Kolb-Archive.digest.vol-ha
October 30, 2007 - November 18, 2007
-and such a lovely day too. Guess I'll run around the neighborhood
one more time to
warm the oil for the change. My magic mixture is presently 3 qts
20-50 Durablend with
one qt 5-30 for the perzactly poifect average weight and pour qualities.
Getting hard to find anywhere they stock Valvoline semi-synthetic in
20-50.
BB :(
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Welch <mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | :: Kolb aircrafts that have N-number registrations :: |
Faisal,
There was a time in our (the United States') past when someone could ask an
innocent question as you did, and no one would have any reason to wonder why.
But, as you should have noticed, our times have changed.
First of all, you didn't advise us who you were. Secondly, you want something
that could be INCREDIBLY
protected. And thirdly, you are from a foreign country, asking for "our" paperwork.
Sorry for the wild mind-wonderings, but given that we had virtually NO information
about you, and you didn't feel the need to furnish any, what do you expect?
We are bombarded continually by every damn scam and dishonest ploy known.
As I pondered your initial request, given the forms, and a stolen aircraft,
a person could do all kinds of harm.
As is custom to this, and any other list, you might feel free to identify yourself,
and what your affiliation to Kolb is. Before you come down hard on us
for our wild ramblings, consider our suspiscions, and realize what we are up
against, in this day and age.
And it isn't Colbra, it's Kolbra. And it isn't Extra. It's Xtra. The least
you should is how to spell something you sell. Or r u one of those guys that
anythun clos is guud enuf?
And what you should have asked for is: Where does a person go to get all the
information they need to completely learn all the proceedures to license a E-LSA,
(or Rick G. email address.)
Mike Welch
> Subject: Kolb-List: :: Kolb aircrafts that have N-number registrations ::
> From: faisal(at)pakcyber.com
> Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 21:53:10 -0700
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>
>
> please list all aircrafts with types that have N number registrations.
>
> kindly list the complete N number with make and model.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=142678#142678
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Climb to the top of the charts! Play Star Shuffle: the word scramble challenge
with star power.
http://club.live.com/star_shuffle.aspx?icid=starshuffle_wlmailtextlink_oct
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: :: Kolb aircrafts that have N-number registrations :: |
| From: | "faisalasif" <faisal(at)pakcyber.com> |
Dear Mike,
Thanks for the kind words :o).
I know its not a good time, people do misuse information.
In my dealership area we would very soon start building S-LSA version of Mark III
Xtra (not Extra), we are mostly through with the governmental registrations
and requirements.
Secondly, my intentions are to, very soon, launch my own forums, where everyone
owning Kolb aircrafts could share idea's and safety information. It will basically
target my dealership area but I would love to have you guys around.
I am sorry for harsh words if I have used any.
Infact I found the forum only a day back, therefore never having the chance to
introduce myself.
I am grateful to people who email me the information. Please be rest assured that
your information is safe with me and would not be misused.
Regards,
Faisal.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=142778#142778
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Welch <mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Welcome aboard!! |
Dear Faisal,
Thanks for the background information on your dealership. I am pleased to find
out your request for information is an honest request. Welcome to the Kolb
builder's chat forum, (although I don't represent anyone else, and I'm not the
group's spokeperson :-/ )
I am sure all of us here wish you the absolute very best regarding the Kolb sales
in your area. The more Kolbs sold, the better for all of us. Certainly,
increased sales, even overseas, keeps the Kolb factory busy. And, to us, that
is a really good thing.
Glad all the confusion is cleared up. To use an old navy expression........welcome
aboard!!!
Mike Welch SW Utah, Kolb MkIIIClassic
w/ turbo Suzuki 1.0L90%, 90% finished, 80% to go.
> Subject: Kolb-List: Re: :: Kolb aircrafts that have N-number registrations ::
> From: faisal(at)pakcyber.com
> Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 10:56:59 -0700
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>
>
> Dear Mike,
>
> Thanks for the kind words :o).
>
> I know its not a good time, people do misuse information.
>
> In my dealership area we would very soon start building S-LSA version of Mark
III Xtra (not Extra), we are mostly through with the governmental registrations
and requirements.
>
> Secondly, my intentions are to, very soon, launch my own forums, where everyone
owning Kolb aircrafts could share idea's and safety information. It will basically
target my dealership area but I would love to have you guys around.
>
> I am sorry for harsh words if I have used any.
>
> Infact I found the forum only a day back, therefore never having the chance to
introduce myself.
>
> I am grateful to people who email me the information. Please be rest assured
that your information is safe with me and would not be misused.
>
> Regards,
>
> Faisal.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=142778#142778
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Climb to the top of the charts! Play Star Shuffle: the word scramble challenge
with star power.
http://club.live.com/star_shuffle.aspx?icid=starshuffle_wlmailtextlink_oct
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Requests for copies of registration and airworthiness certif |
| From: | "faisalasif" <faisal(at)pakcyber.com> |
Dear Rick,
Please you don't have to apologize for it.
In fact, I should apologize, I never thought of how people would react to partial
information.
It seems all of you are a very closely knitted family, which i would be honored
to join, if permitted.
I apologize again for the harsh words.
Regards,
Faisal
faisal (at) scaled.com.pk
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=142786#142786
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Welcome aboard!! |
| From: | "faisalasif" <faisal(at)pakcyber.com> |
Dear Mike,
I am grateful for your kind gesture.
Its heartening to know that everyone here is a part of a closely knitted family,
which I am honored to have joined( if other accept :) ).
I apologize again for the harsh words. I understand that it was mostly my mistake,
I never realized how people would react to partial information.
Hoping to contribute a lot towards safety,
Regards,
Faisal
faisal (at) scaled.com.pk
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=142788#142788
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "faisalasif" <faisal(at)pakcyber.com> |
:)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=142789#142789
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Grand Vortex Generator Challenge |
| From: | "faisalasif" <faisal(at)pakcyber.com> |
sea foam is polystyrene.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=142790#142790
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "George Bass" <gtb(at)commspeed.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Welcome aboard!! |
This little 'rub' concerning the "Faisal" thing is very interesting.
Mr Faisal was very quick to send requests for enough information
to make almost any Kolb appear to be LEGAL, but, did not have
enough time to view ANY of the list policies or procedures, let alone
any of the previous posts regarding such "little" things as the FAA
documentation required. He claims to be a DEALER for the Kolb,
but, rather than contact the company whose product he represents,
he contacts owners of said product hoping to lure them into offering
their own PERSONAL - OFFICIAL - FEDERAL DOCUMENTATION
for his benefit.?.!
Then has the gall to jump on the members of the list because they
think there is "something fishy going on here".
Frankly, he (an assumption on my part) sounds much more like a
SHADY USED CAR SALESMAN THAN A KOLB DEALER.
George
(Back to lurking mode)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Travis Brown (Kolb Aircraft)" <travis(at)tnkolbaircraft.com> |
| Subject: | Re: :: Kolb aircrafts that have N-number registrations |
::
Hi Everyone
Faisal Asif is a great guy. He has been trying to get a network of
dealerships set up for two years now and his people have gave him much
trouble.
He has a kit setting here for almost two years now and his people want let
him take delivery until they are satisfied the Kolb Aircraft is a good
proven machine.
Everyone on this great list knows Kolb is one of the best.
Thanks for all the support.
Travis @ Kolb
----- Original Message -----
From: "faisalasif" <faisal(at)pakcyber.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 1:56 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Re: :: Kolb aircrafts that have N-number registrations
::
>
> Dear Mike,
>
> Thanks for the kind words :o).
>
> I know its not a good time, people do misuse information.
>
> In my dealership area we would very soon start building S-LSA version of
> Mark III Xtra (not Extra), we are mostly through with the governmental
> registrations and requirements.
>
> Secondly, my intentions are to, very soon, launch my own forums, where
> everyone owning Kolb aircrafts could share idea's and safety information.
> It will basically target my dealership area but I would love to have you
> guys around.
>
> I am sorry for harsh words if I have used any.
>
> Infact I found the forum only a day back, therefore never having the
> chance to introduce myself.
>
> I am grateful to people who email me the information. Please be rest
> assured that your information is safe with me and would not be misused.
>
> Regards,
>
> Faisal.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=142778#142778
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: :: Kolb aircrafts that have N-number registrations :: |
| From: | "faisalasif" <faisal(at)pakcyber.com> |
Dear Travis,
Thank you for your kind words.
I appreciate the help.
Regards,
faisal.
faisal (at) scaled.com.pk
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=142796#142796
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Welcome aboard!! |
| From: | "faisalasif" <faisal(at)pakcyber.com> |
Dear George,
I respect your point of view.
But please do not make assumptions about how much someone knows about aircrafts.
I hope you will think about it before writing, the next time.
Regards,
faisal,
faisal (at) scaled.com.pk
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=142799#142799
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Aaron Gustafson" <agustafson(at)chartermi.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Rebuilding a MK-3 |
And I'm still looking!!! agustafson(at)chartermi.net MK3 any condition
----- Original Message -----
From: Jim Kmet
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 7:39 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Rebuilding a MK-3
As Aaron previously posted on Oct 15th, I too am looking for a MK-3 in
need of a rebuild, send what have you to jlsk1(at)frontiernet.net
Thanks, Jim
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
10/29/2007 9:28 AM
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Insurance details |
| From: | "Kirby Dennis Contr MDA/AL" <Dennis.Kirby(at)kirtland.af.mil> |
(NOTE - "subject" line was changed, to reflect current thread.)
"pat ladd" asked, << but what would have been the situation regarding
your insurance? I have received the full amount of the rebuilding costs
... The insurers will also know that my plane has been rebuilt to an
acceptable standard and will continue to cover it, and me. >>
Pat -
I have a similar situation, following my landing on the mud flats. My
Mark-III suffered a little damage from the incident, so I called my
insurance company (Falcon) and requested to "remove my aircraft from
flight status" in order to do some repair and modifications. They
promptly refunded to me the unused balance of this year's insurance
premium.
Because I carry only liability insurance, I am responsible for any
repairs that must be done on my plane. Since I'm doing the work myself,
after I complete the repairs, I'll certify in my logbook that the plane
is again airworthy (a privilege I enjoy with the Repairman's Certificate
for this plane, as the builder). Then, I'll pick up the renewal of my
insurance where I left off. Easy.
Best of all, the insurance doesn't need to know that the plane was
involved in any kind of "incident" or "accident." This is good, because
regardless if the accident was the pilot's fault or not, insurance
companies will always come back and charge you a higher premium, whether
they had to pay out or not. You are now considered a higher-risk
customer.
So, for my particular situation, the system works to my benefit.
Dennis Kirby
Mark-III Classic, 912ul, Powerfin-72
Cedar Crest, NM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "George Bass" <gtb(at)commspeed.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Welcome aboard!! |
Mr Faisal Assif;
In reply to your latest message, directed to me, my
assumption was that you were a male. My message
was that you took it upon yourself to not only put the
members of this list in jeopardy to provide you with the
information you requested, but, to do so ILLEGALLY.
Appearantly, you have (or had, until it was pointed out)
no concerns regarding the safety, enjoyment, freedom
and responsibilities of the members of this list, perhaps
of any list. Your behavior indicated these thoughts. I
suppose it could be very different in your country. But,
after seeing some of the news programs, worldwide, I
would be very surprised if it was any more lenient than
it is here in the U.S. of A.
No one on this list, myself included, questioned your
knowledge about aircraft in general. Only the planes
that you were, incorrectly, asking about SPECIFICALLY.
I know you will find this hard to believe, but, I really did
spend time thinking about whether I should reply to the
messages you sent, or not. I decided NOT TO, until
YOU DECIDED TO JUMP ON LIST MEMBERS, for the
careful, honorable, safety-minded questions that they
had stated.
I'm glad that someone at the Kolb Company has seen
it appropriate to "vouch" for you. I wish you the best
success IN YOUR COUNTRY. Frankly, I'm done with
this and will not bother answering to it again.
Sincerely,
George Bass
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | possums <possums(at)bellsouth.net> |
At 12:50 PM 10/30/2007, you wrote:
>
> My suspicion is that he is actually Beauford who has tired of his
>old nom de plume.
>
>hmmm, heat seekers under a Kolb wing??????? ingenious.
What's wrong with that!
Don't tell me they've got regs against
that to?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Pike" <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
Oh, that picture so has to go in my next EAA chapter newsletter!
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
----- Original Message -----
From: "possums" <possums(at)bellsouth.net>
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 6:50 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: faisal
> At 12:50 PM 10/30/2007, you wrote:
>>
>> My suspicion is that he is actually Beauford who has tired of his
>>old nom de plume.
>>
>>hmmm, heat seekers under a Kolb wing??????? ingenious.
>
> What's wrong with that!
> Don't tell me they've got regs against
> that to?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Welch <mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Great place for Kolbs...odd request. |
Fellow Kolbers,
At the huge risk of getting all kinds of crap, I'd like to ask this question;
What state is just plain wonderful to live in, and fly your Kolb all around?
And is also very "affordable".
A little background.......as some of you may remember, I recently moved to my
present location, (going on a year now). St. George is in the southwest corner
of Utah. The closest big city is Las Vegas. Weather is beyond awesome, hills
look exactly like Monument Valley, etc., etc. The problem is the local airport
just plain stinks!!
They are NOT experimental friendly. The Airport Security chief is an a..hole,
and frankly, I just don't like it.
They cater to propjets, bizjets, and mostly just factory iron. Had I known how
rotten the airport is, I wouldn't moved here in the first place.
I miss the little airstrips like Northern Idaho had. (I used to live there a
few years ago.) Every small town had a little asphalt strip, and there were
lots of small towns. Casual. Beautiful scenery. Lousy cold weather, though!!
No more cold long winters.
Since I am planning on retiring as soon as possible (maybe 3-4 years), I want
to start looking for a great place to settle to. I like a rural lifestyle with
a reasonably big city not too far away. Mild winters, with just a touch of
snow, low humidity, and lots of lakes and rivers.
I don't know much about Missouri, but it looks like what I'm after. Lots of
green stuff, rolling hills, rivers, etc.
I'm really thinking of buying 10-15 acres and having my own runway, if allowed.
(I'm a former general contractor.)
But, do any of you Kolb guys know anything about the airports and such (In or near
Missouri)? I like being involved in the local EAA chapters. I think I've
pretty much settled on Missouri, but I wonder about the Alabama, Georgia, &
Arkansas region. The weather is not too bad, I just don't know specifically where
to look.
I really do value your opinions. Please be an advocate for why you like where
you are, if you do. I look forward to someday flying my Kolb MkIII to lots
and lots of little airstrips, in a state that this provides.
Thanks, Mike Welch
PS. Please, no northern states, guys. Yes, I know, they're beautiful. But too
cold. Been there, done that.
PSS. I'm headed to Evergreen, Alabama this Friday. My youngest son, on leave
from Afghanistan, is getting married Saturday. I get to look at Alabama on Sunday.
Yay! (My distant relatives are from N. Alabama)
_________________________________________________________________
Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Caf. Stop by today.
http://www.cafemessenger.com/info/info_sweetstuff2.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_OctWLtagline
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert Laird" <rlaird(at)cavediver.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Great place for Kolbs...odd request. |
Fredricksburg, Texas.... fly year 'round, lots of great scenery (but no
close mountains).
On 10/30/07, Mike Welch wrote:
>
>
> Fellow Kolbers,
>
> At the huge risk of getting all kinds of crap, I'd like to ask this
> question; What state is just plain wonderful to live in, and fly your Ko
lb
> all around? And is also very "affordable".
>
> A little background.......as some of you may remember, I recently move
d
> to my present location, (going on a year now). St. George is in the
> southwest corner of Utah. The closest big city is Las Vegas. Weather is
> beyond awesome, hills look exactly like Monument Valley, etc., etc. The
> problem is the local airport just plain stinks!!
> They are NOT experimental friendly. The Airport Security chief is an
> a..hole, and frankly, I just don't like it.
> They cater to propjets, bizjets, and mostly just factory iron. Had I
> known how rotten the airport is, I wouldn't moved here in the first place
.
>
> I miss the little airstrips like Northern Idaho had. (I used to live
> there a few years ago.) Every small town had a little asphalt strip, an
d
> there were lots of small towns. Casual. Beautiful scenery. Lousy cold
> weather, though!! No more cold long winters.
>
> Since I am planning on retiring as soon as possible (maybe 3-4 years),
I
> want to start looking for a great place to settle to. I like a rural
> lifestyle with a reasonably big city not too far away. Mild winters, wit
h
> just a touch of snow, low humidity, and lots of lakes and rivers.
>
> I don't know much about Missouri, but it looks like what I'm after.
> Lots of green stuff, rolling hills, rivers, etc.
> I'm really thinking of buying 10-15 acres and having my own runway, if
> allowed. (I'm a former general contractor.)
>
> But, do any of you Kolb guys know anything about the airports and such (I
n
> or near Missouri)? I like being involved in the local EAA chapters. I
> think I've pretty much settled on Missouri, but I wonder about the Alabam
a,
> Georgia, & Arkansas region. The weather is not too bad, I just don't kn
ow
> specifically where to look.
>
> I really do value your opinions. Please be an advocate for why you
> like where you are, if you do. I look forward to someday flying my Kolb
> MkIII to lots and lots of little airstrips, in a state that this provides
.
>
> Thanks, Mike Welch
>
> PS. Please, no northern states, guys. Yes, I know, they're
> beautiful. But too cold. Been there, done that.
> PSS. I'm headed to Evergreen, Alabama this Friday. My youngest son, on
> leave from Afghanistan, is getting married Saturday. I get to look at
> Alabama on Sunday. Yay! (My distant relatives are from N. Alabama)
> _________________________________________________________________
> Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Caf=E9. Sto
p
> by today.
>
> http://www.cafemessenger.com/info/info_sweetstuff2.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_
OctWLtagline
>
===========
===========
===========
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Pike" <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Great place for Kolbs...odd request. |
North East Tennessee has an awful lot going for it. great scenery, mild
winters, with one or three light snows, mild summers, temps mostly in the
80's, low cost of living, no state income tax, but high sales taxes.
Property is reasonable, and many (not all) small airports are light plane
friendly. There is a lot of EAA activity around Knoxville, but Knowxville is
a traffic nightmare. Morristown, Rogersville, Greenville and Mountain City
all have EAA chapters. There are probably twenty five or more grass strips
within an hour flying time of me, and I fly slow...
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Welch" <mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 9:11 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Great place for Kolbs...odd request.
>
>
> Fellow Kolbers,
>
> At the huge risk of getting all kinds of crap, I'd like to ask this
> question; What state is just plain wonderful to live in, and fly your
> Kolb all around? And is also very "affordable".
>
> A little background.......as some of you may remember, I recently moved
> to my present location, (going on a year now). St. George is in the
> southwest corner of Utah. The closest big city is Las Vegas. Weather is
> beyond awesome, hills look exactly like Monument Valley, etc., etc. The
> problem is the local airport just plain stinks!!
> They are NOT experimental friendly. The Airport Security chief is an
> a..hole, and frankly, I just don't like it.
> They cater to propjets, bizjets, and mostly just factory iron. Had I
> known how rotten the airport is, I wouldn't moved here in the first place.
>
> I miss the little airstrips like Northern Idaho had. (I used to live
> there a few years ago.) Every small town had a little asphalt strip, and
> there were lots of small towns. Casual. Beautiful scenery. Lousy cold
> weather, though!! No more cold long winters.
>
> Since I am planning on retiring as soon as possible (maybe 3-4 years), I
> want to start looking for a great place to settle to. I like a rural
> lifestyle with a reasonably big city not too far away. Mild winters, with
> just a touch of snow, low humidity, and lots of lakes and rivers.
>
> I don't know much about Missouri, but it looks like what I'm after.
> Lots of green stuff, rolling hills, rivers, etc.
> I'm really thinking of buying 10-15 acres and having my own runway, if
> allowed. (I'm a former general contractor.)
>
> But, do any of you Kolb guys know anything about the airports and such (In
> or near Missouri)? I like being involved in the local EAA chapters. I
> think I've pretty much settled on Missouri, but I wonder about the
> Alabama, Georgia, & Arkansas region. The weather is not too bad, I just
> don't know specifically where to look.
>
> I really do value your opinions. Please be an advocate for why you like
> where you are, if you do. I look forward to someday flying my Kolb MkIII
> to lots and lots of little airstrips, in a state that this provides.
>
> Thanks, Mike Welch
>
> PS. Please, no northern states, guys. Yes, I know, they're beautiful.
> But too cold. Been there, done that.
> PSS. I'm headed to Evergreen, Alabama this Friday. My youngest son, on
> leave from Afghanistan, is getting married Saturday. I get to look at
> Alabama on Sunday. Yay! (My distant relatives are from N. Alabama)
> _________________________________________________________________
> Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Caf. Stop
> by today.
> http://www.cafemessenger.com/info/info_sweetstuff2.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_OctWLtagline
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Light Sport N477DB |
| From: | "Dave Bigelow" <up_country(at)hotmail.com> |
Here is a copy of my operating limitations and airworthiness certificate. It's
public record, so I don't have a problem putting a copy on the forum.
Faisal,
Now that we understand who you are and what you are trying to accomplish, I'd like
to welcome you to the Kolb list. There's a world of information in the archives
(which you can search), and a lot of helpful people here who can answer
most questions you might have regarding Kolbs.
--------
Dave Bigelow
Kamuela, Hawaii
FS2, HKS 700E
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=142885#142885
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/operating_limitations_582.pdf
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Great place for Kolbs...odd request. |
In a message dated 10/30/2007 10:12:16 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com writes:
At the huge risk of getting all kinds of crap, I'd like to ask this question;
What state is just plain wonderful to live in, and fly your Kolb all around?
And is also very "affordable".
How about SC? Check out www.trentonflyers.com.
Howard Shackleford
FS II
SC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard & Martha Neilsen" <NeilsenRM(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Great place for Kolbs...odd request. |
Mike
1st there is no ideal place. Its either too hot or too cold part of the year
no matter where you live. I live in Michigan in the summer and Florida in
the winter. Michigan has water everywhere. Everything is green all summer
and good flying weather. There are hundreds of LSA and ultralight strips.
Property prices are about the lowest in the nation. Florida is about the
same in the winter and property prices are better now. So there you have it.
Buy a mansion in Michigan for a song and a small place in Florida for the
winter. The total cost will be about the same as one place in other parts of
the country.
Oh yes I'll be selling my place near Lansing, MI with a 1400 ft private
strip and hanger in a year or so. Perfect Kolb strip and hanger. Make me an
offer.
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIIIC
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Welch" <mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 10:11 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Great place for Kolbs...odd request.
>
>
> Fellow Kolbers,
>
> At the huge risk of getting all kinds of crap, I'd like to ask this
> question; What state is just plain wonderful to live in, and fly your
> Kolb all around? And is also very "affordable".
>
> A little background.......as some of you may remember, I recently moved
> to my present location, (going on a year now). St. George is in the
> southwest corner of Utah. The closest big city is Las Vegas. Weather is
> beyond awesome, hills look exactly like Monument Valley, etc., etc. The
> problem is the local airport just plain stinks!!
> They are NOT experimental friendly. The Airport Security chief is an
> a..hole, and frankly, I just don't like it.
> They cater to propjets, bizjets, and mostly just factory iron. Had I
> known how rotten the airport is, I wouldn't moved here in the first place.
>
> I miss the little airstrips like Northern Idaho had. (I used to live
> there a few years ago.) Every small town had a little asphalt strip, and
> there were lots of small towns. Casual. Beautiful scenery. Lousy cold
> weather, though!! No more cold long winters.
>
> Since I am planning on retiring as soon as possible (maybe 3-4 years), I
> want to start looking for a great place to settle to. I like a rural
> lifestyle with a reasonably big city not too far away. Mild winters, with
> just a touch of snow, low humidity, and lots of lakes and rivers.
>
> I don't know much about Missouri, but it looks like what I'm after.
> Lots of green stuff, rolling hills, rivers, etc.
> I'm really thinking of buying 10-15 acres and having my own runway, if
> allowed. (I'm a former general contractor.)
>
> But, do any of you Kolb guys know anything about the airports and such (In
> or near Missouri)? I like being involved in the local EAA chapters. I
> think I've pretty much settled on Missouri, but I wonder about the
> Alabama, Georgia, & Arkansas region. The weather is not too bad, I just
> don't know specifically where to look.
>
> I really do value your opinions. Please be an advocate for why you like
> where you are, if you do. I look forward to someday flying my Kolb MkIII
> to lots and lots of little airstrips, in a state that this provides.
>
> Thanks, Mike Welch
>
> PS. Please, no northern states, guys. Yes, I know, they're beautiful.
> But too cold. Been there, done that.
> PSS. I'm headed to Evergreen, Alabama this Friday. My youngest son, on
> leave from Afghanistan, is getting married Saturday. I get to look at
> Alabama on Sunday. Yay! (My distant relatives are from N. Alabama)
> _________________________________________________________________
> Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Caf. Stop
> by today.
> http://www.cafemessenger.com/info/info_sweetstuff2.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_OctWLtagline
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tony Oldman" <aoldman(at)xtra.co.nz> |
| Subject: | Re: Great place for Kolbs...odd request. |
Welcome to NewZealand. Sounds like you would like it here. Only places that
they get a bit touchy is flying into
international airports. For some reason they like you to announce your
intended arrival time and carry a radio ?
Our aircraft all have ZK numbers a bit like your N numbers but the license
has not gone to the sports aviation license as yours has .Some day those
that dislike our little planes will come to understand that the only enemy
is gravity.Fly where you will and enjoy, their problems and hang ups are not
yours to ponder over.
>From a fellow Kolb MK111 flyer from down under
{ yet ]----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Welch" <mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2007 3:11 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Great place for Kolbs...odd request.
>
>
> Fellow Kolbers,
>
> At the huge risk of getting all kinds of crap, I'd like to ask this
> question; What state is just plain wonderful to live in, and fly your
> Kolb all around? And is also very "affordable".
>
> A little background.......as some of you may remember, I recently moved
> to my present location, (going on a year now). St. George is in the
> southwest corner of Utah. The closest big city is Las Vegas. Weather is
> beyond awesome, hills look exactly like Monument Valley, etc., etc. The
> problem is the local airport just plain stinks!!
> They are NOT experimental friendly. The Airport Security chief is an
> a..hole, and frankly, I just don't like it.
> They cater to propjets, bizjets, and mostly just factory iron. Had I
> known how rotten the airport is, I wouldn't moved here in the first place.
>
> I miss the little airstrips like Northern Idaho had. (I used to live
> there a few years ago.) Every small town had a little asphalt strip, and
> there were lots of small towns. Casual. Beautiful scenery. Lousy cold
> weather, though!! No more cold long winters.
>
> Since I am planning on retiring as soon as possible (maybe 3-4 years), I
> want to start looking for a great place to settle to. I like a rural
> lifestyle with a reasonably big city not too far away. Mild winters, with
> just a touch of snow, low humidity, and lots of lakes and rivers.
>
> I don't know much about Missouri, but it looks like what I'm after.
> Lots of green stuff, rolling hills, rivers, etc.
> I'm really thinking of buying 10-15 acres and having my own runway, if
> allowed. (I'm a former general contractor.)
>
> But, do any of you Kolb guys know anything about the airports and such (In
> or near Missouri)? I like being involved in the local EAA chapters. I
> think I've pretty much settled on Missouri, but I wonder about the
> Alabama, Georgia, & Arkansas region. The weather is not too bad, I just
> don't know specifically where to look.
>
> I really do value your opinions. Please be an advocate for why you like
> where you are, if you do. I look forward to someday flying my Kolb MkIII
> to lots and lots of little airstrips, in a state that this provides.
>
> Thanks, Mike Welch
>
> PS. Please, no northern states, guys. Yes, I know, they're beautiful.
> But too cold. Been there, done that.
> PSS. I'm headed to Evergreen, Alabama this Friday. My youngest son, on
> leave from Afghanistan, is getting married Saturday. I get to look at
> Alabama on Sunday. Yay! (My distant relatives are from N. Alabama)
> _________________________________________________________________
> Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Caf. Stop
> by today.
> http://www.cafemessenger.com/info/info_sweetstuff2.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_OctWLtagline
>
>
> --
> 29/10/2007 9:28 a.m.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeremy Casey" <1planeguy(at)kilocharlie.us> |
| Subject: | Great place for Kolbs...odd request. |
low humidity,
Mike,
That little note rules out Al, GA., MS, LA, and FL. We say it isn't TOO
humid till you have to cut the air with a knife to walk through it...man
I hate the humidity...it makes a balmy 103 degree July seem like
115...(really...not kidding...)
Jeremy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Girard" <jindoguy(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Great place for Kolbs...odd request. |
Mike, I voted with my feet and moved from the Seattle area to SE Kansas.
Lots of emergency landing fields, fairly low cost of living, and a decent
climate. If you want scenery, wellllll.......
Rick
On 10/31/07, Jeremy Casey <1planeguy(at)kilocharlie.us> wrote:
>
>
> low humidity,
>
>
>
> Mike,
>
> That little note rules out Al, GA., MS, LA, and FL. We say it isn't TOO
> humid till you have to cut the air with a knife to walk through it...man
> I hate the humidity...it makes a balmy 103 degree July seem like
> 115...(really...not kidding...)
>
> Jeremy
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | :: Flight Testing :: |
| From: | "faisalasif" <faisal(at)pakcyber.com> |
Hello everyone,
I hope you all are doing fine.
Now I was wondering if there is a Flight Testing Standard available that addresses
all safety issues. (and its free)
If not, I am planning to take up this issue and create a proper Flight testing
Plan that addresses all safety issues for any single engine / prop based aircraft.
This should be free for all to use and refer too.
Anyone interested in directing me towards a better resource. or assisting me my
attempt.
awaiting your valuable comments,
faisal.
faisal (at) scaled.com.pk
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=142980#142980
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "pat ladd" <pj.ladd(at)btinternet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Insurance details |
Since I'm doing the work myself,
after I complete the repairs, I'll certify in my logbook that the plane
is again airworthy (a privilege I enjoy with the Repairman's Certificate
for this plane, as the builder). Then, I'll pick up the renewal of my
insurance where I left off. Easy. >>
Hi Kirby,
lookes as though the system worked well for you. Here the amount of work
you can do is unlimited but any `incident` should be reported and if it is
repair large enough to make it worth while making an insurance claim the
repair would probably be signed off by a PFA Inspector.
There uis a range of stuff which you can do to your engine and this is due
to be increased and something like your `repairman` exam is on the cards in
the near future.
I know my building/ mechanic capabiliities and I am delighted to pay an
expert. If I put up a shelf things roll off the end.
Some of the regs are just nonsense. When my brother and I built the
Challenger ( he was a good mechanic) there was a spot weld required in the
brake assembly . The only weld in the entire plane. I went to a local
aircraft producer to get it done through the back door by some guy in his
lunch hour. So far so good. When I said I needed a certificate, requiresd by
the PFA, then everything moved up a notch.. A qualified, and `approved`
welder had to be employed . In the end the guy who was going to do it in his
lunch break did the job anyway but it had to go through the `proper`
channels, and at `proper` costs to get the certicate.
Things seem to be easing slightly in Europe what with the increae in the
weight that defines a microlight and the Single Seat Deregulation etc but
we are never going to get your system. On the other hand some things are
getting worse. Mandatory transponders will be introduced in the near future.
Another weight and cost penalty we shall have to bear.
Cheers
Pat
Pat
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | possums <possums(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: :: Flight Testing :: |
At 03:56 PM 10/31/2007, you wrote:
>
>Hello everyone,
>
>I hope you all are doing fine.
>
>Now I was wondering if there is a Flight Testing Standard available
>that addresses all safety issues. (and its free)
>
>If not, I am planning to take up this issue and create a proper
>Flight testing Plan that addresses all safety issues for any single
>engine / prop based aircraft. This should be free for all to use and refer too.
>
>Anyone interested in directing me towards a better resource. or
>assisting me my attempt.
Here's one for free:
http://www.faa.gov/library/manuals/aircraft/media/ac90-89a.pdf
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Cottrell" <lcottrell(at)fmtcblue.com> |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kirby Dennis Contr MDA/AL" <Dennis.Kirby(at)kirtland.af.mil>
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2007 9:00 AM
Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Ivo Props
>
>
>
> ElleryWeld wrote: << the 1st mistake was the pilot was to blame when he
> didn't tighten or check the oil cap on preflight >>
>
> Agree. I like to think I will perform better preflights in the future.
>
> << 2nd the pilots poor judgment with an emergency landing is what caused
> the plane to flip no matter what Prop he had the results would have been
> the same >>
I am going to have to go to Dennis's defense here. On our trip back from MV
this year I was flying over the Bonneville Salt flats going to Wendover. I
had no problems, just wanted to land on the salt just to say I did. I had
been looking at it for quite some time and I found a spot that looked really
good. Well, I decided to do a test high speed touch down to see if it was
soft. Good thing too, when my speed got down to about 40 I could feel the
wheels sinking lower and lower in the salt. I gave it full up and full
throttle and just barely managed to pull it out of the salt. Keeping in mind
that I did not have any innocent young passenger to worry about if the blade
came apart, and I really didn't feel that I had to land anywhere. Given
other factors such as those mentioned above I am pretty sure that I would
have been stuck in the muck as well. I notice all the time here in the
desert that tings on the ground are a lot rougher than from the air.
