Kolb-Archive.digest.vol-pe
October 29, 2018 - November 11, 2018
Sent from my iPhone
> On Oct 28, 2018, at 1:32 PM, loctupdave wrote:
>
>
> I stripped the fuselage down, all but the seat.
> (http://s275.photobucket.com/user/dngspot/media/stripped%20frame_zpsi2cb595u.jpg.html)
>
> then I took the fuselage home and welded the broken tube.
> (http://s275.photobucket.com/user/dngspot/media/weld%20fix_zpskldhgp66.jpg.html)
>
> Now letting the paint stripper do its job. If I cannot remove the paint with
this stuff, out comes the wire wheel.
>
> Does anyone know where the serial number is stamped on this thing, I cannot find
it?
>
>
> (http://s275.photobucket.com/user/dngspot/media/paint%20strip_zpsmvqcxjfn.jpg.html)
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=484058#484058
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: My Firestar 2 Build |
| From: | "loctupdave" <loctupdave(at)att.net> |
Thank you for the replies. I checked the motor mount tube, nothing there. I guess
I will make my own serial number.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=484080#484080
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | George Helton <gdhelton(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: My Firestar 2 Build |
If you can find original plans, it the plans number. Like mine is FS100. The 100th
original Firestar.
George H.
Firestar, FS100, 2702 Hirth
14GDH
Mesick , Michigan
gdhelton(at)gmail.com
Sent from my iPhone
> On Oct 29, 2018, at 6:41 PM, loctupdave wrote:
>
>
> Thank you for the replies. I checked the motor mount tube, nothing there. I guess
I will make my own serial number.
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=484080#484080
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Berle <victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: My Firestar 2 Build |
I believe Helen Melborn told me the number stamped on the rear edge of the motoe
mount tube is the steel cage we;dment number, which is not sautomatically the
same as the aircraft serial number???
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
--------------------------------------------
On Mon, 10/29/18, George Helton wrote:
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: My Firestar 2 Build
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Date: Monday, October 29, 2018, 4:21 PM
Helton
If you can find original plans, it the
plans number. Like mine is FS100. The 100th original
Firestar.
George H.
Firestar, FS100, 2702 Hirth
14GDH
Mesick , Michigan
gdhelton(at)gmail.com
Sent from my iPhone
> On Oct 29, 2018, at 6:41 PM,
loctupdave
wrote:
>
> --> Kolb-List message posted
by: "loctupdave"
>
> Thank you for the replies. I
checked the motor mount tube, nothing there. I guess I will
make my own serial number.
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=484080#484080
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
The Kolb-List Email Forum -
Navigator to browse
List Un/Subscription,
7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
- MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
via the Web Forums!
- NEW MATRONICS LIST WIKI -
Email List Wiki!
- List Contribution Web Site -
support!
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mojavjoe <mojavjoe(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: My Firestar 2 Build |
I agree with Bill. Mine was marked FS001 and I'm sure it was not the first Firestar.
Joe
> >
> > Thank you for the replies. I
> checked the motor mount tube, nothing there. I guess I will
> make my own serial number.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=484080#484080
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> The Kolb-List Email Forum -
> Navigator to browse
> List Un/Subscription,
> 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
> - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
> via the Web Forums!
> - NEW MATRONICS LIST WIKI -
> Email List Wiki!
> - List Contribution Web Site -
> support!
>
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: My Firestar 2 Build |
To the best of my knowledge the first Fire Star is in Homer Kolb's hanger in Springville,
PA. I watched Dick Rahill crash it at Oshkosh in 1989. Homer completely
rebuilt the first Firestar not long before he passed. Got to fly it at
Sun and Fun 1986 or 87, then again at the Kolb Farm in 2008 (?). Was powered
by a Rotax 377 originally, replaced with a 503 DC when rebuilt. Also had VGs.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of mojavjoe
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2018 7:46 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: My Firestar 2 Build
I agree with Bill. Mine was marked FS001 and I'm sure it was not the first Firestar.
Joe
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: My Firestar 2 Build |
| From: | "loctupdave" <loctupdave(at)att.net> |
The previous owner did not have much in the way
of information. The plans I do have I bought from Kolb. Like I said. it looks
like I will have to make my own serial number.
gdhelton(at)gmail.com wrote:
> If you can find original plans, it the plans number. Like mine is FS100. The
100th original Firestar.
> George H.
> Firestar, FS100, 2702 Hirth
> 14GDH
> Mesick , Michigan
> gdhelton(at)gmail.com
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
> > On Oct 29, 2018, at 6:41 PM, loctupdave wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Thank you for the replies. I checked the motor mount tube, nothing there.
I guess I will make my own serial number.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=484080#484080
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=484096#484096
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: My Firestar 2 Build |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
Is this a previously registered a/c? If so, the serial number in the
eyes of the FAA is on the registration paperwork. There is no
requirement that it match Kolb's number (the person who registered it
could have called it a Blowhard serial number 10,000), but
there *is* a requirement that your data plate matches the registration.
On 10/30/2018 1:46 PM, loctupdave wrote:
>
> The previous owner did not have much in the way
> of information. The plans I do have I bought from Kolb. Like I said. it looks
like I will have to make my own serial number.
>
>
> gdhelton(at)gmail.com wrote:
>> If you can find original plans, it the plans number. Like mine is FS100. The
100th original Firestar.
>> George H.
>> Firestar, FS100, 2702 Hirth
>> 14GDH
>> Mesick , Michigan
>> gdhelton(at)gmail.com
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>
>>> On Oct 29, 2018, at 6:41 PM, loctupdave wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you for the replies. I checked the motor mount tube, nothing there.
I guess I will make my own serial number.
>>>
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | George Helton <gdhelton(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: My Firestar 2 Build |
Yup, sounds like you get to be creative.
George H.
