Kolb-Archive.digest.vol-gd
June 21, 2006 - July 11, 2006
DVD
On 6/21/06, john s. flannery wrote:
>
> Each day since this bird came up the road from Texas on a trailer a couple
> weeks ago, there have been myriad blanks to fill. A gift of curses perhaps.
> Each remedy brings discovery. Righted steps produce revelation of wrong
> previous steps by unknowns. No fear of flying on my part; mainly fear of the
> past life of this 480+/- pound simplified complexity is the cue to
> awareness, caution and approach. Who did what to her and how badly was she
> treated in her earlier life? A red-slathered fledermaus, her honesty and
> past hidden by paint like an aging whore, but one probably good for a lot
> more rides.
>
> Today I heard the first encouraging words from a Canadian who has worked
> on the Kolbs since 2002 and with his and perhaps others advice and help from
> those who produce, modify and fly this brand of aircraft, perhaps she can
> reach the status other Kolbs hold. Trustworthy, hands-off flier. One hundred
> eighty degrees from where she has been in our aerial rodeos. Meanwhile I
> spend hours working from one end to the other, off the street corners
> definitely, but not enough time enjoying being above it all. Learning;
> earning.
>
> jsf
>
> Attachment:
> http://www.matronics.com/enclosures/0bc34dab43120e205ba41122a18eb2f494dbf10a.jpg
>
>
--
"Attitude is everything ~ Pick a good one"...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "john s. flannery" <jflan(at)zianet.com> |
Nope, Barnstormers. Really doggy in a lot of ways. I'm a sucker for flying
junk. Should have put a few more dollars into something closer to cherry.
jsf
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 8:31 PM
>
> Looks good from here... Was this the one on eBay?...
>
> DVD
>
>
> On 6/21/06, john s. flannery wrote:
>>
>> Each day since this bird came up the road from Texas on a trailer a
>> couple
>> weeks ago, there have been myriad blanks to fill. A gift of curses
>> perhaps.
>> Each remedy brings discovery. Righted steps produce revelation of wrong
>> previous steps by unknowns. No fear of flying on my part; mainly fear of
>> the
>> past life of this 480+/- pound simplified complexity is the cue to
>> awareness, caution and approach. Who did what to her and how badly was
>> she
>> treated in her earlier life? A red-slathered fledermaus, her honesty and
>> past hidden by paint like an aging whore, but one probably good for a lot
>> more rides.
>>
>> Today I heard the first encouraging words from a Canadian who has worked
>> on the Kolbs since 2002 and with his and perhaps others advice and help
>> from
>> those who produce, modify and fly this brand of aircraft, perhaps she
>> can
>> reach the status other Kolbs hold. Trustworthy, hands-off flier. One
>> hundred
>> eighty degrees from where she has been in our aerial rodeos. Meanwhile I
>> spend hours working from one end to the other, off the street corners
>> definitely, but not enough time enjoying being above it all. Learning;
>> earning.
>>
>> jsf
>>
>> Attachment:
>> http://www.matronics.com/enclosures/0bc34dab43120e205ba41122a18eb2f494dbf10a.jpg
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> "Attitude is everything ~ Pick a good one"...
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
> http://wiki.matronics.com
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron" <captainron1(at)cox.net> |
Well I am glad you brought it up. I certainly second your comment, so as not
to use Ethanol in a 2 cycle motor without further testing. As I observed and
my test revealed its not easy to mix oil and ethanol together, and there is
at least in my mind a question about proper lubrication. My experience is
only with the aforementioned 4 cycle motors. As for the Wiki explanation,
you are right its not the final word, my experience with MPG is very
different from what he wrote. But, I am willing to test my mileage again in
the Cavalier 2.4 liter 16 valve OHC, by running two fuel tanks on mogas
before taking a mpg reading comparison. I want to know about that stuff as
accurately as anybody.
I can without reservations say that both vehicles (Yukon 5.7 liter Vortec
motor, and Cavalier) are running great, and smooth on the E-85.
Ron
Arizona
========================
-----Original Message-----
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Richard Pike
Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 6:08 PM
Who is the author, and what are his credentials?
Wikipedia is all well and good, except that anyone can be an expert on
anything for a while, until the peer-review process shows it to bogus.
In the comments section of the article, not everyone is impressed with
the author's data.
And while all this may in fact be true for the 912, have you ever
actually mixed gasoline with ethanol and 2-stroke oil and watched what
happens? It's not pretty. Did you ever run a 503 on it? The EGT's went
nuts.
If you want to run it in your weed-eater, fine, but please not in my 582.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
Ron wrote:
>
> All of you folks that want to know about E-85 here is a link. I think it
> will answer all of your questions, including that of power and such.
>
>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-85#Power_output_and_usage_in_Racing
>
>
>
> Ron
>
> Arizona
>
>
>
>
>
> _____
>
> [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of William Herren
> Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 12:09 PM
>
>
>
> After I left Monument Valley I went on out to Calif to see my brother. I
> attended the Watsonville fly-in and watched Chris Byngs (sp) win the spot
> landing contest in his MKIII. He would have had the bomb drop too but they
> allowed a helicopter drop from a hover. Being from LA I got the long
dist
> award. I added up the mileage for the trip, not including sightseeing at
> 2301 mi at Watsonville, CA. They had something that I didn't know existed
> anymore, 80 octane av gas. Since my Luscombe's Cont 65 was designed to
burn
> it I bought a load. As I expected, I found no difference in power or
> mileage, I was using the gas the engine was designed to use. I can't
figure
> out how you can get the same mileage on 2/3 the BTUs. You can get the
power
> by burning more ethanol. Bill in Lousyana
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roger Lee" <ssadiver1(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Pressure Ghosts |
You probably don't have any problem. This is a volume issue that translates to
pressure on the gage.
You need to consider volume along with pressure like we do in the fire service
pumping water. I also manufacture diving compressors and this is the same theory
we use for air volume and pressure with a surface supplied air system. When
you are at idle your engine does not require a large volume of fuel so there
is a back pressure (so to speak) that you get measured on the pressure gage. When
you throttle up to max throttle then your engine is requiring all the volume
that your pump delivers and there is no pressure left because the engine is
using all the volume that the pump puts out. As you throttle back the engine
needs less fuel and you have a slight excess volume which also shows that you
have some available volume which reads on your gage as pressure. When you add
the second pump it delivers more volume than the engine can use and it shows up
as some pressure on the gage. Being at 0.0 pressure is not bad at wide open
unless you need additional fuel for more rpm. If you had a larger volume pump
it would show some pressure at the high rpms.
--------
Roger Lee
Tucson, Az.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=42206#42206
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roger Lee" <ssadiver1(at)yahoo.com> |
Hi Matt,
Is it possible to put a spell check feature in the system?
Thanks,
Roger lee
--------
Roger Lee
Tucson, Az.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=42207#42207
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerb <ulflyer(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: AZUSA Breaks |
John,
Couple options, going to band brakes, they may work better than
expansion brakes. Next check out Tracy O'Brien hydraulic brakes. A
friend put them on his Hawk and they worked really well.
http://www.tracyobrien.com/moreinfo.asp?id=47
He has a nose dragger so he didn't use them in a differential
fashion, you may want to with a tail dragger. With band brakes there
would be minimum change, may require adding a flange to the axle
bracket to mounting the band to and reuse the existing cables and
activator. May have to add a flange for the O'Brien brakes also. On
his Hawk, all he had to do was drill two holes into the existing
flange on each axle bracket. Bleeding them out properly required
more attention. Once properly bled out, they have worked great and
have plenty of holding power for his plane.
jerb
At 11:41 AM 6/21/2006, you wrote:
>
>I need to replace the brakes assembly on my original Firestar
>because I am less than satisfied with the 15 year old brakes despite
>tinkering with them.
>
>I'm looking at the AZUSA 5" brakes and wheels. Does anyone have any
>experience with theses?
>
>I read comments in the past about MATCO hydraulic break for the Mark
>III, etc, but I think this would be over kill on a Firestar.
>
>Any other suggestions?
>
>Thanks.
>
>John Murr
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Airgriff2(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: First Flight |
Good for you Pat ! Hope you enjoy many hrs. of flying your Kolb.
Fly Safe
Bob Griffin
Upstate NY (not everyone lives in the city) ha / ha.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "tc1917" <tc1917(at)hughes.net> |
okay, gotta answer here. Been lurking on this list for a long, long time.
Seen a lot come and go and heard a few conversations that should not have
taken place. I dislike anyone slamming anyone for any reason. Each has his
own opinion and given in jest, no problem. Thin skinned need not apply
here.
Now, I put my SlingShot up on blocks after flying it cause I need the wheels
for my four wheeler during hunting season and for baiting out of season. I
take them once in a while for use on the lawn mower although it is so dry
here in the south we are importing water from Aridzona. (We dont have many
wildfires cause peanuts and cotton dont get high nuff to burn good.)
I studied hard for all the tests but I am a mustang flyer with no formal
training so it was tough (oldtimers decease didnt help)seems I remember
everything that dont matter and nothing I want to. I would recommend to
anyone to get a CD package that shows hands on controls and one on one
teaching. It is not that hard, just gotta stay with it and get it done
while it is still in your head.
Now, gotta get out there and find that armadillo I shot last night in the
yard before another one buries it. (wish them good tex'ns would keep their
pets in texas) Ted
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Lehman" <david(at)davidlehman.net> |
Don't be hard on yourself... I'm a repeat offender, bought two of them on
Barnstormers, could have done better buying locally...
DVD
On 6/21/06, john s. flannery wrote:
>
>
> Nope, Barnstormers. Really doggy in a lot of ways. I'm a sucker for flying
> junk. Should have put a few more dollars into something closer to cherry.
>
>
> jsf
> ----- Original Message -----
> Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 8:31 PM
>
>
> >
> > Looks good from here... Was this the one on eBay?...
> >
> > DVD
> >
> >
> >
> > On 6/21/06, john s. flannery wrote:
> >>
> >> Each day since this bird came up the road from Texas on a trailer a
> >> couple
> >> weeks ago, there have been myriad blanks to fill. A gift of curses
> >> perhaps.
> >> Each remedy brings discovery. Righted steps produce revelation of wrong
> >> previous steps by unknowns. No fear of flying on my part; mainly fear
> of
> >> the
> >> past life of this 480+/- pound simplified complexity is the cue to
> >> awareness, caution and approach. Who did what to her and how badly was
> >> she
> >> treated in her earlier life? A red-slathered fledermaus, her
> honesty and
> >> past hidden by paint like an aging whore, but one probably good for a
> lot
> >> more rides.
> >>
> >> Today I heard the first encouraging words from a Canadian who has
> worked
> >> on the Kolbs since 2002 and with his and perhaps others advice and help
> >> from
> >> those who produce, modify and fly this brand of aircraft, perhaps she
> >> can
> >> reach the status other Kolbs hold. Trustworthy, hands-off flier. One
> >> hundred
> >> eighty degrees from where she has been in our aerial rodeos. Meanwhile
> I
> >> spend hours working from one end to the other, off the street corners
> >> definitely, but not enough time enjoying being above it all. Learning;
> >> earning.
> >>
> >> jsf
> >>
> >> Attachment:
> >>
> http://www.matronics.com/enclosures/0bc34dab43120e205ba41122a18eb2f494dbf10a.jpg
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > "Attitude is everything ~ Pick a good one"...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
> > http://wiki.matronics.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
--
"Attitude is everything ~ Pick a good one"...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <jeepacro(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Pressure Ghosts |
Does anyone else have the same reading's on the fuel pressure like the one in question?
Are all like this?
--
Rob.
---- Roger Lee wrote:
>
> You probably don't have any problem. This is a volume issue that translates to
pressure on the gage.
> You need to consider volume along with pressure like we do in the fire service
pumping water. I also manufacture diving compressors and this is the same theory
we use for air volume and pressure with a surface supplied air system. When
you are at idle your engine does not require a large volume of fuel so there
is a back pressure (so to speak) that you get measured on the pressure gage.
When you throttle up to max throttle then your engine is requiring all the volume
that your pump delivers and there is no pressure left because the engine
is using all the volume that the pump puts out. As you throttle back the engine
needs less fuel and you have a slight excess volume which also shows that you
have some available volume which reads on your gage as pressure. When you add
the second pump it delivers more volume than the engine can use and it shows
up as some pressure on the gage. Being at 0.0 pressure is not bad at wide open
unless you need additional fuel for more rpm. If yo
u!
> had a larger volume pump it would show some pressure at the high rpms.
>
> --------
> Roger Lee
> Tucson, Az.
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=42206#42206
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerb <ulflyer(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: AZUSA Breaks |
John,
Another thought - one of the problems I've had with the Azusa
expansion type brakes is there drums are not perfectly round which
causes grabbing as the wheel rotates. Also this is influenced by
what wheels you have, - the wheel barrow type wheels where you had
to center the drum best you could and drill holes through the steel
wheel to mount the brake drum. If you have wheels that allow the
drums to be mounted using the wheels manufactured hole pattern, they
may work a little better, but the drums in side surface still are not
perfectly round. I have seen drums offered where they turn the
inside surface to true up the drum, but they cost more. I previously
made comment about using band brakes which can have two issues, do
they produce enough braking power for your size aircraft (probably
would) and how well do they work once they get wet? The O'Brien
really work well plus you can easily remove a wheel unlike some of
the others out there. Give them more thought.
jerb
At 11:41 AM 6/21/2006, you wrote:
>
>I need to replace the brakes assembly on my original Firestar
>because I am less than satisfied with the 15 year old brakes despite
>tinkering with them.
>
>I'm looking at the AZUSA 5" brakes and wheels. Does anyone have any
>experience with theses?
>
>I read comments in the past about MATCO hydraulic break for the Mark
>III, etc, but I think this would be over kill on a Firestar.
>
>Any other suggestions?
>
>Thanks.
>
>John Murr
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerb <ulflyer(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: FireFly Wing Swivel Joint Repair |
Jack,
Instead of rubber o-rings, might metal (wavy) spring washers be better?
jerb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerb <ulflyer(at)verizon.net> |
Richard,
If your not running ethanol blend gas what then are you running? In
the metro-plex areas like Dallas, there is no choice except for the
summer blend unless your willing to drive many miles to get to a
station located out side the defined perimeter that sells the normal
ethanol free gas.
jerb
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: jim hefner's mv pics! great. |
In a message dated 6/1/2006 9:17:29 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
hefner_jim(at)msn.com writes:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/0519__20_2006_monument_valley_335_199.jpg
unreal!!!......I gotta go there someday.....By George the Firestar is waitin
fer me to finish the parachute now
George Randolph
firestar driver from the Villages, fl
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eugene Zimmerman <etzim62(at)earthlink.net> |
So THAT is the reason so many people are sick and unhealthy ,,,,,
not enough "Heal Breaks"
On Jun 22, 2006, at 8:35 AM, Richard Pike wrote:
> People will still use Heal Breaks to stop their Kolbs.
or did ya mean there kolbs?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | russ kinne <kinnepix(at)earthlink.net> |
In re recent talk of O-rings -- they're great little items. We did
some research on them when I was building underwater camera cases,
and found they should always be lubricated to prevent spalling &
minute tears that would eventually cause leaks.
A Chap-Stick is an excellent lubricant, clean to use and easy to
carry. Just rub on thumb & index finger, then rub the O-ring.
An alternative is a mix of lanolin & beeswax, about 2:1
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack B. Hart" <jbhart(at)onlyinternet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: FireFly Wing Swivel Joint Repair |
................
>NOTE: ............. However, let it be noted that his procedure for
>taking slack out of the wing fold universal joint and wing attachment
>to the fuselage is certainly not a "normal, safe, recommended" method
>of maintenance.
........................
John & FireFlyers,
I know I am not an expert, and flying an ultralight vehicle I do not have to
consult one. But if the FireFly was "experimental" someone would have to
sign off on the re-worked swivel joint. So, I asked an A&P to look at what
I had done. His comment was that it was a "big improvement".
Jack B. Hart FF004
Winchester, IN
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "c b" <seedeebee(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Pressure Ghosts |
All,
This is not an issue of volume vs. pressure, as was vivdly demonstrated
toady. In the past, the fuel pressure indicated 5+ psi for many hours of
flight at different throttle settings. In the last 5-10 hours of flight, the
pressure began to slowly get worse at the top end.
And then...
I had a momentary engine failure in flight today.
So it's not the sender either.
I was running on engine pump only, indicating 0.0 psi at 5200 rpm. It ran
fine for a minute and a half or so, and then shuddered and lost rpm fast. I
hit the electric pump and reduced the throttle simultaneously (adrenaline
also automatically entered the pilot control system). The engine sprung back
to life.
I was at 1500 feet over the approach end of the runway when this happened,
so there wasn't much chance of an off-field landing if the electric backup
failed to do the trick. I landed uneventfully with power to spare.
Yesterday I tested the sender and it seemed not to be working. I blamed the
sender, but for today's flight I took off with the electric pump engaged (as
always) and shut it down on downwind.
I'll be replacing the engine driven pump before the next flight.
Chris B
MK III 912 UL
Desparately seeking reliability...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: FireFly Wing Swivel Joint Repair |
Jack B. Hart wrote:
>
>
>
>
>>
>>
>................
>
>
>>NOTE: ............. However, let it be noted that his procedure for
>>taking slack out of the wing fold universal joint and wing attachment
>>to the fuselage is certainly not a "normal, safe, recommended" method
>>of maintenance.
>>
>>
>........................
>
>John & FireFlyers,
>
>I know I am not an expert, and flying an ultralight vehicle I do not have to
>consult one. But if the FireFly was "experimental" someone would have to
>sign off on the re-worked swivel joint. So, I asked an A&P to look at what
>I had done. His comment was that it was a "big improvement".
>
>Jack B. Hart FF004
>Winchester, IN
>
Good move getting a 2nd opinion, but it should be noted that once an
experimental-homebuilt is signed off for flight, *anyone* can work on or
modify it. Legally, the work must be logged, but no degrees,
certificates, etc are required to perform & log the work. The only
requirement is that if it's considered a 'major modification' (changes
to structure would meet the definition), then a return to 'phase one'
flight test is required, typically for 5 hours. The details of the
procedure to return to 'phase 1' & back to 'phase 2' depend on when the
operating limitations were issued. There have been at least 3 versions
over the last 10 years.
The only time certificates & degrees come into play is the annual
'condition inspection' which must be logged by either the holder of the
'repairman's certificate' (the builder) or someone holding at least an
A&P ticket (no IA is required for experimental-homebuilt inspections).
Charlie
currently on my 4th homebuilt (all purchased), 3 of which had major mods
while I owned them
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Pressure Ghosts |
I am firmly sold on Hauck's method, augmented by my method: Put the two
pumps in line (Hauck) and then run both of them at all times when
committing aviation. (Pike)
Have the electric pump below the level of the fuel tank, in a position
where it will always be primed. Turn on the electric pump to prime the
carbs and start the engine, and then shut it off. Taxi out and do a run
up on the engine pump to verify that it works, (Take long enough and run
it hard enough to drain the float bowls if that is going to happen) and
verify it will pull fuel through a shut down electric pump. Then turn on
the electric pump and then take off. Your experience today validates
this method.
Also, I like to have the fuel pressure gauge pickup between the electric
pump and the engine driven pump. It is unlikely that you will have a
failure mode on the engine driven pump that is so bad the electric pump
will be unable to force fuel through it, so if you can verify that the
electric pump is pressurizing the system between itself and the engine
pump, then you know your status. On a 582 with a Mikuni double pumper
pulse pump, the Facet gives 3.5 pounds at idle, and 2 pounds at full
throttle between itself and the Mikuni. Comforting to watch as I climb
out over those big electric towers...
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
c b wrote:
>
> All,
>
> This is not an issue of volume vs. pressure, as was vivdly
> demonstrated toady. In the past, the fuel pressure indicated 5+ psi
> for many hours of flight at different throttle settings. In the last
> 5-10 hours of flight, the pressure began to slowly get worse at the
> top end.
>
> And then...
>
> I had a momentary engine failure in flight today.
>
> So it's not the sender either.
>
> I was running on engine pump only, indicating 0.0 psi at 5200 rpm. It
> ran fine for a minute and a half or so, and then shuddered and lost
> rpm fast. I hit the electric pump and reduced the throttle
> simultaneously (adrenaline also automatically entered the pilot
> control system). The engine sprung back to life.
>
> I was at 1500 feet over the approach end of the runway when this
> happened, so there wasn't much chance of an off-field landing if the
> electric backup failed to do the trick. I landed uneventfully with
> power to spare.
>
> Yesterday I tested the sender and it seemed not to be working. I
> blamed the sender, but for today's flight I took off with the electric
> pump engaged (as always) and shut it down on downwind.
>
> I'll be replacing the engine driven pump before the next flight.
>
> Chris B
> MK III 912 UL
> Desparately seeking reliability...
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
> http://wiki.matronics.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack B. Hart" <jbhart(at)onlyinternet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: FireFly Wing Swivel Joint Repair |
>
>Jack,
>Instead of rubber o-rings, might metal (wavy) spring washers be better?
>jerb
>
Jerb,
I believe they would work. McMaster Carr sells disk springs and belleville
washers. I have easy access to "O" rings. Since I use them in compression,
I do not worry about them breaking. If one would fail, things will get
loose but nothing is going to fall apart. The trick is to confine the "O"
ring in compression so it cannot break.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Winchester, IN
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Cottrell" <lcottrell(at)fmtcblue.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Pressure Ghosts |
Yesterday I tested the sender and it seemed not to be working. I blamed the
> sender, but for today's flight I took off with the electric pump engaged
> (as always) and shut it down on downwind.
I am having a bit of a difficult time understanding why you guys do not want
to run an electric fuel pump all the time. I understand it is normal
procedure in a GA plane to cut the boost pump off after attaining altitude,
but why not continue to run the electric facet pump. Their lifetime is
measured in the thousands of hours. If you are worried about it pumping too
much fuel, then buy one that has a pressure limit within parameters. Or put
a pressure regulator on it. The plane is way to noisy for you to be bothered
with the noise that they make. I have one on my plane simply because I run
the gas through a selector switch that is by the throttle, therefore below
the level that they recommend for the Rotax fuel pump. When I first put it
on I too tried cutting it off after I had taken off. In one high speed pull
out I heard the engine cough, I have never cut it off since. I personally
cannot think of a way that it would be detrimental to have one running all
the time and at about 28 bucks, I think I could even buy one each year if I
thought that it was necessary.
Larry, Oregon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Cottrell" <lcottrell(at)fmtcblue.com> |
Matt,
Whats up! I normally use the old method of Kolb-list by receiving each email
posted to the list. If there is a attachment that I want to see, I can go to
the BB., but here lately I am not getting all the messages sent to the list. The
one that I notice the most is from John Hauck, perhaps there are others, but
I can only read John's post on the BB. I am reasonably sure that it is not my
email settings.
Larry, Oregon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "dominique" <dominiquefrenchman(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: E-85 Ethanol lubricity test results. |
CaptainRon1(at)cox.net wrote:
> As someone earlier (BJ) posted about the possibility of Ethanol
> washing off oil from cylinder walls I had to find out if there is any
> such danger....
>
> Because of this I am certain that any motor using E-85 will last way
> longer than any motor using Petro fuel all else being equal.
> I am still checking on rubber parts. ---
Ron,
Your test is very interesting, but your conclusions are way off and misguided.
The fact that Ethanol 85 reacts so much differently with oil is a huge cause
for concern. Your test seems to indicate that the Ethanol does not dissolve
oil as well as regular gasoline, which makes me wonder if 2 stroke oil will mix
well with Ethanol 85. Our 2 stroke engines and 2 stroke oil were all designed
for non Ethanol gasoline that mixed very well the oil. There may be some very
undesirable effects now that this has changed. I just cannot comprehend how
you came to such a glowing positive conclusion from the excellent tests you
did. Everyone needs to be very careful with this new fuel.
Dominique
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=42459#42459
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "c b" <seedeebee(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Pressure Ghosts |
>I am having a bit of a difficult time understanding why you guys do not
>want
to run an electric fuel pump all the time.
Larry,
I normally leave the electric pump on all the time. I decided to shut it off
on downwind this time as I cannot run WOT on the ground (for long) and I
wanted to cross-check my diagnosis.
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron" <captainron1(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: E-85 Ethanol lubricity test results. |
I did not test for a 2 cycle motor. I tested mostly for my Suzuki motor 4
stroke, and my Automobiles. I also pointed that out in subsequent post that
I would not use E-85 in a 2 cycle motor (including my Yamaha motorcycle). I
am also guessing that most plant based oil if any for motor vehicles, will
mix well with E-85. But before I were to use any E-85 with any oil in a 2
cycle motor I would do a test. Unless there is already a recommended oil for
the Ethanol based fuels. What I would do is use a glass jar fill it half
with 2 cycle oil and half with E-85 and then shake it till it is well mixed.
Then I'd let it sit over night and see if it separates. I use half so as to
see a more striking separation between the fluids if any.
Again my test was for a 4 stroke and my conclusion was for a 4 stroke motor,
not for a two cycle motor.
Ron
Arizona
======================
-----Original Message-----
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of dominique
Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2006 10:11 PM
CaptainRon1(at)cox.net wrote:
> As someone earlier (BJ) posted about the possibility of Ethanol
> washing off oil from cylinder walls I had to find out if there is any
> such danger....
>
> Because of this I am certain that any motor using E-85 will last way
> longer than any motor using Petro fuel all else being equal.
> I am still checking on rubber parts. ---
Ron,
Your test is very interesting, but your conclusions are way off and
misguided. The fact that Ethanol 85 reacts so much differently with oil is
a huge cause for concern. Your test seems to indicate that the Ethanol does
not dissolve oil as well as regular gasoline, which makes me wonder if 2
stroke oil will mix well with Ethanol 85. Our 2 stroke engines and 2 stroke
oil were all designed for non Ethanol gasoline that mixed very well the oil.
There may be some very undesirable effects now that this has changed. I
just cannot comprehend how you came to such a glowing positive conclusion
from the excellent tests you did. Everyone needs to be very careful with
this new fuel.
Dominique
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=42459#42459
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Bigelow" <up_country(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Pressure Ghosts |
Series plumbing of Fuel system with engine driven pump and electric pump on one
line from tank to engine.
Pros: Simple with only one fuel line.
Cons: Potential for failure of electric or engine pump to block or restrict all
the fuel flow to engine.
Parallel plumbing of Fuel system with engine driven pump and electric pump on seperate
lines from tank to engine.
Pros: Failure of one pump will not restrict the fuel flow from the other pump.
Cons: Both fuel lines must have a check valve to prevent circular flow of fuel
if one pump fails or is shut off. Both the engine and electric pumps normally
have check valves built in. Check valves in electric pump can be checked by
turning off electric pump for a minute or two before flight. Engine pump check
valve integrity cannot be checked before flight.
--------
Dave Bigelow
Kamuela, Hawaii
FS2, Rotax 503 DCDI
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=42482#42482
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "tc1917" <tc1917(at)hughes.net> |
Well, Mike, firstly I hope you read and understand what is asked of you.
You gotta get your bird up and registered and all the paper work finished,
including inspection. Next you gotta find out if you are qualified under
the grandfather rule. If not, you gonna have a lot of training to do. We
have two expert SLA trainers available. One North of Tallahassee, Ga which
is a fair piece from here and another in Enterprise, Al, about a hundred
plus from my place. Both are also examiners to give you your ticket
testing. You cannot used the same one for both unless you get the last five
hours (I think) might be three, from a different trainer. They dont want
the examiner to cheat I guess. If you are certified to take your test and
exams through the grandfather part, you can find the info about the
examiners on our web site: www.homestead.com/southernflyers and go to the
sport pilot section. I went and stayed at a best western for a couple of
days, 35 miles away from the airport. Got some intro time on the amphib
(which is a tail dragger. One of the reasons I picked that one) and a
couple of hours of ground school to find out what I did not know about it.
I have never had any formal training and needed some refinement. Mr Cooper
is a very fair and encouraging guy willing and able to assist you with the
wealth of knowledge stored in his 78 year old head. Hope I am going strong
like that when I am his age. I did not use my SlingShot for the test for
obvious reasons. I do not feel doing some of the tests, stalls and such so
heavily laden was a good idea safety wise so I hired his plane. Worked well
and am not sorry. I have checked into the CD package and I would go to the
package offered through the store on the USUA site. $200 is not a lot
considering it could save you at least half that in hotel bills not to
mention fill in the blanks and hopefully keep you from that dreaded word
"failed". Most of what I have written and the reasoning behind it is to get
you all to the examiner and releave you of the FEAR. Hope this helps. If
you want further info contact me off line at my email box. Ted Cowan.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Thom Riddle <jtriddle(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Pressure Ghosts |
Larry,
Regarding running electric fuel pump all the time.
Although an electric pump may be good for thousands of hours, this says
nothing of the DUTY CYCLE it is designed for. If the pump is rated at
100% duty cycle then it should come close to its MTBF (mean time before
failure) running full time. However, if it is rated for X-thousand
hours at say 50% duty cycle, you should not expect the total hours of
running to reach the MTBF. Heat build up after running for more than
short intervals is frequently the reason for rating a particular motor/
pump at less than 100% duty cycle.
That said, I have no idea what percentage duty cycle your pump is rated
for. You may be able to find out the duty cycle rating from the
manufacturer for this particular pump model. If it is less than 100%
you might want to consider changing your operating procedures. If it is
100% then turn it on and leave it on with a clear conscience.
Thom in Buffalo
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "George Myers" <gmyers(at)grandecom.net> |
| Subject: | Re: For Matt re: homophone detector |
fi yuo cna raed tihs, yuo hvae a sgtrane mnid, too.
Cna yuo raed tihs? Olny 55 plepoe tuo fo 100 anc.
i cdnuolt blveiee taht I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdanieg.
The
phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid, aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabri
gde
Uinervtisy, it dseno't mtaetr in waht oerdr the ltteres in a wrod are,
the
olny iproamtnt tihng is taht the frsit and lsat ltteer be in the rghit
pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it whotuit a
pboerlm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by
istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Azanmig huh? yaeh and I awlyas tghuhot
slpeling was ipmorantt! if you can raed tihs forwrad it.
Do nto acrhvie
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | HVAC Eng/Expert needed |
Is there anyone in our group that has a strong background in HVAC? I am
working on a project that is related to our sport and I am looking for someone
to
help and participate.