Larry C
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert Laird" <rlaird(at)cavediver.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Great place for Kolbs...odd request. |
On 10/31/07, Southern Reflections wrote:
>
> I would say You are looking for a high,dry warm,cool, clear,
> climate,where every body is nice, the days are long and the air is sweet
>
You forgot: calm winds, low density altitude, no thermals, higher
percentage of O2 in the air, and alto-cirrus blocking the sun in the early
morning and late afternoons.
-- R
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Southern Reflections" <purplemoon99(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Great place for Kolbs...odd request. |
R,between the two of us we may set this lad in the proper direction to
relocate.....Joe N101HD
do not art.
----- Original Message -----
From: Robert Laird
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2007 7:32 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Great place for Kolbs...odd request.
On 10/31/07, Southern Reflections wrote:
I would say You are looking for a high,dry warm,cool, clear,
climate,where every body is nice, the days are long and the air is
sweet
You forgot: calm winds, low density altitude, no thermals, higher
percentage of O2 in the air, and alto-cirrus blocking the sun in the
early morning and late afternoons.
-- R
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BMWBikeCrz(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Back Need Help ! |
Have been off list for a while ...
First what are the chances if getting busted if I don't register my firestar
in time ? Private strip ... but lots of GA guys that don't care for
ultralights ...
Next ... anyone near Lake City Florida that can help me get a few repairs
made ? The plane is up there and I am here near Tampa ...
Also I need to speak with people in the Tampa bay area that can advise me on
the correct procedures for registration
Thanks ! Dave
**************************************
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Girard" <jindoguy(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Back Need Help ! |
Dave, Contact Mike Z at Mike Z Sport Aviation. He lives in Lakeland and his
office is at Plant City Airport. My advice is don't take any chances. Go to
FAA.gov and order an N number tonight. I'm serious do it now, there's a five
week backlog to get your registration through and you can't start the
airworthiness procedure until you get the hard card back. Print out form
8050-88a and get an 8050-1 registration form (it's a three parter and you
can't download it) from the Tampa or Lakeland FSDO. Fill out the forms,
don't sign the -88a until in the presence of the notary (been there, did
that) and send all off to OK City tomorrow. Mike can put you in touch with
Jay (DAR) at South Lakeland (X49) for the inspection. Hope this helps.
Rick
On 10/31/07, BMWBikeCrz(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> *Have been off list for a while ...
>
> First what are the chances if getting busted if I don't register my
> firestar in time ? Private strip ... but lots of GA guys that don't care for
> ultralights ...
>
> Next ... anyone near Lake City Florida that can help me get a few repairs
> made ? The plane is up there and I am here near Tampa ...
>
>
> Also I need to speak with people in the Tampa bay area that can advise me
> on the correct procedures for registration
>
> Thanks ! Dave*
>
>
> **************************************
> See what's new at
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Great place for Kolbs...odd request. |
| From: | "Dave Bigelow" <up_country(at)hotmail.com> |
The climate you are looking for exists at elevations above 2500 feet on the western
side of the Island of Hawaii. However, the rest......?
--------
Dave Bigelow
Kamuela, Hawaii
FS2, HKS 700E
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=143084#143084
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | November is Matronics Email List Fund Raiser Month! |
Dear Listers,
You've probably noticed that there are no banner ads or pop-up windows or spam
from any of the List and Forum services at Matronics. These include, for example:
The Email List Postings - http://www.matronics.com/listbrowse
The Email List Forum Site - http://forums.matronics.com
The List Wiki - http://wiki.matronics.com
The List Search Engine - http://www.matronics.com/search
This is because I have always enjoyed a List experience that was completely about
the sport we enjoy - airplanes - and not about advertising!
But running a high performance, highly available service like this isn't free and
a fair amount of money in terms of computer upgrades, business-class Internet
connectivity, and electricity. Consequently, many similar sites turn to advertising
to support these costs. Advertising that you have to look at each and
every time you read an email message or browse the their web site.
Rather than subject my List community to another constant commercial bombardment,
I have chosen to hold a PBS-like fund raiser each year in November to support
the continued operation and upgrade of the List services. It's solely through
the Contributions of List members that the Lists and Forums continue to be
possible!
During the month, I will be sending out a Fund Raiser reminder message every few
days and I ask for your patience and understanding during the month throughout
these regular messages. Think of them as PBS' Pledge Breaks... :-)
To minimize the impact of the Fund Raiser on the List community, I implemented
a new feature late last year specifically related to making Contributions. If
you are an Email List subscriber, once you make a Contribution using the online
web site, you will no longer receive the email from me regarding the Fund Raiser!
There are a couple of exceptions to this, however. If someone replies
to a Contribution message I've sent, you might receive that. Additionally, the
messages will always be posted to the Forums site. To a first order, however,
once you make a Contribution, you won't get my email messages about the Fund
Raiser for the rest of the month. For Contributions by check, the squelch
will take effect once the check is received.
There is a whole new line up of really great Contribution gifts this year! When
you make a qualifying Contribution, you can select one of the many free gifts
that are available during the Fund Raiser. These gifts are provided through
the generous support of a number of our industry's leading supporters including:
Bob Nuckolls - AeroElectric - http://www.aeroelectric.com
Andy Gold - Builder's Bookstore - http://www.buildersbooks.com
Jon Croke - HomebuiltHELP - http://www.homebuilthelp.com
Please visit these guy's respective sites, as they have some great products to
offer and are generously supporting the Matronics List Fund Raiser.
You can make your List Contribution using any one of three secure methods this
year including using a credit card, PayPal, or by personal check. From the Contribution
site, you can select any one of this year's free gifts with a qualifying
Contribution amount. The Contribution page is pretty loooonnnnng this year
in order to list great selection of great gifts available so be sure to scroll
all the way to the bottom of the web page to see everything that's available!
Please make a List Support Contribution:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
I would like to thank everyone in advance for their generous support! Your Contributions
truely keep this operation afloat!
Thank you,
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Forum Administrator
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Great place for Kolbs...odd request. |
| From: | "Rex Rodebush" <rrodebush(at)tema.net> |
Next year we're retiring and moving from Ohio to the Missouri Ozarks, about 15-20
miles West of Branson. I grew up in that area and it has everything we want.
Just visit different areas on your vacations and check them out.
Rex Rodebush
Building a Mark III X-tra
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=143178#143178
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: I am getting a Kolb MK III!! |
| From: | "grantr" <grant_richardson25(at)yahoo.com> |
Thanks for the responses guys!
I talked with my instructor and he said he has flown a MK III with a 503 and a
heavy passenger and it did well.
We are only 400 to 600 feet ASL with flat terrain So I think I will be fine. I
will mostly be flying solo and at my weight of 150# the plane should perform
well with me in it.
I am looking forward to the trip to get it. I am having to put a 3rd set of tires
on my truck. I am on my second set of Cooper tires. Just had them put on in
06 and the sidewalls on all 4 are cracked all the way around the tire close to
the rim. I am not going with Cooper again. The tires seem out of round as well.
Sometimes the truck shakes like mad and other times it doesn't do it so bad.
So just a heads up don't buy cooper tires!!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=143196#143196
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "lucien" <lstavenhagen(at)hotmail.com> |
gaman(at)att.net wrote:
> Mike,
> I just shared an experience I had with an IVO and IVO's response to my inquiry
about having it repaired.I don't run a IVO because it's repairable.I run it
because it is the only 3 blade that meets the mass inertia limits of a B box.Small
injuries like the one I described,might well be repairable.It doesn't take
a muffler to destroy any prop,a 3oz spring will do.As for the rest of your
assumptions,assume away.
>
Not meaning to drag this out some more, but actually the IVO in 3 blades exceeds
the MOI limits of the (Rotax) B box by about 40 or 50% in pretty much all the
workable lengths of the blades (60" on up).
The only 3 blade I know that's under the B box limit is the powerfin B model and
possibly the GSC with the wood blades.
The IVO in 2 blades is in the vicinity of the B box limit or possibly below it
depending on the length of the blades.
Not too feel too bad about it tho - the Warp drive 3 blade is, last I heard, something
like 2x the MOI limit of even the C box ;).
Well this is all from memory, so some of my figures on this are possibly wrong......
I'm fairly sure about the 3-blade IVO tho as I measured my 62" MOI once and IIRC
it was somewhere around the 4500 kg/cm2 figure for it you find around the internet.
I have an IVO medium on my 912 and that's a massive, heavy sucker (anyone know
the MOI limit on the 912 gearbox?)
LS
--------
LS
FS II
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=143201#143201
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Welch <mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: I am getting a Kolb MK III!! |
Grant,
Glad to hear you're going to get your Kolb. I drove 16 hours "one way" to go
pick up my GlaStar project.
And, as a corollary to the old expression, "TIME SPENT FLYING IS NOT DEDUCTED
FROM YOUR LIFE!!", I would like to add:
Neither is "GOING TO GET YOUR AIRPLANE".
Mike Welch
_________________________________________________________________
Peek-a-boo FREE Tricks & Treats for You!
http://www.reallivemoms.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM&loc=us
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Girard" <jindoguy(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Prop inertia, again |
Since the old wives tale about the inertia of Warp Drive props has surfaced
again, I am again publishing the data from the inertia tests I did last
winter, The tests were performed per Rotax Service Information instruction
SI 11 UL 91 E, available from the Rotax owners site and paraphrased in the
CPS catalog.
Here are the numbers for a 66" Ritz 2 blade wood prop, a 66" Warp Drive 3
blade straight carbon fiber prop with CNC aluminum hub, an IVO 60" 3
bladecomposite prop with quick adjust hub, and a 48" 2 blade Tennessee
Propellerwood prop. Each prop was run 3 times and the times shown are
the average ofthe three, although each prop's runs were all +/- 1
second. I'll go heaviestto lightest.
Warp Drive 66" 3 blade CNC hub
Wt. 9 lb. 12 oz.
Average time to 30 oscillations, 180 seconds
Inertia 5200 Kg cm^2
IVO 60" 3 blade Quick adjust hub
Wt. 6 lb. 4 oz.
Average time to 30 oscillations, 161 seconds
Inertia 2700Kg cm^2
Ritz 66 X 28 2 blade
Wt 5 lb. 1 oz.
Average time to 30 oscillations, 190 seconds
Inertia 3000 Kg cm^2
TPI 48 X 34 2 blade
Wt. 3 lb. 3 oz.
Average time to 30 oscillations, 127 seconds
Inertia 1100Kg cm^2
So there you have it, you can definitely see the variance in inertia caused
by length and mass. The Ritz is right at the top of the allowable range for
a B gearbox, while the shorter, heavier IVO is right near it and the TPI
shorty should represent no problem. The Warp drive is well within range of
the C and E gearboxes but would be brutal on a B box.
Rick
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Prop inertia, again |
| From: | "lucien" <lstavenhagen(at)hotmail.com> |
jindoguy(at)gmail.com wrote:
> Since the old wives tale about the inertia of Warp Drive props has surfaced again,
I am again publishing the data from the inertia tests I did last winter,
The tests were performed per Rotax Service Information instruction SI 11 UL
91 E, available from the Rotax owners site and paraphrased in the CPS catalog.
Whoa, if these tests are accurate (and sounds like they are), I happily stand corrected.
I don't remember too well but it seems I got the same no. of oscillations
with my 62" IVO, but clearly my calculation came out messed up.....
I've always wondered how the boxes have stood up to years of use of these props
anyway ;)
LS
--------
LS
FS II
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=143214#143214
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Girard" <jindoguy(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Prop inertia, again |
Lucien, Sorry, didn't mean to sound so strident, but over the years I've
heard people claim this same thing about Warp Drive Props with no data to
back it up. That was why I shivered my way through the tests last winter.
Ladies and gentleman, this test is almost ridiculously easy to do. There is
no magic or mystery. The attached photo is of the plate on which I mounted
the propellers. The slots in the end are where the 6 foot lengths of safety
wire were placed. All told, it took less than 30 minutes to assemble, mount
and level the test apparatus. Certainly not rocket science, although I do
admit trying to track down the theory of the torsion pendulum to assemble a
spreadsheet turned into an exercise in futility.
Fortunately that work was done by Rotax. All you have to supply is the
weight of the prop and the time required to swing through 30 oscillations.
The only trick to it, I found, was keeping any up and down movement out of
the test. Once I got a good side to side swing, I started the stop watch,
timed the first 30, then the next 30 and then 30 more oscillations. I also
did the test by starting and stopping and starting again, just to make sure
that what I learned in physics class about the frequency, speed and swing of
a pendulum balancing out was true. Of course there is a small difference due
to air resistance, but I couldn't find a meaningful difference in the
variance of swing that I used.
It's coming on winter, some of us will lay up for the cold weather, others
will be doing maintenance and some are still building. Why not setup the
inertia test on your prop and publish the results here. I'll volunteer to
assemble the data and publish a table from which some reasonable assumptions
might be made by those in the process of considering a new prop purchase.
Rick
On 11/1/07, lucien wrote:
>
>
> jindoguy(at)gmail.com wrote:
> > Since the old wives tale about the inertia of Warp Drive props has
> surfaced again, I am again publishing the data from the inertia tests I did
> last winter, The tests were performed per Rotax Service Information
> instruction SI 11 UL 91 E, available from the Rotax owners site and
> paraphrased in the CPS catalog.
>
>
> Whoa, if these tests are accurate (and sounds like they are), I happily
> stand corrected. I don't remember too well but it seems I got the same no.
> of oscillations with my 62" IVO, but clearly my calculation came out messed
> up.....
>
> I've always wondered how the boxes have stood up to years of use of these
> props anyway ;)
>
> LS
>
> --------
> LS
> FS II
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=143214#143214
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert Laird" <rlaird(at)cavediver.com> |
| Subject: | Re: I am getting a Kolb MK III!! |
To get my Kolb, 26 hours, one-way from SE Texas to just north of Los
Angeles, CA, then back, over Thanksgiving two years ago. You're right,
every minute was worth it!
-- Robert
On 11/1/07, Mike Welch wrote:
>
>
> Grant,
>
> Glad to hear you're going to get your Kolb. I drove 16 hours "one way"
> to go pick up my GlaStar project.
>
> And, as a corollary to the old expression, "TIME SPENT FLYING IS NOT
> DEDUCTED FROM YOUR LIFE!!", I would like to add:
>
> Neither is "GOING TO GET YOUR AIRPLANE".
>
> Mike Welch
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flykolb" <flykolb(at)wowway.com> |
| Subject: | Kolb Mark III For Sale |
I have a Kolb Mark III which is being rebuilt by an A&P who is also a
machinist for US Airways, It has been stripped to the metal, powder
coated, recovered, and painted. It has a BRS, a custom gas tank with 15+
gal capacity, new panel, etc. It should be finished around this
Thanksgiving and will be almost like new - or better than new in some
respects.
It has a Rotax 532 (65hp). .
It is located in Concord, NC (near Charlotte). I left it there for
restoring when I moved to Michigan and I am not going to be able to keep
it up here. I've had lots of great flights in it!
I added up the cost for a new Kolb Mark III Classic on The New Kolb
Company and got a total of $22,000 for the kit including what is on my
plane. That is without engine or instruments and without the time and
tools needed to build it. I'm asking $16,900.
Give me a call if you might be interested.
Jim
1-800-383-1868
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Cottrell" <lcottrell(at)fmtcblue.com> |
| Subject: | Re: I am getting a Kolb MK III!! |
> We are only 400 to 600 feet ASL with flat terrain So I think I will be
> fine. I will mostly be flying solo and at my weight of 150# the plane
> should perform well with me in it.
>
I do not want to be an alarmist, but do a weight and balance on it before
you fly it. I used an old weight sheet that I had for a Mark III and a pilot
that only weighed 150 lbs would be too light to fly it. You may have to
weigh down the front to keep the CG within the parameters. I know that
anyone weighing less than 175 cannot fly my firestar. Check and be safe!
Glad that you found what you want.
Larry C
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Kmet" <jlsk1(at)frontiernet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: I am getting a Kolb MK III!! |
I second Larry`s post, if you are unfamiliar with the MK-3, just about the
time you toch down , when you pull off the last bit of power, the nose will
probably come up, instead of down, maybe put another 100 LBs in the passeger
seat, Then reduce some in the next few landings. Jim
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Cottrell" <lcottrell(at)fmtcblue.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 8:24 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: I am getting a Kolb MK III!!
>
>> We are only 400 to 600 feet ASL with flat terrain So I think I will be
>> fine. I will mostly be flying solo and at my weight of 150# the plane
>> should perform well with me in it.
>>
>
>
> I do not want to be an alarmist, but do a weight and balance on it before
> you fly it. I used an old weight sheet that I had for a Mark III and a
> pilot that only weighed 150 lbs would be too light to fly it. You may have
> to weigh down the front to keep the CG within the parameters. I know that
> anyone weighing less than 175 cannot fly my firestar. Check and be safe!
> Glad that you found what you want.
> Larry C
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Flycrazy8(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Fwd: Kolb flying area |
-----------------------------1193974537--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Vic Gibson" <apilot(at)webtv.net> |
| Subject: | Re: I am getting a Kolb MK III!! |
Re: Mark III CG........I first flew my Classic with a 33% CG. I do not recommend
doing that. Now it is at 28% and is a dream to fly. For intial flights, I
recommend a 25% CG and then later go to 28%.
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Kmet
Sent: Thursday, November 1, 2007 6:50 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: I am getting a Kolb MK III!!
I second Larry`s post, if you are unfamiliar with the MK-3, just about the
time you toch down , when you pull off the last bit of power, the nose will
probably come up, instead of down, maybe put another 100 LBs in the passeger
seat, Then reduce some in the next few landings. Jim
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Cottrell" <lcottrell(at)fmtcblue.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 8:24 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: I am getting a Kolb MK III!!
>
>> We are only 400 to 600 feet ASL with flat terrain So I think I will be
>> fine. I will mostly be flying solo and at my weight of 150# the plane
>> should perform well with me in it.
>>
>
>
> I do not want to be an alarmist, but do a weight and balance on it before
> you fly it. I used an old weight sheet that I had for a Mark III and a
> pilot that only weighed 150 lbs would be too light to fly it. You may have
> to weigh down the front to keep the CG within the parameters. I know that
> anyone weighing less than 175 cannot fly my firestar. Check and be safe!
> Glad that you found what you want.
> Larry C
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Vic Gibson" <apilot(at)webtv.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Kolb Mark III For Sale |
That is a really good buy. Someone will jump on it. I would never sell
mine for that. They are worth every bit of $25K
-----Original Message-----
From: flykolb
Sent: Thursday, November 1, 2007 1:38 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Kolb Mark III For Sale
I have a Kolb Mark III which is being rebuilt by an A&P who is also a mac
hinist for US Airways, It has been stripped to the metal, powder coated,
recovered, and painted. It has a BRS, a custom gas tank with 15+ gal capa
city, new panel, etc. It should be finished around this Thanksgiving and
will be almost like new - or better than new in some respects.
It has a Rotax 532 (65hp). .
It is located in Concord, NC (near Charlotte). I left it there for restor
ing when I moved to Michigan and I am not going to be able to keep it up
here. I've had lots of great flights in it!
I added up the cost for a new Kolb Mark III Classic on The New Kolb Compa
ny and got a total of $22,000 for the kit including what is on my plane.
That is without engine or instruments and without the time and tools need
ed to build it. I'm asking $16,900.
Give me a call if you might be interested.
Jim
1-800-383-1868
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: I am getting a Kolb MK III!! |
| From: | "grantr" <grant_richardson25(at)yahoo.com> |
Yes I am excited about the trip!
Thanks for the tip. A tail heavy plane will only fly once!
Yes I plan to check the W/B. I do not know how to check it but I am pretty sure
My instructor does as he finished his challenger 2.
I fly radio controlled planes and its easy to check the CG on them you just pick
up the plane under the wing spar(25% of the cord) and see if it balances on
your finger tips.
I don't think that will be happening with a 400+ pound airplane. LOL :D
Thanks
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=143369#143369
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | People to fly with in southwest or central georgia area? |
| From: | "grantr" <grant_richardson25(at)yahoo.com> |
As you know I am getting a MK III soon and once I get my training I would like
to find some people to fly with whom also enjoy experiential aircraft. i have
not been able to locate any one fairly close to me. the closet is my instructor
which is 2hrs south of me near Valdosta, GA.
I am located in Plains, GA. Is there anyone close to the Columbus, Albany or Macon
area?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=143372#143372
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: I am getting a Kolb MK III!! |
| From: | "grantr" <grant_richardson25(at)yahoo.com> |
Are you talking about just cheap bathroom scales?
Do you weight it sitting on the scales like it sits normally or do you have to
raise the tail scale to level the aircraft before weighing?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=143378#143378
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: I am getting a Kolb MK III!! |
In a message dated 11/2/2007 9:52:01 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
grant_richardson25(at)yahoo.com writes:
I don't think that will be happening with a 400+ pound airplane. LOL :D
Well, that's how I do it with my Firefly
Steve
Firefly 007/Floats
do not archive
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: I am getting a Kolb MK III!! |
In a message dated 11/2/2007 10:15:23 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
grant_richardson25(at)yahoo.com writes:
Are you talking about just cheap bathroom scales?
Most of the bathroom scales that I have tried are too inaccurate for a 400#
airplane. The digital ones are ok but:
The weight must be placed on them just right and
They go on and off as you step on or off, it is tricky to set them.
Steve
Firefly 007/Floats
do not archive
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: I am getting a Kolb MK III!! |
| From: | "George Alexander" <gtalexander(at)att.net> |
jb92563 wrote:
> You can leave the plane in its normal sitting on the ground attitude .......
Ray of Riverside:
My assumption is that you were including both measuring the ARMs and weighing the
plane in the above statement.....
The W&B should be done with the aircraft in the level flight configuration. (With
a Firestar that's about 9 deg angle of attack as measured on the bottom surface
of the wing or 7.5" up from level at leading edge of wing).
In response to Cristal's subject: "Help with level flight attitude for Mark II",
Possums posted an image that shows the correct set up for a Firestar. Don't
know what the correct AOA would be for a MK III.
Since most of the empty weight in any Kolb is aft of the mains, probably makes
a measurable difference. I haven't done it, but try weighing just the tail wheel
both ways. Probably several pounds difference resulting in an error for the
empty CG (indicating further aft than actual) if you use the weight sitting
on the ground.
My .02 worth.
--------
George Alexander
http://gtalexander.home.att.net
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=143430#143430
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Replacing aluminum panel - with 6061T6 |
| From: | "John H Murphy" <jhm9812(at)yahoo.com> |
I'm installing a EIS to replace the altimeter, cgt, & egt on my FS.
Aircraft Spruce has aluminum called 6061T6 in 2x2 sheets. Would this do the trick
for a replacement panel?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=143434#143434
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "pat ladd" <pj.ladd(at)btinternet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: I am getting a Kolb MK III!! |
You can leave the plane in its normal sitting on the ground attitude >>
You are asking for trouble if you do. The plane MUST be in flying position.
Cheers
Pat
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dana Hague <d-m-hague(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: I am getting a Kolb MK III!! |
At 06:40 PM 11/2/2007, jb92563 wrote:
>The attitude of the aircraft makes no difference in calculating the CG due
>to the nature of the math, but it does make the measurements more critical.
If you measure the weights with the plane not in flying attitude, you would
have to take into account the vertical position of the CG to and use
trigonometry (or a plumb bob) to determine the level flight position. The
level flight CG is where the plum bob line intersects the vertical CG
line. If you don't know where it is vertically (and I doubt many do), the
plane MUST be in level flight attitude when weighing.
-Dana
--
--
But do you trust the _government_ with semi-automatic assault rifles?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "George Bass" <gtb(at)commspeed.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Great place for Kolbs. |
Mike Welch;
North Central Arizona..... Everything you asked for ecept the water,
but, that
isn't too far away. Nice little flight over to Bullhead City (on the
Colorado) &
then there's Lake Pleasant, Lake Powell, Roosevelt Lake & a few smaller
ones. Probably not as much water as you'd like tho.
Today it was 75 degrees at the time I wrote this (4:43 pm). No snow,
lots of
neat people, cow pasture airstrips all over the place, & another one in
many
of the cities around here. Cities like: Sedona, Cottonwood, Rimrock,
Payson,
Prescott, Seligman, Kimgman, Winslow, Holbrook, Valle, Williams, etc.
Also plenty of beautiful country to fly over, but, the mountains are not
as
primitive appearing as the ones much further North.
Hope you find the place you're looking for,
George Bass
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: I am getting a Kolb MK III!! |
In a message dated 11/2/2007 1:37:40 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
jb92563(at)yahoo.com writes:
You can leave the plane in its normal sitting on the ground attitude but you
should use a plumb bob or other weight on a string to measure the location
along the tape measure from the nose.
I'm pretty sure it must be in flying attitude; ie., bottom of wing @ 9
degrees.
Howard Shackleford
FS II
SC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Girard" <jindoguy(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Replacing aluminum panel - with 6061T6 |
John, 6061-T6 is a good grade of aluminum, about 20% less tensile as
2024-T3, but much better corrosion resistance. It'll make a fine panel.
Rick
On 11/2/07, John H Murphy wrote:
>
>
> I'm installing a EIS to replace the altimeter, cgt, & egt on my FS.
>
> Aircraft Spruce has aluminum called 6061T6 in 2x2 sheets. Would this do
> the trick for a replacement panel?
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=143434#143434
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Denny Rowe" <rowedenny(at)windstream.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Replacing aluminum panel - with 6061T6 |
Yep.
----- Original Message -----
From: "John H Murphy" <jhm9812(at)yahoo.com>
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 3:38 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Replacing aluminum panel - with 6061T6
>
> I'm installing a EIS to replace the altimeter, cgt, & egt on my FS.
>
> Aircraft Spruce has aluminum called 6061T6 in 2x2 sheets. Would this do
> the trick for a replacement panel?
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=143434#143434
>
>
> --
> 11/1/2007 6:47 PM
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Flycrazy8(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Re: People to fly with in southwest or central georgia area? |
Kolb-List message posted by: "grantr"
As you know I am getting a MK III soon and once I get my training I would
like to find some people to fly with whom also enjoy experiential aircraft. i
have not been able to locate any one fairly close to me. the closet is my
instructor which is 2hrs south of me near Valdosta, GA.
I am located in Plains, GA. Is there anyone close to the Columbus, Albany or
Macon area?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Hey Grant
I keep my Kolb in Donalsonville, Ga. (17J) ...Which is south of Albany, Ga.
We have an experimental/sport/ultralight club of around thirty members that
love to fly.
Our website is _www.southernflyersul.com_ (http://www.southernflyersul.com)
if you care to check us out.
There is another club that is around the columbus/phenix city area that I
could hook you up with too..... Theie website is
_www.homestead.com/southernflyers_ (http://www.homestead.com/southernflyers) ... Ted Cowan flys an Kolb
Slingshot with that club and is a good guy to fly with too .
Stevon Baxley
Kolb Firefly
334-899-5908
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Flycrazy8(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Flight safety question - chutes |
Kolb-List message posted by: "jb92563" _jb92563(at)yahoo.com_
(mailto:jb92563(at)yahoo.com)
I was wondering what people are using for safety when flying kolbs?
Do you wear a parachute?
Have a Ballistic or Throwable parachute mounted?
Do not have any kind of parachute?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Hey Ray
For safety I usually wear my parachute while holding my throwable chute in my
lap and with my free hand on the Firing handle of my ballistic chute .....
............. : - ))
..............................................................................
..............Just kidding.... LOL
The best safety device you can have is to do a very good pre-flight of your
airplane before you go flying... Making sure your plane is safe and reliable to
fly and the weather is good .
I have a ballistic parachute on my airplane that is used as a last resort .
As most of the other pilots that I know do too . .
I don't know of any one flying our type of birds that wears a parachute . It
would be almost impossible to successfully get out of our planes in flight and
then to successfully deploy the chute.
Anyone agree ?
Stevon Baxley
Kolb Firefly
Pansey, Alabama
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "pat ladd" <pj.ladd(at)btinternet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: I am getting a Kolb MK III!! |
See how these two attitudes cancel the differences out by the math?>>
Whoa! If you want to find the total WEIGHTt of the plane that will do fine.
If you are calculating the BALANCE you will be in trouble.
Thats why it is called `weight and balance`
Cheers
Pat
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Aluminum panel - continued - how to finish it off? |
| From: | "John H Murphy" <jhm9812(at)yahoo.com> |
How are most folks finishing off their bright aluminum panels? Is there an adhesive
that is applied or is it painted? I would think black would be a good color.
My original instrument panel has a leather type material that is black in
color applied to the panel.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=143660#143660
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Denny Rowe" <rowedenny(at)windstream.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Aluminum panel - continued - how to finish it off? |
I recomend black anodizing after its finished as long as you have a local
shop that does that.
Denny Rowe
Mk-3 N616DR
----- Original Message -----
From: "John H Murphy" <jhm9812(at)yahoo.com>
Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2007 11:53 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Aluminum panel - continued - how to finish it off?
>
> How are most folks finishing off their bright aluminum panels? Is there an
> adhesive that is applied or is it painted? I would think black would be a
> good color. My original instrument panel has a leather type material that
> is black in color applied to the panel.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=143660#143660
>
>
> --
> 11/2/2007 9:46 PM
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | List Fund Raiser |
Dear Listers,
Just a reminder that November is the Matronics Email List Fund Raiser month. I've
got a bunch of really nice incentive gifts this year. There's really something
for everyone!
Please make a Contribution today:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Thank you!
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "tc1917" <tc1917(at)hughes.net> |
you can do as many of us have done and go to the local auto or hardware and
buy some krinkle paint. follow the directions. looks good and is durable.
ted cowan, alabama
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | possums <possums(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Grand Vortex Generator Challenge |
TEST
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | robert bean <slyck(at)frontiernet.net> |
I remember back when I first joined this list making a comment about
that "ugly wrinkle paint"
John Hauck didn't take it kindly. :) Reason for my opinion was
having seen so many of the
old planes done badly with it, drips runs, sags, etc. Done right it
looks ok but tends to hold dirt.
Next time I do my panel over I'll go with a darker color to kill
reflection into the windshield.
Easy way is to glue (rubber cement) a flat texture laminate sheet,
aka formica, onto the aluminum.
There are an infinite number of colors available. Easy to work
with. If you put it on a
panel with pre-existing holes you can cut it close to the edges with
snips and finish to flush
with a half-round file. It comes in different thicknesses, get the
thin stuff.
BB,, MkIIIc in basement shop away from the squirrels and chipmunks.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Travis Brown (Kolb Aircraft)" <travis(at)tnkolbaircraft.com> |
| Subject: | Re: I am getting a Kolb MK III!! |
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | possums <possums(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Help with level flight attitude for Mark II |
At 04:15 PM 11/5/2007, you wrote:
>
>
>Ray
>
>The CG does shift aft when in a climb and with the tail on the
>ground, just denying that fact doesn't change anything. Anyone that
>has ever lifted the tail of their airplane knows that the tail is
>lighter when lifted to the specified W&B position. Lift it high
>enough and the tail will keep on going. Now maybe where ever your
>head is at it doesn't do that but it does here in the Midwest. The
>CG ranges are calculated based on a specific attitude. If they were
>calculated with the tail wheel on the ground they would be
>different. The CG ranges are given with the idea that the plane will
>be flown in allot of flight attitudes and not get us in trouble. You
>can do your weight and balance your way but please don't try to
>advise others this way. Also please if you do your W&B your way
>don't take anyone up in your plane or fly over populated areas.
Here are the "old" instructions, again.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Help with level flight attitude for Mark II |
| From: | "ropermike" <ropermike2002(at)yahoo.com> |
For what its worth, i weighed my MKll tailwheel on the ground and elevated 2'.
It weighed 5lbs less elevated and the mains weighed 2.5 lbs more. I used the elevated
weight for my weight and balance....Mike
--------
The next best thing to playing and winning is playing and losing!...Mike Hillger
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=144065#144065
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Help with level flight attitude for Mark II |
| From: | "R. Hankins" <rphanks(at)grantspass.com> |
"CG does NOT change unless weights are shifted on or within the airplane. IMHO
it is a constant, when in the air!"
Absolutely correct Rick! Not just your opinion, but solid irrefutable physics.
Unless mass is moved, added, or subtracted, the CG of the plane does not change.
This is true on the ground and in the air.
The distribution of weight on the scales and therefore the calculation of C.G.
with respect to a datum does change with attitude on the ground. One can choose
any attitude one wants with a new design to measure this position and verify
limits with flight testing. The important thing is that (once the testing is
done and limits set) all those thereafter make their measurements in the exact
same manner.
Builders use different tire & wheel sizes, custom landing gear, short tail springs
etc to costomize their craft. Because of this. using the wing bottom at a
set angle to level makes for a much more repeatable process than taxi attitude.
This lets us all benefit from the flight testing done by the initial designers.
Doing it any other way puts the EXPERIMENT back into EXPERIMENTAL.
Fly safe!
--------
Roger in Oregon
1992 KXP 503 - N1782C
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=144067#144067
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Help with level flight attitude for Mark II |
| From: | "johnjoyes" <john(at)joyes.org.uk> |
Of course those who have replied that the CG does not change with attitude are
right ! Those who have (correctly) observed that the tail weight changes as you
lift the tail are getting confused -it does not mean that the CG is moving!
