1 minute. He also added that the
problem is not the EIS unit it's self but the probes that send the EIS this
info." -End of pertinent post - Would you comment on this please? Is this
just an urban legend, or is there something to this that I might need to be
aware of? I am using the 2002 model on a Rotax 582, 65HP, dual EGT's.
Thank you, Richard Pike
His answer:
This sounds like an urban legend that has its roots in an advertisement
that is run by another EGT instrument manufacturer (JPI). JPI advertises
how fast their probes are, and compares them to Electronics International,
who uses an ungrounded (and thus somewhat thermally insulated) EGT probe.
My guess is that someone heard about this, and assumed we used slow
responding, ungrounded probes. (Actually, I think JPI exaggerates their
claim.)
In any event, the EIS uses grounded probes. These probes respond very
quickly, much more quickly than the piston, for example. When an engine is
damaged, it is because the piston gets so hot, it expands until it wont fit
in the cylinder, or melts a hole it in. Our EGT probe will respond much
quicker than the piston (the EGT probe is a 1/8" diameter probe...the
pistion is a big chunk of metal).
But, it is possible to have an engine quit without exceeding any limits.
Just turn off the ignition, or the fuel, and this will happen, or if the
engine breaks (like a crankshaft).
I hope that helps a bit. For two-stroke engine, the most likely way to
damage them is getting them too lean, and running them that way for too
long, and the EGT will detect this every time. If you have analog gauges
you are not likely to be looking at them when this occurs, but with alarms
(like the EIS has) you are quite likely to notice, and have plenty of time
to take corrective action.
Thanks Greg Toman
Grand Rapids Technologies, Inc
616 245-7700 fax 616 245-7707
www.grtavionics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: EIS EGT lag? |
| This sounds like an urban legend that has its roots in an
advertisement
| that is run by another EGT instrument manufacturer (JPI).
| For two-stroke engine, the most likely way to
| damage them is getting them too lean, and running them that way for
too
| long, and the EGT will detect this every time. If you have analog
gauges
| you are not likely to be looking at them when this occurs, but with
alarms
| (like the EIS has) you are quite likely to notice, and have plenty
of time
| to take corrective action.
|
| Thanks Greg Toman
| Grand Rapids Technologies, Inc
Hi Richard/All:
I am sure Greg Toman is a very knowledgeable man, knows his EIS's and
two strokes. I surely would not debate that.
Mike Highsmith is also very knowledgeable, flying many, many hours
with two strokes over the last 20+ years. Mike is no urban legend.
I think the jest of this whole debate is lag in pilot's reaction and
corrective action should the EGT's scream out of the green. I
personally do not think the warning light, blinking digital digits, or
zipping analog needles will catch a seizure in time to do anything
about it, unless.........................one has been running their
two stroke for a long time at near critically high EGTs and that thin
film of oil between piston and cylinder wall is broken. If that is
the case and one may be able to catch that before failure, ok. But if
one has been monitoring his instruments, no matter what kind he is
using, he would also know he has a high EGT problem and should have
stayed home and on the ground rather than be up there where he is with
a two stroke that is about to puke.
What Greg says, "If you have analog gauges
| you are not likely to be looking at them when this occurs, but with
alarms
| (like the EIS has) you are quite likely to notice, and have plenty
of time
| to take corrective action.", is only one scenario of the dreaded two
stroke seizure. There are so many others that his EIS will not be
able to warn and give the pilot plenty of time to take corrective
action. Partially blocked fuel filters, or
any partial fuel blockage, a prop pitched to light for engine and
aircraft, stuck ring, and immediate blow by happens fast!
I don't want to belabor the point, but old fashioned gauges and EIS
alike work, but they aren't going to prevent too many two stroke
seizures.
OK, gang. The above is my own humble opinion based on flying two
strokes for the first major part of my UL experience. Was only a
short five and a half years, but somehow I crammed 1,140 two stroke
flying hours into it. Then another 224 hours in 5 months of flying
the MKIII powered by the 582. Got my first and last seizure on the
582 in September 1993.
john h
MKIII - 2,411.0 hours
912ULS - 1,065.1 hours
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | blure2(at)comcast.net |
1.53 RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO Received: contains an IP address used for HELO
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "woody" <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
> ( sorry Pat but this car does not live up to the
> high esteme the world holds it to).
>
> Ha,
> you must have a Jaguar. Only politicians and scrap metal dealers use them
> over here.
>
> Pat
A Jag??? Thats a car for the peasantry. Mine is "the" top of the line
English car.
________________________________________________________________________________
> Problem is no one knows or will tell me what the offending circuit is.
Like any crime, there are bits of evidence and a list of suspects that can
lead in the right direction.
Do not
archive
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | blure2(at)comcast.net |
| Subject: | Half Nuts or Whole |
1.53 RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO Received: contains an IP address used for HELO
Hi, Group;
I used to lurk around here several years ago before I soloed. In the meantime,
I finished my ultralight training and have logged about 80 hours. Most of that
came in a Quicksilver Sprint and recently about five in a newly reconstructed
CGS Hawk Arrow. That is the extent of my qualifications. Without boring you with
the details, I am interested in selling the Sprint and Hawk and acquiring
either a Firestar II or SlingShot.
The Firestar II is not the subject of my question, other than to say I would like
to know of any quality Firestars for sale? The SlingShot, however, is. So,
I'll keep it simple: is the SlingShot over my head at my experience level? I would
need, of course, some tail-dragger training, which I would get. But, is the
plane just too much too soon?
Thank you,
Bob Blu
Centennial, CO
Hi, Group;
I used to lurk around here several years ago before I soloed. In the meantime,
I finished my ultralight training and have logged about 80 hours. Most of that
came in a Quicksilver Sprint and recently about five in a newly reconstructed
CGS Hawk Arrow. That is the extent of my qualifications. Without boring you with
the details, I am interested in selling the Sprint and Hawk and acquiring
either a Firestar II or SlingShot.
The Firestar II is not the subject of my question, other than to say I would like
to know of any quality Firestars for sale? The SlingShot, however, is. So,
I'll keep it simple: is the SlingShot over my head at my experience level? I would
need, of course, some tail-dragger training, which I would get. But, is the
plane just too much too soon?
Thank you,
Bob Blu
Centennial, CO
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "pat ladd" <pj.ladd(at)btinternet.com> |
Hi Listers,
Because I collect signed aviation prints I have been sent the blurb reprinted below.
It struck me that there may be some listees in the vicinity in California who are
interested in aviation art
So for your information, here it is.
Cheers
Pat
Robert Taylor Signing Tuesday 1st November
CAF Museum, 455 Aviation Drive, Camarillo Airport, California.
To help launch his new book Air Combat Paintings Volume V, the world's foremost
aviation artist, Robert Taylor will be joining us at the CAF hangar in Camarillo
between 2 and 7pm for an exhibition of his work. We will also be joined by
two outstanding WWII Fighter Aces:
Lieutenant Colonel Clyde East - He joined the RCAF in 1941 on Spitfires and transferred
to the USAAF in 1944, flying P-51's in Europe. In 200 combat missions
he scored 141/2 victories and later flew in combat in Korea.
Colonel Arthur Fiedler - Arriving in Europe in 1944 he flew the P-47 and P51 much
of this with
the 325th 'Checkertails'. In over 66 combat missions he scored 8 victories and
later flew in Korea and Vietnam.
This really is a unique opportunity to meet our guests and have them sign your
books and prints, adding authenticity and value. You are welcome to bring along
items for signing and on this occasion there will be no charge. Museum facilities
will be open during this event, including Warbird and restoration displays
- to benefit the museum a voluntary admission donation of $5 would be appreciated.
RSVP - in order to help us organise this event we ask that you let us know as soon
as possible if you are attending. Please do not hesitate to call for further
information; we look forward to hearing from you.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Kolb-List Digest: 11 Msgs - 10/28/05 |
Bob Blu how much for your SPRINT. deliver TO NY?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Jung <jrjungjr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Half Nuts or Whole |
Bob and Group,
This is a difficult question. I suspect that it involves more about you
than the planes. Before changing to a Firestar, I flew a Sprint. I was
more than half way to my private ticket in a Cessna before switching to
a Kolb. That is what made me feel comfortable. I did not get tail
dragger training, just a couple of hours in a Kolb. I feel that
changing to a Firestar is enough change that it should be done with
caution and some more dual time.
As far as the Slingshot goes, it may not be much more of a transition
than the Firestar, but it would be better it someone with experience in
both would address that.
John Jung
On Oct 28, 2005, at 11:56 PM, Kolb-List Digest Server wrote:
>
> Hi, Group;
>
> I used to lurk around here several years ago before I soloed. In the
> meantime,
> I finished my ultralight training and have logged about 80 hours. Most
> of that
> came in a Quicksilver Sprint and recently about five in a newly
> reconstructed
> CGS Hawk Arrow. That is the extent of my qualifications. Without
> boring you with
> the details, I am interested in selling the Sprint and Hawk and
> acquiring
> either a Firestar II or SlingShot.
>
> The Firestar II is not the subject of my question, other than to say I
> would like
> to know of any quality Firestars for sale? The SlingShot, however, is.
> So,
> I'll keep it simple: is the SlingShot over my head at my experience
> level? I would
> need, of course, some tail-dragger training, which I would get. But,
> is the
> plane just too much too soon?
>
> Thank you,
>
> Bob Blu
> Centennial, CO
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "woody" <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
>
> If you mean a Rolls then your whole story is manifestly a pack of lies.
> Rolls do NOT break down. Thats official!
>
> Pistol at Dawn Suh!
>
That is why no one will tell me what the offending circuit is in the car.
It just doesn't exist. ( They ain't that quiet. Still a lot of tire noise
comming through with Pirrelli's)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Warren" <noon(at)wmni.net> |
| Subject: | Cuyuna II-02 Motor |
I'am Just completion building my never flowen Ultrastar. This has a new Cuyuna
II 02 motor. I have early have own Two Cuyuna's motors (R430's) and one had seized.
I heard that they have corrected the problem this II 02 ?? Looking for
any information on this subject. warren
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "George E. Myers Jr." <gmyers(at)grandecom.net> |
| Subject: | Not Kolb related but.......... |
In case you're planning to fly on Quantas Airlines in the near future.
Enjoy!!!
Remember, it takes a college degree to fly a plane, but only a high school
diploma to fix one. (Reassurance for those of us who fly routinely in their
jobs) After every flight, Qantas pilots fill out a form, called a "gripe
sheet," which tells mechanics about problems with the aircraft. The
mechanics correct the problems, document their repairs on the form, and then
pilots review the gripe sheets before the next flight. Never let it be said
that ground crews lack a sense of humor. Here are some actual maintenance
complaints submitted by Qantas' pilots (marked with a P) and the solutions
recorded (marked with an S) by Maintenance engineers. By the way, Qantas is
the only major airline that has never had an accident.
P: Left inside main tire almost needs replacement.
S: Almost replaced left inside main tire.
P: Test flight OK, except auto-land very rough.
S: Auto-land not installed on this aircraft.
P: Something loose in cockpit.
S: Something tightened in cockpit.
P: Dead bugs on windshield.
S: Live bugs on back-order.
P: Autopilot in altitude-hold mode produces a 200 feet per minute descent.
S: Cannot reproduce problem on ground..
P: Evidence of leak on right main landing gear.
S: Evidence removed.
P: DME volume unbelievably loud.
S: DME volume set to more believable level.
P: Friction locks cause throttle levers to stick.
S:That's what they're for.
P: IFF inoperative.
S: IFF always inoperative in OFF mode.
P: Suspected crack in windshield.
S: Suspect you're right.
P: Number 3 engine missing.
S: Engine found on right wing after brief search.
P: Aircraft handles funny.
S: Aircraft warned to straighten up, fly right, and be serious.
P: Target radar hums.
S: Reprogrammed target radar with lyrics.
P: Mouse in cockpit.
S: Cat installed.
And the best one for last..................
P: Noise coming from under instrument panel. Sounds like a midget pounding
something with a hammer.
S: Took hammer away from midget.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "b young" <by0ung(at)brigham.net> |
| Subject: | help finding a fuel sensor. |
there are two different capacitance fuel level sender probes that i am aware of....
1 westach 2 prinston both can be wired into a stand alone gague or can
be ordered to readout on an EIS. both can be calibrated so that the level in
the tank and the readout on the gague are the same.... the one that i have
on my mkIII has 5 calibration points. empty, 1/4 , 1.2 , 3/4 , full. and
it reads out in tenths of gallons on my EIS... along with the EIS master warning
light, the aux input also has an adjustable alarm point... so when i
get down to 3 gallons the warning light flashes...
boyd
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Edward Steuber" <esteuber(at)rochester.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Cuyuna II 0 2 motor |
Warren ,
Search the archives and all the info is there...I have some experience
with this engine but the info you need is in the archives ....put there by
individuals on this list with lot's of experience with these motors...
The one thing I do know is that Cuyuna had a problem with too tight
piston cylinder clearances at manufacture...I have corrected both of my engines
for this problem...
Ed in Western NY
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "woody" <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
| Subject: | Re: aviation prints |
Maybe a kiind soul in the vicinity could pick up a book for you
----- Original Message -----
From: "pat ladd" <pj.ladd(at)btinternet.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: aviation prints
>
> Hi Listers,
>
> Because I collect signed aviation prints I have been sent the blurb
reprinted below.
> It struck me that there may be some listees in the vicinity in California
who are interested in aviation art
> So for your information, here it is.
>
> Cheers
>
> Pat
>
> Robert Taylor Signing Tuesday 1st November
>
> CAF Museum, 455 Aviation Drive, Camarillo Airport, California.
>
> To help launch his new book Air Combat Paintings Volume V, the world's
foremost aviation artist, Robert Taylor will be joining us at the CAF hangar
in Camarillo between 2 and 7pm for an exhibition of his work. We will also
be joined by two outstanding WWII Fighter Aces:
>
> Lieutenant Colonel Clyde East - He joined the RCAF in 1941 on Spitfires
and transferred to the USAAF in 1944, flying P-51's in Europe. In 200 combat
missions he scored 141/2 victories and later flew in combat in Korea.
>
> Colonel Arthur Fiedler - Arriving in Europe in 1944 he flew the P-47 and
P51 much of this with
> the 325th 'Checkertails'. In over 66 combat missions he scored 8 victories
and later flew in Korea and Vietnam.
>
> This really is a unique opportunity to meet our guests and have them sign
your books and prints, adding authenticity and value. You are welcome to
bring along items for signing and on this occasion there will be no charge.
Museum facilities will be open during this event, including Warbird and
restoration displays - to benefit the museum a voluntary admission donation
of $5 would be appreciated.
>
> RSVP - in order to help us organise this event we ask that you let us know
as soon as possible if you are attending. Please do not hesitate to call for
further information; we look forward to hearing from you.
>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Lanny Fetterman <donaho(at)csrlink.net> |
Hi all, Ellery and other winter flyers, do you change your main jets, move
the clip on the needle, on make no carb. changes when the temp goes down? I
have thought about flying in the winter, but I hate to mess with my carbs,
since I have them dialed in for summer temps. Lanny Fetterman F.S.
II 598 P.S. The EAA suggested that I get a student pilot
license.
N-number my airplane, and then take the practical test to get my sport
pilot rating. So I made an appointment at the local FSDO to get the
student license. I hope this all comes together at some point in time!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: first flight |
| Just wanted to let the list know that I flew
| the MKlllc yesterday for the first time.
| David Patrick
Hi Dave/All:
Great!
Sorry I missed the first flight, but was hauling JD's out of TN and
MS, all weekend.
Am anxious to see the finished product.
Dave's MKIII is configured like mine. There is another MKIII in
Lucedale, MS, that is also configured like Miss P'fer, with the main
gear moved forward of the normal position, modified by John Cooley.
Congratulations!
john h
MKIII/912ULS
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ElleryWeld(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Re: Winter flying |
Thanks for your concerns Gary
I have my own design of skis I am not copying anyone else's so they might
not work for you even though I have been using them and I am not reliable for
someone else's installation or experience of the use of skis just trying to be
a nice guy and help others out that might not have the tooling or knowledge of
how to get into winter flying without spending a minum of $800.00 for a pair
of skis
I realize there are a lot of people out there this day and age looking to
nail another lawsuit so if you put it that way I will just weld the frames
together and let you install the bottom skins and make up your own cables and
bungies and do your own rigging its your ass in the sling not mine and I had better
let this go in to the archives so no one can say I said it will work Have a
nice winter
Ellery
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Frantisek Sabol" <fero(at)sabolovci.sk> |
| Subject: | LCR 814 TGti Twinpack |
HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=ham version=3.0.2
Sirs.
We have started to manufacture small planes and we are looking for suitable engine.
The LCR 814 TGti Twinpack seems to be the best, but unfortunately we are
not able to get full spicifications. Please advice.
Best regards
Fero Sabol
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "info" <info(at)aircrafttechsupport.com> |
| Subject: | First flight!!!!!! |
CONGTATS Dave,
How 'bout some pics of the MIII?
From: Subject: Kolb-List: first flight
Hi,
Just wanted to let the list know that I flew
the MKlllc yesterday for the first time.
It was a blast.Special thanks to John Hauck and
James Tripp for all their help.Thanks to all the regular list
members as your input has made this project a success
David Patrick
Mklll c
1.4hrs
Jim & Dondi Miller
Aircraft Technical Support, Inc.
Poly-Fiber, Ceconite & Randolph Distributors
(Toll Free) (877) 877-3334
Web Site: www.poly-fiber.com
E-mail: info(at)aircrafttechsupport.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack B. Hart" <jbhart(at)onlyinternet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: LCR 814 TGti Twinpack |
>
>Sirs.
>We have started to manufacture small planes and we are looking for suitable engine.
The LCR 814 TGti Twinpack seems to be the best, but unfortunately we are
not able to get full spicifications. Please advice.
>Best regards
>Fero Sabol
>
>
Fero,
Try:
http://www.rotaryengines.ca/main/aircraft.htm
Jack B. Hart FF004
Winchester, IN
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "D Lucas" <d_a_lucas(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: LCR 814 TGti Twinpack |
>Try:
http://www.rotaryengines.ca/main/aircraft.htm
I have been curious about this engine as well and have sent off e-mails soliciting
a few more details but nobody answers.
Perhaps the're not in business anymore.
Tried Wankel in Germany as well .... Same result.
Such is life.
David.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Schnabel <tnfirestar2(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | ultralight crashes into high school crowd |
Has anyone heard more details on this accident? News link was down when i tried
it, but it sounds like no one was seriously injured, thank goodness.
Jay D wrote:
http://www.siouxcityjournal.com/articles/2005/11/03/news/latest_news/d2e
It looked like a 2 place Quicksilver. I couldn't tell if it had 1 or 2
people on board. The report was that he was flying over a high school
football game yesterday. It was windy. He was coming toward the field
and banked hard to the left at a slow speed at about 40' high, and
went in wing first, nose down, along the sidelines into the
spectators. It seems no one was hurt bad, thank goodness for our
sport.
I can't find out any more from the newswires right now. I am surprised
that the news aren't all over this.
Jay D
----------------------
> Turn on MSNBC right now and watch the Quicksilver crash into a
> crowd.
>
> Jay D
SPONSORED LINKS
Aviation Aviation school Outdoor recreation Recreation software Aviation headset
---------------------------------
Visit your group "ultralightchapter104" on the web.
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
ultralightchapter104-unsubscribe(at)yahoogroups.com
---------------------------------
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Schnabel <tnfirestar2(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | ultralight crash into football crowd |
The complete URL
http://www.siouxcityjournal.com/articles/2005/11/03/news/latest_news/d2e3f17a000dcf15862570ae0017f4ad.txt
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Beauford" <beauford(at)tampabay.rr.com> |
| Subject: | U.S. Navy Commander, Departing... |
Kolb Listers:
I Regret to inform you of the passing of "Skip" Staub on 02 November at Moffitt
Cancer Center in Tampa. It was a long, hard fight and Skip
gave it his usual all-out, max effort.
Skip was a long-time Kolb Ultrastar owner-pilot, a pioneer member of this Kolb
List, and an American Patriot.
He served 20 years as a U.S. Naval Aviator and was one of that services' highest
time pilots in the
Vought F8U Crusader, the last of the Navy's single-engine "hot" gunfighters.
To give an idea of the kind of man he was, please permit me to offer a brief war-story
on Skip...I read the narrative about it one time when he wasn't looking
and he's not here to raise hell with me for telling it, so here goes...
One rainy evening about 40 years ago, while serving as an exchange pilot with the
USAF, flying the F-100D fighter-bomber from Tuy Hoa
air base RVN, he was launched, along with one wing man, in response to a call for
help from a small U.S. Special Forces camp.
The camp was located in bad terrain in a neighboring country close to the Viet
Nam border and it was in the process of being overrun by a large force of North
Vietnamese Army regulars. As Skip's flight arrived in the area, the thickening
weather forced the forward air controller and a flight of F-4's which had been
orbiting over the camp to break off and go home with their ordnance undropped.
Skip made FM radio contact with the camp commander and could hear the intensity
of the firefight in the background. The man
said words to the effect that it was all going to be over soon unless some close
air support materialized... He only had about 60
guys and some local irregulars facing what appeared to be a full regiment of NVA...
The enemy had closed to within about 100
meters of the front gate and it was getting dicey.
Skip told him that all he had were "dumb" Mk 82 iron bombs and even if they could
figure out a way to get down into the
valley under the overcast, that was far too close to be delivering them, particularly
attacking up the valley toward the friendlies.
The camp commander radioed back that they would "rather be killed by Americans
than by these bastards" and to bring it on...