Thanks
Steve Boetto
Firefly 007
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flykolb" <flykolb(at)wowway.com> |
| Subject: | Cross country flying |
Check this out!!!! Kolb related: If he can do it in a powered
parachute, a Kolb would be a no brainer!
Jim
Mark III
Michigan
LOW AND SLOW: MAN FLIES ACROSS COUNTRY IN POWERED PARACHUTE
For many pilots, the joy of flying lies in getting a bird's-eye view of
the land. Baron Tayler, of Robesonia, Pennsylvania, is getting a good,
long
look at the United States, flying low and slow across the country in a
Voyager powered parachute. Tayler took off May 10 from the deck of the
"USS
Midway" in San Diego and will land on the "USS Yorktown" in Mount
Pleasant,
South Carolina. Last weekend he successfully made it through the Rocky
Mountains' Raton Pass in New Mexico at 8,100 feet msl. His goal is to
bring
awareness to the powered parachutes. He still has nearly three dozen
planned
stops at cities ( http://www.redbaroncoasttocoast.com/Main/FlightPlan )
along
the way. Tayler keeps a road log, photos, and video footage of the
journey
online ( http://www.redbaroncoasttocoast.com ).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "dominique" <dominiquefrenchman(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Cross country flying |
At least he does not have to worry about tie downs or trying to find a hanger.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=42512#42512
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Herb Gayheart <herbgh(at)juno.com> |
Ted
I did a ball park cost estimate based on the EAA sport pilot site and
came up with abt 2500 to 3000 dollars to get one of my UL"s inspected
by a DAR and the cost of ground school and several hours of flight
training.. That about right?? Herb
>
> Well, Mike, firstly I hope you read and understand what is asked of
> you.
> You gotta get your bird up and registered and all the paper work
> finished,
> including inspection. Next you gotta find out if you are qualified
> under
> the grandfather rule. If not, you gonna have a lot of training to
> do. We
> have two expert SLA trainers available. One North of Tallahassee,
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Pressure Ghosts |
| I normally leave the electric pump on all the time. I decided to
shut it off
| on downwind this time as I cannot run WOT on the ground (for long)
and I
| wanted to cross-check my diagnosis.
|
| Chris
|
Hi Chris:
Curious. Why can't you run WOT on the ground (for long)?
Not having a heating problem with the 912? or not taking the time to
tie the aircraft down?
john h
mkIII
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <kfackler(at)ameritech.net> |
Possibly low if your state imposes a sales or use tax on a/c registrations,
especially if they pop you for a late penalty.
-Ken Fackler
Kolb Mark II / A722KWF
Rochester MI
----- Original Message -----
> I did a ball park cost estimate based on the EAA sport pilot site and
> came up with abt 2500 to 3000 dollars to get one of my UL"s inspected
> by a DAR and the cost of ground school and several hours of flight
> training.. That about right?? Herb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Cottrell" <lcottrell(at)fmtcblue.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Pressure Ghosts |
> Regarding running electric fuel pump all the time.
>
> That said, I have no idea what percentage duty cycle your pump is rated
> for. You may be able to find out the duty cycle rating from the
> manufacturer for this particular pump model. If it is less than 100% you
> might want to consider changing your operating procedures. If it is 100%
> then turn it on and leave it on with a clear conscience.
I wonder do they sell pumps that are obviously required to keep an engine
running that would only have a 50 percent duty cycle? It is only a WAG on my
part but I don't think so. No real research was done on this particular
conclusion, other than the one that I ran on the Miller Big 40 welder that I
used at work every day, but I think I will leave mine running all the time.
Oh by the way the welder after 1600 hours quit working, but it was still
getting fuel since the pump still worked. If the one on my plane does fail,
then perhaps the pulse pump will keep me in the air until I can reach the
ground. My point was- that it doesn't make sense to worry about the life of
a $28.00 part when your plane and butt is obviously worth more. Of course
that is a determination that you will have to make for yourself.
Larry, Oregon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "c b" <seedeebee(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Re: Fuel Pressure Ghosts |
>Curious. Why can't you run WOT on the ground (for long)?
John,
Good question.
I suppose I could run WOT on the ground with a proper anchor system and a
competent person at the controls. I might even qualify someday...
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | TheWanderingWench <thewanderingwench(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Sport Pilot Knowledge Test Now Class-Specific |
Hi folks -
I just read this on another list-serve.
Arty
06/22/06 - Sport Pilot Knowledge Test Now
Class-Specific
EAA Announcement
Effective June 23, 2006, the FAA has modified the
sport pilot knowledge (written) test. Previously, the
knowledge test covered all classes of light-sport
aircraft (LSA). Now, each LSA classairplane, powered
parachute, weight-shift, glider, lighter-than-air, and
gyroplaneshas a test tailored specifically to that
class.
"Individuals flying powered parachute and
weight-shift-control aircraft will like this," said
Larry Clymer, manager of the FAA's Light-Sport
Aviation Branch in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. "Now, they
won't have to answer airplane-type questions that
don't apply to their aircraft. For example, powered
parachute pilots won't get questions about weight and
balance because that doesn't apply to them. And
airplane pilots won't have to answer questions about
powered parachute canopies."
All FAA-approved testing centers, including EAA
partner LaserGrade, are prepared to offer the new
class-specific knowledge tests. For a link to the FAA
website to view sample knowledge test questions, or
locate a testing center near you, visit the EAA sport
pilot website.
www.LessonsFromTheEdge.com
"Life's a daring adventure or nothing"
Helen Keller
"I refuse to tip toe through life just to arrive safely at death."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Fuel Pressure Ghosts |
| Although an electric pump may be good for thousands of hours, this
says
| nothing of the DUTY CYCLE it is designed for. |
| Thom in Buffalo
Thom:
Haven't done any formal research on the subject, but if you go back a
few years you will find that Mazda trucks used a Facet Electric Fuel
Pump as primary and only pump source, which operated 100% of the time.
The Rotax 914 does not use an engine driven fuel pump, but does uses
two electric fuel pumps. Don't know who makes them.
Purolator makes Facets. Never did find the "actual" specs on the
pump, but they are sold universally for primary pumps in marine,
automotive, racing, and experimental aircraft and primary and backup
pumps. I will venture a guess that they are 100% duty cycle pumps.
Well........I did take a peek at Purolator's web page. Here is a link
to go to their application page. They do give 6,000 hours for the
replacement for the cube type Facet, but could not find expected life
of their other pumps. Based on application for all their pumps, I
would venture to say they are all continuous duty type pumps.
| Although an electric pump may be good for thousands of hours, this
says
| nothing of the DUTY CYCLE it is designed for. |
| Thom in Buffalo
Thom:
Haven't done any formal reasearch on the subject, but if you go back a
few years you will find that Mazda trucks used a Facet Electric Fuel
Pump as primary and only pump source, which operated 100% of the time.
The Rotax 914 does not use an engine driven fuel pump, but does uses
two electric fuel pumps. Don't know who makes them.
Purolator makes Facets. Never did find the "actual" specs on the
pump, but they are sold universally for primary pumps in marine,
automotive, racing, and experimental aircraft and primary and backup
pumps. I will venture a guess that they are 100% duty cycle pumps.
http://www.facet-purolator.com/mcl/media/Appref/hd_pdfs/Facet_Guide_2004.pdf
http://www.facet-purolator.com/solidstate.asp
http://www.facet-purolator.com/Default1.html
Almost forgot. I have a 4kw Onan Generator that uses a Facet
Electronic Fuel Pump. It has been pumping away for more than 2,500
hours with out a hiccup.
john h
mkIII
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick Miles <ultrastarrick(at)yahoo.com> |
ultrastar re-drive needed
It is an aluminum plate that bolts to the engine and has an eccentric top fitting
for setting tension for the belts
__________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne T. McCullough" <blackbird754(at)alltel.net> |
Checking to see if these come thru....
Wayne
----- Original Message -----
From: Rick Miles
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 11:13 AM
Subject: Kolb-List: re redrive
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eugene Zimmerman <etzim62(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Pressure Ghosts |
Yeah Thom,
And what is the duty cycle of the Rotax charging system?
On Jun 23, 2006, at 7:28 AM, Thom Riddle wrote:
>
> Larry,
>
> Regarding running electric fuel pump all the time.
>
> Although an electric pump may be good for thousands of hours, this
> says nothing of the DUTY CYCLE it is designed for. If the pump is
> rated at 100% duty cycle then it should come close to its MTBF
> (mean time before failure) running full time. However, if it is
> rated for X-thousand hours at say 50% duty cycle, you should not
> expect the total hours of running to reach the MTBF. Heat build up
> after running for more than short intervals is frequently the
> reason for rating a particular motor/ pump at less than 100% duty
> cycle.
>
> That said, I have no idea what percentage duty cycle your pump is
> rated for. You may be able to find out the duty cycle rating from
> the manufacturer for this particular pump model. If it is less than
> 100% you might want to consider changing your operating procedures.
> If it is 100% then turn it on and leave it on with a clear conscience.
>
> Thom in Buffalo
>
>
> www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
> wiki.matronics.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert Laird" <rlaird(at)cavediver.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Pressure Ghosts |
Chris --
I had a similar problem, with a Facet and mechanical pump in series.
With the help of a fuel flow gauge, I was able to determine that one
of the check valves built into the Facet was partially open, thus
restricting large amounts of fuel, but not small amounts. If I kept
the Facet turned on, no problems. But if I turned it off, the
mechanical pump alone could not overcome the restriction so on WOT the
fuel flow would not keep up with the need for fuel.
This is why I'll always fly with a fuel flow meter in my aircraft.
-- Robert
On 6/22/06, c b wrote:
>
> All,
>
> This is not an issue of volume vs. pressure, as was vivdly demonstrated
> toady. In the past, the fuel pressure indicated 5+ psi for many hours of
> flight at different throttle settings. In the last 5-10 hours of flight, the
> pressure began to slowly get worse at the top end.
>
> And then...
>
> I had a momentary engine failure in flight today.
>
> So it's not the sender either.
>
> I was running on engine pump only, indicating 0.0 psi at 5200 rpm. It ran
> fine for a minute and a half or so, and then shuddered and lost rpm fast. I
> hit the electric pump and reduced the throttle simultaneously (adrenaline
> also automatically entered the pilot control system). The engine sprung back
> to life.
>
> I was at 1500 feet over the approach end of the runway when this happened,
> so there wasn't much chance of an off-field landing if the electric backup
> failed to do the trick. I landed uneventfully with power to spare.
>
> Yesterday I tested the sender and it seemed not to be working. I blamed the
> sender, but for today's flight I took off with the electric pump engaged (as
> always) and shut it down on downwind.
>
> I'll be replacing the engine driven pump before the next flight.
>
> Chris B
> MK III 912 UL
> Desparately seeking reliability...
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | Re: missing email |
At 08:01 PM 6/22/2006 Thursday, you wrote:
>
>Matt,
> Whats up! I normally use the old method of Kolb-list by receiving each email
posted to the list. If there is a attachment that I want to see, I can go to
the BB., but here lately I am not getting all the messages sent to the list.
The one that I notice the most is from John Hauck, perhaps there are others, but
I can only read John's post on the BB. I am reasonably sure that it is not
my email settings.
>Larry, Oregon
Hum, might be the new enclosure-to-URL code. I've disabled it for now and will
look at it in depth this weekend.
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: | DCulver701(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: HVAC Eng/Expert needed |
Hi Steve i,m certainly not a HVAC engineer, but i,ve installed quite a few
systems years ago. If i can,t help you, maybe i can point you in the right
direction. Best regards, Dave Culver
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cat36Fly(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: HVAC Eng/Expert needed |
I have a bit of experience in that field. What is your question?
Larry Tasker
EX-SPERT
EX - IS A HAS BEEN
SPERT - A DRIP UNDER PRESSURE
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Pressure Ghosts |
cHECK FOR FUEL RESTRICTION IN TANK
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: HVAC Eng/Expert needed |
May have to talk to you on the phone, If you send a # to my email I will call
you at my cost
thanks
Steve
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: HVAC Eng/Expert needed |
Thanks Dave
I would like to talk to you.
Leave a # and I will give you a call
steve
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "john s. flannery" <jflan(at)zianet.com> |
Have had to hold right stick (initial flight about dislocated right
shoulder and elbow) and a bit of rudder and right wing continues to want
to rise. Flaps and ailerons are fairly close to level with underside of
wing. Tried four-inch wide aluminum tab and slight relief, but this said
to be '91 Mark III Classic certainly hasn't flown hands off since last
person may have tried it.
Haven't been up with this tab, yet. Further ideas?
jsf
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <jeepacro(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: still fighting |
Can you put shim's in the wing swivel attach joint to help change the trailing
edge angle of attack? Can you put one the top (right hand side) to lower, and
one on the bottom of the left to lift?
--
Rob.
---- "john s. flannery" wrote:
> Have had to hold right stick (initial flight about dislocated right shoulder
and elbow) and a bit of rudder and right wing continues to want to rise. Flaps
and ailerons are fairly close to level with underside of wing. Tried four-inch
wide aluminum tab and slight relief, but this said to be '91 Mark III Classic
certainly hasn't flown hands off since last person may have tried it.
>
> Haven't been up with this tab, yet. Further ideas?
>
> jsf
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert Laird" <rlaird(at)cavediver.com> |
| Subject: | Re: still fighting |
Do you know about the "English" u-joint that Kolb sells to help this
problem? I bought it (I had the same problem) and it cured it
completely. I no longer need bungee cords to act as trim (which would
be a temporary fix for you).
Contact Kolb and they'll send one out to you.
-- Robert
On 6/23/06, jeepacro(at)cox.net wrote:
>
> Can you put shim's in the wing swivel attach joint to help change the trailing
edge angle of attack? Can you put one the top (right hand side) to lower, and
one on the bottom of the left to lift?
> --
> Rob.
>
> ---- "john s. flannery" wrote:
> > Have had to hold right stick (initial flight about dislocated right shoulder
and elbow) and a bit of rudder and right wing continues to want to rise. Flaps
and ailerons are fairly close to level with underside of wing. Tried four-inch
wide aluminum tab and slight relief, but this said to be '91 Mark III Classic
certainly hasn't flown hands off since last person may have tried it.
> >
> > Haven't been up with this tab, yet. Further ideas?
> >
> > jsf
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "john s. flannery" <jflan(at)zianet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: still fighting |
Many thanks. None of the three Kolb people IU have talked to at length have
said a word about this item. I can't imagine why.
If I can get this bird to fly hands off, I shall be pleasantly surprised.
Wouldn't mind flying ultralights for pleasure rather than just survival.
Again, gracios.
jsf in NM
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 12:59 PM
>
> Do you know about the "English" u-joint that Kolb sells to help this
> problem? I bought it (I had the same problem) and it cured it
> completely. I no longer need bungee cords to act as trim (which would
> be a temporary fix for you).
>
> Contact Kolb and they'll send one out to you.
>
> -- Robert
>
> On 6/23/06, jeepacro(at)cox.net wrote:
>>
>> Can you put shim's in the wing swivel attach joint to help change the
>> trailing edge angle of attack? Can you put one the top (right hand side)
>> to lower, and one on the bottom of the left to lift?
>> --
>> Rob.
>>
>> ---- "john s. flannery" wrote:
>> > Have had to hold right stick (initial flight about dislocated right
>> > shoulder and elbow) and a bit of rudder and right wing continues to
>> > want to rise. Flaps and ailerons are fairly close to level with
>> > underside of wing. Tried four-inch wide aluminum tab and slight relief,
>> > but this said to be '91 Mark III Classic certainly hasn't flown hands
>> > off since last person may have tried it.
>> >
>> > Haven't been up with this tab, yet. Further ideas?
>> >
>> > jsf
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
> http://wiki.matronics.com
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: still fighting |
| If I can get this bird to fly hands off, I shall be pleasantly
surprised.
| Wouldn't mind flying ultralights for pleasure rather than just
survival.
| Again, gracios.
|
| jsf in NM
jsf in NM:
Reckon most all of us will be surprised if you get your Kolb to fly
hands off, for more than a few seconds.
BTW what model Kolb do you have? and where are you located?
john h
mkIII
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "dominique" <dominiquefrenchman(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: HVAC Eng/Expert needed |
He is going to build a Kolb MK-III with airconditioning :D
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=42669#42669
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | robert bean <slyck(at)frontiernet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: still fighting |
John, that is quite a tab. First I would level the cabin and
check/compare wing
incidences. Then check tailplane (horizonal stab) incidence
differential.
If only off a little I would go with the TNK offset universal.
-Anybody know what they get for them? $$$?
The air was nice today here in the northeast. I got in a neighborhood
tour
to check if anything is currently trying to fall off after last weeks
rough
return trip. Felt good.
-BB
On 23, Jun 2006, at 4:21 PM, john s. flannery wrote:
> Have had to hold right stick (initial flight about dislocated right
> shoulder and elbow) and a bit of rudder and right wing continues to
> want to rise. Flaps and ailerons are fairly close to level with
> underside of wing. Tried four-inch wide aluminum tab and slight
> relief, but this said to be '91 Mark III Classic certainly hasn't
> flown hands off since last person may have tried it.
>
> Haven'tbeen upwith this tab, yet. Further ideas?
>
> jsf
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: still fighting |
In a message dated 6/23/2006 8:56:07 PM Eastern Standard Time,
slyck(at)frontiernet.net writes:
If only off a little I would go with the TNK offset universal.
-Anybody know what they get for them? $$$?
I think I paid $75 plus frt. for one.
Howard Shackleford
FS II
SC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "john s. flannery" <jflan(at)zianet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: still fighting |
First, thanks. Appreciate the good feedback I've had. Here's what we did and
realized today had skipped putting protractor under horizontal stabilizer
(flying wires don't twang like my friends Kolb Ultarstar II...more base,
while his are treble, but left and right not far apart). I had been tweaking
for a week or more, trying different approaches, then went back to basics
as level as possible, since dropping left flap had produced 5 or more mph
less indicated at same rpms.
We set boom at 0 degrees with protractor and then checked angle under wings.
Both were 10.3 degrees or at least within a degree of each other.
Then leveled stick and measured slope under wings
Left aileron 13 degrees.
Left flap 14.5 degrees
Right aileron 13.5 degrees
Right flap 12 degrees
The pipes controlling flaps and ailerons were last measurements:
Left 22.5 degrees
Right 21 degrees.
The four inch length tab with about two extended aft and bent about 15
degrees helped, but stick was still needed to keep it near level in flight.
Still feels like yawing. Replaced the aileron tab with 12" length and have
not flown. Not a good morning. Today, hopefully monsoons will start here in
the drought-stricken Southwest.
jsf
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 5:52 PM
>
> John, that is quite a tab. First I would level the cabin and
> check/compare wing
> incidences. Then check tailplane (horizonal stab) incidence differential.
> If only off a little I would go with the TNK offset universal.
> -Anybody know what they get for them? $$$?
>
> The air was nice today here in the northeast. I got in a neighborhood
> tour
> to check if anything is currently trying to fall off after last weeks
> rough
> return trip. Felt good.
> -BB
> On 23, Jun 2006, at 4:21 PM, john s. flannery wrote:
>
>> Have had to hold right stick (initial flight about dislocated right
>> shoulder and elbow) and a bit of rudder and right wing continues to want
>> to rise. Flaps and ailerons are fairly close to level with underside of
>> wing. Tried four-inch wide aluminum tab and slight relief, but this said
>> to be '91 Mark III Classic certainly hasn't flown hands off since last
>> person may have tried it.
>>
>> Haven't been up with this tab, yet. Further ideas?
>>
>> jsf
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
> http://wiki.matronics.com
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerb <ulflyer(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: still fighting |
Bob,
Many different things can contribute to the flight characteristics
your experiencing. Sounds like a rigging problem. In order to
determine the likely cause it will be necessary to properly level the
aircraft in the proper attitude to take correct meaningful
measurements. This becomes a process of elimination. Refer to the
builders manual on how measurements should be taken and how the
aircraft needs to be leveled during the process.
- Level the Aircraft - see the builders manual for reference points
and detailed procedure.
- Wing incidence at the wing root - where it should be and equal on both sides.
- Wing twist on each wing - equal both sides - inboard station near
wing root compared to last full rib station.
- Wing dihedral at the wing tip - equal on both sides.
- Flaps - do they have equal deflection (reflect) relative to the
lower surface of the wing,
- Ailerons/Flaperons - are they both centered when stick is in the
center, neutral position.
- is the trailing edge position correct relative to the
training edge of the flaps.
- Tail vertical stab alignment, centered, or off set in the correct direction.
- Horizontal stabilizer - incidence and dihedral set within the
proper range and equal both sides.
- Engine thrust line - is the engine set in the proper position,
- up/down tilt, rotated the proper amount and in the correct
direction from the plans
specified reference point.
jerb
At 03:21 PM 6/23/2006, you wrote:
>Have had to hold right stick (initial flight about dislocated right
>shoulder and elbow) and a bit of rudder and right wing continues to
>want to rise. Flaps and ailerons are fairly close to level with
>underside of wing. Tried four-inch wide aluminum tab and slight
>relief, but this said to be '91 Mark III Classic certainly hasn't
>flown hands off since last person may have tried it.
>
>Haven't been up with this tab, yet. Further ideas?
>
>jsf
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "tc1917" <tc1917(at)hughes.net> |
I would like to mention and I must have somehow put the sport pilot info
page on the web but forgot to put the link on the index. it is not
complete. S.A.T.
I spent approximately $1000 getting my plane registered, airworthyness cert,
one hour pre-test flying time, 3 hours ground school, books, 2 days
hotels/meals, and examiner. if you have to take training, it will be
considerably more. get your plane ready while you are preping for the
final. ted cowan, alabama
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
#2....Fuel Pumps on standard category general aviation FAA approved
aircraft , either electric or mechanical , are not nearly as
dependable as the small electric facets you guys are "discussing"...
#3 I have found GA and exp. planes with rigging problems caused by
poor repairs or initial building mistakes....(made a few myself)
Know
it all Ed in Western NY
Morning "Know it all Ed in Western NY":
While I was doing a little nonprofessional reasearch about our little
Facet fuel pumps, ran across a Swift Aircraft Email List. Guess what?
Major topic of discussion was multitude of problems with certified
fuel pumps and using Facets as "boost" pumps. Some were running
Facets, even though they were not certified, at the risk of getting
snagged on an inspection, etc. I know Rotax 912 certified engines and
parts are identical in quality, because they are the same parts, with
the exception that certified parts have a serial number and are
tracked with a paper trail. I imagine this is also probably true in
GA aviation.
As imprecise as building, rigging and flying an experimental airplane
is, not surprised at all the trim problems we encounter. Doesn't take
much to get an imbalance in an airplane. First off, in a side by side
seating arrangement, the fat pilot with no passenger is going to cause
the wing on that side of the aircraft to drop and require quite a bit
of opposite stick to maintain level flight, especially on a cross
country flight. Lot's of times, flying around the patch, we do not
notice we have rigging problems. However, get out and fly for an hour
or two, maintaining something like a semblance of a heading, and all
kinds of trim and rigging problems will raise their ugly little heads.
In addition, I have never encountered a Kolb expert (someone who knows
all about Kolb aircraft), including the designer, and don't think I
ever will. There's too much to learn about these little airplanes to
ever consider anyone as an expert on them. Some of us have been
building and flying them a little longer than others, thereby
providing us with a lot more time to make a lot more mistakes and
discover a lot more question marks, but don't think we will ever find
a Kolb expert. I try to capitalize on mistakes and ideas of others,
and myself, to keep me and my mkIII flying enjoyably. If it ain't
fun, don't think I want to waste my time doing it.
Take care,
john h
mkIII (Going to try and find that crew from South Alabama that is
flying near my area today. Weather will be accentuated with normal
thunderstorms here in the South).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack B. Hart" <jbhart(at)onlyinternet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: First Flight |
>
........................................
>...................... Ailerons didn`t seem too heavy.
>
........................................
Pat,
How does this compare with the Challenger?
Jack B. Hart FF004
Winchester, IN
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "frank & margie" <frank-margie(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Still fighting--- |
Ref. the discussion on roll problems/rigging/etc., jerb wrote:
Many different things can contribute to the flight characteristics
your experiencing. Sounds like a rigging problem. In order to
determine the likely cause it will be necessary to properly level the
aircraft in the proper attitude to take correct meaningful
measurements. This becomes a process of elimination. Refer to the
---------------------
John/all,
Sounds like the offset universal works, once you have eliminated
rigging problems as a cause---jerb's list would be a good guide.
There is another possibility that hasn't ever been mentioned in
discussions on roll problems in Kolbs. And this may not apply to
pushers, or planes with flaps. But it's worth thinking about. I had
the same problem on a non-Kolb (Flightstar), which is a tractor design,
and mine does not have flaps. It does have full-span ailerons. We
checked everything we could think of, or anybody we asked could think
of. Engine offset helped, but only a little. Reducing the droop in the
ailerons helped some, but didn't come close to fixing the problem. I
don't know where I got the idea, but I had a friend run the plane up
while I stood behind it (actually under the boom, about 2 feet behind
the aileron trailing edge). I held a piece of cardboard (maybe a foot
square) in the propwash---you could feel the difference between right
and left sides, there was a LOT more push on the cardboard on the left
side. Evidently the descending prop blade pushes more air even when on
the ground. And it evidently was pushing upward harder on the left
aileron, causing a roll to the left. This was true even when we
adjusted all the droop out of the ailerons---and they're supposed to be
set at 3 degrees.
We put a trim tab on the right aileron, with the outboard edge even
with the tip of the prop arc (this is way inboard of the usual location
for aileron tabs). Tab is about 12" wide, 2-1/2" deep, and only bent
down about 15-20 degrees. Result was hands off flying (as far as roll
was concerned, we also put a tab on the rudder to fix a small yaw
tendency).
How could this be true on a pusher? Especially with your descending
blade on the right? I don't know, but----your prop is pretty close to
the TE of your flaps---could the descending blade build up pressure
above the flap, pushing it down slightly? Could the ascending blade be
stronger on a Kolb, maybe resulting in a slight upward push on the left
flap (or aileron)? Is there enough play in the flap linkage to allow
movement? How close is the prop arc to the inboard end of the aileron?
I don't know how to check for thrust differential on a pusher---the
propwash isn't separated by the windscreen like it is on mine, and the
cardboard trick obviously won't work. Wonder what smoke would show about
the airflow around the prop? Just food for thought. Having been there,
I know what you're going thru.
Good luck.
Frank Clyma
Orange Park, FL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | possums <possums(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Test - Getting Older?? |
At 11:52 PM 6/24/2006, you wrote:
>
>Awww, yer crappin' me! Can't hear bugger all
No Bob, it's there and it's loud to a teenager, just not to you.
Catch one and see.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerb <ulflyer(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Still fighting--- |
Frank, A Kolb if it has been built straight or any properly design
aircraft for that matter, shouldn't need any major trim tabs, you may
have masked the symptom but you never determined or corrected the root cause.
Some thing major is in play with this guys airplane based upon his comments.
jerb
At 11:00 PM 6/24/2006, you wrote:
>Ref. the discussion on roll problems/rigging/etc., jerb wrote:
>
>Subject: Re: Kolb-List: still fighting
>
><ulflyer(at)verizon.net>
>
>Many different things can contribute to the flight characteristics
>your experiencing. Sounds like a rigging problem. In order to
>determine the likely cause it will be necessary to properly level the
>aircraft in the proper attitude to take correct meaningful
>measurements. This becomes a process of elimination. Refer to the
>
>---------------------
>John/all,
> Sounds like the offset universal works, once you have
> eliminated rigging problems as a cause---jerb's list would be a good guide.
>
> There is another possibility that hasn't ever been mentioned in
> discussions on roll problems in Kolbs. And this may not apply to
> pushers, or planes with flaps. But it's worth thinking about. I
> had the same problem on a non-Kolb (Flightstar), which is a tractor
> design, and mine does not have flaps. It does have full-span
> ailerons. We checked everything we could think of, or anybody we
> asked could think of. Engine offset helped, but only a little.
> Reducing the droop in the ailerons helped some, but didn't come
> close to fixing the problem. I don't know where I got the idea,
> but I had a friend run the plane up while I stood behind it
> (actually under the boom, about 2 feet behind the aileron trailing
> edge). I held a piece of cardboard (maybe a foot square) in the
> propwash---you could feel the difference between right and left
> sides, there was a LOT more push on the cardboard on the left
> side. Evidently the descending prop blade pushes more air even
> when on the ground. And it evidently was pushing upward harder on
> the left aileron, causing a roll to the left. This was true even
> when we adjusted all the droop out of the ailerons---and they're
> supposed to be set at 3 degrees.
>
> We put a trim tab on the right aileron, with the outboard edge
> even with the tip of the prop arc (this is way inboard of the usual
> location for aileron tabs). Tab is about 12" wide, 2-1/2" deep,
> and only bent down about 15-20 degrees. Result was hands off
> flying (as far as roll was concerned, we also put a tab on the
> rudder to fix a small yaw tendency).
>
> How could this be true on a pusher? Especially with your
> descending blade on the right? I don't know, but----your prop is
> pretty close to the TE of your flaps---could the descending blade
> build up pressure above the flap, pushing it down slightly? Could
> the ascending blade be stronger on a Kolb, maybe resulting in a
> slight upward push on the left flap (or aileron)? Is there enough
> play in the flap linkage to allow movement? How close is the prop
> arc to the inboard end of the aileron? I don't know how to check
> for thrust differential on a pusher---the propwash isn't separated
> by the windscreen like it is on mine, and the cardboard trick
> obviously won't work. Wonder what smoke would show about the
> airflow around the prop? Just food for thought. Having been
> there, I know what you're going thru.
>
>Good luck.
>
>Frank Clyma
>Orange Park, FL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Still fighting--- |
The prop does create a bias as you describe. Note the sides of the
fuselage just ahead of the prop, the gnats are plastered on the right
fuselage side, and the underside of the left flap, but not on the left
side of the fuselage, or the underside of the right flap.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
frank & margie wrote:
> Ref. the discussion on roll problems/rigging/etc., jerb wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: still fighting
>
> >
>
> Many different things can contribute to the flight characteristics
> your experiencing. Sounds like a rigging problem. In order to
> determine the likely cause it will be necessary to properly level the
> aircraft in the proper attitude to take correct meaningful
> measurements. This becomes a process of elimination. Refer to the
>
> ---------------------
> John/all,
>
> ---your prop is pretty close to the TE of your flaps---could the
> descending blade build up pressure above the flap, pushing it down
> slightly? Could the ascending blade be stronger on a Kolb, maybe
> resulting in a slight upward push on the left flap (or aileron)? Is
> there enough play in the flap linkage to allow movement? How close is
> the prop arc to the inboard end of the aileron? I don't know how to
> check for thrust differential on a pusher---the propwash isn't
> separated by the windscreen like it is on mine, and the cardboard
> trick obviously won't work. Wonder what smoke would show about the
> airflow around the prop? Just food for thought. Having been there, I
> know what you're going thru.