Firestar
Mesick, Michigan
Sent from my iPhone
> On Oct 30, 2018, at 2:46 PM, loctupdave wrote:
>
>
> The previous owner did not have much in the way
> of information. The plans I do have I bought from Kolb. Like I said. it looks
like I will have to make my own serial number.
>
>
> gdhelton(at)gmail.com wrote:
>> If you can find original plans, it the plans number. Like mine is FS100. The
100th original Firestar.
>> George H.
>> Firestar, FS100, 2702 Hirth
>> 14GDH
>> Mesick , Michigan
>> gdhelton(at)gmail.com
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>
>>> On Oct 29, 2018, at 6:41 PM, loctupdave wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you for the replies. I checked the motor mount tube, nothing there. I
guess I will make my own serial number.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>
>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=484080#484080
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=484096#484096
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: My Firestar 2 Build |
| From: | "loctupdave" <loctupdave(at)att.net> |
With what I have for information this plane has never had a N number. There is
no data plate or evidence of a N number removal.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=484104#484104
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: My Firestar 2 Build |
On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 4:12 PM loctupdave wrote:
>
> With what I have for information this plane has never had a N number.
> There is no data plate or evidence of a N number removal.
>
> If it's never been registered, and you intend to register it as a
> homebuilt, then you get to pick the model name and serial number when you
> register it. Be prepared to show some kind of chain of ownership of the
> 'project', or a document signed by you stating that it was built from
> 'parts', meaning scratch built. You'll have to do the 51% checklist, etc.
If you intend to fly it as an ultralite, all the above is moot.
Charlie
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: My Firestar 2 Build |
| From: | "loctupdave" <loctupdave(at)att.net> |
It would be wonderful knowing the year it was made.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=484106#484106
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: My Firestar 2 Build |
| From: | "Jerry-TS-MkII" <12flybellaire(at)gmail.com> |
RE: SN..
Was this ever registered before? Or was it flown as a U/L? If it's ever been
registered, the FAA should have a SN associated with the plane/paperwork. :-)
Jerry
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=484107#484107
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: My Firestar 2 Build |
| From: | "loctupdave" <loctupdave(at)att.net> |
I cannot see anything on the plane or information given that would suggest it has
been restored by the FAA.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=484108#484108
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: My Firestar 2 Build |
| From: | "Jerry-TS-MkII" <12flybellaire(at)gmail.com> |
If you know the original builder.. Kolb might have records of who bought kits or
plans? I'm not sure of when they changed ownership.. so that could be a problem,
but might be worth a try. It may not be an issue, if it's never been registered.
I know with a U/L transition to ELSA, it was "pick a number" and put
it on the airplane and related documents.
Jerry
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=484110#484110
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | George Helton <gdhelton(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: My Firestar 2 Build |
If youre going to fly it as a ultralight, its a non-issue except I.D. purposes
anyway.
George H.
Firestar
14GDH
Mesick, Michigan
Sent from my iPhone
> On Oct 30, 2018, at 11:43 PM, Jerry-TS-MkII <12flybellaire(at)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> If you know the original builder.. Kolb might have records of who bought kits
or plans? I'm not sure of when they changed ownership.. so that could be a problem,
but might be worth a try. It may not be an issue, if it's never been
registered. I know with a U/L transition to ELSA, it was "pick a number" and
put it on the airplane and related documents.
>
> Jerry
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=484110#484110
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JC Gilpin <j.gilpin(at)bigpond.com> |
| Subject: | Re: My Firestar 2 Build |
That was the aircraft that I used for the travels that I did over in the
USA in 2013,14,15. I flew it as an ultralight, and to my knowledge it never
had been registered. The previous owner also flew it as an ultralight. He
had no information as to it's history and no paperwork. I just took it 'as
is' and hit the road and the air, and it served me well.
The vertical stab had been modified in a very distinctive way, and the
trailer is also very distinctive. These features can be seen in the blog
http://jgflyingroadtrip2013.blogspot.com/ Someone may remember seeing
these features in the past and might be able to bring up some history....
JG
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: My Firestar 2 Build |
JG/Kolbers:
What an adventurer you are. I know the difficulties of planning,
building, and flying cross country flights in a Kolb. No way I would
ever attempt to do the trips that you have done. Was sitting here
reading your blog wondering what it would be like if I decided to go to
Australia and do the same thing you have done several times here in the
US. The foreseeable and unforeseeable problems are monumental.
Glad we got to spend time together sharing travel stories on a couple of
your trips.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of JC Gilpin
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2018 3:18 AM
Subject: Kolb-List: Re: My Firestar 2 Build
That was the aircraft that I used for the travels that I did over in the
USA in 2013,14,15. I flew it as an ultralight, and to my knowledge it
never had been registered. The previous owner also flew it as an
ultralight. He had no information as to it's history and no paperwork. I
just took it 'as is' and hit the road and the air, and it served me
well.
The vertical stab had been modified in a very distinctive way, and the
trailer is also very distinctive. These features can be seen in the blog
http://jgflyingroadtrip2013.blogspot.com/ Someone may remember seeing
these features in the past and might be able to bring up some
history....
JG
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | PLEASE READ - Matronics Email List 2018 Fund Raiser During |
November!
Dear Listers,
Each November I hold a PBS-like fund raiser to support the continued operation
and upgrade of the Email List and Fourm Services at Matronics. It's solely through
the Contributions of List members (you) that these Matronics Lists are possible.
You have probably noticed that there are no banner ads or pop-up windows on any of the Matronics Lists or related web sites such as the Forums site http://forums.matronics.com , Wiki site http://wiki.matronics.com , or other related pages such as the List Search Engine http://www.matronics.com/search , List Browse http://www.matronics.com/listbrowse , etc. This is because I believe in a List experience that is completely about the sport we all enjoy - namely Airplanes and not about annoying advertisements.