The weight and balance check should be done with the lower wing surface set at
9 degrees to the horizontal. On my machine, the tailwheel is 9 inches off the
ground to achieve this.
What would be MUCH MORE INTERESTING is what other MkII owners use for the position
of the Pilot/passenger CG,, as it makes a big difference in the calculation.
Previous owners of my plane have used a figure of 4 inches forward if datum
(the front wing edge), but I reckon it is more like 2 inches. Are there any
other opinions?
Interestingly, in the UK, the CG range allowed by the powers-that-be is much lower
than in the Kolb manual, 16.8 to 24 inches aft of datum. When flying solo,
it is necessary for even a heavyweight pilot like me to add ballast weight of
6kg in the nose ahead of the pedals.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=144103#144103
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeremy Casey" <1planeguy(at)kilocharlie.us> |
| Subject: | Re: Help with level flight attitude for Mark II |
What would be MUCH MORE INTERESTING is what other MkII owners use for
the position of the Pilot/passenger CG,, as it makes a big difference in
the calculation. Previous owners of my plane have used a figure of 4
inches forward if datum (the front wing edge), but I reckon it is more
like 2 inches. Are there any other opinions?
One option is to use the exact position of the pilot CG for the calcs.
The easiest way is to do a weight with the pilot sitting in the plane.
Assuming you have already done the EMPTY weighing and calculated the CG
you can work the whole "weight x arm = moment" thing in reverse, since
you have the empty CG and then you get the CG with the pilot in the
plane (from weighing) that can be extrapolated out since you know the
change in CG position and the weight of the pilot...just solve for the
ARM.
I hope that is clear as mud...would have to dig up an example to explain
further...
Jeremy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "boyd" <by0ung(at)brigham.net> |
| Subject: | Help with level flight attitude for Mark II |
Let me add my 2 cents worth.... before you start you know it is worth what
it cost.
Basically in an aircraft we are concerned with the cg in the for and aft
position.... you could also figure it in a top to bottom,, and a left to
right moment...... that would give you the center of mass for the plane as
a whole.....
Now unless there is movement on fuel in the tank,,,, or people or objects
move while in flight,,,, the Center of Mass will not move....
Now lifting the tail plot...
Lifting the tail will change the weight of the tail, only because the
center of mass has changed reference in relation to the wheels... and if
you lift the tail high enough that the center of mass moves in front of the
wheel axels.... the tail will show a negative weight,,, the center of mass
of the plane has not moved, only the relationship with other members , the
wheels for example, has moved....
Ok the question comes up... why do we have to have the plane at the
correct attitude when measuring the cg.... let me over emphasize with the
following examples....
1: plane in the proper attitude and the cg is at 21 inches from the leading
edge.... the center of mass cg would line up with say the top center of
the fuel cap.... draw a vertical line from the fuel cap to the bottom of the
wing and will intersect at 31 % of the wing cord..... all ok!!!!
2 same plane,,,, rotate the nose down till the nose cone touches the
ground:
The center of mass has not moved,,,, but if you draw a vertical line from
the center of the fuel cap to the bottom of the wing it may be at 85% of
the wing cord ok or not ok!!!!
3: pitch the nose up.... again the center of mass has not moved.... and
draw a vertical line from the fuel cap to the wing..... it may be exactly
at the leading edge... or 0% of wing cord..... again ok or not ok!!!!
Or are the examples 2 and 3 ok or not!!!! The center of mass has not
moved.... the plane would be safe.... but if the manufacture instructs
that the wing cord % cg limits should be from x to y if measured at z
angle.... then follow the instructions and you will know that it is within
limits... it is a paperwork issue....
Now if the manufacture changed the angle... he would also have to change the
limits of the % of wing cord at that angle. Rotate it too far... say 90
Deg.. and you could not get results that are helpful.
If you do the cg work according to the plans the results are predictable...
if you come up with your own angles say tail wheel on the ground,,, or
the bottom of the wing level... you will have to come up with your own
limits that are acceptable in % wing cord... and do the testing to make
sure your results are acceptable.... and it can be done... but why reinvent
the wheel.
Ok maybe that has been 3 cents worth....
Boyd
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "boyd" <by0ung(at)brigham.net> |
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
One option is to use the exact position of the pilot CG for the calcs.
The easiest way is to do a weight with the pilot sitting in the plane.
Assuming you have already done the EMPTY weighing and calculated the CG
you can work the whole "weight x arm = moment" thing in reverse, since
you have the empty CG and then you get the CG with the pilot in the
plane (from weighing) that can be extrapolated out since you know the
change in CG position and the weight of the pilot...just solve for the
ARM.
I hope that is clear as mud...would have to dig up an example to explain
further...
Jeremy
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I have built a spreadsheet to do this if anyone would like.
Boyd
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "boyd" <by0ung(at)brigham.net> |
I guess I had thought things through a bit more and was not going to send
the last email until I had changed things a bit...... SORRY
Unless things move inside an aircraft,, or fuel is burnt.. the cg does not
change by changing the pitch or attitude of the aircraft..... what we
need to do is make sure our planes fit into the same model that the factory
has set... examples.
If you were to raise the tail till the bottom of the wing was level,,,,
then drop a plum bob from the leading edge to the seat. Measure the cg of
the pilot using the belly button method. The results would be greatly
different than,,, with the tail wheel on the ground, drop a plum bob from
the leading edge and using the belly button method of obtaining the pilot
cg....
The aircraft kit manufacture, KOLB, had determined a method of obtaining
the cg in a manner that ALL that follow their instructions will have a
plane with predictable results. If you do it some other way,,, your results
may vary.
I think this is what I was going to change things to before I hit the send
receive button.
Boyd
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Welch <mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com> |
Kolber Guys,
Hey!! I'm back (from my visit to Alabama) What a beautiful state! And the highways.
I've never seen such great highways. I'd like to take this opportunity
to thank all of you that took the time to respond to my "where to retire"
question. Thank you, guys.
If I'm not too late to join this W & B party, I'd like to clear things up a bit.
This is an apples and oranges thing.
Here is the apples:
First of all, Boyd's response is the most accurate (along with a couple of others),
so far. It is a fact. The center of gravity (or mass) does NOT change,
if nothing else has moved. By taking various weight measurements, and picking
an arbitrary datum, a person can calculate the "center of gravity". And you
can twist and turn the object all you want, it doesn't alter its center of gravity".
This is where Ray is correct, but that's all we know at this point. But we need
more information. We also want to "balance" our object. And it has been
decided by others (Homer?) a long time ago that IF the wing is held at 9 degrees
, AND we could suspend the airplane by a string (attached to our specific c.o.g.),
then we will come up with the specific balance point. And they say this
balance point should be located at a particular percentage of the main wings
chord. Let's say....28-32% from the leading edge of the main wings.
So here is the oranges:
In physics, this imaginary string is known as the "NORMAL" force. It is a line
at which 100% of the weight of an object is pulling down, with respect to gravity.
It is "normal" to the earth's gravity. Now, if you can picture our imaginary
string supporting our airplane, with all loads correctly in place.....and
this string goes up through the main wings at a point between 28% and 32%
(I don't know actual percentages at this moment), then we can say we are "balanced".
...."you're good to go!!"
Now, if we drop the tail down to rest on the ground (but not touch, because remember,
our imaginary string is supporting the entire weight of the plane).
And we still want 28-32% to be our "normal" force, we would see the iimaginary
string roll forward toward the leading edge. Obviously we are rotating the
plane backwards, there fore the supporting string is lining up with a "more forward"
point.
So, with our tail end low, we see our new string support position is way ahead
of the 28-32%. But we want 28-32%. We have to have 28-32%! That's not going
to change. And you have the tail-end almost touching the ground, right?
The only resolution now is to add lots of weight to the back end of the airplane.
This will shift our imaginary line more rearward (travelling rearward parallel
from where it was) And now, we finally have finally our center of gravity
that lines up with 28-32% of chord, WITH THE TAIL-END LOW!!! Now, even
though we have achieved the 28-32% balance point, the plane is concidered incredibly
TAIL HEAVY!!
This revised scenario of weight and balance may take off and land only one time!!!
The reasons are obvious. When calculating weight & balance for you aircraft,
you are furnished certain "GIVENS". One of these givens is that the plane
be put in a certain configuration (main wing 9 degrees up). This is not a
variable. Another "given" is the final balance point must be within 28-32% of
chord. This also not a variable. The next factor is the "NORMAL" force (our
balance point).
If you go and lower the tail, then you will need a NEW point to call your final
balance point. You can NO longer use 28-32% of chord. That is someone else's
figures, not your's. You need to find out what the new "GIVEN" is with tail
low. It may be the leading edge. Who knows? You'd have to experiment, if
you live to tell about it. In other words, you are coming up with your own criteria
to do a weight and balance. But, then don't get to go back and grab someone
else's "GIVENS". It doesn't work that way!!!
As Boyd said. "Why reinvent the wheel??" For a KOLB AIRCRAFT, there is only
one prescribed correct process to calculate weight and balance and have it be
reliable, and that is with the main wing held to 9 degrees flight attitude.
Best to all, Mike Welch
BTW. Did you know, the center of gravity in a banana is not even in the banana?
It is out somewhere in the middle, in mid-air, inside the curve. (Does this
make this an apples, oranges, & bananas comparison? Hmmm?)
> From: by0ung(at)brigham.net
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Kolb-List: W&B
> Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2007 08:02:33 -0700
>
>
> I guess I had thought things through a bit more and was not going to send
> the last email until I had changed things a bit...... SORRY
>
> Unless things move inside an aircraft,, or fuel is burnt.. the cg does not
> change by changing the pitch or attitude of the aircraft..... what we
> need to do is make sure our planes fit into the same model that the factory
> has set... examples.
>
> If you were to raise the tail till the bottom of the wing was level,,,,
> then drop a plum bob from the leading edge to the seat. Measure the cg of
> the pilot using the belly button method. The results would be greatly
> different than,,, with the tail wheel on the ground, drop a plum bob from
> the leading edge and using the belly button method of obtaining the pilot
> cg....
>
> The aircraft kit manufacture, KOLB, had determined a method of obtaining
> the cg in a manner that ALL that follow their instructions will have a
> plane with predictable results. If you do it some other way,,, your results
> may vary.
>
> I think this is what I was going to change things to before I hit the send
> receive button.
>
> Boyd
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Caf. Stop by today.
http://www.cafemessenger.com/info/info_sweetstuff2.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_OctWLtagline
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Cracking in tubing and welds? |
| From: | "grantr" <grant_richardson25(at)yahoo.com> |
> My main concern for safely in our aluminum and chromoly tube structures is cracking
of tubes and welds.
>
> They unusually occur in those hidden areas that are hard to inspect.
>
>
I saw this posted under the chutes thread. Is this something to be overly concerned
with?
Do motorcycles have the same issues? Ive just never heard of this in cycles. I
thought metal fatigue was not that prevalent in our light non aerobatic planes.
My plane does not have a chute and my instructors challenger does not have a chute..
I do plan on finding a used one to put on it later just in case.
Thanks,
Grant
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=144248#144248
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Girard" <jindoguy(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Cracking in tubing and welds? |
Grant, My Mk III is serial number 43. I've had it down for quite awhile to
rebuild the electrical and fuel system and do a thorough inspection. I've
found three spots worth checking.
1. If your fuel tank taps come out of the bottom of the plastic tanks, as
mine did, check the rubber grommets for cracking. Mine were just about
cracked through to the hole. How they didn't leak was just pure luck. Newer
Mk III's have the taps on the top of the tank. Still a good idea to check
the grommets.
2. Check how the trim system is hooked up. Mine had a cable that went from
the spring all the way back to the elevator bell crank and then back forward
again to the cockpit bell crank. When the trim lever was pulled back it
caused the return cable to go slack and bang around inside the tail boom and
the connection from the pedals went through the trim spring. The current
system goes from the trim spring to a tab on the fwd side of the cockpit
bell crank, then separate cables go from the cockpit bell crank to the
elevator bell crank.
3. Water can gather at the low point of the cockpit right where there is a
weld cluster. Mine was rusty and a pain to clean up. I used thin strips of
emery cloth and put a matching strip of duct tape on the cloth side so the
edges wouldn't abrade the cloth as I pulled it back and forth to get the
rust off the bottom of the cluster. Otherwise a Dremel Tool with their
little wire wheel took off all the rust on the top, sides and back. Work a
piece of plastic between the cluster and the cloth, then space the cloth
away from the cluster with something thin, I used tongue depressors, and
slobber on some anti rust paint. Let dry and remove the spacers and the
plastic.
Install the aileron counter weights, really important. Someday I'll figure
out how to upload that few seconds of video I have of the ailerons flapping
up and down as I did a fly by of the strip.
I guess that was really four things. No cracked welds, though.
Rick
On 11/6/07, grantr wrote:
>
>
> > My main concern for safely in our aluminum and chromoly tube structures
> is cracking of tubes and welds.
> >
> > They unusually occur in those hidden areas that are hard to inspect.
> >
> >
>
>
> I saw this posted under the chutes thread. Is this something to be overly
> concerned with?
>
> Do motorcycles have the same issues? Ive just never heard of this in
> cycles. I thought metal fatigue was not that prevalent in our light non
> aerobatic planes.
>
> My plane does not have a chute and my instructors challenger does not have
> a chute..
>
> I do plan on finding a used one to put on it later just in case.
>
> Thanks,
> Grant
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=144248#144248
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Flight safety question - chutes |
| From: | "JetPilot" <orcabonita(at)hotmail.com> |
jindoguy(at)gmail.com wrote:
>
>
> If one hadn't come on my Mk III I don't think I would buy one. I didn't on my
Trike. The problem, IMHO, is a false sense of security they give. Once they're
deployed, you're just a passenger along for the ride.
> Rick
>
>
I have to disagree with Rick on this one. I absolutely would not fly either my
MK-III or trike without a BRS. In experimental aircraft, schit happens, and
BRS chutes have an excellent record for saving lives. I do not take any extra
chances because I have a BRS, nor do I preflight less because of my BRS, but
that is more of an issue of using good judgement than having a BRS or not.
Ricks reasoning is just so wrong. If I thought like Rick, I would not wear a seatbelt,
because it would make me take more chances in my car... Do you drive
in a reckless manner because you have an airbag ? Only a fool would not take
every safety advantage he can get.
Mike
--------
"NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could
have !!!
Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=144293#144293
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | What Listers Are Saying... |
November is Matronics List Fund Raiser month and a number people been sending some
really nice comments regarding the Lists. I thought I'd share a few below.
The Lists are completely supported by your Contributions. All of the bills for
new hardware, connectivity, and electricity are paid by the generous support
of the List members.
Please make your Contribution today to support the continued operation of the List
and Forums:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Thank you!
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
================= What Listers Are Saying ================
Flying and building is much safer with this List!!
Robert D.
Thanks for having and maintaining such a great resource to
all of us builders and flyers.
Wayne E.
Love the fact that you haven't caved to advertising!
Peter J.
..a great resource!!
Robert C.
Not building at the moment, but the Lists keeps me right
up to date with what's going on.
Chris D.
The web forum has been running great.
James O.
I enjoy this [List] site very much...
Paul C.
This is a great list!
Albert G.
..a valuable resource!
Roger C.
I am deployed to Pakistan right now, and being able
to go on-line and keep up with the aircraft discussions
helps keep the aircraft building dream alive in my mind!
Gregory C.
..fantastic service!
Roger M.
..clearly a work of passion!
Mike C.
It is a great service to us!
Kevin C.
The list is a wonderful resource...
Ralph O.
[The Lists] have been the single greatest resource in
building my RV-9A and now my RV-10.
Albert G.
..a valuable and always improving service.
Dick S.
STILL THE BEST BARGAIN AROUND!!
Owen B.
..such a valuable tool.
Jon M.
[The Lists] have been an invaluable resource for me
as a Zenith homebuilder.
David G.
The opportunity to meet (on line at least) many other
interesting builders and to make some new friends is
truly appreciated.
Albert G.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "pat ladd" <pj.ladd(at)btinternet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Flight safety question - chutes |
Just to muddy the waters even more. Very few chutes are fitted in the UK. I
have only ever seen one. . In Germany it is illegal to fly without one.
Unless the plane actually breaks up I would have thought that your are
better off staying with it. You have some control and you have a cage round
you. You would have to be in some extraordinary circumstance to pull the
chute just because of engine failure.
Cheers
Pat
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carlo Tura" <ctura(at)politecnica.it> |
Good morning,
I'm italian and i don't speak english well.
I'looking for manual of a Kolb MK II.
Is possible find it ?
Thank for your attemption
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Russ Kinne <russ(at)rkiphoto.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Flight safety question - chutes |
IMHO -- 'once they're deployed' - you're a LIVE passenger along for
the ride, not a dead crash victim
On Nov 7, 2007, at 12:25 AM, JetPilot wrote:
>
>
> jindoguy(at)gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>
>> If one hadn't come on my Mk III I don't think I would buy one. I
>> didn't on my Trike. The problem, IMHO, is a false sense of
>> security they give. Once they're deployed, you're just a passenger
>> along for the ride.
>> Rick
>>
>>
>
>
> I have to disagree with Rick on this one. I absolutely would not
> fly either my MK-III or trike without a BRS. In experimental
> aircraft, schit happens, and BRS chutes have an excellent record
> for saving lives. I do not take any extra chances because I have a
> BRS, nor do I preflight less because of my BRS, but that is more of
> an issue of using good judgement than having a BRS or not.
>
> Ricks reasoning is just so wrong. If I thought like Rick, I would
> not wear a seatbelt, because it would make me take more chances in
> my car... Do you drive in a reckless manner because you have an
> airbag ? Only a fool would not take every safety advantage he can
> get.
>
> Mike
>
> --------
> "NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast
> as you could have !!!
>
> Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=144293#144293
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | robert bean <slyck(at)frontiernet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Cracking in tubing and welds? |
The most overlooked tube is the lift strut carry-through, -that
single tube passing at the bottom,
beneath your sphincter musckles. That guy connects the total lift of
the struts and could
cause those musckles to contract considerably if it fails.
Seatbelts? yah, I am a firm believer, and I want you motorcycle guys
to buckle up too :)
BB
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Flight safety question - chutes |
| From: | "JetPilot" <orcabonita(at)hotmail.com> |
ElleryWeld(at)aol.com wrote:
> Oh so everyone that doesn't have a BRS is a Fool now.
>
First , Don't misquote me, I never said that and I'm sure you well know this.
What I did say is if you have a chute, and remove it, then yes I would consider
you a fool. You like to sound tough and nostalgic talking about dieing
doing what you love, and not growing old.
There were just two guys in a trike in this area that had a failure, and spiraled
into the ground from 1500 feet due to a structural failure. The pilot was
an A&P mechanic, known for the quality of his work, and also a a great guy and
competent pilot. Witnesses said they were flying along in a normal manner when
there was a bang, and then a long spiraling dive. The ensuing fire was to
intense for them to be pulled clear of the wreckage. A BRS would have almost
surely saved them.
Both the Pilot and his passenger were in their 20's.
Do you honestly expect use to buy that these two guys would be OK with dieing in
their 20's , instead of living life, getting married, and flying some really
nest stuff that will surely be developed in the next 50 years ??? If one can
get past the flowery way you made your statement about dieing, thinks about what
you actually said, it is one of the worst things I have ever seen posted.
When I was in high school, I flew my ultralight without a chute. If you don't
have a BRS, and can not afford one, that is understandable. I have been there
and done it. But if you have one, or can easily get one, and don't, yes, I
would consider you a fool. Just as I would consider anyone a fool that took
the airbags out of their car, because they don't want to "grow old" in a nursing
home.
Here is a link to the over 200 documented saves by BRS, listed along with the cause
of deployment:
http://brsparachutes.com/files/Documents/Lives-Saved.pdf
Only an idiot would say that all these 200 guys were careless in their preflights,
and would have been better off by being more careful than having a BRS.
Mike
--------
"NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could
have !!!
Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=144425#144425
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bryan Dever" <indyaviator(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Flight safety question - chutes |
I don't have a strong opinion on having a BRS chute, that is why I
haven't spent the money for one. If you are flying on a tight budget,
I think that the money would be better spent on training, engine
overhauls, and maintenance.
As far as the 200 "saves" that BRS likes to talk about, I tend to be a
little wary of that number. There are many true saves on that list,
but there are a lot of deployments due to engine failure. I don't
really think of those all as saves. I have to wonder if those pilots
would have been better off if they had spent the extra money on
training for dead stick landings, engine maintenance, and learning not
to fly over hostile terrain. I also wonder what the failure rate is
for BRS. They don't seem to publish that number. If it was a very
low number, I would think that they would.
There are also risks to having a BRS. Pull that handle and you may be
saved, or you may come down in electrical lines or in front of a
speeding semi. In many instances you are better off flying the plane
to the scene of the crash. Obviously if the wing falls off of your
plane this is another story. There is also a real risk to potential
rescue workers and citizens that try and help you out of your crashed
plane if you did not deploy it. We had a brand new Challenger at our
airport many years ago. A pilot accidentally pulled the handle when
exiting the plane after a flight. It was a windy day and the wind
caught the chute and dragged the plane across a field and into a
fence. It caused a lot of damage.
All in all, the benefits of having a BRS surely outweigh not having
one....just not by much in my book. When I am spiraling in from
1200', you can all say "I told you so."
Bryan Dever
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Russ Kinne <russ(at)rkiphoto.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Flight safety question - chutes |
GOOD ON YOU, ELLERY!
On Nov 7, 2007, at 1:30 PM, Michael Sharp wrote:
> Ellery,
>
> I have him as a rule in outlook to trash anything from him. Been
> an A** Hole from the begining....
>
>
> ElleryWeld(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> This is from your words "Only a fool would not take every safety
> advantage he can get".
> It's a Good thing all people are not alike that was just my opinion
> and I see you have yours I take anything you say with a grain of
> salt because of many other conversations you have argued to this
> list in the past
>
> Do you also know why the two young fellas
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Flight safety question - chutes |
| From: | "JetPilot" <orcabonita(at)hotmail.com> |
ElleryWeld(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
> Do you also know why the two young fellas Crashed "Aerobatic manuvers" from
what I understand wich the craft was not designed for if there the same guys
I am thinking about [/b]
> I will never read another post from you thanks to my Delete Button
> ]
So what part of " flying along in a normal manner " do you not understand ?? There
were plenty of witnesses and no aerobatics involved.
You posted something downright stupid, and now you are all bitter and reacting
like a baby when someone points it out in public. Personally, I dont care if
you use chute or not. I beleive everyone should have the right to kill themself
if they want. Where I do take issue is where fools like you give this very
BAD advice to others here on the list. Lots of people read this list that
never post, its our responsibility to give them good information.
Mike
--------
"NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could
have !!!
Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=144458#144458
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "George Bass" <gtb(at)commspeed.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Unpleasantness |
List;
I've been amember of this list for a number of years now. There have
been
many reasons that I have enjoyed the information, education &
entertainment
of the members here. Part of my warm regard for the list has always
been
in the things others have accomplished & the methods that they have used
to overcome the trials and challenges of building their own aircraft.
Or efforts
to modify one constructed by someone else.
Recently, I have seen a change in the list. I have realized that I no
longer am
anxious to get to the computer & see the latest offerings from members,
due
in part, to the unexpected, unfounded, often uncalled-for, rantings &
attacks to
several members.
I realize that I am mearly a "lurker" & that I have never owned a Kolb
(this was
not by choice, I assure you). I have, however, flown a couple, & even
had the
distinct honor of flying the late Mr. Dave Pelletier's Firestar on a
couple days.
These things will alwasy remain as milestones to me. Memories of the
good days, & the great friendships that can be developed in this sport.
The reason I am writing this, is that I do not need the silly,
antagonistic, hatred
& flaming that has become the dominant theme on this list. Therefore,
I will
be removing myself from the list. I will miss the true heartfelt
encouragement
that has come from here, as well as the educational experiences of those
of
the list that have given so much of themselves. Not just the negative
things,
like accidents & (to quote some) stupid decisions & such, but, even to
the
point of providing thrue humor & laughter at themselves & us all.
I had hoped I could last until the next Monument Valley UnOfficial
Fly-In,
because I had purchased an aircraft that I had wanted to use there &
meet
all the folks that I've come to know through this list. Who knows,
maybe I'll
be able to make it anyway.
For all the engine info, I can't thank you all enough. My wishes to you
all, are
that you have nothing but Blue Skies & Soft Landings, exactly where you
want
them to be.
George Bass
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Southern Reflections" <purplemoon99(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Unpleasantness |
George, It's a shame that you are going to remove your self from the
list because of a little unplesantness. It appears that you enjoy the
list,and you get alot out of it. now that you 've got a plane, it would
seem to me that this would be the best time for you to stay on the list.
If you see something that you don't like, or something that offends you
,hit the deleat button . Enjoy your life,your plane, and your friends
on the list. that my 2 cents worth hope you reconsider.. Joe N101HD
601XL/RAM
----- Original Message -----
From: George Bass
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 3:08 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Unpleasantness
List;
I've been amember of this list for a number of years now. There have
been
many reasons that I have enjoyed the information, education &
entertainment
of the members here. Part of my warm regard for the list has always
been
in the things others have accomplished & the methods that they have
used
to overcome the trials and challenges of building their own aircraft.
Or efforts
to modify one constructed by someone else.
Recently, I have seen a change in the list. I have realized that I
no longer am
anxious to get to the computer & see the latest offerings from
members, due
in part, to the unexpected, unfounded, often uncalled-for, rantings &
attacks to
several members.
I realize that I am mearly a "lurker" & that I have never owned a Kolb
(this was
not by choice, I assure you). I have, however, flown a couple, &
even had the
distinct honor of flying the late Mr. Dave Pelletier's Firestar on a
couple days.
These things will alwasy remain as milestones to me. Memories of the
good days, & the great friendships that can be developed in this sport.
The reason I am writing this, is that I do not need the silly,
antagonistic, hatred
& flaming that has become the dominant theme on this list.
Therefore, I will
be removing myself from the list. I will miss the true heartfelt
encouragement
that has come from here, as well as the educational experiences of
those of
the list that have given so much of themselves. Not just the
negative things,
like accidents & (to quote some) stupid decisions & such, but, even to
the
point of providing thrue humor & laughter at themselves & us all.
I had hoped I could last until the next Monument Valley UnOfficial
Fly-In,
because I had purchased an aircraft that I had wanted to use there &
meet
all the folks that I've come to know through this list. Who knows,
maybe I'll
be able to make it anyway.
For all the engine info, I can't thank you all enough. My wishes to
you all, are
that you have nothing but Blue Skies & Soft Landings, exactly where
you want
them to be.
George Bass
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Bourne <biglar(at)gogittum.com> |
I hear a lot of grumbling, and hear clearly George Bass'
thoughts...........and here's a valid request from a new member that got
not a single answer. Doesn't anyone have a Mk II manual you can help
him with ??
C'mon guys, lets get back to the good ol' warm ways. Lar.
Carlo Tura wrote:
>
> Good morning,
>
> I'm italian and i don't speak english well.
>
> I'looking for manual of a Kolb MK II.
>
> Is possible find it ?
>
> Thank for your attemption
>
> Charlie
>
>
>
> *
>
>
> *
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dana Hague <d-m-hague(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Flight safety question - chutes |
At 10:34 AM 11/7/2007, jb92563 wrote:
>
>Being a glider pilot I figure that engine outs are no reason to ever
>deploy a chute unless the terrain below is unlandable from a glide.
Yet you hear again and again of Cirrus pilots doing it in a panic.
Even if the terrain is unlandable, I'd still fly the airplane down. Even
if you go into the trees, if you go in under control chances are you'll
walk away from it.
Actually my plane already took one reserve ride. The first owner had an
engine failure at 2000' right over the airport, panicked and pulled the
chute... and drifted into power lines.
>Why would anyone NOT take chute with them when you can get a hand
>throwable attached to the entire aircraft for under $800.
Can you still get a hand deployed chute for anything bigger than a hang
glider? If so that'd be real attractive since a new BRS would cost as much
as I paid for my plane.
>Another could be a failure in the control system to the tail by snapping a
>cable or breaking a weld resulting in loss of elevator
>authority....followed by a steep dive to the ground?(Unless you have
>properly trimmed fixed trim tabs)
That's the one that worries me most... when I got my plane it really wanted
to dive when I took my hand off the stick. Now with tabs the hands off
speed is around cruise speed.
-Dana
--
--
But do you trust the _government_ with semi-automatic assault rifles?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Russ Kinne <russ(at)rkiphoto.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Flight safety question - chutes |
Mike
Some (many?) of us wonder about you 'giving good information'.
We recall much earlier posts, apparently from you, and it does give
us cause.
Enough of this jazz. Let's move on -- stop bashing people. Even to
calling them fools.
On Nov 7, 2007, at 2:54 PM, JetPilot wrote:
>
>
> ElleryWeld(at)aol.com wrote:
>>
>>
>> Do you also know why the two young fellas Crashed "Aerobatic
>> manuvers" from what I understand wich the craft was not
>> designed for if there the same guys I am thinking about [/b]
>> I will never read another post from you thanks to my Delete Button
>> ]
>
>
> So what part of " flying along in a normal manner " do you not
> understand ?? There were plenty of witnesses and no aerobatics
> involved.
>
> You posted something downright stupid, and now you are all bitter
> and reacting like a baby when someone points it out in public.
> Personally, I dont care if you use chute or not. I beleive
> everyone should have the right to kill themself if they want.
> Where I do take issue is where fools like you give this very BAD
> advice to others here on the list. Lots of people read this list
> that never post, its our responsibility to give them good information.
>
> Mike
>
> --------
> "NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast
> as you could have !!!
>
> Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=144458#144458
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chuck McCullough" <chuck(at)mcculloughassociates.com> |
| Subject: | Xtra Information |
Hello all,
My name is Chuck and I'm new to the list. Thanks to David Keys, who took
me for a ride in his Xtra this weekend, I'm interested in finding a used
Xtra. But, before I get ahead of myself, I need some honest feedback from
all of you on the suitability of this plane for my purpose.
I can smooth out a good grass runway on my property. Depending on the
arrangement, it can be as long as 700'. There is a fence at the end, but no
tall obstacles. The surrounding area is rural with a lot of options. The
approach to land would be over trees, though (the wind is S 90% of the
time).
My goal is to find a good STOL plane that both myself and a passenger (lets
say 350lbs combined) can take off and safely and routinely on that strip.
The nearest "real"airport is about a 30 minute drive and we could use it for
any extra heavy or extra hot days. This is in north Texas, so flying season
can be pretty hot, but we almost always will have a headwind to take off
into. I need to park the plane in my barn, which would require folding and
unfolding the wings each time.
I searched the archives and found several comments on routine folding, so I
think I'm OK on that. What I really need to hear from all y'all is your
opinion on the T/O & landing distances that you experience in your airplanes
in the real world. TNK says 150'solo/200'dual, but they also say you can
build one in 400 hours ;>. I would also love to hear your opinions on
engine/prop combos for safe STOL operations (that inflight adjustable IVO
looked interesting).
So, before I start travelling around the country looking at used ones, I
need opinions!
Also, anyone know of a good used Xtra for sale?
Thanks,
Chuck
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Kmet" <jlsk1(at)frontiernet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Xtra Information |
Chuck, with an approach over trees, 700 feet of ground to use, & a fence
at the end, Unless you have exceptional piloting skills, you might want
to join a Helicopter forum, (smiles). kolbs are some of the best stol
aircraft, but dang, that`s short. Jim
----- Original Message -----
From: Chuck McCullough
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 7:26 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Xtra Information
Hello all,
My name is Chuck and I'm new to the list. Thanks to David Keys, who
took me for a ride in his Xtra this weekend, I'm interested in finding a
used Xtra. But, before I get ahead of myself, I need some honest
feedback from all of you on the suitability of this plane for my
purpose.
I can smooth out a good grass runway on my property. Depending on
the arrangement, it can be as long as 700'. There is a fence at the
end, but no tall obstacles. The surrounding area is rural with a lot of
options. The approach to land would be over trees, though (the wind is
S 90% of the time).
My goal is to find a good STOL plane that both myself and a passenger
(lets say 350lbs combined) can take off and safely and routinely on that
strip. The nearest "real"airport is about a 30 minute drive and we
could use it for any extra heavy or extra hot days. This is in north
Texas, so flying season can be pretty hot, but we almost always will
have a headwind to take off into. I need to park the plane in my barn,
which would require folding and unfolding the wings each time.
I searched the archives and found several comments on routine folding,
so I think I'm OK on that. What I really need to hear from all y'all is
your opinion on the T/O & landing distances that you experience in your
airplanes in the real world. TNK says 150'solo/200'dual, but they also
say you can build one in 400 hours ;>. I would also love to hear your
opinions on engine/prop combos for safe STOL operations (that inflight
adjustable IVO looked interesting).
So, before I start travelling around the country looking at used ones,
I need opinions!
Also, anyone know of a good used Xtra for sale?