>
> Good luck.
>
> Frank Clyma
> Orange Park, FL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Still fighting--- |
How could this be true on a pusher? Especially with your
descending blade on the right?
Frank Clyma
Orange Park, FL
Decending blade may not be on the right, depending on what type engine
is powering the airplane and whether it is turning through a gear box
or belt drive. Rotax 2 strokes rotate opposite direction 4 strokes.
john h
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerb <ulflyer(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Still fighting--- |
Richard,
That's because there are a bunch more right wings gnats than there
are left wings.
jerb
At 06:28 AM 6/25/2006, you wrote:
>
>The prop does create a bias as you describe. Note the sides of the
>fuselage just ahead of the prop, the gnats are plastered on the
>right fuselage side, and the underside of the left flap, but not on
>the left side of the fuselage, or the underside of the right flap.
>
>Richard Pike
>MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>frank & margie wrote:
>>Ref. the discussion on roll problems/rigging/etc., jerb wrote:
>>
>>Subject: Re: Kolb-List: still fighting
>>
>>>
>>
>>Many different things can contribute to the flight characteristics
>>your experiencing. Sounds like a rigging problem. In order to
>>determine the likely cause it will be necessary to properly level the
>>aircraft in the proper attitude to take correct meaningful
>>measurements. This becomes a process of elimination. Refer to the
>>
>>---------------------
>>John/all,
>>
>>---your prop is pretty close to the TE of your flaps---could the
>>descending blade build up pressure above the flap, pushing it down
>>slightly? Could the ascending blade be stronger on a Kolb, maybe
>>resulting in a slight upward push on the left flap (or
>>aileron)? Is there enough play in the flap linkage to allow
>>movement? How close is the prop arc to the inboard end of the
>>aileron? I don't know how to check for thrust differential on a
>>pusher---the propwash isn't separated by the windscreen like it is
>>on mine, and the cardboard trick obviously won't work. Wonder what
>>smoke would show about the airflow around the prop? Just food for
>>thought. Having been there, I know what you're going thru.
>>
>>Good luck.
>>
>>Frank Clyma
>>Orange Park, FL
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "john s. flannery" <jflan(at)zianet.com> |
I flew the Kolb this morning with the 12" bent aluminum trim tab
duct-taped on right aileron. Minimal applications of stick and rudder
pressure used on takeoff, during power changes, banks and reduced power
landing at Truth or Consequences airport. Straight, mostly, and level,
mostly, with improved indicated airspeed at throttle settings used
previously in this prolonged tussle. Pretty close to where I think it
should be now, and am relieved and amazed not to have to use great
pressure on the stick. Almost back to the three-fingers days.
Thanks to list members for so many suggestions. Will be back for more of
your help I am sure, trying to improve this mistreated machine.
jsf
jsf
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "boyd" <by0ung(at)brigham.net> |
| Subject: | Fuel Pressure Ghosts |
Ok I have been thinking about this thread and this is what I have come
up
with=85..
If you want to be able to test the fuel system for restrictions in the
engine driven or elect or both pumps=85 strainers in the bottom of the
tank
etc=85... disconnect the hose from the outlet of the pump or pumps if
ran in
series. And install a new one that will reach the floor a clear
hose
would be nice in helping to see what is happening. It would be real
easy
if using an electric pump=85. Just turn it on and let fuel run into a
fuel
can sitting on the floor. Then turn the pump off and see if the fuel
continues to pass through the hose=85 it should continue to siphon out
if the
fuel can on the floor is lower than the one in the plane. Next, time
how
long it takes to siphon out a gallon of gas=85 if it will keep up with
your
fuel burn while siphoning it should surely keep up with 1 or both pumps
running. If you don=92t have an elect pump you should be able to get
the gas
flowing by turning the prop over by hand, make sure the hose remains
out
of the prop disk. Or I suppose you could , if using a clear hose, just
suck on it. If the siphoning speed wont keep up with your engine fuel
burn,,, you might want to investigate where the restrictions might be.
Make sure you get all the air out of the line while making this test as
an
air bubble will partially or totally restrict the flow. If while
running
this test there is a steady line of air bubbles=85it may indicate a leak
in
the fuel delivery system.
Ok a bit more technical=85 the difference in pressure in fuel levels
is
just under =BD psi per foot=85. So if the level of gas in the plane is
3 ft
higher than the end of the siphon hose=85 there should be just under 1
=BD
psi difference in the levels=85. So that would tell you what kind of
fuel
flow you would have through the system at that pressure=85 assuming
that all
the components were laid out on a flat bench.
Any questions feel free to respond on or off list.
Do archive.
Boyd
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert Laird" <rlaird(at)cavediver.com> |
| Subject: | Re: First Flight |
S'ok, Pat, you can say "buggers"... most Americans don't understand
it*, anyway. :-)
On 6/24/06, pat ladd wrote:
> told me that we are out to lunch tomorrow so that more or less b--gg---s up
* I mean, we know what it means, but it doesn't have that same raw
feel that it does to you Brits.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "frank & margie" <frank-margie(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Still fighting--- |
jerb wrote:
Frank, A Kolb if it has been built straight or any properly design
aircraft for that matter, shouldn't need any major trim tabs, you may
have masked the symptom but you never determined or corrected the root
cause.
Some thing major is in play with this guys airplane based upon his
comments.
jerb
-----------------------
jer,
I think you're right on both counts. The common use of an offset
bushing, however, does indicate something related especially to Kolbs.
It may be mostly weight offset to one side when flown solo, as John H
points out. Mine may be related to the distance from the prop to the
windscreen, and the way the windscreen splits the propwash. Or I may
have something else going on that we never found. As John also said, we
never stop learning. And to some extent, every plane is just slightly
different---even 2 supposedly identical Mark 3's are probably just a
little different.
jer, would you contact me off-list? I have a totally non-Kolb item
I'd like to get your input on.
Frank Clyma
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Edward Steuber" <esteuber(at)rochester.rr.com> |
John,
Interesting about the problems with the certified fuel
pumps.......only kidding about the "know it all "stuff....that's my wife
!
Thin skinned and humbled Ed in Western NY
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Rice <rice(at)iapdatacom.net> |
I recall something about people in Brazil using synthetic oil in 2
strokes when burning gas with ethanol....
Larry the micro mong guy
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Max Stanford" <maxstanford77(at)yahoo.com> |
I would like to thank everyone for signing my email up for lots of free stuff.
Thanks for the free meds BigLar, but thats really not my thing.
Thanks for the thought guys, but if next time you all could sign me up for some
free Ultralight or Challenger realated offers I would be greatful.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=43049#43049
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "biglar" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Big Lar visit |
Thanks for the nice shot, Bob. I've had a heck of a time finding internet access,
and finally have found a WiFi connection at Kinko's in Medford, OR. Truck
is losing the lift pump and it's in the shop here and won't be done till late
tomorrow. I sure do hate to lose vacation time over something like this. I
had a nice brunch with Roger Hankins this morning, and got to talk planes again
for a bit.
The truck has 98,500 miles on it now, and I need to have this fixed right away, before I go over the 100,000 mile warranty limit. I'm trying to duplicate last year's trip to central and coastal British Columbia, ( http://www.webpictures.homestead.com/bc05.html ) and hoping for better weather than last year. Thanks. Lar Do not Achive.
--------
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Building Kolb Mk IIIC
"Vamoose"
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=43196#43196
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: serial number |
John:
Very unusual engine mounting hardware. Not what is called for for
Kolb's.
First batch of MKIII cages didn't get a serial number stamped on the
root tube. My serial number is M3-011. Number 11 to come off the
line.
There is no serial number plate or stamped on my airframe.
john h
mkIII
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eugene Zimmerman <etzim62(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | MkIII, suzuki G10 |
Bob,
Can you please give us your current assessment of the suzuki
performance on your Mk III?
Climb? Cruise? Fuel burn? Smoothness/ vibration?
How do you feel it compares to rotax?
Are you pleased with engine or do you have any major disappointments
or failed expectations with it?
Is there anything you would do differently if you were powering
another kolb?
I'd be interested in your current preference of reduction ratio and
prop size, as well as gear or belt drive?
As you can tell I am very interested in the geo/ suzuki engine option.
On Jun 26, 2006, at 8:39 PM, robert bean wrote:
> BB, MkIII, suzuki G10, 53.1 hrs.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "The BaronVonEvil" <grageda(at)innw.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Still fighting--- |
Hi All,
On an Item of note regarding "Still Fighting". I have a Firestar II that I bought
used a few years ago. It flew quite well and without trim. About two vears
ago I decided to recover the fuselage due to some wear and tear of the fabric
and primer failure issues. I thought about repriming the fuselage cage with epoxy
primer as had the original builder. However I decided to have the cage powder
coated for the better durability it offers.
After completion I flew my Firestar only to find out that now I had a right wing
heavy issue and needed lots of trim. I didnt change anything on the wings or
struts. I bought the English Ujoints and corrected the problem by changing the
incidence of the left wing. ( It took three washers in the joint).
Apparently during the powdercoat process of heating up the cage to make the material
flow, the heat (400+ degrees) allowed the cage to relax enough here and
there to change the incidence between the wing panels.
So if you are thinking of powdercoating your cage, it is highly advisable that
you do so at the start of construction. Otherwise you may end up retrimming your
plane as I had to.
Thanks for the Great Kolb Forum
The Baron
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=43258#43258
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/english_u_joint_142.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: serial number |
You might want to put up a couple good clear pictures of your motor
mount setup. John H is right, something is really non-standard, maybe we
could take a look?
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
john s. flannery wrote:
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "frank & margie" <frank-margie(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Ref:
The prop does create a bias as you describe. Note the sides of the
fuselage just ahead of the prop, the gnats are plastered on the right
fuselage side, and the underside of the left flap, but not on the left
side of the fuselage, or the underside of the right flap.
------------------------------------
Richard,
I think I'll go with jerb's explanation------
I've been lurking on this list long enough so's I should know what
engine setup you have, but seeing how my memory is no longer functional,
please let me know what engine/redrive/prop you use. Your info is real
interesting, and I want to think on it some more.
Thanks,
Frank Clyma
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "frank & margie" <frank-margie(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Ref. John Hauck's comment:
Decending blade may not be on the right, depending on what type engine
is powering the airplane and whether it is turning through a gear box
or belt drive. Rotax 2 strokes rotate opposite direction 4 strokes.
----------------------------------------
John,
You've got me on that one, I assumed Rotax 2stroke/gearbox----and I
know about the definition of "assume". I think the differential airflow
possibility would exist in any case, but the roll effect might be in the
opposite direction. I wouldn't have believed it could exert such a
strong effect, which is why I shared the info. The difference made by
the trim tab is like night and day----holding constant side stick
pressure, especially right side, gets uncomfortable pretty quickly.
Frank Clyma
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Bigelow" <up_country(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Twin Engine Firestar 2 |
Several months back, I posted my intention to install two Hirth F-33 engines on
my Firestar 2. The design goal was to end up with an aircraft that could at
least maintain altitude on one engine and get to a landing spot if one of the
engines failed. The main issues I anticipated were vibration and the possible
interaction of the overlapped propellers. The engines were mounted on two struts
that were secured to a flat plate that was mounted on the original Lord engine
mounts. In turn, the engines were flat plate mounted on their own set of
mounts.
The right engine uses a prop extender to put the 53 inch Powerfin two blade prop
4 inches behind the left engine prop and allow the overlap. Each engine is
mounted 16 inches from the aircraft center line, and each propeller clears the
aileron on its side by several inches. The whole installation including the
mounting system (excluding battery) weighs almost exactly the same as the Rotax
503.
The interaction of the two propellers crossing each other in opposite directions
at the overlap was pretty much a gamble. I couldnt find any information whether
or not it would work. In the early 80s, I had the chance to do some thrust
tests on the twin engine setup of the Para Plane powered parachute. The Para
Plane installation was very well designed with two small single cylinder (Solo,
if I remember correctly) engines mounted on both sides of a central set of
concentric prop shafts. The engines were connected to each shaft with a belt
drive, and the props counter-rotated several inches apart. We wanted to find
out if the two counter-rotating props would affect each other at various RPMs
of the two engines. Interestingly enough, there was no measurable affect.
With both engines running at full RPM, the thrust (150 lb) was twice that of when
one engine (75 lb) was run alone. With that knowledge in my pocket, I figured
overlapping props crossing in opposite directions would probably not interact
appreciably.
It took several months of part time work to get the mounts set up and the throttles/choke,
fuel system, and electrical system set up. When all that was complete,
I tied the Firestar securely, and started and broke in the engines. I had
some jetting issues because of being at 5,000 feet density altitude. Matt
Dandar, the owner of Recreational Power Engineering (where I purchased the F-33s)
gave me good technical support, and I got the engines running quite well.
With a spring scale tied to the tail wheel area, each engine measured about 150
lbs of static thrust when run alone. The vibration level was about what you
would expect from a single cylinder engine not unreasonable at all. However,
when both engines were run together at high RPM, the thrust was only a little
over 200 pounds, and the vibration level was high. It appeared that the area
where the props overlapped and crossed was too turbulent for the props to work
efficiently.
I had to wait several weeks for the local winds to drop below 10 mph, but finally
had several days with light winds. I trailered the Firestar to the Waimea
Airport, which has almost a mile of paved runway. My grass strip at home is only
700 feet long, and is not ideal for testing a modification of this magnitude.
Takeoff confirmed the static thrust test info. The thrust was not nearly
equal to the Rotax 503, and it should have been greater. I climbed to a couple
of thousand feet above the airport and alternately put one engine to idle,
and the other to full throttle. The yaw was easily controlled with rudder and
I could just maintain level flight. Vibration was about the same as with the
Rotax 503.
With both engines anywhere above 4,500 RPM, the vibration was severe enough that
eventually something on the plane would fail. I did a touch and go, and a full
stop and called it a day. The experiment was a failure, and I really dont
see that there is much I can do to fix it. I think it would work if the engines
could be moved far enough apart to eliminate the propeller overlap, but that
would require bigger struts (more weight and drag). Also, the aileron gap
would have to be extended (shorter ailerons) to provide sufficient clearance for
the props.
I hate to post the details of a failed experiment for the world to pick apart,
but believe it is good to get the info in the archives in case someone else in
the future has the same idea. I think it could be made to work with a concentric
shaft counter-rotating setup like the Para Plane, but I dont have the machine
shop resources available to build it. Guess Ill remount the Rotax 503 and
go fly. Mine has never missed a beat, and hopefully will continue in that mode.
In the meantime, Im looking at the HKS 700E.
As a footnote, the Hirth F-33 engines are beautifully engineered packages, and
Im in no way being critical of them. They are good engines, and Matt Dandar of
RPE backs up and supports his product. They would be my first choice as a light
weight compact package for a single place trike, powered parachute, or other
Part 103 legal ultralight.
--------
Dave Bigelow
Kamuela, Hawaii
FS2, Rotax 503 DCDI
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=43287#43287
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/twin_hirth_f_33_firestar08_142.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/twin_hirth_f_33_firestar07_214.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Edward Steuber" <esteuber(at)rochester.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Dirt in the exhaust |
I was finally able to get the rest of the dope on the Ultrastar and
test-run the overhauled engine. A slight problem arose....Apparently
when the engine was detached from the airframe in the cornfield some
dirt made its way into the exhaust. Before installing the exhaust after
the overhaul I blew compressed air into both openings and did not notice
any thing unusual...no rattling noises ...But upon starting after 5 or 6
pulls on the rope, a bunch of small pieces of dirt and corn stalk blew
out....My question is this...when you pull a 2 stroke through with the
rope and it does not fire, what are the chances of the dirt back sucking
into the cylinders. I know soon as is starts the flow ejects anything in
the exhaust but is there a chance it may have got into the
cylinders....2 strokes are funny ducks !
Waddling around Ed
in Western NY ........... had to drop the "Know it All title"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
Have a 582 and B box, 68" Ivo two blade, so standing at the tail and
looking forward, the prop turns clockwise. Thus you have a swirl of air
that also turns clockwise, ahead of the prop as well as behind it. Which
plasters gnats appropriate to that swirl ahead of the prop (about 18"
max) as well as behind it, which means it would also be pushing the
right flap down, and the left flap up. At least to the extent that slop
in the mechanism allows, which shouldn't be all that much.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
frank & margie wrote:
> Ref:
>
> >
>
> The prop does create a bias as you describe. Note the sides of the
> fuselage just ahead of the prop, the gnats are plastered on the right
> fuselage side, and the underside of the left flap, but not on the left
> side of the fuselage, or the underside of the right flap.
>
> ------------------------------------
> Richard,
> I think I'll go with jerb's explanation------
>
> I've been lurking on this list long enough so's I should know what
> engine setup you have, but seeing how my memory is no longer
> functional, please let me know what engine/redrive/prop you use. Your
> info is real interesting, and I want to think on it some more.
>
> Thanks,
> Frank Clyma
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dirt in the exhaust |
what are the chances of the dirt back sucking into the cylinders. I
know soon as is starts the flow ejects anything in the exhaust but is
there a chance it may have got into the cylinders....2 strokes are
funny ducks !
Waddling around
Ed in Western NY ........... had to drop the "Know it All
title"
Funny Duck:
Can't say for "certain" whether it will suck dirt out of the exhaust
or not, but there is a darn good chance it will.
Some years ago, 1989, on a return flight from River Ranch, FL, 447
powered Firestar, wrist pin needle bearing came apart in one cylinder.
When I pulled the cylinders off, there were needles stuck in the top
of both pistons, although the 447 has two seperate crankcases.
Undoubtedly, the needles from one cylinder were blown out the bad
cylinder and into the good cylinder.
NOTE: This engine started coming apart while at the flyin, yet made
it all the way from Central Florida back to Titus, Alabama. Very
fortunate, i.e., lucky as Hell.
john h (chicken hawk)
mkIII
PS: Did someone come up with SN: M3-001, the first customer built
MKIII? I think it was Rudy Doctor. I remember seeing his kit, ready
for shipment, when I arrived at the Kolb Company 1 Feb 1991.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | robert bean <slyck(at)frontiernet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: MkIII, suzuki G10 |
On 26, Jun 2006, at 10:02 PM, Eugene Zimmerman wrote:
>
>
> Bob,
>
> Can you please give us your current assessment of the suzuki
> performance on your Mk III?
Eugene, thought by now I had related most of what I know about it
but will try to make a few line comments here.
>
> Climb? Cruise? Fuel burn? Smoothness/ vibration?
Two weeks ago I had the good fortune to fly alongside (behind) Bob Erb
in his beautiful
FSII/503. At takeoff he outclimbs me considerably. At cruise I had to
abandon my usual
4700RPM and go to 4800 (about 85% power) to stay with him. My having
at best, 5 more HP is compensated
by his being so much lighter and cleaner. Maybe when I get the long
neglected doors
made I can cut back to 4700 again.
Fuel burn at 4700 is slightly over 2gph/ regular mogas
smoothness: pretty tough to make 3 cylinders smooth, sorta throbs like
an old radial.
sounds like one too. Think 7cyl Jacobs.
Not enough vibration to be objectionable
> How do you feel it compares to rotax?
Never flew one
>
> Are you pleased with engine or do you have any major disappointments
> or failed expectations with it?
> Is there anything you would do differently if you were powering
> another kolb?
I would use the G13 4 cylinder which is nearly identical except one
more cylinder.
The block weighs approximately 15 lbs more than the 3 cyl.
The suzuki engine is very well made and reports from builders don't
show any
mechanical failures (yet).
Richard Swiderski's web site has a bunch of info on the turbo version 3
cyl he is re-inventing.
My Kolb would be a little on the tame side for a lot of pilots but I'm
happy with it as it is.
I don't fly out of a high elevation area so performance is acceptable.
I went with a carb but would recommend FI to anyone else.
> I'd be interested in your current preference of reduction ratio and
> prop size, as well as gear or belt drive?
I have the cog belt drive. It is quiet and has performed reliably.
The reduction ratio is 2.26:1
which would be more appropriate for a trike, where most suzukis have
been installed.
The russian gear drive (Swiderski again) is reportedly well made and
has a ratio better suited
to a Kolb.
The belt drive requires some touchy adjustments and fine tuning whereas
the gear drive is
bolt on and go.
A 70" warp drive prop was too big in the 3 blade configuration and not
very smooth
with two blades. I went with a 65" powerfin.
>
> As you can tell I am very interested in the geo/ suzuki engine option.
Hope this helps, write off list for more info if you want.
>
>
> On Jun 26, 2006, at 8:39 PM, robert bean wrote:
>
>> BB, MkIII, suzuki G10, 53.1 hrs.
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
> http://wiki.matronics.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gherkins Tim-rp3420" <rp3420(at)freescale.com> |
| Subject: | Twin Engine Firestar 2 |
Dave,
Thanks for posting your report. I found it very interesting and appreciate your
pioneering resourcefulness.
Tim Gherkins
FSII
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Monday, June 26, 2006 10:40 PM
Several months back, I posted my intention to install two Hirth F-33 engines on
my Firestar 2. The design goal was to end up with an aircraft that could at
least maintain altitude on one engine and get to a landing spot if one of the
engines failed. The main issues I anticipated were vibration and the possible
interaction of the overlapped propellers. The engines were mounted on two struts
that were secured to a flat plate that was mounted on the original Lord engine
mounts. In turn, the engines were flat plate mounted on their own set of
mounts.
The right engine uses a prop extender to put the 53 inch Powerfin two blade prop
4 inches behind the left engine prop and allow the overlap. Each engine is
mounted 16 inches from the aircraft center line, and each propeller clears the
aileron on its side by several inches. The whole installation including the
mounting system (excluding battery) weighs almost exactly the same as the Rotax
503.
The interaction of the two propellers crossing each other in opposite directions
at the overlap was pretty much a gamble. I couldnt find any information whether
or not it would work. In the early 80s, I had the chance to do some thrust
tests on the twin engine setup of the Para Plane powered parachute. The Para
Plane installation was very well designed with two small single cylinder (Solo,
if I remember correctly) engines mounted on both sides of a central set of
concentric prop shafts. The engines were connected to each shaft with a belt
drive, and the props counter-rotated several inches apart. We wanted to find
out if the two counter-rotating props would affect each other at various RPMs
of the two engines. Interestingly enough, there was no measurable affect.
With both engines running at full RPM, the thrust (150 lb) was twice that of when
one engine (75 lb) was run alone. With that knowledge in my pocket, I figured
overlapping props crossing in op! posite directions would probably not interact
appreciably.
It took several months of part time work to get the mounts set up and the throttles/choke,
fuel system, and electrical system set up. When all that was complete,
I tied the Firestar securely, and started and broke in the engines. I had
some jetting issues because of being at 5,000 feet density altitude. Matt
Dandar, the owner of Recreational Power Engineering (where I purchased the F-33s)
gave me good technical support, and I got the engines running quite well.
With a spring scale tied to the tail wheel area, each engine measured about 150
lbs of static thrust when run alone. The vibration level was about what you
would expect from a single cylinder engine not unreasonable at all. However,
when both engines were run together at high RPM, the thrust was only a little
over 200 pounds, and the vibration level was high. It appeared that the area
where the props overlapped and crossed was too turbulent for the props to work
efficiently.
I had to wait several weeks for the local winds to drop below 10 mph, but finally
had several days with light winds. I trailered the Firestar to the Waimea
Airport, which has almost a mile of paved runway. My grass strip at home is only
700 feet long, and is not ideal for testing a modification of this magnitude.
Takeoff confirmed the static thrust test info. The thrust was not nearly
equal to the Rotax 503, and it should have been greater. I climbed to a couple
of thousand feet above the airport and alternately put one engine to idle,
and the other to full throttle. The yaw was easily controlled with rudder and
I could just maintain level flight. Vibration was about the same as with the
Rotax 503.
With both engines anywhere above 4,500 RPM, the vibration was severe enough that
eventually something on the plane would fail. I did a touch and go, and a full
stop and called it a day. The experiment was a failure, and I really dont
see that there is much I can do to fix it. I think it would work if the engines
could be moved far enough apart to eliminate the propeller overlap, but that
would require bigger struts (more weight and drag). Also, the aileron gap
would have to be extended (shorter ailerons) to provide sufficient clearance for
the props.
I hate to post the details of a failed experiment for the world to pick apart,
but believe it is good to get the info in the archives in case someone else in
the future has the same idea. I think it could be made to work with a concentric
shaft counter-rotating setup like the Para Plane, but I dont have the machine
shop resources available to build it. Guess Ill remount the Rotax 503 and
go fly. Mine has never missed a beat, and hopefully will continue in that mode.
In the meantime, Im looking at the HKS 700E.
As a footnote, the Hirth F-33 engines are beautifully engineered packages, and
Im in no way being critical of them. They are good engines, and Matt Dandar of
RPE backs up and supports his product. They would be my first choice as a light
weight compact package for a single place trike, powered parachute, or other
Part 103 legal ultralight.
--------
Dave Bigelow
Kamuela, Hawaii
FS2, Rotax 503 DCDI
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=43287#43287
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/twin_hirth_f_33_firestar08_142.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/twin_hirth_f_33_firestar07_214.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "George Alexander" <gtalexander(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Hope I'm not making a big mistake.... |
jimhefner wrote:
>
>
> Am I totally crazy or what? :o
Kind of like being partially pregnant. Some people would say that you can't be
any more crazy than you already are. Needs change. Not many people stick with
the same "stuff" forever. The guy that I bought my Original FS from was selling
it because he didn't like leaving his wife sitting at the airport while
he went out and bored holes.
My only comment would be to remind you that there is a world of difference in the
payload of a C175 and C150. Make sure that a C150 will serve your "new" needs.
Unless the 3 of you are all below average in weight, you could be out of,
or at least, marginally close to the edge of the envelope of a C150. Particularly
if you have to deal with density altitude.
Like they say..... advice and comments.... get what you paid for it.
--------
George Alexander
http://gtalexander.home.att.net
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=43375#43375
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kirk Smith" <snuffy(at)usol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dirt in the exhaust |
<....My question is this...when you pull a 2 stroke through with the
rope and it does not fire, what are the chances of the dirt back sucking
into the cylinders. >
Don't know where the suction/back pressure at the exhaust port would
come from during cranking. The tuned exhaust isn't even working at that
point. I would suspect the dirt got sucked in the intake and was in the
crankcase or transfer port channels from the crash.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "JetPilot" <orcabonita(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Hope I'm not making a big mistake.... |
I would get a Kolb MK-III Xtra instead of a 150. The visibility of the 150 sucks
compared to the Kolb, and the expenses of general aviation will add much faster
than you think. You will be pretty much stuck inside a aluminum shell with
small portholes to look out of, and confined to longer well developed runways.
I have owned 2 Cessna 150's and have no desire to own another one.
I also have a wife that likes to fly and I would not even consider a single seat
plane, thats why I got the MK-III. It carrys two people without all the disadvantages
and drawbacks of the Cessna 150...
JettPilot
--------
"NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could
have !!!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=43387#43387
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Twin Engine Firestar 2 |
Sounds like a great effort, Dave. Good on you. I'll second the comment
that it's too bad it didn't work out. Lar.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 26, 2006 10:40 PM
>
> Several months back, I posted my intention to install two Hirth F-33
> engines on my Firestar 2. The design goal was to end up with an aircraft
> that could at least maintain altitude on one engine and get to a landing
> spot if one of the engines failed. The main issues I anticipated were
> vibration and the possible interaction of the
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "blackbird" <blackbird754(at)alltel.net> |
Fired up the Kobra yesterday and it went really well.....Have installed the new
blue head 582.....
Can't wait to get her airborne....
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=43419#43419
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/dash_close_up_704.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/fuel_tank_169.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kirby Dennis Contr MDA/AL <Dennis.Kirby(at)kirtland.af.mil> |
| Subject: | Re: serial number |
<< John, any number found on the engine mount or anywhere on the cage is
not a serial number. Mine has a number stamped on it but that was only for
production purposes. Then just make one up - If you are the manufacturer.
robert bean >>
This topic came up a few years ago, also.
If I recall, Dennis Souder chimed in confirming what Bob Bean says above -
that the number stamped on the end of the big center tube on Kolbs that came
from the Pennsylvania Kolb factory is not necessarily a serial number, but a
factory routing number of some sort.
My 1996 Mark-III is serial number 300 (before they started referring to it
as the "Classic"), a number that was given to me by the factory along with
my bill of sale. I stamped "M3-300" on the big center tube myself, so it
matches what's on my data plate.
Dennis Kirby
912ul,
Cedar Crest, NM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)msbit.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Dirt in the exhaust |
> Anything that might help to
> flush carbon..
Higher oil ratios, less/no carbon. Maintain operations in the 1150
EGT range, no/little carbon (fly an EGT, not an
airspeed....interesting way to look at it). 300+ hrs at 100:1 and
just a light amber glaze on the piston crown.
Jim Baker
580.788.2779
Elmore City, OK
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Guillermo Uribe" <WillUribe(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | Hope I'm not making a big mistake.... |
Hi Jim,
After building my FireStar II I stopped flying my Cessna 172 after owning it
for almost 20 years. I then eventually sold it to Dave Rains. A Kolb is so
much more fun to fly then a Cessna. Last Sunday Dave and I were landing at
Dell City in the 175 when the case on one of the mags broke. We had to leave
the Cessna there until he can get a replacement. To replace the part it is
going to cost him about $600. Can you imagine how much it will cost if you
bent your Cessna gear in an off airport landing? Dave now has the 172 up for
sell so we can build a Kolbra. I would buy a MK-III then a C-150.
Regards,
Will Uribe
El Paso, TX
FireStar II N4GU
http://home.elp.rr.com/airplane/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Rice <rice(at)iapdatacom.net> |
| Subject: | Twin Engine Firestar |
Why not concentric shafts? It's been done before & worked well.
Just a thought.
Larry the micro mong guy
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eugene Zimmerman <etzim62(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: MkIII, suzuki G10 |
Thanks for the info. Bob.
Now I'm eager to here from others using the Suzuki.
From reports I've heard the 4 cylinder matches the 912 rotax
performance real close.