Skip asked his Air Force 1LT wingman if he was game to try it and got an affirmative
response. For the next
fifteen minutes, Skip and his wing man alternately pressed home bombing and strafing
attacks in the failing light under the 300 foot
overcast ceiling in the mountain valley. Forced to trust the notoriously inaccurate
tactical maps of the area, they used the peaks of the mountains
they could see poking through the cloud tops to orient their timed dead-reckoning
descents at 400 knots through the solid
clag, breaking out just above the valley floor on each pass and following the river
to the fight at the camp.
Each made four descents into the weather and four attacks... dropping two 500 lb.
bombs on each of the first two passes, and strafing with their four 20 mm cannon
on each of the last two passes.
The NVA attack was disrupted and then aborted... the enemy forces withdrew as darkness
fell. Because of the accuracy of the delivery and some deep digging, no
serious friendly casualties were taken from the bombs or the strafing. The
camp was relieved the following morning.
Each and every American in the camp wrote a personal letter to Skip, and the same
for his wingman. There are some Americans (and their children) walking around
on this planet today because these two pilots refused to leave 60 guys behind
that evening.
The Silver Star Skip received for his deeds that day earned him admission to Arlington
with full honors. That's where he wanted to go, and that's where he will
be taken, probably in January 2006, at a time and date to be determined.
Skip is survived by his loving and courageous wife, Ann... His beloved 180 horsepower
Globe Swift (he owned and flew it 41 years), his trusty old Kolb Ultrastar,
and his big yellow Honda Gold Wing.
This man lived life on his terms right up to the end. He will be missed.
Beauford
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob N." <ronoy(at)shentel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: U.S. Navy Commander, Departing... |
My sincere salute to Brother Airman Skip.
regards,
Bob N.
ronoy(at)shentel.net
http://www.angelfire.com/rpg/ronoy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dennis Souder" <flykolb(at)pa.net> |
| Subject: | Re: U.S. Navy Commander, Departing... |
Bill,
My sincerest condolences on the passing of your friend Skip,
I had the privilege to spend a little bit of time with Skip on various
occasions, mostly at SNF airshows and then a couple times at his home
airstrip. I'll remember Skip as a real gentleman with a very pleasant and
upbeat personality and ...with a twinkle in his eyes. Thank you for the
story (again) - wish I had known him longer.
Please pass my condolences on to Ann.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: "Beauford" <beauford(at)tampabay.rr.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: U.S. Navy Commander, Departing...
>
> Kolb Listers:
> I Regret to inform you of the passing of "Skip" Staub on 02 November at
Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa. It was a long, hard fight and Skip
> gave it his usual all-out, max effort.
>
> Skip was a long-time Kolb Ultrastar owner-pilot, a pioneer member of this
Kolb List, and an American Patriot.
>
> He served 20 years as a U.S. Naval Aviator and was one of that services'
highest time pilots in the
> Vought F8U Crusader, the last of the Navy's single-engine "hot"
gunfighters.
>
> To give an idea of the kind of man he was, please permit me to offer a
brief war-story on Skip...I read the narrative about it one time when he
wasn't looking and he's not here to raise hell with me for telling it, so
here goes...
>
> One rainy evening about 40 years ago, while serving as an exchange pilot
with the USAF, flying the F-100D fighter-bomber from Tuy Hoa
> air base RVN, he was launched, along with one wing man, in response to a
call for help from a small U.S. Special Forces camp.
> The camp was located in bad terrain in a neighboring country close to the
Viet Nam border and it was in the process of being overrun by a large force
of North Vietnamese Army regulars. As Skip's flight arrived in the area, the
thickening weather forced the forward air controller and a flight of F-4's
which had been orbiting over the camp to break off and go home with their
ordnance undropped.
>
> Skip made FM radio contact with the camp commander and could hear the
intensity of the firefight in the background. The man
> said words to the effect that it was all going to be over soon unless some
close air support materialized... He only had about 60
> guys and some local irregulars facing what appeared to be a full regiment
of NVA... The enemy had closed to within about 100
> meters of the front gate and it was getting dicey.
>
> Skip told him that all he had were "dumb" Mk 82 iron bombs and even if
they could figure out a way to get down into the
> valley under the overcast, that was far too close to be delivering them,
particularly attacking up the valley toward the friendlies.
> The camp commander radioed back that they would "rather be killed by
Americans than by these bastards" and to bring it on...
>
> Skip asked his Air Force 1LT wingman if he was game to try it and got an
affirmative response. For the next
> fifteen minutes, Skip and his wing man alternately pressed home bombing
and strafing attacks in the failing light under the 300 foot
> overcast ceiling in the mountain valley. Forced to trust the notoriously
inaccurate tactical maps of the area, they used the peaks of the mountains
> they could see poking through the cloud tops to orient their timed
dead-reckoning descents at 400 knots through the solid
> clag, breaking out just above the valley floor on each pass and following
the river to the fight at the camp.
>
> Each made four descents into the weather and four attacks... dropping two
500 lb. bombs on each of the first two passes, and strafing with their four
20 mm cannon on each of the last two passes.
>
> The NVA attack was disrupted and then aborted... the enemy forces withdrew
as darkness fell. Because of the accuracy of the delivery and some deep
digging, no serious friendly casualties were taken from the bombs or the
strafing. The camp was relieved the following morning.
>
> Each and every American in the camp wrote a personal letter to Skip, and
the same for his wingman. There are some Americans (and their children)
walking around on this planet today because these two pilots refused to
leave 60 guys behind that evening.
>
> The Silver Star Skip received for his deeds that day earned him admission
to Arlington with full honors. That's where he wanted to go, and that's
where he will be taken, probably in January 2006, at a time and date to be
determined.
>
> Skip is survived by his loving and courageous wife, Ann... His beloved
180 horsepower Globe Swift (he owned and flew it 41 years), his trusty old
Kolb Ultrastar, and his big yellow Honda Gold Wing.
>
> This man lived life on his terms right up to the end. He will be missed.
>
> Beauford
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DCulver701(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: U.S. Navy Commander, Departing... |
Beauford, that story says it all, and i salute him. Best regards, Dave
Culver
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Swiderski" <rswiderski(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | U.S. Navy Commander, Departing... |
Thanks Beauford, for sharing the inspiring memorial to Skip. -richard
swiderski
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Beauford
Subject: Kolb-List: U.S. Navy Commander, Departing...
Kolb Listers:
I Regret to inform you of the passing of "Skip" Staub on 02 November at
Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa. It was a long, hard fight and Skip
gave it his usual all-out, max effort.
Skip was a long-time Kolb Ultrastar owner-pilot, a pioneer member of this
Kolb List, and an American Patriot.
He served 20 years as a U.S. Naval Aviator and was one of that services'
highest time pilots in the
Vought F8U Crusader, the last of the Navy's single-engine "hot" gunfighters.
To give an idea of the kind of man he was, please permit me to offer a brief
war-story on Skip...I read the narrative about it one time when he wasn't
looking and he's not here to raise hell with me for telling it, so here
goes...
One rainy evening about 40 years ago, while serving as an exchange pilot
with the USAF, flying the F-100D fighter-bomber from Tuy Hoa
air base RVN, he was launched, along with one wing man, in response to a
call for help from a small U.S. Special Forces camp.
The camp was located in bad terrain in a neighboring country close to the
Viet Nam border and it was in the process of being overrun by a large force
of North Vietnamese Army regulars. As Skip's flight arrived in the area, the
thickening weather forced the forward air controller and a flight of F-4's
which had been orbiting over the camp to break off and go home with their
ordnance undropped.
Skip made FM radio contact with the camp commander and could hear the
intensity of the firefight in the background. The man
said words to the effect that it was all going to be over soon unless some
close air support materialized... He only had about 60
guys and some local irregulars facing what appeared to be a full regiment of
NVA... The enemy had closed to within about 100
meters of the front gate and it was getting dicey.
Skip told him that all he had were "dumb" Mk 82 iron bombs and even if they
could figure out a way to get down into the
valley under the overcast, that was far too close to be delivering them,
particularly attacking up the valley toward the friendlies.
The camp commander radioed back that they would "rather be killed by
Americans than by these bastards" and to bring it on...
Skip asked his Air Force 1LT wingman if he was game to try it and got an
affirmative response. For the next
fifteen minutes, Skip and his wing man alternately pressed home bombing and
strafing attacks in the failing light under the 300 foot
overcast ceiling in the mountain valley. Forced to trust the notoriously
inaccurate tactical maps of the area, they used the peaks of the mountains
they could see poking through the cloud tops to orient their timed
dead-reckoning descents at 400 knots through the solid
clag, breaking out just above the valley floor on each pass and following
the river to the fight at the camp.
Each made four descents into the weather and four attacks... dropping two
500 lb. bombs on each of the first two passes, and strafing with their four
20 mm cannon on each of the last two passes.
The NVA attack was disrupted and then aborted... the enemy forces withdrew
as darkness fell. Because of the accuracy of the delivery and some deep
digging, no serious friendly casualties were taken from the bombs or the
strafing. The camp was relieved the following morning.
Each and every American in the camp wrote a personal letter to Skip, and the
same for his wingman. There are some Americans (and their children) walking
around on this planet today because these two pilots refused to leave 60
guys behind that evening.
The Silver Star Skip received for his deeds that day earned him admission to
Arlington with full honors. That's where he wanted to go, and that's where
he will be taken, probably in January 2006, at a time and date to be
determined.
Skip is survived by his loving and courageous wife, Ann... His beloved 180
horsepower Globe Swift (he owned and flew it 41 years), his trusty old Kolb
Ultrastar, and his big yellow Honda Gold Wing.
This man lived life on his terms right up to the end. He will be missed.
Beauford
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph" <ul15rhb(at)juno.com> |
| Subject: | Re: U.S. Navy Commander, Departing... |
Thanks for relating this story Beauford.
I salute Skip.
Ralph Burlingame
Original Firestar
18 years flying it
-- "Beauford" wrote:
Kolb Listers:
I Regret to inform you of the passing of "Skip" Staub on 02 November at Moffitt
Cancer Center in Tampa. It was a long, hard fight and Skip
gave it his usual all-out, max effort.
Skip was a long-time Kolb Ultrastar owner-pilot, a pioneer member of this Kolb
List, and an American Patriot.
He served 20 years as a U.S. Naval Aviator and was one of that services' highest
time pilots in the
Vought F8U Crusader, the last of the Navy's single-engine "hot" gunfighters.
To give an idea of the kind of man he was, please permit me to offer a brief war-story
on Skip...I read the narrative about it one time when he wasn't looking
and he's not here to raise hell with me for telling it, so here goes...
One rainy evening about 40 years ago, while serving as an exchange pilot with the
USAF, flying the F-100D fighter-bomber from Tuy Hoa
air base RVN, he was launched, along with one wing man, in response to a call for
help from a small U.S. Special Forces camp.
The camp was located in bad terrain in a neighboring country close to the Viet
Nam border and it was in the process of being overrun by a large force of North
Vietnamese Army regulars. As Skip's flight arrived in the area, the thickening
weather forced the forward air controller and a flight of F-4's which had been
orbiting over the camp to break off and go home with their ordnance undropped.
Skip made FM radio contact with the camp commander and could hear the intensity
of the firefight in the background. The man
said words to the effect that it was all going to be over soon unless some close
air support materialized... He only had about 60
guys and some local irregulars facing what appeared to be a full regiment of NVA...
The enemy had closed to within about 100
meters of the front gate and it was getting dicey.
Skip told him that all he had were "dumb" Mk 82 iron bombs and even if they could
figure out a way to get down into the
valley under the overcast, that was far too close to be delivering them, particularly
attacking up the valley toward the friendlies.
The camp commander radioed back that they would "rather be killed by Americans
than by these bastards" and to bring it on...
Skip asked his Air Force 1LT wingman if he was game to try it and got an affirmative
response. For the next
fifteen minutes, Skip and his wing man alternately pressed home bombing and strafing
attacks in the failing light under the 300 foot
overcast ceiling in the mountain valley. Forced to trust the notoriously inaccurate
tactical maps of the area, they used the peaks of the mountains
they could see poking through the cloud tops to orient their timed dead-reckoning
descents at 400 knots through the solid
clag, breaking out just above the valley floor on each pass and following the river
to the fight at the camp.
Each made four descents into the weather and four attacks... dropping two 500 lb.
bombs on each of the first two passes, and strafing with their four 20 mm cannon
on each of the last two passes.
The NVA attack was disrupted and then aborted... the enemy forces withdrew as darkness
fell. Because of the accuracy of the delivery and some deep digging, no
serious friendly casualties were taken from the bombs or the strafing. The
camp was relieved the following morning.
Each and every American in the camp wrote a personal letter to Skip, and the same
for his wingman. There are some Americans (and their children) walking around
on this planet today because these two pilots refused to leave 60 guys behind
that evening.
The Silver Star Skip received for his deeds that day earned him admission to Arlington
with full honors. That's where he wanted to go, and that's where he will
be taken, probably in January 2006, at a time and date to be determined.
Skip is survived by his loving and courageous wife, Ann... His beloved 180 horsepower
Globe Swift (he owned and flew it 41 years), his trusty old Kolb Ultrastar,
and his big yellow Honda Gold Wing.
This man lived life on his terms right up to the end. He will be missed.
Beauford
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ElleryWeld(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: What's Being Said... |
This is a great place to share info or Get ideas for your own project
Ellery B
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "woody" <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
| Subject: | slow day - laugh a bit |
The list is kind of slow so I thought it would be a good time to add some
humour. This was recentley sent to me and I found it quite funny.
Unfortunately the girlfriend didn't. Guess its a pilot thing.
Airplanes usually kill you quickly; a woman takes her time.
>Airplanes can be turned on by a flick of a switch.
>Airplanes don't get mad if you do a "touch and go."
>Airplanes don't object to a pre-flight inspection.
>Airplanes come with a manual to explain their operation.
>Airplanes have strict weight and balance limitations.
>Airplanes can be flown at any time of the month.
>Airplanes don't come with in-laws.
>Airplanes don't care about how many other airplanes you've flown
>before.
>Airplanes and pilots both arrive at the same time.
>Airplanes don't mind if you look at other airplanes.
>Airplanes don't mind if you buy airplane magazines.
>Airplanes expect to be tied down.
>Airplanes don't comment on your piloting skills.
>Airplanes don't whine unless something is really wrong.
>However, when airplanes go quiet, just like women, it's usually not
>good.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Bigelow" <orcabonita(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Building Kolb MK III XTRA !!! |
Hi,
My name is Mike Bigelow and I am finally getting back into ultralights after
a long absence :) I had one of the first weight shift Quicksilvers back in
high school with a single cylinder 12 HP engine and I had a blast flying it
(my first solo). Ever since then I have always dreamed of getting another
ultralight... After 24 years of flying other less fun airplanes I have
finally ordered the kits for the MK III Xtra. I am having the guy by the
factory help me build it at his shop, so that way its done in a couple
months and all the building details are taken care of. I am putting a Rotax
912-S on the plane, ballistic chute, dual controls, all the factory options,
etc... I have been reading your list for months now and have gotten lots
of good information, but I still have some questions. Is there anything
else I should do on this plane that is not covered in the factory options ??
I don't care to much for the mechanical trim system of the elevator and
would like a electric aerodynamic trim tab instead, has anyone ever done
this ? I would also like more than 10 gallons of fuel capacity, is there a
bigger tank available for this plane ? I have also heard some good things
about the Kiev Hot prop, so right now its a toss-up between that or the Warp
Drive prop.... I would like to get this plane done perfect the first time,
so any advice you guys have about any part of this project would be greatly
appreciated.
Thanks
Michael A. Bigelow
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ted Cowan <trc1917(at)direcway.com> |
Here is a great deal for someone that doesnt want to go thru the agony of
building their own. The two guys who built this are true profectionists and
it is a beautiful plane. For info go to: www.homestead.com/southernflyers
and click on "for Sale". Ted Cowan.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack B. Hart" <jbhart(at)onlyinternet.net> |
| Subject: | Nose Cone - Duct Tape Time |
FireFlyers & Kolbers,
At the beginning of its 26th flight, I nosed the FireFly over on my first
attempt to takeoff from a grass strip on December 19, 1999.
After flight # 573 today, I did it again. Landed in a direct cross wind
with no problem, but as I tried to make a 180 on the runway I got off into
long grass beside the runway. My first mistake was that I turned into the
cross wind. Once the right main rolled into the grass and the wind struck
the right side of the vertical fin and rudder there was not enough grip by
the tail wheel to bring the FireFly the rest of the way around. My second
mistake was that I tried to move on out into the grass to bring it around
and I put it on its nose with too much throttle.
The first nose over cracked the bottom of the nose cone but it was not
noticeable. This episode left noticeable cracks and they will have to
be repaired. So until it gets warm enough to work with fiber glass, the
FireFly will have duct tape on its nose.
The plus is that I nosed over a pusher, and so I do not have the added
expense of new propeller blades.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Winchester, IN
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James, Ken" <KDJames(at)berkscareer.com> |
| Subject: | Building Kolb MK III XTRA !!! |
Welcome to the group .. I'm currently building a Mk III X at much much
slower pace (like watching paint dry )So any mods you make or problems you
please put the info up for all too see, and remember take lots of pics we
all like to see pics :-)
Ken James
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Bigelow [mailto:orcabonita(at)hotmail.com]
Subject: Kolb-List: Building Kolb MK III XTRA !!!
Hi,
My name is Mike Bigelow and I am finally getting back into ultralights after
a long absence :) I had one of the first weight shift Quicksilvers back in
high school with a single cylinder 12 HP engine and I had a blast flying it
(my first solo). Ever since then I have always dreamed of getting another
ultralight... After 24 years of flying other less fun airplanes I have
finally ordered the kits for the MK III Xtra. I am having the guy by the
factory help me build it at his shop, so that way its done in a couple
months and all the building details are taken care of. I am putting a Rotax
912-S on the plane, ballistic chute, dual controls, all the factory options,
etc... I have been reading your list for months now and have gotten lots
of good information, but I still have some questions. Is there anything
else I should do on this plane that is not covered in the factory options ??
=20 I don't care to much for the mechanical trim system of the elevator and
would like a electric aerodynamic trim tab instead, has anyone ever done
this ? I would also like more than 10 gallons of fuel capacity, is there a
bigger tank available for this plane ? I have also heard some good things
about the Kiev Hot prop, so right now its a toss-up between that or the Warp
Drive prop.... I would like to get this plane done perfect the first time,
so any advice you guys have about any part of this project would be greatly
appreciated.
Thanks
Michael A. Bigelow
IMPORTANT/CONFIDENTIAL: This communication is intended solely for the use of the
individual or entity to which it is addressed. This e-mail contains information
from the Berks Career & Technology Center that may be privileged, confidential,
and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this communication
is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately
and permanently delete this message including all attachments.
Thank you.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "kfackler" <kfackler(at)ameritech.net> |
| Subject: | Mark III vs. Mark IIIx |
I would like to seek some input from those of you who had the opportunity when
selecting your airplane to choose between a Mark III and the Mark III Xtra.
Which one did you choose, and why?
I realize that it's probably not possible to answer in a sound byte. Having said
that, what were the two or three most compelling reasons for your decision?
-Ken Fackler
Kolb Mark II / A722KWF
Rochester MI
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Kolb-List Digest: 6 Msgs - 11/07/05 |
I am just a lurker, but I enjoy all the tips and hope I remember if I ever
get started on my own plane. Thanks Pete
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Building Kolb MK III XTRA !!! |
I have tried several props on my MKIII, Ivo 3-blade, 2-blade, Warp
3-blade, Kiev Hot Prop - I have found the best performance (on a 582,
2.58:1 B box) with an Ivo 2 blade 68" prop. I have not tried a Warp Drive
Taper prop, but would love to try a 68" 2 blade and see how it stacks up
performance wise against the Ivo. (Anybody want to loan me one for a week?)
I tried a Kiev Hot Prop 3 blade 66" - which is the recommended size for
this engine/gearbox, but it did not do as well as the Ivo, save your money.
(I posted the results to this list, they ought to be in the archives)
If your main priority is the best overall performance, go with a two blade
prop. If your main priority is smoothness rather than performance, go with
a three blade prop. If your main priority is a prop that survives parts of
your airplane coming off and going through it, get a Warp Drive.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>Hi,
>
>My name is Mike Bigelow and I am finally getting back into ultralights after
>a long absence :) I had one of the first weight shift Quicksilvers back in
>high school with a single cylinder 12 HP engine and I had a blast flying it
>(my first solo). Ever since then I have always dreamed of getting another
>ultralight... After 24 years of flying other less fun airplanes I have
>finally ordered the kits for the MK III Xtra. I am having the guy by the
>factory help me build it at his shop, so that way its done in a couple
>months and all the building details are taken care of. I am putting a Rotax
>912-S on the plane, ballistic chute, dual controls, all the factory options,
>etc... I have been reading your list for months now and have gotten lots
>of good information, but I still have some questions. Is there anything
>else I should do on this plane that is not covered in the factory options ??
> I don't care to much for the mechanical trim system of the elevator and
>would like a electric aerodynamic trim tab instead, has anyone ever done
>this ? I would also like more than 10 gallons of fuel capacity, is there a
>bigger tank available for this plane ? I have also heard some good things
>about the Kiev Hot prop, so right now its a toss-up between that or the Warp
>Drive prop.... I would like to get this plane done perfect the first time,
>so any advice you guys have about any part of this project would be greatly
>appreciated.
>
>Thanks
>Michael A. Bigelow
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Mark III vs Mark III Xtra |
| From: | "Rex Rodebush" <rrodebush(at)tema.net> |
Main reason for me is that I can sit with my feet straight in the Xtra.
Sitting angled in is hard on the old lower back.
>
I would like to seek some input from those of you who had the
opportunity when
selecting your airplane to choose between a Mark III and the Mark III
Xtra
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "woody" <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Building Kolb MK III XTRA !!! |
Check the archives for Padre Pikes aileron control rod mod and for my tail
wire mod. The original Twinstar had an aerodynamic trim system built onto
the elevator in the form of a small flap that was cable activated. Works
good..