Thanks,
Chuck
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Malcolmbru(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: cross wind landing |
almost had a bad landing. scuffed a wing tip but did no damage just rubbed
a little paint off and left some dirt. I think i need to work on Xwind
landing malcolm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Malcolmbru(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Unpleasantness |
I have seen people send such unpleasant postings to the moderator. He can
delete anyone from the list and not even tell anyone. they don't even need to
be directed at yourself . sometimes it feels good to stick up for someone.
mal
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Pike" <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Xtra Information |
Chuck, I have a MKIII Classic with a 582, and fly from a 700' strip. 2
caveats: I take off downhill and land uphill on a slight slope. The
approach to land is over some giant TVA powerlines, but they are about
1200' from touchdown. I do need to lose 300' in 1200' to get it down
after crossing the powerlines, or else fly a close base leg inside the
lines and slam dunk the final. Taking off heavy on a hot day and
clearing the powerlines usually works well, occasionally I need to turn
and parallel the wires until I gain more altitude, but that is not a
problem.
The MKIII & 582 is sufficient for two people in this situation. If the
airstrip was perfectly flat, hot day and no headwind, I would not be
comfortable flying heavy. Not that the airplane wouldn't do it, but I
would not be comfortable. (And I try not to do things that I am not
comfortable with. Bad for the blood pressure...)
Something that is uncertain from your post is how far away the trees are
- If they are right at the edge of your property and cannot be cut down
- give it up. If they are several hundred yards away, no problem.
Hope this helps.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
----- Original Message -----
From: Chuck McCullough
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 8:26 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Xtra Information
Hello all,
My name is Chuck and I'm new to the list. Thanks to David Keys, who
took me for a ride in his Xtra this weekend, I'm interested in finding a
used Xtra. But, before I get ahead of myself, I need some honest
feedback from all of you on the suitability of this plane for my
purpose.
I can smooth out a good grass runway on my property. Depending on
the arrangement, it can be as long as 700'. There is a fence at the
end, but no tall obstacles. The surrounding area is rural with a lot of
options. The approach to land would be over trees, though (the wind is
S 90% of the time).
My goal is to find a good STOL plane that both myself and a passenger
(lets say 350lbs combined) can take off and safely and routinely on that
strip. The nearest "real"airport is about a 30 minute drive and we
could use it for any extra heavy or extra hot days. This is in north
Texas, so flying season can be pretty hot, but we almost always will
have a headwind to take off into. I need to park the plane in my barn,
which would require folding and unfolding the wings each time.
I searched the archives and found several comments on routine folding,
so I think I'm OK on that. What I really need to hear from all y'all is
your opinion on the T/O & landing distances that you experience in your
airplanes in the real world. TNK says 150'solo/200'dual, but they also
say you can build one in 400 hours ;>. I would also love to hear your
opinions on engine/prop combos for safe STOL operations (that inflight
adjustable IVO looked interesting).
So, before I start travelling around the country looking at used ones,
I need opinions!
Also, anyone know of a good used Xtra for sale?
Thanks,
Chuck
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Denny Rowe" <rowedenny(at)windstream.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Xtra Information |
I would also love to hear your opinions on engine/prop combos for safe
STOL operations (that inflight adjustable IVO looked interesting).
So, before I start travelling around the country looking at used ones,
I need opinions!
Also, anyone know of a good used Xtra for sale?
Thanks,
Chuck
Chuck,For the best Stol performance as well as reliability you want a
Rotax 912 for power. The speed range of Kolbs makes inflight adjustable
props impracticle.While the IVO seems to work decent on smaller two
strokes, for the 912 I would go with a tapered tip Warp Drive prop or
maybe a Powerfin.Both of those are way higher quality than an IVO. Warp
props are hands down the toughest.Good luck and be sure to check
Barnstormers.com.Denny RoweMk-3, 2SI 690L-70, Powerfin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Vic Peters" <vicsvinyl(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Xtra Information |
Hey Chuck, I may have one for you. Is 3hrs. used enough. 912 ul with 250
to 280 hrs. Owner said 250 Lockwood Aviation said 280. They disassembled
, inspected and reassembled it before I purchased it. 70" 3 blade Warp.
Full Lotus also available, with rudders , no rigging need some minor
work. GOT LAKE?
I'm on the FAA list for ELSA airworthiness Inspection in my state, Me.,
waiting.
Ellery may punish me for selling before I learn to fly it.
He has flown it during it's brief life as a registered UL trainer.
He now has his own Xtra kit, he's a builder not a buyer.
Contact me off list if you'd like.
vicsvinyl(at)verizon.net
Vic
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "pat ladd" <pj.ladd(at)btinternet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Unpleasantness |
Recently, I have seen a change in the list. >>
George,
dont go. You are quite right there has been a change in tone on the list
recently and it is to be deplored. However these things come and go on
every list. Some people are just adversarial by nature and their replies
always seem to be couched in stronger terms than necessary. It isn`t
worth foregoing all the the years of friendliness and help that are
the norm just because one or two listers seem to have a burr under
their saddle.
Just ignore it, hit the delete and wait a while . Things will settle
down .Besides, we can`t afford to lose the nice guys.
Cheers
Pat
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | I still like the Kolb List |
| From: | "olendorf" <olendorf(at)gmail.com> |
This is not a sales pitch but since I recently contributed to Matts fund raiser
I have been thinking about how this list is worth the money to me. Here are
a few of the items that came to mind that directly resulted from this list.
I flew the 300 miles to Pennsylvania 3 times. GREAT trips that I will remember
forever. Thanks to Terry for setting up the fly-ins to Homers farm where I met
all the great Kolb flyers. I especially liked meeting Homer Kolb, John Hauck
and John Williamson. Also during these trips I attended the Shrevesport North
fly-ins which are very well attended and they have a great campground.
There is nothing like flying out of Smoketown airport and seeing Amish farmers
plowing behind 6 horses.
Flying in formation with 8 or 9 other Kolbs. Wow, what people on the ground must
have thought.
Speaking of great flying places to relocate, I would think about Pennsylvania.
Those people sure are nice.
I also get tons of good info on everything from engine maintenance to VGs, and
elevator reinforcements. How many lives does this list save each year? Ill bet
its more than 2.
I get to see pictures of other Kolb trips. Monument valley, Alaska, Idaho. Where
else do you get these?
Ill be rebuilding my windshield with inspiration from PlaneCrazys windshield.
I wish I could weld aluminum like that but I cant so Ill do what I can.
How many guys are sad for Paul Petty having to sell his Kolbra? Me too.
I could sure use a Beauford story about now.
P.S. Also with my contribution I am getting the Rotax DVD gift. That looks like
it might be pretty good.
P.P.S. Regarding the recent bad stuff on the list. This seems to happen every
fall/winter. Maybe people are not getting their flying fix. I know Im not getting
mine.
--------
Scott Olendorf
Original Firestar, Rotax 447, Powerfin prop
Schenectady, NY
http://KolbFirestar.googlepages.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=144607#144607
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Girard" <jindoguy(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Flight safety question - chutes |
Ellery, I think you hit on something without realizing it 2/3 of BRS
is BS. Good thinking. :-)
Rick
On Nov 7, 2007 1:54 PM, JetPilot wrote:
>
>
> ElleryWeld(at)aol.com wrote:
> >
> >
> > Do you also know why the two young fellas Crashed "Aerobatic manuvers" from
what I understand wich the craft was not designed for if there the same
guys I am thinking about [/b]
> > I will never read another post from you thanks to my Delete Button
> > ]
>
>
> So what part of " flying along in a normal manner " do you not understand ??
There were plenty of witnesses and no aerobatics involved.
>
> You posted something downright stupid, and now you are all bitter and reacting
like a baby when someone points it out in public. Personally, I dont care if
you use chute or not. I beleive everyone should have the right to kill themself
if they want. Where I do take issue is where fools like you give this very
BAD advice to others here on the list. Lots of people read this list that
never post, its our responsibility to give them good information.
>
> Mike
>
> --------
> "NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could have !!!
>
> Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=144458#144458
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | If You Got This Email, You Haven't Made A Contribution Yet! |
:-)
Dear Listers,
If you received this particular Matronics List Email message, its because you haven't
yet made a Contribution to support your Lists! Implemented for the first
time last year, the Matronics system selectively sends out the Contribution
messages to those that forgot to whip out the 'ol credit card this year to support
the continued operation and upgrade of the Matronics Email Lists! Don't
you wish PBS worked that way? :-)
You heard that right. Once you make your Contribution, these support requests
messages during November will suddenly stop coming to your personal email inbox!
I wanted to implement something like this for a number of years, but it was
always such a daunting task to modify the back-end List processing code, that
I just kept putting it off. Finally last year, I just decided to bite the bullet
and put the code-pounding time it to make it work. A few days later, bam!
A working system!
I really do appreciate each and every one of your individual Contributions to support
the Lists. It is your support that enables me to upgrade the hardware
and software that are required to run a List Site like this. It also goes to
pay for the commercial-grade Internet connection and to pay the rather huge electric
bill to keep the computer gear running and the air conditioner powered
up. I run ALL of the Matronics Email List and Forums sites here locally which
allows me to control and monitor every aspect of the system for the utmost in
reliably and performance.
Your personal Contribution matters because when combined with other Listers such
as yourself, it pays the bills to keep this site up and running. I accept exactly
ZERO advertising dollars for the Matronics Lists sites. I can't stand
the pop-up ads and all other commercialism that is so prevalent on the Internet
these days and I particularly don't want to have it on my Email List site.
If you appreciate the ad-free, grass-roots, down-home feel of the Matronics Email
Lists, please make a Contribution to keep it that way!!
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Thank you!
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
[Please note the following regarding the selective posting system. There are certain
circumstances where you might still see a Contribution related message.
These situations include if someone replies to one of the messages, or when
using the List Browse feature, or when accessing List message via the Forum.
Since most of these are anonymous public access methods, there is no simple way
to filter them.]
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chuck McCullough" <chuck(at)mcculloughassociates.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Xtra Information |
Thanks all for the comments!
Even though I have a lot of GA time, I will definitely be trailering my
plane to a longer strip until I can fly it expertly. My take away from all
your comments is that I've got plenty of length for ground roll. So, if I
can do something about those pesky trees. I actually found a place where I
won't have any approach or departure obstacles and 700' and oriented
correctly for winds. I'll just have to do some dirtwork. No problem.
So, I'm in the market for an Xtra 912 or 912S or no engine at all. My
though is that the 912S isn't much more expensive than the 912 and you get
20hp more.
Vic - you really ought to keep your plane at least until you have 40hrs on
it. Then if you still want to sell, shoot me a note.
Thanks,
Chuck
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Muffler Paint, what kind to use? |
| From: | "R. Hankins" <rphanks(at)grantspass.com> |
I use Krylon stove and BBQ Paint. It works well and costs about $7.00
--------
Roger in Oregon
1992 KXP 503 - N1782C
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=144860#144860
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Pike" <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
Anybody got an oil injection pump for a 582 sitting on a shelf, collecting
dust? I need one. Yesterday.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack B. Hart" <jbhart(at)onlyinternet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Muffler Paint, what kind to use? |
>
>
>Suggestions, comments, ideas?
>
Ray
I used black spray can paint for outdoor grills, etc. Found it at
the local hardware store. It has held up well going on five years.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Winchester, IN
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 582 oil pump |
Richard
Ronnie down in Lucedale sent me one for little money..brand new..Herb
writes:
>
>
> Anybody got an oil injection pump for a 582 sitting on a shelf,
> collecting
> dust? I need one. Yesterday.
>
> Richard Pike
> MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dana Hague <d-m-hague(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Aluminum panel - continued - how to finish it off? |
At 08:19 PM 11/10/2007, planecrazzzy wrote:
>There's always "engine turning"....??!!
That'd sure be pretty... until you get into that precise position with the
sun behind you...
-Dana
--
--
A truly wise man never plays leapfrog with a unicorn.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dana Hague <d-m-hague(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Muffler Paint, what kind to use? |
At 03:16 PM 11/9/2007, jb92563 wrote:
>
>What sort of paint can I use that will stand up to 2 cycle temps?
>
>I have heard of a heat proof silver paint, but I have no idea how it
>stands up to 1400 degrees F.
I used high temperature (rated 1200 IIRC) black spray paint on the exhaust
on my PPG. The first 6" or so from the cylinder burned off, but the rest
is holding up fine.
-Dana
--
--
A truly wise man never plays leapfrog with a unicorn.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Welch <mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Where'd they go?? |
Earlier this afternoon I replied to Ray's request about exhaust coatings. Minutes
later I initiated a new thread finally replying to whoever it was that wanted
a suggestion for finishing their panel.
Neither of them has shown up about 7 hours after I sent them. And yet I see others
show up. What gives??
Mike Welch
_________________________________________________________________
Climb to the top of the charts! Play Star Shuffle: the word scramble challenge
with star power.
http://club.live.com/star_shuffle.aspx?icid=starshuffle_wlmailtextlink_oct
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eugene Zimmerman <ez(at)embarqmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 582 oil pump |
What!
Another oil pump? What happened?
Gene,
On Nov 9, 2007, at 7:27 PM, Richard Pike wrote:
>
> Anybody got an oil injection pump for a 582 sitting on a shelf,
> collecting dust? I need one. Yesterday.
>
> Richard Pike
> MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Welch <mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Blocking my emails |
Matt.
Are you blocking my emails to the Kolb list?? Mike Welch
DNA
_________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Cracking in tubing and welds? |
| Cracks are more an issue with some types of aluminum parts, as I
had a cracked wing rib that failed at a rivet hole on the leading edge
of the wing.
|
|
| No need to be overly concerned, just perform good preflights and
check some of those high stress areas regularly and make sure the
corrosion protection is replaced in those rare areas that start to
rust.
|
| --------
| Ray
Ray:
I believe cracks are more an issue of both aluminum and 4130 parts,
especially fuselage welds. The nature of a two stroke engine
encourages stress cracks through high frequency vibration.
Personally, I would be more concerned with internal 4130 tube
corrosion than external. External corrosion I can see and fix.
Internal I have no control over unless I use tube seal to prevent.
john h
mkIII
Nellis AFB, Nevada
Big air show here tomorrow and Sunday. Happened to arrived here this
morning and was surprised by the old War Birds that were flying in
Nellis traffic.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Pike" <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
If anybody has a 582 oil pump sitting on a shelf collecting dust, I need
one. Yesterday.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Russ Kinne <russ(at)rkiphoto.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Flight safety question - chutes |
Brian
Have read your post in re BRS's.
FWIW If I can have a life-saving chute on my plane, I'll have one.
I've made a bunch of sport jumps & have no problems with a chute
saving my life, and my plane.
Obviously if you're over the Interstate (maybe!) or powerlines you
don't pull the red handle.
The 'accidental deployment' of chute that you mention was PILOT
ERROR, no more no less.
Don't cloud the issues with ridiculous comments, please. Kill
yourself if you wish.
On Nov 7, 2007, at 1:46 PM, Bryan Dever wrote:
>
> I don't have a strong opinion on having a BRS chute, that is why I
> haven't spent the money for one. If you are flying on a tight budget,
> I think that the money would be better spent on training, engine
> overhauls, and maintenance.
>
> As far as the 200 "saves" that BRS likes to talk about, I tend to be a
> little wary of that number. There are many true saves on that list,
> but there are a lot of deployments due to engine failure. I don't
> really think of those all as saves. I have to wonder if those pilots
> would have been better off if they had spent the extra money on
> training for dead stick landings, engine maintenance, and learning not
> to fly over hostile terrain. I also wonder what the failure rate is
> for BRS. They don't seem to publish that number. If it was a very
> low number, I would think that they would.
>
> There are also risks to having a BRS. Pull that handle and you may be
> saved, or you may come down in electrical lines or in front of a
> speeding semi. In many instances you are better off flying the plane
> to the scene of the crash. Obviously if the wing falls off of your
> plane this is another story. There is also a real risk to potential
> rescue workers and citizens that try and help you out of your crashed
> plane if you did not deploy it. We had a brand new Challenger at our
> airport many years ago. A pilot accidentally pulled the handle when
> exiting the plane after a flight. It was a windy day and the wind
> caught the chute and dragged the plane across a field and into a
> fence. It caused a lot of damage.
>
> All in all, the benefits of having a BRS surely outweigh not having
> one....just not by much in my book. When I am spiraling in from
> 1200', you can all say "I told you so."
>
> Bryan Dever
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Welch <mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Beautiful exhaust & awesome looking panels |
Kolb guys,
I recently responded to Ray's request regarding beautifying his exhaust. I also
commented on a nice panel finish in the same email.
For some inexplicable reason I must have been kicked off the Kolb list, because
my reply and a couple of new emails to this list have not ever been posted.
I don't know why not.
So that I don't have to completely retype my reply to Ray, here is the "copied
and pasted" message:
( I had to rejoin the Kolb list. Does that make me a new person? )
Mr. Ray,
I would suggest "cermacoating" your exhaust parts. It gives them a "polished aluminum
look." From what I gather, it is essentially a metallic looking powder-coat
paint finish, except maybe more heat resistant.I had an outfit named Performance
Coatings do my GEO engine muffler/exhaust, and also my GlaStar header-style
custom exhaust system (pipes). They charged me $60 complete, for the GEO
exhaust muffler unit, and I believe $100, or there-abouts, for the Lycoming
exhaust headers. And you don't do ANYTHING. They do it all....from cleaning the
surface, coating, and then buffing them shiny. I was VERY satisfied with the
price and the quality. Let me go see if I can find their phone number................back
in a minute. I'm back. Here is the outfit I dealt with, although
I see there are a couple of places named "Performance Coatings."
http://www.headercoatings.com/
And while I'm at it, since I'm name-dropping here, someone asked about what to
coat their panel with. I saw a couple of suggestions like krinkle paint, or laminate
(plastic). Is anyone familiar with this process?? I saw them featured on
"SPORT PILOT" TV show. Unbelievably beautiful work, but as you can imagine...not
cheap.If nothing else, maybe, just maybe, an ingenious soul can duplicate
their process on a small scale, for their own little flat panel surface. Anyway,
it's just a suggestion.
http://www.pfluegers.com/
BTW. It's nice when this forum isn't bothered by General Rancor. (No one particular
in mind!!!)
Mike Welch in SW Utah, eternally working on MkIII project
nX
_________________________________________________________________
Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Caf. Stop by today.
http://www.cafemessenger.com/info/info_sweetstuff2.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_OctWLtagline
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Lanny Fetterman <donaho(at)uplink.net> |
| Subject: | Dodged a small bullet, learned a lesson! |
Hi all, Just thought I would share a lesson I learned today. I was going
to fog my 503 for winter storage today. Since the FSII was on the trailer,
in the hanger and it was raining, I figured I would just take the carbs off
and fog the crankcase without starting the engine. Seemed like a good idea
at the time, but I digress.
Anyway, I put the little plastic straw thingie on the fogging can, stuck
the straw into the intake and pushed the button on the aerosol can. In the
blink of an eye the plastic straw blew off the can and went into the
crankcase, CRAP!! Who would have ever predicted that.
I could see the very top of the plastic straw standing straight up in the
crankcase. I wasn`t sure if it was sitting on the bottom of the case or if
it could fall further and disappear. Long story short, I used a four
fingered grabbing tool to pull it back to the intake side of the cylinder,
then grabbed it with a pair of needle nose pliers, and pulled it out. This
all took about half an hour from the beginning of the circus to the end. I
think I had some divine help as the straw was very slippery from the
fogging oil.
What I learned is, never use the straw to inject fogging oil into the
crankcase! All`s well that ends well. Lanny N598LF : )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eugene Zimmerman <ez(at)embarqmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Where'd they go?? |
Yeah,
Al-Qaida sabotage of the internet.
I noticed the same problem.
Gene
On Nov 9, 2007, at 11:24 PM, Mike Welch wrote:
>
>
> Earlier this afternoon I replied to Ray's request about exhaust
> coatings. Minutes later I initiated a new thread finally replying
> to whoever it was that wanted a suggestion for finishing their panel.
>
> Neither of them has shown up about 7 hours after I sent them. And
> yet I see others show up. What gives??
>
> Mike Welch
> _________________________________________________________________
> Climb to the top of the charts! Play Star Shuffle: the word
> scramble challenge with star power.
> http://club.live.com/star_shuffle.aspx?
> icid=starshuffle_wlmailtextlink_oct
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Girard" <jindoguy(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dodged a small bullet, learned a lesson! |
Lanny, Back in the days of the Mikuni pumper carb, I was trying to get
a Zenoah to run. We were trying to get it started and I used a little
WD-40 as starting fluid. Of course I used the little tube to direct
the spray right down the carb throat.
Spray down the carb throat, the engine runs a bit then stops, repeat.
Just keep spraying, engine keeps running.
Can runs out, engine stops.
Hey, where did that tube go?
Pull the spark plug and there was a tiny piece of red tube lying on it.
All sorts of foul words directed at self and most everything else I
could think to blame for my stupidity.
Order head and base gasket and new Mikuni slide carb.
A few days later, disassemble engine and look for more pieces.
Not one to be found. Flush engine real good with WD-40 and no darn red
tube pieces.
Reassemble engine with new carb and reinstall.
Vroom.
Yeah, no little tubes anywhere near an intake, ever! :-)
Rick
On Nov 10, 2007 7:32 PM, Lanny Fetterman wrote:
>
> Hi all, Just thought I would share a lesson I learned today. I was going
> to fog my 503 for winter storage today. Since the FSII was on the trailer,
> in the hanger and it was raining, I figured I would just take the carbs off
> and fog the crankcase without starting the engine. Seemed like a good idea
> at the time, but I digress.
> Anyway, I put the little plastic straw thingie on the fogging can, stuck
> the straw into the intake and pushed the button on the aerosol can. In the
> blink of an eye the plastic straw blew off the can and went into the
> crankcase, CRAP!! Who would have ever predicted that.
> I could see the very top of the plastic straw standing straight up in
the
> crankcase. I wasn`t sure if it was sitting on the bottom of the case or if
> it could fall further and disappear. Long story short, I used a four
> fingered grabbing tool to pull it back to the intake side of the cylinder,
> then grabbed it with a pair of needle nose pliers, and pulled it out. This
> all took about half an hour from the beginning of the circus to the end. I
> think I had some divine help as the straw was very slippery from the
> fogging oil.
> What I learned is, never use the straw to inject fogging oil into the
> crankcase! All`s well that ends well. Lanny N598LF : )
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack B. Hart" <jbhart(at)onlyinternet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Cracking in tubing and welds? |
>
>
>I believe cracks are more an issue of both aluminum and 4130 parts,
>especially fuselage welds. The nature of a two stroke engine
>encourages stress cracks through high frequency vibration.
>
Ray,
What causes the shake of the cage is the reaction force caused by engine
power pulse. Since the engine is geared most of the reaction forces
transferred to the cage are caused by the flywheel reaction of the propeller.
The lighter or lower inertia propeller is more easily accelerated and
de-accelerated, therefore there is less reaction force transmitted through
the mounts and on to the cage.
If the vibration amplitude is so low that it does not exceed the cage metal
yield stress, vibration frequency is a non issue. Has anyone any
documentation that a Kolb fell out of the sky because of a cage failure?
If you are really concerned about this go with the lowest inertia propeller
you can find.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Winchester, IN
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Vic Peters" <vicsvinyl(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Where'd they go?? |
Matts too busy counting his money.
Just funnin
Vic
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "beauford T" <beauford173(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | IVO Prop Revisit |
Kolbers and Kolbettes:
More grist for the recent IVO prop mill.... This may or may not be
fresh news to some of you... figured
it cannot hurt to pass it along.
....in my slightly sweaty paw this morning... IVO service bulletin
number two, which they sent me, along with the stainless steel blade
movement detection tape. For your reading enjoyment, I have quoted the
first part of the bulletin, complete with their minor syntax burps,
below... There is more to the bulletin than appears here, including a
section on how IVO blades can come loose and knurled plate instructions
and cautions for ultralight models. If you are interested, the complete
item was available on their website last time I looked...
www.ivoprop.com/servicebul2.htm
QUOTE:
IVOPROP SERVICE BULLETINS
Subject: Ivoprop ultralight & model 3:1 gearboxes or direct drive
engines or 3 cylinder engines.
Note: This service bulletin supersedes any previous operational alerts
issued by Ivoprop Corp.
Purpose: To detect blade movement inside the hub due to improper
installation and, or
harmonic resonance between prop and power plant; To prevent further
flight if this
situation is detected and develops in (sic) unsafe condition (aluminum
bushings becoming loose, breaking
bolts, blades etc...) "new blades do not have bushings"
What To Do: Prior to the next flight, accomplish the following:
Get a torque wrench and check its calibration by hanging a known weight
on its arm and multiplying the weight
in pounds by the arm length in inches. This reading should be as close
as possible to actual recommended torque
on mounting bolts. (We tried several torque wrenches and most of them
were off by a lot.)
Check torque on mounting bolts. 200 inch x lbs.
Direct drive engines only: Mark the prop position in relation to the
crankshaft. There are two positions to mount a three blade prop and
three positions to mount a two blade prop. This makes a great
difference in how the prop and engine vibrate together
and each position creates a totally new situation. It is impossible to
determine which position is best for your particular prop engine
airframe configuration without actually testing on it.
Run the engine on the ground through the full RPM range.
Check the torque on the mounting bolts and, if you are not using
locknuts, safety wire the bolts.
Cut the strips of stainless steel tape about 2" long and 1/4" wide (tape
supplied with this service bulletin) Clean
the area around the gap between blades, or gap between blades and blade
blocks with MEK solvent. Apply stainless steel tape across the gap next
and parallel to mold parting line. Use a round object to press the
stainless steel tape on the surface.
Follow this inspection schedule to check if tape is broken: After short
ground run up through full RPM range, and then first 15 min, 30 min, 1
hour, 2 hours, 4 hours, and then every preflight inspection. Also
follow this schedule from the beginning if the prop has been reinstalled
in a different position in relation to the crankshaft.
If tape breaks or cracks, remove the tape, clean the surface with MEK
solvent and apply new tape and start inspection schedule from the
beginning. If tape breaks again do not fly with the prop and contact
Ivoprop Corp.
Request to Dealers: Please forward this service bulletin and stainless
steel tape to your customers who are subject to this S.B. Keep the
record of the addresses of your customers to which this Service Bulletin
applies. Make sure that any prop being sold for the above mentioned
combinations is accompanied by this Service Bulletin.
Compliance: Mandatory
Note: Do not use prop in 2-blade configuration without blade
blocks(missing pieces of pie which fill out the big gaps bewtween the
blades.)
UNQUOTE:
...worth what ye paid fer it...
Beauford
FF-076
Brandon, FL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Welch <mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com> |
Yay!! I've been restored. For several days, nothing I did got anywhere in regards
to this list. Now, I get 28 emails this morning. I was beginning to think
I had been black-balled. I know I'm a jerk, but I thought it was just my
little secret. (That's a joke!!)
Bob Bean,
Unless Jeron has changed his policy, he will NOT sell you that GEO 3 cyl. header
flange. I asked him to sell me one, and his reply was "NO", he said he doesn't
go to the work of making things, and then sell pieces to people, so that
they can undercut his profits! Anyway, that was my experience about that!!
(And I am a Bonafide Raven customer. I paid him almost $5000 to install and test
run all the redrive parts for my GEO engine.)
But, not to fear!! I got a local outfit to water-jet cut me one, along with
3 other pieces for my turbo system. All-together the 4 parts came to $100....and
that included setting up the computer design. Next time, he said, it will
be much more reasonable. If you are interested, send me a note and I'll find
out what they charge for just the flange. I had them cut my flanges out of 1/4"
stainless steel.
For those looking at attractive panel finishes;
In case anyone missed my panel suggestions, take a look at these: (just copy
and paste them in your address bar)
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=007&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&viewitem=&item=170165175083&rd=1
http://cgi.ebay.com/carbon-fibre-adheresive-film-for-gauge-holder-body-kit_W0QQitemZ280015832957QQihZ018QQcategoryZ6775QQrdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQcmdZViewItem
On the second link I chose an example, because they have some samples using
the film. There are many other cheaper vendors, just do a search for "carbon
fiber film", or carbon vinyl, etc, etc. I have the carbon fiber film already,
but I seriously think I may change to the burled walnut look.
BFN, Mike Welch
_________________________________________________________________
Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Caf. Stop by today.
http://www.cafemessenger.com/info/info_sweetstuff2.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_OctWLtagline
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Cracking in tubing and welds? |
Jack and all
I think an engine mount that places the lord isolators in line with the
crank shaft center would be a great help. Herb
writes:
>
>
>
> >
> >
> >I believe cracks are more an issue of both aluminum and 4130 parts,
>
> >especially fuselage welds. The nature of a two stroke engine
> >encourages stress cracks through high frequency vibration.
> >
>
> Ray,
>
> What causes the shake of the cage is the reaction force caused by
> engine
> power pulse. Since the engine is geared most of the reaction forces
>
> transferred to the cage are caused by the flywheel reaction of the
> propeller.
> The lighter or lower inertia propeller is more easily accelerated
> and
> de-accelerated, therefore there is less reaction force transmitted
> through
> the mounts and on to the cage.
>
> If the vibration amplitude is so low that it does not exceed the
> cage metal
> yield stress, vibration frequency is a non issue. Has anyone any
> documentation that a Kolb fell out of the sky because of a cage
> failure?
> If you are really concerned about this go with the lowest inertia
> propeller
> you can find.
>
> Jack B. Hart FF004
> Winchester, IN
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kolbdriver" <kolbdriver(at)mlsharp.com> |
Jaron Has not changed his policy. I asked about a balance lightened
flywheel for my 1.3 and was told the same thing.
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mike Welch
Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2007 10:58 AM
Subject: Kolb-List: I'm back!
Yay!! I've been restored. For several days, nothing I did got anywhere
in regards to this list. Now, I get 28 emails this morning. I was
beginning to think I had been black-balled. I know I'm a jerk, but I
thought it was just my little secret. (That's a joke!!)
Bob Bean,
Unless Jeron has changed his policy, he will NOT sell you that GEO 3 cyl.
header flange. I asked him to sell me one, and his reply was "NO", he said
he doesn't go to the work of making things, and then sell pieces to people,
so that they can undercut his profits! Anyway, that was my experience about
that!! (And I am a Bonafide Raven customer. I paid him almost $5000 to
install and test run all the redrive parts for my GEO engine.)
But, not to fear!! I got a local outfit to water-jet cut me one, along
with 3 other pieces for my turbo system. All-together the 4 parts came to
$100....and that included setting up the computer design. Next time, he
said, it will be much more reasonable. If you are interested, send me a
note and I'll find out what they charge for just the flange. I had them cut
my flanges out of 1/4" stainless steel.
For those looking at attractive panel finishes;
In case anyone missed my panel suggestions, take a look at these: (just
copy and paste them in your address bar)
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=007&sspagename=S
TRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&viewitem=&item=170165175083&rd=1
http://cgi.ebay.com/carbon-fibre-adheresive-film-for-gauge-holder-body-kit_W
0QQitemZ280015832957QQihZ018QQcategoryZ6775QQrdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQcmdZView
Item
On the second link I chose an example, because they have some samples
using the film. There are many other cheaper vendors, just do a search for
"carbon fiber film", or carbon vinyl, etc, etc. I have the carbon fiber
film already, but I seriously think I may change to the burled walnut look.
BFN, Mike Welch
_________________________________________________________________
Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Caf. Stop by
today.
http://www.cafemessenger.com/info/info_sweetstuff2.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_OctWL
tagline
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Girard" <jindoguy(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Musings on Safety and the BRS |
Unless the statistics have changed very recently, and I don't think they
have, the big three killers of pilots are:
1) Continued flight into deteriorating weather
2) Failure to fly the aircraft in an emergency
3) Failure to manage the fuel supply
As a quality control engineer I learned the Pareto Principle, which says in
essence, for the greatest improvement, attack the biggest problem first. So
let's look at number one.
If you fly into deteriorating weather, will a BRS save you. Unlikely. Why?
Who is most likely to have a problem in this situation? Answer, the pilot
who isn't sufficiently trained to fly on instruments. In that situation the
pilot has about 60 seconds to make all the right decisions to save his/her
life and those of the unlucky who are in the aircraft, too. It isn't magic.
It's just that spatial disorientation will overtake his lack of ability,
he/she will most likely put the aircraft into a graveyard spiral and the
rest is inevitable.
Would a BRS save him/her? Unlikely. Why? He/She has insufficient training to
be in that environment in the first place and doesn't recognize the danger.
Remember that 60 seconds? He/She would have to surrender control almost
immediately and pull the handle. Again, unlikely. Deteriorating weather
isn't a mugger who grabs you from behind, shoves a gun or knife in your side
and demands your money or your life. It happens, at the very worst, over
many minutes or even hours, but the pilot either forces himself to continue,
getthereitis, lulls himself, well this wasn't in the forecast so it can't
be, or started out knowing the weather was bad, scud running. The pilot who
lives to tell the tale is the pilot who recognizes the gathering danger and
reverses course or lands and waits it out. None of these are absolutes, of
course, but good rules of thumb, backed by grim statistics. So to believe a
BRS would help in this situation, you have to posit that a pilot who has
been making bad decisions for many minutes or hours will miraculously make a
good one. Again, I assert it's unlikely.