During the month of November I will be sending out List messages every couple of
days reminding everyone that the Fund Raiser is underway. I ask for your patience
and understanding during the Fund Raiser and throughout these regular messages.
The Fund Raiser is only financial support mechanism I have to pay all
of the bills associated with running these lists. YOUR personal Contribution
counts!
This year we have a really HUGE and TERRIFIC line up of free gifts to go along
with the various Contribution levels. In fact, there are 9 great gifts to choose
from! There's something for everyone, to be sure.
Please make your List Contribution using any one of three secure methods including
using a Credit Card, PayPal, or by Personal Check. All three methods afford
you the opportunity to select one of this year's free gifts with a qualifying
Contribution amount!!
To make your Contribution, please visit the secure web site:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
I would like to thank everyone in advance for their generous financial AND moral
support over the years!
Thank you!
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
RV-4/RV-6/RV-8 Builder/Rebuilder/Pilot
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: My Firestar 2 Build |
| From: | "west1m" <west1m(at)hotmail.com> |
victorbravo(at)sbcglobal. wrote:
> I believe Helen Melborn told me the number stamped on the rear edge of the motoe
mount tube is the steel cage we;dment number, which is not sautomatically
the same as the aircraft serial number???
>
> Bill Berle
> www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
> www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Mon, 10/29/18, George Helton wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: Re: My Firestar 2 Build
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Date: Monday, October 29, 2018, 4:21 PM
>
>
> Helton
>
> If you can find original plans, it the
> plans number. Like mine is FS100. The 100th original
> Firestar.
> George H.
> Firestar, FS100, 2702 Hirth
> 14GDH
> Mesick , Michigan
> gdhelton(at)gmail.com
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Oct 29, 2018, at 6:41 PM,
> loctupdave
> wrote:
> >
> > --> Kolb-List message posted
> by: "loctupdave"
> >
> > Thank you for the replies. I
> checked the motor mount tube, nothing there. I guess I will
> make my own serial number.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=484080#484080
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> The Kolb-List Email Forum -
> Navigator to browse
> List Un/Subscription,
> 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
> - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
> via the Web Forums!
> - NEW MATRONICS LIST WIKI -
> Email List Wiki!
> - List Contribution Web Site -
> support!
>
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
I wonder about your FS100 number, model Number? My old
firestar plans have that number on them as well
--------
West1m
Hastings, MN
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=484229#484229
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/fs1032_665.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/fs100_138.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | Please Make A Contribution To Support Your Lists |
Dear Listers,
There is no advertising income to support the Matronics Email Lists and Forums.
The operation is supported 100% by your personal Contributions during the November
Fund Raiser.
Please make your Contribution today to support the continued operation and upgrade
of these services. You can pick up a really nice gift for making your Contribution
too!
You may use a Credit Card or Paypal at the Matronics Contribution Site here:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
or, you can send a personal check to the following address:
Matronics / Matt Dralle
581 Jeannie Way
Livermore, CA 94550
Thank you in advance for your generous support!
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List and Forum Administrator
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Berle <victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test |
Today was first engine run (after my recent mods). My modifications since last
test flight were:
1) Move oil cooler from top surface of the wing down to 12 inches under the wing.
2) Move oil reservoir tank down underneath the wing.
3) Fabricate a "solid" cover for the center section so that no air could "leak"
or flow upwards form the bottom to the top of the wing (causing drag and bad
airflow into the prop)
4) Move the fuel tank forward so it is now under the center of gravity, so that
the aircraft CG is not near the aft end of the CG rrange.
On this test run, we were finally able to do a static thrust measurement.
At 5850 RPM on the ground, the giant spring scale registered 250 pounds of thrust.
The engine is nominally 58-60HP at its redline of 6200 RPM, which means I
was making 94% of max RPM. This was with a 3 blade wide chord propeller, 65 inch
diameter, with 11 degrees of pitch measured at the tip.
So the purpose of this Kolb List post is to solicit data/opinion/experience from
Kolbers who have measured the static thrust on their Rotax 503, 532, and 582
engines and similar. I have NO IDEA if 250 pounds of thrust is a little, a lot,
average, below average, or incredible for a Firestar 2.
Kolbers...how does 250 pounds of thrust compare to what static thrust YOU measured
with your 503/532/582 on a Kolb?
Does 250 pounds of thrust seem correct for a "60HP class" engine... somewhere between
the 503 and 582?
How many pounds of thrust do YOU think is appropriate or acceptable for Kolb being
set up for short takeoff performance?
The next step is to finalize the center section cover (I made four or five of them
trying to come up with what would work best). Finally went with thin aluminum
sheet metal and Velcro. Once this is all finalized and installed, I can resume
my test flying, and see if this made enough difference to raise the cruise
speed to 65MPH.
Once I get to 63-65 MPH I can reduce drag using the streamlilned strut fairings
(from Dennis Carley / U-Fly-it) and work on all of the little drag redusing things
that Jack Hart has documented on his Firefly. Hopefully I can get my Firestar
up to the 68-72 MPH cruise speed that Larry C is getting on his Firestar
/ HKS setup.
Larry and I both have the same large bush tires and Firestar 2 airframe. I have
a different gearbox and longer landing gear legs than Larry does.
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test |
I do things a little different, but it has all worked out pretty well in the end.
New engine and/or prop, perform static runs to get the prop pitch in the ball park.
I don't concern myself with what the static thrust numbers are. Never did
a static thrust test on any of my Kolbs.
Go fly straight and level, wide open throttle. Keep adjusting prop pitch until
I can just bump the red line at WOT, straight and level flight.
That exercise gives me the best climb/cruise. I don't need to adjust for best
short field, climb performance. I will have it. That is the nature of Kolb flight
performance. If you over pitch you will have less climb and cruise. Under
pitch and you are spinning your wheels, wasting power.