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Bigelow" <orcabonita(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: Building Kolb MK III XTRA !!!
>
> Hi,
>
> My name is Mike Bigelow and I am finally getting back into ultralights
after
> a long absence :) I had one of the first weight shift Quicksilvers back
in
> high school with a single cylinder 12 HP engine and I had a blast flying
it
> (my first solo). Ever since then I have always dreamed of getting another
> ultralight... After 24 years of flying other less fun airplanes I have
> finally ordered the kits for the MK III Xtra. I am having the guy by the
> factory help me build it at his shop, so that way its done in a couple
> months and all the building details are taken care of. I am putting a
Rotax
> 912-S on the plane, ballistic chute, dual controls, all the factory
options,
> etc... I have been reading your list for months now and have gotten lots
> of good information, but I still have some questions. Is there anything
> else I should do on this plane that is not covered in the factory options
??
> I don't care to much for the mechanical trim system of the elevator and
> would like a electric aerodynamic trim tab instead, has anyone ever done
> this ? I would also like more than 10 gallons of fuel capacity, is there
a
> bigger tank available for this plane ? I have also heard some good things
> about the Kiev Hot prop, so right now its a toss-up between that or the
Warp
> Drive prop.... I would like to get this plane done perfect the first
time,
> so any advice you guys have about any part of this project would be
greatly
> appreciated.
>
> Thanks
> Michael A. Bigelow
>
>
> --
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: slow day - laugh a bit |
Woody,
I forwarded this to my wife and this is her response:
"AND...the airplanes don't mind sleeping in the cold hanger with their pilots."
Quoting woody :
>
> The list is kind of slow so I thought it would be a good time to add some
> humour. This was recentley sent to me and I found it quite funny.
> Unfortunately the girlfriend didn't. Guess its a pilot thing.
>
>
> Airplanes usually kill you quickly; a woman takes her time.
> >Airplanes can be turned on by a flick of a switch.
> >Airplanes don't get mad if you do a "touch and go."
> >Airplanes don't object to a pre-flight inspection.
> >Airplanes come with a manual to explain their operation.
> >Airplanes have strict weight and balance limitations.
> >Airplanes can be flown at any time of the month.
> >Airplanes don't come with in-laws.
> >Airplanes don't care about how many other airplanes you've flown
> >before.
> >Airplanes and pilots both arrive at the same time.
> >Airplanes don't mind if you look at other airplanes.
> >Airplanes don't mind if you buy airplane magazines.
> >Airplanes expect to be tied down.
> >Airplanes don't comment on your piloting skills.
> >Airplanes don't whine unless something is really wrong.
> >However, when airplanes go quiet, just like women, it's usually not
> >good.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Mark III vs Mark III Xtra |
| Main reason for me is that I can sit with my feet straight in the
Xtra.
| Sitting angled in is hard on the old lower back.
|
"Rex Rodebush"
Rex/Gang:
Been flying my MKIII and several others since 1992. Have accumulated
more than 2,400 hours on my airframe alone. The only time I think
about where my legs are pointing is when someone makes comments about
sitting angled. I am sure I am sitting angled, but never has bothered
me.
I prefer the MKIIIc over the Xtra, based on limited flight experience
in several iterations of the newer model. Maybe I am a little
prejudice because I have spent so much time and flown so many places
in my old MKIIIc. I do prefer my 20 and 40 degree flaps over none at
all or flaperons. I consider them to be a major safety factor,
enabling me to make more survivable landings in much smaller spaces.
These flaps are used on most all landings and have been proven to be
very beneficial during actual engine out/emergency situations,
requiring landing in spaces not meant for MKIIIc's to land in.
I think the smaller nose cone is more aerodynamic than the broad flat
nose on the Xtra.
Guess I am happy with what I have. My MKIIIc provides me with all my
aviating needs and desires. Would like to climb and cruise right up
there with John W and his 912S powered Kolbra, but for now and the
near future will be happy hauling my stuff a little slower in the
comfort of the side by side two place over the tandem seating in the
Kolbra. May be possible to get cruise up another 10 mph in my MKIIIc,
but would take a lot of work cleaning up several areas that are now
creating a lot of drag. Miss P'fer has always cruised at 80 to 85 mph
powered with the 582, 912UL, and 912ULS.
Take care,
john h
MKIIIc/912ULS
Titus, Alabama
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Building Kolb MK III XTRA !!! |
| If your main priority is the best overall performance, go with a
two blade
| prop. If your main priority is smoothness rather than performance,
go with
| a three blade prop. If your main priority is a prop that survives
parts of
| your airplane coming off and going through it, get a Warp Drive.
|
| Richard Pike
Richard P/Gang:
Does the above mean I have been flying all these hours enjoying
smoothness of my Warp Drive 3 blade taper tip 72" prop, rather than
performance?
Or does it mean that those props and combos work the way you describe
on your own particular Kolb MKIIIc which has been changes somewhat in
the center section/cabin area?
I haven't tried experiementing between the two and three blade Warp
Drive props on my airplane. Only the three blade.
Many years ago I did do a lot of testing for Warp Drive using my
original Firestar. Was quite obvious during testing that the two
blade Culver wooden prop outperformed the Warp. However, later on the
MKIII I tested the square tip and taper tip three blade Warp. The
taper tip blades performed better in cruise speed. Both were about
equal in climb.
Take care,
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Bigelow" <orcabonita(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Mark III vs. Mark IIIx |
The MK III XTRA is faster, with more room inside, better visibility out the
front (more glass), and it is a much nicer looking airplane. It seems to me
that the XTRA is better in every way with no downside...
Mike
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard & Martha Neilsen" <NeilsenRM05(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Mark III vs Mark III Xtra |
I have a MKIIIc and bought it because that was the only one available at the
time. My thoughts on the differences are the Extra is faster and gives you
more room for your feet, the potential for a larger instrument panel, and
the panel is closer. The down side of the Extra is they don't come standard
with flaps but can be ordered and there are some who believe that there
isn't enough horizontal stabilizer area because of the wide flat nose. The
classic is 10 MPH slower and the instrument panel is too far away to reach
when strapped in. I also don't notice the foot angle except that I have
better forward and down visibility.
If I were to choose now I would likely pick the Extra but get the flap
option (no question here), make a larger horizontal stabilizer and likely
the larger panel. Check with Jim Clayton he is building one with these
changes and I think 1-3 axis electric trim.
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIIIc
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Mark III vs Mark III Xtra
>
> | Main reason for me is that I can sit with my feet straight in the
> Xtra.
> | Sitting angled in is hard on the old lower back.
> |
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Mark III vs Mark III Xtra |
| From: | "Rex Rodebush" <rrodebush(at)tema.net> |
I agree with John about the flaps. My Xtra was one of the first and the
standard flaps and ailerons were included. I think they still might be
available as an option and should be considered if they are.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Building Kolb MK III XTRA !!! |
This is a topic that several friends and I have kicked around in our EAA
chapter. Some of those friends have experimented with two vs. three blade
props on their Skylanes, etc, and their consensus is that two blades give
better overall performance, and here is the rationale:
For a given amount of horsepower - let's say we have 80 HP, that is a good
compromise between several of the motors we usually use - then we have to
decide how we are going to apply it, or in this case, divide it up. If we
have a prop of any given diameter, if it is a two blade prop, then we will
end up with a certain pitch. If we have a three blade prop of the same
diameter, then it will have to have less pitch, because now we are dividing
the available power by three blades instead of two. Which means that we
will have to use less pitch so that the engine can still reach it's power
peak. Now we have a three blade prop that at max cruise speed will have a
lower pitch than the two blade prop of the same diameter.
Now we throw in a variable - if you always fly at your max cruise speed,
then you won't notice much difference in anything. But if you sometimes
want to fly at speeds less than max cruise, then the lesser pitch of the
three blade prop will not allow you to fly at rpm's substantially lower
than max cruise, the prop still needs a bunch of rpm's because it has no
"spread" it is a shallow pitch prop, optimized for one target speed. With a
three blade prop, throttling back brings your airspeed down at a faster
rate than a two blade prop does per rpm. Or to look at it another way,
flying slowly still requires a lot of rpm's.
If you pitch either a two or three blade prop for full throttle level
flight just touching the tach red line, - let's say you max out at 90 -
when you slow down to 60, the two blade prop/engine combo will be turning
slower than the three blade prop/engine combo. You can't slow down the
three blade engine/prop combo as much. So while it might not have much
effect when optimized for max cruise, it gives up a lot of efficiency
(unnecessarily high rpm's) at anything less than max cruise. On the other
hand, you usually get better acceleration out of the hole with a three
blade prop, because it is lower pitched, like a climb prop.
Example: Yesterday I took the FSII up for a while, it was smooth as glass
out, and I was not going anywhere, just looking at fall colors. With the
582 swinging a 68" two blade prop, I could easily maintain altitude and
55mph at 4350 rpm, and I found it a very mellow and delightful experience.
Since at that rpm, the 582 was burning less than three GPH, and was
comparatively very quiet, it's performance was ideal.
With a two blade prop, which is using more pitch than a same diameter three
blade for a given rpm, the prop has more "spread," or effective useful
range, not only does it have more pitch at full throttle flight, it still
has more pitch at all speeds, which is sort of like keeping your car in
high gear at all rpm's, while a three blade is like being in second gear
all the time. Fortunately, our Kolb's accelerate and climb good enough that
even a two blade prop (high gear) doesn't hurt us much.
So I guess that in your case John, since you apparently typically run at
high cruise - from what I glean from your posts - it probably is six of
one, half a dozen of another. Of course, if you have the tip clearance to
give it a try, a two blade Warp Drive prop a couple inches longer than your
three blade might give even more climb. (Like you need it! )
But for those of us not going anywhere in particular, but just going up to
poot around - like us Old Poops do - then a two blade gives better overall
performance.
Obviously this does not factor in having an in-flight adjustable prop, that
is outside my experience. No comments or opinions there. Might change
everything...?
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
> | If your main priority is the best overall performance, go with a
>two blade
>| prop. If your main priority is smoothness rather than performance,
>go with
>| a three blade prop. If your main priority is a prop that survives
>parts of
>| your airplane coming off and going through it, get a Warp Drive.
>|
>| Richard Pike
>
>Richard P/Gang:
>
>Does the above mean I have been flying all these hours enjoying
>smoothness of my Warp Drive 3 blade taper tip 72" prop, rather than
>performance?
>
>Or does it mean that those props and combos work the way you describe
>on your own particular Kolb MKIIIc which has been changes somewhat in
>the center section/cabin area?
>
>I haven't tried experiementing between the two and three blade Warp
>Drive props on my airplane. Only the three blade.
>
>Many years ago I did do a lot of testing for Warp Drive using my
>original Firestar. Was quite obvious during testing that the two
>blade Culver wooden prop outperformed the Warp. However, later on the
>MKIII I tested the square tip and taper tip three blade Warp. The
>taper tip blades performed better in cruise speed. Both were about
>equal in climb.
>
>Take care,
>
>john h
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Building Kolb MK III XTRA !!!/Difference in Performance |
of Two and Three Blad Props
| So I guess that in your case John, since you apparently typically
run at
| high cruise - from what I glean from your posts - it probably is six
of
| one, half a dozen of another. |
| |
| Richard Pike
Richard P/Gang:
I cruise the MKIII/912ULS at what I would call normal cruise for the
912UL and 912ULS, 5,000 rpm, which is about 75% power. Gives me 80 to
85 mph.
High cruise for either model 912 is max continuous, or 5,500 rpm. I
prop the airplane to just bump the red line of 5,500 rpm WOT, straight
and level flight. Gives me the best of both climb and cruise.
Recently I have made some long cross country flights at 4,000 rpm and
65 mph. My fuel burn was 3.5 instead of 5.0 gph. Can't keep CHT and
eng oil temps in the green at low power settings.
I don't understand your explanation of the difference in a two or
three blad prop, but that is ok. I am happy with the set up I have.
I haven't experimented with a two blade Warp, so have nothing to
compare my present performance with. Maybe one of these days Warp
will let me do some two blade testing. I might be surprised, and
maybe I won't be.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)telepath.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Building Kolb MK III XTRA !!! |
> their consensus is that
> two blades give better overall performance
Borrowed from Hartzell....
A two-blade propeller is capable of achieving a higher efficiency
than a three-blade propeller , but at the same time it uses less
power and produces less thrust.
If you were to operate a propeller at a lower power setting than that
for which the efficiency is at its peak, you would have a lower thrust
and also a lower efficiency. Likewise if you operate at a higher
power setting, the thrust will be higher but the efficiency is lower
there also. There is therefore an optimum power setting for each
propeller where its efficiency will be highest. If conditions require
more thrust than is available from this optimum power setting, then
the power must be increased and prop efficiency begins to fall off
from its peak value. There reaches a point where a propeller
operating at a power higher than that which results in peak
efficiency has the same efficiency as a prop with more blades
operating at less-than- optimum power. Further increases in power
favor the performance of the propeller with more blades. This is
because the propeller with fewer blades is no longer operating at its
peak efficiency.
Jim Baker
580.788.2779
'71 SV, 492TC
Elmore City, OK
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard & Martha Neilsen" <NeilsenRM05(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Building Kolb MK III XTRA !!!/Difference in Performance |
of Two and Three Blad Props
John
It must be nice. I asked Power Fin to sponsor a test of their two bladed hub
on my airplane. They said sure send me $150 I will send you a two bladed
prop hub and you can keep it as long as you want. I wasn't at all happy with
the rough running two bladed prop and it perform as well. I probably need to
run a larger two blade prop to get more performance.
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIIIc
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Hauck">
Maybe one of these days Warp
> will let me do some two blade testing. I might be surprised, and
> maybe I won't be.
>
> john h
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Bigelow" <orcabonita(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | FLAPS ??? Kolb MK III XTRA .... |
Thanks for everyones input on my MK III XTRA project. One very important
thing that someone mentioned is flaps... Which options are available on the
XTRA and which is the best one ? I definately want flaps if possible, but
are the flaperons better on the kolb than the normal flaps on the inside and
ailerons on the outside setup ?
MIKE...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard & Martha Neilsen" <NeilsenRM05(at)comcast.net> |
I have been dealing with a noisy airplane since I lowered the thrust line
with my new engine mount. For most of the summer I have been flying with ear
plugs under my headphones. This has cut the noise but caused communication
problems. I have had some success in reducing the noise but not enough. I
have been considering updated noise canceling headphones but they are
expensive. Yesterday I bought some cheep noise reduction in you ear phones
($20). They work! They cut the noise and boy can I hear the radio. I bought
Radio Shack ear phones they are really Koss "sparkplugs" they aren't that
great but they prove that the concept works. The only problem I'm having is
only one earphone works. I need to find a mono to stereo adapter plug.
If you have a good headset but they don't reduce the noise enough you might
want to consider these ear bud style ear phones for use under the headphone.
They are designed to reduce the out side noise level so that you can hear
music. Some of them have noise canceling cercuittry. Sony makes a line of
reasonable priced units that I'm going to try next. The Sony MDR-NC11 units
are $50-150 depending on where you buy them and have noise canceling, Sony
MDR-51LP or MDR-EX71SL are in the $30-40 range. If you want to spend more
you can pay $400 plus.
Richard Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIIIc
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Earl & Mim Zimmerman <emzi(at)supernet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Building Kolb MK III XTRA !!! // Props. |
Richard Pike wrote:
>
> I have tried several props on my MKIII, Ivo 3-blade, 2-blade, Warp
> 3-blade, Kiev Hot Prop - I have found the best performance (on a 582,
> 2.58:1 B box) with an Ivo 2 blade 68" prop. I have not tried a Warp Drive
> Taper prop, but would love to try a 68" 2 blade and see how it stacks up
> performance wise against the Ivo.
My friend Joel tried the 68" Warp Taper on his 582 MKIII to see if he
could get any better cruise, but he soon put the 68" Ivo back on, both
were two blade props. If Ivo had the same blades for left hand rotation
I would have one on my Rans S6 also! ~ Earl
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Terry Frantz <tkrolfe(at)usadatanet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Nose Cone - Duct Tape Time |
Jack B. Hart wrote:
>
>FireFlyers & Kolbers,
>
>At the beginning of its 26th flight, I nosed the FireFly over on my first
>attempt to takeoff from a grass strip on December 19, 1999.
>
>The plus is that I nosed over a pusher, and so I do not have the added
>expense of new propeller blades.
>
>Jack B. Hart FF004
>Winchester, IN
>
>
>
>
Jack,
Welcome to the club. There are those that have already been there and
there are the rest that will join us sooner or later. The FireFly likes
to teach humility, especially with others watching.
This is the reason I made and placed a "Chicken hoop" under the nose of
my FireFly. Didn't want to repair or replace the fiberglass nose cone.
Have had only two occasions for it's use, but was I ever glad it was
there. Only had to touch up the paint on the hoop and a little on the
nose. I get negative comments about my hoop, but I just smile knowing
it works. Problem is that Kolb didn't design strong enough cross
members in the front of the cage to attach the hoop, so I welded in my
own 5/8" cross members to support it.
Spent too much time painting my bird with a complicated trim pattern to
have it messed up. Tall grass and soft mud and farmers fields will get
you even if you have the larger wheels as I do.
Good luck with the repair,
Terry - FireFly #95
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard & Martha Neilsen" <NeilsenRM05(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: FLAPS ??? Kolb MK III XTRA .... |
Mike
Yes flaps like those on the classic are available for the Xtra. These are
the only options that I'm aware of. The standard flaperons work and are
somewhat lighter but not as effective. The classic type flaps are very
powerful and can get the inexperienced into trouble but are real nice to
have when needed. I used those flaps during my forced landing last summer to
get me exactly were I wanted to land. I have never flown with the flaperons
but have been told and watched them in use and they aren't very effective.
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIIIc
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Bigelow" <orcabonita(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: FLAPS ??? Kolb MK III XTRA ....
>
>
> Thanks for everyones input on my MK III XTRA project. One very important
> thing that someone mentioned is flaps... Which options are available on
> the
> XTRA and which is the best one ? I definately want flaps if possible,
> but
> are the flaperons better on the kolb than the normal flaps on the inside
> and
> ailerons on the outside setup ?
>
> MIKE...
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack B. Hart" <jbhart(at)onlyinternet.net> |
| Subject: | Two or Three Blade Propellers |
Kolbers,
I belive I have sent the jump to "AeroDesign Propeller Selector" to the
List, but if I have not, here it is again:
http://www.gylesaero.com/freeware/propcalc.shtml
This program lets you put in some of your own aircraft performance data and you
can "What if" to see how aircraft performance will change. Since John H.
put up some performance data, I inserted some of it into the program as follows:
"Air Speed" -> 80 mph
"RPM -> 2,058 (where I assumed the gear ratio was 2.43 divided into 5,000 engine
rpm
"Number of Blades" -> 3
"Prop Diameter" -> 72 inches
From Rotax I looked at the power curve for the 912ULS and picked off 90 hp
at 5,000 rpm. Next I increased "Blade Pitch" until the "Power Absorbed"
reached 90 hp. At this point the "Thrust" developed was 323 pounds.
Propeller "Efficiency" turned out to be 76.6%
Then I changed the "Number of Blades" -> 2. Since John's plane requires the
same amount of thrust to fly at the same speed, I increased "Blade Pitch"
until the "Thrust" value came back to the same value as before. But when
one looks at the "Power Absorbed" it has gone from 90 to 94 hp. And
propeller efficiency has dropped to 73.0%.
If this program is accurate in its predictions and since the 912ULS cannot
develop 94 hp at 5,000 rpm, it indicates that for the same throttle setting
one will have to settle for less cruise speed with the two blade propeller.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Winchester, IN
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Earl & Mim Zimmerman <emzi(at)supernet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Two or Three Blade Propellers |
Jack B. Hart wrote:
> If this program is accurate in its predictions and since the 912ULS cannot
> develop 94 hp at 5,000 rpm, it indicates that for the same throttle setting
> one will have to settle for less cruise speed with the two blade propeller.
>
> Jack B. Hart FF004
> Winchester, IN
>
That is not what my experience has found! I don't think that your
example is inaccurate on at least one point in that the "90 hp" that you
pulled from the Rotax power curve is probably 5000 rpm WOT and not an
accurate measure of the power used to obtain 5000 rpm at 80 mph with a 2
or 3 blade prop.
I agree with Mr. Pike. ~ Earl
> If your main priority is the best overall performance, go with a two blade
> prop. If your main priority is smoothness rather than performance, go with
> a three blade prop. If your main priority is a prop that survives parts of
> your airplane coming off and going through it, get a Warp Drive.
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Future Seaplane Base |
Congrats Steve,
A Lifelong dream fullfilled is a blessing, and I am happy to see you
make yours, particularly since it is mine too!
I have never flown a plane on floats..but as I have been contemplateing
buying enough ground to build a runway..the thought of all the mowing
involved makes me think more of floats , and a fishing boat!
Don Gherardini
OEM.Sales / Engineering dept.
American Honda Engines
Power Equipment Company
CortLand, Illinois
800-626-7326
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "pat ladd" <pj.ladd(at)btinternet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Future Seaplane Base |
It looks like I will be able to fulfill a lifelong dream and
be able to fly out of my own back yard>>
Hi Steve,
I envy you. many years ago I stayed for a a couple of days with a guy named
Jack Pullman who had a house on Lake Wales. He was a dealer for an amphibian
ultralight which he thought I was going to buy. He had a slipway from his
garden into the water and we just sat in the plane, took off the brake and
slid gently backward into the lake. Out with a paddle to get the plane into
position and then pulled the string and away we went. I thought it was the
best thing since sliced bread. When we landed back on the lake we just
slowed down, dropped the undercarriage and taxied up the slip. Magnificent.