On Jun 27, 2006, at 9:20 AM, robert bean wrote:
>
>
> On 26, Jun 2006, at 10:02 PM, Eugene Zimmerman wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Bob,
>>
>> Can you please give us your current assessment of the suzuki
>> performance on your Mk III?
> Eugene, thought by now I had related most of what I know about it
> but will try to make a few line comments here.
>>
>> Climb? Cruise? Fuel burn? Smoothness/ vibration?
> Two weeks ago I had the good fortune to fly alongside (behind) Bob
> Erb in his beautiful
> FSII/503. At takeoff he outclimbs me considerably. At cruise I
> had to abandon my usual
> 4700RPM and go to 4800 (about 85% power) to stay with him. My
> having at best, 5 more HP is compensated
> by his being so much lighter and cleaner. Maybe when I get the
> long neglected doors
> made I can cut back to 4700 again.
>
> Fuel burn at 4700 is slightly over 2gph/ regular mogas
> smoothness: pretty tough to make 3 cylinders smooth, sorta throbs
> like an old radial.
> sounds like one too. Think 7cyl Jacobs.
> Not enough vibration to be objectionable
>> How do you feel it compares to rotax?
> Never flew one
>>
>> Are you pleased with engine or do you have any major
>> disappointments or failed expectations with it?
>> Is there anything you would do differently if you were powering
>> another kolb?
> I would use the G13 4 cylinder which is nearly identical except one
> more cylinder.
> The block weighs approximately 15 lbs more than the 3 cyl.
> The suzuki engine is very well made and reports from builders don't
> show any
> mechanical failures (yet).
> Richard Swiderski's web site has a bunch of info on the turbo
> version 3 cyl he is re-inventing.
>
> My Kolb would be a little on the tame side for a lot of pilots but
> I'm happy with it as it is.
> I don't fly out of a high elevation area so performance is acceptable.
>
> I went with a carb but would recommend FI to anyone else.
>> I'd be interested in your current preference of reduction ratio
>> and prop size, as well as gear or belt drive?
> I have the cog belt drive. It is quiet and has performed
> reliably. The reduction ratio is 2.26:1
> which would be more appropriate for a trike, where most suzukis
> have been installed.
> The russian gear drive (Swiderski again) is reportedly well made
> and has a ratio better suited
> to a Kolb.
> The belt drive requires some touchy adjustments and fine tuning
> whereas the gear drive is
> bolt on and go.
> A 70" warp drive prop was too big in the 3 blade configuration and
> not very smooth
> with two blades. I went with a 65" powerfin.
>>
>> As you can tell I am very interested in the geo/ suzuki engine
>> option.
> Hope this helps, write off list for more info if you want.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jun 26, 2006, at 8:39 PM, robert bean wrote:
>>
>>> BB, MkIII, suzuki G10, 53.1 hrs.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>> http://wiki.matronics.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
> wiki.matronics.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ron <CaptainRon1(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: MkIII, suzuki G10 |
I am also going to power my M3X with a Suzuki, its a 16 valve DOHC. I
have been told various values for the HP from 105 to 120 hp. I am not
sure what it will end up being. I am pretty deep into it right now.
The good thing is that I can choose just exactly how I want it built.
So far I am under 1K including the engine core and accessories. I am
sure that will change as the reduction drive alone will run about
1.7K So far so good. If I will convert another later I'll be able to
do it very quickly. Its a great motor I am more impressed with it all
the time. I was over at the engine shop today and the fellow there
said it looks good as new. The pistons that I was planning on
replacing after cleaning look as though they just came out of the
wrapping paper. So far this little used engine is just fantastic in
terms of its durability. It did look like hell from the outside when
I first got it. They build them good. I will need to modify the cage
on the Kolb and that's for sure. The oil sump needs to sit right
where that engine mount tube is at. My solution is two parallel tubes
cradling the motor in between. I still don't know why the factory
didn't do it that way to begin with. Surely by now they need to
consider that due to the tremendous cost of the Rotax 912 very few
will be able to afford it. You can buy an entire Suzuki automobile
for the cost of one Rot 912, it can't be that expensive to produce.
Anyway the Suzuki conversion looks like a better deal all around.
I would if I were you get the Suzuki 1.3 16V Sohc, it has a bit less
Hp but its usually less expensive and much more abundant.
Ron
Arizona
===================
>
>Thanks for the info. Bob.
>
>Now I'm eager to here from others using the Suzuki.
>From reports I've heard the 4 cylinder matches the 912 rotax
>performance real close.
>
>
>On Jun 27, 2006, at 9:20 AM, robert bean wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>On 26, Jun 2006, at 10:02 PM, Eugene Zimmerman wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>Bob,
>>>
>>>Can you please give us your current assessment of the suzuki
>>>performance on your Mk III?
>>Eugene, thought by now I had related most of what I know about it
>>but will try to make a few line comments here.
>>>
>>>Climb? Cruise? Fuel burn? Smoothness/ vibration?
>>Two weeks ago I had the good fortune to fly alongside (behind) Bob
>>Erb in his beautiful
>>FSII/503. At takeoff he outclimbs me considerably. At cruise I
>>had to abandon my usual
>>4700RPM and go to 4800 (about 85% power) to stay with him. My
>>having at best, 5 more HP is compensated
>>by his being so much lighter and cleaner. Maybe when I get the
>>long neglected doors
>>made I can cut back to 4700 again.
>>
>>Fuel burn at 4700 is slightly over 2gph/ regular mogas
>>smoothness: pretty tough to make 3 cylinders smooth, sorta throbs
>>like an old radial.
>>sounds like one too. Think 7cyl Jacobs.
>>Not enough vibration to be objectionable
>>>How do you feel it compares to rotax?
>>Never flew one
>>>
>>>Are you pleased with engine or do you have any major
>>>disappointments or failed expectations with it?
>>>Is there anything you would do differently if you were powering
>>>another kolb?
>>I would use the G13 4 cylinder which is nearly identical except one
>>more cylinder.
>>The block weighs approximately 15 lbs more than the 3 cyl.
>>The suzuki engine is very well made and reports from builders don't show any
>>mechanical failures (yet).
>>Richard Swiderski's web site has a bunch of info on the turbo
>>version 3 cyl he is re-inventing.
>>
>>My Kolb would be a little on the tame side for a lot of pilots but
>>I'm happy with it as it is.
>>I don't fly out of a high elevation area so performance is acceptable.
>>
>>I went with a carb but would recommend FI to anyone else.
>>>I'd be interested in your current preference of reduction ratio
>>>and prop size, as well as gear or belt drive?
>>I have the cog belt drive. It is quiet and has performed reliably.
>>The reduction ratio is 2.26:1
>>which would be more appropriate for a trike, where most suzukis
>>have been installed.
>>The russian gear drive (Swiderski again) is reportedly well made
>>and has a ratio better suited
>>to a Kolb.
>>The belt drive requires some touchy adjustments and fine tuning
>>whereas the gear drive is
>>bolt on and go.
>>A 70" warp drive prop was too big in the 3 blade configuration and
>>not very smooth
>>with two blades. I went with a 65" powerfin.
>>>
>>>As you can tell I am very interested in the geo/ suzuki engine option.
>>Hope this helps, write off list for more info if you want.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>On Jun 26, 2006, at 8:39 PM, robert bean wrote:
>>>
>>>>BB, MkIII, suzuki G10, 53.1 hrs.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>>>http://wiki.matronics.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>>wiki.matronics.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | WhiskeyVictor36(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Twin Engine Firestar 2 |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________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "JetPilot" <orcabonita(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: MkIII, suzuki G10 |
The Suzuki engine seems like a really great alternative for the Kolbs. They are
cheap to get, parts are cheap and plentiful, and fuel consumption is very low.
It will be neat to see how they work out on the MK-3's and how their reliability
is.
If the 4 cylinder weighs only 15 pounds more than the 3 cylinder engine, I would
think that the 4 cylinder would be better even for the Firestar. A lot more
power and a lot less vibration for only 15 pounds seems like a real bargain to
me.
Mike
--------
"NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could
have !!!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=43600#43600
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "JetPilot" <orcabonita(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dirt in the exhaust |
esteuber(at)rochester.rr. wrote:
>
>
> My question is this...when you pull?a 2 stroke?through with the rope and it
does not fire, what are the chances of the dirt back sucking into the cylinders.
I know soon as is starts the flow ejects anything in the exhaust but is
there a chance it may have got into the cylinders....2 strokes are funny ducks
!
>
If the dirt and stuff did not come out when you blew air through the exhaust and
handled it, pulling on the rope would not have been enough to break the dirt
loose and suck it in.
Once the engine starts it is a different story. A two stroke engine has very strong
pressure pulses in the exhaust that could very well suck stuff back in when
running. There is a good chance stuff got sucked in once the engine was started.
I would clean that exhaust out with gasoline or something to dissolve
any oil built up, then with soap and high pressure water that would dissolve
any last bit of dirt that might be in there.
--------
"NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could
have !!!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=43605#43605
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)msbit.net> |
| Subject: | Twin Engine Firestar 2 |
> Some two strokes can be set to run either way,
Why go to all that trouble.
_____________
|--O O---|
_____________
The above represents two engines, back-to-back on the
mounting plate with the counter-rotating shafts mounted below
the crankcases.
> The final issue is the belt drive; the belt AND
> sprockets must be able to transmit the HP going the
> other way
Not a problem...see above.
Jim Baker
580.788.2779
Elmore City, OK
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <jeepacro(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Microlight Championships |
Hi all, I was reading the Ulralightflying magazine today and saw that the
US National Micro light championship competitors will perform task and contests
that are designed according to world class specs. What are the task's and contests?
Has anyone on the list participated? Did you like it? Thanks in advance
--
Rob.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: MkIII, suzuki G10 |
In a message dated 6/28/2006 2:10:03 PM Eastern Standard Time,
orcabonita(at)hotmail.com writes:
The Suzuki engine seems like a really great alternative for the Kolbs. They
are cheap to get, parts are cheap and plentiful, and fuel consumption is very
low. It will be neat to see how they work out on the MK-3's and how their
reliability is.
If the 4 cylinder weighs only 15 pounds more than the 3 cylinder engine, I
would think that the 4 cylinder would be better even for the Firestar. A lot
more power and a lot less vibration for only 15 pounds seems like a real bargain
to me.
Mike
Geez, about 4 years ago I checked out the 3 cyl. to go on my FS II &
determined it was just too heavy. The 4 cyl. must run close to 150+ lbs. Besides
the
weight, at somewhere around 70 hp, youd hacw to beef up the cage.
Howard Shackleford
FS II
SC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | WhiskeyVictor36(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Twin Engine Firestar 2 |
In a message dated 6/28/2006 2:41:44 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
jspc78(at)yahoo.com writes:
www.quantumwrench.com/Kolb.htm
Jim,
What a great personal web page you have put together. I just finished
looking over your page pertaining to your Kolb building project. Wow! You are
really doing it right. With all of the metal prep it should last a lifetime.
Bill Varnes
Original Kolb FireStar
Audubon NJ
Do Not Archive
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Bigelow" <up_country(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Twin Engine Firestar 2 |
Thanks for all the positive feedback and brainstorming. Here's my take on two
of the ideas presented:
Turning one engine around and using belt drives to drive concentric drive shafts
to counter-rotating props is an elegant solution, and I'm sure it would work.
The thing that bothers me about this method goes back to the original design
criterion, that being to fly on one engine when the other "craps" out. If one
of those belts fails (and they do), it would most likely go through both of
the counter-rotating props and take them both out. Perhaps the belts could be
enclosed or guarded somehow.
Changing the prop direction on one engine by reversing the engine might cut the
interferance. You would have to modify the timing plate inside the flywheel
so the ignition advance would be correct for the change in rotation. Right now,
the sparks come at some number of degrees before top dead center, and if you
just reversed the direction of rotation, the sparks would come at the same number
of degrees after top dead center. The engine might run with that degree
of retardation, but wouldn't have much power.
Every solution I can come up with seems to bring a whole new set of problems.
I think I just have to look in the mirror and tell the guy there, "You blew a
lot of work and money on that one - move on!"
--------
Dave Bigelow
Kamuela, Hawaii
FS2, Rotax 503 DCDI
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=43694#43694
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Pearce" <rap(at)isp.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Tie Down Suggestions |
I saw a home made version of the claw made with 3/16"stainless steel air
craft cable. Had a center ring with three 1 foot runners with collars with
rings weld to them. Works on same principal as the claw pull up on the
center just puts the angle driven rods in a bind.
Rick Pearce Mark3 amphib
do not archieve
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2006 10:25 PM
>
> This this link out, it will take you to Sporty's
> Pilot Shop they sell the Claw Die Down lit -
> weighs 8#, comes with the 3 claw mechanisms,
> hammer, stakes, rope,carrying bag. I had heard
> these work good, but haven't used one myself. I
> would think they should be able to ship it
> priority express or mail where you have them fairly quick.
> jerb
>
> http://www.sportys.com/acb/showdetl.cfm?Product_ID=10258&DID=19
>
> At 09:20 AM 6/14/2006, you wrote:
> >TheWanderingWench
> >
> >Hi folks,
> >
> >I just joined the list - after having an incredible
> >adventure joining the Monument Valley Kolber's a few
> >weeks ago. Met many wonderful folks, who didn't seem
> >to care at all that I had flown in (from Oregon) in a
> >single seat Maxair Drifter instead of in a Kolb. They
> >treated me like I was human anyway! :>)
> >
> >On the flight, I lost my fantastically light titanium
> >tie downs. I can't get another pair now, and I'm
> >leaving for the EAA Airshow at Arlington, WA in a few
> >weeks, so need to get some soon.
> >
> >Do any of you have a set of tie downs that you like?
> >Suggestions and contact information for obtaining tie
> >downs would be appreciated. Weight and size are a
> >factor for me, since everything has to be strapped
> >down and I already am carrying all my camping gear,
> >extra parts, etc. (I don't have a ground crew when I
> >fly.)
> >
> >Thanks -
> >
> >Arty Trost
> >Sandy, Oregon
> >
> >
> >
> >www.LessonsFromTheEdge.com"Life's a daring
> >adventureor
> >nothing" Helen Keller"I
> >refuse to tip toe through life just to arrive safely at death."
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Edward Steuber" <esteuber(at)rochester.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Dirt in the exhaust |
Thanks to everyone that replied about the dirt in the exhaust....With
all the comments weighed carefully , I am going to pull the exhaust and
see what may have happened...I'll let you all know what I find !
Ed in Western NY
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | robert bean <slyck(at)frontiernet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: MkIII, suzuki G10 |
I agree with the 4 cylinder being inappropriate for the FSII.
-and even the 3 cylinder would look a bit conspicuous sticking up tall.
There is a lay down sideways version available that would have
a better cosmetic effect.
You have to consider though, that you could carry 5 gallons of gas
instead of 10 for a savings of 30 lbs.
-BB, southern weather up here now but thankfully at the perimeter
of the deluge.
On 28, Jun 2006, at 11:43 PM, HShack(at)aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 6/28/2006 2:10:03 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> orcabonita(at)hotmail.com writes:
>> The Suzuki engine seems like a really great alternative for the
>> Kolbs.- They are cheap to get, parts are cheap and plentiful, and
>> fuel consumption is very low.- It will be neat to see how they work
>> out on the MK-3's and how their reliability is.--
>>
>> If the 4 cylinder weighs only 15 pounds more than the 3 cylinder
>> engine, I would think that the 4 cylinder would be better even for
>> the Firestar.- A lot more power and a lot less vibration for only
15
>> pounds seems like a real bargain to me.
>>
>> Mike-
> -
> Geez, about 4 years ago I checked out the 3 cyl. to go on my FS II &
> determined it was just too heavy.- The 4 cyl. must run close to 150+
> lbs.- Besides the weight, at somewhere around 70 hp, youd hacw to
beef
> up the cage.
> -
> -
> -
> Howard Shackleford
> FS II
> SC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eugene Zimmerman <etzim62(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Twin Engine Firestar 2 |
Reversing the rotation on a two-stroke is not as simple as just
changing the ignition timing.
Sure, a two-stroke can be caused to run backwards but making equal
power in the opposite direction will require changing the cylinder
ports to the opposite side also.
Because normally the crankshaft acts as a rotator of the fuel/air
charge in the crankcase providing a supercharger effect to throw the
fuel/air charge towards the open intake port side of the cylinder.
Changing the rotation will cause the fuel/air charge to be thrown
towards the opposite side of the crankcase away from the intake port
side. This greatly hinders the ability of the engine to "breathe"
properly.
On Jun 29, 2006, at 5:21 AM, Dave Bigelow wrote:
>
>
> Thanks for all the positive feedback and brainstorming. Here's my
> take on two of the ideas presented:
>
> Turning one engine around and using belt drives to drive concentric
> drive shafts to counter-rotating props is an elegant solution, and
> I'm sure it would work. The thing that bothers me about this
> method goes back to the original design criterion, that being to
> fly on one engine when the other "craps" out. If one of those
> belts fails (and they do), it would most likely go through both of
> the counter-rotating props and take them both out. Perhaps the
> belts could be enclosed or guarded somehow.
>
> Changing the prop direction on one engine by reversing the engine
> might cut the interferance. You would have to modify the timing
> plate inside the flywheel so the ignition advance would be correct
> for the change in rotation. Right now, the sparks come at some
> number of degrees before top dead center, and if you just reversed
> the direction of rotation, the sparks would come at the same number
> of degrees after top dead center. The engine might run with that
> degree of retardation, but wouldn't have much power.
>
> Every solution I can come up with seems to bring a whole new set of
> problems. I think I just have to look in the mirror and tell the
> guy there, "You blew a lot of work and money on that one - move on!"
>
> --------
> Dave Bigelow
> Kamuela, Hawaii
> FS2, Rotax 503 DCDI
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=43694#43694
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Twin Engine Firestar 2 |
One more idea before you decide to throw in the towel - The Rotax A
drive gearbox relied on an adapter plate to mate the gearbox to the
engine. If you could mate a gearbox to the Hirth, then you would get
your prop turning the other way.
Or just substitute a Rotax 277 with gearbox for one of the Hirths? The
277 makes 28 hp.
(Easy for me to say, since you are the one spending the money...)
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
Dave Bigelow wrote:
>
> Thanks for all the positive feedback and brainstorming. Here's my take on two
of the ideas presented:
>
> Turning one engine around and using belt drives to drive concentric drive shafts
to counter-rotating props is an elegant solution, and I'm sure it would work.
The thing that bothers me about this method goes back to the original design
criterion, that being to fly on one engine when the other "craps" out. If
one of those belts fails (and they do), it would most likely go through both
of the counter-rotating props and take them both out. Perhaps the belts could
be enclosed or guarded somehow.
>
> Changing the prop direction on one engine by reversing the engine might cut the
interferance. You would have to modify the timing plate inside the flywheel
so the ignition advance would be correct for the change in rotation. Right
now, the sparks come at some number of degrees before top dead center, and if
you just reversed the direction of rotation, the sparks would come at the same
number of degrees after top dead center. The engine might run with that degree
of retardation, but wouldn't have much power.
>
> Every solution I can come up with seems to bring a whole new set of problems.
I think I just have to look in the mirror and tell the guy there, "You blew
a lot of work and money on that one - move on!"
>
> --------
> Dave Bigelow
> Kamuela, Hawaii
> FS2, Rotax 503 DCDI
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=43694#43694
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Sharp <kolbdriver(at)mlsharp.com> |
| Subject: | Re: MkIII, suzuki G10 |
I'm in the middle of the conversion, Zuki 1.3L 4cyl. The engine block less intake,
exhaust and flywheel weighs in at 118# I'm figuring that the all in weight
is going to be about 175# give or take...
Mike
HShack(at)aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 6/28/2006 2:10:03 PM Eastern Standard Time, orcabonita(at)hotmail.com
writes:
The Suzuki engine seems like a really great alternative for the Kolbs. They
are cheap to get, parts are cheap and plentiful, and fuel consumption is very
low. It will be neat to see how they work out on the MK-3's and how their reliability
is.
If the 4 cylinder weighs only 15 pounds more than the 3 cylinder engine, I would
think that the 4 cylinder would be better even for the Firestar. A lot more
power and a lot less vibration for only 15 pounds seems like a real bargain to
me.
Mike
Geez, about 4 years ago I checked out the 3 cyl. to go on my FS II & determined
it was just too heavy. The 4 cyl. must run close to 150+ lbs. Besides the
weight, at somewhere around 70 hp, youd hacw to beef up the cage.
Howard Shackleford
FS II
SC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | TheWanderingWench <thewanderingwench(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Microlight Championships |
Rob -
Go to www.usua.org for all the details. I've never
participated but have several friends who have, and
they say you really get hooked.
Arty
--- jeepacro(at)cox.net wrote:
>
> Hi all, I was reading the Ulralightflying
> magazine today and saw that the US National Micro
> light championship competitors will perform task and
> contests that are designed according to world class
> specs. What are the task's and contests? Has
> anyone on the list participated? Did you like it?
> Thanks in advance
> --
> Rob.
>
>
>
>
> browse
> Subscriptions page,
> FAQ,
>
>
> Admin.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
www.LessonsFromTheEdge.com
"Life's a daring adventure or nothing"
Helen Keller
"I refuse to tip toe through life just to arrive safely at death."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)msbit.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Twin Engine Firestar 2 |
If one of those belts fails (and they do), it would most likely go
through both of the counter-rotating props and take them both
out. Perhaps the belts could be enclosed or guarded somehow.
Belts? Belts??? We doan need no steenking belts!!! Wonder
what the ratio of that big ring gear would be driving another
gear? A whole other set of problems now......backlash/chatter
among them. Unless one were to soft couple the driven gear on
the shaft.
Jim Baker
580.788.2779
Elmore City, OK
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "pat ladd" <pj.ladd(at)btinternet.com> |
| Subject: | Emailing: PICT0024 |
Hi all,
I expect that I have got this wrong and sent the whole shebang instead
of the couple of pics which I intended to send. Nevertheless in there
somewhere are one or two pics of me and the new Xtra.
If the whole lot has been sent then there are pics of Wendy in Mick
Moulai`s machine as well..
I expect someone will tell me how do do it properly.
Cheers
Pat
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Emailing: PICT0024 |
Nevertheless in there somewhere are one or two pics of me and the
new Xtra.
Pat
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pat:
Will it fly?
Good looking bird!
john h
mkIII
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron" <captainron1(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Emailing: PICT0024 |
All I see is just one picture, which is nice. Do you have more, I'd like to
see all of them including the inside of your cage and the instrument pod.
Ron
Arizona
_____
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of pat ladd
Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2006 2:12 PM
Hi all,
I expect that I have got this wrong and sent the whole shebang instead of
the couple of pics which I intended to send. Nevertheless in there
somewhere are one or two pics of me and the new Xtra.
If the whole lot has been sent then there are pics of Wendy in Mick Moulai`s
machine as well..
I expect someone will tell me how do do it properly.
Cheers
Pat
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave & Eve Pelletier" <pelletier(at)cableone.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Emailing: PICT0024 |
Congratulations...she's a fine looking bird.
AzDave
----- Original Message -----
From: pat ladd
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2006 2:12 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Emailing: PICT0024
Hi all,
I expect that I have got this wrong and sent the whole shebang
instead of the couple of pics which I intended to send. Nevertheless
in there somewhere are one or two pics of me and the new Xtra.
If the whole lot has been sent then there are pics of Wendy in Mick
Moulai`s machine as well..
I expect someone will tell me how do do it properly.
Cheers
Pat
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
Hi Folks:
Did an oil change day before I left for Monument Valley. After 65
hours time for another oil change. That was 65 hours with a steady
diet of 100LL except for 15 or 20 gal of auto fuel at MV and again at
Larry Cottrell's. About 300 gals of 100LL.
When I did the oil change I also took the oil tank apart and cleaned
it out. Was amazed at the amount of lead in the bottom of the tank
and suspended in the oil. A couple fuel stops and my fresh oil had
already turned that sickly grey color of lead. I run Valvoline 20W50
Durablend, semi-synthetic oil when I fly cross countries because the
organic oil suspends lead much better than full synthetic. Don't do a
lot of local flying anymore, so Durablend is what I have been running
most of the time.
When I am home a lot where I can run a steady diet of 91 octane or
higher, I use Shell Rotella Full Synthetic 5W40. Manufactured
primarily for diesels, I run organic Rotella in my diesels and gas
engines. Full Synthetic Rotella is available at Wal-Mart and is
nearly half the price of Mobil I full synthetic.
I also get the Durablend at Wal-Mart along with a TG 5614 Fram oil
filter.
Was fun flying around the local area with nothing on board but 5 gal
fuel and me. No wind and a short time prior to dark. Amazing
airplane when it is light. Too bad I can not build a light mkIII.
hehehe
john h
mkIII
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 912's and 100LL |
Appreciate the offer.
I did get to fly in your mkIII several years ago.
Richard has a unique airstrip, as a lot of us Kolbers enjoy. The large power transmission
lines and towers certainly get ones attention taking off and landing.
Not to mention the down hill T/O and up hill landing.
john h
mkIII
--------
John Hauck
MKIII/912ULS
hauck's holler, alabama
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=43870#43870
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Denny Rowe" <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Emailing: PICT0024 |
Pat,
I never got the post with the pics, could you send em to me off list?
I seem to not get many many posts these days as well as have many of my
posts never make it to the list. ?????
Hope this one posts.
Denny Rowe
rowedl(at)highstream.net
----- Original Message -----
From: Dave & Eve Pelletier
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2006 6:40 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Emailing: PICT0024
Congratulations...she's a fine looking bird.
AzDave
----- Original Message -----
From: pat ladd
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2006 2:12 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Emailing: PICT0024
Hi all,
I expect that I have got this wrong and sent the whole shebang
instead of the couple of pics which I intended to send. Nevertheless
in there somewhere are one or two pics of me and the new Xtra.
If the whole lot has been sent then there are pics of Wendy in Mick
Moulai`s machine as well..
I expect someone will tell me how do do it properly.
Cheers
Pat
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
6/25/2006
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Fly-In Aug 12-13 Near middle Tn. overnight camping,
all welcome. still have not met alot of you guys E-mail me or check
funflite.com for location.
|
| Wade
| FS2 #1030
Morning Wade:
Got some GPS coordinates?
Will food be available?
Shower?
Steambath?
Massage?
Where is your airstrip located? Looks like a good'un.
john h
mkIII
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Emailing: PICT0024 |
on my own I have the trim right forward and she is stll nose light.
A
| bit of tweaking needed.
|
| Cheers
|
| Pat
You can bring the nose down by slightly drooping the ailerons.
Glad you are getting some air time.
john h
mkIII
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <kfackler(at)ameritech.net> |
Sweet Lord A'mighty!
The page that the link below goes to shows a weight-shift Eagle, if I'm
not mistaken. That's the bird I first learned to fly in.
How about a poll on this? What was YOUR first airplane, the one that you
actually flew?
----- Original Message -----
From: Herb Gayheart
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, June 30, 2006 9:37 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Aug Fly-In
Hey Wade
I hope to fly down one week end soon.. Putting hours on my
Firefly..
Here is the link again in html .. Herb
http://www.funflite.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard & Martha Neilsen" <NeilsenRM(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: First airplane |
My first plane was a Weedhopper model C.
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIIIc
----- Original Message -----
From: kfackler(at)ameritech.net
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, June 30, 2006 10:07 AM
Subject: Kolb-List: First airplane
Sweet Lord A'mighty!
The page that the link below goes to shows a weight-shift Eagle, if
I'm not mistaken. That's the bird I first learned to fly in.
How about a poll on this? What was YOUR first airplane, the one that
you actually flew?
----- Original Message -----
From: Herb Gayheart
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, June 30, 2006 9:37 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Aug Fly-In
Hey Wade
I hope to fly down one week end soon.. Putting hours on my
Firefly..
Here is the link again in html .. Herb
http://www.funflite.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Herb Gayheart <herbgh(at)juno.com> |
| Subject: | Re: First airplane |
Sweitzer 2-33. No 2 cycle engine to be concerned with... no engine at
all.. :-) I took a few hours training in a 150 and after a long ,
boring and uncomfortable cross country , I went home and jumped into my
MkIII and never looked back... Herb
Sweet Lord A'mighty!
The page that the link below goes to shows a weight-shift Eagle, if I'm
not mistaken. That's the bird I first learned to fly in.
How about a poll on this? What was YOUR first airplane, the one that you
actually flew?
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, June 30, 2006 9:37 AM
Hey Wade
I hope to fly down one week end soon.. Putting hours on my Firefly..
Here is the link again in html .. Herb
http://www.funflite.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Lehman" <david(at)davidlehman.net> |
| Subject: | Re: First airplane |
In 1961, I bought a Piper J-3, N42245... 33 airplanes and helicopters sinc
e
then...
DVD
On 6/30/06, Herb Gayheart wrote:
>
> Sweitzer 2-33. No 2 cycle engine to be concerned with... no engine at
> all.. :-) I took a few hours training in a 150 and after a long , borin
g
> and uncomfortable cross country , I went home and jumped into my MkIII an
d
> never looked back... Herb
>
>
> Sweet Lord A'mighty!
>
> The page that the link below goes to shows a weight-shift Eagle, if I'm
> not mistaken. That's the bird I first learned to fly in.
>
> How about a poll on this? What was YOUR first airplane, the one that you
> actually flew?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Herb Gayheart
> *To:* kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> *Sent:* Friday, June 30, 2006 9:37 AM
> *Subject:* Re: Kolb-List: Aug Fly-In
>
>
> Hey Wade
>
> I hope to fly down one week end soon.. Putting hours on my Firefly..
>
> Here is the link again in html .. Herb
>
> http://www.funflite.com/
>
>
--
"Attitude is everything ~ pick a good one"...
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: First airplane |
my 1st was a J-3 Cub. Soon will be flying a Kolb Firestar.
"For once you have tasted flight, You will walk this earth with your eyes
turned skyward. For there you have been, And there you long to return."
Jim Swan , Eaton Rapids, Mi 48827
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Vince Hallam" <vince(at)devonwindmills.co.uk> |
| Subject: | Re: First airplane |
answer to poll....Tiger moth at Luton Sept 6 1939
Vince Hallam
please phone rather than email for best results!
07941 313141
01803 316191
www.devonwindmills.co.uk
----- Original Message -----
From: Richard & Martha Neilsen
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, June 30, 2006 3:39 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: First airplane
My first plane was a Weedhopper model C.