Unless Bill B's FSII is not remotely configured like Larry C's FSII, it should
have very similar performance figures. A little longer main gear legs and bigger
tires aren't going to make much difference. On one flight to Alaska I traded
my 8X6 tires for 6X6 to get a little more cruise speed. Couldn't detect any
difference in performance. Same results going from a Maule 8" Tundra Tail
Wheel to a Maule 6" solid rubber tail wheel. No difference.
One thing that will add a lot of drag to a Kolb is loose fabric. There are a lot
of Kolbs out there that don't have "really" tight fabric. Fabric has almost
a rubbery feel. I shrink the fabric on my aircraft extra tight. Fabric feels
like a drum head. All three of my Kolbs have had respectable cruise speed
too.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Berle
Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2018 1:49 AM
Subject: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test
Today was first engine run (after my recent mods). My modifications since last
test flight were:
1) Move oil cooler from top surface of the wing down to 12 inches under the wing.
2) Move oil reservoir tank down underneath the wing.
3) Fabricate a "solid" cover for the center section so that no air could "leak"
or flow upwards form the bottom to the top of the wing (causing drag and bad
airflow into the prop)
4) Move the fuel tank forward so it is now under the center of gravity, so that
the aircraft CG is not near the aft end of the CG rrange.
On this test run, we were finally able to do a static thrust measurement.
At 5850 RPM on the ground, the giant spring scale registered 250 pounds of thrust.
The engine is nominally 58-60HP at its redline of 6200 RPM, which means I
was making 94% of max RPM. This was with a 3 blade wide chord propeller, 65 inch
diameter, with 11 degrees of pitch measured at the tip.
So the purpose of this Kolb List post is to solicit data/opinion/experience from
Kolbers who have measured the static thrust on their Rotax 503, 532, and 582
engines and similar. I have NO IDEA if 250 pounds of thrust is a little, a lot,
average, below average, or incredible for a Firestar 2.
Kolbers...how does 250 pounds of thrust compare to what static thrust YOU measured
with your 503/532/582 on a Kolb?
Does 250 pounds of thrust seem correct for a "60HP class" engine... somewhere between
the 503 and 582?
How many pounds of thrust do YOU think is appropriate or acceptable for Kolb being
set up for short takeoff performance?
The next step is to finalize the center section cover (I made four or five of them
trying to come up with what would work best). Finally went with thin aluminum
sheet metal and Velcro. Once this is all finalized and installed, I can resume
my test flying, and see if this made enough difference to raise the cruise
speed to 65MPH.
Once I get to 63-65 MPH I can reduce drag using the streamlilned strut fairings
(from Dennis Carley / U-Fly-it) and work on all of the little drag redusing things
that Jack Hart has documented on his Firefly. Hopefully I can get my Firestar
up to the 68-72 MPH cruise speed that Larry C is getting on his Firestar
/ HKS setup.
Larry and I both have the same large bush tires and Firestar 2 airframe. I have
a different gearbox and longer landing gear legs than Larry does.
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Cottrell <lcottrell1020(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test |
I can't add much of anything to what John said, since most of my knowledge
comes from John in the first place. One thing I can add is that the
increase in airspeed comes from cleaning up the drag- strut fairings, gear
legs etc.
Anxiously waiting to hear how the plane is going to fly.
Larry
On Sun, Nov 4, 2018 at 12:51 AM Bill Berle
wrote:
>
> Today was first engine run (after my recent mods). My modifications since
> last test flight were:
>
> 1) Move oil cooler from top surface of the wing down to 12 inches under
> the wing.
> 2) Move oil reservoir tank down underneath the wing.
> 3) Fabricate a "solid" cover for the center section so that no air could
> "leak" or flow upwards form the bottom to the top of the wing (causing drag
> and bad airflow into the prop)
> 4) Move the fuel tank forward so it is now under the center of gravity, so
> that the aircraft CG is not near the aft end of the CG rrange.
>
> On this test run, we were finally able to do a static thrust measurement.
>
> At 5850 RPM on the ground, the giant spring scale registered 250 pounds of
> thrust. The engine is nominally 58-60HP at its redline of 6200 RPM, which
> means I was making 94% of max RPM. This was with a 3 blade wide chord
> propeller, 65 inch diameter, with 11 degrees of pitch measured at the tip.
>
> So the purpose of this Kolb List post is to solicit
> data/opinion/experience from Kolbers who have measured the static thrust on
> their Rotax 503, 532, and 582 engines and similar. I have NO IDEA if 250
> pounds of thrust is a little, a lot, average, below average, or incredible
> for a Firestar 2.
>
> Kolbers...how does 250 pounds of thrust compare to what static thrust YOU
> measured with your 503/532/582 on a Kolb?
>
> Does 250 pounds of thrust seem correct for a "60HP class" engine...
> somewhere between the 503 and 582?
>
> How many pounds of thrust do YOU think is appropriate or acceptable for
> Kolb being set up for short takeoff performance?
>
> The next step is to finalize the center section cover (I made four or five
> of them trying to come up with what would work best). Finally went with
> thin aluminum sheet metal and Velcro. Once this is all finalized and
> installed, I can resume my test flying, and see if this made enough
> difference to raise the cruise speed to 65MPH.
>
> Once I get to 63-65 MPH I can reduce drag using the streamlilned strut
> fairings (from Dennis Carley / U-Fly-it) and work on all of the little drag
> redusing things that Jack Hart has documented on his Firefly. Hopefully I
> can get my Firestar up to the 68-72 MPH cruise speed that Larry C is
> getting on his Firestar / HKS setup.
>
> Larry and I both have the same large bush tires and Firestar 2 airframe. I
> have a different gearbox and longer landing gear legs than Larry does.
>
> Bill Berle
> www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
> www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and
> for-profit entities
>
>
--
*The older I get, the less tolerant I am of those who are intolerant of
others.*
*If you forward this email, or any part of it, please remove my email
address before sending.*
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Berle <victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test |
My aircraft is close but not identical to Larry C's Firestar.