Many happy flying hours to you.
Pat
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack B. Hart" <jbhart(at)onlyinternet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Two or Three Blade Propellers |
>
>That is not what my experience has found! I don't think that your
>example is inaccurate on at least one point in that the "90 hp" that you
>pulled from the Rotax power curve is probably 5000 rpm WOT and not an
>accurate measure of the power used to obtain 5000 rpm at 80 mph with a 2
>or 3 blade prop.
>I agree with Mr. Pike. ~ Earl
>
Earl,
You may well be correct about the hp. Since John H. did not mention his
propeller pitch I had to pick off a hp value to be able to use the propeller
selector program.
There is no disagreement with Mr Pike. For the same propeller diameter, rpm
and thrust, and switching from two to three blades, the program verifies
what Richard Pike said.
Also to find an equivalent two blade propeller, one must increase propeller
diameter and reduce pitch. If this is done, you end up with a 80 inch
propeller. It will develop the same thrust and efficiency as the 72 inch
three blade propeller with the engine putting out 90 hp. The pitch
difference between the three blade 72 inch to the two blade 80 inch
propeller is not very large. Three blade pitch is 57.2 inches and the two
blade pitch is 55.7 inches.
I am pleased that we are both in agreement with Richard Pike.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Winchester, IN
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Clayton <jspc78(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Mark III vs Mark III Xtra |
Michael Bigelow
Hi Mike, Rick/All,
First of all, sorry for the delayed response. Things
are hopping again in Silicon Valley...so as my dad
says "make hay while the sun is shining" ;-)
I am building an Xtra and did choose to go with the
flaps, and larger horizontal stabilizer. The factory
folks were great about accommodating my request: they
sent the wing drawings with the flaps, and charged a
fee to change the cage to accept the flap linkages
(all different from the flaperons). The good news for
us is the early Xtras had the flaps same as the
Classic, so they have the jigs to make the cage
special by request (I don't recall the difference in
price--Travis at TNK can help you there).
Why did I go with the flaps and larger stab? The
flaps are easy: All my flight experience has been in
planes with flaps, and I can't imagine flying without
them. For me this plane is to be a short-field bush
plane, and flaps are VERY effective at adding lift and
*lots* of drag--use with caution and practice landings
with an instructor experienced in Kolb flaps! The
larger stab was a more difficult choice: The Xtra has
more frontal area, and that longer nose has a greater
arm against the stab, but many are quite happy with
their Xtra's with the same stab as the Classic. I
spoke with several people that had flown both sizes,
and since I personally favor stability over speed, I
choose to go with the larger stabilizer. I've had the
uncomfortable experience of flying a plane in rough
weather with a too small horizontal stab and it was a
nerve-wracking workout! So for me I tend to avoid all
that excitement and favor stability, over the tiny
possible difference in speed (less than one mph!?)the
slight increase in wetted area will give.
Regarding the electric trim: I am going to go with a
trim tab at the back of an elevator (and possibly
rudder, aileron), actuated by an electric trim servo.
I must give credit to the inventor, Mark German
(builder of a Kolbra) who designed beautiful, strong,
and light trim tabs, and came up with the connection
to a readily available trim servo. This bit is being
sorted out this winter, and I would be happy to report
it's effectiveness and the details once tested. But
I'm quite sure this will work out, in terms of
planning for your build--just the details, and proving
it out left.
Hope this helps, Jim
Jim Clayton
California
Mark-3X, 912ULS.....Building
www.quantumwrench.com/Kolb.htm
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On
Behalf Of Richard & Martha Neilsen
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Mark III vs Mark III Xtra
Neilsen"
-->
I have a MKIIIc and bought it because that was the
only one available at the time. My thoughts on the
differences are the Extra is faster and gives you more
room for your feet, the potential for a larger
instrument panel, and the panel is closer. The down
side of the Extra is they don't come standard with
flaps but can be ordered and there are some who
believe that there isn't enough horizontal stabilizer
area because of the wide flat nose. The classic is 10
MPH slower and the instrument panel is too far away to
reach when strapped in. I also don't notice the foot
angle except that I have better forward and down
visibility.
If I were to choose now I would likely pick the Extra
but get the flap option (no question here), make a
larger horizontal stabilizer and likely the larger
panel. Check with Jim Clayton he is building one with
these changes and I think 1-3 axis electric trim.
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIIIc
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Flycrazy8(at)aol.com |
Kolb-List message posted by: N27SB(at)aol.com
The
b I wonder what the Bigboy Fatcats will think of a little old Firefly on
Floats.
back yard has over 140 ft of white sand beach.
Hey Steve
Reckon them FatCats will say " well there goes the neighborhood " :-)
Who needs an airport when you can land a "fly" in less than 140 ft ?
Congratulations to You on the other part of your dream (other than flying )
Stephen
Do Not Archve
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Icrashrc(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Mark III vs Mark III Xtra |
Please share more information on the trim system. Was it posted on the Kolb
list? Are there any pictures posted? I wasn't able to find anything more in the
archives but I'm not the best at searching either. Thank you!
Scott Thompson
{tapping my fingers waiting for my Mark III X to show up}
From: Jim Clayton <jspc78(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Mark III vs Mark III Xtra
Michael Bigelow
Hi Mike, Rick/All,
First of all, sorry for the delayed response. Things
are hopping again in Silicon Valley...so as my dad
says "make hay while the sun is shining" ;-)
I am building an Xtra and did choose to go with the
flaps, and larger horizontal stabilizer. The factory
folks were great about accommodating my request: they
sent the wing drawings with the flaps, and charged a
fee to change the cage to accept the flap linkages
(all different from the flaperons). The good news for
us is the early Xtras had the flaps same as the
Classic, so they have the jigs to make the cage
special by request (I don't recall the difference in
price--Travis at TNK can help you there).
Why did I go with the flaps and larger stab? The
flaps are easy: All my flight experience has been in
planes with flaps, and I can't imagine flying without
them. For me this plane is to be a short-field bush
plane, and flaps are VERY effective at adding lift and
*lots* of drag--use with caution and practice landings
with an instructor experienced in Kolb flaps! The
larger stab was a more difficult choice: The Xtra has
more frontal area, and that longer nose has a greater
arm against the stab, but many are quite happy with
their Xtra's with the same stab as the Classic. I
spoke with several people that had flown both sizes,
and since I personally favor stability over speed, I
choose to go with the larger stabilizer. I've had the
uncomfortable experience of flying a plane in rough
weather with a too small horizontal stab and it was a
nerve-wracking workout! So for me I tend to avoid all
that excitement and favor stability, over the tiny
possible difference in speed (less than one mph!?)the
slight increase in wetted area will give.
Regarding the electric trim: I am going to go with a
trim tab at the back of an elevator (and possibly
rudder, aileron), actuated by an electric trim servo.
I must give credit to the inventor, Mark German
(builder of a Kolbra) who designed beautiful, strong,
and light trim tabs, and came up with the connection
to a readily available trim servo. This bit is being
sorted out this winter, and I would be happy to report
it's effectiveness and the details once tested. But
I'm quite sure this will work out, in terms of
planning for your build--just the details, and proving
it out left.
Hope this helps, Jim
Jim Clayton
California
Mark-3X, 912ULS.....Building
www.quantumwrench.com/Kolb.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chris Mallory" <wcm(at)tampabay.rr.com> |
I would like to wish a happy Veteran's day to all those who served.
Please see this link and reflect: http://www.soldierworks.com/untilthen.htm
Chris Mallory
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "pat ladd" <pj.ladd(at)btinternet.com> |
hi All,
the latest small step in along and tortuous journey.
The CAA today issued the Noise Certificate for my new Xtra.
Registered G-PLAD.
Fly Soon....soon.... of course the weather is deterioratimg fast, rain and wind
all this week, gales forecast for this weekend.....
Cheers
Pat
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kirby Dennis Contr MDA/AL <Dennis.Kirby(at)kirtland.af.mil> |
| Subject: | Rotax-912 Service Bulletin Compliance |
Fellow Kolbers operating the 912 -
When I installed a 912ul in my Mark-IIIC this summer, it was apparent that
none of the mandatory Rotax SBs had been accomplished for this
previously-owned engine. (I purchased it used, with 21 hrs total run time.)
So I've been busy lately, reading up on the SBs and complying with the
bulletins. However, one particular SB has me puzzled, and I'm hoping to
learn how you other 912 drivers complied with it.
Rotax bulletin SB-912-036UL, "Inspection for Correct Venting of the Oil
System."
The published reason for the need for this SB states that damage to the
valve train is possible, due to incorrect venting of the lubrication system.
The SB says that compliance requires the owner to perform a venting of the
oil system (per procedures in Service Instruction SI-04-1997), and then
inspect for correct venting of the hydraulic valve tappets.
When I installed this 912 on my Kolb, I meticulously followed the
Installation Manual's procedures for venting the oil system. (e.g.,
disconnected the suction hose from the oil tank, filled the oil hose with
oil using a funnel, turning the engine over several revolutions to ensure a
continuous feed of oil to the pump, etc.)
I have since run this 912 engine for about 13 hours with no problems. Oil
pressure jumps right into the green within seconds of engine start. No
over-temp problems at all; oil pressures where they should be for all RPMs.
All indications suggest that my oil delivery system is working as it should.
Do I still need to re-vent the oil system, as the SB dictates?
Just wanting to know what others have done in this situation.
Many thanks for your inputs ...
Dennis Kirby
Cedar Crest, NM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DCulver701(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Re: Future Seaplane Base |
Congratulations Steve, on your new place, and as far as your fatcat neighbors
go, maybe you'll make a few converts, especially if gas goes back up. lol
Sounds like it has a lot of potential from what you've described. June & i
will be down at Sunlake on lake Yale in another week. I'll have to get together
with you to see your plane. The pictures of it look great. Best regards,
Dave Culver
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Moore <mooreb4(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | New Georgia Ultrastar owner, First post! |
Been reading your list for a few weeks. Joined last wk or so. Made email contact
w Dale Sellers in S GA. Am now posting to the list. Bought a Ultrastar in
great shape on Ebay from an older gent in Alabama and brought it back to Alpharetta,
GA (20 miles N of Atlanta) about 6 weeks ago. I threw a lot of questions
to Dale and now am ready to join in the list.
If any US owners, or other Kolbers are closer to me than Dale, please let me know.
My only pilot experience is briefly controlling a Blanac (sp) glider and
a Cessna, years ago. Just keeping em straight and level. So, it will be awhile
before I am soloing in my new bird.
Am looking to take lessons. Quicksilver lessons are easy to find. Taildragger
lessons seem more scarce. Would starting with the QS mess me up?
The Seaplane subject got me going. We have a place about 50 yds from a sheltered
cove on Lake Lanier. Has anyone ever heard of floats on a US? Someone said
that the prop might get hit by spray from the floats, not good. Any way to
deflect the spray from reaching the prop? What are the regs. for operation on
a Corps of Engineers lake?
Enough questions. Glad you guys are out there. Brian
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax-912 Service Bulletin Compliance |
| Do I still need to re-vent the oil system, as the SB dictates?
|
| Dennis Kirby
Dennis K/Gang:
Sounds to me like you are in good shape, have complied the the SB
before you knew it existed.
If it was me, I would let it ride.
Air is the problem, if it gets into the system. Oil pump can cavitate
and hydraulic lifters can collapse. I have never had a problem in
this area. Usually, after oil change or any time the oil system is
"cracked", I turn the engine over by hand until I feel I have gotten
any air out of the system. Probably 5 or 6 complete revolutions of
the prop.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ken Richter" <susan203(at)centurytel.net> |
Does anyone have any ideas for me I am flying a mk2 with a 503dcdi and a 66" ivo
three blade prop, one problem is on full power climb out the nose of the plane
seems to bob around a little looking back at the tail during this I see the
tail bobbing around too which I'm sure is whats causing the nose to move this
isn't a huge deal but it seems to have gotten worse when I added the three blade
prop,I've inspected the tail and I don't see anything loose, Second problem
is when flying with two 200lb people I am unable to trim the plane to fly straight
and level it handles the weight fine but the cg must be too far forward,
Any ideas would be appreciated.
Ken in MN
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | russ kinne <kinnepix(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Winter flying |
Ellery
None of us want you to take a chance on getting nailed in a lawsuit
while trying to help fellow Kolbers! -- remember it costs just as much
to defend yourself. And lawyers will latch onto ANYthing if they think
they can squeeze money out of you. I used to buy "crowd insurance"
when photographing advertising photos -- just in case some clown
stubbed his toe and claimed it was because I had 6 sexy models posing
-- this has happened. (But not to me, yet, thank God)
I would strongly suggest you have every customer sign a "hold-harmless
release" when he buys skiis or mounting kits from you. I can write
you none if you want. One stupid little piece of paper could save you
from a lot of hassle and thousands of $$. Crazy way to live but that's
the way it seems to be in 2005.
Fair winds,
Russ Kinne
On Oct 31, 2005, at 10:52 PM, ElleryWeld(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> Thanks for your concerns Gary
> I have my own design of skis I am not copying anyone else's so they
> might
> not work for you even though I have been using them and I am not
> reliable for
> someone else's installation or experience of the use of skis just
> trying to be
> a nice guy and help others out that might not have the tooling or
> knowledge of
> how to get into winter flying without spending a minum of $800.00 for
> a pair
> of skis
> I realize there are a lot of people out there this day and age
> looking to
> nail another lawsuit so if you put it that way I will just weld the
> frames
> together and let you install the bottom skins and make up your own
> cables and
> bungies and do your own rigging its your ass in the sling not mine and
> I had better
> let this go in to the archives so no one can say I said it will work
> Have a
> nice winter
>
> Ellery
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Does anyone have any ideas for me I am flying a mk2 with a 503dcdi
and a 66" ivo three blade prop, one problem is on full power climb out
the nose of the plane seems to bob around a little looking back at the
tail during this I see the tail bobbing around
Ken R/ Gang:
The 5" tail boom on a MK2, and for that matter the 6" tail boom on the
MKIII, are long and limber. When you add prop wash at full throttle
and a little bumpy air maybe, the tail section is going to move around
some. Insuring that the tail wire bracing is good and tight. Tight
enough so it will twang and not thump when you snap it during
preflight.
Second problem is when flying with two 200lb people I am unable to
trim the plane to fly straight and level
With two 200 lb folks in the MKII you probably are experiencing fwd cg
plus the added nose down force caused by a high pusher prop. You and
your passenger could lose a lot of weight, or you could get stronger
springs for your forced elevator trim.
john h
MKIII/912ULS
Titus, Alabama
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Earl & Mim Zimmerman <emzi(at)supernet.com> |
Ken Richter wrote:
>
> Does anyone have any ideas for me I am flying a mk2 with a 503dcdi and a 66"
ivo three blade prop, one problem is on full power climb out the nose of the plane
seems to bob around a little looking back at the tail during this I see the
tail bobbing around too which I'm sure is whats causing the nose to move this
isn't a huge deal but it seems to have gotten worse when I added the three
blade prop,I've inspected the tail and I don't see anything loose, Second problem
is when flying with two 200lb people I am unable to trim the plane to fly
straight and level it handles the weight fine but the cg must be too far forward,
Any ideas would be appreciated.
>
> Ken in MN
Ken our MKII will do this if you fly with your feet removed from the
rudder pedals. And the trim issue is characteristic of the MKII. The
seats are in front of the center of lift so any added weight will
require more up trim. This was improved in the MKIII by adding a larger
tail surface. ~ Earl
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mitty <benny_bee_01(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: New Georgia Ultrastar owner, First post! |
Brian,Welcome to the group!
I am after one of the ultrastars cuz i think they are
the best :)
I also one of the moderator on yahoo group dedicated
to ultrastars so join if you would like to.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/KolbUltrastar/
Anyhow,hope to hear from you soon.
Mitty
--- Brian Moore wrote:
>
>
> Been reading your list for a few weeks. Joined last
> wk or so. Made email contact w Dale Sellers in S
> GA. Am now posting to the list. Bought a Ultrastar
> in great shape on Ebay from an older gent in Alabama
> and brought it back to Alpharetta, GA (20 miles N of
> Atlanta) about 6 weeks ago. I threw a lot of
> questions to Dale and now am ready to join in the
> list.
>
> If any US owners, or other Kolbers are closer to me
> than Dale, please let me know. My only pilot
> experience is briefly controlling a Blanac (sp)
> glider and a Cessna, years ago. Just keeping em
> straight and level. So, it will be awhile before I
> am soloing in my new bird.
>
> Am looking to take lessons. Quicksilver lessons are
> easy to find. Taildragger lessons seem more scarce.
> Would starting with the QS mess me up?
>
> The Seaplane subject got me going. We have a place
> about 50 yds from a sheltered cove on Lake Lanier.
> Has anyone ever heard of floats on a US? Someone
> said that the prop might get hit by spray from the
> floats, not good. Any way to deflect the spray from
> reaching the prop? What are the regs. for operation
> on a Corps of Engineers lake?
>
> Enough questions. Glad you guys are out there.
> Brian
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>
>
>
> Click on
> about
> provided
> www.buildersbooks.com,
> Admin.
> _->
> browse
> Subscriptions page,
> FAQ,
>
>
>
>
>
>
__________________________________
http://farechase.yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: New Georgia Ultrastar owner, First post! |
In a message dated 11/11/2005 6:48:02 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
mooreb4(at)yahoo.com writes:
Would starting with the QS mess me up?
Hi Brian, I fly a Firefly on floats. Got my transition training in a QS in
Key West. I think it will help a lot.
Has anyone ever heard of floats on a US?
I have an old picture of a friend of mine flying a US on floats in the
80's. He loved it.
Someone said that the prop might get hit by spray from the floats, not good.
If you use a Kiev or Warp with a metal leading edge, forget about the water.
What are the regs. for operation on a Corps of Engineers lake?
Most C of E lakes are restricted but not all. Call Mike Volk at Seaplane
Pilot's Assoc. at
1-888-SPA-8923 for info. You should really join if you want to ask a bunch
of questions.
Good luck Brian, It's a blast.
Steve Boetto
Firefly #007 on floats
Nuther FF on the way
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: New Georgia Ultrastar owner, First post! |
Hi Steve/Brian/Gang:
| Has anyone ever heard of floats on a US?
My first trip to Sun and Fun, March 1984, was also attended by the
prettiest US I had ever seen. It was red and white sun burst on
fiberglass floats. I have some photos of it.
| I have an old picture of a friend of mine flying a US on floats in
the
| 80's. He loved it.
May have been the same person and aircraft. This one was out of Ft
Lauderdale, IIRC, but I may be wrong.
There was also a four engine Lazair on floats there. The sea plane
base for ULs was a ditch filled with water. Can still see the Lazair
flying in and out of that ditch. Pilot was barefooted with his pants
legs rolled up. What a sight!
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: New Georgia Ultrastar owner, First post! |
In a message dated 11/11/2005 9:48:41 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com writes:
My first trip to Sun and Fun, March 1984, was also attended by the
prettiest US I had ever seen. It was red and white sun burst on
fiberglass floats.
John, might be the same plane. Ron Leuck of Aerocomp did the match and test
flew it. Don't know who the owner was but Ft. Laud is in the neighborhood.
Steve
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Moore <mooreb4(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | New Georgia Ultrastar |
John and Steve, Thank you for your posts. I would love to see a picture of this
plane. I need to check out the regs for Lanier and cnatact the seaplane folks.
I have never seen a float plane on it. Its a very boat crowded lake in the
summer. However, I drove across the dam yesterday and only saw about 5 sailboats
on a beautiful day.
Whether by land or by sea I will get in the air in due time. Brian
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: New Georgia Ultrastar owner, First post! |
The Seaplane subject got me going. We have a place about 50 yds from a
sheltered cove on Lake Lanier. Has anyone ever heard of floats on a US? Someone
said that the prop might get hit by spray from the floats, not good. Any
way to deflect the spray from reaching the prop? What are the regs. for
operation on a Corps of Engineers lake?
Enough questions. Glad you guys are out there. Brian
Brian, This is the only form of Lanier in the Seaplane Directory. Does not
look Good.
LAKE SIDNEY LANIER - CLOSED. Coordinates: N34-14.00; W083-57.00. Controlling
Agency: USACE, Mobile District (251/690-2511).
steve
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob and Jenn B" <tabberdd(at)hotmail.com> |
Can someone please tell me the size of the Mk II gear legs, are they 1 1/4"
or 1 3/8"? I'm switching from the original sleeved gear to the solid
aluminum. Travis thinks they are 1 1/4" but I can't tell without taking my
out first.
Bob
Mk II 503 SCSI
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ElleryWeld(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Winter flying |
Russ could you send me a copy of that Hold-Harmless Release to protect my
self that would work great for me I could email it out for people to sign and
Buyer can send it back with payment
Ellery in Maine
Original Firestar
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Cheap scale to measure thrust |
We have found an inexpensive scale to measure the thrust of your "vehicle".
It's a 440 Pound Big Game Scale as manufactured by "Moultrie Feeders".
MFH-S440
We ordered ours from Bass Pro Shops. About $20, plus frt.
Howard Shackleford
FS II
SC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Pierzina <planecrazzzy(at)yahoo.com> |
Ray,
I didn't swear on the "list".......and my messages were sent "OFF LIST"
and then dragged onto the list by
others....
and if you really want the word "JERK" to pop up in the archives.....add search
words like :
Propeller
Rotax
Brakes
Tires
EIS
ELT
Oil
Seafoam
Stits
Polytone
Polyspray
Firestar
Firefly
Ultrastar
aluminum
Rivets
Chromemoly
"know it all" ??? I don't answer questions....I just share my building....
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: | Cat36Fly(at)aol.com |
Jim;
My climb was at WOT. I am not sure my tach is dead on as I seldom see 6000
RPM. I plan to do some prop pitch testing after I get the critter to do fairly
straight and level. So far the weather gods have been good to me and I got
1.7 in on Saturday.