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIIIc
----- Original Message -----
From: kfackler(at)ameritech.net
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, June 30, 2006 10:07 AM
Subject: Kolb-List: First airplane
Sweet Lord A'mighty!
The page that the link below goes to shows a weight-shift Eagle, if
I'm not mistaken. That's the bird I first learned to fly in.
How about a poll on this? What was YOUR first airplane, the one that
you actually flew?
----- Original Message -----
From: Herb Gayheart
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, June 30, 2006 9:37 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Aug Fly-In
Hey Wade
I hope to fly down one week end soon.. Putting hours on my
Firefly..
Here is the link again in html .. Herb
http://www.funflite.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron" <captainron1(at)cox.net> |
C-150 out of Southborough Mass around 1975 (airport closed down a few years
later and now it's an industrial park in its place)
Ron
_____
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
kfackler(at)ameritech.net
Sent: Friday, June 30, 2006 7:08 AM
Sweet Lord A'mighty!
The page that the link below goes to shows a weight-shift Eagle, if I'm not
mistaken. That's the bird I first learned to fly in.
How about a poll on this? What was YOUR first airplane, the one that you
actually flew?
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, June 30, 2006 9:37 AM
Hey Wade
I hope to fly down one week end soon.. Putting hours on my Firefly..
Here is the link again in html .. Herb
http://www.funflite.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Lanny Fetterman <donaho(at)csrlink.net> |
Quicksilver MX, two axis. It was tough to unlearn those skills when I went
to the Firestar II which is three axis. Lanny Fetterman N598LF. BTW My
application for amateur built was rejected by the FAA, no reason was given.
They sent me new forms to fill out, and put me in the ELSA catagory.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: First airplane |
65 hp Taylorcraft, in '57, then Schweitzer 233 in '80, then Pterodactyl in
'83, then Kolb Firestar
George Randolph
firestar driver
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ray anderson <rsanoa(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: First airplane |
Curtis Wright Jr. .45hp Szekley ... 1936
kfackler(at)ameritech.net wrote: Sweet Lord A'mighty!
The page that the link below goes to shows a weight-shift Eagle, if I'm not mistaken.
That's the bird I first learned to fly in.
How about a poll on this? What was YOUR first airplane, the one that you actually
flew?
----- Original Message -----
From: Herb Gayheart
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, June 30, 2006 9:37 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Aug Fly-In
Hey Wade
I hope to fly down one week end soon.. Putting hours on my Firefly..
Here is the link again in html .. Herb
http://www.funflite.com/
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: First airplane |
-How about a poll on this? What was YOUR first airplane, the one that
you actually flew?
Well, I solo's a Hughes TH-55 helicopter in September 1968. Was a
wonderful time indeed. By this time I had accepted the fact that I
would probably never get to go to flight school in the Army. However,
at the ripe old age of 29 and a senior Captain, I had made it.
My first fixed wing flight as Pilot In Command was my Ultrastar.
Built and flown July 1984. This was my first flight and also my solo
flight in a fixed wing aircraft. Don't recommend anyone else being
that stupid.
First GA type solo flight was a Cessna 152 in June 1990. Needed a
Private ticket to fly the mkIII that I was building. Never got more
than 20 or so hours in the Cessna's. Could not wait to get back in a
Kolb. I did get an hour in a 152 two years later because I could not
find a CFI that would give me a BFR in my mkIII.
john h
mkIII
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: First airplane |
In 1961, I bought a Piper J-3, N42245... 33 airplanes and helicopters
since
then...
DVD
Looks like you did more buying than flying. ;-)
I have built and owned three aircraft:
Ultrastar
Firestar
mkIII
More than 14 years and 2,500 hours in the mkIII. Hard to believe I
could get one to last that long. The first two did not take me long
to wear out. hehehe
john h
mkIII
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: First airplane |
answer to poll....Tiger moth at Luton Sept 6 1939
Vince Hallam
Vince, my friend:
I was 4 months, 28 days old on that date.
Time for us to have lunch again. When are you coming back over to the
US? and Sun and Fun?
john h
mkIII
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Noyer <a58r(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: First airplane |
First 1/4 airplane: '37 Aeronca C-3 with 3 cyl 37hp (on a good day)
Szekley (pronounced shay-kay, not zeek-lee), four-way partnership, '40.
regards,
Bob N.
http://www.angelfire.com/rpg/ronoy/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: First airplane |
Sheezzzz!
That was three years prior to birth date. hehehe
john h
mkIII
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: First airplane |
| First 1/4 airplane: '37 Aeronca C-3 with 3 cyl 37hp (on a good day)
| Szekley (pronounced shay-kay, not zeek-lee), four-way partnership,
'40.
|
| regards,
| Bob N.
Grey Baron:
You told me a Wright Flyer........................
john h
mkIII
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: First airplane |
First solo was a PA-140 in Nov 1972
First solo in a plane I owned was a Rutan Long-EZ I built. Jan 7, 1985
The most Fun overall is Firefly #007 on floats
All three of these craft are still in service today.
Steve Boetto
________________________________________________________________________________
First flight at Davis Air Service Chehalis, Washington in 1957 in my
Dad's Aeronica Chief. First solo 1970 in my Dad's 47 PA12. My first
plane a 47 C-120 Spam
Can.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Vincent" <emailbill(at)chartermi.net> |
| Subject: | Vortex Generators |
Hi Gang
Just received my July 2006, EAA Sport Pilot magazine.On page 27, there
is a story about vortex generators, cuffs, fences and stall strips.
Since there has been numerous discussions on this subject I thought some
of you may be interested in the article.
Bill Vincent
Firestar II
Upper Peninsula of Michigan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)msbit.net> |
I wasn't , then though, ah what the heck....
First flight...before I can remember accurately. My first big
impression was riding in the back of Pop's 170 somewhere
around '57 as he flew over to a towered/lighted airport to do
night landings and sim ILS approaches. I remember that one
because there was a grasshopper hanging on to the strut and I
was fascinated with his gripping power. Fell off after 20 min.
Soloed a J3 in '68. Soloed a Navion in '69. Got time in a
Citabria, PA-11, PA-18. I recall winning a dinky trophy for a fuel
consumption contest at a Navion fly-in...off by just .2 gal. Also
recall that there was a vent in the roof of the Navion that the
back seat pax could open and, if you're young and bored and
just riding along somewhere, one could sneak on a roll of toilet
paper, feed one end out the vent and let suction do the rest by
unwinding it out into the ether. Always wondered what folks on
the ground thought about that. "Look, Ma!"
Didn't do much of anything for quite awhile til getting a private
ticket in 2002. But I wasn't stuck on the ground, either. As an Air
Traffic type for Uncle, we could get familiarization flights if we
did something to wow the front office. Not that I was any great
shakes but always managed to latch on to some project that
gained some modicum of notoriety (to be fair, some of the rides
simply involved calling the Command Post and asking what was
going out and could I get a ride). Through this mechanism I got
rides in:
UH-1, T-28, U-8, U-21, OV-10, T-38, C-141, C-5, C-23, F-111,
F-4, KC-135, KC-10, KC-97, C-121, T-39, T37, C-130 (including
assault strip landings and takeoffs plus LAPES drops while
standing in the door), C-119, C-123, and a couple others I've
probably forgotten. I must say that the Aarvark was the most
impressive of the lot. Did a max climb to 45K then down over the
Wash (NW East Anglia, UK) and then up to Mach 1 toward
Skegness and then back to RAF Lakenheath. What impressed
me was tha lack of noise. That was one big electric
machine...just a hum and a whoosh. I also recall that they didn't
give me a correct pre-flight brief in the cockpit mock-up. After I
was in the airplane I'd hooked up the oxygen mask to the
console and flipped the selector in the direction and number of
clicks that I was told to (selector was a by-feel affair, to my left-
rear and behind my line of sight)....not the right result. There was
vastly reduced flow but marginally sufficient. The pilot asked
how I was doing and I asked is it normally like this, hard to
breath? He said "Oh crap!" and flipped the selector one more
notch....big old blast of oxy that literally forced the mask off my
face for a second then calmed down.
Built FS 2 in 1994. Soled a 152 and 172 in 2002. Bought a
Bellanca Viking (complex/high perf) in 2003 while having a
grand total of 120 hours. That's turning out to be a money pit.
The plane is basically OK but the systems are a bit long in the
tooth. The engine cranckcase cracked about 3/4 of the way
around #6 cylinder the Friday before Mother's Day. Got it on the
ground in Beckley, WV and have bought a Continental rebuilt
($27k) and R&R'ing various components, including the prop
which, I learned this morning, needs a new hub to the tune of
$3.2k. I keep telling folks this is like giving a diamond to a pig.
But a fast pig at that...just before the crack I was tooling along at
180kts.
The adventure contines....
Jim Baker
580.788.2779
Elmore City, OK
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: First airplane |
| How could you have flown a stork pre-natally??? By three years?
Russ:
Don't think I know what you are talking about.
Should have listed part of the referenced msg from Ray Anderson.
Ray said he soloed in 1936. That was three years prior to my birth
date.
Don't remember flying a stork, but flew an old ragged Ultrastar for a
gentleman that flew like a turkey.
john h
mkIII
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ray anderson <rsanoa(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: First airplane |
John,
I actually soloed in 1935 and bought the mate to my solo airplane, Curtiss Jr.
in 1936. Got a lot of riding time with my instructor in his Cessna AW, the
first Cessna with a cantilever wing. Tube, fabric and wood construction. Pilot
up front in single seat, two passengers behind. Also in his 1932 Cabin Waco.
Can't remember the model. Every thing free and easy without much interference
from the Feds. John, you would have been in hog heaven back then.
John Hauck wrote:
| How could you have flown a stork pre-natally??? By three years?
Russ:
Don't think I know what you are talking about.
Should have listed part of the referenced msg from Ray Anderson.
Ray said he soloed in 1936. That was three years prior to my birth
date.
Don't remember flying a stork, but flew an old ragged Ultrastar for a
gentleman that flew like a turkey.
john h
mkIII
---------------------------------
at 1/min.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: First airplane |
| I actually soloed in 1935
Every thing free and easy without much interference from the Feds.
John, you would have been in hog heaven back then.
|
Ray:
You got that right.
I never enjoyed flying so much until I built the Ultrastar. Pretty
much flew it and the Firestar when, where, and how I wanted to.
Figured if the Feds got on me I could always plead ignorance.
Funny how things, my attitude, changed once I got the mkIII with an N
number stuck on its tail. Felt better because I was finally legal,
but really toned down my flying.
Other morning I realized my Class III physical would expire the last
of this month, well..........tomorrow. Called Doc Foshee over in
Clanton. He is retired, but still gives flight physicals in his home
which in right next to the airport. Doc said come on over and get my
physical. Got to my airstrip and the cows had crapped all over the
north end and the little parking area in front of the hangers. I have
never seen so much cow crap in one area in my life. Didn't have time
to the one of the tractors to drag it, so that cut my 750 ft strip to
about 350 ft. Now sweat. Got out with no problem. Landed at Clanton
Airport, taxied overe to the NW corner of the field, up next to the
fence. Hopped the fence, walked about a block to Doc's house. Got my
physical and was back in the airplane in 20 minutes. Now my problem
was getting back into my strip without hitting cow crap. No wind to
help, but got her in and stopped before we got to the "mined" end of
the strip.
So...I am good to go for another two years. Got my BFR while on my
flight out West. Need to sign off my Annual Inspection, and I am good
to go.
Take care,
john h
mkIII
PS: Nice living and flying in a small town atmosphere.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "blackbird" <blackbird754(at)alltel.net> |
I am wondering what you guys do to rivit the lexan to the frame....I have done
this panel twice now and have cracks starting in 24 hours....Am I pulling them
too tight...I have already opened the rivit hole in the lexan up some...
Very frustrating....
Wayne
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=44074#44074
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: First airplane |
My first is also my present- Kolb Firestar II, first flown in '98.
Howard Shackleford
FS II
SC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DAquaNut(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: First airplane |
My first plane and solo was in a Wizard J-3 in 1981 I believe. Took 3.5
hours time in a Champ 7-ac I believe it was.
Ed Diebel Firefly # 62
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Riviting Lexan |
Drill the holes a generous size larger than the rivet. Use aluminum
rivets. The lexan will expand and contract differently than the
aluminum or steel framework, give it room to move. Make sure it is real
Lexan and not acrylic or plexiglas. Anything with superglue or mek or
lacquer thinner in it will make Lexan/Acrylic/Plexiglas go bad and crack.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
blackbird wrote:
>
> I am wondering what you guys do to rivit the lexan to the frame....I have done
this panel twice now and have cracks starting in 24 hours....Am I pulling them
too tight...I have already opened the rivit hole in the lexan up some...
>
>
> Very frustrating....
>
>
> Wayne
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=44074#44074
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ElleryWeld(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Re: First airplane |
I have had plenty of remote controll airplanes that is how I learned how to
fly then I bought a Vector 627 SR U/L and been flying since but I get the most
enjoyment Flying the tricked out Firestar
Ellery in Maine
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Edward Steuber" <esteuber(at)rochester.rr.com> |
Soloed my dads Aeronca Chief out of our farm strip in 1963 at 16 years
old in Holley NY...
ED in Western NY
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "blackbird" <blackbird754(at)alltel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Riviting Lexan |
Ok guys,
I am using aluminum rivits and was wondering do I enlarge the hole one size up
....Have got a couple of responses on using washers also....and do I hand pull
them....
Wayne
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=44114#44114
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Riviting Lexan |
| I am using aluminum rivits and was wondering do I enlarge the hole
one size up ....Have got a couple of responses on using washers
also....and do I hand pull them....
|
|
| Wayne
Wayne/All:
Over the past several years, I have noticed quality of "lexan" has
deteriorated. Couple years ago I replaced the lexan in one of my
doors with some "no name" polycarbonate. Within days I noticed
several rivet holes were experiencing stress cracks. Stop drilled and
no more problems.
In the old days, Lexan brand polycarbonate manufactured by GE seldom,
if ever, stress cracked, unless there was quite some age on the
material.
Never had to enlarge holes to prevent cracks. However, seemed to
payoff to debur these holes. Seemed the polycarbonate would react
like steel and aluminum if each hole was not deburred. Sometimes it
is impossible to debur. So....I go for it and hope it does not crack.
john h
mkIII
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Denny Rowe" <rowedl(at)highstream.net> |
| Subject: | Re: First airplane |
Built 1981 Pterodactyl Ptraveler
First flight 1982.
A friend still flies that bird, or at least some of the pieces. :-)
Denny Rowe, Mk-3
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Herb Gayheart <herbgh(at)juno.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Riviting Lexan |
Guys
Never tried it but am promised that a small rubber O ring in each
enlarged hole prevents crazing , Herb
writes:
>
> | I am using aluminum rivits and was wondering do I enlarge the
> hole
> one size up ....Have got a couple of responses on using washers
> also....and do I hand pull them....
> |
> |
> | Wayne
>
> Wayne/All:
>
> Over the past several years, I have noticed quality of "lexan" has
> deteriorated. Couple years ago I replaced the lexan in one of my
> doors with some "no name" polycarbonate. Within days I noticed
> several rivet holes were experiencing stress cracks. Stop drilled
> and
> no more problems.
>
> In the old days, Lexan brand polycarbonate manufactured by GE
> seldom,
> if ever, stress cracked, unless there was quite some age on the
> material.
>
> Never had to enlarge holes to prevent cracks. However, seemed to
> payoff to debur these holes. Seemed the polycarbonate would react
> like steel and aluminum if each hole was not deburred. Sometimes it
>
> is impossible to debur. So....I go for it and hope it does not
> crack.
>
> john h
> mkIII
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Sharp <kolbdriver(at)mlsharp.com> |
| Subject: | Re: First airplane |
Trained in a 152 '85
Bought a '63 Musketeer, flew it for 5 or 6 yrs
rented 172's and Yankee's since then.
kfackler(at)ameritech.net wrote: Sweet Lord A'mighty!
The page that the link below goes to shows a weight-shift Eagle, if I'm not mistaken.
That's the bird I first learned to fly in.
How about a poll on this? What was YOUR first airplane, the one that you actually
flew?
----- Original Message -----
From: Herb Gayheart
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, June 30, 2006 9:37 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Aug Fly-In
Hey Wade
I hope to fly down one week end soon.. Putting hours on my Firefly..
Here is the link again in html .. Herb
http://www.funflite.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | robert bean <slyck(at)frontiernet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Riviting Lexan |
On the tube I fastened the lexan to I ran a strip of electrician's
splicing tape.
It stays soft and gives a cushion to help prevent stress. It also
seals out
moisture.
My windshield frame tubes are steel tube with nutserts and stainless
10-32 screws.
So far no problems with loosening even though I don't have them squeezed
down tight.
-BB
On 1, Jul 2006, at 10:12 AM, Herb Gayheart wrote:
>
> Guys
>
> Never tried it but am promised that a small rubber O ring in each
> enlarged hole prevents crazing , Herb
>
>
> writes:
>>
>> | I am using aluminum rivits and was wondering do I enlarge the
>> hole
>> one size up ....Have got a couple of responses on using washers
>> also....and do I hand pull them....
>> |
>> |
>> | Wayne
>>
>> Wayne/All:
>>
>> Over the past several years, I have noticed quality of "lexan" has
>> deteriorated. Couple years ago I replaced the lexan in one of my
>> doors with some "no name" polycarbonate. Within days I noticed
>> several rivet holes were experiencing stress cracks. Stop drilled
>> and
>> no more problems.
>>
>> In the old days, Lexan brand polycarbonate manufactured by GE
>> seldom,
>> if ever, stress cracked, unless there was quite some age on the
>> material.
>>
>> Never had to enlarge holes to prevent cracks. However, seemed to
>> payoff to debur these holes. Seemed the polycarbonate would react
>> like steel and aluminum if each hole was not deburred. Sometimes it
>>
>> is impossible to debur. So....I go for it and hope it does not
>> crack.
>>
>> john h
>> mkIII
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: First airplane |
Hello
Maxair Hummer!!!!
Duane Zollinger FS2 Ohio
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RICHARD BUTLER" <RICHARDBUTLERS(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: First airplane |
Cessna 180 Floats
from Kenmore Air Harbor
Lk Union
Seattle.
R Butler
Rimrock, AZ
----- Original Message -----
From: EnaudZ(at)aol.com<mailto:EnaudZ(at)aol.com>
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, July 01, 2006 9:28 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: First airplane
Hello
Maxair Hummer!!!!
Duane Zollinger FS2 Ohio
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <kfackler(at)ameritech.net> |
| Subject: | Re: First airplane |
Just for grins, I've recorded all the responses to this poll so far and
posted them on a webpage. If you're interested, here's the URL:
http://www.kfackler.com/kolb/first_plane.html
-Ken
----- Original Message -----
From: RICHARD BUTLER
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, July 01, 2006 1:09 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: First airplane
Cessna 180 Floats
from Kenmore Air Harbor
Lk Union
Seattle.
R Butler
Rimrock, AZ
----- Original Message -----
From: EnaudZ(at)aol.com
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, July 01, 2006 9:28 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: First airplane
Hello
Maxair Hummer!!!!
Duane Zollinger FS2 Ohio
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roger Lee" <ssadiver1(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Riviting Lexan |
Hi All,
Here are some tips from my helicopter building days, plus a plane or two.
By the way my first plane was a swing seat 15 hp. quicksilver in 1980. Then a quicksilver
mx in 1982.
Ok back to the problem at hand.
First we had to sand, polish and slightly bevel the all around the edges of the
lexan with very very fine sandpaper. The manufactures were very insistant about
polishing the edges. I guess sharp straight edges can crack easier than beveled
polished edges.
We were taught to drill the lexan or plexiglass one drill bit oversize to allow
for vibration (a killer) and expansion. Use a reamer to knock the sharp edges
off your drilled holes on both sides.
We usually used screws because you can control the amount of torque on the screw
easier than a pop rivet and it is easier to replace or remove if need arises.
If you use pop rivets use aluminum and use a small size. If you use large pop
rivets then you put to much torque on the lexan before the rivet pops. Many
of our builders would also use a plastic washer between the screw head and the
plastic. I did worked well.
Using this procedure, we never had stress cracks. I learned this procedure right
from two different manufactures. The guys who did not do it this way always
had a crack somewhere sometime. As the body twist and expands, plus the glass
expanding something has to give, be it a slightly larger hole that allows movement
or the stress will find you a weak spot to crack.
This was really important for our helicopters because of the vibration and sometimes
the very large plexiglass or lexan area for the front windscreen and or
doors.
It has always worked for me and I have never had to stop drill any of my projects.
My Mark III, which I bought already built, now has pop rivets that I think
are too tight and I have a couple of stop drill sites.
--------
Roger Lee
Tucson, Az.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=44171#44171
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: First Airplane |
| Here is a picture of my first airplane which was a T-Bird;
| --------
| Bill Vincent
Bill V:
Affectionately referred to the two place T-Bird at the Flight Farm,
Monterey, NY, back in '88 and '89, as the flying anchor. Never flew
in it, but watched it fly a lot when I would be there to attend the
annual flyins.
Glad you became a Kolb convert!
john h
mkIII
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ron <CaptainRon1(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Kolb inside photo's |
Folks as most of you know I am still in the process of building the
M3X I may even beat B.L. for that record.
However I am trying to finish it off as soon as I can before i get
another flying job and away I go in pursuit of $$$$.
Anyway I see photo's here of the various Kolbs most of which look
better than what I predict will be my final product, I am always
wanting to see photo's of the inside pod. Maybe there are some ideas
that I can adopt. I am big on ergonomics and can only at this point
estimate what will be comfortable during flight. Seeing pics of other
Kolbs especially those that have been flying a while, and modified
for sitting and piloting comfort will add a lot to our knowledge
base. I know J.H. has spent more time in his M3 than all, however I
don't remember any pics of the inside, or for that matter of many
others. I saw some of the FS and some great video of a couple of
those flying. Also would be interesting to see the instruments that
many think are needed in addition to the FAR's minimum required.
Ron
Arizona
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Warp Drive hub |
Nope. All you have to do is beat the next highest bidder.
Which - as of 4:10 Eastern time on Saturday, was $13.
So bid $26 and maybe you'll get it.
(But check again just before the auction ends just in case)
And it is item # 180001664911
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
Ron wrote:
If I am not too late!
Richard do you have a minimum price for all that stuff?
Ron
Arizona
==============================================
>
> I have a 2 blade Warp Drive prop hub for sale on ebay,
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eugene Zimmerman <etzim62(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: First airplane |
On Jun 30, 2006, at 10:07 AM,
wrote:
> How about a poll on this? What was YOUR first airplane, the one
> that you actually flew?
Ok, someone has to be first with this one.
First solo, Easy-Riser with Chrysler-West Bend turning the fan.
Next a Pterodactyl Ascender ,
Then various Kolbs beginning with the Ultra-Star.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron" <captainron1(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Kolb inside photo's |
That is some nice panel. Will you be using the standard Kolb seats?
Ron
Arizona
==============================
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Saturday, July 01, 2006 5:11 PM
Not flying yet, two more months... or so....
Hope it helps.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Key" <dhkey(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Kolb inside photo's |
yes, but I got the space foam seats.
>From: "Ron" <captainron1(at)cox.net>
>Reply-To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Kolb inside photo's
>Date: Sat, 1 Jul 2006 20:26:23 -0700
>
>
>That is some nice panel. Will you be using the standard Kolb seats?
>
>Ron
>Arizona
>==============================
>
>-----Original Message-----
>Sent: Saturday, July 01, 2006 5:11 PM
>
>Not flying yet, two more months... or so....
>
>Hope it helps.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Craig Nelson" <Craig.Nelson(at)heraeus.com> |
| Subject: | It's been two years |
<> T <> he <> re
<> m <> ig <> ht
<> have been a passenger on board? July 2
uncle Craig
MkIIIEX 912 ULS WARP WWW.milows.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: It's been two years |
Congratulations. You have an absolutely beautiful airplane.
May you have zero problems, clear skies, smooth air and tailwinds.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
Craig Nelson wrote:
> <> T <> he <> re
> <> m <> ig <> ht
> <> have been a passenger on board? July 2
> uncle Craig
> MkIIIEX 912 ULS WARP WWW.milows.com
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Don Martin" <kolbdriver(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | vibration damper? |
Saw some info on the list (long time ago) about some kind of stuff used to
dampen the vibration between aluminum tubes that are close to one another.
Can't find this in the archives. Anybody remember?
Got the tail surfaces of the Firestar II covered. Start the wings tomorrow.
Have to have it all done before I move to Texas Aug 1st. Kind of like the
duck moving slowly across the pond...looks calm from above, but paddlin
like hell below.
Don
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | TheWanderingWench <thewanderingwench(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: It's been two years |
YEAH!!! WOW!!! FABULOUS!!! CONGRATULATIONS!!
Hope to see you in the sky some day.
Arty
--- Craig Nelson wrote:
> <> T <> he
> <> re
> <> m <> ig
> <> ht
> <> have been a passenger on board?
> July 2
> uncle Craig
> MkIIIEX 912 ULS WARP WWW.milows.com
>
www.LessonsFromTheEdge.com
"Life's a daring adventure or nothing"
Helen Keller
"I refuse to tip toe through life just to arrive safely at death."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "tc1917" <tc1917(at)hughes.net> |
My first one was a weight shift eagle. flew it for a couple of years and
got a Cobra. loved it and flew it for about three years. Build an original
Firestar - White Lightn'n - and flew it for three years or so when I
fininished my present play toy, the SlingShot. Loved them all. Self
taught. Like flying a big RC plane only I can go somewhere (as John Hauck
says). Ted Cowan, Alabama
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: It's been two years |
Looks a lot better off the ground than in the trailer.
Congrates on your new ride.
john h
mkIII
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ElleryWeld(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: First airplane |
Update on first airplane plane info first flew in a Vector 627 SR 1994
after working all night putting it together I figured it was ready and so was I
Ellery Batchelder Jr
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Terry <tkrolfe(at)usadatanet.net> |
Gene,
Cool pictures! Didn't know about the Easy-Riser, what year was that?
Terry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <kfackler(at)ameritech.net> |
| Subject: | First airplane website update |
Fellow Kolb enthusiasts:
I have updated the website with the additions and corrections. I also
prettied it up some with a few Kolb photos. Here is the URL again for
your convenience:
http://www.kfackler.com/kolb/first_plane.html
I've received several comments about how interesting it is to see the
very broad range of entry points we represent into aviation. I couldn't
agree more.
-Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eugene Zimmerman <etzim62(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: First flight |
Thanks Terry,
It was Spring of 1980.
Hope to meet up with you in the air again soon.
On Jul 2, 2006, at 11:48 AM, Terry wrote:
> Gene,
>
> Cool pictures! Didn't know about the Easy-Riser, what year was that?
>
> Terry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Kolb inside photo's |
| How comfortable is the seat compared to the factory hammock?
|
| Ron
If you are referring to a FS II seat, it does not come with a sling
type seat, but a flat bench type seat, same as a Kolbra, Sling Shot,
and Fire Fly.
john h
mkIII
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DAquaNut(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Lubricating control cables |
Group,
I am doing my 25 hour maintenance as in the Rotax manual. On page 10-2
line 14 ,under the maintenance schedule it says to lubricate the control cables.
Is this referring to the choke and throttle cables, or the flying surface
cables??? It has a #3 , beside it, which says according to manufacturers
instruction. It is not clear to me what they are suggesting to be oiled. What
is
the easiest way to lubricate the throttle and choke cables as that is what I
think they must mean?
Ed
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick Miles <ultrastarrick(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: I need some US struts also, I lost mine. |
If I would do it again I would use the 03-40000 6061T6 STREAMLINE $65.75 each and
order the ends from Kolb they were about $ 85 then make the spacer for the
end to fit the strut. or you could order all the material from Kolb probly cost
more I think they are the same as the firestar.
Brian Moore wrote:
Rick, Thanks
I am asking $3800, firm. In great shape, as far as I
can tell. US is at Mathis airport, near Alpharetta,
GA.
Do you know if the US strut length is standard? I
quess you just get a little more tube than needed and
cut to fit, right?
How much did the components cost you in total?
--- Rick Miles wrote:
> I ordered new strut ends from Kolb then orderered
> the rest from aircraft spuce and made them. how
> mouch for you US?
>
> Brian Moore wrote: Rick,
> Saw your 1/06 Matronics post.
> I've misplaced my struts.
> What have you found out re replacements?
> Thanks, Brian
> Need to sell my US to pay for my new PPC.
>
> __________________________________________________
> protection around
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Want to be your own boss? Learn how on Yahoo! Small
> Business.
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Girard" <jindoguy(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: I need some US struts also, I lost mine. |
Brian, I have streamlined tubing struts on my Mk III. When it comes time to
replace them, I'll use round tubes and streamlined covers. The streamlined
tube is more than adequate for lift loads, but I think about them every time
I get dumped out the backside of a Kansas boomer thermal. Round tube with
streamlined covers will let me tailor the tubes to my comfort zone.
On 7/2/06, Rick Miles wrote:
>
> If I would do it again I would use the 03-40000 6061T6 STREAMLINE $65.75
> each and order the ends from Kolb they were about $ 85 then make the spacer
> for the end to fit the strut. or you could order all the material from Kolb
> probly cost more I think they are the same as the firestar.
>
> *Brian Moore * wrote:
>
> Rick, Thanks
> I am asking $3800, firm. In great shape, as far as I
> can tell. US is at Mathis airport, near Alpharetta,
> GA.
> Do you know if the US strut length is standard? I
> quess you just get a little more tube than needed and
> cut to fit, right?
> How much did the
>
>
--
Rick Girard
"Ya'll drop on in"
takes on a whole new meaning
when you live at the airport.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Max Stanford" <maxstanford77(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Lubricating control cables |
Just think about it for 2 seconds. Is your engine manufacturer going to make a
recommendation of how often to inspect your flying surface cables, especially
being that they have no idea what type of plane it will be installed in ?
This one is a no brainer.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=44458#44458
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | possums <possums(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Lubricating control cables |
At 06:22 PM 7/2/2006, you wrote:
>
> Group,
>
> I am doing my 25 hour maintenance as in the Rotax manual. On page
> 10-2 line 14 ,under the maintenance schedule it says to lubricate
> the control cables. Is this referring to the choke and throttle
> cables, or the flying surface cables??? It has a #3 , beside
> it, which says according to manufacturers instruction. It is not
> clear to me what they are suggesting to be oiled. What is the
> easiest way to lubricate the throttle and choke cables as that is
> what I think they must mean?