Let's look at number two. What does failure to fly the airplane mean,
anyway? It means simply that when a new situation, a fire, a rough running
or dead engine, or anything that the pilot was unprepared to handle
happened, he/she forgot the first rule of flying, Fly the airplane. Would a
BRS help? Probably not. To say it would is to defy logic. You have to
believe that a pilot who has been trained to fly the airplane, and who has
forgotten that training, will remember to do something for which he/she has
NO training. Again, unlikely.
Let's look at number three, failure to manage the fuel supply. The pilot
miscalculated how far he was going, failed to take into account changing
winds, didn't check the tanks before taking off, or failed to switch the
fuel valve to a tank containing fuel. Would a BRS help. Maybe. You again
have to assume that a pilot who was trained not to do all the things he/she
did to get into a fuel exhaustion situation, even as simple as checking to
see if there is fuel in another tank, has forgotten all this and decides to
not fly the plane but become a victim of fate. Maybe is the best I'm going
to give you an this one.
Now let's look at the 201 saves claimed by BRS Inc. First, BRS counts lives
saved, not deployments. If you count the actual deployments, there have been
158. Of these three are, to my mind, extremely suspect. Same model,
Buccaneer, same day, June 16, 1995 (my correction here, the list actually
says 1905), same cause, Classified Military Info (!!!!) Since there is an
ultralight called a Buccaneer and a report in the Ultralight News has an
article listing so many designed in deficiencies (you'll really appreciate a
Kolb of any model if you read about the problems with this POS, editorial
aside, sorry), I'm taking the liberty of reducing BRS's list of deployments
by two. Now, we're down to 156.
Applying the Pareto Principle again:
60 Loss of Control. You can find a few further explanations like weather,
aerobatics, violent air, control jams (one listed "kneeboard jammed
controls"), and one husband and wife listed "high altitude upset" at 16,000
feet (that must have been a heck of a ride), and one flying wing listed "out
of CG". It should be noted that 9 were hang gliders or paragliders.
44 Structural or Component Failure. Most have no details, but of these 16
list things like broken bolts, "joining bolt that held the spring", "failure
during aerobatics", lost propeller, "installation of wrong propeller" and
corrosion.
22 Engine out (21 listed unlandable terrain, the other was "inexperienced
pilot")
So we have 126 of 156 in these three categories.
I thought it was interesting that only 2 listed fuel problems, 2 were for
mid airs, one of which was a hang glider, and only 1 was for medical
incapacitation.
My personal favorite is a German fellow flying the same model trike, BOTH
TIMES, who made the two major causes, the earliest, in 1997 is listed as
loss of control/spiral, the later, in 2005, structural failure "after three
tuck tumbles". Hmmmmm.
Kolbs, listed directly as such or by model, Ultrastar, Firestar, Firestar
II, Firefly (this one could be a hang glider as the date was listed as 1995
and UP had a model called the Firefly, but it was sold in 1978/79. I don't
know if the Kolb Firefly was in the field in 1995) appears 8 times. 5 were
for loss of control (including the Firefly), 2 were for structural failure (
1 listed aerobatics, the other a component ) and 1 was for engine out /
unlandable terrain.
The only comment I would make about this "data" is that the reporting is
less than NTSB quality. I'd like to know about those engine outs, such as
engine make and model, what loss of control means, the amount of flight
training and experience the pilots had, or didn't have. We do know that a
BRS won't help if you fly into an apartment building.
In closing, the need for a BRS seems to be a very personal need. With these
statistics you can see why.
The one other statistic you can apply is this: BRS claims , "*More than
23,000 parachute systems have been installed" . *With only 156 recorded
deployments that's equals a .00678% of actually needing it. Personally, I
stand by my assertion that the money is better spent on maintenance and
training. Those of you reading this will, of course, do as you (or your
wife) wishes. :-)
Rick
*
*
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Southern Reflections" <purplemoon99(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Beautiful exhaust & awesome looking panels |
Mike, don't forget that the cermacoating reduces the heat in the engine
area, plus help's the reburn in the exhast gases, plus the pipes cool twice
as fast as the other parts of the engine . I think it well worth the money
and they look great .I'll try to post pict. later Joe N101HD
601XL/RAM
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Welch" <mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2007 3:21 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Beautiful exhaust & awesome looking panels
>
>
> Kolb guys,
>
> I recently responded to Ray's request regarding beautifying his exhaust.
> I also commented on a nice panel finish in the same email.
>
> For some inexplicable reason I must have been kicked off the Kolb list,
> because my reply and a couple of new emails to this list have not ever
> been posted. I don't know why not.
>
> So that I don't have to completely retype my reply to Ray, here is the
> "copied and pasted" message:
>
> ( I had to rejoin the Kolb list. Does that make me a new person? )
>
>
> Mr. Ray,
>
> I would suggest "cermacoating" your exhaust parts. It gives them a
> "polished aluminum look." From what I gather, it is essentially a metallic
> looking powder-coat paint finish, except maybe more heat resistant.I had
> an outfit named Performance Coatings do my GEO engine muffler/exhaust, and
> also my GlaStar header-style custom exhaust system (pipes). They charged
> me $60 complete, for the GEO exhaust muffler unit, and I believe $100, or
> there-abouts, for the Lycoming exhaust headers. And you don't do ANYTHING.
> They do it all....from cleaning the surface, coating, and then buffing
> them shiny. I was VERY satisfied with the price and the quality. Let me go
> see if I can find their phone number................back in a minute. I'm
> back. Here is the outfit I dealt with, although I see there are a couple
> of places named "Performance Coatings."
>
> http://www.headercoatings.com/
>
> And while I'm at it, since I'm name-dropping here, someone asked about
> what to coat their panel with. I saw a couple of suggestions like krinkle
> paint, or laminate (plastic). Is anyone familiar with this process?? I saw
> them featured on "SPORT PILOT" TV show. Unbelievably beautiful work, but
> as you can imagine...not cheap.If nothing else, maybe, just maybe, an
> ingenious soul can duplicate their process on a small scale, for their own
> little flat panel surface. Anyway, it's just a suggestion.
>
> http://www.pfluegers.com/
>
> BTW. It's nice when this forum isn't bothered by General Rancor. (No one
> particular in mind!!!)
>
> Mike Welch in SW Utah, eternally working on MkIII
> project nX
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Caf. Stop
> by today.
> http://www.cafemessenger.com/info/info_sweetstuff2.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_OctWLtagline
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | Post Mortem - Matronics List Pummeled By Spam... |
Dear Listers,
Over a 3-day period, Thursday 11/8 though Saturday 11/10, the Matronics Lists were
pummeled with over 450,000 spam emails causing posting delays and a few duplicate
messages. Yeah, I really said nearly half a million spams! The good
news is that I don't believe a single one of them actually made it to the Lists
thanks to the aggressive List filtering code and the Barracuda spam filter.
The bad news was that it caused quite a back log of email messages starting Friday
and continuing until late Saturday when I noticed that delivery seemed a bit
sluggish. By about 11pm on Saturday night, I had managed to get the backlog
cleared out of the spam filter by temporarily adjusting some of the filtering.
A check of the queues this morning, and everything looks like its working great
and there are no incoming filtering delays and spam levels appear to be back
to "normal".
There were a number of people asking what was going on, so I thought that I'd send
out a follow up post mortem on the event...
November is the annual List Fund Raiser. Your contribution directly enables me
to buy systems like the Barracuda spam filter that keep the List free of that
garbage. Please make a contribution to support your Lists!
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Thank you!
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack B. Hart" <jbhart(at)onlyinternet.net> |
| Subject: | Cold Weather Flying In An Open Cockpit |
Kolbers,
I like to fly all winter. I can keep warm with insulated boots and gloves,
ski pants, and an LLBean winter jacket. To keep my face from freezing, I
wear a ski mask, under the soft flying helmet and goggles.
Normally I fly with out the ski mask if the air temperature is above 45
degrees F. The only problem with the ski mask is that when the air is not
moving to pressurize the space behind the goggles, my exhaled breath leaks
up into the space and fogs up my glasses. This makes it difficult to taxi
out and to start the take-off roll. This is a time when you need good
vision.
I inserted a bent piece of wire to make the ski mask conform to my face and
prevent the problem. I thought may be others would be interested in how it
was done. It can be seen at:
http://www.thirdshift.com/jack/firefly/firefly136.html
When I modify my heavier ski mask I will use a longer wire and curl the wire
back and up along the side of my head. This will reduce the risk of
inadvertently getting a wire end in an eye.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Winchester, IN
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bart Morgan <bartmo(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | exhaust parts treatment |
Re. exhaust parts treatment.
Try www.jethot.com .
Bart Morgan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bart Morgan <bartmo(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | exhaust parts treatment |
Sorry, it's www.jet-hot.com instead of www.jethot.com
Bart
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dana Hague <d-m-hague(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Ultrastar weight, folding in wind |
With everybody saying "an Ultrastar will make weight no problem" or "an
Ultrastar with ANY additions will be fat", I finally weighed my US
today. Mine is pretty much stock, Cuyuna, no fairing, with the silver
coats, Freebird brakes, basic instruments (ASI, Alt, compass, CHT, and
EGT/Tach), handheld GPS and radio clipped on. Came in at 277
lbs. Allowing for the 4 gallons of fuel in the tanks, that's 253 lbs, so I
guess I'm legal!
Finally got my flying fix tonight after 3 weeks of windy weekends. The
limiting factor for me seems to be when it's too windy to fold or unfold
the wings solo, the flying is no problem. That space of time when the wing
is resting on the support while I fiddle with the rear pin and the strut
seems to be the danger zone.
-Dana
--
--
A truly wise man never plays leapfrog with a unicorn.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Welch <mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | exhaust coeatings |
Rick G.
When I priced around, trying to get a good deal on my cermachrome jobs, I did
find the price was fairly high. Except that this outfit was quite a bit less
than the others I talked to. My GEO muffler/exhaust unit was used, and had
already been painted that brownish color barbeque paint, that was useless, and
surface rusted in many places.
The guy I dealt with told me it wasn't much of a big deal being used, because
he said he had to dip the entire thing in chemical bath, anyway.
So's as I don't go giving out an old recommendation, I'll call the guy tomorrow
and see if things still are as primo as they use'ta was. BTW, I had my stuff
done a year ago.
I'll let you know if;
A) he remembers me, & B) if his prices are about the same.
Mike Welch
_________________________________________________________________
Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Caf. Stop by today.
http://www.cafemessenger.com/info/info_sweetstuff2.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_OctWLtagline
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Girard" <jindoguy(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Cold Weather Flying In An Open Cockpit |
Jack, try putting a coat of onion juice on the inside of you goggles
then polishing dry. Works on my welding helmet lense.
Rick
On Nov 11, 2007 1:28 PM, Jack B. Hart wrote:
>
> Kolbers,
>
> I like to fly all winter. I can keep warm with insulated boots and gloves,
> ski pants, and an LLBean winter jacket. To keep my face from freezing, I
> wear a ski mask, under the soft flying helmet and goggles.
>
> Normally I fly with out the ski mask if the air temperature is above 45
> degrees F. The only problem with the ski mask is that when the air is not
> moving to pressurize the space behind the goggles, my exhaled breath leaks
> up into the space and fogs up my glasses. This makes it difficult to taxi
> out and to start the take-off roll. This is a time when you need good
> vision.
>
> I inserted a bent piece of wire to make the ski mask conform to my face and
> prevent the problem. I thought may be others would be interested in how it
> was done. It can be seen at:
>
> http://www.thirdshift.com/jack/firefly/firefly136.html
>
> When I modify my heavier ski mask I will use a longer wire and curl the wire
> back and up along the side of my head. This will reduce the risk of
> inadvertently getting a wire end in an eye.
>
> Jack B. Hart FF004
> Winchester, IN
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | GPS selection help? |
| From: | "grantr" <grant_richardson25(at)yahoo.com> |
Guys I want a GPS for my new plane. I have 2 in mind the Garmin 196 and the Airmap
600.
The airmap has a better price and has a color screen.
I want to be able to power the GPS with 12v power from the plane along with having
the internal backup batteries.
I talked to a guy today who was trying to rip me a new one. He has a garmin 195
and wanted $800. he then said he would take $600. Ha. I can get the new 196
fro a tad more. Anyway he told me the government turns off the satellite that
the air gps units use from time to time. Is that true?
He said the gps units will just go out no signal while flying. Has that happened
to any of you?
What are you opinions of the Garmin 196 and Airamp 600?
I am not looking for a very expensive unit. i just want a good reliable one that
I can program waypoints in and will show me airports, ground speed altitude
and more.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=145243#145243
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Musings on Safety and the BRS |
Personally, I
| stand by my assertion that the money is better spent on maintenance
and
| training. Those of you reading this will, of course, do as you (or
your
| wife) wishes. :-)
|
| Rick
Rick:
Hope you remember that if you ever get into a situation where a
parachute might save your life.
My flying career would have been over in 1985, if I had not had a
parachute.
Again in 1990, if I had not had the same parachute, my flying career
would also have been over.
I have been hauling a Second Chantz, then a BRS around the North
American Continent since 1992. I used the Second Chantz during
initial test phase of my mkIII, but by the time I got through the big
Red Oak tree, the canopy snagged and fouled on the tree limbs. I was
also too low for a good save but I pulled the handle anyhow because I
was already through flying.
There are many situations when a parachute can and will save your life
if you train yourself to use it immediately when the time comes. I do
that and I am still alive.
Should one find himself in an IFR situation with no horizon, a
recovery parachute would be an excellent method of survival.
If I have a second to throw the chute or pull the handle, I will if
the need arises. If I have a minute to make the decision, I have a
life time.
I do not agree with your long disertation of why one should not have a
recovery parachute. I do agree in good maintenance and training
though.
Take care,
john h
Survivor of two fatal accidents.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Cottrell" <lcottrell(at)fmtcblue.com> |
| Subject: | Re: GPS selection help? |
----- Original Message -----
From: "grantr" <grant_richardson25(at)yahoo.com>
>
> I want to be able to power the GPS with 12v power from the plane along
> with having the internal backup batteries.
Hi,
I have a 196 that I bought off Ebay that was only 6 months old for about
300 less than the list price. I can't give you any idea on the comparison
with the 600, but I found that the 196 causes a serious interference with my
radio. I power it with batteries.
LarryC
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: GPS selection help? |
| From: | "The BaronVonEvil" <grageda(at)innw.net> |
Hi Grant,
I haven't noticed GPS satellites being shut off. I think the GPS sats are the same
for ground or air regardless. There maybe a time like 9-11 national emergency
when that might happen but I think everyone would know then about a shut
down of the system.
I would say buy the best one that will fit your budget. Most of the Air types
of GPS receivers need to be updated on a regular basis to keep current with changes
in terrain and obstacles. So you gotta figure on buying those updates into
the costs as well.
My suggestion would be to find a local pilot in your area with a GPS already installed
and try using it as a navigator for them on a short trip.
Or mount one in your car and try using it while you drive around to get a sense
as to how it will work for you.
Personally, I still use a map and a compass, they don't need batteries.
Best of Luck
Carlos G.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=145252#145252
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Cottrell" <lcottrell(at)fmtcblue.com> |
| Subject: | Re: GPS selection help? |
I should have said - With a new 503 engine and power from the plane battery
I experienced interference problems that I was not able to cure until I
powered it with batteries.
Larry C
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Cottrell" <lcottrell(at)fmtcblue.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2007 7:16 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: GPS selection help?
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "grantr" <grant_richardson25(at)yahoo.com>
>>
>> I want to be able to power the GPS with 12v power from the plane along
>> with having the internal backup batteries.
>
>
> Hi,
> I have a 196 that I bought off Ebay that was only 6 months old for about
> 300 less than the list price. I can't give you any idea on the comparison
> with the 600, but I found that the 196 causes a serious interference with
> my radio. I power it with batteries.
> LarryC
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dana Hague <d-m-hague(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: GPS selection help? |
At 08:51 PM 11/11/2007, grantr wrote:
>...he told me the government turns off the satellite that the air gps
>units use from time to time. Is that true?
>
>He said the gps units will just go out no signal while flying. Has that
>happened to any of you?
That'd be crazy. Can you imagine the fallout if the government turned the
GPS system off while airliners full of passengers were in the air relying
on it?
They DO have the ability to degrade the signal, using a system called
"selective availablity" or SA, to prevent bad guys from using it against us
, but they haven't done it in some years now, and say they won't any more.
I _have_ seen flaky GPS receivers, though, that sometimes lose the signal
for no reason... could be the case with the one he was trying to sell you.
-Dana
--
If the government doesn't trust us with our guns, why should we trust
them with theirs?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Denny Rowe" <rowedenny(at)windstream.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Ultrastar weight, folding in wind |
dana,
you can subtract the portable radio and gps frm the weight also.
denny
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dana Hague" <d-m-hague(at)comcast.net>
Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2007 6:18 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Ultrastar weight, folding in wind
>
> With everybody saying "an Ultrastar will make weight no problem" or "an
> Ultrastar with ANY additions will be fat", I finally weighed my US today.
> Mine is pretty much stock, Cuyuna, no fairing, with the silver coats,
> Freebird brakes, basic instruments (ASI, Alt, compass, CHT, and EGT/Tach),
> handheld GPS and radio clipped on. Came in at 277 lbs. Allowing for the
> 4 gallons of fuel in the tanks, that's 253 lbs, so I guess I'm legal!
>
> Finally got my flying fix tonight after 3 weeks of windy weekends. The
> limiting factor for me seems to be when it's too windy to fold or unfold
> the wings solo, the flying is no problem. That space of time when the
> wing is resting on the support while I fiddle with the rear pin and the
> strut seems to be the danger zone.
>
> -Dana
> --
> --
> A truly wise man never plays leapfrog with a unicorn.
>
>
> --
> 269.15.27/1121 - Release Date: 11/9/2007 7:29 PM
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dana Hague <d-m-hague(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Ultrastar weight, folding in wind |
At 09:30 PM 11/11/2007, Denny Rowe wrote:
>you can subtract the portable radio and gps frm the weight also.
I know, it'd probably save me all of one pound... though the FAA can be
stuffy about anything that's "mounted" to an aircraft. The nice thing is
to know (within the accuracy of my scale, anyway) that it's reasonably
close to the proper weight instead of 20 or 30 lbs into "fat" territory.
-Dana
--
If the government doesn't trust us with our guns, why should we trust
them with theirs?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "beauford T" <beauford173(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: GPS selection help? |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dana Hague" <d-m-hague(at)comcast.net>
Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2007 9:27 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: GPS selection help?
At 08:51 PM 11/11/2007, grantr wrote:
>...he told me the government turns off the satellite that the air gps
>units use from time to time. Is that true?
>
>He said the gps units will just go out no signal while flying. Has that
>happened to any of you?
That'd be crazy. Can you imagine the fallout if the government turned the
GPS system off while airliners full of passengers were in the air relying
on it?
They DO have the ability to degrade the signal, using a system called
"selective availablity" or SA, to prevent bad guys from using it against us
, but they haven't done it in some years now, and say they won't any more.
I _have_ seen flaky GPS receivers, though, that sometimes lose the signal
for no reason... could be the case with the one he was trying to sell you.
-Dana
--
If the government doesn't trust us with our guns, why should we trust
them with theirs?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: GPS selection help? |
| Personally, I still use a map and a compass, they don't need
batteries.
|
| Best of Luck
|
| Carlos G.
Carlos:
Curious!
Don't quite understand why you are making GPS recommendations to a
newbie, then say you use sectional and mag compass?
john h
Las Vergas, NV (Nellis AFB)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Girard" <jindoguy(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Musings on Safety and the BRS |
John, My point was, even taking just the raw data the chances are slim
that you will deploy it. We also have no negative data on the
aftermath of a deployment. My friend Steve deployed his chest pack
over Douglas Firs He slid over 100' through the tree canopy sustaining
numerous puncture and abrasion wounds. He broke a leg when he hit the
forest floor. An acquaintance, I only flew with him once, landed in
power lines, got accidentally grounded and was electrocuted. Don't be
so sure a deployment is a good thing. Next we have to figure the type
of flying done. You can certainly avoid aerobatics and better your
chances, avoid using engines that have a high mortality rates. Many of
the engine failures were Eagles and Eagle XT aircraft. They were
almost all West Bend gokart engine powered. I don't fly that engine or
know anyone who does. I did four times 30 years ago, but I am no
longer in shape to foot launch my powered aircraft, although I can my
hang glider. Many of the aircraft involved in loss of control
accidents were two axis control, weight shift or a combination. Throw
them out of the sample and the chances of a deployment decline
further. If the data were better you could better calculate the
specific risk and the chances would get smaller still. I have done
dozens of simulated engine outs and never missed the approach to the
field I chose. I practice engine out landings when just shooting touch
and goes. All these go to lessen the chance, too. I get recurrent
training as I advance in ratings.
Notice all the dire predictions. Other than what I have just now told
you, you know nothing else about my flying habits, my skill level,
what risks I take,other than that flying in itself is a risk, after
all. I'm just not buying the idea that BRS is essential for safety.
Too much of the data is like yours, anecdotal and unquantified. I find
it akin to the assertion that keeping the porch light on keeps the
bogey man at bay. If I leave the light on for my convenience and the
bogey man never comes, did the light keep me safer. Better to ask the
question, is there a bogey man, first, don't you think. As for
previous assertions about seat belts and airbags. I wear a much better
set of seat belt and shoulder harness in my aircraft than came in my
2006 truck. Air bags are passive safety systems, a computer makes all
the decisions to activate them, BRS parachutes are active safety
systems, the pilot has to make the decision to utilize it. If the
computer system was available to make the BRS a passive system, would
you trust the computer to make the decision for you? Would that be
safer, too?
Rick
On Nov 11, 2007 7:38 PM, John Hauck wrote:
>
>
> Personally, I
> | stand by my assertion that the money is better spent on maintenance
> and
> | training. Those of you reading this will, of course, do as you (or
> your
> | wife) wishes. :-)
> |
> | Rick
>
> Rick:
>
> Hope you remember that if you ever get into a situation where a
> parachute might save your life.
>
> My flying career would have been over in 1985, if I had not had a
> parachute.
>
> Again in 1990, if I had not had the same parachute, my flying career
> would also have been over.
>
> I have been hauling a Second Chantz, then a BRS around the North
> American Continent since 1992. I used the Second Chantz during
> initial test phase of my mkIII, but by the time I got through the big
> Red Oak tree, the canopy snagged and fouled on the tree limbs. I was
> also too low for a good save but I pulled the handle anyhow because I
> was already through flying.
>
> There are many situations when a parachute can and will save your life
> if you train yourself to use it immediately when the time comes. I do
> that and I am still alive.
>
> Should one find himself in an IFR situation with no horizon, a
> recovery parachute would be an excellent method of survival.
>
> If I have a second to throw the chute or pull the handle, I will if
> the need arises. If I have a minute to make the decision, I have a
> life time.
>
> I do not agree with your long disertation of why one should not have a
> recovery parachute. I do agree in good maintenance and training
> though.
>
> Take care,
>
> john h
> Survivor of two fatal accidents.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Denny Rowe" <rowedenny(at)windstream.net> |
| Subject: | Re: GPS selection help? |
>
>
> | Personally, I still use a map and a compass, they don't need
> batteries.
> |
> | Best of Luck
> |
> | Carlos G.
>
>
> Carlos:
>
> Curious!
>
> Don't quite understand why you are making GPS recommendations to a
> newbie, then say you use sectional and mag compass?
>
> john h
> Las Vergas, NV (Nellis AFB)
>
>
> John,
Carlos did not recommend any particular GPS, just said pick the one that
fits your budget.
Than added that he finds dead reconing and pilotage to be all he himself
requires.
Did I miss something?
Denny, mk-3, Airmap 100 that I don't get to use nearly enough :-(
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: GPS selection help? |
| Did I miss something?
|
| Denny
Denny:
Yep, I got the part that he did not recommend a particular brand of
GPS, but was telling the newbie how he should go about deciding on
what he needed.
Based on what the Baron Von Evil wrote in his email, I took it to mean
he had no experience with GPS and was telling a newbie what he should
do to decide on one. Thought that a little peculiar.
Normally, to me, it would be more appropriate to hand out advice if
one had experience in that particular area.
john h
mkIII
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Musings on Safety and the BRS |
|
| John, My point was, even taking just the raw data the chances are
slim
| that you will deploy it.
|
| Rick:
My point is, if you need it and do not have it, you gonna wish you
did.
Slim chances of needing it are not good enough for me. I may be the
one in a million that need it.
Your friend would probably have been dead had he not had a parachute,
the one that slid more than 100' through a tree. He probably was not
flying a Kolb aircraft. Also seems strange that one could fall
through a tree, get torn apart by limbs and not have the parachute
snag and hold. I don't remember anyone, during my Army career,
including me, that made a tree landing and did not snap the parachute.
Was unfortunate your other friend hit a powerline and died. What kind
of airplane was he flying? Try to remember this is the Kolb List and
most of us are flying Kolbs. Parachute deployments should be
addressed that direction rather than hang gliders, powered parachutes,
powered paragliders, etc. I personally am not familiar with those
type aircraft and how they react and survive emergency parachute
deployment.
No matter how it happens or why it happens, there may be situations
that are not survivable any other way except a parachute recovery
system. I don't care how many studies you do and how many numbers you
have. When the time comes and you ain't ready, put your head between
your legs and kiss your butt goodbye.
john h
mkIII - firm believer and user of parachute recovery systems.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Musings on Safety and the BRS |
|
| John, My point was, even taking just the raw data the chances are
slim
| that you will deploy it.
|
| Rick:
My point is, if you need it and do not have it, you gonna wish you
did.
Slim chances of needing it are not good enough for me. I may be the
one in a million that need it.
Your friend would probably have been dead had he not had a parachute,
the one that slid more than 100' through a tree. He probably was not
flying a Kolb aircraft. Also seems strange that one could fall
through a tree, get torn apart by limbs and not have the parachute
snag and hold. I don't remember anyone, during my Army career,
including me, that made a tree landing and did not snap the parachute.
Was unfortunate your other friend hit a powerline and died. What kind
of airplane was he flying? Try to remember this is the Kolb List and
most of us are flying Kolbs. Parachute deployments should be
addressed that direction rather than hang gliders, powered parachutes,
powered paragliders, etc. I personally am not familiar with those
type aircraft and how they react and survive emergency parachute
deployment.
No matter how it happens or why it happens, there may be situations
that are not survivable any other way except a parachute recovery
system. I don't care how many studies you do and how many numbers you
have. When the time comes and you ain't ready, put your head between
your legs and kiss your butt goodbye.
john h
mkIII - firm believer and user of parachute recovery systems.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Musings on Safety and the BRS |
I don't remember anyone, during my Army career,
| including me, that made a tree landing and did not snap the
parachute.
|
Gang:
Need to correct a typo above. "snap" should read "snag".
Thanks,
john h
mkIII
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert Laird" <rlaird(at)cavediver.com> |
| Subject: | Re: GPS selection help? |
Grant --
I currently fly with the Garmin 196... prior to that, had an Airmap 100...
my brother flew with the Airmap 500 (the b&w version of the 600). Each
advance is better than the one before, for sure. The larger screen of the
196 is terrific, but I really liked the Airmap 100, too. I use it for a
backup now. As long as the color is viewable in daylight, I'd probably lean
toward the 600 as I know it has more-or-less the same features and
capabilities of the 196. You can find out about it's battery use on the
Lowrance web site.
-- Robert
On 11/11/07, grantr wrote:
>
>
> Guys I want a GPS for my new plane. I have 2 in mind the Garmin 196 and
> the Airmap 600.
>
> The airmap has a better price and has a color screen.
>
> I want to be able to power the GPS with 12v power from the plane along
> with having the internal backup batteries.
>
> I talked to a guy today who was trying to rip me a new one. He has
> a garmin 195 and wanted $800. he then said he would take $600. Ha. I can
> get the new 196 fro a tad more. Anyway he told me the government turns off
> the satellite that the air gps units use from time to time. Is that true?
>
> He said the gps units will just go out no signal while flying. Has that
> happened to any of you?
>
> What are you opinions of the Garmin 196 and Airamp 600?
>
> I am not looking for a very expensive unit. i just want a good reliable
> one that I can program waypoints in and will show me airports, ground speed
> altitude and more.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=145243#145243
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "George T. Alexander, Jr." <gtalexander(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | GPS selection help? |
Grant, Larry et al:
Used 196s have been running $425-$475 pretty consistently on eBay. There
are also several outfits that sell reconditioned ones that they took in on
trade. That's where I got mine just after the 296 came out.
The 196 provides information that is helpful. Has many features that I
never get to with the kind of flying that I do. I find that I mostly use it
for watching ground speed. Helps, too, for some precision in location for
radio calls. ("Hey Beauford, I'm 5 miles east of the field.") Has a
credible land feature that I use in the car, very often. (Probably got my
money's worth out of it in the car.) It also has marine if you are into
boating. If you think you will be into long haul X-Ctry, it is a great
unit. If you are just boring holes close to home, may be more than you
need. Even though I fit in the latter category, I like gadgets!
Larry..... radio interference. Found that if I physically separated the
radio and gps, including all wires (antenna, power, headset adapter,
particularly the hs adapter, etc...) as much as possible, the interference
went away. May try some of the ferrite peanuts/modules to see if they have
any effect.
My .02 worth.
George Alexander
http://gtalexander.home.att.net
-----Original Message-----
-->
----- Original Message -----
From: "grantr" <grant_richardson25(at)yahoo.com>
>
> I want to be able to power the GPS with 12v power from the plane along
> with having the internal backup batteries.
Hi,
I have a 196 that I bought off Ebay that was only 6 months old for about
300 less than the list price. I can't give you any idea on the comparison
with the 600, but I found that the 196 causes a serious interference with my
radio. I power it with batteries.
LarryC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Girard" <jindoguy(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Musings on Safety and the BRS |
Okay, I agree, let's just talk about Kolbs since this is the Kolb
list. We have 8 deployments. One was for aerobatic induced failure.
Don't do aerobatics. The other structural issue was a component
failure, do good maintenance and preflights and eliminate that one.
One was for engine failure over unlandable terrain. What engine? What
maintenance? How much time on the engine? All stock parts or not? What
caused the engine failure? Was it engine components, or support
equipment like throttle cables, kill switches, or master switches?
Ignition failure? Many questions we need to know to assess the risk,
and we just don't. The last 5 are loss of control. What's the
definition of loss of control? What were the meteorological
conditions? The total experience of the pilot? Time in type? Currency
of experience of the pilot? Only one loss of control statistic gives
us a clue. Spin. Was the pilot trained for spins? Doesn't seem like
it, but we don't know. Did the spin go flat? if so what was the CG
location? Did it actually spin, or did the pilot just fear it would?
Did he regularly practice stall recovery? More questions for which we
have no answers? Without answers to these questions, in the least, and
we can make no meaningful risk assessment.
Insisting that if I need it I'll wish I had it seems more like a
religious evaluation than a risk / value assessment.
Another area we haven't touched upon is the effect of incorrect BRS
installation. I have three aircraft with a BRS installed. I did not do
the original installation on any of them. Two out of three directly
ignored the installation manual warning that the rocket will not
penetrate polyester fabric. How many of those 23,000 installations are
improperly installed. My personal statistical sample says that 2/3,
ie. 15,333 are done wrong and will not work if the attempt is made. Is
that reasonable? How does that affect the safety aspect of the BRS?
How does it skew the statistics?
I don't care whether anyone wants a BRS for whatever reason, just say
I believe it makes me safer. It's your belief, you have a right to it.
Don't make claims that you can somehow prove it, within any reasonable
examination of the vague and unquantifed "data", you can't.
As for my friend Steve, he died in a motorcycle last July and I can't
get that info.
I know I keep pushing the point, but how many of your tree landings
were done form a low altitude deployment? Was the canopy fully
inflated? Was it a streamer? Steve's reserve was a hand deploy model
with a deployment bag, It was not a primary. How many of your tree
landings were with a hand deployed reserve? More questions, less
quantifiable data.
Rick
Rick
On Nov 11, 2007 9:49 PM, John Hauck wrote:
>
>
> |
> | John, My point was, even taking just the raw data the chances are
> slim
> | that you will deploy it.
> |
> | Rick:
>
> My point is, if you need it and do not have it, you gonna wish you
> did.
>
> Slim chances of needing it are not good enough for me. I may be the
> one in a million that need it.
>
> Your friend would probably have been dead had he not had a parachute,
> the one that slid more than 100' through a tree. He probably was not
> flying a Kolb aircraft. Also seems strange that one could fall
> through a tree, get torn apart by limbs and not have the parachute
> snag and hold. I don't remember anyone, during my Army career,
> including me, that made a tree landing and did not snap the parachute.
>
> Was unfortunate your other friend hit a powerline and died. What kind
> of airplane was he flying? Try to remember this is the Kolb List and
> most of us are flying Kolbs. Parachute deployments should be
> addressed that direction rather than hang gliders, powered parachutes,
> powered paragliders, etc. I personally am not familiar with those
> type aircraft and how they react and survive emergency parachute
> deployment.
>
> No matter how it happens or why it happens, there may be situations
> that are not survivable any other way except a parachute recovery
> system. I don't care how many studies you do and how many numbers you
> have. When the time comes and you ain't ready, put your head between
> your legs and kiss your butt goodbye.