Next is an elevator trim tab by next weekend!
Larry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "frank & margie" <frank-margie(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Stuck Throttle Cable Splitter |
A friend who flies from the same field I do had the throttle on his Kolb freeze
at the 3/4 open position. As Murphy would have it, he was at the end of a low
pass over the runway at the time. Anything else but a Kolb would probably not
have made it over the trees at the end of the runway. (He couldn't reach the
ignition switch to shut it off; he will be relocating the switch.) (He might
give himself a little more leeway next time too----.)
The problem was in the splitter. It's a three into one on an oil injected 503DC.
The single throttle cable that enters the bottom of the splitter was prevented
from being centered in the brass plug (inside the splitter) because the slot
in the brass was not wide enough (at the bottom of the slot) for the cable
to fit more than 1/2 way into it. The resulting sideways pull on the brass plug
eventually scored the soft aluminum barrel, and finally built up enough of
an aluminum ridge to freeze the unit solid.
The splitter was bought about 5 years ago. I have the same engine setup on my
Flightstar, and it's also around 5 years old. We found the same problem in mine,
only not yet scored enough to seize.
Y'all might want to check your splitters. (Hope I'm not repeating an old story
here. I lurk on this list most of the time, but I was away for awhile this summer.
I couldn't find anything in the archives, and maybe I can save somebody
else from an event that might ruin their whole morning---.)
Frank Clyma
Orange Park, FL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "frank & margie" <frank-margie(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Stuck Throttle Cable Splitter |
A friend who flies from the same strip I do had the throttle on his Kolb freeze
at the 3/4 open position. As Murphy would have it, he was at the end of a low
pass over the runway at the time. Anything other than a Kolb would probably
not have made it over the trees at the end of the runway. (He couldn't reach
the ignition to turn it off; he will be relocating the ignition switch. He will
probably give himself a little more leeway next time too---)
The problem was in the splitter. It's a 3 into 1 on an oil injected 503DC. The
single throttle cable that enters the splitter from the bottom was not centered
in the brass plug inside the unit. The bottom 1/2 of the slot in the brass
was not wide enough to let the cable go all the way in, and the resulting sideways
pull on the brass plug eventually scored the soft aluminum barrel enough
to form a ridge that froze the plug.
The splitter was bought about 5 years ago. I have the same engine setup on my
Flightstar, and we found the same problem in mine, only not yet to the point of
freezing the motion of the plug.
Y'all might want to check your splitters. (Hope I'm not repeating an old story
here. I lurk on this list most of the time, but I was away for awhile this summer,
and I couldn't find anything in the archives. Maybe the info will save
somebody from an event that could ruin their whole morning---.)
Frank Clyma
Jacksonville, FL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "kfackler" <kfackler(at)ameritech.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Mk II Gear Legs |
> Ken, tell us more about your fiberglass legs.
Well, I'm willing, but not sure what to say. Unlike most of you chaps, I'm
not a builder. I bought the plane ready to fly and it had fiberglass gear
legs. It never occured to me to question that. Along the way, I "discovered"
that my plane doesn't have the standard Kolb axle fittings which take the
tapered aluminum legs. The fittings on mine appear to have been homemade and
are for a constant diameter tube, which of course works well with the
fiberglass. In trying to find replacements, I also learned that fiberglass
comes in various strengths, which is probably old news to any of the true
builders. The legs have a strength rating of 100k. Please don't ask me what
that means, however!
One of my flying buddies, Mark Gray, a Firestar driver, monitors the List on
a semi-occasional basis. He's a brilliant engineer and could undoubtedly
shed some light. Hopefully he'll see this and add his comments.
-Ken Fackler
Kolb Mark II / A722KWF
Rochester MI
dna
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kirby Dennis Contr MDA/AL <Dennis.Kirby(at)kirtland.af.mil> |
| Subject: | Re: Apology to all on the Kolb list |
Gee, Mike - Looks like you're being a bit harsh on Scott for an innocent and
otherwise very legitimate post. It does not seem like Mr Thompson is the
one who should be offering the apology ...
<< Icrashrc(at)aol.com wrote: Please share more information on the trim
system. Was it posted on the Kolb list? Are there any pictures posted? I
wasn't able to find anything more in the archives but I'm not the best at
searching either. Thank you!
Scott Thompson >>
<< planecrazzzy(at)yahoo.com writes: One of the BIGGEST reasons it's hard to
find something in the archives.... It's because people put the kind of CRAP
http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
Gee, Mike Looks like
youre being a bit harsh on Scott for an innocent and otherwise very
legitimate post. It does not seem like Mr Thompson is the one who should be
offering the apology ...
Icrashrc(at)aol.com wrote:
Please share more information on the trim system. Was it posted on the Kolb list?
Are there any pictures posted? I wasn't able to find anything more in the archives
but I'm not the best at searching either. Thank you!
Scott Thompson
planecrazzzy(at)yahoo.com
writes: One of the BIGGEST reasons it's hard to find something in the archives....
It's because people put the kind of CRAP , like what YOU just added to them
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | venting of 912 oil system |
| From: | Erich_Weaver(at)URSCorp.com |
11/14/2005 01:23:59 PM
Dennis:
A few years back I talked to Todd at Lockwood about all this. Cant
remember his exact words, but the gist of it was this is a lot of fuss over
very little and is not likely to affect you. Cycle the prop when changing
oil as described by John H.
On a related note, its easy to misread your oil level on the 912 because
the oil typically drains down into the crank case when its been sitting.
You can either check it when its still hot (ouch!) or, when its not hot,
remove the filler cap and rotate the prop until you hear the unmistakable
sound of a toilet flush coming from the oil tank, and then check the oil
level. Sometimes it takes quite a few prop revolutions until I get the
flushing sound. I go through this routine as part of every pre-flight.
regards
Erich Weaver
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Abbott" <jacksbird(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Aero Vee Engine Kit |
I am doing some research on engine options for the Mark III X I am building. I
came across a very affordable Aero Vee Engine Kit by Aero Conversions, Inc.. It
is a fraction of the price ( $5,700) of a Jab 2200 ot a Rotax 912.
1. Does anyone have any experience with this engine and/or assembling the kit?
2 What is your experience with using it on a Mark III? Is it a good match for the
aircraft?
Thanks for your comments.
John Abbott
Building Mk3X
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ian Heritch" <iheritch(at)satx.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Aero Vee Engine Kit |
John,
You may already know this, but, Aero Conversions Inc is a sister company to
Sonex who seem to have a good reputation (especially if you do things their
way). There are several Yahoo groups lists moderated by Sonex and I believe
there is one list dedicated to the Aero Vee and their carb.
I cannot help you with your second question, others on this list will be
able to opine.
Ian Heritch
Slingshot 912
Sonex Jab 3300
I am doing some research on engine options for the Mark III X I am building.
I came across a very affordable Aero Vee Engine Kit by Aero Conversions,
Inc.. It is a fraction of the price ( $5,700) of a Jab 2200 ot a Rotax 912.
1. Does anyone have any experience with this engine and/or assembling the
kit?
2 What is your experience with using it on a Mark III? Is it a good match
for the aircraft?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard & Martha Neilsen" <NeilsenRM05(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Aero Vee Engine Kit |
John
You may want to review the archives on this. I flew a direct drive Great
Plains 2180cc VW conversion on a MKIIIc for four years. It was a marginal
single place airplane with that engine. When I changed the engine to a
reduction drive VW the difference was hard to believe. I run the engine at
the same RPMs as I did direct drive and it easily produces twice the thrust.
I now have a two place airplane that cruises at least 10 MPH faster at a
lower power settings. The Areo Vee is basically the same direct drive engine
that I had. You will not be happy. Direct drive engines that produce their
power over 3000 will not produce the thrust that that you will want for a
MKIIIc or x.
The price difference for a VW is captivating. The engine works well as a
airplane engine but requires allot of custom work to get it all working
right. I'm close to having a good set up for the MKIII but the reliability
hasn't been proven yet. The biggest problem still is a good reduction drive.
I use a Valley reduction drive which is the most proven drive for VWs but
others are looking a gear drive units that might just be the ticket.
Again check the archives and if I can be of any help just let me know.
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIIIc
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Abbott" <jacksbird(at)charter.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: Aero Vee Engine Kit
>
> I am doing some research on engine options for the Mark III X I am
> building. I came across a very affordable Aero Vee Engine Kit by Aero
> Conversions, Inc.. It is a fraction of the price ( $5,700) of a Jab 2200
> ot a Rotax 912.
>
> 1. Does anyone have any experience with this engine and/or assembling the
> kit?
> 2 What is your experience with using it on a Mark III? Is it a good match
> for the aircraft?
>
> Thanks for your comments.
> John Abbott
> Building Mk3X
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Clayton <jspc78(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Apology to all on the Kolb list |
Hi Scott/everyone,
Sorry you were treated so rudely, and I encourage you
to keep posting; the more friendly interesting
questions asked the better off we all are here.
I worked with friends the come up with the electric
trim and tab because that is what I wanted, for the
mission I had in mind. I have experience building
complex systems, and my plane has complex systems that
suit me. They won't suit everyone, and for some
reason I can't understand, when I report on something
I am working on, one or two folks take it as an
affront to aviation and flame away without
understanding anything about me or my project. My
friends understand I have a large group of advisors
that have to unanimously approve my hairbrained ideas,
and I always do some kind of testing and failure mode
analysis before a change makes it onto my plane. I do
this stuff at work all day so it's fun for me. My
methods are not for everyone: several good friends on
this list have reminded me finishing the plane and
flying it before I retire would be nice :-) I try to
temper my enjoyment of re-engineering stuff with my
desire to fly someday.
The best part of sharing with this group is for every
nincompoop with nothing but flames to offer, there are
hundreds with great advice and valuable wisdom to
share.
So back to the electric trim. It is currently a great
idea I need to build and verify. When I have parts
made and the geometry worked out, I will share it with
the group. While this trim scheme suits me, several
have recently pointed out the bungee trim works well
(and has for 20 years+ on Kolbs) so please don't infer
just because I mess with the design of my Kolb it's
because the original is substandard or inferior.
Kolbs are a stout and well designed family of planes,
and if testing and failure mode analysis don't
interest you, KEEP IT STOCK and you won't go wrong.
Ok Scott, keep up the questions; what else you got :-)
Good luck on your project, do keep us posted on your
progress.
-Jim
Jim Clayton
California
Mark-3X, 912ULS.....Building
www.quantumwrench.com/Kolb.htm
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On
Behalf Of Icrashrc(at)aol.com
Subject: Kolb-List: Apology to all on the Kolb list
Apparently I've violated some secret elevator trim
handshake and have left at
least one person offended. While I knew not to ask the
dreaded Seafoam
question I had no idea asking a simple question could
be so offensive. I've been
lurking here a while now, finally bought a kit and
figured I could ask a question
or two. Guess I was wrong. I'll have to trade up to a
Fergie I guess [see, I
know I wasn't supposed to say that]! Ya'll take care,
I'm going back to silent
mode.
Scott
In a message dated 11/12/2005 8:31:48 AM US Eastern
Standard Time,
planecrazzzy(at)yahoo.com writes:
Hi,
One of the BIGGEST reasons it's hard to find
something in the
archives....
It's because people put the kind of CRAP , like what
YOU just added to them
!!!
Gotta
Fly...
Mike in MN N381PM
From: Icrashrc(at)aol.com
Subject: Kolb-List: Mark III vs Mark III Xtra
Please share more information on the trim system. Was
it posted on the
Kolb
list? Are there any pictures posted? I wasn't able to
find anything
more in the
archives but I'm not the best at searching either.
Thank you!
Scott Thompson
{tapping my fingers waiting for my Mark III X to show
up}
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
Sounds to me like a fine plan. One heads up: The rudder and ailerons of the
MKIII are quite susceptible to flutter. Putting my white nav light on the
trailing edge of the rudder caused it to flutter, I had to end up making a
counterweight (vulture knocker) sticking out ahead of the vertical fin to
make it quit. Likewise for the right aileron, I made a ground adjustable
trim tab for the right wingtip, and until I got the factory counterbalances
installed, I had to limit my speeds to less than 85, or the right aileron
would start to buzz.
So if your servos are installed so as to affect the weight of the control
surfaces, plan ahead.
As part of your failure mode planning, after you get things flying,
investigate how the stick pressure changes with two up and no trim assist.
A MKIII with no elevator spring boost and a passenger's weight will soon
test the endurance of your bicep...
Richard Pike
>
>So back to the electric trim. It is currently a great
>idea I need to build and verify. When I have parts
>made and the geometry worked out, I will share it with
>the group. While this trim scheme suits me, several
>have recently pointed out the bungee trim works well
>(and has for 20 years+ on Kolbs) so please don't infer
>just because I mess with the design of my Kolb it's
>because the original is substandard or inferior.
>Kolbs are a stout and well designed family of planes,
>and if testing and failure mode analysis don't
>interest you, KEEP IT STOCK and you won't go wrong.
>
>Ok Scott, keep up the questions; what else you got :-)
> Good luck on your project, do keep us posted on your
>progress.
>
>-Jim
>
>Jim Clayton
>California
>Mark-3X, 912ULS.....Building
>www.quantumwrench.com/Kolb.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Izek Therrien" <kolb.list(at)kolbsport.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Mark III vs Mark III Xtra |
Hi all,
Some comments on the list have attracted my attention and I think it is
important that I make a clarification. First of all, there is no option
for a larger tail on the Mark III Xtra. The actual tail, horizontal
stabilizer and elevator, has 23 square feet. It is important to
understand that a larger tail volume will not increase stability to the
aircraft. Tail surface areas are inherent to a tight relationship
between the center of gravity, the center of lift, the reference area of
the wing and the relative tail length.
An aircraft must be seen like a system that acts like a balance. To
achieve equilibrium on a balance, the weight on each platter needs to be
identical. It is the same for an aircraft. There is only one tail volume
that will put the aircraft in an equilibrium state which is when all the
moments around the major axis are equal to zero. The tail aspect ratio
is also an important factor that we will skip for now.
The Mark III Xtra was the object of several modifications since its
first market introduction in 2000. Some of these modifications were done
to enable the aircraft in the trainer category and others were done to
ameliorate the aircraft's overall design and flight characteristics. At
Kolb we do encourage you to modify the aircraft on a cosmetic level,
including upholstery, avionics and systems. However, we do not encourage
you to modify the airframe or any of the flying surfaces.
Also, before you can compare flight characteristics between M3Xs, you
must understand that there are 3 major versions of this aircraft and it
is difficult to draw fast conclusions on what makes the aircraft more or
less stable. For instance, the latest version of the aircraft has a
lower wing angle of incidence which affected the wing's downwash and
aircraft's water line. We have also modified the tail area and angle of
incidence to what we believe to be optimum.
If some of you have some great ideas regarding modifications that could
improve the aircraft please feel free to communicate with me at
izek.therrien(at)kolbsport.com and I will be honored to discuss it with
you.
Best regards,
Izek Therrien
www.tnkolbaircraft.com
www.kolbsport.com
--
2005-11-15
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | The Do N*t Archive Flag and List Content... |
Kolb-Listers,
The Do N*t Archive flag's specific text serves multiple purposes. Obviously, the
first one is to detour messages of inconsequence around the archiving process.
But the words "do n*t archive" serve also to educate new members on the available
functionality. Since nobody seems to read the FAQ or List Usage Guidelines,
how else are people going to learn about the feature? ;-)
While I do monitor all of the Lists here on Matronics, I don't always read every
message. I also don't like to step in and "moderate" discussions that may be
getting a little out of hand (like lately). I believe there is significant
value in a discussion forum that is open to all and that polices itself. I publish
the List Usage Guidelines once a month for a reason and that reason is that
I *expect* everyone to graciously abide by them.
Guys, the power of the Internet is its global connection of people and resources.
However, its weakness is also this global culture. When you're posting a
message, stop and think about how it might sound to someone from a different part
of the country or even the world. We each have a responsibility to assure
that the messages we post are not offensive and do not contain personal attacks.
So let's get back to discussions that pertain to the aircrafts we love, and stop
nit picking each others choice of words. And one final thought on the Do N*t
Archive flag. This feature was originally conceived of to allow time-relative
messages to be kept out of the archives (e.g. fly-in at my place this coming
weekend, etc.) Frankly, if people are using the Do N*t Archive flag often,
they might do well to reconsider the content they are posting to the hundreds
of people subscribed to the List...
Best regards,
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Admin.
Matt G Dralle | Matronics | PO Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551
925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle(at)matronics.com Email
http://www.matronics.com/ WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Silver Fern Microlights Ltd" <kiwimick(at)sfmicro.fsnet.co.uk> |
| Subject: | Re: Aero Vee Engine Kit |
Hi John,
The AeroVee is a great engine and Sonex are excellent to deal with however I
do not think it will work too well on the Xtra.
I still feel the best option is the new Jab2200 (85hp).
I have just completed a 2300 mile trip around France displaying the Xtra.
The average air temp was 35 degC.
At Max weight it is climbing at 800 fpm, cruising at 70-75kt, there are no
over heating problems on this engine at all, I have even done a full power
climb from sea level to 6000' with no probs. I think it is quieter than a
912 just as smooth, more economical, it is lighter and cheaper and as
reliable.
Mike
Xtra/Jab2200
116 hrs and still smiling
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Abbott" <jacksbird(at)charter.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: Aero Vee Engine Kit
>
> I am doing some research on engine options for the Mark III X I am
> building. I came across a very affordable Aero Vee Engine Kit by Aero
> Conversions, Inc.. It is a fraction of the price ( $5,700) of a Jab 2200
> ot a Rotax 912.
>
> 1. Does anyone have any experience with this engine and/or assembling the
> kit?
> 2 What is your experience with using it on a Mark III? Is it a good match
> for the aircraft?
>
> Thanks for your comments.
> John Abbott
> Building Mk3X
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "dama" <dama(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aero Vee Engine Kit |
Do you have any pics from your trip, Mike? Sounds like a great adventure...
Kip
----- Original Message -----
From: "Silver Fern Microlights Ltd" <kiwimick(at)sfmicro.fsnet.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Aero Vee Engine Kit
>
> Hi John,
> The AeroVee is a great engine and Sonex are excellent to deal with however
I
> do not think it will work too well on the Xtra.
> I still feel the best option is the new Jab2200 (85hp).
> I have just completed a 2300 mile trip around France displaying the Xtra.
> The average air temp was 35 degC.
> At Max weight it is climbing at 800 fpm, cruising at 70-75kt, there are no
> over heating problems on this engine at all, I have even done a full power
> climb from sea level to 6000' with no probs. I think it is quieter than a
> 912 just as smooth, more economical, it is lighter and cheaper and as
> reliable.
>
> Mike
> Xtra/Jab2200
> 116 hrs and still smiling
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Abbott" <jacksbird(at)charter.net>
> To:
> Subject: Kolb-List: Aero Vee Engine Kit
>
>
> >
> > I am doing some research on engine options for the Mark III X I am
> > building. I came across a very affordable Aero Vee Engine Kit by Aero
> > Conversions, Inc.. It is a fraction of the price ( $5,700) of a Jab 2200
> > ot a Rotax 912.
> >
> > 1. Does anyone have any experience with this engine and/or assembling
the
> > kit?
> > 2 What is your experience with using it on a Mark III? Is it a good
match
> > for the aircraft?
> >
> > Thanks for your comments.
> > John Abbott
> > Building Mk3X
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
|One thing I have started to do recently, is to
| remove all the trim on final so I have a better feel/control of the
elevator
| on landing.
| Jim Ballenger
Hi Jim B/Gang:
I do that too. Pull off all forced elevator trim when the power comes
off. I still shoot my landings with closed throttle, its a 912. This
helps me set up my approaches should I lose the engine on final. If I
do, I should be able to make my designated touch down point on the air
strip. My MKIII is not a Cessna 172, it is a home built experimental
that is slow, draggy, and willing to haul anything I can put in it.
When the power comes back in, the nose up trim also comes back in.
Seems to be caused by high thrust line pusher configuration.
Take care,
john h
MKIII/912ULS
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard & Martha Neilsen" <NeilsenRM05(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | MKIII Xtra Speeds |
I see in the literature that the Xtra is 10MPH faster than the classic. What
are those of you that have the Xtra actually seeing, with say a Rotax 80HP?
What about wheel pants do they help any? I know our planes aren't designed
to go fast but at our speeds every little bit helps. It becomes much more of
a concern when you are flying with a group that have 100HP engines in their
Kolbs.
The attached report with a 85HP Jabru indicates the same speeds or slightly
slower than the standard 80HP Rotax in a classic. I have been saying high
RPM direct drive engines take more HP to get the same thrust. Is this a
conformation or isn't the Xtra any faster than the classic.
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIIIc
----- Original Message -----
From: "Silver Fern Microlights Ltd" <kiwimick(at)sfmicro.fsnet.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Aero Vee Engine Kit
>
>
> Hi John,
> The AeroVee is a great engine and Sonex are excellent to deal with however
> I
> do not think it will work too well on the Xtra.
> I still feel the best option is the new Jab2200 (85hp).
> I have just completed a 2300 mile trip around France displaying the Xtra.
> The average air temp was 35 degC.
> At Max weight it is climbing at 800 fpm, cruising at 70-75kt, there are no
> over heating problems on this engine at all, I have even done a full power
> climb from sea level to 6000' with no probs. I think it is quieter than a
> 912 just as smooth, more economical, it is lighter and cheaper and as
> reliable.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aero Vee Engine Kit/Comparing 912 and Jabiru |
| I still feel the best option is the new Jab2200 (85hp).
|I have even done a full power
| climb from sea level to 6000' with no probs.