I have longer landing gear legs, maybe 8 or 10 inches more steel tube on each side
sticking out in the breeze.
I have a shorter windshield than Larry. His comes back almost to the pilot's shoulders
(from the photos I've seen). Mine comes back to the pilot's knees.
Larry has streamlined struts and fairings. In my initial test flights, my aircraft
did NOT have the streamlined struts or fairings, and no fairings on the gear
legs either. Many many Kolbers have said that these streamlined struts and
gear legs will give you 5-7 MPH. My airplane is 20 MPH slower than his. So the
strut fairings will NOT make up that difference.
My exhaust system is totally different than Larry's. He has the stock HKS system
above the wing, with a small speed fairing behind the big can. Mine is a long
2-into-1 behind and below the fuselage, with a long thin muffler parallel to
the tailboom.
I have the 3.47-to-1 gearbox. Larry has the 2.58-to-1.
Larry has a "solid" fairing over the center section, top surface only. In my test
flights I had big holes in this fairing/cover where the oil cooler air came
out and the cover was not solid. The rear half of the wing was a "bottom surface"
cover only.The leading edge was top and bottom surface back to the thickest
part of the airfoil on mine. Then it was bottom-only from there back to the
rear.
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
--------------------------------------------
On Sun, 11/4/18, John Hauck wrote:
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Date: Sunday, November 4, 2018, 6:52 AM
Hauck"
I do things a little different, but it
has all worked out pretty well in the end.
New engine and/or prop, perform static
runs to get the prop pitch in the ball park. I don't
concern myself with what the static thrust numbers
are. Never did a static thrust test on any of my
Kolbs.
Go fly straight and level, wide open
throttle. Keep adjusting prop pitch until I can just
bump the red line at WOT, straight and level flight.
That exercise gives me the best
climb/cruise. I don't need to adjust for best short
field, climb performance. I will have it. That
is the nature of Kolb flight performance. If you over
pitch you will have less climb and cruise. Under pitch
and you are spinning your wheels, wasting power.
Unless Bill B's FSII is not remotely
configured like Larry C's FSII, it should have very similar
performance figures. A little longer main gear legs
and bigger tires aren't going to make much difference.
On one flight to Alaska I traded my 8X6 tires for 6X6 to get
a little more cruise speed. Couldn't detect any
difference in performance. Same results going from a
Maule 8" Tundra Tail Wheel to a Maule 6" solid rubber tail
wheel. No difference.
One thing that will add a lot of drag
to a Kolb is loose fabric. There are a lot of Kolbs
out there that don't have "really" tight fabric.
Fabric has almost a rubbery feel. I shrink the fabric
on my aircraft extra tight. Fabric feels like a drum
head. All three of my Kolbs have had respectable
cruise speed too.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com]
On Behalf Of Bill Berle
Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2018 1:49
AM
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar
STATIC THRUST test
Bill Berle
Today was first engine run (after my
recent mods). My modifications since last test flight were:
1) Move oil cooler from top surface of
the wing down to 12 inches under the wing.
2) Move oil reservoir tank down
underneath the wing.
3) Fabricate a "solid" cover for the
center section so that no air could "leak" or flow upwards
form the bottom to the top of the wing (causing drag and bad
airflow into the prop)
4) Move the fuel tank forward so it is
now under the center of gravity, so that the aircraft CG is
not near the aft end of the CG rrange.
On this test run, we were finally able
to do a static thrust measurement.
At 5850 RPM on the ground, the giant
spring scale registered 250 pounds of thrust. The engine is
nominally 58-60HP at its redline of 6200 RPM, which means I
was making 94% of max RPM. This was with a 3 blade wide
chord propeller, 65 inch diameter, with 11 degrees of pitch
measured at the tip.
So the purpose of this Kolb List post
is to solicit data/opinion/experience from Kolbers who have
measured the static thrust on their Rotax 503, 532, and 582
engines and similar. I have NO IDEA if 250 pounds of thrust
is a little, a lot, average, below average, or incredible
for a Firestar 2.
Kolbers...how does 250 pounds of thrust
compare to what static thrust YOU measured with your
503/532/582 on a Kolb?
Does 250 pounds of thrust seem correct
for a "60HP class" engine... somewhere between the 503 and
582?
How many pounds of thrust do YOU think
is appropriate or acceptable for Kolb being set up for short
takeoff performance?
The next step is to finalize the center
section cover (I made four or five of them trying to come up
with what would work best). Finally went with thin aluminum
sheet metal and Velcro. Once this is all finalized and
installed, I can resume my test flying, and see if this made
enough difference to raise the cruise speed to 65MPH.
Once I get to 63-65 MPH I can reduce
drag using the streamlilned strut fairings (from Dennis
Carley / U-Fly-it) and work on all of the little drag
redusing things that Jack Hart has documented on his
Firefly. Hopefully I can get my Firestar up to the 68-72 MPH
cruise speed that Larry C is getting on his Firestar / HKS
setup.
Larry and I both have the same large
bush tires and Firestar 2 airframe. I have a different
gearbox and longer landing gear legs than Larry does.
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com - safety
& performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net
- winning proposals for non-profit and
for-profit entities
Support Your Lists This Month --
(And Get Some AWESOME FREE Gifts!)
Fund Raiser. Click on
to find out more about
Incentive Gifts provided
www.mypilotstore.com
support!
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
The Kolb-List Email Forum -
Navigator to browse
List Un/Subscription,
7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
- MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
via the Web Forums!
- NEW MATRONICS LIST WIKI -
Email List Wiki!
- List Contribution Web Site -
support!
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Berle <victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test |
Hi Larry,
What was the cruising speed you got from your HKS/Firestar BEFORE the strut fairings,
gear leg fairings, etc?