>
> john h
> mkIII - firm believer and user of parachute recovery systems.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Welch <mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | GPS recommendations |
Kolb guys,
Has anyone ever lost GPS coverage? YES!! ME! As I stated a few months back,
while flying my Cessna over the Cascades and in heavy turbulence, I briefly
(6-10 minutes...twice) lost coverage. The screen went blank, then said "Poor
GPS Coverage" When the bumbs went away, we were back in business.
Now, as I also previously stated, this was an antiquated Garmin 95XL. If I got
4 satelites, I was doing good. The newer GPSes would most likely NOT go out
on you, if faced with the same shaking.
My present handheld is a Garmin 296. I can't believe how fantastic this model
is, compared to the older 95XL. When I flew my Cessna last winter to Utah,
from Sacramento, it was a pleasure to have the modern functions of this GPS.
One feature that I had never used before was the "waypoint" function. I programmed
a waypoint to fly around a MOA. I was amazed how the GPS directed me to
a "spot", and after I arrived, it then altered the path to a new direction.
So cool!! (In the past I guess all I had to do is put in my destination, none
of that ...first go here, then go there...)
One thing that surprised me, though, is I also used my Garmin GNS300XL in my
plane (built-in panel GPS/com). I set it to fly the course, but I really didn't
think I'd look at it. I did not think that I would have any "need" of it,
since I had the handheld fastened to the yoke. I actually did use both!!
Along with the two GPSes, I also used complete and thorough sectional charts,
and flight data sheets. I knew where I was on the map, at all times.
Back to my recommendation. While I would choose the Garmin over the other brands
(mostly 'cause I haven't owned the other ones), I really would suggest the
296, because of the improvements and added features over the 196. Basically....the
196 is nice, but the 296 is nicer.
Just my opinion, Mike Welch
_________________________________________________________________
Peek-a-boo FREE Tricks & Treats for You!
http://www.reallivemoms.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM&loc=us
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Welch <mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Caution...error in story |
Ah ha!! While rereading my last post, I noticed an error in my description of
the airspace I was trying to avoid. I accidently referred to it as a MOA. Oops!
You know you don't have to fly around MOA's. It was Restricted Airspace
(north of the Mojave airport).
BTW. I am enjoying this friendly argument between John & Rick. The problem is,
though, I still don't know whether I should have a BRS or not. I'm listening
intently to BOTH arguments. Please proceed, I AM interested.
Mike W.
_________________________________________________________________
Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Caf. Stop by today.
http://www.cafemessenger.com/info/info_sweetstuff2.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_OctWLtagline
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: GPS recommendations |
| Back to my recommendation. While I would choose the Garmin over
the other brands (mostly 'cause I haven't owned the other ones), I
really would suggest the 296, because of the improvements and added
features over the 196. Basically....the 196 is nice, but the 296 is
nicer.
|
| Just my opinion,
Mike Welch
Hi Mike:
Not all of us can afford a 296, even though it is much "nicer" than my
196.
However, I have been able to fly all over the lower 48, much of Canada
and Alaska, and get back home with the 196.
Fact is, I use the 196 more in the truck than I do in the airplane.
Don't leave home without it.
Made the first flight around CONUS and up to Alaska with a Garmin
55AVD. Never lost coverage in 17,400 miles and 232 flight hours.
Next flight to Alaska was with a 95XL. It also worked great. Took me
north of Point Barrow and the North American Continent and back home.
To me the most important aspect of GPS is the ability to have the
Jeppesen Data Base of airport info so I can punch in destinations and
waypoints, radio frequencies, fuel availability, runways, etc.,
without going through the hassle of pulling them off a sectional or
other means.
Occasionally lose GPS coverage for no explained reason, but does not
usually last long.
I think the 196 is the best bang for the buck. I paid 825.00 for mine
in 1993. Now you can get one for half that price. It has more than
enough capability for me to fly anytime/anywhere.
john h
mkIII
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Caution...error in story |
| BTW. I am enjoying this friendly argument between John & Rick.
The problem is, though, I still don't know whether I should have a BRS
or not. I'm listening intently to BOTH arguments. Please proceed, I
AM interested.
| Mike W.
Mike:
I really have nothing to add.
I was saved twice by a $500.00 hand deployed Jim Handbury parachute.
That is $250.00 a whack. Got my money's worth out of it and it has
been retired since March 1990.Dennis Souder was saved by a Jim
Handbury hand deployed parachute. In these three cases, had we not
had them and used them, we would not have survived.
I could care less about numbers, studies, and all the rest of that
horse manure. Fact is, when you need, hope you have it.
I have flown this mkIII for more than 2,700 hours without nary a hint
of needing a parachute. Hope I can fly another 2,700 hours and still
not need it.
john h
mkIII
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Girard" <jindoguy(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Caution...error in story |
Just to make the argument completely contradictory. I, too, have been
saved by a reserve parachute. I would not fly my hang glider without
it. I am a thermal flyer and have had to deal with 3000 fpm + shears
transiting thermal boundaries in a weight shift control flying wing.
Knowing it's there on my chest lets me enjoy the roller coaster ride.
I am trained to use my reserve, I've had a deployment and lived to
pester John. :-) I BELIEVE I am safer having the 'chute.
My advice to anyone about BRS or any other reserve system is this: If
it gives you piece of mind while flying, get one. Install it properly,
have your installation blessed by the good folks at BRS, do all your
maintenance and preflights, and fly like you don't have it. Since
training isn't available, take the time to think through possible
deployment situations and evaluate the effectiveness of those
procedures until you're satisfied that it will produce the results you
want.
Another anecdote and I'll stop. Years ago, there was a report in
Soaring Magazine about a death resulting from a bail out following a
mid air. The unfortunate pilot always flew with a parachute. Each time
he landed, he undid his harness, undid his parachute harness and got
out of his sailplane. When he had the mid air, he did exactly as he'd
trained himself. He unbuckled his harness, unbuckled his parachute and
went over the side. He had two thousand feet to reflect on the
effectiveness of his training.
Rick
On Nov 11, 2007 11:37 PM, John Hauck wrote:
>
>
> | BTW. I am enjoying this friendly argument between John & Rick.
> The problem is, though, I still don't know whether I should have a BRS
> or not. I'm listening intently to BOTH arguments. Please proceed, I
> AM interested.
> | Mike W.
>
> Mike:
>
> I really have nothing to add.
>
> I was saved twice by a $500.00 hand deployed Jim Handbury parachute.
> That is $250.00 a whack. Got my money's worth out of it and it has
> been retired since March 1990.Dennis Souder was saved by a Jim
> Handbury hand deployed parachute. In these three cases, had we not
> had them and used them, we would not have survived.
>
> I could care less about numbers, studies, and all the rest of that
> horse manure. Fact is, when you need, hope you have it.
>
> I have flown this mkIII for more than 2,700 hours without nary a hint
> of needing a parachute. Hope I can fly another 2,700 hours and still
> not need it.
>
> john h
> mkIII
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: GPS selection help? |
| From: | "The BaronVonEvil" <grageda(at)innw.net> |
Hi John,
I have used GPS systems in the past. They were early versions and were somewhat
clumsy to use, i.e. scrolling thru menus to get to the correct screens and so
on. I have flown in planes equipped with the latest systems and they are impressive
but, oh so expensive .
They are packed with features that make long distance travel allot more precise
and can keep you out of airspace that you shouldn't be in as well.
For the type of flying I do (Low and Slow) a current sectional and an properly
swung (Calibrated to the plane) compass is plenty good for my own needs.
Its all in what you want to get out of flying I guess. I prefer simplicity.
Grant was asking for an opinion and I offered mine.
Best Regards
Carlos
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=145315#145315
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: GPS recommendations |
I have been flying with my Garmin GPSmap 196 for about 3 years. I love it and
it has been great. However, a few months ago I flew up to Alaska at the end of
May. Weather was terrible. We flew hundreds of miles at 500 feet because
we couldn't get to 550 feet. When we couldn't maintain VFR flying into Anchorage
we climbed. I didn't have IFR charts with me and my "copilot" was having
trouble determining how high the terrain was that we needed to avoid. It was
then that I decided that I wanted terrain in my GPS. However, on that same trip
I saw a 3-mile long island with a 2180' high peak on it that was not in the
196 database. When I get my 296 I think I'll check to see if it's in that db.
For ultralights and other VFR flying I still think the 196 is great. I only decided
to upgrade to the 296 because I plan to do more IFR flying. The 296 also
has a rechargable LiOn battery.
The only problem I have had with the 196 was that it goes through batteries fast.
Also the spring tension against the batteries was inadequate and on my Quicksilver
the vibration kept causing power outages. I never had that problem in
the Kolb and now always use external power.
As much as I like the Garmins, they're probably not really needed in most UltraLight
flying where direct to is sufficient. But if you can affort it ($400+ used)
or if you do GA flying to, the Garmins are great.
--------
Jim
N. Idaho
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=145316#145316
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dana Hague <d-m-hague(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Caution...error in story |
At 12:37 AM 11/12/2007, John Hauck wrote:
>I was saved twice by a $500.00 hand deployed Jim Handbury parachute...
Are hand deployed chutes still available? I know they are for hang gliders
and paragliders, but for larger planes? At $500 vs. $2500 or more I think
there'd be a lot less resistance to the idea, even though the more
expensive rocket deployed chute is probably more reliable.
-Dana
--
"If I knew there were coming to my house a man with the fixed intention
of doing me good I would run for my life." - Thoreau
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Girard" <jindoguy(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Caution...error in story |
Call Betty Pfeiffer at High Energy Sports. To bring down 450 to 500
lbs at a reasonable descent rate your going to need a chute bigger
than one for a paraglider or hang glider. I went from 6' 2" to 6' 1"
by having too small a chute. :-)
Rick
On Nov 12, 2007 6:28 AM, Dana Hague wrote:
>
> At 12:37 AM 11/12/2007, John Hauck wrote:
>
> >I was saved twice by a $500.00 hand deployed Jim Handbury parachute...
>
> Are hand deployed chutes still available? I know they are for hang gliders
> and paragliders, but for larger planes? At $500 vs. $2500 or more I think
> there'd be a lot less resistance to the idea, even though the more
> expensive rocket deployed chute is probably more reliable.
>
> -Dana
>
> --
> "If I knew there were coming to my house a man with the fixed intention
> of doing me good I would run for my life." - Thoreau
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: GPS recommendations |
| From: | "lucien" <lstavenhagen(at)hotmail.com> |
I had a change to use my airmap 600c alongside the (then) co-owner's 296 when I
ferried my titan from nebraska down here to new mexico.
The 296 sat in the RAM mount while I kept the 600c on my lap. The 296 lost the
satellites on several occasions for reasons unknown, once somewhere over Kansas
for quite a while. The 600c never lost coverage the entire trip, even occasionally
falling between my legs on the seat.
I'm still mystified as to why the garmin lost coverage, since the airmap kept a
firm lock during the same time. When I got back I compared them both in the office,
the airmap was able to pick up a couple satellites and once even got a
lock, but the 296 couldn't pick up any.
Personally, I think this particular 296 might have a problem, though what it is
I'm not sure.
The airmap does use a 16 channel reciever where the 296 uses a 12 so they are different
recievers.
The airmap, though, is one of the best bang/buck options you can get though. The
software isn't as good as the garmin but once you get used to using it, it does
most everything you need. Screen is a little small tho so if you're farsighted
like I am be sure and pack the reading glasses.
LS
--------
LS
FS II
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=145344#145344
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Girard" <jindoguy(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Not Kolb, but if you're an aviation buff you'll want to see |
this
Imagine cruising along in your (insert your Kolb model here) and
coming across this. You'd be able to see it from quite a distance.
Look at the car in the background as the video starts.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKJMxxgd9UI
Rick
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: GPS selection help? |
| From: | "lucien" <lstavenhagen(at)hotmail.com> |
John Hauck wrote:
> | Did I miss something?
> |
> | Denny
>
> Denny:
>
> Yep, I got the part that he did not recommend a particular brand of
> GPS, but was telling the newbie how he should go about deciding on
> what he needed.
>
> Based on what the Baron Von Evil wrote in his email, I took it to mean
> he had no experience with GPS and was telling a newbie what he should
> do to decide on one. Thought that a little peculiar.
>
> Normally, to me, it would be more appropriate to hand out advice if
> one had experience in that particular area.
>
> john h
> mkIII
I seem to recall a thread a little while ago about VG's, where suggestions were
made that they weren't needed tho the suggestor had no experience with them on
his plane?
insert big smiley here.....
As for the Baron's advice, I have no trouble with an alternative viewpoint - i.e.
lots of experience with pilotage/ded reckoning - being put into the mix when
it comes to GPS, tho I'll admit that pertains more to the question of no GPS
vs. using (any) GPS.
As for the particular brand of GPS I've used garmin and airmap GPS's a fair bit
and find the differences to be pretty minimal, with each having advantages/disadvantages.
The airmaps are less expensive and have very good bang/buck, the
600c being in my experience a great deal. The Garmins, OTOH, have better software,
IMO. It's somewhat easier to use and is a little more capable.
As for satellite outages, they're real and a valid concern. For example, the military
shuts down GPS in my area on a regular basis for hours at a time. The coverage
of the shutdown is pretty significant too and you wouldn't want to be
in the middle of shooting an approach in here when it does shut off suddenly.
Usually there're NOTAMS to this affect, but that don't turn em back on again!
LS
--------
LS
FS II
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=145366#145366
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Russ Kinne <russ(at)rkiphoto.com> |
| Subject: | Re: GPS selection help? |
FWIW -- as I understand it there are 27 GPS satellites; 24 are in
use, 3 are spares. So whichever side of globe you're on, you can get
a good fix. My handheld often 'sees' 6-8.
I have found that they will not receive under thick green leaves
(shouldn't be flying that low!!) or in heavy snow.
This happened to me once in a boat, was a big surprise.
Some time ago a small bizjet flew from Norway to the MBAA meet in
Florida, using nothing but a handheld GPS. Worked fine. They had a
panelful of bigger units but didn't have to use them .
I think if you have problems, it's with the receiver or its
installation; not the GPS satellites.
GPS's are impressive little beasts but do need good installation and
a good view of the sky.
On Nov 12, 2007, at 9:22 AM, lucien wrote:
>
>
> John Hauck wrote:
>> | Did I miss something?
>> |
>> | Denny
>>
>> Denny:
>>
>> Yep, I got the part that he did not recommend a particular brand of
>> GPS, but was telling the newbie how he should go about deciding on
>> what he needed.
>>
>> Based on what the Baron Von Evil wrote in his email, I took it to
>> mean
>> he had no experience with GPS and was telling a newbie what he should
>> do to decide on one. Thought that a little peculiar.
>>
>> Normally, to me, it would be more appropriate to hand out advice if
>> one had experience in that particular area.
>>
>> john h
>> mkIII
>
>
> I seem to recall a thread a little while ago about VG's, where
> suggestions were made that they weren't needed tho the suggestor
> had no experience with them on his plane?
>
> insert big smiley here.....
>
> As for the Baron's advice, I have no trouble with an alternative
> viewpoint - i.e. lots of experience with pilotage/ded reckoning -
> being put into the mix when it comes to GPS, tho I'll admit that
> pertains more to the question of no GPS vs. using (any) GPS.
>
> As for the particular brand of GPS I've used garmin and airmap
> GPS's a fair bit and find the differences to be pretty minimal,
> with each having advantages/disadvantages. The airmaps are less
> expensive and have very good bang/buck, the 600c being in my
> experience a great deal. The Garmins, OTOH, have better software,
> IMO. It's somewhat easier to use and is a little more capable.
>
> As for satellite outages, they're real and a valid concern. For
> example, the military shuts down GPS in my area on a regular basis
> for hours at a time. The coverage of the shutdown is pretty
> significant too and you wouldn't want to be in the middle of
> shooting an approach in here when it does shut off suddenly.
> Usually there're NOTAMS to this affect, but that don't turn em back
> on again!
>
> LS
>
> --------
> LS
> FS II
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=145366#145366
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: GPS selection help? |
| I seem to recall a thread a little while ago about VG's, where
suggestions were made that they weren't needed tho the suggestor had
no experience with them on his plane?
|
| insert big smiley here.....
|
| LS
Lucien:
Gee, how do I say this without "suggesting"?
I didn't need them before I flew them, and I still don't need them.
Please don't take that as a suggestion. ;-)
john h
mkIII
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ElleryWeld(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Xtra Information |
and you think you spent a bundle on the KOLB wait till you get spending on
the T-Craft
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Not Kolb, but if you're an aviation buff you'll want to |
see
| From: | "mosquito56" <mosquito-56(at)hotmail.com> |
That is the uglies flying machine I have ever seen. What is the purpose. To fly
a camera for Nascar or to haul cargo?
Don
--------
Don Merritt- Laredo, Tx
Apologies if I seem antagonistic.
I believe in the freeflowing ideas and discussions between individuals for assistance
in this thing we call life.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=145414#145414
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: GPS selection help? |
| From: | "lucien" <lstavenhagen(at)hotmail.com> |
>
> Lucien:
>
> Gee, how do I say this without "suggesting"?
>
> I didn't need them before I flew them, and I still don't need them.
> Please don't take that as a suggestion. ;-)
>
> john h
> mkIII
If you had been left at that, I'd not have taken it that way, but nevertheless
the VG thread became, IIRC, one of the longest threads in the history of the list?
We all, of course, like to verify the other guy fits into his britches, but our
work in that regard generally carries more weight when we still fit in our own
before we begin.
;)
As for pilotage and ded reckoning, I personally have never observed a case where
a pilot who uses that mode as a primary method of navigation disqualifies him
(automatically?) from making informed comments about suitable GPS's to a "newbie".
It would only be in case that pilot had no experience with the GPS, which I don't
think is the case with the original commentator (the Baron?).
But that's just my impression from his comments, he didn't strike me as unqualified
to make those remarks....
If I'm wrong of course, I stand corrected.
LS
--------
LS
FS II
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=145415#145415
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Welch <mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Exhaust coatings revisited. |
Kolb guys (and gals),
I just got off the phone with Jerry, the owner of Performance Coatings. I asked
him about his prices and other stuff. Here is what he said;
Prices are still the same for him, he hasn't raised his prices in four years, although
he says he did some checking recently, and has found that his competition
had indeed raised their prices. He apologizes, but says he intends on raising
his prices effective Jan 1, 2008. The cost of all the products keep increasing,
he says.
Next, regarding cermacoating a used item, all he needs is it to be free of grease
and oils. He says wash the item in laquer thinner and get off all the oils.
The rest...old paint, rust, etc., he takes care of, in the liquid hot bath.
As an example of what an item costs to have coated, he says he does the local Rotax
guy's systems for about $50-$75. He has a $50 minimum. I had my stuff done
by him. The results were very good.
For those of you unfamiliar with the advantages of cermacoating, do a Google search
and read up on it. And, as Joe pointed out, it helps lower the temperature
around the outside area of your engine. Check it out.
Oh, and if you do call and talk to Jerry, tell him Mike Welch sent ya. He said
he offers group and club discounts, and I told him I would tell all the Kolb
guys. He said he will offer a discount for the Kolb group.
Mike Welch
http://www.headercoatings.com/
_________________________________________________________________
Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Caf. Stop by today.
http://www.cafemessenger.com/info/info_sweetstuff2.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_OctWLtagline
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Girard" <jindoguy(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Not Kolb, but if you're an aviation buff you'll want |
to see
The explanation on the Avweb flyer is that it's a 1/4 scale model of a
super cargo carrier. Imagine it 4 times bigger. You could take a nap
in the shade if it came overhead.
Rick
On Nov 12, 2007 10:44 AM, mosquito56 wrote:
>
> That is the uglies flying machine I have ever seen. What is the purpose. To fly
a camera for Nascar or to haul cargo?
> Don
>
> --------
> Don Merritt- Laredo, Tx
> Apologies if I seem antagonistic.
> I believe in the freeflowing ideas and discussions between individuals for
assistance in this thing we call life.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=145414#145414
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Girard" <jindoguy(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Exhaust coatings revisited. |
Thanks, Mike. Nice treat for the group.
Rick
On Nov 12, 2007 11:00 AM, Mike Welch wrote:
>
>
> Kolb guys (and gals),
>
> I just got off the phone with Jerry, the owner of Performance Coatings. I
asked him about his prices and other stuff. Here is what he said;
>
> Prices are still the same for him, he hasn't raised his prices in four years,
although he says he did some checking recently, and has found that his competition
had indeed raised their prices. He apologizes, but says he intends on raising
his prices effective Jan 1, 2008. The cost of all the products keep increasing,
he says.
>
> Next, regarding cermacoating a used item, all he needs is it to be free of grease
and oils. He says wash the item in laquer thinner and get off all the oils.
The rest...old paint, rust, etc., he takes care of, in the liquid hot bath.
>
> As an example of what an item costs to have coated, he says he does the local
Rotax guy's systems for about $50-$75. He has a $50 minimum. I had my stuff
done by him. The results were very good.
>
> For those of you unfamiliar with the advantages of cermacoating, do a Google
search and read up on it. And, as Joe pointed out, it helps lower the temperature
around the outside area of your engine. Check it out.
>
> Oh, and if you do call and talk to Jerry, tell him Mike Welch sent ya. He said
he offers group and club discounts, and I told him I would tell all the Kolb
guys. He said he will offer a discount for the Kolb group.
>
> Mike Welch
>
> http://www.headercoatings.com/
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Caf. Stop by today.
> http://www.cafemessenger.com/info/info_sweetstuff2.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_OctWLtagline
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jimmy" <jhankin(at)planters.net> |
I have my unit (Airmp 100) wired into the voltage produced by the
engine. It is about 14 volts.
When flying I unbutton the button of my shirt next to my belt and stick
the unit into my shirt.
How do those of you that have newer units with lower voltage hook up
into the internal power of their planes, or do you use battery power,
re-chargable or standard.
Jimmy
Firefly- N6007L
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Vic Peters" <vicsvinyl(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Xtra Information |
Still have the Kolb
Brother is paying for the project Craft 1946 BC12D 160 HP
Vic
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Vic Peters" <vicsvinyl(at)verizon.net> |
Just plug it in to the hot box 12v power or any other. It uses what it
needs.
there are limits of course.
Vic
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Russ Kinne <russ(at)rkiphoto.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Xtra Information |
That's the right kind of a brother to have!!!
On Nov 12, 2007, at 6:00 PM, Vic Peters wrote:
> Still have the Kolb
> Brother is paying for the project Craft 1946 BC12D 160 HP
> Vic
> ============================================================ _-
> www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List_-
> ============================================================ _-
> forums.matronics.com_-
> ===========================================================
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: GPS selection help? |
| From: | "grantr" <grant_richardson25(at)yahoo.com> |
How about the Garmin 96C vs the Airmap 600c ?
These are the same price. Which one is the better bang for the buck?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=145549#145549
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dana Hague <d-m-hague(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: GPS selection help? |
At 08:35 PM 11/12/2007, grantr wrote:
>How about the Garmin 96C vs the Airmap 600c ?
>These are the same price. Which one is the better bang for the buck?
I can't answer that, but I do know that the 96 is very popular amongst the
hang gliding and paragliding crowd.
-Dana
--
Be wary of strong drink. It can make you shoot at tax collectors-- and miss.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: GPS selection help? |
There is a Garmin GPSmap 196 on Barnstormers listed for $400. Sounds like
a good deal. I do not know them.
GARMIN GPS 196 $400 FOR SALE Garmin Handheld GPS 196. Good shape
with 12v and data cords. Jepp and Obstacle Data about 1 yr old. Contact
Scott Dupuis - SLIPSTREAM AVIATION located Chino Hills, CA USA
Telephone: 909-319-3057
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Girard" <jindoguy(at)gmail.com> |
I have my Lowrance 2000C wired into ship's power through a 2 amp blade
type automotive fuse. No problems in 20 hours.
Rick
On Nov 12, 2007 5:18 PM, Vic Peters wrote:
>
> Just plug it in to the hot box 12v power or any other. It uses what it
> needs.
> there are limits of course.
> Vic
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | List of Contributors |
Each year at the end of the List Fund Raiser, I post a message acknowledging everyone
that so generously made a Contribution to support the Lists. Its sort of
my way of publicly thanking everyone that took a minute to show their appreciation
for the Lists.
Won't you take a moment and assure that your name is on that List of Contributors
(LOC)? As a number of members have pointed out over the years, the List seems
at least - if not a whole lot more - valuable as a building/flying/recreating/entertainment
tool as your typical magazine subscription!
Please take minute and assure that your name is on this year's LOC! Show others
that you appreciate the Lists. Making a Contribution to support the Lists is
fast and easy using your Credit card or Paypal on the Secure Web Site:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
or by popping a personal check in the mail to:
Matt Dralle / Matronics
PO Box 347
Livermore CA 94551-0347
I would like to thank everyone that has so generously made a Contribution thus
far in this year's List Fund Raiser! Remember that its YOUR support that keeps
these Lists going and improving! Don't forget to include a little comment about
how the Lists have helped you!
Best regards,
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | robert bean <slyck(at)frontiernet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Xtra Information |
Vic, keep the Kolb. The Taylorcraft is a fine airplane but no easier
to land (they are both easy)
-However, if that Tcraft has new bungees and you are landing on
pavement there is NO way to
keep from bouncing. Owner/friend put in new ones and challenged us
to try, let everyone at the
airport give it a go. He won.
In addition you will be sitting with your head up in the wing roots
with limited side vision.
You will be paying for an annual every year unless registered
experimental.
BB
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | robert bean <slyck(at)frontiernet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: GPS recommendations |
gadgets gadgets, gizmos........ :(
I bought a nice bicycle for $200. excellent gas mileage and good for
old withering legs :)
BB
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack B. Hart" <jbhart(at)onlyinternet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Mikuni Carb issue? |
>
>
>Anyone have any other ideas or suggestions....I'm new to mikuni carbs.
>
Ray,
Try:
http://www.carbparts.com/mikuni/mikuni_atv.htm
Also, you should be able to find a manual for your particular carburetor on
the web.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Winchester, IN
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "boyd" <by0ung(at)brigham.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Mikuni Carb issue? |
> However the engine keeps dying of fuel starvation when I take it off the
choke and advance the throttle.
>
I would check for dirt in the float needle seat. If it overflowed the
vents on one occasion... then wont pass enough fuel on the next,,,, the
common factor is the float needle seat.
Boyd
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dana Hague <d-m-hague(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Mikuni Carb issue? |
At 09:56 AM 11/13/2007, Jack B. Hart wrote:
>Also, you should be able to find a manual for your particular carburetor on
>the web.
Try http://www.mikuni.com/pdf/vmmanual.pdf .
-Dana
--
Inflation is a result of legalized counterfeiting.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: GPS selection help? |
| From: | "olendorf" <olendorf(at)gmail.com> |
I fold my sectional into a plastic kneeboard and I have my GPS mounted on a bent
piece of lexan that slides right over the kneeboard. I really like the GPS
96. It is pretty easy to read at the angle you see here. It is water proof and
it will float. It last a long time on 2 AA nimh rechargables. I'd guess it
would last 12 hours or more.
http://kolbfirestar.googlepages.com/gpsat10000feet.JPG
--------
Scott Olendorf
Original Firestar, Rotax 447, Powerfin prop
Schenectady, NY
http://KolbFirestar.googlepages.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=145809#145809
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Musings on Safety and the BRS |
| From: | "JetPilot" <orcabonita(at)hotmail.com> |
[quote="jindoguy(at)gmail.com"]Unless the statistics have changed very recently,
and I don't think they have, the big three killers of pilots are:
1) Continued flight into deteriorating weather
2) Failure to fly the aircraft in an emergency
3) Failure to manage the fuel supply
> [b]
Your statistics are worthless, because they are for CERTIFIED airplanes, not experimentals.
In experimentals, the causes of accidents are totally different
than in certified airplanes. The fact that you got this very basic and important
fact wrong is just the first reason why I would dismiss what you say. You
need to be credible and accurate before I would consider letting you advise
me on a safety item.
Your thinking that you can preflight, and catch everything that might go wrong
in something as complicated as experimental airplane is nothing short of fantasy.
Many very gifted, meticulous people have had structural failures in experimental
airplanes. It happens. There are many critical components that cannot
be tested for defects short of magnafluxing, and other advanced means. Much
of the wing structure is hidden in fabric never to be seen for years. So
again, when you say just do good preflight and good maintenance will negate the
need for a BRS is nothing short of redicuous. Too many people much smarter,
and more talented than you have been saved by BRS chutes. Sure some were
stupid, but many saves were very talented builders and flyers
Mike
--------
"NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could
have !!!
Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=145851#145851
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Some pictures from Kolb Flying Today... |
| From: | "JetPilot" <orcabonita(at)hotmail.com> |
Here are a couple pictures from my Kolb, first is flying through some rain beside
a couple small storms... You may notice 50 mph on the airspeed indicator,
that makes it a lot smoother in turbulence next to the storm. The weather cleared
up nicely, made for a glass smooth evening and beautiful sunset.
Mike
--------
"NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could
have !!!
Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=145854#145854
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc02220_821.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc02182_148.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Cottrell" <lcottrell(at)fmtcblue.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Musings on Safety and the BRS |
----- Original Message -----
From: "JetPilot" <orcabonita(at)hotmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 7:56 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Musings on Safety and the BRS
I just finished reading JetPilot's reply, and unlike most of you was very
amused. Can't explain it, just was. My wife came up and asked what I was
laughing about. I attempted to explain to her the discussion about BRS
chutes, and told her that I would like one, but due to the cost could not
get one. She, like the smarta$$ she is pointed out that they don't work from
25 feet altitude. Got me there!
Larry C
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dana Hague <d-m-hague(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Mikuni Carb issue? |
At 09:04 PM 11/13/2007, Richard Girard wrote:
>Don't know if Mikuni's have the same needle rotation issues as the
>Bing. Shouldn't be very costly to replace...
What is the "needle rotation issue"? Something I should be concerned about
with my Mikuni?
-Dana
--
CanYouFixTheSpaceBarOnMyKeyboard?
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Musings on Safety and the BRS |
| From: | "olendorf" <olendorf(at)gmail.com> |
> With only 156 recorded deployments that's equals a .00678% of actually needing
it.
How many of us have life insurance? I know 00% of us will be using that.
[Wink]
--------
Scott Olendorf
Original Firestar, Rotax 447, Powerfin prop
Schenectady, NY
http://KolbFirestar.googlepages.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=145870#145870
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: GPS selection help? |
| From: | "olendorf" <olendorf(at)gmail.com> |
jb92563 wrote:
> If you like your Garmin 96, then you might like this is even better.
>
>
I'm going to try that out. I already have an Axim X50V and a bluetooth gps.
--------
Scott Olendorf
Original Firestar, Rotax 447, Powerfin prop
Schenectady, NY
http://KolbFirestar.googlepages.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=145871#145871
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Girard" <jindoguy(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Mikuni Carb issue? |
Dana, It's been seven years since I had an engine equipped with a
Mikuni, which is why I phrased my concern the way I did.
One of the checks done during an annual on Bing carburetors (or any
time, for that matter) is to see if the carb jet needle spins freely
in the clip that sets its height in the needle jet. Bing has three
remedies of which you choose two. One is to squeeze the clip together
to seee if you can tighten up its hold on the needle. If unsuccessful,
replace the needle and clip. Also check the bottom of the spring seat
to see if it has a counterbore on its underside. If it doesn't,
replace it, too.
Now, whether you fixed it or replaced it, after you install the clip
back on the needle, Bing has a tiny O ring that is put on the needle
and up against the top surface of the clip, hence the need for the
counterbore in the spring seat.
If the needle is allowed to rotate in the clip it will eventually saw
through the needle and it will drop into the needle jet amd shut off
the fuel flow from the main jet which, just like the Mikuni, screws
into the bottom of the needle jet housing. I don't know if either carb
has enough fuel flow through the idle circuit to keep the engine
running should the needle fall into the needle jet.
I do know the wear does happen if the needle spins. On a 582 I worked
on at Sun n Fun, one of the needles was almost worn through. Just by
eyeball, I'd estimate the diameter of the needle where the clip was
installed was 1/3 normal.
See also Rotax Service instruction 8-UL 91E. I changed the name for my
personal files, but that is what's attached.
Rick
On Nov 13, 2007 9:26 PM, Dana Hague wrote:
>
> At 09:04 PM 11/13/2007, Richard Girard wrote:
>
> >Don't know if Mikuni's have the same needle rotation issues as the
> >Bing. Shouldn't be very costly to replace...
>
> What is the "needle rotation issue"? Something I should be concerned about
> with my Mikuni?
>
> -Dana
>
> --
> CanYouFixTheSpaceBarOnMyKeyboard?
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack B. Hart" <jbhart(at)onlyinternet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Mikuni Carb issue? |
>
>At 09:04 PM 11/13/2007, Richard Girard wrote:
>
>>Don't know if Mikuni's have the same needle rotation issues as the
>>Bing. Shouldn't be very costly to replace...
>
>What is the "needle rotation issue"? Something I should be concerned about
>with my Mikuni?
>
Dana,
The only reason it could be an issue is if the clip has a burr on it that
will shave the brass needle as it rotates and the clip is held fast. Check
the clips for burrs and if they exist remove them with a jewelers file.