I think it is quieter than a
| 912 just as smooth, more economical, it is lighter and cheaper and
as
| reliable.
|
| Mike
| Xtra/Jab2200
| 116 hrs and still smiling
Hi Mike/Gang:
Good to hear from our neighbor across the pond.
Sorry, but I feel the best option for the MKIIIx is the 912ULS and
then the 912UL. Unfortunately, I have no experience flying the Jabiru
on a Kolb. However, I have had the opportunity to fly my buddy John
W's wing many hours when his Kolbra was powered by a Jabiru. Our
cruise speeds were about the same. However, take off and climb out,
there was no comparison between his Jabiru powered Kolbra and my
912ULS powered MKIIIc. Remembering, the Kolbra, MKIIIc, and the
MKIIIx, all utilize the same wing section, if we don't include
ailerons and flaps. All that changed when John W saw the light and
installed a 912ULS on his Kolbra. Woe is me. I am now left in his
dust, on take offs and cruise. Amazing, the difference in performance
between the two power packages.
It is not unusual for John W and I to take off and climb WOT for one
or two hours while crossing the Rocky Mountains. We do not
necessarily find it necessary to seek out passes to cross most any
mountain range in the Lower 48, Canada, or Alaska. Out in the Western
part of the US, field elevations are usually over 6,000 feet. The
field elevation of our Monument Valley Flyin airstrip is around 6,000
feet. Normal altitude for crossing the Rockies is 14,000 to 15,000
feet MSL. I might add, on take off my MKIII is pushing 1,200 lbs take
off weight.
I think the prop dictates the degree of "smoothness" in our engines.
Warp Drive props do a really good job in this area. They also seem to
be maintainence free. Once I get mine dialed in, there isn't anything
else to do but fly.
I mentioned I have never flown a Jabiru powered aircraft, so I don't
have any experience except what I have observed. One morning in
particular comes to mind. There were five of us on a flight to Kitty
Hawk, NC. We spent the night at Wallace, NC, not far from the
Atlantic Ocean. The airport was locked solid in fog and very heavy
due when we got out of our tents the next morning. When we got ready
to crank and depart for Kitty Hawk, all the Rotax powered aircraft, to
include one 582, fired up, waiting for the engine oil temps to hit
120. The one Jabiru powered Kolbra seemed to have a slight problem.
Would not start. Absolutely did not fire the first time. Seems the
heavy moisture laden air had caused condensation in the two
distributor caps of the Jabiru. John W had to pull them both, dry
them out, then we were ready to proceed on our flight.
From what I read, the Jabiru is a far more maintenance intensive
engine than the 912 series engines. That for me is a negative point.
On some of my longer flights I would have to take time off to adjust
valves, retorque heads, etc. These maintenance items arre not
required by the 912's.
I believe I heard the 912 was not approved for use on your homebuilt
aircraft in Great Britain. This means you must use another power
system. I do not think any power system that does not utilize a power
reduction system will ever match the performance of the 912 series
engines.
Please understand I am not trying to pick your engine apart, but
simply proud to tell folks about my power plant, showing differences
between the two.
I do not know if you have flown a Kolb with a 912UL or a 912ULS. No
comparison to anything else available.
john h
MKIII - 2,400+ hours
912ULS - 1,050+ hours
912UL - 1,135+ hours
582 - 220 hours
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: MKIII Xtra Speeds/Jabiru and 912 Comparison/MKIIIc Speeds |
| I see in the literature that the Xtra is 10MPH faster than the
classic.
| The attached report with a 85HP Jabru indicates the same speeds or
slightly
| slower than the standard 80HP Rotax in a classic.
|
| Rick Neilsen
Hi Rick/Gang:
Seems Mike's Jabiru powered Xtra cruises about the same as my old
MKIIIc, 70 to 75 knots. Of course, my old bird is carrying a little
more weight than Mike's, I am sure. Take off weight of 1,200 lbs when
fuel is topped off, all my gear is aboard, and me.
I haven't had a chance to fly with Xtras here in the States, but I
imagine they will fly circles around me. Only one way to find out.
Find some that will fly with me and Miss P'fer. ;-)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bryan green <lgreen1(at)sc.rr.com> |
Hi John and all,
When I trim a 172 for best glide with power off I roll the trim
almost all way nose up upon adding power you have to hold the nose down
till you get the trim out. If I remember correctly on my Firestar the
power would force the nose down more and I thought it would be the same
on the mark III. Can you educate me when you get time.
Bryan Green Elgin SC
Firestar 447 BRS Soon to be flying again
John Hauck wrote:
>
>|One thing I have started to do recently, is to
>| remove all the trim on final so I have a better feel/control of the
>elevator
>| on landing.
>| Jim Ballenger
>
>Hi Jim B/Gang:
>
>I do that too. Pull off all forced elevator trim when the power comes
>off. I still shoot my landings with closed throttle, its a 912. This
>helps me set up my approaches should I lose the engine on final. If I
>do, I should be able to make my designated touch down point on the air
>strip. My MKIII is not a Cessna 172, it is a home built experimental
>that is slow, draggy, and willing to haul anything I can put in it.
>
>When the power comes back in, the nose up trim also comes back in.
>Seems to be caused by high thrust line pusher configuration.
>
>Take care,
>
>john h
>MKIII/912ULS
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | robert bean <slyck(at)frontiernet.net> |
So far I've left the trim at zero and had only a slight pull (back) on
the stick to maintain
level with the exception of the 80 lb salt bag test. In that case I
guessed at about
3 notches and was right on. My only problem is that with my seat in
the "way back"
position and my harness where it should be, there's no way I can reach
the
stock lever handle. -Better guess right before I leave.
I noticed Izek's mention that the newer Xtras have less incidence in
the wings.
If this does give any improvement my guess is that the cabin shape
fights
the wing in the earlier config and this improves total lift. The only
other way
to combat this thrust line departure would be a small fixed lifting
canard stuck
through the nose bowl.
-BB, world's slowest, cheapest MkIII :)
archive if you like
On 15, Nov 2005, at 6:57 PM, John Hauck wrote:
>
> |One thing I have started to do recently, is to
> | remove all the trim on final so I have a better feel/control of the
> elevator
> | on landing.
> | Jim Ballenger
>
> Hi Jim B/Gang:
>
> I do that too. Pull off all forced elevator trim when the power comes
> off. I still shoot my landings with closed throttle, its a 912. This
> helps me set up my approaches should I lose the engine on final. If I
> do, I should be able to make my designated touch down point on the air
> strip. My MKIII is not a Cessna 172, it is a home built experimental
> that is slow, draggy, and willing to haul anything I can put in it.
>
> When the power comes back in, the nose up trim also comes back in.
> Seems to be caused by high thrust line pusher configuration.
>
> Take care,
>
> john h
> MKIII/912ULS
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob and Jenn B" <tabberdd(at)hotmail.com> |
Ok, time for some more help. A good point was brought up about when I
replace the gear legs and axle assemblies on my Mk II that the angle be
correct for the wheels. The 1 1/4" gear legs are from the firestar and the
standard axle assemblies from Kolb are welded at too much of an angle
because the mk II sits low compared to the firestar. Travis at TNK said he
would weld whatever angle I wanted. What do I want?
It was suggested that I use the Mk III angle. I never looked closely
before, does a standard Mk III sit at the same height as the Mk II? If
someone with a Mk III could measure the distance between the gear at the
axles and the height from one socket perpendicular to the ground, I would
appreciate it. That would give me an idea of how the two compare and if it
would be close enough. I'm also looking at the length of the gear leg from
the socket to the axle.
Thanks (I believe I will archive so others may benefit in the future even if
I do get attacked by a certain few)
Bob
Mk II SCSI
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Clayton <jspc78(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Mark III vs Mark III Xtra |
Hi Izek/all,
Not sure where you get your information, but I have a
horizontal stabilizer that is larger than the standard
triangle shaped stab. I got the drawings from TNK. I
am *only* talking about a larger horizontal stabilizer
(NOT the elevator!). No other flight, or control
surface has been changed. When Barnaby Wainfan was
commissioned to design the Xtra, he added more wetted
area at the front of the fuse since the new nose is
larger. For that and several other reasons he chose
to increase the area of the horizontal stabilizer.
When I met him at Oshkosh in 2003 he was teaching the
aerodynamics class some on this list have taken,
dealing with very basic aerodynamic principles. I
asked him about his choice of larger horizontal
stabilizer, and he explained his reasoning that
brought him to increasing the area of the stab. As a
former flight instructor I applied my experience to
his statements, then consulted a copy of "Aerodynamics
For Naval Aviators" (most CFI's keep a copy) and I
found his statements and reasoning on this topic to be
cogent and applicable.
As the CG moves aft, closer to the limit (and
beyond!), both static and dynamic pitch stability
become more of a factor to the pilot, and important to
the designer, and can be positively managed through a
variety of changes in the airframe proportions. Since
I like the proportions of kolbs, I looked for a tested
way to increase pitch stability since several folks
having flown both stab sizes agreed the smaller stab
was a little more work to fly (less static stability),
and looking at the stab, I found the stab "seemed to
small" to provide the stability I wanted. I looked
for scientific corroboration, and found it in my
conversations with Barnaby, and consulting my texts,
which both agreed with my hunch.
Because of that I chose to make the stab larger, using
TNK drawings. I can only guess at why TNK chose to
change some of Barnaby's design, but a careful and
detailed inquiry on stab size failed to turn up any
sound aerodynamic principles in the decision making
process. In my line of work I often see large
organizations follow practices and procedures that
don't stand up to scrutiny, but still continue to
occur because "we have always done it that way". I
appreciate TNK keeping our planes viable and kits
available, and admire the folks I've met, working at
TNK, for their honesty, and desire to help.
What is the downside to enlarging the stab?
Increasing the wetted area will increase drag. On an
aircraft going less than 100mph, this should be
trivial (this is a guess, but flight testing will
verify). Small increase in weight. That will move
the CG aft some tiny fraction, easily managed since I
can move things around in the plane once weighted.
The plane becomes less capable of aerobatic
maneuvers...ok with me ;-)
In summary, I completely agree changing any aspect of
the flight surfaces, or affecting the balance of the
flight and control surfaces requires much research and
diligence on the part of the factory, or builder, and
should never be undertaken lightly. After a careful
and detailed inquiry in the question of the Stab size,
I chose to go with the stab as designed by the
designer of the plane.
Izek: If you would like to take issue with my
assertions regarding aerodynamic theory and it's
application, feel free to contact me directly since I
suspect we have taken up enough of our fellow listers
time with this :-)
-Jim
Jim Clayton
California
Mark-3X, 912ULS.....Building
www.quantumwrench.com/Kolb.htm
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On
Behalf Of Izek Therrien
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Mark III vs Mark III Xtra
-->
Hi all,
Some comments on the list have attracted my attention
and I think it is important that I make a
clarification. First of all, there is no option for a
larger tail on the Mark III Xtra. The actual tail,
horizontal stabilizer and elevator, has 23 square
feet. It is important to understand that a larger tail
volume will not increase stability to the aircraft.
Tail surface areas are inherent to a tight
relationship between the center of gravity, the center
of lift, the reference area of the wing and the
relative tail length.
An aircraft must be seen like a system that acts like
a balance. To achieve equilibrium on a balance, the
weight on each platter needs to be identical. It is
the same for an aircraft. There is only one tail
volume that will put the aircraft in an equilibrium
state which is when all the moments around the major
axis are equal to zero. The tail aspect ratio is also
an important factor that we will skip for now.
The Mark III Xtra was the object of several
modifications since its first market introduction in
2000. Some of these modifications were done to enable
the aircraft in the trainer category and others were
done to ameliorate the aircraft's overall design and
flight characteristics. At Kolb we do encourage you to
modify the aircraft on a cosmetic level, including
upholstery, avionics and systems. However, we do not
encourage you to modify the airframe or any of the
flying surfaces.
Also, before you can compare flight characteristics
between M3Xs, you must understand that there are 3
major versions of this aircraft and it is difficult to
draw fast conclusions on what makes the aircraft more
or less stable. For instance, the latest version of
the aircraft has a lower wing angle of incidence which
affected the wing's downwash and aircraft's water
line. We have also modified the tail area and angle of
incidence to what we believe to be optimum.
If some of you have some great ideas regarding
modifications that could improve the aircraft please
feel free to communicate with me at
izek.therrien(at)kolbsport.com and I will be honored to
discuss it with you.
Best regards,
Izek Therrien
www.tnkolbaircraft.com
www.kolbsport.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
If I remember correctly on my Firestar the
| power would force the nose down more and I thought it would be the
same
| on the mark III.
| Bryan Green Elgin SC
| | >I do that too. Pull off all forced elevator trim when the power
comes
| >off.
| >When the power comes back in, the nose up trim also comes back in.
| >Seems to be caused by high thrust line pusher configuration.
Bryan/Gang:
Thought that is what I said in my post. Power off I need no "nose up
trim". Power on I need to compensate for the high thrust line pushing
the nose down by adding "nose up trim".
Don't know what else to say about that. ;-)
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "kfackler" <kfackler(at)ameritech.net> |
| Subject: | List contributions and a question |
> Won't you take a moment and assure that your name is on that List of
> Contributors (LOC)?
Okey dokey, check's in the mail to the Livermore address.
In the meantime, do you ever create new list groups on request? If so, what
are the requirements for that?
-Ken Fackler
Kolb Mark II / A722KWF
Rochester MI
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | Re: List contributions and a question |
At 06:04 PM 11/15/2005 Tuesday, you wrote:
>
>> Won't you take a moment and assure that your name is on that List of
>> Contributors (LOC)?
>
>Okey dokey, check's in the mail to the Livermore address.
>
>In the meantime, do you ever create new list groups on request? If so, what
>are the requirements for that?
>
>-Ken Fackler
>Kolb Mark II / A722KWF
>Rochester MI
Thank you for the Contribution, Ken. Much appreciated!
Yes, I do add new Lists upon request. Well, within reason, of course. If you're
looking to add a List for a design or manufacture that isn't currently represented,
let me know and we'll see what we can work out.
Thanks again for the List Contribution!
Matt Dralle
List Admin.
Matt G Dralle | Matronics | PO Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551
925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle(at)matronics.com Email
http://www.matronics.com/ WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Clayton <jspc78(at)yahoo.com> |
Hi Richard/all,
Thanks for the info: I have been considering only
electric trimming the elevator to avoid the risk of
flutter on the rudder. Has anyone experienced flutter
in a Kolb elevator? I do have the balance weights on
the ailerons. I am very impressed with your website,
and do recall the pictures of the balance weight on
the rudder. Good point on the failure of the trim,
and maintaining attitude with arm strength. I have
considered some stipped down version of the bungee
trim in case of electric trim failure...not sure yet
what makes the most sense.
-Jim
-----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: Re: MKIII trim
Sounds to me like a fine plan. One heads up: The
rudder and ailerons of the
MKIII are quite susceptible to flutter. Putting my
white nav light on the
trailing edge of the rudder caused it to flutter, I
had to end up making a
counterweight (vulture knocker) sticking out ahead of
the vertical fin to
make it quit. Likewise for the right aileron, I made a
ground adjustable
trim tab for the right wingtip, and until I got the
factory counterbalances
installed, I had to limit my speeds to less than 85,
or the right aileron
would start to buzz.
So if your servos are installed so as to affect the
weight of the control
surfaces, plan ahead.
As part of your failure mode planning, after you get
things flying,
investigate how the stick pressure changes with two up
and no trim assist.
A MKIII with no elevator spring boost and a
passenger's weight will soon
test the endurance of your bicep...
Richard Pike
>
>So back to the electric trim. It is currently a
great
>idea I need to build and verify. When I have parts
>made and the geometry worked out, I will share it
with
>the group. While this trim scheme suits me, several
>have recently pointed out the bungee trim works well
>(and has for 20 years+ on Kolbs) so please don't
infer
>just because I mess with the design of my Kolb it's
>because the original is substandard or inferior.
>Kolbs are a stout and well designed family of planes,
>and if testing and failure mode analysis don't
>interest you, KEEP IT STOCK and you won't go wrong.
>
>Ok Scott, keep up the questions; what else you got
:-)
> Good luck on your project, do keep us posted on
your progress.
>
>-Jim
>
>Jim Clayton
>California
>Mark-3X, 912ULS.....Building
>www.quantumwrench.com/Kolb.htm
on
about
provided
www.buildersbooks.com,
Admin.
browse
page,
FAQ,
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard & Martha Neilsen" <NeilsenRM05(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Mark III vs Mark III Xtra |
Jim/All
Well said. I attended that same aerodynamics forum that Barnaby gave and I
agree with your decision to enlarge the horizontal stabilizer 100%.
I was tempted to respond as you did (you said it much better) but I had one
concern that someone might think their idea might work better than Kolb's
design and not research the issue as well as you did. The general rule
should still be... don't make any changes other than cosmetic. You could be
betting you life on those changes.
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIIIc
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Clayton" <jspc78(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Mark III vs Mark III Xtra
>
> Hi Izek/all,
>
> Not sure where you get your information, but I have a
> horizontal stabilizer that is larger than the standard
> triangle shaped stab. I got the drawings from TNK. I
> am *only* talking about a larger horizontal stabilizer
> (NOT the elevator!). No other flight, or control
> surface has been changed. When Barnaby Wainfan was
> commissioned to design the Xtra, he added more wetted
> area at the front of the fuse since the new nose is
> larger. For that and several other reasons he chose
> to increase the area of the horizontal stabilizer.
> When I met him at Oshkosh in 2003 he was teaching the
> aerodynamics class some on this list have taken,
> dealing with very basic aerodynamic principles. I
> asked him about his choice of larger horizontal
> stabilizer, and he explained his reasoning that
> brought him to increasing the area of the stab. As a
> former flight instructor I applied my experience to
> his statements, then consulted a copy of "Aerodynamics
> For Naval Aviators" (most CFI's keep a copy) and I
> found his statements and reasoning on this topic to be
> cogent and applicable.
>
> As the CG moves aft, closer to the limit (and
> beyond!), both static and dynamic pitch stability
> become more of a factor to the pilot, and important to
> the designer, and can be positively managed through a
> variety of changes in the airframe proportions. Since
> I like the proportions of kolbs, I looked for a tested
> way to increase pitch stability since several folks
> having flown both stab sizes agreed the smaller stab
> was a little more work to fly (less static stability),
> and looking at the stab, I found the stab "seemed to
> small" to provide the stability I wanted. I looked
> for scientific corroboration, and found it in my
> conversations with Barnaby, and consulting my texts,
> which both agreed with my hunch.
>
> Because of that I chose to make the stab larger, using
> TNK drawings. I can only guess at why TNK chose to
> change some of Barnaby's design, but a careful and
> detailed inquiry on stab size failed to turn up any
> sound aerodynamic principles in the decision making
> process. In my line of work I often see large
> organizations follow practices and procedures that
> don't stand up to scrutiny, but still continue to
> occur because "we have always done it that way". I
> appreciate TNK keeping our planes viable and kits
> available, and admire the folks I've met, working at
> TNK, for their honesty, and desire to help.
>
> What is the downside to enlarging the stab?
> Increasing the wetted area will increase drag. On an
> aircraft going less than 100mph, this should be
> trivial (this is a guess, but flight testing will
> verify). Small increase in weight. That will move
> the CG aft some tiny fraction, easily managed since I
> can move things around in the plane once weighted.
> The plane becomes less capable of aerobatic
> maneuvers...ok with me ;-)
>
> In summary, I completely agree changing any aspect of
> the flight surfaces, or affecting the balance of the
> flight and control surfaces requires much research and
> diligence on the part of the factory, or builder, and
> should never be undertaken lightly. After a careful
> and detailed inquiry in the question of the Stab size,
> I chose to go with the stab as designed by the
> designer of the plane.
>
> Izek: If you would like to take issue with my
> assertions regarding aerodynamic theory and it's
> application, feel free to contact me directly since I
> suspect we have taken up enough of our fellow listers
> time with this :-)
>
> -Jim
>
> Jim Clayton
> California
> Mark-3X, 912ULS.....Building
> www.quantumwrench.com/Kolb.htm
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On
> Behalf Of Izek Therrien
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Mark III vs Mark III Xtra
>
> -->
>
> Hi all,
>
> Some comments on the list have attracted my attention
> and I think it is important that I make a
> clarification. First of all, there is no option for a
> larger tail on the Mark III Xtra. The actual tail,
> horizontal stabilizer and elevator, has 23 square
> feet. It is important to understand that a larger tail
> volume will not increase stability to the aircraft.
> Tail surface areas are inherent to a tight
> relationship between the center of gravity, the center
> of lift, the reference area of the wing and the
> relative tail length.
>
> An aircraft must be seen like a system that acts like
> a balance. To achieve equilibrium on a balance, the
> weight on each platter needs to be identical. It is
> the same for an aircraft. There is only one tail
> volume that will put the aircraft in an equilibrium
> state which is when all the moments around the major
> axis are equal to zero. The tail aspect ratio is also
> an important factor that we will skip for now.
>
> The Mark III Xtra was the object of several
> modifications since its first market introduction in
> 2000. Some of these modifications were done to enable
> the aircraft in the trainer category and others were
> done to ameliorate the aircraft's overall design and
> flight characteristics. At Kolb we do encourage you to
> modify the aircraft on a cosmetic level, including
> upholstery, avionics and systems. However, we do not
> encourage you to modify the airframe or any of the
> flying surfaces.
>
> Also, before you can compare flight characteristics
> between M3Xs, you must understand that there are 3
> major versions of this aircraft and it is difficult to
> draw fast conclusions on what makes the aircraft more
> or less stable. For instance, the latest version of
> the aircraft has a lower wing angle of incidence which
> affected the wing's downwash and aircraft's water
> line. We have also modified the tail area and angle of
> incidence to what we believe to be optimum.