You can lubricate your choke and throttle cables without taking them
off the carbs.
Part # 7435
CABLE LUBER SYSTEM - $17.95
"Prevent cable freezing and extend cable life by lubricating cable with the
"Cable Luber" system. Special precision machined lube block allows ease
of lubrication between cable and housing without removing the cable.
Just attach the Cable Luber to either end of the cable and insert nozzle
from aerosol can. Specially designed seals in block force lube down
inside cable housing. A must for the serious mechanic. Cable Life Aerosol
lubricates and rustproofs moving parts even at temperatures far below -50
degrees.
Buy it at a Motorcycle shop
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DAquaNut(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Lubricating control cables |
In a message dated 7/2/2006 8:56:36 P.M. Central Standard Time,
possums(at)mindspring.com writes:
You can lubricate your choke and throttle cables without taking them off the
carbs.
Part # 7435
CABLE LUBER SYSTEM - $17.95
"Prevent cable freezing and extend cable life by lubricating cable with the
"Cable Luber" system. Special precision machined lube block allows ease
of lubrication between cable and housing without removing the cable.
Just attach the Cable Luber to either end of the cable and insert nozzle
from aerosol can. Specially designed seals in block force lube down
inside cable housing. A must for the serious mechanic. Cable Life Aerosol
lubricates and rustproofs moving parts even at temperatures far below -50
degrees.
Buy it at a Motorcycle shop
Possom,
Thanks for the very helpful info without the useless slam.
That is how the list was designed to work, and it is in spite of certain
individuals. Those of us who have been around a while know who to listen to.
Thanks again,
Ed Diebel (Firefly #62)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flykolb" <flykolb(at)wowway.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Lubricating control cables |
Matt
What happened here?
"Just think about it for 2 seconds. Is your engine manufacturer going
to make a recommendation of how often to inspect your flying surface
cables, especially being that they have no idea what type of plane it
will be installed in ?
This one is a no brainer."
"Effective immediately, "Max Stafford" has been banned from posting to
the Matronics Lists.
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator"
This guy is still attacking the list although in less obnoxious ways.
Jim
----- Original Message -----
From: DAquaNut(at)aol.com
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, July 03, 2006 12:00 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Lubricating control cables
In a message dated 7/2/2006 8:56:36 P.M. Central Standard Time,
possums(at)mindspring.com writes:
You can lubricate your choke and throttle cables without taking
them off the carbs.
Part # 7435
CABLE LUBER SYSTEM - $17.95
"Prevent cable freezing and extend cable life by lubricating cable
with the
"Cable Luber" system. Special precision machined lube block allows
ease
of lubrication between cable and housing without removing the
cable.
Just attach the Cable Luber to either end of the cable and insert
nozzle
from aerosol can. Specially designed seals in block force lube
down
inside cable housing. A must for the serious mechanic. Cable Life
Aerosol
lubricates and rustproofs moving parts even at temperatures far
below -50
degrees.
Buy it at a Motorcycle shop
Possom,
Thanks for the very helpful info without the useless
slam. That is how the list was designed to work, and it is in spite of
certain individuals. Those of us who have been around a while know who
to listen to.
Thanks again,
Ed Diebel (Firefly #62)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: First airplane website update |
In a message dated 7/2/2006 4:57:50 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
kfackler(at)ameritech.net writes:
You are a good man Kenneth
George Randolph
Firestar driver from the Villages
Fellow Kolb enthusiasts:
I have updated the website with the additions and corrections. I also
prettied it up some with a few Kolb photos. Here is the URL again for your
convenience:
_http://www.kfackler.com/kolb/first_plane.html_
(http://www.kfackler.com/kolb/first_plane.html)
I've received several comments about how interesting it is to see the very
broad range of entry points we represent into aviation. I couldn't agree more.
-Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Lehman" <david(at)davidlehman.net> |
| Subject: | Do-It-Yourself Flight Training... |
I suppose by now most of you have seen this video...
http://media.putfile.com/ultralight-flying
I'm going to fly my Firestar for the first time this morning and I hope I'm
better prepared than this guy was!...
David
--
"Attitude is everything ~ pick a good one"...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Thom Riddle <jtriddle(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Lubricating control cables |
Okay, Max. I've thought about it for two seconds.... 1.... 2.... You
are still and arse orifice.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: First airplane list, missing info |
Ken, would you please add my name to the list:
Richard Pike
Cessna 150, 1964
kfackler wrote:
>
> Gentlemen:
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Fire Fly Performance |
Think the attached photo was taken Sun and Fun 2003, maybe 2004.
This is a normal take off in a 447 powered Fire Fly. The photo is
framed with the horizon.
Pretty impressive looking for a little hot rod.
john h
mkIII
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Herb Gayheart <herbgh(at)juno.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fire Fly Performance |
John
Yep! One of the things that I have noticed the last few times I have
flown mine.. Really levitates... Always liked that in my MkIII also..
Herb
writes:
> Think the attached photo was taken Sun and Fun 2003, maybe 2004.
>
> This is a normal take off in a 447 powered Fire Fly. The photo is
> framed with the horizon.
>
> Pretty impressive looking for a little hot rod.
>
> john h
> mkIII
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeff Smith" <Vario3(at)dejazzd.com> |
| Subject: | Firestar for sale |
Hello,
I have a Firestar for sale for $3000. It's a STEAL! I live 10 miles
from Homer. It's a 377 that just had the engine rebuilt, but not
installed. The plane needs cleaning, but it only has 200 hrs on it. BRS
chute too. Need money or I would never sell it. I built it and like I
said I live near the factory, so it was done right.
Jeff Smith
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Girard" <jindoguy(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Firestar for sale |
Jeff, I'll take it. I can send a deposit via paypal, if that's okay and pick
up the plane in two weeks.
On 7/3/06, Jeff Smith wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I have a Firestar for sale for $3000. It's a STEAL! I live 10 miles
> from Homer. It's a 377 that just had the engine rebuilt, but not installed.
> The plane needs cleaning, but it only has 200 hrs on it. BRS chute too. Need
> money or I would never sell it. I built it and like I said I live near the
> factory, so it was done right.
>
>
> Jeff Smith
>
--
Rick Girard
"Ya'll drop on in"
takes on a whole new meaning
when you live at the airport.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | russ kinne <kinnepix(at)earthlink.net> |
Matt
Thank you SO MUCH! -- for taking "Max Stafford" off the list, but I
think he'll re-surface as someone else. I also think he's the same
guy as "jetpilot", Michael E. Bigelow" and "orcabonita". And now
he'll likely try to take me apart somehow. Hey, go ahead, I've
survived better people than him trying it.
And the FCC does have some most serious teeth, which he may yet feel --
Anyway, thanx for your efforts.
Russ Kinne
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Cottrell" <lcottrell(at)fmtcblue.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Lubricating control cables |
OK, I give up! I have the mad max blocked on my email, but I do believe that
Matt "banned" him from the lists???? So what's up with that? statute of
limitations run out?
Larry, Oregon
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, July 03, 2006 10:23 AM
>
> Okay, Max. I've thought about it for two seconds.... 1.... 2.... You are
> still and arse orifice.
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
> http://wiki.matronics.com
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Max Stanford" <maxstanford77(at)yahoo.com> |
Russ Kinne
You are very mistaken to say that I was taken off the list This response here on
the list proves you wrong. You are also very mistaken to think that I am here
as someone else. I am here to stay, so get used to it.
I also remember Matt promising to ban anyone that started this stuff again on the
list, I got banned and did my time out. Now you have started this again without
so much as a word from myself. Matt, when you read this, I ask that you
apply the rules fairly and ban Russ Kinne as you did me. I should be able to
come to the list without having to read repeated personal attacks by Russ and
a couple others.
Max
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=44664#44664
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
Okay, guys. Let's just drop this right now. My ban last time came when I specifically
said that I did not want to see anymore discussion regarding a particular
topic thread. Max subsequently posted a very inappropriate follow up message
and was banned for the requisite 5-day period.
Here's the warning. I suggest that everyone drop this thread now and get back
to Kolb-specific discussions. Anymore mud flinging, and someone's going to end
up in List jail again. I don't really care who.
End this now.
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Admin.
At 08:31 PM 7/3/2006 Monday, you wrote:
>
>Russ Kinne
>
>You are very mistaken to say that I was taken off the list This response here
on the list proves you wrong. You are also very mistaken to think that I am here
as someone else. I am here to stay, so get used to it.
>
>I also remember Matt promising to ban anyone that started this stuff again on
the list, I got banned and did my time out. Now you have started this again without
so much as a word from myself. Matt, when you read this, I ask that you
apply the rules fairly and ban Russ Kinne as you did me. I should be able to
come to the list without having to read repeated personal attacks by Russ and
a couple others.
>
>Max
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=44664#44664
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: | "Edward Steuber" <esteuber(at)rochester.rr.com> |
We have been having a very long stretch of windy and scattered
thunderstorm weather here in western NY but finally yesterday morning ,
I was able to get the Ultrastar in the air again . The Cuyuna engine
performed better than it ever has temperature wise ....1100 egt's. It's
amazing what the right parts will do....pistons,rings and cageless wrist
pin bearings....lets see how far it goes this time....51 hours last
time.
I know there are a few Cuyuna's still being used out there on
Kolbs , especially Ultrastars...I have heard a lot of negatives about
these engines and would like to get an idea how the rest of the Cuyuna
operators are doing as far as failure rates . My experience so far is
limited to 2 engines and the first one had about 160 hours before a
weather related crash (not me)took it out of service.
After all, I recently learned on this list that Cuyuna means
"falls from the sky" in Native American lingo...
Ed in Western NY
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Airgriff2(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: First airplane |
>
> > How about a poll on this? What was YOUR first airplane, the one that you
> actually flew?
>
My first aircraft was a "standard Ragallo wing" an 18 ' Sky Sports Hang
Glider. Manufactured by Tom Peginney who is still in aviation owning the company
which produces the Flightstar, CT, and is the US distributor of the HKS engine.
Fly Safe
Bob Griffin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeff Smith" <Vario3(at)dejazzd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Firestar for sale |
Your first. If you just want to come and see it and then pay, that's
fine. How far are you?
Jeff
----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Girard
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, July 03, 2006 6:56 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firestar for sale
Jeff, I'll take it. I can send a deposit via paypal, if that's okay
and pick up the plane in two weeks.
On 7/3/06, Jeff Smith < Vario3(at)dejazzd.com> wrote:
Hello,
I have a Firestar for sale for $3000. It's a STEAL! I live 10
miles from Homer. It's a 377 that just had the engine rebuilt, but not
installed. The plane needs cleaning, but it only has 200 hrs on it. BRS
chute too. Need money or I would never sell it. I built it and like I
said I live near the factory, so it was done right.
Jeff
Smith
--
Rick Girard
"Ya'll drop on in"
takes on a whole new meaning
when you live at the airport.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Key" <dhkey(at)msn.com> |
Hey Max, What kind of Kolb do you have? Can you post a photo for me? I'd
like to see your workmanship? Have you met anyone on the list yet? I'd like
to meet you, it sounds like you know a lot about the Kolbs and I could
probably pick up some building tips from you. I'm working on an Xtra and I
was wondering if I can put the transponder antenna next to the pitot tube or
if you think there's a better place to put it.
Thanks,
David
>From: "Max Stanford" <maxstanford77(at)yahoo.com>
>Reply-To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Kolb-List: Re: q
>Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2006 20:31:57 -0700
>
>
>Russ Kinne
>
>You are very mistaken to say that I was taken off the list This response
>here on the list proves you wrong. You are also very mistaken to think
>that I am here as someone else. I am here to stay, so get used to it.
>
>I also remember Matt promising to ban anyone that started this stuff again
>on the list, I got banned and did my time out. Now you have started this
>again without so much as a word from myself. Matt, when you read this, I
>ask that you apply the rules fairly and ban Russ Kinne as you did me. I
>should be able to come to the list without having to read repeated personal
>attacks by Russ and a couple others.
>
>Max
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=44664#44664
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "N111KX (Kip)" <n111kx(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: First Airplane |
It's pretty unexciting but my first lesson was in a Cherokee 180 in 1986... :?
Kip
--------
Kip
Firestar II (born September 2000)
Atlanta, GA
N111KX
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=44719#44719
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eugene Zimmerman <etzim62(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Ultrastar alive |
I've had good experiences with hundreds of hours of trouble free
service with Cuyuna engines. Never had one fall from the sky.
On Jul 4, 2006, at 7:12 AM, Edward Steuber wrote:
> We have been having a very long stretch of windy and
> scattered thunderstorm weather here in western NY but finally
> yesterday morning , I was able to get the Ultrastar in the air
> again . The Cuyuna engine performed better than it ever has
> temperature wise ....1100 egt's. It's amazing what the right parts
> will do....pistons,rings and cageless wrist pin bearings....lets
> see how far it goes this time....51 hours last time.
> I know there are a few Cuyuna's still being used out there
> on Kolbs , especially Ultrastars...I have heard a lot of negatives
> about these engines and would like to get an idea how the rest of
> the Cuyuna operators are doing as far as failure rates . My
> experience so far is limited to 2 engines and the first one had
> about 160 hours before a weather related crash (not me)took it out
> of service.
> After all, I recently learned on this list that Cuyuna
> means "falls from the sky" in Native American lingo...
>
> Ed in Western NY
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Ultrastar alive |
: Re: Kolb-List: Ultrastar alive
|
| I've had good experiences with hundreds of hours of trouble free
| service with Cuyuna engines. Never had one fall from the sky.
Gang:
I think I put nearly 500 hours on my Cuyuna ULII02 mounted on my
Firestar.
Was a good engine. Had CDI ignition and Mikuni carbs.
Biggest problem with the ULII02 was cylinder base gaskets leaking. In
order to lighten the ULII02 more than previous Cuyunas, they milled
more metal. In the process the metal where the cylinders and cases
met were very thin. The engine mounting system on the US required
dropping the engine to retorque the case bolts. Was easy to get a
little lazy about this, which was recommended every 100 hours, I
think. Soon as the case bolts relaxed a little, it would start
blowing oil.
Other than that, had not complaints from this little engine.
My buddy's Cuyuna ULII02 on an US seized the PTO crank bearings at
10.0 hours. This was a case of poor quality bearings. I was flying
his US at the time. Welded those bearings right to the crankshaft.
Ended up junking that crank.
john h
mkIII
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cat36Fly(at)AOL.COM |
David,
Have you considered putting the antenna in the belly between the gear?
I put X-ponder and VHF there, one on each side and according to Dover AFB
approach they both work fine (they see me and hear me).
Larry Tasker
MKlll x 582/warp
N615RT
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Ultrastar alive |
| I think I put nearly 500 hours on my Cuyuna ULII02 mounted on my
| Firestar.
Sorry Folks:
The above should have read "Ultrastar".
john h
mkIII
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Key" <dhkey(at)msn.com> |
I didn't want to go through the fabric because I've already painted it... I
didn't want to penetrate the fabric if I don't have to. Drilling the boom
tube is out of the question. So I thought drilling through the fiberglass
would be better but I was afraid that the pitot tube would mess up the
antenna reception or transmission. I checked the Acceptable Methods book
AC43.13B, in 12-20a it talks about transponders. It says that special
consideration must be given to pulse equipment such as DME and weather radar
but it doesn't mention anything about pitot tubes.
I had a book on the considerations of antenna mounting but I can't find it
now, figures...
>From: Cat36Fly(at)aol.com
>Reply-To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: q
>Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2006 10:34:57 EDT
>
>David,
>
>Have you considered putting the antenna in the belly between the gear?
>I put X-ponder and VHF there, one on each side and according to Dover AFB
>approach they both work fine (they see me and hear me).
>
>Larry Tasker
>MKlll x 582/warp
>N615RT
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "George Myers" <gmyers(at)grandecom.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Ultrastar alive |
I put 122 hours on a cayuna 430D in the summer of 2003. The only trouble
I
had was a broken fan belt that went through prop & broke it. Shook some
sense into me regarding preflight.. Later, I sold it to a local who taugh
t
himself to fly & I go play with him a couple times a month. The engine st
ill
runs great. AND he bought a rebuilt backup engine for $400.00 plus 50.00
shipping. Smoke them numbers.
George
-------Original Message-------
We have been having a very long stretch of windy and scattered
thunderstorm weather here in western NY but finally yesterday morning , I
was able to get the Ultrastar in the air again . The Cuyuna engine perfor
med
better than it ever has temperature wise ....1100 egt's. It's amazing wha
t
the right parts will do....pistons,rings and cageless wrist pin bearings.
=2E.
lets see how far it goes this time....51 hours last time.
I know there are a few Cuyuna's still being used out there on Ko
lbs
, especially Ultrastars...I have heard a lot of negatives about these
engines and would like to get an idea how the rest of the Cuyuna operator
s
are doing as far as failure rates . My experience so far is limited to 2
engines and the first one had about 160 hours before a weather related cr
ash
(not me)took it out of service.
After all, I recently learned on this list that Cuyuna means "fal
ls
from the sky" in Native American lingo...
Ed in Western NY
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
Back when I built my MKIII, I was still working at TRI ATCT, and had
opportunity to get one of the AF techs to look at the underside of the
airplane. The primary goal is to keep your antenna as far from other
metal parts that extend away from the surface as possible. So I cut a
sort of triangle shaped slab of thin aluminum for a ground plane, and
slid it around and under the left side of the main tube behind the cross
member that ties the main gear together. I had predrilled the hole for
the antenna, so once I knew it would fit, all I had to do was slather it
down with polytak and cram it against the inside of the fabric.
Here is a picture of where it is:
http://www.bcchapel.org/pages/0003/pg9.htm
Sort of evenly spaced between the gear and a bit behind them. Works good.
If you don't have the hoop skid under the nose, a good place would be
right at the back of the nose fairing, but if the hoop is still there,
then that would not be so good. Stick an aluminum plate in there
somewhere for a ground plane.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
David Key wrote:
>
> I didn't want to go through the fabric because I've already painted
> it... I didn't want to penetrate the fabric if I don't have to.
> Drilling the boom tube is out of the question. So I thought drilling
> through the fiberglass would be better but I was afraid that the pitot
> tube would mess up the antenna reception or transmission. I checked
> the Acceptable Methods book AC43.13B, in 12-20a it talks about
> transponders. It says that special consideration must be given to
> pulse equipment such as DME and weather radar but it doesn't mention
> anything about pitot tubes.
>
> I had a book on the considerations of antenna mounting but I can't
> find it now, figures...
>
>
>> From: Cat36Fly(at)aol.com
>> Reply-To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: q
>> Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2006 10:34:57 EDT
>>
>> David,
>>
>> Have you considered putting the antenna in the belly between the gear?
>> I put X-ponder and VHF there, one on each side and according to Dover
>> AFB
>> approach they both work fine (they see me and hear me).
>>
>> Larry Tasker
>> MKlll x 582/warp
>> N615RT
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
> http://wiki.matronics.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gene Ledbetter" <gdledbetter(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Searching for Bryan Melborne |
Bryan's cell phone is 606-682-0645.
Gene
--------
Gene D.
2000 Firefly
330 Hours
New 447
Brakes, Ivo
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=44783#44783
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Email List Photo Shares <pictures(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | [ Wayne McCullough ] : New Email List Photo Share Available! |
A new Email List Photo Share is available:
Poster: Wayne McCullough
Lists: Kolb-List,Ultralight-List
Subject: Kolbra 004
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/blackbird754@alltel.net.07.04.2006/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: | "David Key" <dhkey(at)msn.com> |
I see your pitot there too. I did make a ground plane for it but didn't have
the forsight to make a hole in the fabric. I guess I will put it under the
nose near the pitot, if that dosen't work well I'll move the pitot to the
strut or something.
THANKS
>From: Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org>
>Reply-To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: q
>Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2006 13:01:13 -0400
>
>
>Back when I built my MKIII, I was still working at TRI ATCT, and had
>opportunity to get one of the AF techs to look at the underside of the
>airplane. The primary goal is to keep your antenna as far from other metal
>parts that extend away from the surface as possible. So I cut a sort of
>triangle shaped slab of thin aluminum for a ground plane, and slid it
>around and under the left side of the main tube behind the cross member
>that ties the main gear together. I had predrilled the hole for the
>antenna, so once I knew it would fit, all I had to do was slather it down
>with polytak and cram it against the inside of the fabric.
>Here is a picture of where it is:
>http://www.bcchapel.org/pages/0003/pg9.htm
>Sort of evenly spaced between the gear and a bit behind them. Works good.
>
>If you don't have the hoop skid under the nose, a good place would be right
>at the back of the nose fairing, but if the hoop is still there, then that
>would not be so good. Stick an aluminum plate in there somewhere for a
>ground plane.
>
>Richard Pike
>MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>David Key wrote:
>>
>>I didn't want to go through the fabric because I've already painted it...
>>I didn't want to penetrate the fabric if I don't have to. Drilling the
>>boom tube is out of the question. So I thought drilling through the
>>fiberglass would be better but I was afraid that the pitot tube would mess
>>up the antenna reception or transmission. I checked the Acceptable Methods
>>book AC43.13B, in 12-20a it talks about transponders. It says that special
>>consideration must be given to pulse equipment such as DME and weather
>>radar but it doesn't mention anything about pitot tubes.
>>
>>I had a book on the considerations of antenna mounting but I can't find it
>>now, figures...
>>
>>
>>>From: Cat36Fly(at)aol.com
>>>Reply-To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>>>To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>>>Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: q
>>>Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2006 10:34:57 EDT
>>>
>>>David,
>>>
>>>Have you considered putting the antenna in the belly between the gear?
>>>I put X-ponder and VHF there, one on each side and according to Dover AFB
>>>approach they both work fine (they see me and hear me).
>>>
>>>Larry Tasker
>>>MKlll x 582/warp
>>>N615RT
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>>http://wiki.matronics.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>http://wiki.matronics.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Email List Photo Shares <pictures(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | [ John Ratcliffe ] : New Email List Photo Share Available! |
A new Email List Photo Share is available:
Poster: John Ratcliffe
Lists: Kolb-List,Ultralight-List
Subject: Mark 3X Wing Fold Fitting Modification
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/imagemasters@bellsouth.net.07.04.2006/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: | "Beauford" <beauford(at)tampabay.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: First airplane |
Just got this percuter back to operational... 2 weeks or so... did I
miss anything exciting...? :-)
First solo was 65 HP Aeronca 7AC, N83768, at Bowman Field in
Louisville in 1956... was 16. Worked as a line boy for flying time at
the local Beech FBO, Central American Airways... they are still there..
Beauford
----- Original Message -----
From: kfackler(at)ameritech.net
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, June 30, 2006 10:07 AM
Subject: Kolb-List: First airplane
How about a poll on this? What was YOUR first airplane, the one that
you actually flew?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph Hoover" <flht99reh(at)columbus.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Happy Independance Day |
Thank you for rembering and your Poem. They each and everyone deserve our Prayers
and respect. Both to them and their sacrafice!
And for their families, Our appreciation should also go.
Yesterday, here in Ohio on the Ohio State University TV Channel, I was again reminded
of both Germany and Japan. And the sacrafices that our Nation made as a
people, along with the soldiers. they were times unlike any other and created
a bond among a people that lasted long into the 70's and 80's.
I think many if not most may have forgotten the price that freedom really costs
when someone in the world wants a piece of ya! Probably every life in some way
was effected by loss in some form or another by the inability of people to agree
and get along. Oh, the ways of man!
Ohio Ralph
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=44819#44819
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph Hoover" <flht99reh(at)columbus.rr.com> |
And, Pat, The more English you speak the sooner you may pass on! NOT!
I tie early death in America to "CARBINATED BEVERAGES"!
Someone disprove that. Otherwise, in keeping with the site rules: "KOLBS RULE".
Someone go fly.
Belching from overcarbination, here in Ohio Ralph!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=44822#44822
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Two Seater time wanted |
In a message dated 7/4/2006 11:26:56 PM Eastern Standard Time,
alfi98596(at)yahoo.com writes:
Hi All
I bought a beautiful factory built Firestar / 503 with 45 TT.
The only fixed wing training I have is 6 hours in a C140 tail dragger
Howard Shackleford
FS II
SC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Bigelow" <up_country(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | One Man Rigging Tip |
Here's a way that makes it easier to self-rig my FS2. Cut out a notch in the bottom
of each wing main spar tab (see photo) about one diameter of the attach
hole deep.
Before unfolding the wing, put both main spar pins into the fittings on the cage.
Unfold the wing and swing it into position. Drop the notch over the pin,
and lay the wing tip down onto that piece of foam or rug you are carrying under
your arm. Go to the cage, lift the wing slightly off the notch, pull the pin,
and reinsert through the hole. Safety the pin.
Lift the wing tip and walk down the leading edge until even with the wing strut
end (other end is already attached to the cage). Pick up the end of the strut
with your foot, and insert and safety the pin.
Forgive me if you already are doing it this way - just a tip for those who are
still trying to figure out an easier way.
--------
Dave Bigelow
Kamuela, Hawaii
FS2, Rotax 503 DCDI
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=44868#44868
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/fs2_main_spar_tab_140.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary L. Knapp" <gary56(at)sover.net> |
| Subject: | Greetings From Southern Vermont. |
Howdy All.
My name is Gary and I'm a proud owner of a 92' Firestar.
I have been sandbaggin here for a while and have read some great posts
that have answered some questions I had.
I haven't had my bird up yet, as my GA instructor thinks I need a little
training on it. (He just wants to fly it himself).
I have about 30 hrs in a 172 & Cherokee 140, Flew a 41' J-3 Cub, a
couple weeks ago to get some tail wheel and stick time and absolutely
loved low and slow. Kind of like flyin a farmall tractor.
I'm lookin for anyone up in my neck of the woods with a Kolb to hob knob
with and eventually fly with.
Thanks for the great forum.
Gary
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary L. Knapp" <gary56(at)sover.net> |
Thanks for the quick comeback!
It's a 447, with 280 hours of trouble free operation.
Want to get my feet wet with the next 20 hours and then send her in for
a rebuild this fall and hopefully have her on skis this winter.
Gary
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "N111KX (Kip)" <n111kx(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Greetings From Southern Vermont. |
Looks great, Gary. Enjoy that scenery up there before it gets too cold :)
Kip
--------
Kip
Firestar II (born September 2000)
Atlanta, GA
N111KX
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=44911#44911
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave & Eve Pelletier" <pelletier(at)cableone.net> |
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, July 04, 2006 12:24 PM
>
> I see your pitot there too. I did make a ground plane for it but didn't
> have the forsight to make a hole in the fabric.
David,
Seems like you're very reluctant to make a hole in the fabric. It is
pretty easy to do...use a soldering iron. Now I'm not telling you where to
mount the antenna, but I wouldn't worry too much about making a hole in the
fabric and letting that stop me from putting it in the best place.
AzDave
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
> http://wiki.matronics.com
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Lucas" <d_a_lucas(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Vortex Generators |
G'day all !
There was also an article about VG's in 'Aviation Consumer' Feb 2006 which was
generaly positive over their use. The article refered to their use mainly on Cessna
172 through to the Beech Duke type of aircraft. One 'letter to the editor'
in the April 2006 issue brought up an interesting point re wing loading in
turbulence.
The VG's enable the wing to fly at a higher angle of attack and thus lower the
stall speed, Vs, but in turbulence you want the wing to stall before the design
limit load of the structure is reached. Va (maneuvering speed) gives you protection
here.
With VG's the aircrafts Va is lowered proportionally to the decrease in Vs therefore
the writer recomended to calculate and record the lowered Va for a VG equipt
aircraft.
Sounds logical for the aircraft types mentioned. Guess it applies to Kolbs too.
David.
(The older I get, the smarter I was !)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=44966#44966
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Vortex Generators |
The article refered to their use mainly on Cessna 172 through to the
Beech Duke type of aircraft. |
| David.
| (The older I get, the smarter I was !)
Don't think there is much relationship between the aircraft tested and
a Kolb.
We fly very slow, normally.
If by chance we encounter severe turbulence, there is not problem
slowing down to prevent overstressing the Kolb. First of all, your
body will not be able to tolerate nearly the abuse from turbulence
that your Kolb will. Based on some experience, when I have to hang on
to the bottom of the seat to keep from getting beat up, it is an
unconditioned response to reduce power and airspeed.
Soon as I can figure out how VG's can improve performance of my mkIII,
I run right out and buy a set.
john h
mkIII
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Key" <dhkey(at)msn.com> |
it must of been all that time spent covering, brushing, sanding, painting
silver, wet sanding, painting more silver, wet sanding, painting white,
sanding, masking off, painting red, scuffing, masking off, painting blue and
uncovering. If I didn't touch fabric again for the next three lifetimes that
would be ok with me.
I did put many drain holes along the wings and tail with a soldering iron. I
could do that again.
Thanks for the tip.
>From: "Dave & Eve Pelletier" <pelletier(at)cableone.net>
>Reply-To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: q
>Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2006 08:34:00 -0700
>
>
>
>
>----- Original Message ----- Sent: Tuesday, July 04, 2006 12:24 PM
>
>
>>
>>I see your pitot there too. I did make a ground plane for it but didn't
>>have the forsight to make a hole in the fabric.
>
>
>David,
>
> Seems like you're very reluctant to make a hole in the fabric. It is
>pretty easy to do...use a soldering iron. Now I'm not telling you where to
>mount the antenna, but I wouldn't worry too much about making a hole in the
>fabric and letting that stop me from putting it in the best place.
>
>AzDave
>>
>>
>>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>>http://wiki.matronics.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>http://wiki.matronics.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | robert bean <slyck(at)frontiernet.net> |
For small holes the soldering iron works well.
-if you want a larger hole, glue (GOOP is a good sub for polytack)
a washer of plastic or thin metal on the inside first, then cut the
hole.
Some fabric and sewing stores carry plastic washers.
You can seal the joined edge with a smear of GOOP or clear nail
polish.
-BB
On 5, Jul 2006, at 11:34 AM, Dave & Eve Pelletier wrote:
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Tuesday, July 04, 2006 12:24 PM
>
>
>>
>> I see your pitot there too. I did make a ground plane for it but
>> didn't have the forsight to make a hole in the fabric.
>
>
> David,
>
> Seems like you're very reluctant to make a hole in the fabric. It
> is pretty easy to do...use a soldering iron. Now I'm not telling you
> where to mount the antenna, but I wouldn't worry too much about making
> a hole in the fabric and letting that stop me from putting it in the
> best place.