I have only a few possibilities left if the "solid" center section fairing does
not get me up to 60 MPH without the fairings:
1) Modify the intake maniforlds or use the "straight" intakes like yours, to point
the carburetors forward into the airflow. Mine are the other curved type and
my carburetors face rearward. This puts a little bit of suction at the carb
inlet from forward speed AND the inlet be ing in the "suction" area in front
of the prop.
2) Remove the entire exhaust system to mount the stock HKS exhaust. This will be
difficult because my engine is lower on the mount plate than yours.
3) Trade my engine for another engine that has a 2.58 gearbox
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
--------------------------------------------
On Sun, 11/4/18, Larry Cottrell wrote:
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test
To: "kolb-list(at)matronics.com"
Date: Sunday, November 4, 2018, 8:16 AM
I can't add much
of anything to what John said, since most of my knowledge
comes from John in the first place. One thing I can add is
that the increase in airspeed comes from cleaning up the
drag- strut fairings, gear legs etc.
Anxiously waiting to
hear how the plane is going to fly.Larry
On Sun,
Nov 4, 2018 at 12:51 AM Bill Berle
wrote:
Bill Berle
Today was first engine run (after my recent mods). My
modifications since last test flight were:
1) Move oil cooler from top surface of the wing down to 12
inches under the wing.
2) Move oil reservoir tank down underneath the wing.
3) Fabricate a "solid" cover for the center
section so that no air could "leak" or flow
upwards form the bottom to the top of the wing (causing drag
and bad airflow into the prop)
4) Move the fuel tank forward so it is now under the center
of gravity, so that the aircraft CG is not near the aft end
of the CG rrange.
On this test run, we were finally able to do a static thrust
measurement.
At 5850 RPM on the ground, the giant spring scale registered
250 pounds of thrust. The engine is nominally 58-60HP at its
redline of 6200 RPM, which means I was making 94% of max
RPM. This was with a 3 blade wide chord propeller, 65 inch
diameter, with 11 degrees of pitch measured at the tip.
So the purpose of this Kolb List post is to solicit
data/opinion/experience from Kolbers who have measured the
static thrust on their Rotax 503, 532, and 582 engines and
similar. I have NO IDEA if 250 pounds of thrust is a little,
a lot, average, below average, or incredible for a Firestar
2.
Kolbers...how does 250 pounds of thrust compare to what
static thrust YOU measured with your 503/532/582 on a Kolb?
Does 250 pounds of thrust seem correct for a "60HP
class" engine... somewhere between the 503 and 582?
How many pounds of thrust do YOU think is appropriate or
acceptable for Kolb being set up for short takeoff
performance?
The next step is to finalize the center section cover (I
made four or five of them trying to come up with what would
work best). Finally went with thin aluminum sheet metal and
Velcro. Once this is all finalized and installed, I can
resume my test flying, and see if this made enough
difference to raise the cruise speed to 65MPH.
Once I get to 63-65 MPH I can reduce drag using the
streamlilned strut fairings (from Dennis Carley / U-Fly-it)
and work on all of the little drag redusing things that Jack
Hart has documented on his Firefly. Hopefully I can get my
Firestar up to the 68-72 MPH cruise speed that Larry C is
getting on his Firestar / HKS setup.
Larry and I both have the same large bush tires and Firestar
2 airframe. I have a different gearbox and longer landing
gear legs than Larry does.
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com
- safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net
- winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit
entities
==========
br>
fts!)
r>
>
e.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
==========
-List" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
==========
FORUMS -
eferrer"
target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
==========
WIKI -
errer"
target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
==========
b Site -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
--
The
older I get, the less tolerant I am of those who are
intolerant of others.
If you forward this email, or any part of
it, please remove my email address before sending.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | Coming Soon - The List of Contributors - Please Make A Contribution |
Today!
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 my way
of publicly thanking everyone that took a minute to show their appreciation
for the Lists.
Please 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 as valuable a building / entertainment tool as your typical magazine
subscription!
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 dropping a personal check in the mail to:
Matt Dralle / Matronics
581 Jeannie Way
Livermore CA 94550
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: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test |
Bill B,
Did you ever do an actual in flight prop pitch check, WOT, straight and level,
just bump the red line?
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Berle
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2018 2:07 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test
Hi Larry,
What was the cruising speed you got from your HKS/Firestar BEFORE the strut fairings,
gear leg fairings, etc?
I have only a few possibilities left if the "solid" center section fairing does
not get me up to 60 MPH without the fairings:
1) Modify the intake maniforlds or use the "straight" intakes like yours, to point
the carburetors forward into the airflow. Mine are the other curved type and
my carburetors face rearward. This puts a little bit of suction at the carb
inlet from forward speed AND the inlet be ing in the "suction" area in front
of the prop.
2) Remove the entire exhaust system to mount the stock HKS exhaust. This will be
difficult because my engine is lower on the mount plate than yours.
3) Trade my engine for another engine that has a 2.58 gearbox
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
--------------------------------------------
On Sun, 11/4/18, Larry Cottrell wrote:
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test
To: "kolb-list(at)matronics.com"
Date: Sunday, November 4, 2018, 8:16 AM
I can't add much
of anything to what John said, since most of my knowledge
comes from John in the first place. One thing I can add is
that the increase in airspeed comes from cleaning up the
drag- strut fairings, gear legs etc.
Anxiously waiting to
hear how the plane is going to fly.Larry
On Sun,
Nov 4, 2018 at 12:51 AM Bill Berle
wrote:
Bill Berle
Today was first engine run (after my recent mods). My
modifications since last test flight were:
1) Move oil cooler from top surface of the wing down to 12
inches under the wing.
2) Move oil reservoir tank down underneath the wing.