>
> If some of you have some great ideas regarding
> modifications that could improve the aircraft please
> feel free to communicate with me at
> izek.therrien(at)kolbsport.com and I will be honored to
> discuss it with you.
>
> Best regards,
>
>
> Izek Therrien
> www.tnkolbaircraft.com
> www.kolbsport.com
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
In a message dated 11/15/2005 3:34:19 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
njlabhart(at)kih.net writes:
I haven't read the posts about passenger liability, but I do have
some personal insight on law suits. I was just a gnat's butt away
from being sued. I really don't understand why I wasn't. Things
I would advise...
Have insurance.
Have a will.
Make sure you have survivorship on your house deed.
Have an attorney draw up a release for passengers to sign.
As a builder, you will always be liable.
Hope this helps someone.
Dana Labhart
do not archive
Hi Dana, Glad to hear things went well.
Steve Boetto
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | russ kinne <kinnepix(at)earthlink.net> |
BigLar
Enjoyed your pix of the Okefenokee -- and glad to see you caught your
best profile in that self-timer shot.
I canoed & camped there years ago, sleeping in a jungle hammock. Great
place! Even saw a possum at midnite -- must have been POGO!
A most entertaining website. Do you plan one on a nudist camp
sometime??
Best,
Russ
DNA!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Silver Fern Microlights Ltd" <kiwimick(at)sfmicro.fsnet.co.uk> |
| Subject: | Re: MKIII Xtra Speeds |
Rick, the speeds I quoted for the Jab/Xtra with a Rpm of 2600, this is quite
economical. If I run it at 2800 I get 80kt which is approx 90 mph, full
power 3100 gives about 93 kt, this is with a Prince P-Tip 62"x38".
What Rpm is a 912 pulling at 90mph?.
Mike
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard & Martha Neilsen" <NeilsenRM05(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: MKIII Xtra Speeds
>
>
> I see in the literature that the Xtra is 10MPH faster than the classic.
> What
> are those of you that have the Xtra actually seeing, with say a Rotax
> 80HP?
> What about wheel pants do they help any? I know our planes aren't designed
> to go fast but at our speeds every little bit helps. It becomes much more
> of
> a concern when you are flying with a group that have 100HP engines in
> their
> Kolbs.
>
> The attached report with a 85HP Jabru indicates the same speeds or
> slightly
> slower than the standard 80HP Rotax in a classic. I have been saying high
> RPM direct drive engines take more HP to get the same thrust. Is this a
> conformation or isn't the Xtra any faster than the classic.
>
> Rick Neilsen
> Redrive VW powered MKIIIc
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Silver Fern Microlights Ltd" <kiwimick(at)sfmicro.fsnet.co.uk>
> To:
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Aero Vee Engine Kit
>
>
>>
>>
>> Hi John,
>> The AeroVee is a great engine and Sonex are excellent to deal with
>> however
>> I
>> do not think it will work too well on the Xtra.
>> I still feel the best option is the new Jab2200 (85hp).
>> I have just completed a 2300 mile trip around France displaying the Xtra.
>> The average air temp was 35 degC.
>> At Max weight it is climbing at 800 fpm, cruising at 70-75kt, there are
>> no
>> over heating problems on this engine at all, I have even done a full
>> power
>> climb from sea level to 6000' with no probs. I think it is quieter than a
>> 912 just as smooth, more economical, it is lighter and cheaper and as
>> reliable.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Do N*t Archive Flag... |
At 12:36 PM 11/16/2005 Wednesday, you wrote:
>
>Kolbers
><...>
>"Do N*t Archive" and sometimes "do n*t archive". What would you
>prefer us to use? Everyone seems to say "do n*t archive" and I
>assume that works.
>I do think Pat Ladd's idea of making it active, not passive, is a good
>one. Only the posts worth archiving would be signed "archive", or even
>just "A". But it's up to you; it's your list and your decision.
>I for one am very grateful you keep this up & active & running and
>useful to me at least.
>I won't speak for anyone else.
>Russ Kinne
The phrase "do n*t archive" is case INsensitive so any combination will work such
as Do N*t Archive, DO n*t ARCHIVE, Do N*T aRcHiVe, etc. will all function as
required. I used the stars (*) in the strings above and in the past so that
I could refer to it, but so that it would still go into the archive.
Regarding the usage of the Do N*t Archive flag. Keep in mind that its an automated
process that detects the presence of the string "do n*t archive" in the message
text and appends or not to the archive depending on whether or not it finds
it.
I find it really amazing that people have suggested that using the flag is somehow
difficult...? Its just three little words. Sufficiently unique that they
won't ever normally be typed in a message. Intuitive enough that most will be
able to remember what it is. Come on guys, if you can build and fly an airplane,
you can type three words to indicate that your message shouldn't be appended
to the archive.
Reversing the logic on the "do n*t archive" flag such that messages will ONLY be
archived if the flag is entered, sounds great, but experience has shown that
about one message a month ends up in the archive using that logic; that's useless.
For as many people as don't remember to added the "do n*t archive" flag
when they should, WAY more people don't remember to add a "do archive" flag to
messages of long-term interest.
Really, I don't think the problem is what the string is or what the logic is.
The bottom line is there are certain messages that should be archived for the
rest of eternity, and some that should not. Just use common sense. Frankly,
hard drive space is sufficiently affordable now that the size of the archive really
isn't that big of a deal anymore. Searching through it, however, becomes
more difficult. That being said, using some creative searching strings, I have
always been able to find anything I've been looking for using the search engine.
Let's put this whole topic to bed and just get back to airplane discussions.
Matt Dralle
Airplane Builder and Flyer and List Administrator
Matt G Dralle | Matronics | PO Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551
925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle(at)matronics.com Email
http://www.matronics.com/ WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "woody" <duesouth(at)govital.net> |
Molt Taylor said it best. Have them sign a guarantee that flying will kill
or seriously injure them. If something happens then you fulfilled the
guarantee. If nothing happens they should try harder. If they are afraid to
sign they are not the people you want flying with you.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Silver Fern Microlights Ltd" <kiwimick(at)sfmicro.fsnet.co.uk> |
| Subject: | Re: Aero Vee Engine Kit/Comparing 912 and Jabiru |
All,
I agree with John H when you compare Kolb's and 912 or Jab 2200, but only
when you are comparing the OLD Jabs like John W had.
Just to name a few of the changes to the new ones.
OLD NEW
76 hp 85hp
small heads & valves big heads & valves
manual adjust valves hydraulic adjust valves
small carb big carb
integral fuel plenum seperate fuel plenum
simple oil sump revised oil sump
aluminium con rods steel con rids
I have never had heating probs(oil or cht) while stationary, at a show early
this year while on a demo flight I was stuck on the ground for 20 mins while
waiting for take off, air temp as 32 degC.
I have found the Kolb Jab combo is prone to prop selection to obtain the
best performance.
I have flown a 912 Classic and it was fine but I felt that the revs were
higher than the Jab, noise higher than the Jab, weight higher than the Jab,
fuel burn higher than the Jab, Bulkier installation than the Jab, more
expensive than the Jab, no faster than the Jab, left the ground slower than
the Jab. However the climb performance was better than the Jab by about
250fpm (mine climbs at about 800fpm at 1000lbs and 650-700 @1150lbs). There
is no doubt that the 912 is a great engine and I can use it over here on the
Xtra but I decided to choose the Jab.
There is no comparison between the old and the new Jabs, I have flown a
Savannah with a old Jab and one the new and you could instantly feel the
difference.
The new Jab is now as low a maint engine as the 912 but without the water
radiator and hoses, gearbox, and seperate oil tank, plus the Jab only has
one carb to worry about, so I guess there is a little less to go wrong (in
theory anyway). I have even flown mine in some very heavy rain, left it out
in the rain while away on trips with no issues.
I have only been to 13000 feet above sea in G-CDFA and I must admit she was
feeling the lack of air, I think it would only go to about 15-16000. The 912
would probably be better at these heights I think.
Please do not get me wrong I am not knocking the 912 but there is just no
comparison between the old and new Jabs. I think it comes down to how big
your wallet is and personal preference.
The Kolb is such a great aircraft with either of these engines.
Mike
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Aero Vee Engine Kit/Comparing 912 and Jabiru
>
>
> | I still feel the best option is the new Jab2200 (85hp).
>
> |I have even done a full power
> | climb from sea level to 6000' with no probs.
>
> I think it is quieter than a
> | 912 just as smooth, more economical, it is lighter and cheaper and
> as
> | reliable.
> |
> | Mike
> | Xtra/Jab2200
> | 116 hrs and still smiling
>
>
> Hi Mike/Gang:
>
> Good to hear from our neighbor across the pond.
>
> Sorry, but I feel the best option for the MKIIIx is the 912ULS and
> then the 912UL. Unfortunately, I have no experience flying the Jabiru
> on a Kolb. However, I have had the opportunity to fly my buddy John
> W's wing many hours when his Kolbra was powered by a Jabiru. Our
> cruise speeds were about the same. However, take off and climb out,
> there was no comparison between his Jabiru powered Kolbra and my
> 912ULS powered MKIIIc. Remembering, the Kolbra, MKIIIc, and the
> MKIIIx, all utilize the same wing section, if we don't include
> ailerons and flaps. All that changed when John W saw the light and
> installed a 912ULS on his Kolbra. Woe is me. I am now left in his
> dust, on take offs and cruise. Amazing, the difference in performance
> between the two power packages.
>
> It is not unusual for John W and I to take off and climb WOT for one
> or two hours while crossing the Rocky Mountains. We do not
> necessarily find it necessary to seek out passes to cross most any
> mountain range in the Lower 48, Canada, or Alaska. Out in the Western
> part of the US, field elevations are usually over 6,000 feet. The
> field elevation of our Monument Valley Flyin airstrip is around 6,000
> feet. Normal altitude for crossing the Rockies is 14,000 to 15,000
> feet MSL. I might add, on take off my MKIII is pushing 1,200 lbs take
> off weight.
>
> I think the prop dictates the degree of "smoothness" in our engines.
> Warp Drive props do a really good job in this area. They also seem to
> be maintainence free. Once I get mine dialed in, there isn't anything
> else to do but fly.
>
> I mentioned I have never flown a Jabiru powered aircraft, so I don't
> have any experience except what I have observed. One morning in
> particular comes to mind. There were five of us on a flight to Kitty
> Hawk, NC. We spent the night at Wallace, NC, not far from the
> Atlantic Ocean. The airport was locked solid in fog and very heavy
> due when we got out of our tents the next morning. When we got ready
> to crank and depart for Kitty Hawk, all the Rotax powered aircraft, to
> include one 582, fired up, waiting for the engine oil temps to hit
> 120. The one Jabiru powered Kolbra seemed to have a slight problem.
> Would not start. Absolutely did not fire the first time. Seems the
> heavy moisture laden air had caused condensation in the two
> distributor caps of the Jabiru. John W had to pull them both, dry
> them out, then we were ready to proceed on our flight.
>
> From what I read, the Jabiru is a far more maintenance intensive
> engine than the 912 series engines. That for me is a negative point.
> On some of my longer flights I would have to take time off to adjust
> valves, retorque heads, etc. These maintenance items arre not
> required by the 912's.
>
> I believe I heard the 912 was not approved for use on your homebuilt
> aircraft in Great Britain. This means you must use another power
> system. I do not think any power system that does not utilize a power
> reduction system will ever match the performance of the 912 series
> engines.
>
> Please understand I am not trying to pick your engine apart, but
> simply proud to tell folks about my power plant, showing differences
> between the two.
>
> I do not know if you have flown a Kolb with a 912UL or a 912ULS. No
> comparison to anything else available.
>
> john h
> MKIII - 2,400+ hours
> 912ULS - 1,050+ hours
> 912UL - 1,135+ hours
> 582 - 220 hours
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Denny Rowe" <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
| Subject: | Re: MKIII Xtra Speeds |
>
>
> Rick, the speeds I quoted for the Jab/Xtra with a Rpm of 2600, this is
> quite
> economical. If I run it at 2800 I get 80kt which is approx 90 mph, full
> power 3100 gives about 93 kt, this is with a Prince P-Tip 62"x38".
> What Rpm is a 912 pulling at 90mph?.
>
> Mike
> -----
Kolbers,
Just thought I would point out to all that the Jab 2200 that Mike is flying
is the second generation 2200.
John W had the earlier model on his Kolbra as I recall and many say those
early Jabs were nowhere near 80hp, the new Jabs claim 85hp and have much
better cooling cylinder heads.
Luray Weactor has the newer Jab on his Slingshot as does Will Tatham on his
Mk-3 extra, both are ecstatic about their performance, also these engines
seem to perform best with good old wood props.
The simplicity of the 2200 installation is very attractive.
That said, the 912 will always have a performance edge do to the gearbox.
If you have the coin, these two are your very best choices bar none.
Someday I hope to hang a 2200 on my bird, but for now I have kids to raise.
:-)
Fly safe.
Denny Rowe, Mk-3,, 2SI 690L-70, PA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: MKIII Xtra Speeds/MKIIIc Speeds |
| Rick, the speeds I quoted for the Jab/Xtra with a Rpm of 2600, this
is quite
| economical. If I run it at 2800 I get 80kt which is approx 90 mph,
full
| power 3100 gives about 93 kt, this is with a Prince P-Tip 62"x38".
| What Rpm is a 912 pulling at 90mph?.
|
| Mike
Hi Mike/Gang:
My MKIII flies 90 mph (78 kts) at 5,200 rpm. That's calibrated
airspeed.
However, it is an 85 mph airplane, no matter what it is powered with,
582, 912, 912S.
5,500 rpm is 95 mph and very uncomfortable.
Again, the best speed for my airplane is 85 mph. Anything over 90 mph
and you are wasting hp.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aero Vee Engine Kit/Comparing 912 and Jabiru |
Hi Mike/Gang:
| I have even flown mine in some very heavy rain, left it out
| in the rain while away on trips with no issues.
This is good to hear. Jabiru must have made significant improvements
over their old dual distributor ignition system. The old engine that
did not see rain, but lots of fog kept it from firing.
| I have only been to 13000 feet above sea in G-CDFA and I must admit
she was
| feeling the lack of air, I think it would only go to about 15-16000.
The 912
| would probably be better at these heights I think.
Why do you think the 912 would do better than your engine at higher
altitudes? Seems if your MKIIIx is faster in all parameters than the
MKIIIc with 912, then it would also surpass the 912 at altitude.
| Please do not get me wrong I am not knocking the 912 but there is
just no
| comparison between the old and new Jabs. I think it comes down to
how big
| your wallet is and personal preference.
All of aviation, especially experimental/homebuilt and ultralight,
comes down to how big your wallet is and personal preference. Would
be very interesting to see a unbiased test between Kolbs powered with
Jab and 912. I have about 2,300 hours of 912 time in my MKIII longer
than you have Jab time in your Xtra, which may give me a little edge
on knowing what I am flying a little better after all these hours. I
admit again, I have no personal experience flying a Kolb with Jab
power, but have flown many hours with my buddy and his Jab powered
Kolbra. I do not see how an additional 10 hp flying a direct drive 62
inch two blade prop is going to make that much difference in
performance. The gear box makes the difference on our Kolbs. Ask
Rick Neilsen what performance changes he saw after flying direct drive
and switching to a reduction system.
john h
MKIII/912ULS
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | roger lee <ssadiver1(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | My Mark III, not a crash |
Hi All,
Just to put the rumors to rest. It was my Mark III Classic, 912s with 545 hrs
TT.
On take off and on downwind the passenger side horizontal stabilizer bracket
broke and the stabilizer went straight up and stayed there. It was a little hard
to control, but made a safe landing. Had to call NTSB because it was an in
flight control failure. What broke was the stainless "L" bracket on the front
inside edge of the horizontal stabilizer that allows the stabilizer to fold up.
Looking at this I can see why it failed. It is kept slightly loose so you can
fold the stabilizer up. This allows this to have some amount, ever so slight,
of vibration as you fly. This caused, over time, metal fatigue on the "L" brackets.
When I checked the other side I used a magnifying glass and found another
crack.
I would highly recommend that these stainless "L" brackets be changed at 250
hrs. and I would recommend putting in place a second horizontal stabilizer wire
forward of the first. I learned this from J. Hauck, but did not put mine in
place in time. My error. If I had put a second stabilizer wire in front of the
first (top and bottom) it would have prevented the horizontal stabilizer from
flying up. I am also going to add a second "L" bracket some where between 8"-10"
behind the other. My Kolb will then be double wire braced and and have double
"L" brackets. I never fold my plane up so I will also keep these bolts at
the "L" bracket tight which will help with the minute vibration. I am also going
to use turn buckles like J. Hauck instead of adjustable tangs to dial in my
cable tightness.
The NTSB may have suggestions to Kolb, I'm not sure what they will do?
Roger Lee
Tucson, Az.
(520) 574-1080
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Denny Rowe" <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Aero Vee Engine Kit/Comparing 912 and Jabiru |
John H asked:.
>
> Why do you think the 912 would do better than your engine at higher
> altitudes? Seems if your MKIIIx is faster in all parameters than the
> MKIIIc with 912, then it would also surpass the 912 at altitude.
John, Mike was probably refering to the 912s bigger slower turning prop
being more efficient and providing better climb at all altitudes. The
smaller prop however may have a slight advantage speed wise.
>
I do not see how an additional 10 hp flying a direct drive 62
> inch two blade prop is going to make that much difference in
> performance.
The differance from John Ws Jab to Mikes, Lurays, and Wills is the extra hp
on top of the bigger props. John flew with a two bladed Warp that was only
58 inches in diameter, These fellows are using 62 and 64 inch wood blades
that are getting a better bite. (Using more of their power) No doubt the
912 has a prop efficientcy edge over the Jab but with the extra 5 hp, the
2200 is still in the ballgame.
As far as comparing your 100hp 912s to a 2200, I don't think anyone doubts
the Rotax has more than a small edge. An extra 15 hp and a gearbox swiging
a big fan will win every time.
The gear box makes the difference on our Kolbs. Ask
> Rick Neilsen what performance changes he saw after flying direct drive
> and switching to a reduction system.
. john h
> MKIII/912ULS
Agreed, but for a simple, lighter, and slightly cheaper price, the Jab is an
excellent alternative.
Denny Rowe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aero Vee Engine Kit/Comparing 912 and Jabiru |
Hi Denny/All:
John, Mike was probably refering to the 912s bigger slower turning
prop
| being more efficient and providing better climb at all altitudes.
The
| smaller prop however may have a slight advantage speed wise.
Was comparing the 912 to the Jab. I know I have an additional
"useable" 10 hp, not 15 hp, to use with the 912ULS. I only get 95 hp
at 5,500 rpm, but that is max continuous hp. I can run the 912ULS or
for that matter, the 912UL, at WOT all day long as long as I do not
exceed 5,500 rpm. I can get 100 hp for 5 minutes at 5,800 rpm.
| The differance from John Ws Jab to Mikes, Lurays, and Wills is the
extra hp
| on top of the bigger props. John flew with a two bladed Warp that
was only
| 58 inches in diameter, These fellows are using 62 and 64 inch wood
blades
| that are getting a better bite. (Using more of their power)
That's probably the performance increase, Denny, the longer wood props
with more cord???
| Agreed, but for a simple, lighter, and slightly cheaper price, the
Jab is an
| excellent alternative.
Don't doubt it is a good alternative to the 912 series engines.
However, we have not found the radiators/hoses, remote oil tank/hoses,
and the gear box to make this series any more complicated than the
direct drive air cooled engines. After 2,200 hours flying with the
extra gear, I find no more problem flying with it installed than you
do driving your water cooled automobile or motorcycle. I like the
price of the Jab better! ;-)
Has Jabiru sorted out their cylinder head torque problem? Glad they
came up with hydraulic valve lifters. Sure save a lot of maintenance
time, especially on the road.
Please do not take me wrong for supporting the engine I fly. I feel I
have as much right to express my opinion about my engine as anyone
else does about theirs. Also note, I qualified myself several times
by stating I had never flown a Jab powered Kolb, or any other Jab
powered airplane.
Take care,
john h
MKIII/912ULS
Titus, Alabama
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | possums(at)mindspring.com |
| Subject: | My Mark III, not a crash |
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: My Mark III, not a crash
At 10:29 PM 11/16/2005, you wrote:
You can change those things to. You can even use swaged "machined" turnbuckles.
I used them on the rudders and elevator wires too - gives you some adjustment when
the wires stretch..
Not that there is anything wrong with the original equipment.
It's just cleaner and not that expensive to do it like it should be done.
http://www.mindspring.com/~possums/Modtail&swagedwires.jpg
Just to put the rumors to rest. It was my Mark III Classic, 912s with 545 hrs
TT.
On take off and on downwind the passenger side horizontal stabilizer bracket
broke and the stabilizer went straight up and stayed there. It was a little hard
to control, but made a safe landing. Had to call NTSB because it was an in
flight control failure. What broke was the stainless "L" bracket on the front
inside edge of the horizontal stabilizer that allows the stabilizer to fold up.
Looking at this I can see why it failed. It is kept slightly loose so you can
fold the stabilizer up. This allows this to have some amount, ever so slight,
of vibration as you fly. This caused, over time, metal fatigue on the "L" brackets.
When I checked the other side I used a magnifying glass and found another
crack.
I would highly recommend that these stainless "L" brackets be changed at 250
hrs. and I would recommend putting in place a second horizontal stabilizer wire
forward of the first. I learned this from J. Hauck, but did not put mine in
place in time. My error. If I had put a second stabilizer wire in front of the
first (top and bottom) it would have prevented the horizontal stabilizer from
flying up. I am also going to add a second "L" bracket some where between 8"-10"
behind the other. My Kolb will then be double wire braced and and have double
"L" brackets. I never fold my plane up so I will also keep these bolts at
the "L" bracket tight which will help with the minute vibration. I am also going
to use turn buckles like J. Hauck instead of adjustable tangs to dial in my
cable tightness.