If Bing had been careful about the clips they would not have to have added
an "O" ring to the needle clip assembly to keep the needle from rotating.
If the needle cannot rotate the burr can not shave the slot.
It might be a good thing to call Mikuni and ask if there has ever been a
problem of the clips cutting the needles into two pieces.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Winchester, IN
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dana Hague <d-m-hague(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Mikuni Carb issue? |
Thanks Rick and Jack,
When I had it apart the other day (moving the needle clip for colder
weather) it looked tight, but I'll check it again. According to
ultralightnews.com (referring specifically to the Mikuni):
"The first and most widely reported was the failure of the retaining clip
of the jet needle, due to vibration and fatigue located in the carb slide.
This failure allows the jet needle to fall down into the main jet cutting
of the supply of fuel to the engine.
"The engine still runs but at an idle. This should be an area of regular
inspection. An update kit was available at one time which replaced the
slide and jet needle, and allowed for the placement of a small plastic
spacer between the slide and clip helping to eliminate wear and fatigue on
the clip."
-Dana
--
This is a test of the emergency tagline system. Were this an actual
tagline, you would see amusing mottos, disclaimers, a zillion net
addresses, or edifying philisophical statements. This is only a test.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Cottrell" <lcottrell(at)fmtcblue.com> |
----- Original Message -----
From: "boyd" <by0ung(at)brigham.net>
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 8:05 AM
Subject: gps noise
> Larry.... someone told me that the noise or interference from the 196 when
> pluged into the airplane power is..... the data cord has 4 wires in the
> plug.... 2 for data and 2 for power..... I am thinking here,,,, the
> ground for power may be a common for the data lines as well......
> anyway the noise is coming from the gps through the data lines,,, so if
> you use a volt meter and figure out which wires go from the cigarette
> lighter plug to the gps plug... then use a small drill and drill out the
> copper connectors in the gps plug that go to the data lines and leave the
> power lines intact.... in theory the noise will go away.....
>
> This sounded good to me but I have not tried it.....
>
>
> Boyd
>
Boyd sent this to me in response to my statement of the other day that the
power cord from my 196 causes interference. I drilled my cord out according
to instructions and found that for the most part it does stop the
interference. There were two instances though that I still got the static,
but it was not constant. Not sure what to think, other than it is better,
but still requires more squelch to stop the noise than without. It is now
usable, where it was not before.
Larry C
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Denny Rowe" <rowedenny(at)windstream.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Musings on Safety and the BRS |
Kolbers,
Even though I do not have a BRS or for that matter a 912 installed on my
Mk-3, (both because of budget constaints). I always tell folks if you can
afford either, put em on.
If the worst does happen, having the chute installed gives you something to
do on the way down besides screaming.
Denny Rowe
Mk-3 N616DR
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | gary aman <gaman(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Mikuni Carb issue? |
The carb update just uses an O ring around the needle just above the clip.The pressure
of that O ring being squeezed between the plastic spring seat and the
base of the slide prevents the needle from spinning in the clip.
Dana Hague wrote: Thanks Rick and Jack,
When I had it apart the other day (moving the needle clip for colder weather)
it looked tight, but I'll check it again. According to ultralightnews.com (referring
specifically to the Mikuni):
"The first and most widely reported was the failure of the retaining clip of
the jet needle, due to vibration and fatigue located in the carb slide. This
failure allows the jet needle to fall down into the main jet cutting of the supply
of fuel to the engine.
"The engine still runs but at an idle. This should be an area of regular inspection.
An update kit was available at one time which replaced the slide and
jet needle, and allowed for the placement of a small plastic spacer between the
slide and clip helping to eliminate wear and fatigue on the clip."
-Dana
--
This is a test of the emergency tagline system. Were this an actual tagline,
you would see amusing mottos, disclaimers, a zillion net addresses, or edifying
philisophical statements. This is only a test.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dana Hague <d-m-hague(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Mikuni Carb issue? |
At 06:52 PM 11/14/2007, gary aman wrote:
>The carb update just uses an O ring around the needle just above the
>clip.The pressure of that O ring being squeezed between the plastic spring
>seat and the base of the slide prevents the needle from spinning in the clip.
I don't have a plastic spring seat in my carb, just the metal needle
retainer plate. Presumably it would work the same, but then the plate
wouldn't sit down flat against the slide?
-Dana
--
It feels great to wake up and not know what day it is, doesn't it?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | gary aman <gaman(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Mikuni Carb issue? |
Sorry, thought the inquiry was about the update on the bing 54 series.You don't
want to change the location of the needle in relation to the slide no matter
how you secure the needle.
At 06:52 PM 11/14/2007, gary aman wrote:
>The carb update just uses an O ring around the needle just above the
>clip.The pressure of that O ring being squeezed between the plastic spring
>seat and the base of the slide prevents the needle from spinning in the clip.
I don't have a plastic spring seat in my carb, just the metal needle
retainer plate. Presumably it would work the same, but then the plate
wouldn't sit down flat against the slide?
-Dana
--
It feels great to wake up and not know what day it is, doesn't it?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | Value of the List... |
If you look forward to checking your List email everyday (and a lot of you have
written to say that you do!), then you're probably getting at least 0 or 0 worth
of Entertainment from the Lists each year. You'd pay twice that for a subscription
to some lame magazine or even a dinner out. Isn't the List worth at least
that much to you? Wouldn't it be great if you could pay that amount and get
a well-managed media source free of advertising, SPAM, and viruses? Come to
think of it, you do... :-)
Won't you please take a minute to make your Contribution today and support the
Lists?
Contribution Page:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Again, I want to say THANK YOU to everyone that has made a Contribution thus far
during this year's List Fund Raiser!! These Lists are made possible exclusively
through YOUR generosity!!
Thank you for your support!
Matt Dralle
Email List Admin.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | 2 stroke vs 4 stroke |
| From: | "grantr" <grant_richardson25(at)yahoo.com> |
What makes the 2 stroke less reliable than the 4 stroke? In theory the 2 stroke
should be more reliable especially the piston port engine because it only had
a few moving parts to fail. Pistons, crank and rods and thats it. 4 strokes have
many more parts that could lead to an engine failure.
So why are engine outs more common with 2 strokes? Why is there more maintenance
involved with the 2 cycle?
What oil do you guys use in your rotax engines? I know a lot of people use penzoil
air cooled 2 cycle oil.
Is anyone using the blue max in there 503? I like the idea of mixing it 100:1 because
it reduces the carbon build up. I talked to a guy who ran it in a hirth
for 100hrs with no problems. He said there was hardly any carbon build up running
it 100:1.
here is a link to the oil
http://www.recpower.com/blumax.htm
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146190#146190
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: 2 stroke vs 4 stroke |
Don't follow the siren song of 100:1 oil mixes, it's just not enough oil
for an aircraft application. I tried it years ago, the Rotax survived,
but I really didn't like listening to the engine rattle as I babied it
back to the field. Added enough oil to the premix to get it back to 50:1
and the rattle went away. Lesson learned...
Been running Phillips Injex in Rotax 2-strokes for 24 years and more
than 1200 hours with no problems, very little carbon build up, and rings
that easily go more than 100 hours without sticking. Jet your Bing so
that cruise power gives egt's between 1075 and 1125 and Injex will give
you almost no carbon buildup.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
grantr wrote:
>
> What makes the 2 stroke less reliable than the 4 stroke? In theory the 2 stroke
should be more reliable especially the piston port engine because it only had
a few moving parts to fail. Pistons, crank and rods and thats it. 4 strokes
have many more parts that could lead to an engine failure.
>
> So why are engine outs more common with 2 strokes? Why is there more maintenance
involved with the 2 cycle?
>
> What oil do you guys use in your rotax engines? I know a lot of people use penzoil
air cooled 2 cycle oil.
> Is anyone using the blue max in there 503? I like the idea of mixing it 100:1
because it reduces the carbon build up. I talked to a guy who ran it in a hirth
for 100hrs with no problems. He said there was hardly any carbon build up running
it 100:1.
> here is a link to the oil
> http://www.recpower.com/blumax.htm
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146190#146190
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Girard" <jindoguy(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 2 stroke vs 4 stroke |
4 stroke engines, in general, have pressure oiling systems, 2 strokes
have to rely on the oil being either direct injected into the engine
or being premixed with the gas.
I've used BlueMax oil in a Hirth I had in the shop last summer, but
not enough to make a statistical blip.
The primary killer of 2 strokes is running too lean. Remember how it's
oiled? Also faulty crank seals don't leak oil out, like a 4 stroke,
they leak air in, leaning the mixture. If you run a 4 stroke lean, it
won't like it, beyond a narrow range that is, but the quantity of oil
delivered to the piston skirt and bearings remains the same.
There's also the issue of proper storage. A 4 stroke, with good
quality oil in it, had that oil splashed all over its innards as it
ran. The 2 stroke has its oil delivered in a solvent. To store it
properly (Rotax says any time over 30 days of inactivity) you need to
run a can of misting oil, first through the carb until the extra oil
kills the engine, then into the combustion chamber via a spark plug
hole.
Last there is operating temperature. My HKS has a max head temp spec
of 338 degrees, the 912 is 300 continuous, 325 for short periods,
after which the heads must be Rockwell tested for proper hardness. The
447 I just broke in has a max CHT of 480 degrees, and regularly hit
close to 400 in climb.
These certainly aren't all the differences that effect engine
longevity, but its a start.
Rick
On Nov 15, 2007 8:14 AM, grantr wrote:
>
> What makes the 2 stroke less reliable than the 4 stroke? In theory the 2 stroke
should be more reliable especially the piston port engine because it only had
a few moving parts to fail. Pistons, crank and rods and thats it. 4 strokes
have many more parts that could lead to an engine failure.
>
> So why are engine outs more common with 2 strokes? Why is there more maintenance
involved with the 2 cycle?
>
> What oil do you guys use in your rotax engines? I know a lot of people use penzoil
air cooled 2 cycle oil.
> Is anyone using the blue max in there 503? I like the idea of mixing it 100:1
because it reduces the carbon build up. I talked to a guy who ran it in a hirth
for 100hrs with no problems. He said there was hardly any carbon build up running
it 100:1.
> here is a link to the oil
> http://www.recpower.com/blumax.htm
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146190#146190
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Welch <mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | 2 stroke vs 4 stroke |
Regarding the argument of 2 stroke engines versus 4 strokes, I read an article
once that did a very deep and scientific explanation of why 2 strokes are short
lived, when compared to 4 stroke engines.
Including all the items mentioned by Rick, there was a huge difference that has
to do with the velocity of the moving parts. Yes, 2 strokes produce prodigious
amounts of power, but the friction of these internal surfaces is incredibly
higher than the comparable frictions a 4 stroke sees. And when you add in
the sensitivities of oiling that the 2 stroke has, (proper ratio, no suction leaks,
etc.), the 4 stroke usually lasts many times over the life of a 2 stroke
engine.
BUT!! As always, there is a but. In this comparison, one could conclude a 4
stroke engine is better, but that isn't a a complete win for the 4 stroke. A
2 stroke will generally produce significantly more power for a given weight.
A 4 stroke could only dream of the power output of a typical 2 stroke, and this
is because of the obvious; a 4 stroke engine only has 1/2 the opportunity to
produce power that the 2 stroke has. Every second rotation of the crankshaft
a 2 stroke is working on a power stroke, whereas a 4 stoke engine only sees
this at every 4 revolutions.
Another limiting factor of the 2 stroke engine is its size. Recall a moment
ago where we stated the high velocity of the internal moving parts of a 2 stroke.
As everyone knows, force is increased with the square of the velocity. In
other words, as a 2 stroke gets bigger, the higher speed of the parts becomes
a huge detriment to keeping the engine together. A 100 cc engine can easily
spin 8000 RPM. A 1000 cc will have more difficultly being able to spin 8000
RPM's....and stay together. A 3000 cc 2 stroke engine could only spin 8000 RPM
for only a few seconds. As the piston's mass increases, so does its momentum.
And the bigger the piston, the less interested it is in stopping, and turning
around and going the other direction. Therefore, you would have to increase
the size (and mass) of the rod, to handle this huge piston. But a more massive
rod is less likely to be changing directions, just like the more massive
piston. And what you have is vicious cycle, the engine is held to being relatively
"small", due to the physics of velocity of the moving parts.
This is explained by the formula: KE = 1/2 x mass x velocity x velocity
or KE = 1/2mV(sqrd)
KE equals Kinetic Energy, m means mass of the item that's moving, and v means the
velocity of the moving mass.
Obviously, as a piston's velocity is increased, the Kinetic Energy (KE) goes
WAY up!!!
Example: Let's say we have a 1 kg piston moving up and down at 75 cm/sec, therefore
we would get:
KE = 1/2 x 1 kg x 75 cm/sec (squared),......which equals.........5,625 Kinetic
Units
But, let's double the velocity of our piston to 150 cm/sec, and see what this produces:
We then get: KE = 1/2 X 1 kg x 150 cm/sec x 150 cm/sec.......which equals........22,500
Kinetic Units
Wow! By simply doubling the pistons velocity, the Kinetic Energy quadrupled!!
And all this extra energy is focused on the connecting rod. If you keep increasing
the velocity, or even the mass, for that matter, there will be a point
where the connecting rod will no longer be able to contain this energy.
This scenario is classily displayed at the "races", when some fire breathing
dragster blows an engine. He usually "throws a rod", where the rod couldn't keep
up with the kenetic energy of the pistons spinning at 9 grand!!!
Anyway, that's what I was thinking. Mike Welch
_________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 2 stroke vs 4 stroke |
2 stroke reliability.??
two or three things imho...Lack of operator knowledge...and
lubrication.... striving for good fuel consumption equals less
lubrication... a common thread on 2 cycle lists is fuel burn... You have
to put some fuel through to get good lubrication...
My notion...decarbon frequently...mix the oil at a low ratio(50 to 1)
and run the pee out of them...and when they hit 5 to 600 hours...sell
them on ebay as low or unknown time!! :-) And there in lies the other
problem....used and unknown time engines....No one should complain about
a bad 2 stroker if they buy used!!! Herb
writes:
>
>
> What makes the 2 stroke less reliable than the 4 stroke? In theory
> the 2 stroke should be more reliable especially the piston port
> engine because it only had a few moving parts to fail. Pistons,
> crank and rods and thats it. 4 strokes have many more parts that
> could lead to an engine failure.
>
> So why are engine outs more common with 2 strokes? Why is there
> more maintenance involved with the 2 cycle?
>
> What oil do you guys use in your rotax engines? I know a lot of
> people use penzoil air cooled 2 cycle oil.
> Is anyone using the blue max in there 503? I like the idea of mixing
> it 100:1 because it reduces the carbon build up. I talked to a guy
> who ran it in a hirth for 100hrs with no problems. He said there was
> hardly any carbon build up running it 100:1.
> here is a link to the oil
> http://www.recpower.com/blumax.htm
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146190#146190
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BMWBikeCrz(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Kolb : Help ! which form ? |
Working on the regestration of the firestar
Have N-Number Have Serial Number But 8050-88
is no good ... which form do I use to claim owmership of a non Regesterd "fat
ultralight"
Thanks! Dave
**************************************
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 2 stroke vs 4 stroke |
| From: | "JetPilot" <orcabonita(at)hotmail.com> |
grantr wrote:
>
> What makes the 2 stroke less reliable than the 4 stroke? In theory the 2 stroke
should be more reliable especially the piston port engine because it only had
a few moving parts to fail.
>
2 Strokes are less reliable than 4 strokes, that is just a fact of life. Don't
get hung up on the theory, just recognize the real world results for what they
are. For a 2 stroke to run reliably it must have near perfect fuel air mixture
AND prop loading, and there is the problem. In real life, perfection rarely
exists, and it is ever harder to keep perfection of these things in hundreds
of hours of aircraft use. Many companies have tried making 2 stroke engines
reliable enough for certified aircraft, and every project has been abandoned.
If a bunch of engine experts and companies with lots of resources were unable
to make a 2 stroke more reliable on airplanes than 4 strokes, chances are almost
zero that you will be able to.
Bottom line is if you want a reliable engine that is least likely to quit then
its a no brainier, fly a 4 stroke.
If you can not afford a 4 stroke, and have no other option then to fly with a 2
stroke, do yourself a favor and read this article. Its short, and gives you
really good useful, real world information (not a bunch of theory ) on how to
keep your 2 stroke running as reliably as possible.
http://curedcomposites.netfirms.com/twostroke.html
Mike
--------
"NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could
have !!!
Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146238#146238
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: 2 stroke vs 4 stroke |
Which is exactly why I like to cruise my 582 as close to 5,000 rpm as I
can get it. Good synopsis.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
Mike Welch wrote:
>
>
> Regarding the argument of 2 stroke engines versus 4 strokes, I read an article
once that did a very deep and scientific explanation of why 2 strokes are
short lived, when compared to 4 stroke engines.
>
> Including all the items mentioned by Rick, there was a huge difference that
has to do with the velocity of the moving parts. Yes, 2 strokes produce prodigious
amounts of power, but the friction of these internal surfaces is incredibly
higher than the comparable frictions a 4 stroke sees. And when you add in
the sensitivities of oiling that the 2 stroke has, (proper ratio, no suction
leaks, etc.), the 4 stroke usually lasts many times over the life of a 2 stroke
engine.
>
> BUT!! As always, there is a but. In this comparison, one could conclude a
4 stroke engine is better, but that isn't a a complete win for the 4 stroke.
A 2 stroke will generally produce significantly more power for a given weight.
A 4 stroke could only dream of the power output of a typical 2 stroke, and
this is because of the obvious; a 4 stroke engine only has 1/2 the opportunity
to produce power that the 2 stroke has. Every second rotation of the crankshaft
a 2 stroke is working on a power stroke, whereas a 4 stoke engine only sees
this at every 4 revolutions.
>
> Another limiting factor of the 2 stroke engine is its size. Recall a moment
ago where we stated the high velocity of the internal moving parts of a 2 stroke.
As everyone knows, force is increased with the square of the velocity.
In other words, as a 2 stroke gets bigger, the higher speed of the parts becomes
a huge detriment to keeping the engine together. A 100 cc engine can easily
spin 8000 RPM. A 1000 cc will have more difficultly being able to spin 8000
RPM's....and stay together. A 3000 cc 2 stroke engine could only spin 8000
RPM for only a few seconds. As the piston's mass increases, so does its momentum.
And the bigger the piston, the less interested it is in stopping, and turning
around and going the other direction. Therefore, you would have to increase
the size (and mass) of the rod, to handle this huge piston. But a more
massive rod is less likely to be changing directions, just like the more massive
piston. And what you have is vicious cycle, the en!
> gine is held to being relatively "small", due to the physics of velocity of
the moving parts.
>
> This is explained by the formula: KE = 1/2 x mass x velocity x velocity
or KE = 1/2mV(sqrd)
>
> KE equals Kinetic Energy, m means mass of the item that's moving, and v means
the velocity of the moving mass.
>
> Obviously, as a piston's velocity is increased, the Kinetic Energy (KE) goes
WAY up!!!
> Example: Let's say we have a 1 kg piston moving up and down at 75 cm/sec, therefore
we would get:
>
> KE = 1/2 x 1 kg x 75 cm/sec (squared),......which equals.........5,625 Kinetic
Units
>
> But, let's double the velocity of our piston to 150 cm/sec, and see what this
produces:
>
> We then get: KE = 1/2 X 1 kg x 150 cm/sec x 150 cm/sec.......which equals........22,500
Kinetic Units
>
> Wow! By simply doubling the pistons velocity, the Kinetic Energy quadrupled!!
And all this extra energy is focused on the connecting rod. If you keep increasing
the velocity, or even the mass, for that matter, there will be a point
where the connecting rod will no longer be able to contain this energy.
>
> This scenario is classily displayed at the "races", when some fire breathing
dragster blows an engine. He usually "throws a rod", where the rod couldn't
keep up with the kenetic energy of the pistons spinning at 9 grand!!!
>
> Anyway, that's what I was thinking. Mike Welch
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carlos" <grageda(at)innw.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Kolb : Help ! which form ? |
Hi Dave,
The Affidavit of Ownership, AC Form 8050-88a is the one to be used for
Fat Ultralights. Bascially You state in writing before an Notary Public
that this plane is your plane and nobody else's.
Then you submit your AC Form 8050-1, application for Aircraft
Registration and $5.00 dollars to the FAA in Oklahoma.
The EAA has a packet for about $20 bucks + shipping that has all the
forms and a booklet as to how to fill in the blanks.
Thats it really. Just get it into the FAA as soon as possible. Time is
running out!
Good Luck
Carlos G
Kolb Firestar
N6177R
----- Original Message -----
From: BMWBikeCrz(at)aol.com
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 9:20 AM
Subject: Kolb-List: Kolb : Help ! which form ?
Working on the regestration of the firestar
Have N-Number Have Serial Number But 8050-88
is no good ... which form do I use to claim owmership of a non
Regesterd "fat ultralight"
Thanks! Dave
************
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dana Hague <d-m-hague(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 2 stroke vs 4 stroke |
At 09:14 AM 11/15/2007, grantr wrote:
>
>What makes the 2 stroke less reliable than the 4 stroke? In theory the 2
>stroke should be more reliable especially the piston port engine because
>it only had a few moving parts to fail. Pistons, crank and rods and thats
>it. 4 strokes have many more parts that could lead to an engine failure.
>
>So why are engine outs more common with 2 strokes? Why is there more
>maintenance involved with the 2 cycle?
>
>What oil do you guys use in your rotax engines? I know a lot of people use
>penzoil air cooled 2 cycle oil.
>Is anyone using the blue max in there 503? I like the idea of mixing it
>100:1 because it reduces the carbon build up. I talked to a guy who ran it
>in a hirth for 100hrs with no problems. He said there was hardly any
>carbon build up running it 100:1.
>here is a link to the oil
>http://www.recpower.com/blumax.htm
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146190#146190
>
>
--
But I don't have an "any key" on my computer!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dana Hague <d-m-hague(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 2 stroke vs 4 stroke |
At 09:14 AM 11/15/2007, grantr wrote:
>What makes the 2 stroke less reliable than the 4 stroke? In theory the 2
>stroke should be more reliable especially the piston port engine because
>it only had a few moving parts to fail. Pistons, crank and rods and thats
>it. 4 strokes have many more parts that could lead to an engine failure.
>
>So why are engine outs more common with 2 strokes? Why is there more
>maintenance involved with the 2 cycle?
The primary reason is the way that 2-strokes are lubricated. Yes, as
others have pointed out, they're more highly stressed since they get more
power out of the same size package, but modern metallurgy and materials
technology means that actual mechanical failures (not related to
lubrication) are rare.
The lubrication, of course, is dependent on the fuel/air mixture. Assuming
there's the proper amount of oil mixed with the fuel (or injected in),
having the right fuel/air mixture is critical. Too little (too lean) and
the engine seizes, or bearings fail, or it runs hot... and the engine
quits. Too much (too ruch) and it carbons up, eventually shorting out the
spark plug... and the engine quits. Even if it's adjusted right initially,
air leaks (bearing seals, gaskets, and carburetor boots) can make it run
lean. Furthermore, the optimum mixture point changes with the seasons and
weather conditions.
Here's an interesting thought: Many people remove the oil injection system
from their Rotax engines, fearing the failure of the injection pump. I'd
like to see statistics regarding the relative reliability of the same model
engine with and without oil injection. At least with oil injection, you
always have the intended amount of oil per revolution regardless of
fuel/air mixture.
Another thought: If you _do_ have oil injection, seems it would be
possible to inject at least part of it into the bearings, getting the
benefit of a 4-stroke's pressurized oil system to at least the lower end...
from whence the oil would find its way into the crankcase to mix with the
fuel as it does on any 2-stroke.
Still another thought: I have long believed that electronic fuel injection
(EFI) could be a major improvement to 2-stroke reliability. By taking the
mixture adjustment out of the operator's hands, it should be possible to
eliminate the problems from ignorant adjustments, or failure to make a
needed seasonal adjustment. Or, perhaps not even the complexity of fuel
injection, just an automatic mixture controlled carburetor, with feedback
from an exhaust oxygen sensor sensing the ratio (I know that O2 sensors are
problematic with oil in the fuel but it shouldn't be insurmountable).
-Dana
--
But I don't have an "any key" on my computer!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dana Hague <d-m-hague(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 2 stroke vs 4 stroke |
At 12:51 PM 11/15/2007, JetPilot wrote:
>-
>If you can not afford a 4 stroke, and have no other option then to fly
>with a 2 stroke, do yourself a favor and read this article. Its short,
>and gives you really good useful, real world information (not a bunch of
>theory ) on how to keep your 2 stroke running as reliably as possible.
>
>http://curedcomposites.netfirms.com/twostroke.html
That's a good article. One thing I found particularly interesting, the
point about long partial power descents. I've always been leery about long
idling descents, partially from concern about shock cooling, but also for
fear of the engine loading up and quitting. I have to think about that one.
-Dana
--
But I don't have an "any key" on my computer!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BMWBikeCrz(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Kolb-List Digest: GPS & 8050-88A |
I LOVE my Gps 72 ...NO frills has saved my bacon on several occasions
...Kinda like me its "cheap 'N Good"
also found my form ...8050-88A still trying to figure out which box to check
"I dunno where I got it ,just slapped a bunch of parts togather" soubds a
little scairy to tell the Government ...LOL ...Dave
**************************************
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | gary aman <gaman(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Kolb : Help ! which form ? |
your form is 8050-88A
BMWBikeCrz(at)aol.com wrote: Working on the regestration of the firestar
Have N-Number Have Serial Number But 8050-88
is no good ... which form do I use to claim owmership of a non Regesterd "fat
ultralight"
Thanks! Dave
************
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dana Hague <d-m-hague(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 2 stroke vs 4 stroke |
At 05:53 PM 11/15/2007, jb92563 wrote:
>There are fuel injected 2 strokes available.
>
>I agree these must be more reliable and probably worth the extra cost.
Well, Rotax oughta get with the program!
-Dana
--
Censorship: The reaction of the ignorant to freedom.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dana Hague <d-m-hague(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 2 stroke vs 4 stroke |
At 08:08 PM 11/15/2007, Richard Girard wrote:
The question of fuel injection came up at the Rotax Service Center
classes at Lockwood this last spring. Eric Tucker was asked, why it
wasn't used by Rotax. None available that meets Rotax reliability
standards.
Unless you could adapt an existing automotive fuel injection system I can
well imagine that the development cost for a reliable system would be
prohibitive.
From time to time I've played with the idea of developing an electronic
carburetor adjustment system for the small 2-strokes used on PPG's (nice
thing about a PPG is that an engine failure during testing is normally a
non event). My thought was to use an oxygen sensor in the exhaust to
measure the air/fuel ratio, and some electronics to drive an off the shelf
R/C servo to adjust the main mixture needle valve (most of these engines
use Walbro pumper carburetors). You could program it to keep as far on the
rich side of a stoichiometric ratio as desired. It would have to have a
failsafe mode, of course, to revert to a rich condition in the event of
failure of the O2 sensor, as well as during startup before the sensor is
hot enough to generate a signal (cars use heated sensors for startup, until
the exhaust is hot enough to keep the sensor hot, but they require too much
power for the lighting coil on a small engine).
On an engine with a float carburetor, it could control the mixture by
porting and metering manifold vacuum to the float bowl, similar to how the
altitude compensating carbs do it.
FAR simpler than true fuel injection, and mechanically simple... but
unfortunately a little beyond my own electronics skills.
Along those lines, has anybody tried the altitude compensating carbs
available for Rotax engines? Unfortunately they don't compensate for air
temperature as well...
-Dana
--
Of all the forces in the world, only the Federal Government has enough
power left to destroy America.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Cottrell" <lcottrell(at)fmtcblue.com> |
The weather turned off clear and of course a bit cold. The wind forecast
was from the south at no more than 10 all day. I rolled out the Firestar
and fueled up to max. When I took off at 10: AM the temp was 31 degrees.
I have been presenting the Ranchers that allow me to hunt my hawks on
their property with a framed 8x10 aerial photo of their ranch. It seems
to go over pretty well, and it is the least that I could do. There were
two ranches that I did not like the picture that I had and wanted to do
it over. I climbed up to 1600 feet agl and headed east. I have a
enclosure around the front, but leave off the clear plastic that Kolb
sends to make their full enclosure. (Slows flight by 10 mph) I do have a
heater that captures the air from the engine shroud. I also use a cowboy
(buckaroo in this area) "Wild Rag", a silk scarf around my neck, down
vest, leather flight jacket. I also use "Bog" boots on my
feet.(neoprene) as my feet generally get cold at these temps. The flight
was just great. I had my 10 MPH wind from the south and was making 86
over the ground. The air was as stable as it ever gets. I had checked
the batteries in the camera before leaving the ground and of course
after I took three pictures the rascal was showing dying batteries. My
path after the ranch houses took me along the Jordan River, and out to
the Jordan Craters Lava Flow. I was also checking for duck ponds to
visit later.
The Jordan craters flow covers about 25 miles, and was featured in one
of Louis Lamour's novels. The lava has not collapsed, so the lava is
scabbed over and it is hollow underneath. Kind of unnerving when you
walk on it. Little spots have collapsed making little potholes where
grass and willows grow. Some of them are filled with water and ducks are
as safe there as they ever get. I also took a picture of a "line shack"
made out of the lava rock. A bit hard to see. Then I came back over the
Pillars of Rome. As I came back over the desert leaving the ranches
behind, I can see a glowing white dot that is a feral horse that lives
there with a buckskin and a bay. She shows up when the sun hits her for
at least 10 miles. She is a "Cream" and to me looks like Silver, Gene
Autry's horse. She also has black eyes, but that is the only color on
her. She is also as wild as a March hare, and starts running as soon as
she sees a plane. ( They round them up with choppers) I took this
picture and lined up for a real close up and had her with her head up
looking behind her at me. Mane and tail were flying, I was 25 feet high
and 50 feet behind. You guessed it, the camera died!
Larry C
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Some pictures from Kolb Flying Today... |
| From: | "grantr" <grant_richardson25(at)yahoo.com> |
Where are you located? I see you have some nice farm land around.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146366#146366
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: 2 stroke vs 4 stroke |
Years ago, the guy that now has the 582 FSII in the hangar adjacent to
mine had a Hummer with a Zenoah 250 and a Mikuni pumper carb on it. We
rigged a long length of aluminum tubing from next to the seat back to
the high speed needle so that he could turn it in or out to adjust the
high speed needle according to what the EGT was showing. Anvil simple
and he never had an engine out.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
Dana Hague wrote:
>
> At 08:08 PM 11/15/2007, Richard Girard wrote:
>
> The question of fuel injection came up at the Rotax Service Center
> classes at Lockwood this last spring. Eric Tucker was asked, why it
> wasn't used by Rotax. None available that meets Rotax reliability
> standards.
>
> Unless you could adapt an existing automotive fuel injection system I
> can well imagine that the development cost for a reliable system would
> be prohibitive.
>
> From time to time I've played with the idea of developing an
> electronic carburetor adjustment system for the small 2-strokes used
> on PPG's (nice thing about a PPG is that an engine failure during
> testing is normally a non event). My thought was to use an oxygen
> sensor in the exhaust to measure the air/fuel ratio, and some
> electronics to drive an off the shelf R/C servo to adjust the main
> mixture needle valve (most of these engines use Walbro pumper
> carburetors). You could program it to keep as far on the rich side of
> a stoichiometric ratio as desired. It would have to have a failsafe
> mode, of course, to revert to a rich condition in the event of failure
> of the O2 sensor, as well as during startup before the sensor is hot
> enough to generate a signal (cars use heated sensors for startup,
> until the exhaust is hot enough to keep the sensor hot, but they
> require too much power for the lighting coil on a small engine).
>
> On an engine with a float carburetor, it could control the mixture by
> porting and metering manifold vacuum to the float bowl, similar to how
> the altitude compensating carbs do it.
>
> FAR simpler than true fuel injection, and mechanically simple... but
> unfortunately a little beyond my own electronics skills.
>
> Along those lines, has anybody tried the altitude compensating carbs
> available for Rotax engines? Unfortunately they don't compensate for
> air temperature as well...
>
> -Dana
> --
> Of all the forces in the world, only the Federal Government has
> enough power left to destroy America.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dana Hague <d-m-hague(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 2 stroke vs 4 stroke |
At 10:50 PM 11/15/2007, Richard Pike wrote:
>Years ago, the guy that now has the 582 FSII in the hangar adjacent to
>mine had a Hummer with a Zenoah 250 and a Mikuni pumper carb on it. We
>rigged a long length of aluminum tubing from next to the seat back to the
>high speed needle so that he could turn it in or out to adjust the high
>speed needle according to what the EGT was showing. Anvil simple and he
>never had an engine out.
One of my PPG's has a Solo 210 engine (single cylinder, 14hp). No EGT, but
at the start of every day of flying it, I start it slightly rich, lean it
for peak rpm, then back off 100 rpm or 1/8 turn. In 350+ hours flying it,
I've had problems with engine accessories (muffler, ignition, redrive) but
never a seizure or any other trouble inside the engine.