3) Fabricate a "solid" cover for the center
section so that no air could "leak" or flow
upwards form the bottom to the top of the wing (causing drag
and bad airflow into the prop)
4) Move the fuel tank forward so it is now under the center
of gravity, so that the aircraft CG is not near the aft end
of the CG rrange.
On this test run, we were finally able to do a static thrust
measurement.
At 5850 RPM on the ground, the giant spring scale registered
250 pounds of thrust. The engine is nominally 58-60HP at its
redline of 6200 RPM, which means I was making 94% of max
RPM. This was with a 3 blade wide chord propeller, 65 inch
diameter, with 11 degrees of pitch measured at the tip.
So the purpose of this Kolb List post is to solicit
data/opinion/experience from Kolbers who have measured the
static thrust on their Rotax 503, 532, and 582 engines and
similar. I have NO IDEA if 250 pounds of thrust is a little,
a lot, average, below average, or incredible for a Firestar
2.
Kolbers...how does 250 pounds of thrust compare to what
static thrust YOU measured with your 503/532/582 on a Kolb?
Does 250 pounds of thrust seem correct for a "60HP
class" engine... somewhere between the 503 and 582?
How many pounds of thrust do YOU think is appropriate or
acceptable for Kolb being set up for short takeoff
performance?
The next step is to finalize the center section cover (I
made four or five of them trying to come up with what would
work best). Finally went with thin aluminum sheet metal and
Velcro. Once this is all finalized and installed, I can
resume my test flying, and see if this made enough
difference to raise the cruise speed to 65MPH.
Once I get to 63-65 MPH I can reduce drag using the
streamlilned strut fairings (from Dennis Carley / U-Fly-it)
and work on all of the little drag redusing things that Jack
Hart has documented on his Firefly. Hopefully I can get my
Firestar up to the 68-72 MPH cruise speed that Larry C is
getting on his Firestar / HKS setup.
Larry and I both have the same large bush tires and Firestar
2 airframe. I have a different gearbox and longer landing
gear legs than Larry does.
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com
- safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net
- winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit
entities
==========
br>
fts!)
r>
>
e.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
==========
-List" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
==========
FORUMS -
eferrer"
target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
==========
WIKI -
errer"
target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
==========
b Site -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
--
The
older I get, the less tolerant I am of those who are
intolerant of others.
If you forward this email, or any part of
it, please remove my email address before sending.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick Neilsen <neilsenrm(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test |
Bill
How about adjusting the wing angle of attack to get your plane flying
level? "When you have eliminated all other possibilities then the answer no
matter how improbable must be the answer".
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW Powered MKIIIC
On Mon, Nov 5, 2018 at 3:08 AM Bill Berle wrote:
>
> Hi Larry,
>
> What was the cruising speed you got from your HKS/Firestar BEFORE the
> strut fairings, gear leg fairings, etc?
>
> I have only a few possibilities left if the "solid" center section fairing
> does not get me up to 60 MPH without the fairings:
>
> 1) Modify the intake maniforlds or use the "straight" intakes like yours,
> to point the carburetors forward into the airflow. Mine are the other
> curved type and my carburetors face rearward. This puts a little bit of
> suction at the carb inlet from forward speed AND the inlet be ing in the
> "suction" area in front of the prop.
>
> 2) Remove the entire exhaust system to mount the stock HKS exhaust. This
> will be difficult because my engine is lower on the mount plate than yours.
>
> 3) Trade my engine for another engine that has a 2.58 gearbox
>
> Bill Berle
> www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
> www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and
> for-profit entities
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Sun, 11/4/18, Larry Cottrell wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test
> To: "kolb-list(at)matronics.com"
> Date: Sunday, November 4, 2018, 8:16 AM
>
> I can't add much
> of anything to what John said, since most of my knowledge
> comes from John in the first place. One thing I can add is
> that the increase in airspeed comes from cleaning up the
> drag- strut fairings, gear legs etc.
> Anxiously waiting to
> hear how the plane is going to fly.Larry
> On Sun,
> Nov 4, 2018 at 12:51 AM Bill Berle
> wrote:
> Bill Berle
>
>
> Today was first engine run (after my recent mods). My
> modifications since last test flight were:
>
>
> 1) Move oil cooler from top surface of the wing down to 12
> inches under the wing.
>
> 2) Move oil reservoir tank down underneath the wing.
>
> 3) Fabricate a "solid" cover for the center
> section so that no air could "leak" or flow
> upwards form the bottom to the top of the wing (causing drag
> and bad airflow into the prop)
>
> 4) Move the fuel tank forward so it is now under the center
> of gravity, so that the aircraft CG is not near the aft end
> of the CG rrange.
>
>
> On this test run, we were finally able to do a static thrust
> measurement.
>
>
> At 5850 RPM on the ground, the giant spring scale registered
> 250 pounds of thrust. The engine is nominally 58-60HP at its
> redline of 6200 RPM, which means I was making 94% of max
> RPM. This was with a 3 blade wide chord propeller, 65 inch
> diameter, with 11 degrees of pitch measured at the tip.
>
>
> So the purpose of this Kolb List post is to solicit
> data/opinion/experience from Kolbers who have measured the
> static thrust on their Rotax 503, 532, and 582 engines and
> similar. I have NO IDEA if 250 pounds of thrust is a little,
> a lot, average, below average, or incredible for a Firestar
> 2.
>
>
> Kolbers...how does 250 pounds of thrust compare to what
> static thrust YOU measured with your 503/532/582 on a Kolb?
>
>
> Does 250 pounds of thrust seem correct for a "60HP
> class" engine... somewhere between the 503 and 582?
>
>
> How many pounds of thrust do YOU think is appropriate or
> acceptable for Kolb being set up for short takeoff
> performance?
>
>
> The next step is to finalize the center section cover (I
> made four or five of them trying to come up with what would
> work best). Finally went with thin aluminum sheet metal and
> Velcro. Once this is all finalized and installed, I can
> resume my test flying, and see if this made enough
> difference to raise the cruise speed to 65MPH.