The NTSB may have suggestions to Kolb, I'm not sure what they will do?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Denny Rowe" <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
| Subject: | Re: My Mark III, not a crash |
Roger,
Glad to hear you got her down safe!
I like yours and Johns suggestion about the extra set of wires on the tail.
However, I don't think you should add the second set of L brackets behind
the originals. The Kolb HS is built to move slightly as the elevator is
deflected so the trailing edge of the stabilizers move up and down, the
extra set of attatch fittings will cause a bind and put additional stress on
the stabs root tube.
My Mk-3 has the older style attatch fittings made from 4130, I like these
much better than the stainless L ones that were also shown in my plans.
Stainless is a fantastic material for certain applications, but chromolly is
much stronger and holds up much better under vibration and heavy loads.
As you mentioned, everyone with the stainless L brackets should check them
at once, and consider switching them out for sure.
Denny Rowe,
Mk-3, PA, And maker of the "Stainless Scoop" line of stainless steel Free
Air scoops for Rotax 503, 447, and 377 tractor mounted engines, as well as
an employee of the largest Stainless steel producer in the country.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
Ahhh, you like my butt, huh ?? Hmmmm ?? No nudist sites. Not
around Queer Springs, at least........not my cuppa.
Seriously, I'm glad you enjoyed the pics. I sure enjoyed my visit there,
and plan on it again as soon as I can get the time off work. Wait till you
see the pages on Vacation 2005 in a few weeks. Too bad the weather was so
bad, but it was still great. Was your seminar in LA productive
?? Lar. XXX
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Building Kolb Mk III
N78LB Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "russ kinne" <kinnepix(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Web Pages
>
> BigLar
> Enjoyed your pix of the Okefenokee -- and glad to see you caught your
> best profile in that self-timer shot.
> I canoed & camped there years ago, sleeping in a jungle hammock. Great
> place! Even saw a possum at midnite -- must have been POGO!
> A most entertaining website. Do you plan one on a nudist camp
> sometime??
> Best,
> Russ
> DNA!
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: My Mark III, not a crash |
In a message dated 11/17/2005 12:34:04 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
ssadiver1(at)yahoo.com writes:
What broke was the stainless "L" bracket on the front inside edge of the
horizontal stabilizer that allows the stabilizer to fold up. Looking at this I
can see why it failed. It is kept slightly loose so you can fold the
stabilizer up. This allows this to have some amount, ever so slight, of vibration
as
you fly. This caused, over time, metal fatigue on the "L" brackets. When I
checked the other side I used a magnifying glass and found another crack.
I would highly recommend that these stainless "L" brackets be changed at 250
hrs. and I would recommend putting in place a second horizontal stabilizer
wire forward of the first. I learned this from J. Hauck, but did not put mine
in place in time. My error. If I had put a second stabilizer wire in front of
the first (top and bottom) it would have prevented the horizontal stabilizer
from flying up. I am also going to add a second "L" bracket some where
between 8"-10" behind the other. My Kolb will then be double wire braced and and
have double "L" brackets. I never fold my plane up so I will also keep these
bolts at the "L" bracket tight which will help with the minute vibration.
To All, Question, I thought that since the trailing edge of the
horizontal stab. moved up and down slightly with elevator changes that it was
important to keep the forward joint at the L brackets loose. If you tightened
it as
suggested above would it not suffer from fatigue over time?
Steve Boetto
Firefly on Floats and Seabase Builder
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph" <ul15rhb(at)juno.com> |
Hi Gang,
The tail folding L-brackets are made of aluminum on the Original Firestar and there
has never been a problem with any cracking on them. A few years back, the
tail wires were loose and I could see the stabilizer moving in flight. I have
replaced them and the tail is solid.
Ralph
Original Firestar
18 years flying it
-- roger lee wrote:
Hi All,
Just to put the rumors to rest. It was my Mark III Classic, 912s with 545 hrs
TT.
On take off and on downwind the passenger side horizontal stabilizer bracket
broke and the stabilizer went straight up and stayed there. It was a little hard
to control, but made a safe landing. Had to call NTSB because it was an in
flight control failure. What broke was the stainless "L" bracket on the front
inside edge of the horizontal stabilizer that allows the stabilizer to fold up.
Looking at this I can see why it failed. It is kept slightly loose so you can
fold the stabilizer up. This allows this to have some amount, ever so slight,
of vibration as you fly. This caused, over time, metal fatigue on the "L" brackets.
When I checked the other side I used a magnifying glass and found another
crack.
I would highly recommend that these stainless "L" brackets be changed at 250
hrs. and I would recommend putting in place a second horizontal stabilizer wire
forward of the first. I learned this from J. Hauck, but did not put mine in
place in time. My error. If I had put a second stabilizer wire in front of the
first (top and bottom) it would have prevented the horizontal stabilizer from
flying up. I am also going to add a second "L" bracket some where between 8"-10"
behind the other. My Kolb will then be double wire braced and and have double
"L" brackets. I never fold my plane up so I will also keep these bolts at
the "L" bracket tight which will help with the minute vibration. I am also going
to use turn buckles like J. Hauck instead of adjustable tangs to dial in my
cable tightness.
The NTSB may have suggestions to Kolb, I'm not sure what they will do?
Roger Lee
Tucson, Az.
(520) 574-1080
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
I am very sorry. I looked at that and thought I was replying directly to
Russ. Never even thought of checking the address. Once again, I'm sorry
for the boo-boo. Lar. Do not
Archive.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Building Kolb Mk III
N78LB Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Web Pages
> Seriously, I'm glad you enjoyed the pics. I sure enjoyed my visit there,
> and plan on it again as soon as I can get the time off work. Wait till
> you
> see the pages on Vacation 2005 in a few weeks.
> Larry Bourne
> Palm Springs, CA
> Building Kolb Mk III
> N78LB Vamoose
> www.gogittum.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "russ kinne" <kinnepix(at)earthlink.net>
> To:
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Web Pages
>
>
>>
>> BigLar
>> Enjoyed your pix of the Okefenokee -- and glad to see you caught your
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | russ kinne <kinnepix(at)earthlink.net> |
LAR
I did the same thing! Mebbe someday I'll get the hang of these
confusers --
LA meetings went well. Not my type of country, nor people, but OK for a
visit.
DNA
On Nov 17, 2005, at 9:33 AM, Larry Bourne wrote:
>
> I am very sorry. I looked at that and thought I was replying directly
> to
> Russ. Never even thought of checking the address. Once again, I'm
> sorry
> for the boo-boo. Lar. Do not
> Archive.
>
> Larry Bourne
> Palm Springs, CA
> Building Kolb Mk III
> N78LB Vamoose
> www.gogittum.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com>
> To:
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Web Pages
>
>
>> Seriously, I'm glad you enjoyed the pics. I sure enjoyed my visit
>> there,
>> and plan on it again as soon as I can get the time off work. Wait
>> till
>> you
>> see the pages on Vacation 2005 in a few weeks.
>
>> Larry Bourne
>> Palm Springs, CA
>> Building Kolb Mk III
>> N78LB Vamoose
>> www.gogittum.com
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "russ kinne" <kinnepix(at)earthlink.net>
>> To:
>> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Web Pages
>>
>>
>>>
>>> BigLar
>>> Enjoyed your pix of the Okefenokee -- and glad to see you caught your
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "pat ladd" <pj.ladd(at)btinternet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: MKIII Xtra Speeds |
I hope to hang a 2200 on my bird, but for now I have kids to raise. >.
C`mon Denny, sort out your priorities....
Pat
do n*t archive
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "pat ladd" <pj.ladd(at)btinternet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: 912 in a Kolb.....in the UK...?? |
a rumour that the Jab Xtra is overweight >>
Nahhhhh!
well just a bit. The extra weight allowed by fitting the Vortex Governors
has come into play and this will just squeak it by. I hope.
Mick has talked to PFA and argued that sure there was an error in weighing
his but now that the proper weighing has been done and the plane was tested
by the PFA AT THAT WEIGHT there is no reason that the weight limit should
not be raised to that figure. It is still firmly in the microlight category.
How he knows about the 912 etc I do not want to know.
Roll on the NEC and I can look at other planes which I perhaps should have
ordered. Must n`t think like that. It will be alright. It will be alright It
will be alright.........
Pat
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard & Martha Neilsen" <NeilsenRM05(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax vs Jabiru |
Sorry I guess I started this....well maybe not.
When I was flying my direct drive VW I was in denial. When you spend allot
on money and put allot of effort into some thing you tend to defend it even
if it isn't as good as it should be. The direct drive VW which Jabaru was
designed from is a higher RPM engine than the Jabaru. The VW likes to cruise
at 3000-3400 and lets call it 5 min power in the 3600-3800 range. Granted at
least one is planning to cruise his redrive VW at 4000..... well I hope that
all works out The Jabaru, according to Mike, appears to cruise in the
2600 -2800 range with its max around 3100. These RPMs are quite a bit lower
than the VW and likely account for better performance than I had with my
direct drive engine. This doesn't mean that the Jabaru is running at a RPM
that works best on a low speed high drag big Kolb. These planes are designed
to be STOL airplanes and need a prop at least 70 inches turning around
2000-2100 RPM. If you put a low thrust engine on one you are missing some of
the fun flying one. Once I came to grips with my mistake and put a high
thrust engine on my airplane I realized what I was missing. I no longer have
to be concerned with things like not being able to take off from a short
field I have landed at. There are many other benefits which I will not get
into now but my plane seemed to came alive with more thrust.
It is truly sad that Rotax has the market sown up with their line of engines
allowing them get the price they get. If I had the budget of Rotax or Jabiru
I would surely blow the doors off the market with VW based engines. The low
cost racing quality parts that are available are unmatched in any other
engine. I'm still trying to refine my engine so that it will get closer to
the reliability of a Jabiru and maybe even to the level of a 912 series. If
someone would produce a engine similar to the 912 or fashion a redrive for a
Jabiru we might the benefit of at least some completive pricing. For now I
will continue refining redrive VWs and will be happy to help anyone else
that wants to join in.
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIIIc
----- Original Message -----
From: "pat ladd" <pj.ladd(at)btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: MKIII Xtra Speeds
>
> I hope to hang a 2200 on my bird, but for now I have kids to raise. >.
>
> C`mon Denny, sort out your priorities....
>
> Pat
>
> do n*t archive
>
>
> --
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Denny Rowe" <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
| Subject: | Re: MKIII Xtra Speeds |
Well since you put it that way Pat.
My kids do like to fly with me, and a 2200 would surely be considered more
reliable than my 690L, and we wouldn't want to put the little ones in any
more danger than nessesary so it only makes sense to drop the $12 grand on
the new engine, after all, ITS FOR THE KIDS!
Thats funny, it always works for the politicians, but Linda doen't want to
hear it. :-(
Oh well, back to work midnight tonight.
Denny "still two stroking" Rowe
Please do n*t archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "pat ladd" <pj.ladd(at)btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: MKIII Xtra Speeds
>
> I hope to hang a 2200 on my bird, but for now I have kids to raise. >.
>
> C`mon Denny, sort out your priorities....
>
> Pat
>
> do n*t archive
>
>
> --
>
>
> --
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: hub distance |
BB/Gang:
I am guessing at mine. I have about 3/4" clearance from the tip of a
72" prop. Reckon that comes out to about 36.75" from tailboom to
center of prop and thrust line. I want my thrust line as low as I can
get it without sacrificing the chance of a blade strike on the
tailboom. My airplane has been thoroughly tested in many weather and
terrain (landing) conditions without blade strike on tailboom.
john h
MKIII/912ULS
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: My Mark III, not a crash |
In a message dated 11/16/05 11:34:04 PM Central Standard Time,
ssadiver1(at)yahoo.com writes:
> I never fold my plane up so I will also keep these bolts at the "L" bracket
> tight which will help with the minute vibration.
To All, Sorry to beat this up but I think that this is serious.
I Talked to Bryan Melborn today in regard to this type of fatigue. Bryan has
done dozens of inspections over the years on the L brackets and in every case
were he found cracking at the L bracket junction it was tight or binding. The
crack can and usually does occur under the fabric at the first rivet. The
horizontal stab. moves fore and aft as the elevator goes up and down. It also
slightly tilts. Bryan suggested that anyone that has a question in regard to this
issue should call him on the Kolb Hotline which is 606 682 3388.
BTW, Bryan sends HIGH marks to Roger for an amazing recovery. Bryan thinks
that this is a very dangerous situation and not everyone will be as lucky as
Roger.
I think this one should go in the archives.
Steve Boetto
FireFly
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aero Vee Engine Kit/Comparing 912 and Jabiru |
| I also know that one of my school aircraft has a 912 and it seems
to be
| stronger at high alt and the other one has a two stroke and is happy
as long
| as I keep pouring fuel down it's throat.
|
| Mike
Mike/All:
Amen, on the thirsty two stroke. The 582 burned 5.5 gph at 5,800 rpm
which gave me 80 mph cruise. That's more than the 912ULS at 5 gph at
5,000 rpm and 80 to 85 mph cruise. Of course the 912 beat'em all out
with 4 gph at 5,000 rpm and 80 to 85 mph cruise. In addition, the 912
ran 200+ hours on spark plugs and the 912ULS only 100.
I did a study many years ago when I first started flying the 912.
Compared it with the 582. At approximately 1,000 hours operational
time on each engine, the purchase and operational costs cross. The
912 becomes cheaper to buy and operate. However, it did not factor in
mandatory overhauls. Realistically, the 912 would still come out on
top, I think, because I believe it will go well over the factory
recommended TBO of 1500 hours. The 582 will go over the 300 hour TBO,
but not a whole lot before failure.
john h
MKII/912ULS
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: My Mark III, not a crash/Forward Horizontal Stabilizer |
Attachment
| The
| crack can and usually does occur under the fabric at the first
rivet.
|
| Steve Boetto
Hi Steve B/All:
Seems to me it is better to fix the bracket on the outside of the
fabric for proper preflight inspection. May be prettier under the
fabric, but not nearly as safe and functional.
I always attach the horizontal stabilizer forward bracket after I
cover and paint. However, all holes for bracket rivets are predrill
and fitted prior to covering.
john h
MKIII/912ULS
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: MKIII Xtra Speeds/MKIIIc Speeds/Fire Fly Speeds |
| Ole Gramps would describe the sensation as "..Like a dog sh**ing a
peach
| seed" and that is pretty accurate I think...the airplane is tense
and
| quivering!
|
| Don Gherardini
DonG/Gang:
Yep, I saw it. And a trail of smoke was coming off its quivering
little tail it was going so fast. hehehe
Seriously, these are very realistic numbers based on performance of
the Ultrastar (35 hp) and Firestar (40 hp) many years ago. Both
would fly 85 mph, straight and level, WOT. When one takes a similar
fuselage with 22' wingspan, rather than 27.5', it ain't hard to get
over 90 mph in a Fire Fly. Also, Don G built new streamlined single
wing struts. That probably helped a whole bunch.
Love it!
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: My Mark III, not a crash/Forward Horizontal Stabilizer |
Attachm...
In a message dated 11/17/2005 6:55:09 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com writes:
Hi Steve B/All:
Seems to me it is better to fix the bracket on the outside of the
fabric for proper preflight inspection. May be prettier under the
fabric, but not nearly as safe and functional.
I always attach the horizontal stabilizer forward bracket after I
cover and paint. However, all holes for bracket rivets are predrill
and fitted prior to covering.
john h
MKIII/912ULS
Hi John, help me out here, I am not concerned here about whether or not the
L bracket is covered or not. Although I am a Kolb Neophyte, I think that I
understand the importance of having the joint free and moving. I am concerned if
people start boltin em up tight. or worse yet if the FAA mandates that it be
done based on the report of Roger's plane. The geometry of the elevator horn
moves in an arc and requires that the fore mounts can slide fore and aft. If
I am wrong here I will relinquish but I think I am on track.
BTW, I'm ready for another Motocross Challenge, I've been practicing.
Steve B
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: My Mark III, not a crash/Forward Horizontal Stabilizer |
Attachm...
| Hi John, help me out here, I am not concerned here about whether or
not the
| L bracket is covered or not. Although I am a Kolb Neophyte, I think
that I
| understand the importance of having the joint free and moving.
|
| BTW, I'm ready for another Motocross Challenge, I've been
practicing.
|
| Steve B
Steve B/Gang:
That's the importance of following the plans and instructions for
spacing and attachment. Unless the elevator hinges are centered
exactly, there will be some fore and aft movement of
elevator/horizontal stabilizer. If there is not enough space for the
horizontal stabilizer attachment to move for and aft in the other half
of the attachment on the tailboom, it will start bending things which
will eventually break.
Still important to be able to see the hardware to see if it is
failing, even if installed correctly, according to plans.
What kind of bike are you going to be riding to do the MX Challenge?
;-)
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard & Martha Neilsen" <NeilsenRM05(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: My Mark III, not a crash/Forward Horizontal Stabilizer |
Attachment
Hey All
I just checked the L brackets on my MKIIIc. There are four per side eight
total so at least two would need to crack completely before they would let
go. Must be dumb luck but my brackets are on the outside for full
inspection. Also the rear edge of the horizontal stabilizer doesn't move at
all (up, down, forward, or backward) through the full travel of the
elevator. I see washers on the bolt that holds the tail fold fittings. Seems
like in the instructions I was told to put the washers as needed to put the
elevator hinge right at the hinge point of the elevator fold/bellcrank to
eliminate this movement. What am I missing?
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIIIc
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: My Mark III, not a crash/Forward Horizontal
Stabilizer Attachment
>
> | The
> | crack can and usually does occur under the fabric at the first
> rivet.
> |
> | Steve Boetto
>
> Hi Steve B/All:
>
> Seems to me it is better to fix the bracket on the outside of the
> fabric for proper preflight inspection. May be prettier under the
> fabric, but not nearly as safe and functional.
>
> I always attach the horizontal stabilizer forward bracket after I
> cover and paint. However, all holes for bracket rivets are predrill
> and fitted prior to covering.
>
> john h
> MKIII/912ULS
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | roger lee <ssadiver1(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: My Mark III, not a crash/Forward Horizontal Stabilizer |
Attachm...
Hi everyone,
My "L" bracket that broke was the set mounted on the main tail boom and not on
the stabilizer itself. It was not the one under the fabric. I am going to take
some pictures tomorrow (Friday) and post them. If when I look at this bracket
at the forward end of the horizontal stabilizer and if it indeed needs to be
slightly loose for the system to work then I will see if a second bracket can
be added and not impede the stabilizer movement. If it can not be added without
causing some binding then I will at least add the second set of stabilizer
wires and change out the rest of the "L" brackets. I talked to NTSB today and
told them what happened and they are only going to make me fill out the standard
form and do not think it will affect anyone else. They were happy that I posted
something on the web so people would take a closer look at their brackets.
The extra set of wires would have kept the horizontal stabilizer from fly up,
but I still believe these should have a change out
time. I
think mine will be 250 Hrs. I also think that these brackets on the stabilizer
side should be on top of the fabric. I am moving mine from under the fabric to
on top. Hope this helps someone from this type of thing. It could have been
catastrophic. Have a safe flight.
Roger Lee
| Hi John, help me out here, I am not concerned here about whether or
not the
| L bracket is covered or not. Although I am a Kolb Neophyte, I think
that I
| understand the importance of having the joint free and moving.
|
| BTW, I'm ready for another Motocross Challenge, I've been
practicing.
|
| Steve B
Steve B/Gang:
That's the importance of following the plans and instructions for
spacing and attachment. Unless the elevator hinges are centered
exactly, there will be some fore and aft movement of
elevator/horizontal stabilizer. If there is not enough space for the
horizontal stabilizer attachment to move for and aft in the other half
of the attachment on the tailboom, it will start bending things which
will eventually break.
Still important to be able to see the hardware to see if it is
failing, even if installed correctly, according to plans.
What kind of bike are you going to be riding to do the MX Challenge?
;-)
john h
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Denny Rowe" <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
| Subject: | Re: My Mark III, not a crash/Forward Horizontal Stabilizer |
Attachment
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard & Martha Neilsen" <NeilsenRM05(at)comcast.net>
. Also the rear edge of the horizontal stabilizer doesn't move at
> all (up, down, forward, or backward) through the full travel of the
> elevator. I see washers on the bolt that holds the tail fold fittings.
> Seems
> like in the instructions I was told to put the washers as needed to put
> the
> elevator hinge right at the hinge point of the elevator fold/bellcrank to
> eliminate this movement. What am I missing?
>
> Rick Neilsen
> Redrive VW powered MKIIIc
>
Rick,
The instructions tell us to place the spacers to minimize stabilizer
movement and to make sure the front mounts are centered so no binding
occures on elevator deflection in either direction.
Yours is the exception if you get no up-down, fore-aft movement in your
stab, I have never seen one that did not have a little motion to it.
All the same, I hope you have a little wiggle room at your front HS attatch
fitting.
Denny Rowe, Mk-3 with a wiggle in its tail.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: My Mark III, not a crash/Forward Horizontal Stabilizer |
Attachm...
In a message dated 11/18/05 8:09:15 AM Central Standard Time,
rowedl(at)highstream.net writes:
> >Seems
> >like in the instructions I was told to put the washers as needed to put
> >the
> >elevator hinge right at the hinge point of the elevator fold/bellcrank to
> >eliminate this movement. What am I missing?
> >
> >Rick Neilsen
>
Hi Rick, I was talking about the forward attach point of the Horizontal
Stabilizer. The rear points should be shimmed. Page 7 Rev 0 of my 1995 Firefly
plans show a clear detail. It reads:
"There may be some movement of the horizontal stabilizer back and forth as
the elevator is moved up and down. Make sure that the L-hinge on the stabilizer
September 29, 2005 - November 18, 2005
Kolb-Archive.digest.vol-fp