>
> AzDave
>>
>>
>> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>> http://wiki.matronics.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
> http://wiki.matronics.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "The BaronVonEvil" <grageda(at)innw.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Two Seater time wanted |
Hi Alfi,
I have a Firestar II and found it to be very docile and straight forward flying
planes. The Firestar has light controls but not sensitive.
I suspect that when you can solo in a cub then you will be pleasantly surprized
in a Kolb. Just make sure the weight and balance checks out and do a thorough
pre-flight.
I also have a Maxair Drifter (single) that I fly and it is similar to a Kolb but
alittle slower to respond due to all the flying wires. If you cannot find a
kolb two seater around, you might seek out a two place Drifter to obtain some
dual on. It is a tandom arangement like a cub.
I have flown the Challenger Two place, and it is no where near to what a Kolb is
like to fly. They tend to be sluggish by comparision and the rudder feels somewhat
vague at times.
Those are my opinions and if you need some help just, holler ....
Carlos Grageda
AKA
The BaronVonEvil
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=45027#45027
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | WillUribe(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Check out eBay Motors: Kolb Ultrastar & trailer (item 130002615226 |
end time J
_Click here: eBay Motors: Kolb Ultrastar & trailer (item 130002615226 end
(http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Kolb-Ultrastar-trailer_W0QQitemZ130002615226QQihZ003QQcategoryZ63722QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmd
ZViewItem)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Rice <rice(at)iapdatacom.net> |
Piper Colt, 1968, Georgetown, KY, I was 15, didn't solo until 1983 in a
Piper Tomahawk in Meadville, PA.
Larry the micro mong guy
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Check out eBay Motors: Kolb Ultrastar & trailer (item 130002615226 |
end time J
From: <WillUribe(at)aol.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: Check out eBay Motors: Kolb Ultrastar & trailer
(item 130002615226 end time J
Will:
Nice looking US.
Hasn't been flown much by any of the three owners. Seller says there
is 75 hours on it. I kinda doubt that. Notice the spark plug wire
caps. Not secured. They won't stay on a Cuyuna, inverted, for 75
hours without falling off. I tested that theory back in 1985.
john h
mkIII
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Swiderski" <rswiderski(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Something New!!!!!! |
Hello Rick,
I was out of the country for a month touring Poland (Hey Big Lar, I've got over
1200 pictures for you next time you pay me a visit!) so I am late posting. I
have thought long and hard on how to best build a Kolb trailer pulled by a light
6 cylinder vehicle with 150 lbs max tongue wt. I have photographed & studied
many smart people's designs and I believe I have combined the best ideas into
an almost ideal trailer. The heart of the design is the basic concept of
Dennis Souder's open air trailer I was thrilled to look at. He used a boat trailer
with a rail down the center to guide & hold tailwheel & tail feathers up
front. The brillance of the design was he had a dropped floor for the plane's
wheels immediately behind the trailer's axle & only a few inches off the ground.
It did not hit/drag on the ground because it was so close to the axle. That
low height, meant you only had to lift the plane a few inches off the ground
(translates easy to load!) When you use that concept in an enclosed trailer,
it also eliminates the problem of scraping the leading eadge of wings on trailer
floor. This concept forces the tongue weight up unexceptable high when using
an enclosure as the axle is so far aft. I solved this issue by using 2 axles
far apart (can't use leaf springs here) this also cushioned ride because
when one wheel went into a hole, the other one still holds the trailer side up.
The 2 axles apart was not enough to keep the tongue wt below 150 lbs. The secret
was incorporating a truss just in front of the front axle, then using this
truss to winch up the tail boom at the H-section behind the engine. This took
all the weight that the trailer saw on the tail wheel & put it back on the front
axle. My trialer now has the same tongue weight with my plane loaded or unloaded.
There are many other things that help to make thing better/easier/more
comfortable that I could share with you if you care to give me call, 352-307-9009
(just south of Ocala FL), but the dropped floor for plane's wheels; the
2 spread a!
xles; &
the truss to hold off the tail's weight off from the front, are the keys to the
puzzle. I went overboard in details on mine & could have made it lighter than
it's 2000 lbs by quit a bit, but it pulls perfectly straight with no wagging
& this last Sun & Fun, I actually used my 4 cyl Ford Escort to pull it at 60mph!
It is very streamlined aerodynamically, front & back, plus low to ground. I'll
try to attach a picture.
richard swiderski
slingshot 003 waiting for my TIG welder to come in ( I cut out her backbone so
I could drop my 175 lb, 110hp, turbocharged, intecooled, distributorless, port
injected, dual computered, 2.32 : 1 SPG-2 gear redive, 3 cyl Suzuki engine)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=45113#45113
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/trlrrtfr_188.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <kfackler(at)ameritech.net> |
| Subject: | First airplane list |
Gentlefolk:
If you haven't visited the First Airplane site recently
(http://www.kfackler.com/kolb/first_plane.html), you might want to give
it a look. There's a bit of a "surprise" at the bottom of the table of
entries.
-Ken Fackler
Kolb Mark II / A722KWF
Rochester MI
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | possums <possums(at)mindspring.com> |
At 05:32 PM 7/4/2006, you wrote:
>Just got this percuter back to operational... 2 weeks or so... did
>I miss anything exciting...? :-)
>
>First solo was 65 HP Aeronca 7AC, N83768, at Bowman Field in
>Louisville in 1956... was 16. Worked as a line boy for flying time
>at the local Beech FBO, Central American Airways... they are still there..
>Beauford
Good Grief !!
He's only 10 year's older than me!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | possums <possums(at)mindspring.com> |
>
> I have a depth perception problem (only one eye)
>
>AzDave
And they let you fly a plane??
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Domenic Perez" <perezmdomenic(at)plateautel.net> |
Chandelle Standard 18' hang glider in 1977 was my first aviating and
first aircraft I owned. Stalled it and ended up 40' up in a pine tree
once. Didn't get hurt. Neither did the hang glider, but tricky to
retrieve.
First powered airplane was a Cascade Ultralights Kasperwing 180B.
Odd control system in that roll was a steering wheel working wingtip
rudders while pitch was weight shift. But it was OK and one of the best
planes ever for the super slow end of the speed range. I think I could
fly straight and level at 22-24 mph all day.
M. Domenic Perez
Vaughn, NM
FS II
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | possums <possums(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Vortex Generators |
At 01:06 PM 7/5/2006, you wrote:
>
>Soon as I can figure out how VG's can improve performance of my mkIII,
>I run right out and buy a set.
>
>john h
I don't have the luxury of flaps, but I think even "you" would be
impressed - you might even be able to "hover" - like the ole days
in the chopper.
$100.00 and a little of the right kind of double sided tape,
who knows??
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed Chmielewski" <edchmiel(at)mindspring.com> |
June of 1975, at K16 AB in Korea. Regular Army Spec 4 in an AF Flying
Club C150 with a Korean Ministry of Transport instructor, and ROK AF
F-100's in the pattern to boot.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <kfackler(at)ameritech.net> |
Got it, Ed! You're info is now on the website. Thanks,
-Ken
----- Original Message -----
From: Ed Chmielewski
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 3:13 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: First solo
June of 1975, at K16 AB in Korea. Regular Army Spec 4 in an AF Flying
Club C150 with a Korean Ministry of Transport instructor, and ROK AF
F-100's in the pattern to boot.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <kfackler(at)ameritech.net> |
| Subject: | Re: First airplane |
Your info is now included on the website, Domenic. Thanks!
-Ken
----- Original Message -----
From: Domenic Perez
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 1:30 AM
Subject: Kolb-List: First airplane
Chandelle Standard 18' hang glider in 1977
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Key" <dhkey(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Rotax 912 fuel filter and gasolator |
912 installation manual calls for a fuel fliter with a mesh size .1 mm
between the tank and the fuel pump. Where did you find the fuel fliter with
the .1 mm mesh size?
I'd like to know your thoughts on gasolators and the brands you use. I can
not put one in the lowest point of the fuel system, it seems to me that one
anywhere would trap water as long as it runs through it. Is there something
I don't understand.
Thanks,
David
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flykolb" <flykolb(at)wowway.com> |
Ken,
Mine was in Sept. 1993 in a C-152.
Great site Ken!
Jim Minewiser
Mark III
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Vortex Generators |
| $100.00 and a little of the right kind of double sided tape,
| who knows??
Possum:
Loan me a hundred, "pay day stakes".
Thanks,
hauck
mkIII
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax 912 fuel filter and gasolator |
| I can
| not put one in the lowest point of the fuel system, it seems to me
that one
| anywhere would trap water as long as it runs through it. Is there
something
| I don't understand.
|
| Thanks,
| David
David K/Gang:
Water is heavier than gasoline. If you pull fuel off the top of the
tank, water remains in the tank. Pull it out of the bottom of the
tank and it will then go through the gascolator, which can be drained
periodically.
I have a homemade gascolator. Fuel tank outlet is in the lowest part
of my fuel tank. Everything comes out of that hole. Even the last
drop of fuel. From the outlet I loop the fuel line under the tailboom
and back to the Facet Fuel Pump. At the lowest point of the loop, I
installed a "T". From the "T", I run a line forward to the lowest
point in my fuselage, which is between the gear legs. I have a Briggs
and Stratton nylon valve at the end of the line just prior to a 90 deg
fitting and short piece of fuel line to exit the bottom of the
fuselage. It is right next to the vent line from the top of the tank
that vents out the bottom of the fuselage. Water and contaminants
collect in the fuel line that lays in the keel of the airplane.
I have been using a Purolator Fuel Filter, same one, since 1984 on my
Ultrastar. Uses nylon mesh filters.
This is the filter:
http://www.midwayautosupply.com/searchby.asp?txtSearch=Purolator&select1=mfg
I did replace the glass cylinder with a piece of aluminum tubing of
the same size. First night it was on the Ultrastar the glass cylinder
cracked and I lost six gals of gas. I may have overtightened it, or
it may have been a defective glass part. However, was not going to
take another chance of it cracking. I believe John W flies with the
same filter, glass cylinder and all.
john h
mkIII
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "JetPilot" <orcabonita(at)hotmail.com> |
Hi Russ,
We had our disagreements and pissing match on the list months ago, but shortly
afterwards you took the time to email me and send me some really good advice about
trim tabs on my MK-III. I figure anyone that can get over a disagreement
on the list to help a fellow Kolber out has got to be a pretty descent guy.
I am not going to get drawn into the current dispute with Max. And even though
I am not thrilled about you linking my name with Max, I am not going to take
you apart . I appreciate the good advice you sent, it helped me make an important
building decision and thats what this list is really all about.
Michael A. Bigelow
--------
"NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could
have !!!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=45250#45250
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "N111KX (Kip)" <n111kx(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Firestar Pics and Videos |
A gyro flying friend of mine have benn geting some decent shots and videos of me
and his machine. The videos are untitled but are worth the load time. Keep an
eye out for my dead stick landing over the airport (and his on page four too).
http://gyrobuilder.homelinux.org/gallery2/v/monarch_flight/july2006/?g2_page=1
Kip
Firestar II
Atlanta
--------
Kip
Firestar II (born September 2000)
Atlanta, GA
N111KX
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=45449#45449
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "N111KX (Kip)" <n111kx(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Firestar Pics and Videos |
Thanks, he has a neat gyro. You'll likely never see me in one but flying in formation
and watching all of the parts work is fun...
Kip
--------
Kip
Firestar II (born September 2000)
Atlanta, GA
N111KX
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=45471#45471
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Williamson" <kolbrapilot2(at)comcast.net> |
Hi All,
Just finished a major update to my website.
The Kolbra just turned 4 years old so I slimmed the website down to include only
what I think are the better photos I have taken from the Kolbra or of a Kolb.
It has been a fun very 4 years.
http://home.comcast.net/~kolbrapilot1/
--------
John Williamson
Arlington, TX
Kolbra, 912ULS
http://home.comcast.net/~kolbrapilot1
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=45481#45481
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack B. Hart" <jbhart(at)onlyinternet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Vortex Generators |
> Hi Gang Just received my July 2006,
>EAA Sport Pilot magazine.On page 27,
>there is a story about vortex
>generators, cuffs, fences and stall
>strips.
--------------------
Bill,
I just received my copy today. It was a good article, and it pretty much
indicates what effect VG's can have on a Kolb. One of the planes shown was
a "vintage J-3 Cub".
I have seen VG's on thick wing heavy lifter STOL aircraft. Just before I
moved to Indiana, a fellow moved a MOOSE, Murphy Aircraft Mfg. Ltd., into
the communal hangar. It had vortex generators on top of the wings, on the
bottom of the horizontal stabilizers, and on each side of the vertical
stabilizer. I took my step stool down and measured things. The VG placement
on the Moose wing was almost identical in proportion to what I have on the
FireFly. The wing chord was a little longer than my FireFly but the span
was 14 feet larger. It was a good feeling to hangar with such a strong
beast.
Before I closed the hangar door for the last time and slipped the key under
the door, I looked at it again. It was a rare occurance, that a MOOSE
showed up at Perryville, Missouri, and I doubt that one will find its way to
Winchester, Indiana.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Winchester, IN
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph Hoover" <flht99reh(at)columbus.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Mazolla-Me and slide me in! |
Last week was the first time since I had my full wind screen off that I tried to
get into my Firestar Single 1990 KXP. It now has the doors and the full canopy
from nose cone up to wings. And guess what!
At 230 pounds and 6'1" tall with two bad legs and two bad knees, I have to almost
but not quite Butter my body to get into that teensy little slit along the
side. Whats with that?
I have viewed several Firestars with the darned tube running along the center from
the top bow below the wings all the way down to the instrument panel. When
I first looked at them I thought there is a sure way to go "cross-eyed". Reminded
me of that movie about the handle traversing the bridge area of the nose
(on your face, not on the plane) so's one could remove their glasses easly. Backfired
on the inventor and he went from riches to rags cause all of his customers
became cross-eyed, and sued him.
So now I find myself havin to give consideration to one of three choices:
1). keep what I have and begin working out.
2). stop eating, loose weight and shorten both legs.
or...........
3). Switch over to the split down the middle, braced windscreen, for year around
flying.
Help....any assistance here!
Perplexed, confused and slidding around in my seat here in Ohio, Ralph!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=45609#45609
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eugene Zimmerman <etzim62(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Mazolla-Me and slide me in! |
On Jul 7, 2006, at 9:28 PM, Ralph Hoover wrote:
> Help....any assistance here!
>
> Perplexed, confused and slidding around in my seat here in Ohio,
> Ralph!
Ralph,
I Think you might like something like I did on this one.
I don't understand why Kolb didn't do something like this a long time
ago.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "boyd" <by0ung(at)brigham.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Mazolla-Me and slide me in! |
So now I find myself havin to give consideration to one of three choices:
1). keep what I have and begin working out.
2). stop eating, loose weight and shorten both legs.
or...........
3). Switch over to the split down the middle, braced windscreen, for year
around
flying.
Help....any assistance here!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Ralph
OR option 4). Instead of split down the middle,,,, use only one
windscreen post.... either on the left or on the right... and make the
door / windscreen go from the post, over the top and down the other side.
Then a small door or permanent window from the post down. It should make
climbing in like there was no windscreen or door.
archive
Boyd Young
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Mazolla-Me and slide me in! |
Win'sheeld tube? What tube? We don' need no steenking tube!
http://www.bcchapel.org/pages/0003/Latch.html
1/8" thick Lexan, fastened snugly along the left fuselage side,
including the top left side of the upper cabin bow near the leading
edge, then securely latched on the right side, just bends and wraps
around, and it's good to go. But it does need about four 3" snap vents
to move cooling air onto your bod.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
Ralph Hoover wrote:
>
> Last week was the first time since I had my full wind screen off that I tried
to get into my Firestar Single 1990 KXP. It now has the doors and the full canopy
from nose cone up to wings. And guess what!
>
> At 230 pounds and 6'1" tall with two bad legs and two bad knees, I have to almost
but not quite Butter my body to get into that teensy little slit along the
side. Whats with that?
>
> I have viewed several Firestars with the darned tube running along the center
from the top bow below the wings all the way down to the instrument panel. When
I first looked at them I thought there is a sure way to go "cross-eyed". Reminded
me of that movie about the handle traversing the bridge area of the nose
(on your face, not on the plane) so's one could remove their glasses easly.
Backfired on the inventor and he went from riches to rags cause all of his customers
became cross-eyed, and sued him.
>
> So now I find myself havin to give consideration to one of three choices:
> 1). keep what I have and begin working out.
> 2). stop eating, loose weight and shorten both legs.
> or...........
> 3). Switch over to the split down the middle, braced windscreen, for year around
flying.
>
> Help....any assistance here!
>
> Perplexed, confused and slidding around in my seat here in Ohio, Ralph!
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=45609#45609
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Cooley" <johnc(at)datasync.com> |
| Subject: | Bill of Sale for Parts |
Hi Gang,
Looks like I may have my Twinstar MK II sold. One of the stipulations in
selling it is for it to be sold as "Airplane Parts".
Now for my question to the list, does anyone have a pre-drafted copy of a
bill of sale for parts they would care to share. I realize something can be
written up fairly easy, but was thinking there may be generic form out there
that pretty much would cover all the bases.
Thanks,
John Cooley
Lucedale, Ms.
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph Hoover" <flht99reh(at)columbus.rr.com> |
| Subject: | First Flight Shaking Ralph of Ohio! |
First Flight! July 8th, 2006 Since first lesson August 6th, 2005! Little money,
lots of time. 19 hours of actual instruction.
Today I experienced the most frightening / exciting / emotional forty -five minutes
of my life to date! knowing that going in, how could one describe the feelings
of fear, exeleration and excitement balled up, if you will in a period of
time that seemed like forever and yet less than a moment to reflect back upon?
My intent, deep inside was to avoid the actual take-off of my Firestar, but yet
come to the edge of where lift-off might exist. Knowing that my tail dragger
and the Challenger had two-different modes of operendi, I knew that I didnt want
to mistake what felt like lift or climb to actually become lift or climb. My
PIC, whom by the way was not there at the time, stated: If, when your practicing
your taxiing, the Kolb lifts off, make a decision, how much field is left
and decide if you need to fly or make a close relationship with the soy field
ahead. I chose to lift!
Immediately after my decision, I thought: stupid, you didnt have to make this move
, at this time , in this plane, here today. My heart began pounding, the plane
wanted to lift like I have never felt, but was sought to Power forward and
lift. At this point, I am at the end of the runway and climbing unlike I had
at any time in the Challenger, with PIC aboard. Altimeter reading 1600 feet
ASL. How is that, out of the chute, way before I was prior in the Challenger at
twice the distance? Obviously, faulty instruments, correct when I am back on
the ground. All my training comes into play: Gain altitude, keep airspeed above
stall (stall, both mechanical and electrical ASI indicate way below stall,
what gives?) Look down at the Garmin, which I installed at this time , not for
flight but for shake down, was stating 34 MPH (ground speed). Crap, I need
to crank forward and gain some speed and altitude. What am I thinking? I have
been flying this pattern so many times, its imbedded in my memory so deep that......Where
is the field? Darned it, its only a six mile circular pattern, where
is....OH! Whew! There is the field. Thank God. Wow, cant do anything about
it now, its way to close, and Im way to high. Oh well, next round.
Right wing rears up, CRAP! Right Aileron and a little left rudder, string went
to the right, left rudder (stand away from the string). Now level, whops first
turn, now down wind, yet really no wind, why is plane acting funny? What do I
know about plane acting funny, this is the first time I have flown it? Getting
mad and scared, common sense levels in. I have to make some choices; I am where
I should be, at the altitude I should be by: WHAT.? AN ADDITIONAL 1,000
FEET, how did that happen, throttle back, leveling off, now at 2200 feet ASL.
Need to get down to 1600 feet without loosing much air speed. God, Are you there?
Work with me here God, This isnt what I would have chosen as my mode of operendi,
but here it is on my plate.....HELP!
First attempt to land: way too high, way too fast. Go around! Second attempt
to land: still a little high, still too much speed. Third attempt: right height,
speed a little fast, but I can dump that in time.....OH CRAP , What was that,
left wing up, right aileron down, plane acted a tad bit funny. Where ok now,
pul stick back, crank engine up, way to many things happening! Towers below,
wind causing me to crab really bad, altitude way too high, so many things mounting
up way to quickly! STOP! Think! What is the way you were taught? Calmly,
gently on the stick. Forget that you have no idea how fast you are going. Ignore
that flashing light on the panel stating EGT way too high! Think, one EGT
reading that far off, obviously a wire crossed. ASI lamp blinking, expect that,
the stupid ASI isnt reading correctly. You know the feeling. If the bottom
begins falling out, push forward on the stick, DO NOT PULL BACK! Back in control,
as much control as I could possibly have at this point. God! you are still
with me, arent you? Of course, if I drop, well, In heaven with Him, I will
be. But that would not be His choice, for me at this time in this place, Thank
you Jesus!
What is thta little dot on the field? Lets see, 400 feet on final AGL, Airspeed,
no idea, but feels (what the H do I know about feel in a Kolb), since I have
never felt a Kolb before? Oh well, I believe that this feels and looks like where
I had been before in the Challenger at this altitude, at this feeling (read
speed) and Dave is standing at the 1/4 field length guiding me in. STUPID!
GET OFF THE FIELD! That didnt do anything. Dave is moving his right hand flat
in an up and down motion. Ah-ha! Cut throttle, forward stick, line up with the
field, WHOO! a gust, right aileron down, right rudder slow, slow pull back,
pull back some more, there thump, wheels on the ground. Stick all the way back,
whoa, now I have ground control, speed bleeding off, stopped at half field.
Job done!
Now after hugs and pats on the back. I take the Kolb to the hanger. Shaking along
the way. thank you Lord!
Thank you Dave. Thank you instructor Andy. I asked these guys: did you ever forget
the feeling of your first flight? Apparently NOT! Now I understand the N.V.M.of
S. phrase that God gave me!
Rip goes the shirt!
Going back again tomorrow. Lot more to learn but who, but those that have been
what we have been through, could possibly understand?
Calmed like the sea....Ralph of Ohio!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=45773#45773
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph Hoover" <flht99reh(at)columbus.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Mazolla-Me and slide me in! |
Ralph
OR option 4). Instead of split down the middle,,,, use only one
windscreen post.... either on the left or on the right... and make the
door / windscreen go from the post, over the top and down the other side.
Then a small door or permanent window from the post down. It should make
climbing in like there was no windscreen or door.
archive
Boyd Young
Pictures please. My mind isn't the same as it used to be.
I think I know what your refering to but it would be easier to see it. Thanks.
Ralph
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=45774#45774
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph Hoover" <flht99reh(at)columbus.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Mazolla-Me and slide me in! |
Richard, I appreciate you method. But that appears to be a "tear it down and build
it up" kind of project.
I may consider it sometime this year.
Thanks
Ohio Ralph
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=45776#45776
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Girard" <jindoguy(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: First Flight Shaking Ralph of Ohio! |
Congratulations Ralph! Sounds real similar to my first flight in the MkIII.
It definitely gets better and better from here. As my Aussie buddies say,
"Good on ya, mate."
Rick
On 7/8/06, Ralph Hoover wrote:
>
> >
>
> First Flight! July 8th, 2006 Since first lesson August 6th, 2005! Little
> money, lots of time. 19 hours of actual instruction.
>
>
> Today I experienced the most frightening / exciting / emotional forty
> -five minutes of my life to date! knowing that going in, how could one
> describe the feelings of fear, exeleration and excitement balled up, if you
> will in a period of time that seemed like forever and yet less than a moment
> to reflect back upon?
>
> My intent, deep inside was to avoid the actual "take-off" of my Firestar,
> but yet come to the edge of where lift-off might exist. Knowing that my tail
> dragger and the Challenger had two-different modes of operendi, I knew that
> I didn't want to mistake what felt like lift or climb to actually become
> lift or climb. My PIC, whom by the way was not there at the time, stated:
> "If, when your practicing your taxiing, the Kolb lifts off, make a decision,
> how much field is left and decide if you need to fly or make a close
> relationship with the soy field ahead. I chose to lift!
>
> Immediately after my decision, I thought: "stupid, you didn't have to make
> this move , at this time , in this plane, here today". My heart began
> pounding, the plane wanted to lift like I have never felt, but was sought to
> "Power forward and lift". At this point, I am at the end of the runway and
> climbing unlike I had at any time in the Challenger, with PIC aboard.
> Altimeter reading 1600 feet ASL. How is that, out of the chute, way before
> I was prior in the Challenger at twice the distance? Obviously, faulty
> instruments, correct when I am back on the ground. All my training comes
> into play: Gain altitude, keep airspeed above stall (stall, both mechanical
> and electrical ASI indicate way below stall, what gives?) Look down at the
> Garmin, which I installed at this time , not for flight but for shake down,
> was stating 34 MPH (ground speed). Crap, I need to crank forward and gain
> some speed and altitude. What am I thinking? I have been flying this
> pattern so many tim!
> es, its imbedded in my memory so deep that......Where is the field? Darned
> it, its only a six mile circular pattern, where is....OH! Whew! There is the
> field. Thank God. Wow, can't do anything about it now, its way to close, and
> I'm way to high. Oh well, next round.
>
> Right wing rears up, CRAP! Right Aileron and a little left rudder, string
> went to the right, left rudder (stand away from the string). Now level,
> whops first turn, now down wind, yet really no wind, why is plane acting
> funny? What do I know about plane acting funny, this is the first time I
> have flown it? Getting mad and scared, common sense levels in. I have to
> make some choices; I am where I should be, at the altitude I should be by:
> WHAT.? AN ADDITIONAL 1,000 FEET, how did that happen, throttle back,
> leveling off, now at 2200 feet ASL. Need to get down to 1600 feet without
> loosing much air speed. God, Are you there? Work with me here God, This
> isn't what I would have chosen as my mode of operendi, but here it is on my
> plate.....HELP!
>
> First attempt to land: way too high, way too fast. Go around! Second
> attempt to land: still a little high, still too much speed. Third attempt:
> right height, speed a little fast, but I can dump that in time.....OH CRAP ,
> What was that, left wing up, right aileron down, plane acted a tad bit
> funny. Where ok now, pul stick back, crank engine up, way to many things
> happening! Towers below, wind causing me to crab really bad, altitude way
> too high, so many things mounting up way to quickly! STOP! Think! What is
> the way you were taught? Calmly, gently on the stick. Forget that you have
> no idea how fast you are going. Ignore that flashing light on the panel
> stating EGT way too high! Think, one EGT reading that far off, obviously a
> wire crossed. ASI lamp blinking, expect that, the stupid ASI isn't reading
> correctly. You know the feeling. If the bottom begins falling out, push
> forward on the stick, DO NOT PULL BACK! Back in control, as much control as
> I could possibly have a!
> t this point. God! you are still with me, aren't you? Of course, if I
> drop, well, In heaven with Him, I will be. But that would not be His choice,
> for me at this time in this place, Thank you Jesus!
>
> What is thta little dot on the field? Lets see, 400 feet on final AGL,
> Airspeed, no idea, but feels (what the "H" do I know about feel in a Kolb),
> since I have never felt a Kolb before? Oh well, I believe that this feels
> and looks like where I had been before in the Challenger at this altitude,
> at this feeling (read speed) and Dave is standing at the 1/4 field length
> guiding me in. STUPID! GET OFF THE FIELD! That didn't do anything. Dave is
> moving his right hand flat in an up and down motion. Ah-ha! Cut throttle,
> forward stick, line up with the field, WHOO! a gust, right aileron down,
> right rudder slow, slow pull back, pull back some more, there thump, wheels
> on the ground. Stick all the way back, whoa, now I have ground control,
> speed bleeding off, stopped at half field. Job done!
>
> Now after hugs and pats on the back. I take the Kolb to the hanger.
> Shaking along the way. thank you Lord!
> Thank you Dave. Thank you instructor Andy. I asked these guys: "did you
> ever forget the feeling of your first flight"? Apparently NOT! Now I
> understand the N.V.M.of S. phrase that God gave me!
>
> Rip goes the shirt!
>
> Going back again tomorrow. Lot more to learn but who, but those that have
> been what we have been through, could possibly understand?
>
> Calmed like the sea....Ralph of Ohio!
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=45773#45773
>
>
--
Rick Girard
"Ya'll drop on in"
takes on a whole new meaning
when you live at the airport.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard & Martha Neilsen" <NeilsenRM(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: First Flight Shaking Ralph of Ohio! |
Congratulations Ralph!!!! Thanks for sharing.
Sounds like you may have a static source issue with your air speed
indicator. Check the archives for options. I disconnected the tube from my
static source pick up and just used the cockpit pressure as a static source.
It works much better than the static source I was using.
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIIIc
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, July 08, 2006 8:04 PM
>
>
> First Flight! July 8th, 2006 Since first lesson August 6th, 2005! Little
> money, lots of time. 19 hours of actual instruction.
>
>
> Today I experienced the most frightening / exciting / emotional
> forty -five minutes of my life to date! knowing that going in, how could
> one describe the feelings of fear, exeleration and excitement balled up,
> if you will in a period of time that seemed like forever and yet less than
> a moment to reflect back upon?
>
> My intent, deep inside was to avoid the actual ?otake-off? of my
> Firestar, but yet come to the edge of where lift-off might exist. Knowing
> that my tail dragger and the Challenger had two-different modes of
> operendi, I knew that I didn?Tt want to mistake what felt like lift or
> climb to actually become lift or climb. My PIC, whom by the way was not
> there at the time, stated: ?oIf, when your practicing your taxiing, the
> Kolb lifts off, make a decision, how much field is left and decide if you
> need to fly or make a close relationship with the soy field ahead. I chose
> to lift!
>
> Immediately after my decision, I thought: ?ostupid, you didn?Tt have to
> make this move , at this time , in this plane, here today?. My heart
> began pounding, the plane wanted to lift like I have never felt, but was
> sought to ?oPower forward and lift?. At this point, I am at the end of
> the runway and climbing unlike I had at any time in the Challenger, with
> PIC aboard. Altimeter reading 1600 feet ASL. How is that, out of the
> chute, way before I
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Schnabel <tnfirestar2(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Engine break-in, first taxiing |
This report will pale in comparison the Ralph from Ohio's recent First Flight report...
I cant wait for that day to happen here!
But here is an update on my Firestar 2, it has waited patiently in the trailer
the past 10 months for me to show her some daylight. So finally home from work
long enough, and the weather was perfect enough, I did a little engine break-in
work last Friday
After determining the battery that was new but now dead (2 years of storage will
do that to a battery I guess), and could not be recharged, a new batt was
installed. Tied the tail wheel down to a nearby stump with cargo straps used on
a C-130 (a souvenir from my ANG stint, and I figured if this bird breaks these
babies it deserves to fly on its own!). The first start up was a little slow.