-Dana
--
Balance the budget--declare politicians a game species.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: 2 stroke vs 4 stroke |
The recipe for all Experimental aircraft: Simplicate and add lightness.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
Dana Hague wrote:
>
> At 10:50 PM 11/15/2007, Richard Pike wrote:
>
>> Years ago, the guy that now has the 582 FSII in the hangar adjacent
>> to mine had a Hummer with a Zenoah 250 and a Mikuni pumper carb on
>> it. We rigged a long length of aluminum tubing from next to the seat
>> back to the high speed needle so that he could turn it in or out to
>> adjust the high speed needle according to what the EGT was showing.
>> Anvil simple and he never had an engine out.
>
> One of my PPG's has a Solo 210 engine (single cylinder, 14hp). No
> EGT, but at the start of every day of flying it, I start it slightly
> rich, lean it for peak rpm, then back off 100 rpm or 1/8 turn. In
> 350+ hours flying it, I've had problems with engine accessories
> (muffler, ignition, redrive) but never a seizure or any other trouble
> inside the engine.
>
> -Dana
> --
> Balance the budget--declare politicians a game species.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)msbit.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 2 stroke vs 4 stroke |
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (4.41)
X-SpamReason %%SpamReason%%:
> Years ago, the guy that now has the 582 FSII in the hangar adjacent to
> mine had a Hummer with a Zenoah 250 and a Mikuni pumper carb on it. We
> rigged a long length of aluminum tubing from next to the seat back to
> the high speed needle so that he could turn it in or out to adjust the
> high speed needle according to what the EGT was showing. Anvil simple
> and he never had an engine out.
>
> Richard Pike
> MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
Richard has a sterling idea...but let's extend this out a bit.
http://www.acroname.com/robotics/info/ideas/continuous/continuous.html
There are some really powerful 1/4 scale servos out there that would
work nicely to control a needle. All one would need is the pulse
width generating electronics to control the servo....about $6 in
parts and $15 for the servo. An easy project, electronically. The
harder part would be building a servo mount. Perhaps a gear drive
set?
And then this......
> > The question of fuel injection came up at the Rotax Service Center
> > classes at Lockwood this last spring. Eric Tucker was asked, why it
> > wasn't used by Rotax. None available that meets Rotax reliability
> > standards.
Gee....hope Rotax doesn't hear about this.....
"Two-stroke, twin-cylinder Rotax, Fuel Injection, R.A.V.E.TM exhaust;
Water cooled"
On what? SeaDoo GTi, Rotax powered.
> > Unless you could adapt an existing automotive fuel injection system I
> > can well imagine that the development cost for a reliable system would
> > be prohibitive.
Now, I'm sure you'll try to tell me that JetSki engines are apples
and UL engines are oranges. Several other two stroke engine lines
have fuel injection: Fuji, Hirth, Orbital (especially Orbital),
Mercury, OMC, Bimota.....it's not hard to do, just not worth it in
the small volume world of UL sales. THAT is what Eric really means
but doesn't have the heart to say. I can't imagine that all these
companies would front all that research and $$$$, risking customer
loyalty, for an unreliable product....even Rotax.
Jim Baker
580.788.2779
Elmore City, OK
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 2 stroke vs 4 stroke |
| From: | "Jim ODay" <jimoday(at)hotmail.com> |
JetPilot wrote:
>
> grantr wrote:
> >
> > What makes the 2 stroke less reliable than the 4 stroke? In theory the 2 stroke
should be more reliable especially the piston port engine because it only
had a few moving parts to fail.
> >
>
>
> Bottom line is if you want a reliable engine that is least likely to quit then
its a no brainier, fly a 4 stroke.
>
> If you can not afford a 4 stroke, and have no other option then to fly with a
2 stroke, do yourself a favor and read this article. Its short, and gives you
really good useful, real world information (not a bunch of theory ) on how to
keep your 2 stroke running as reliably as possible.
>
> http://curedcomposites.netfirms.com/twostroke.html
>
> Mike
Good information on engines. Thank you! Can you point me to more reading on these
engines? I am a novice on these little motors.
Can you recommend any video programs or books on operating the Rotax 2 cycle engine?
A "Rotax 2 Stoke for Dummies" would be perfect.
I "can afford a 4 stroke"; what type of 4 stroke can be used on the Firestar, or
is that not an option?
If 2 stoke is my only option, I have a 477, is a dual ignition model more reliable?
Or is it the proper tuning that is the primary key to good service?
Thanks.
Jim
--------
Jim O'Day
Fargo, ND
Firestar II
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146394#146394
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dana Hague <d-m-hague(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 2 stroke vs 4 stroke |
At 11:29 PM 11/15/2007, Jim Baker wrote:
>http://www.acroname.com/robotics/info/ideas/continuous/continuous.html
>
>There are some really powerful 1/4 scale servos out there that would
>work nicely to control a needle. All one would need is the pulse
>width generating electronics to control the servo....about $6 in
>parts and $15 for the servo. An easy project, electronically. The
>harder part would be building a servo mount. Perhaps a gear drive
>set?
Mechanically it's simple. You don't need continuous rotation, the needle
adjustment needed for weather or altitude changes is small, maybe 1/4 turn.
>"Two-stroke, twin-cylinder Rotax, Fuel Injection, R.A.V.E.TM exhaust;
>Water cooled"
>
>On what? SeaDoo GTi, Rotax powered.
>
> > > Unless you could adapt an existing automotive fuel injection system I
> > > can well imagine that the development cost for a reliable system would
> > > be prohibitive.
>
>Now, I'm sure you'll try to tell me that JetSki engines are apples
>and UL engines are oranges. Several other two stroke engine lines
>have fuel injection...
I knew there were some outboards with fuel injection; I didn't realize
Rotax made any. If the development is already done, I'm surprised they
haven't applied it to the aircraft engines.
-Dana
--
When you were born, you cried and the world rejoiced...
Live your life so that when you die, the world cries and you rejoice.
-- Cherokee saying
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Cottrell" <lcottrell(at)fmtcblue.com> |
| Subject: | Re: a flying day |
My wife has informed me that Silver was the Lone Rangers Horse. I
actually knew that.
Larry (Dangerfield) C
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dana Hague <d-m-hague(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 2 stroke vs 4 stroke |
At 06:53 AM 11/16/2007, icrashrc wrote:
>
>As far as a servo driver there's no need to reinvent the wheel...
If I was just building a remote mixture control I wouldn't use electronics
at all; a simple push/pull cable would suffice. The electronics would be
needed to interpret the O2 sensor's signal voltage and move the servo as
required.
Some outfits sell O2 sensor driven display units. They don't control
anything, just display what the sensor is seeing. That might be a good
start, as a manual tuning aid and to see how the sensor holds up.
-Dana
--
Resist militant "normality" -- A mind is a terrible thing to erase.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eugene Zimmerman <ez(at)embarqmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re:Remote Carb Adjustment |
A simple method I've used years ago on a JLO Rockwell (Cuyuna
predecessor ) is a speedometer cable fitted with a knob. It was
simple and it worked well.
On Nov 15, 2007, at 10:50 PM, Richard Pike wrote:
>
> Years ago, the guy that now has the 582 FSII in the hangar adjacent
> to mine had a Hummer with a Zenoah 250 and a Mikuni pumper carb on
> it. We rigged a long length of aluminum tubing from next to the
> seat back to the high speed needle so that he could turn it in or
> out to adjust the high speed needle according to what the EGT was
> showing. Anvil simple and he never had an engine out.
>
> Richard Pike
> MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | robert bean <slyck(at)frontiernet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: a flying day |
Larry, I too have a battery-gobbling early digital. After some
experimenting, the best
batteries I have found to date are:
DURACELL AA/HR6//DC1500 NiMH 2650mAh
I found them at Kmart.
I also use a slow charger that takes overnight to recharge.
BB
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | gary aman <gaman(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: a flying day |
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 2 stroke vs 4 stroke |
| From: | "JetPilot" <orcabonita(at)hotmail.com> |
Jim ODay wrote:
>
>
> I "can afford a 4 stroke"; what type of 4 stroke can be used on the Firestar,
or is that not an option?
>
> If 2 stoke is my only option, I have a 477, ...... is a dual ignition model more
reliable? Or is it the proper tuning that is the primary key to good
service?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Jim
Hi Jim
The best engine for the Firestar appears to be the HKS 4 stroke engine. Dave
Bigelow installed an HKS engine on his Firestar to fly over very hostile terrain
in Hawaii, and has had very good luck with it. Although there is only one
case of the HKS on a Kolb that I know of, Dave is very technically competent and
has posted an about his setup on this forum:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?t=13013&highlight=hks
Trikes have been much faster to adopt the HKS engine, it is now the engine of choice
on the more expensive Mid Sized trikes that are to small for a 912's.
The reliability, and smoothness of this engine is well known in the many trikes
flying this engine.
Mike
--------
"NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could
have !!!
Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146489#146489
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 2 stroke vs 4 stroke |
| From: | "JetPilot" <orcabonita(at)hotmail.com> |
Jim ODay wrote:
>
>
> If 2 stoke is my only option, I have a 477, ...... is a dual ignition model more
reliable? Or is it the proper tuning that is the primary key to good
service?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Jim
I also fly a Trike with a 447 on it, and the main drawback of the 447 is the single
ignition system. With a single ignition 447, a fouled plug, bad wire, cap
comming lose, etc. etc. etc. will all bring you out of the sky. The engine
might run on one cylender, but it wont produce a usable amount of power.
For a 2 stroke, a 503 is a more reliable choice because of the dual ignition systems.
It has a little extra power which is nice also :) . As far as more
info on 2 strokes, I use the Rotax books, and never exceed the limits they set.
Another good thing is never run the 2 stroke at its full rated RPM. If you
look at the power curve, max torque occours well below MAX RPM, and gives much
less abuse to the engine. Try to get the last couple HP out of the engine with
near limit RPM's, and your reliability and engine life well go WAY DOWN.
One good rule of thumb is to set your RPM for max power RPM MINUS 10 % static,
which is close to 5900 RPM on a 503 and 447, and fine adjust from there according
to the EGT's, and required power in the various phases of flight.
Mike
--------
"NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could
have !!!
Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146490#146490
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Girard" <jindoguy(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 2 stroke vs 4 stroke |
Jim, You see Rotax selling any ultralight engines with the R.A.V.E.
exhaust anymore? When those electronic fuel injection units have a
problem in a snowmobile, what's the worst that can happen? Then you
have the problem of powering them with a dynamo that's already
strapped for power output. The ignition systems use dedicated coils to
power them, where do you find the room to put in some more? Rotax goes
to great effort to engineer a light reliable engine. If they had a
fuel injection system of aircraft reliability and light weight, do you
think they would not offer it?
Yeah, all that snowmobile stuff is great, look at the difference
between the power of a 582 and a 583. more than 25% more power for the
583. How many successful 583 applications have you seen on an
airplane?
Hirth has been advertising fuel injection for around ten years, if it
were the next great panacea, don't you think you'd be seeing more of
them in the air?
Rick
On Nov 15, 2007 10:29 PM, Jim Baker wrote:
>
> X-SpamReason %%SpamReason%%:
>
> > Years ago, the guy that now has the 582 FSII in the hangar adjacent to
> > mine had a Hummer with a Zenoah 250 and a Mikuni pumper carb on it. We
> > rigged a long length of aluminum tubing from next to the seat back to
> > the high speed needle so that he could turn it in or out to adjust the
> > high speed needle according to what the EGT was showing. Anvil simple
> > and he never had an engine out.
> >
> > Richard Pike
> > MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
> Richard has a sterling idea...but let's extend this out a bit.
>
> http://www.acroname.com/robotics/info/ideas/continuous/continuous.html
>
> There are some really powerful 1/4 scale servos out there that would
> work nicely to control a needle. All one would need is the pulse
> width generating electronics to control the servo....about $6 in
> parts and $15 for the servo. An easy project, electronically. The
> harder part would be building a servo mount. Perhaps a gear drive
> set?
>
> And then this......
>
> > > The question of fuel injection came up at the Rotax Service Center
> > > classes at Lockwood this last spring. Eric Tucker was asked, why it
> > > wasn't used by Rotax. None available that meets Rotax reliability
> > > standards.
>
> Gee....hope Rotax doesn't hear about this.....
>
> "Two-stroke, twin-cylinder Rotax(R), Fuel Injection, R.A.V.E.TM exhaust;
> Water cooled"
>
> On what? SeaDoo GTi, Rotax powered.
>
> > > Unless you could adapt an existing automotive fuel injection system I
> > > can well imagine that the development cost for a reliable system would
> > > be prohibitive.
>
> Now, I'm sure you'll try to tell me that JetSki engines are apples
> and UL engines are oranges. Several other two stroke engine lines
> have fuel injection: Fuji, Hirth, Orbital (especially Orbital),
> Mercury, OMC, Bimota.....it's not hard to do, just not worth it in
> the small volume world of UL sales. THAT is what Eric really means
> but doesn't have the heart to say. I can't imagine that all these
> companies would front all that research and $$$$, risking customer
> loyalty, for an unreliable product....even Rotax.
>
>
> Jim Baker
> 580.788.2779
> Elmore City, OK
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dana Hague <d-m-hague(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Worlds largest engine is a 2-stroke |
At 07:12 PM 11/16/2007, Eugene Zimmerman wrote:
>http://people.bath.ac.uk/ccsshb/12cyl/
Now THAT'S one impressive engine!
The crosshead is an interesting design. The website talks it about it
eliminating side loading on the pistons, and it does that, but it also
isolates the space under the piston from the crankcase, so the latter can
be oil filled. More reciprocating mass of course, but I guess it's not
such a big deal at only 102 rpm! Of course piston lubrication would still
be an issue during lean running if such an engine were a transfer port
design (which this engine doesn't seem to be).
-Dana
--
Atheists are people who have no invisible means of support.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 2 stroke vs 4 stroke |
In a message dated 11/16/2007 9:15:07 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
jindoguy(at)gmail.com writes:
Hirth has been advertising fuel injection for around ten years, if it
were the next great panacea, don't you think you'd be seeing more of
them in the air?
It only Hirths for a moment
Steve B
Firefly 007/Floats
do not archive
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Baker" <jlbaker(at)msbit.net> |
| Subject: | Re:Remote Carb Adjustment |
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (4.41)
X-SpamReason %%SpamReason%%:
> A simple method I've used years ago on a JLO Rockwell
> (Cuyunapredecessor ) is a speedometer cable fitted with a knob. It
> was simple and it worked well.
Simple is good...and this is about as simple as it gets. Unless
you're really in the experimenters mode and want to build an
electronic solution, this is probably the easiest way to go.
Jim Baker
580.788.2779
Elmore City, OK
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 2 stroke vs 4 stroke |
| From: | "lucien" <lstavenhagen(at)hotmail.com> |
JetPilot wrote:
>
> Hi Jim
>
> The best engine for the Firestar appears to be the HKS 4 stroke engine. Dave
Bigelow installed an HKS engine on his Firestar to fly over very hostile terrain
in Hawaii, and has had very good luck with it. Although there is only one
case of the HKS on a Kolb that I know of, Dave is very technically competent
and has posted an about his setup on this forum:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?t=13013&highlight=hks
>
> Trikes have been much faster to adopt the HKS engine, it is now the engine of
choice on the more expensive Mid Sized trikes that are to small for a 912's.
The reliability, and smoothness of this engine is well known in the many trikes
flying this engine.
>
> Mike
Actually the best engine for the FS is the 503, but putting that aside....
(add lots of smileys here)
The HKS does seem to be becoming successful and I'm gratified to see the Oleniks
selling and supporting it. I had Tom do the 150 hour's on a couple of my 503's
and there aren't better guys to work with than them. I think they know everything
about ligh a/c motors than anyone.
I'm really glad to see it working well out in the field, as it'll give a good alternative
right in a sore spot - the 60 to 65hp range....
PS: Now I'm going to say something _truly_ heretical:
I've been an ower-operator of the 912S for about a year now and am already finding
myself wishing I was back to running a 2-stroke, specifically the 503, again.
I love the 912, it runs great and it gives no trouble, but the 503 is still simpler
by a long ways to debug and maintain, and parts are so vastly, vastly cheaper
(when you need them). And it also gives no trouble apart from the need for
150 hour's......
There, I said it - I'm a 2-stroke heretic not particularly impressed by the 4-stroke
craze....
Alas, though, I've been told that Rotax is going to discontinue the 447 and 503
in a few years, so we may be stuck with the alternatives whether we like it or
not ;).
LS
--------
LS
FS II
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146627#146627
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Girard" <jindoguy(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 2 stroke vs 4 stroke |
Lucien, It's okay to be a heretic. If you have the time, put Airbike
Ace into Google and read about Paul's adventures. He's a member of EAA
chapter 88 and flies his 503 equipped Airbike like most people fly
Cessnas. The story of his trip to Oshkosh this year is in the latest
issue of Sport Pilot. His 503 has over 650 hours and I don't think he
does anything but run it regularly.
As for the HKS, I have one on my trike, runs like a champ and sips
gas. I did 25 landings yesterday afternoon in two hours of flying and
it burned 4 gallons. Can't wait to get one on a Kolb.
Rick
On Nov 17, 2007 9:16 AM, lucien wrote:
>
>
> JetPilot wrote:
> >
> > Hi Jim
> >
> > The best engine for the Firestar appears to be the HKS 4 stroke engine. Dave
Bigelow installed an HKS engine on his Firestar to fly over very hostile terrain
in Hawaii, and has had very good luck with it. Although there is only
one case of the HKS on a Kolb that I know of, Dave is very technically competent
and has posted an about his setup on this forum:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?t=13013&highlight=hks
> >
> > Trikes have been much faster to adopt the HKS engine, it is now the engine
of choice on the more expensive Mid Sized trikes that are to small for a 912's.
The reliability, and smoothness of this engine is well known in the many trikes
flying this engine.
> >
> > Mike
>
>
> Actually the best engine for the FS is the 503, but putting that aside....
>
> (add lots of smileys here)
>
> The HKS does seem to be becoming successful and I'm gratified to see the Oleniks
selling and supporting it. I had Tom do the 150 hour's on a couple of my 503's
and there aren't better guys to work with than them. I think they know everything
about ligh a/c motors than anyone.
>
> I'm really glad to see it working well out in the field, as it'll give a good
alternative right in a sore spot - the 60 to 65hp range....
>
> PS: Now I'm going to say something _truly_ heretical:
> I've been an ower-operator of the 912S for about a year now and am already finding
myself wishing I was back to running a 2-stroke, specifically the 503, again.
> I love the 912, it runs great and it gives no trouble, but the 503 is still simpler
by a long ways to debug and maintain, and parts are so vastly, vastly cheaper
(when you need them). And it also gives no trouble apart from the need
for 150 hour's......
>
> There, I said it - I'm a 2-stroke heretic not particularly impressed by the 4-stroke
craze....
>
> Alas, though, I've been told that Rotax is going to discontinue the 447 and 503
in a few years, so we may be stuck with the alternatives whether we like it
or not ;).
>
> LS
>
> --------
> LS
> FS II
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146627#146627
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 2 stroke vs 4 stroke |
| From: | "JetPilot" <orcabonita(at)hotmail.com> |
jindoguy(at)gmail.com wrote:
>
> As for the HKS, I have one on my trike, runs like a champ and sips
> gas. I did 25 landings yesterday afternoon in two hours of flying and
> it burned 4 gallons. Can't wait to get one on a Kolb.
>
> Rick
>
>
>
What kind of trike do you have Rick ? I fly an Air Creations Racer, I would love
the buggy with the HKS and KISS wing, but they are way expensive new ! There
don't seem to be any used ones on the market yet, which also says a lot
:)
JettPilot
--------
"NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could
have !!!
Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146637#146637
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Big Twin 4 stroke? |
| From: | "grantr" <grant_richardson25(at)yahoo.com> |
What do you guys think of the Big Twin from www.culverprops.com
here is the direct link http://culverprops.com/big-twin.php
Check out the videos of the Kolb MK II.
Its hard to believe that a 38 hp engine turning a max rpm of 3600rpm will fly the
plane.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146670#146670
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Oil Injection Pump |
It was the 582 powered FSII next door to me, that I do the maintenance
on, (And am just getting ready to go out and finish the engine
re-installation) the owner was about 20 miles away, had done a touch &
go at a local grass strip and was headed home when the engine quit.
Landed w/o incident, engine would not start or run. A few minutes later
it started, ran fine, and he called me on his cell phone, wondering if
he could fly it home safely. I told him it had likely seized, and would
probably seize again.
But if he was determined to fly it home, take off (it was a big open
field with lots of options), circle and climb until he was at least 2500
agl, and then head home, expecting it to fail. He did, and it worked.
Pulled the engine down and could find nothing wrong with it. Sent it to
Solo Aviation, and had it majored. In the process of putting it back on
the airplane and hooking all the systems back up, discovered grit in the
oil injection pump filter, on the downstream side (pump side) of the
filter screen.
Think about this for a while. I have thought about it for a month. This
is the filter that goes in the oil line from the reservoir to the pump,
we took it off, and there was sand and grit on the pump side of the
screen. There was nothing in the oil injection tank or the line to the
filter, or in the upstream side of the filter. Where did the grit come
from? No clue. The filter had sat for a while, unless a mud dauber had
stuffed it with mud while it was tucked away in a box...??? DurnifIknow.
This solved a problem that this engine has had for a while, the PTO end
carb float bowl started filling up with oil any time the airplane sat
for any length of time. Replaced the ball check valves on the outside of
the injection pump and that cured it for a week or so, but then it
started again. If you let the airplane sit for 2 weeks, preflight
entailed removing the PTO end float bowl and dumping out all the oil
that had accumulated. Or else start it on the mag end cylinder and run
it until it sucked all the oil out and finally started running on two,
fogging the neighborhood in the process. The grit had been getting into
the little ball check valve and holding it open, and the oil must have
been flowing through the pump, into the manifold, around the needle, and
into the float bowl.
Yeah, I know it sounds screwy, better ideas invited. Kind of like the
mud on the wrong side of the oil filter. Better ideas invited...
Removed the oil pump cover, the upper end had grit in it, you could see
it through the oil intake pipe and also through where the ball check
valves are attached. Knowing that the pump is lubricated via the oil
injection oil also being in the pump, pulled the bottom cover off the
pump and found that all the little roller bearings were running in a
black mess of oil and metal, the grit was gradually eating away the guts
of the pump. Not sure how much longer it would have lasted, but it
certainly was not airworthy.
Nothing damaged but the man's wallet, but it certainly is a complicated
and involved scenario. Now my break's over, off to the hangar to finish
putting it all back together.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
FSII N582EF
Frank Clyma wrote:
> _REF:_
>
> Anybody got an oil injection pump for a 582 sitting on a shelf,
> > collecting
> > dust? I need one. Yesterday.
> >
> > Richard Pike
> ----------------------------------
> Richard,
> Would you tell us what happened to your old pump---and how you
> caught the problem B4 it seized your engine?
>
> Thanks,
> Frank Clyma
> Orange Park, FL
> 503 DCDI/oil injected owner
> *
>
> *
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard & Martha Neilsen" <NeilsenRM(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Big Twin 4 stroke? |
This is a smaller version of the same redrive I have on my VW. That is a
fairly light plane with a light pilot and it was cold. This might be a
alternative for a FirestarII.
I had a discussion with Honda Don at Sun N Fun last year about this engine.
His comment was Honda engines are smooth because they have the heaviest
flywheels in the business. The first thing the guys a Valley did was cut the
fly wheel off to reduce the engine weight.
I have never seen it run up close. Maybe the redrive smoothes it out????
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIIIC
----- Original Message -----
From: "grantr" <grant_richardson25(at)yahoo.com>
Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2007 2:07 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Big Twin 4 stroke?
>
> What do you guys think of the Big Twin from www.culverprops.com
>
> here is the direct link http://culverprops.com/big-twin.php
> Check out the videos of the Kolb MK II.
>
> Its hard to believe that a 38 hp engine turning a max rpm of 3600rpm will
> fly the plane.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146670#146670
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Worlds largest engine is a 2-stroke |
| From: | "JetPilot" <orcabonita(at)hotmail.com> |
Those are neat pictures, but the fact that that engine is a 2 stroke does not mean
anything. First, that engine is running at 102 RPM, and has a dedicated
oil system rather than just mixing oil with the fuel. That makes all the difference
in the world in reliability.
It is also much easier to have racks of computers and many controls on board a
ship to keep the conditions, fuel flow, etc. for that engine absolutely perfect.
So while very neat, one should not make the mistake of thinking that this engine
gives any indication of the reliability the 2 stroke engines we fly.
Mike
--------
"NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could
have !!!
Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146692#146692
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Big Twin 4 stroke? |
| From: | "JetPilot" <orcabonita(at)hotmail.com> |
Given the price of that engine, I would definitely go with the HKS instead. The
big twin engine is heavy, low on power, and pretty darned expensive. The HKS
has almost twice the power for the weight...
Also, HKS has proven reliability in other planes, there is just nothing that makes
bit twin worth the risk. At 5000 dollars, the big twin is very expensive
for a anchor of an engine, especially when the HKS does not cost that much more
!
JettPilot
--------
"NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could
have !!!
Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146693#146693
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 2 stroke vs 4 stroke |
Rotax to Discontinure the 503??
Who's starting that rumor????
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: lucien <lstavenhagen(at)hotmail.com>
Sent: Sat, 17 Nov 2007 10:16 am
Subject: Kolb-List: Re: 2 stroke vs 4 stroke
JetPilot wrote:
>
> Hi Jim
>
> The best engine for the Firestar appears to be the HKS 4 stroke
engine. Dave
Bigelow installed an HKS engine on his Firestar to fly over very
hostile terrain
in Hawaii, and has had very good luck with it. Although there is only
one case
of the HKS on a Kolb that I know of, Dave is very technically competent
and has
posted an about his setup on this forum:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?t=13013&highlight=hks
>
> Trikes have been much faster to adopt the HKS engine, it is now the
engine of
choice on the more expensive Mid Sized trikes that are to small for a
912's.
The reliability, and smoothness of this engine is well known in the
many trikes
flying this engine.
>
> Mike
Actually the best engine for the FS is the 503, but putting that
aside....
(add lots of smileys here)
The HKS does seem to be becoming successful and I'm gratified to see
the Oleniks
selling and supporting it. I had Tom do the 150 hour's on a couple of
my 503's
and there aren't better guys to work with than them. I think they know
everything about ligh a/c motors than anyone.
I'm really glad to see it working well out in the field, as it'll give
a good
alternative right in a sore spot - the 60 to 65hp range....
PS: Now I'm going to say something _truly_ heretical:
I've been an ower-operator of the 912S for about a year now and am
already
finding myself wishing I was back to running a 2-stroke, specifically
the 503,
again.
I love the 912, it runs great and it gives no trouble, but the 503 is
still
simpler by a long ways to debug and maintain, and parts are so vastly,
vastly
cheaper (when you need them). And it also gives no trouble apart from
the need
for 150 hour's......
There, I said it - I'm a 2-stroke heretic not particularly impressed by
the
4-stroke craze....
Alas, though, I've been told that Rotax is going to discontinue the 447
and 503
in a few years, so we may be stuck with the alternatives whether we
like it or
not ;).
LS
--------
LS
FS II
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146627#146627
________________________________________________________________________
Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! -
http://mail.aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 2 stroke vs 4 stroke |
| From: | "grantr" <grant_richardson25(at)yahoo.com> |
Someone told me that someone with Lockwood aviation said rotax was discontinuing
the 447 and 503s
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146722#146722
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Welch <mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | cutting and drilling Lexan |
Kolb builder guys,
I began cutting the Lexan for my doors on the MkIII and managed to crack one.
I wasn't trying to cut the exact fit, just sort of close, so I could handle
the piece easier. But, a crack snapped a huge corner off and now the rest is
too small to use, so I have to get another piece. Crud!! And seeing as how I
screwed up one of the pieces, I thought I'd ask for some help from anyone who
figures they've got Lexan fabrication down to a science!
Yes, I have read up on some pointers from the internet, like scoring with a sheetrock
knife, and ONLY using a special drillbit made for drilling into plastic,
but is there any additonal tips and tricks you guys know?
Like, is water needed for cooling to drill a hole, or is the bit all you need?
Any useful pointers would be much appreciated.
Thanks, Mike Welch....... windowless in SW Utah
_________________________________________________________________
Connect and share in new ways with Windows Live.
http://www.windowslive.com/connect.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_Wave2_newways_112007
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Girard" <jindoguy(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 2 stroke vs 4 stroke |
I have a Northwing Apache Sport. It has an M-Pulse 19 wing on it
today, but it will have a Quest 14.5 on it tomorrow.
I finished setting up the new wing this afternoon, but decided to give
it a good going over in the morning before I put it on the trike. I've
been so spoiled by the way the big wing can use convective lift to
keep fuel consumption down about as low as it's possible to get. There
have been some days I've gotten the fuel burn down to under 2 gallons
an hour. I normally cruise at 4700 rpm which gets me an airspeed of
42. Aerial yachting at its finest. If Kamron is right I should pick up
20 mph with the smaller double surface wing.
Rick
On Nov 17, 2007 10:03 AM, JetPilot wrote:
>
>
> jindoguy(at)gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > As for the HKS, I have one on my trike, runs like a champ and sips
> > gas. I did 25 landings yesterday afternoon in two hours of flying and
> > it burned 4 gallons. Can't wait to get one on a Kolb.
> >
> > Rick
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> What kind of trike do you have Rick ? I fly an Air Creations Racer, I would
love the buggy with the HKS and KISS wing, but they are way expensive new !
There don't seem to be any used ones on the market yet, which also says a lot
:)
>
> JettPilot
>
> --------
> "NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could have !!!
>
> Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146637#146637
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Pike <richard(at)bcchapel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: cutting and drilling Lexan |
Are you sure it's Lexan? Sounds like Plexiglas or acrylic. Lexan you can
beat on it or bend the fool out of it and it ignores you.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
Mike Welch wrote:
>
>
> Kolb builder guys,
>
> I began cutting the Lexan for my doors on the MkIII and managed to crack one.
I wasn't trying to cut the exact fit, just sort of close, so I could handle
the piece easier. But, a crack snapped a huge corner off and now the rest is
too small to use, so I have to get another piece. Crud!! And seeing as how
I screwed up one of the pieces, I thought I'd ask for some help from anyone who
figures they've got Lexan fabrication down to a science!
>
> Yes, I have read up on some pointers from the internet, like scoring with a
sheetrock knife, and ONLY using a special drillbit made for drilling into plastic,
but is there any additonal tips and tricks you guys know?
>
> Like, is water needed for cooling to drill a hole, or is the bit all you need?
>
> Any useful pointers would be much appreciated.
>
> Thanks, Mike Welch....... windowless in SW Utah
> _________________________________________________________________
> Connect and share in new ways with Windows Live.
> http://www.windowslive.com/connect.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_Wave2_newways_112007
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Girard" <jindoguy(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Big Twin 4 stroke? |
At the weight you're quoting for the big twin, which is entirely in
line with the weights listed for the Vanguard and Honda V Twin
industrial engines, the Continental A084 becomes real attractive. They
can still be had for under $1000 and you get the designed in balance
of the flat 4.
Rick
On Nov 17, 2007 4:07 PM, JetPilot wrote:
>
> Given the price of that engine, I would definitely go with the HKS instead.
The big twin engine is heavy, low on power, and pretty darned expensive. The
HKS has almost twice the power for the weight...
>
> Also, HKS has proven reliability in other planes, there is just nothing that
makes bit twin worth the risk. At 5000 dollars, the big twin is very expensive
for a anchor of an engine, especially when the HKS does not cost that much more
!
>
> JettPilot
>
> --------
> "NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could have !!!
>
> Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146693#146693
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Girard" <jindoguy(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Big Twin 4 stroke? |
I should add that they have an active following on Yahoo Groups where
you can find a lot of info to make the conversion from generator
powerplant to aircraft engine pretty painless.
Rick
On Nov 18, 2007 12:02 AM, Richard Girard wrote:
> At the weight you're quoting for the big twin, which is entirely in
> line with the weights listed for the Vanguard and Honda V Twin
> industrial engines, the Continental A084 becomes real attractive. They
> can still be had for under $1000 and you get the designed in balance
> of the flat 4.
>
> Rick
>
>
> On Nov 17, 2007 4:07 PM, JetPilot wrote:
> >
> > Given the price of that engine, I would definitely go with the HKS instead.
The big twin engine is heavy, low on power, and pretty darned expensive. The
HKS has almost twice the power for the weight...
> >
> > Also, HKS has proven reliability in other planes, there is just nothing that
makes bit twin worth the risk. At 5000 dollars, the big twin is very expensive
for a anchor of an engine, especially when the HKS does not cost that much
more !
> >
> > JettPilot
> >
> > --------
> > "NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could have !!!
> >
> > Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146693#146693
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Welch <mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | cutting and drilling Lexan |
Actually, you're right. The first piece I just screwed up today was plexiglass.
But, years ago, when I installed the Lexan windshield on my MkIII, I evidently
didn't do it correctly then, either. I ended up getting tons of cracks
off the mounting holes I drilled.
So, after admitting I've not taken the fabrication correctly and seriously enough,
I want to only proceed the right way.
So, what have you got for me? Tips, pointers, criticisms? Hmm? Mike
W.
October 30, 2007 - November 18, 2007
Kolb-Archive.digest.vol-ha