Cranked over several times before the fuel lines fully filled and it started
(yes I did prime the lines, but still took a while). It smoked like a freight
train the first few minutes, enough so that I became concerned and shut it down
to verify there was nothing amiss, stuck oil line or poorly adjusted injector.
I could find nothing wrong, so restarted. This time she fired on the second
revolution (Sweet!), and within another minute or so the exhaust cleared, and
things looked normal.
Ran through the Rotax break-in process chart, changing RPM at the appropriate
intervals. Watching closely all gauges. RPM had a few spots it liked and would
hold dead steady (5000 was one). But a few were hard to hold steady (5500),
where it would hold then slowly climb, tap the throttle a tad to get it back,
steady, then it would slowly drop... so for some of the 5 minutes runs would have
to baby it to keep it on target, others would hold perfect the whole 5 minutes.
Prop flex perhaps?
Temps looked within range, at 4000-RPM CHT/300 and EGT/925. At WOT 6000-RPM CHT/400
and EGT/1000. From what I have learned these are acceptable. The only deviation
from expectation was the Max RPM of 6000, should have been more like
6500 (on the ground). Not until later did I understand about setting the prop
load down prior to break-in. This was my mistake, but I was assured it would not
be a major issue though was best to be set for a correct Max RPM on the ground.
The 65-minute process consumed just under 3 gallons of fuel. That was my
estimate, and what I loaded. I doubt it would have run 5 more minutes with what
was left in the tanks.
After the break-in and a 30 minute cool down. I installed the short windscreen
after removing the full enclosure. Wade L commented to me a few days before
(during a visit to see the plane) that once I flew a summer flight with the shortie
I would probably not want the full back on till the winter. Once I sat in
the seat and could see the view improvement, I believe what he said will be
totally correct!
So sitting there, break in complete, and there was sure a lot of sunlight left...
a bit more fuel and on to some taxi runs on the new airstrip. Now its been
about 15 years since my last tail dragger experience (Sorrell Hyperlight ultralight),
so nice and easy, and SLOW were key words I kept in mind. The first
few passes were actually pleasantly controllable, the only issue was my turnarounds,
and I suppose that at such slow speeds with the narrow tail wheel the radius
consumed all 100' width of my strip. First runs were below 20 MPH, but in
about 30 minutes I realized I was breaching 30 to 35 and had to watch for those
first signs of lift (did not want an inadvertent lift off at this time!).
I also noticed that with more speed turn radius did improve a good bit. Still
not sure about the heel brakes though. Held me when stopped or very near a stop,
but dont think I will count on them for any urgent slowing down at higher speeds.
Continued on for about 15 more minutes, and felt satisfied that some good progress
was made today. Back into the trailer she went... but just before that,
I took a few pictures. The setting sun was glistened on the wings so brightly
I could imagine the original owner of this bird offering an approving smile from
the heavens above.
Next, I am waiting for some replies from some LSA instructors I have contacted
so I can get some dual hours, and begin work toward the Sport Pilot ticket,
so I can legally get the FS2 up in the air where I know she really longs to be!!
Mike S
Manchester TN
Firestar 2 503
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph Hoover" <flht99reh(at)columbus.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: First Flight Shaking Ralph of Ohio! |
Quote:
Sounds like you may have a static source issue with your air speed
indicator. Check the archives for options. I disconnected the tube from my
static source pick up and just used the cockpit pressure as a static source.
It works much better than the static source I was using.
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIIIc
Yes Rick ,and the funny thing is I asked Kolb a couple times why I might be getting
mis-readings. They suggested that I feed the static tube out between the
plastic nose at the rear and the rest of the material, at the side. To me, this
seemed to act more like an "atomiser" pick-up nozzle and would creater a greater
differencial than what pressurized the input (Pitot). I believe your right.
I need to disconnect the static line inside the cabin and see what happens.
I will say that both (since they were connected to the same inlet and outlets),
read exactly the same, but most assuradly not the actual. Scarry at that time
since everyone knows air speed and altitude are critical any time let alone
"First Flight"! And something besides first flight; This was not just my first
flight in a Kolb solo, It was literally my first flight solo, et: nobody else
in the plane, like the PIC to say, "I'll take from here"! I don't know, but
this was as close as the saying by another brother Kolber: "earn your wings on
the way down"!
Thank you all for your acknoledgment. Never knew it would be quite like that.
I was supprised in all that read my story no one asked what God gving me the N.V.M.
of S. stood for!
And I want to thank this site and every member of the Kolb Family for their input,
wisdom, kindness and out-there-way, even though they probably mentioned the
same advise a hundred times before and didn't stick it in my face. You all know
who you are. I am truely Blessed to have Family like you.
Tear'ry-eyed in Ohio Ralph!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=45898#45898
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph Hoover" <flht99reh(at)columbus.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Engine break-in, first taxiing |
Mike "get the FS2 up in the air where I know she really longs to be!! "
And I have-ta-tell-ya...SHE DOES! Home-sick Angle!
I also noted that with power and stick all the way back it will turn pretty tight
with right or left rudder on the ground. that prop energy sure makes a difference.
As for the brakes. You really don't want them like a cars, to stop on
a dime or like my first taxi trip, she will bow-down to momma Earth, rasing her
tail feathers and creating a "MOONING" to the world hard to live down. I also
noted on my Taxi practice thta full power from a stand still makes one embarrising
Mooning all over the field. I think I have experienced every "dumb" method
of ground driving that could exist. One other, I might share, Remember:
no power to the prop, no control of the direction! Gulp , I know that one real
well.
For more exciting reading on what I did wrong on my last taxi / flight read my
post "self creteque or humble pie served in great portions"!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=45902#45902
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Engine break-in, first taxiing |
Congrats! Let me interject a few comments within your post. -
Mike Schnabel wrote:
Ran through the Rotax break-in process chart, changing RPM at the
appropriate intervals. Watching closely all gauges. RPM had a few spots
it liked and would hold dead steady (5000 was one). But a few were hard
to hold steady (5500), where it would hold then slowly climb, tap the
throttle a tad to get it back, steady, then it would slowly drop... so
for some of the 5 minutes runs would have to baby it to keep it on
target, others would hold perfect the whole 5 minutes. Prop flex perhaps?
My comments - Your engine will not get perfectly settled in for about 30
hours. Even then, a two stroke will sometimes changes rpm's slightly
depending on prop load and whether it is "on the pipe," or "off the
pipe." The resonant exhaust characteristics can cause minor horsepower
(and RPM) excursions within certain ranges. It is slightly affected by
prop load and jetting. Live with it, it will probably get better with time.
Mike said - Temps looked within range, at 4000-RPM CHT/300 and
EGT/925. At WOT 6000-RPM CHT/400 and EGT/1000. From what I have learned
these are acceptable. The only deviation from expectation was the Max
RPM of 6000, should have been more like 6500 (on the ground). Not until
later did I understand about setting the prop load down prior to
break-in. This was my mistake, but I was assured it would not be a major
issue though was best to be set for a correct Max RPM on the ground.
My comments: - Your current RPM on the ground of 6000 is acceptable. You
especially do not want 6500 rpm on the ground. For instance - Last
Friday I finally got done making airworthy an airplane I sold 15 years
ago to a friend, and which had not flown for several years, and then he
died. I am getting it airworthy for his widow to sell. He had purchased
a new Powerfin prop for it. I have never fooled with a Powerfin before.
Installed it as the data sheet specified, and the rpm's at runup were
too low (in my opinion - duh), about 5800 rpm. Took out enough pitch to
get it up to 6100 rpm static, fortunately I also raised the needles and
went one size bigger on the main jets to keep the temps conservative.
Taxied out and took off, and the Powerfin let that puppy jump up to 6800
rpm on climbout, with EGT's at the max to match. Babied it carefully
around the pattern and landed it w/o incident. Tomorrow I will crank
enough pitch back into it to get it down to 5800 rpm static again, so
that in flight, as it unloads, things balance out properly. But the
point is, for you, right now your temps are ok, but your rpm is a bit
low. However, your prop will allow your RPM to unload to probably
somewhere around 6200 in flight, that is safe enough, and most likely,
as your prop unloads, your EGT's will go up a hair, and your CHT will
come down a hair, and you will be in very safe territory, even if not
optimum for performance. At this stage, you don't care about optimum
performance, you will have all the performance you need, plus some, you
want maximum reliability. If you take out enough pitch to get your rpm
anywhere close to 6500 static, the prop will unload in more flight, and
your EGT will go through the roof. That is not maximum reliability. That
is giving you things to worry about on your first trip around the
pattern that you don't need.
For more information on how to adjust prop pitch to affect your CHT and
EGT readings, check out
http://www.bcchapel.org/pages/0003/pg11.htm
Again, congratulations on your successful (semi) crow hops!
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
> Mike S
> Manchester TN
> Firestar 2 503
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Sneak preview the all-new Yahoo.com
> <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=40762/*http://www.yahoo.com/preview>. It's
> not radically different. Just radically better.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph Hoover" <flht99reh(at)columbus.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Self creteque or humble pie served in great portions |
Now that I slept on it and reviewed every move I made and that they are all fresh
in my mind, I'm gonna spill my guts, figuratively below.
Below are the things I should have done but didn't, IN CASE the plane did take
off.
1). Its best to have your instructor there with you at the time. Not in the plane
but there watching.
2). It would be smart to have a radio and ground communication with your Instructor.
3). Instrument readings need to be where they belong: CHT and EGT should not be
flashing, even though you know they are off a bit, but really, at the time adequate.
4). Know "winds aloft" cause most times they will NOT be as they were on the ground.
5). ALWAYS TRUST the instruments such as: Alt, string, ASI (unless they are really
wacky).
6). Remember ALWAYS, you will resort under pressure, to the way you were drilled
through out your training!
7) Relax, if you CAN!
Below are the things I DID DO in case I was making a premature flight.
1). Full tank of fuel.
2). Complete walk around, outside and in.
3). All instruments set as they should be, altimeter, check mags, gauges.
4). Have a plan even though you don't expect to implement it. Up there with everything
else going on is NOT the place to decide what next.
5). Know the field your taxying from, it will get lost in all the crazy once you
accidentally get up.
6). Know fuel consumption rate.
7). Know your field and the little ideocrincrees about it.
8). Get a good look often at the wind sock as you pass over the field, it changes
in Ohio a lot!
9). Trust in your training and your trainer, even when it doesn't feel right or
natural.
10). If you dont know, be willing to ask and show your ignorance this time. It
may save one from eating a lot of crow or a lot of soybean field dirt!
11). No matter what the razzing or how the comments come back from some on the
Kolb web site, there will always be good sincere, level headed, I been there done
that information to glean!
All of the above caused in some way for me to come down safely both plane and driver,
those and the Lord I serve.
Any other good recomendations anyone else can insert would always be appreciated.
I can, at 61 years still learn from others advise and mistakes.
Better for it Ohio Ralph
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=45905#45905
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph Hoover" <flht99reh(at)columbus.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: First Flight Shaking Ralph of Ohio! |
Mr. Pike, not even close. But I don't want to spill the beans just yet. You will
be plesently supprised, being a Preacher and all!
Humble Pie is good cold or warmed up here in Ohio!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=45907#45907
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Lehman" <david(at)davidlehman.net> |
| Subject: | Thank Goodness For Big Tires... |
Yesterday was the second day that I've flown my Firestar and at about
3.9hours since I put her back together and at 1500 feet, the engine
quit
without warning... The only field that looked halfway decent was plowed,
but the wind was with the furrows... My 850x6 tires handled the rough
ground without complaint... I got out of the plane, walked around looking
for anything obvious, didn't find anything... Pulled the starter rope and
she started first pull and ran perfect... I picked up the tail, turned her
around and taxied to the end of the field, did a "runup", crossed my finger
s
and took off... Was only about a mile back to the airport and the engine
never missed a beat... Got home, pulled the float bowl, perfectly clean,
started and ran the engine several more times, no problem... "Gremlins",
ugh...
DVD
--
"Attitude is everything ~ pick a good one"...
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Thank Goodness For Big Tires... |
In a message dated 7/9/2006 8:58:23 PM Eastern Standard Time,
david(at)davidlehman.net writes:
Pulled the starter rope and she started first pull and ran perfect... I
picked up the tail, turned her around and taxied to the end of the field, did a
"runup", crossed my fingers and took off... Was only about a mile back to the
airport and the engine never missed a beat... Got home, pulled the float bowl,
perfectly clean, started and ran the engine several more times, no problem...
"Gremlins", ugh...
DVD
Maybe a mini-siezure; pull the exhaust manifold & take a look at the
cylinder walls.
Howard Shackleford
FS II
SC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Lehman" <david(at)davidlehman.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Thank Goodness For Big Tires... |
RPM never varied (until it quit), prop kept windmilling, CHT was rock solid
on 300 degrees, really good running 503, when it's running... I reached
around and pulled the choke/enrichener/whatever and it didn't make any
difference...
DVD
On 7/9/06, HShack(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> In a message dated 7/9/2006 8:58:23 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> david(at)davidlehman.net writes:
>
> Pulled the starter rope and she started first pull and ran perfect... I
> picked up the tail, turned her around and taxied to the end of the field,
> did a "runup", crossed my fingers and took off... Was only about a mile
> back to the airport and the engine never missed a beat... Got home, pull
ed
> the float bowl, perfectly clean, started and ran the engine several more
> times, no problem... "Gremlins", ugh...
>
> DVD
>
>
> Maybe a mini-siezure; pull the exhaust manifold & take a look at the
> cylinder walls.
>
> Howard Shackleford
> FS II
> SC
>
--
"Attitude is everything ~ pick a good one"...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerb <ulflyer(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Thank Goodness For Big Tires... |
Do you have an in-line primer bulb - if so does it have a by-pass
installed in case the check valve sticks closed. It's happened
before, it surely can happen again.
jerb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerb <ulflyer(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Thank Goodness For Big Tires... |
Thought of this just after sending my prior reply.
Not sure what engine you have, any chance of a ignition switch
failure, intermittent or a soft snap action.
jerb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "tc1917" <tc1917(at)hughes.net> |
I have built a beautiful full flip canopy for the FFII. If you want to see
the pics let me know off line. ted cowan, alabama.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "tc1917" <tc1917(at)hughes.net> |
I have a special designed canopy for a FFII. I cannot apparently publish
our web site on this list so I will just say you can go to homestead.com and
add the / and southernflyers to it. tie it all together for a web site
address and then go to the intro column and see the pics. You can also pull
the hinge pins on the left sided and put short windshield on if you chose.
frame is crome moly. ted cowan, alabama
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "blackbird" <blackbird754(at)alltel.net> |
Just a little note that my home owners insurance cancelled me because I am building
an experimental aircraft in my yard.......Had to temp move it to the airport
........
2 week period I hope.........Have to have an inspection on my yard....I really
cannot make this stuff up....
Stay tuned...
Wayne
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=46075#46075
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/end_of_june_2006_212.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph Hoover" <flht99reh(at)columbus.rr.com> |
Tried every trick in the book. Couldn't get there. Could get to homestead.com but
when adding the /southernfliers. nothing came about. I would like to see it.
Ohio Ralph
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=46091#46091
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "blackbird" <blackbird754(at)alltel.net> |
Yep,
I could not believe it either....The ones who have asked is Georgia Farm Bureau.....23
acres of land also.....I asked what my hobbies have to do with my home......Incredible......
Other insurance companies will not insure me....Reason stated....Too far from
fire station....over 5 miles.....Drove to the nearest one....and by the trip meter
in the vehicle....3.8 miles...
How do you argue?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=46092#46092
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <jeepacro(at)cox.net> |
--
Rob.
---- tc1917 wrote:
>
> I have built a beautiful full flip canopy for the FFII. If you want to see
> the pics let me know off line. ted cowan, alabama.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph Hoover" <flht99reh(at)columbus.rr.com> |
Disclaimer:
The view expressed here is only the view of a madman, and in no way implies the
agreement or acceptance of the keeper of this website. It is not in anyway to
be construed to be policy or procedure for the acceptance of insurance by any
agency or company. It is clearly understod that, though the veiws expressed here
are factual and are documented, they may not necessarly be acceptable in certain
circles of understanding such as that which may be understood by the insuree
or the insurerer! Some of the wording may contain language unstuable for
a non American citizen, small children or blinded inept adults whom because of
age or mental incapacities may not be capable of fully grasping the situation.
This IS and isn't Kolb related. But it is a matter that I have dealt with before.
In the motorcycle world, Some insurance companies would not insure you if you
didn't wear a helmet, regardless of if that was a law in your state or not.
(and personally I dont care what your view of wearing or not, as I have done
both and am still alive, and having survived major crashes, by my choice not to
wear). Certain groups went to their local government representatives and lobbied
hard and long to remove these "biases" from the industries "pick and choose"
clauses. Ohio is still a free state in the helmet issue and as long as mommies
drive their vans down the road with cigarette in one , the cell phone in
the other while little Billy and cute Amy run around the back seat un belted,
NO ONE should dictate the comings and goings of another, unless that coming and
going effect their coming and going!
This may be a "NON-ISSUE" to most fliers, but it will get real ugly real quick
when the insurance industry can pick and choose or put you into a high risk coverage
area, and you have no say so. This may also be an irritating subject to
a lot of the old fliers since they may feel that this isn't Kolb related. But
they need to understand it is Kolb, experimental, ultra light, and flying related
as well as 'RIGHTS" related. We are loosing them left and right by individuals
feeling that this isn't a big issue. I have seen it before. It was a small
step then they made bigger and bigger inroads and finally you were so under
the law that you couldn't afford to participate because of the costs to comply,
which by the way, like it or not is where Sport Flying will end up! ANYTHING
uncle sugar has his hands in will become big, unruly, cumbersome, difficult
to work with and understand until you need a lawyer to tie your shoes!
But back to topic at hand, and everyone has a right to comment on this topic. If
it bothers someone, click out of the topic headed "WORK HALTED" and look at
another topic, please.
The area next to challenge in the insurance industry is the fact that what we do
has some degree of danger. Danger and the business of protection people and
property from danger, do not make friendly relationships. Therefore, money talks
and you know the other half. Insurance even for your health insurance and even
perhaps soon in the already depleting Social Security program may boldly state
"No sports or hobbies that have danger associated with them will be allowed.
If you do these things and we find out, you will no longer be eligible for
Social Security payments nor health insurance or any coverage by any health provider.
All from a little foot (see as wedge) in the doorway of our rights. To
deny you the coverage as it is written is to deny you the justice and freedom
our forefathers fought for then and are still fighting for now, somewhat!
Is there some written clause that specifically denies you the right to work on
that in your yard? You know of course that it is not experimental until it is
ready to fly and has been built, dont you? They know that they cannot deny you
the ability to have tubular steel pieces and parts in your backyard that resemble
a flying machine but are totally unable to fly until completed? They do know
that dont they?
Over-insured, underpaid, getting older day by day, but the mind is still working
well, here in Ohio for Ralph!
Please "archive this" so future generations may know that some have addressed this
issue, stod their ground and fought the good fight, and others felt it folly!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=46107#46107
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Cottrell" <lcottrell(at)fmtcblue.com> |
| Subject: | control surface flutter |
I just got back from a 16 hour repairman's school in Corning Ca. put on
by Rainbow aviation. It was a pretty good course, but of course I wish I
could have had the time to learn more. This will allow me to annual my
plane after it is registered as LP. These people are one of the few that
are recognized by the FAA to put these on. I think the next one is
somewhere in the Midwest in Oct. I found them through the USUA.
The discussion of course got around to balancing surfaces and about
flutter. One of the guys had found this link concerning flutter.
http://www.phdtop.com/sky/ insert it into a Google search. warning it
is a bit risqu=E9!, but not filthy!
Larry, Oregon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne T. McCullough" <blackbird754(at)alltel.net> |
Ralph ,
Thank you for your imput.......AND from another flyer who happens to be a
EAA chapter president , I have written the EAA and see what they say....LOL
You know ....What has the EAA done for me ...issue.....LOL
WT
By the way,
Been fighting terrorism since 1861.....reading REAL history books.....I wish
this was still the AMERICAN REPUBLIC , not democracy.....
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006 10:58 AM
>
>
> Disclaimer:
> The view expressed here is only the view of a madman, and in no way
> implies the agreement or acceptance of the keeper of this website. It is
> not in anyway to be construed to be policy or procedure for the acceptance
> of insurance by any agency or company. It is clearly understod that,
> though the veiws expressed here are factual and are documented, they may
> not necessarly be acceptable in certain circles of understanding such as
> that which may be understood by the insuree or the insurerer! Some of the
> wording may contain language unstuable for a non American citizen, small
> children or blinded inept adults whom because of age or mental
> incapacities may not be capable of fully grasping the situation.
>
> This IS and isn't Kolb related. But it is a matter that I have dealt with
> before. In the motorcycle world, Some insurance companies would not insure
> you if you didn't wear a helmet, regardless of if that was a law in your
> state or not. (and personally I don?Tt care what your view of wearing or
> not, as I have done both and am still alive, and having survived major
> crashes, by my choice not to wear). Certain groups went to their local
> government representatives and lobbied hard and long to remove these
> "biases" from the industries "pick and choose" clauses. Ohio is still a
> free state in the helmet issue and as long as mommies drive their vans
> down the road with cigarette in one , the cell phone in the other while
> little Billy and cute Amy run around the back seat un belted, NO ONE
> should dictate the comings and goings of another, unless that coming and
> going effect their coming and going!
>
> This may be a "NON-ISSUE" to most fliers, but it will get real ugly real
> quick when the insurance industry can pick and choose or put you into a
> high risk coverage area, and you have no say so. This may also be an
> irritating subject to a lot of the old fliers since they may feel that
> this isn't Kolb related. But they need to understand it is Kolb,
> experimental, ultra light, and flying related as well as 'RIGHTS" related.
> We are loosing them left and right by individuals feeling that this isn't
> a big issue. I have seen it before. It was a small step then they made
> bigger and bigger inroads and finally you were so under the law that you
> couldn't afford to participate because of the costs to comply, which by
> the way, like it or not is where Sport Flying will end up! ANYTHING uncle
> sugar has his hands in will become big, unruly, cumbersome, difficult to
> work with and understand until you need a lawyer to tie your shoes!
>
> But back to topic at hand, and everyone has a right to comment on this
> topic. If it bothers someone, click out of the topic headed "WORK HALTED"
> and look at another topic, please.
>
> The area next to challenge in the insurance industry is the fact that what
> we do has some degree of danger. Danger and the business of protection
> people and property from danger, do not make friendly relationships.
> Therefore, money talks and you know the other half. Insurance even for
> your health insurance and even perhaps soon in the already depleting
> Social Security program may boldly state "No sports or hobbies that have
> danger associated with them will be allowed. If you do these things and we
> find out, you will no longer be eligible for Social Security payments nor
> health insurance or any coverage by any health provider. All from a little
> foot (see as wedge) in the doorway of our rights. To deny you the coverage
> as it is written is to deny you the justice and freedom our forefathers
> fought for then and are still fighting for now, somewhat!
>
> Is there some written clause that specifically denies you the right to
> work on that in your yard? You know of course that it is not experimental
> until it is ready to fly and has been built, don?Tt you? They know that
> they cannot deny you the ability to have tubular steel pieces and parts in
> your backyard that resemble a flying machine but are totally unable to fly
> until completed? They do know that don?Tt they?
>
> Over-insured, underpaid, getting older day by day, but the mind is still
> working well, here in Ohio for Ralph!
>
> Please "archive this" so future generations may know that some have
> addressed this issue, stod their ground and fought the good fight, and
> others felt it folly!
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=46107#46107
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph" <ul15rhb(at)juno.com> |
How would the homeowners insurance company ever find out that you were
building an experimental aircraft in your yard?
Ralph
-- "blackbird" wrote:
Just a little note that my home owners insurance cancelled me because
I am building an experimental aircraft in my yard.......Had to temp
move it to the airport ........
2 week period I hope.........Have to have an inspection on my
yard....I really cannot make this stuff up....
Stay tuned...
Wayne
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=46075#46075
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/end_of_june_2006_212.jpg
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne T. McCullough" <blackbird754(at)alltel.net> |
Yearly inspections from the local office.....AND.....my home based
business......which I have a liscense from the local county for...
Amazing....yeah..
WT
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006 1:27 PM
>
> How would the homeowners insurance company ever find out that you were
> building an experimental aircraft in your yard?
>
> Ralph
>
> -- "blackbird" wrote:
>
> Just a little note that my home owners insurance cancelled me because
> I am building an experimental aircraft in my yard.......Had to temp
> move it to the airport ........
>
>
> 2 week period I hope.........Have to have an inspection on my
> yard....I really cannot make this stuff up....
>
>
> Stay tuned...
>
>
> Wayne
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=46075#46075
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/end_of_june_2006_212.jpg
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "blackbird" <blackbird754(at)alltel.net> |
I have to undergo an annual homeowners inspection because of my business in my
shop in the back yard...(23 acres)... I do have a current county business liscense....
Shop is 50 x 40 and not attached to the 6300 square foot home....
One has nothing to do with the other.....I wish I were a minority sometimes...
Fighting terrorism since 1861....Wish I lived in an American REPUBLIC...
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=46151#46151
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Cottrell" <lcottrell(at)fmtcblue.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Thank Goodness For Big Tires... |
----- Original Message -----
From: HShack(at)aol.com
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 7:16 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Thank Goodness For Big Tires...
In a message dated 7/9/2006 8:58:23 PM Eastern Standard Time,
david(at)davidlehman.net writes:
Pulled the starter rope and she started first pull and ran
perfect... I picked up the tail, turned her around and taxied to the
end of the field, did a "runup", crossed my fingers and took off... Was
only about a mile back to the airport and the engine never missed a
beat... Got home, pulled the float bowl, perfectly clean, started and
ran the engine several more times, no problem... "Gremlins", ugh...
DVD
Maybe a mini-siezure; pull the exhaust manifold & take a look at the
cylinder walls.
Howard Shackleford
FS II
SC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Cottrell" <lcottrell(at)fmtcblue.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Thank Goodness For Big Tires... |
Howard is right!, pull the exhaust and check for signs of scraping on
the cylinder walls. Just got back from a repairman's course and we
discussed that very same thing. The instructor stated that the alum
pistons will heat up and grab the walls with out much damage, piston
cools down on the descent and will start up with no problem, but will
generally seize again in about 12- 15 minutes. The first fix is pretty
cheap, just a piston, the second will cost you a cylinder as well.
Larry
----- Original Message -----
From: HShack(at)aol.com
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 7:16 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Thank Goodness For Big Tires...
In a message dated 7/9/2006 8:58:23 PM Eastern Standard Time,
david(at)davidlehman.net writes:
Pulled the starter rope and she started first pull and ran
perfect... I picked up the tail, turned her around and taxied to the
end of the field, did a "runup", crossed my fingers and took off... Was
only about a mile back to the airport and the engine never missed a
beat... Got home, pulled the float bowl, perfectly clean, started and
ran the engine several more times, no problem... "Gremlins", ugh...
DVD
Maybe a mini-siezure; pull the exhaust manifold & take a look at the
cylinder walls.
Howard Shackleford
FS II
SC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph Hoover" <flht99reh(at)columbus.rr.com> |
Interesting: EAA Chapter. I had forgotten that there was a group representing our
interests. However, for what its worth, when I was hot into the Motorcycle
world with the A.M.A. American Motorcyclist Association, and they were located
less than twenty minutes from me, and I was a member, they didn't do a thing.
However, of equal interest, at the time of local issues here in Ohio for the
common riders and the second largest constituents base, California being the
largest, the AMA applied LOTS of dollars on a well to do community in Northern
Illinois that had some very rich and well healed friend of a politico seemingly
having difficulty riding his $ 50,000 Harley modified bike into his private
guarded community. Seems he had what his other rich neighbors felt was a rather
"Noisy Hobby". Therefore after purchasing his million dollar plus home he read
his contract, and sure enough. No Loud Motorcycles, Go Carts, or Cars!
Apparently A.M.A. spent several hundred thousand dollars and won his right to reside
with his noisy bike in that rich neighborhood. But we still had our little
local problem which A.M.A, seemingly didn't have enough money to fix. Go figure.
Now the thing that may be in your favor is that the E.A.A. is much newer and younger
organization than the A.M.A.. They might not yet be sleeping with any group
like THE INSURANCE INDUSTRY! But then again, the insurance industry has spies
everywhere! AND NO Im not a crack-pot but I know a few. HA, HA!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=46184#46184
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | WhiskeyVictor36(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Re: Kolb Laser 2 |
EAA Sport Pilot magazine, July 2006 issue. Under Members Forum, see the
article titled "More Affordable Aircraft, Please" on page 7. Mary Jones
responds on page 8. She says to follow the progress of The New Kolb Aircrafts
latest project on the web at:
_www.KolbSport.com_ (http://www.KolbSport.com)
Bill Varnes
Original Kolb FireStar
Audubon NJ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | WhiskeyVictor36(at)aol.com |
Ken Fackler,
Put me on your list of first airplane/solo.
06/03/1958 PA18 Piper Super Cub 90hp
Bill Varnes
Original Kolb FireStar
Audubon NJ
Do Not Archive
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "ron wehba" <rwehba(at)cebridge.net> |
opp's sorry group
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006 6:30 AM
>
> I have built a beautiful full flip canopy for the FFII. If you want to
> see the pics let me know off line. ted cowan, alabama.
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
> http://wiki.matronics.com
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "ron wehba" <rwehba(at)cebridge.net> |
yes please send em, thanks ron w
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006 6:30 AM
>
> I have built a beautiful full flip canopy for the FFII. If you want to
> see the pics let me know off line. ted cowan, alabama.
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
> http://wiki.matronics.com
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Bigelow" <up_country(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Engine break-in, first taxiing |
> Ran through the Rotax break-in process chart, changing RPM at the appropriate
intervals. Watching closely all gauges. RPM had a few spots it liked and would
hold dead steady (5000 was one). But a few were hard to hold steady (5500),
where it would hold then slowly climb, tap the throttle a tad to get it back,
steady, then it would slowly drop... so for some of the 5 minutes runs would have
to baby it to keep it on target, others would hold perfect the whole 5 minutes.
Prop flex perhaps?
June 21, 2006 - July 11, 2006
Kolb-Archive.digest.vol-gd