>
>
> Once I get to 63-65 MPH I can reduce drag using the
> streamlilned strut fairings (from Dennis Carley / U-Fly-it)
> and work on all of the little drag redusing things that Jack
> Hart has documented on his Firefly. Hopefully I can get my
> Firestar up to the 68-72 MPH cruise speed that Larry C is
> getting on his Firestar / HKS setup.
>
>
> Larry and I both have the same large bush tires and Firestar
> 2 airframe. I have a different gearbox and longer landing
> gear legs than Larry does.
>
>
> Bill Berle
>
> www.ezflaphandle.com
> - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
>
> www.grantstar.net
> - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit
> entities
>
>
> ==========
>
> br>
> fts!)
>
> r>
> >
> e.com" rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
>
> rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>
> ==========
>
> -List" rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>
> ==========
>
> FORUMS -
>
> eferrer"
> target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>
> ==========
>
> WIKI -
>
> errer"
> target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
>
> ==========
>
> b Site -
>
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>
> rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> ==========
>
>
> --
> The
> older I get, the less tolerant I am of those who are
> intolerant of others.
> If you forward this email, or any part of
> it, please remove my email address before sending.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Cottrell <lcottrell1020(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test |
58 to 60 would be the "normal" speed without any "improvements" made to
clean it up.
Larry
On Mon, Nov 5, 2018 at 1:08 AM Bill Berle wrote:
>
> Hi Larry,
>
> What was the cruising speed you got from your HKS/Firestar BEFORE the
> strut fairings, gear leg fairings, etc?
>
> I have only a few possibilities left if the "solid" center section fairing
> does not get me up to 60 MPH without the fairings:
>
> 1) Modify the intake maniforlds or use the "straight" intakes like yours,
> to point the carburetors forward into the airflow. Mine are the other
> curved type and my carburetors face rearward. This puts a little bit of
> suction at the carb inlet from forward speed AND the inlet be ing in the
> "suction" area in front of the prop.
>
> 2) Remove the entire exhaust system to mount the stock HKS exhaust. This
> will be difficult because my engine is lower on the mount plate than yours.
>
> 3) Trade my engine for another engine that has a 2.58 gearbox
>
> Bill Berle
> www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
> www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and
> for-profit entities
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Sun, 11/4/18, Larry Cottrell wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test
> To: "kolb-list(at)matronics.com"
> Date: Sunday, November 4, 2018, 8:16 AM
>
> I can't add much
> of anything to what John said, since most of my knowledge
> comes from John in the first place. One thing I can add is
> that the increase in airspeed comes from cleaning up the
> drag- strut fairings, gear legs etc.
> Anxiously waiting to
> hear how the plane is going to fly.Larry
> On Sun,
> Nov 4, 2018 at 12:51 AM Bill Berle
> wrote:
> Bill Berle
>
>
> Today was first engine run (after my recent mods). My
> modifications since last test flight were:
>
>
> 1) Move oil cooler from top surface of the wing down to 12
> inches under the wing.
>
> 2) Move oil reservoir tank down underneath the wing.
>
> 3) Fabricate a "solid" cover for the center
> section so that no air could "leak" or flow
> upwards form the bottom to the top of the wing (causing drag
> and bad airflow into the prop)
>
> 4) Move the fuel tank forward so it is now under the center
> of gravity, so that the aircraft CG is not near the aft end
> of the CG rrange.
>
>
> On this test run, we were finally able to do a static thrust
> measurement.
>
>
> At 5850 RPM on the ground, the giant spring scale registered
> 250 pounds of thrust. The engine is nominally 58-60HP at its
> redline of 6200 RPM, which means I was making 94% of max
> RPM. This was with a 3 blade wide chord propeller, 65 inch
> diameter, with 11 degrees of pitch measured at the tip.
>
>
> So the purpose of this Kolb List post is to solicit
> data/opinion/experience from Kolbers who have measured the
> static thrust on their Rotax 503, 532, and 582 engines and
> similar. I have NO IDEA if 250 pounds of thrust is a little,
> a lot, average, below average, or incredible for a Firestar
> 2.
>
>
> Kolbers...how does 250 pounds of thrust compare to what
> static thrust YOU measured with your 503/532/582 on a Kolb?
>
>
> Does 250 pounds of thrust seem correct for a "60HP
> class" engine... somewhere between the 503 and 582?
>
>
> How many pounds of thrust do YOU think is appropriate or
> acceptable for Kolb being set up for short takeoff
> performance?
>
>
> The next step is to finalize the center section cover (I
> made four or five of them trying to come up with what would
> work best). Finally went with thin aluminum sheet metal and
> Velcro. Once this is all finalized and installed, I can
> resume my test flying, and see if this made enough
> difference to raise the cruise speed to 65MPH.
>
>
> Once I get to 63-65 MPH I can reduce drag using the
> streamlilned strut fairings (from Dennis Carley / U-Fly-it)
> and work on all of the little drag redusing things that Jack
> Hart has documented on his Firefly. Hopefully I can get my
> Firestar up to the 68-72 MPH cruise speed that Larry C is
> getting on his Firestar / HKS setup.
>
>
> Larry and I both have the same large bush tires and Firestar
> 2 airframe. I have a different gearbox and longer landing
> gear legs than Larry does.
>
>
> Bill Berle
>
> www.ezflaphandle.com
> - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
>
> www.grantstar.net
> - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit
> entities
>
>
> ==========
>
> br>
> fts!)
>
> r>
> >
> e.com" rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
>
> rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>
> ==========
>
> -List" rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>
> ==========
>
> FORUMS -
>
> eferrer"
> target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>
> ==========
>
> WIKI -
>
> errer"
> target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
>
> ==========
>
> b Site -
>
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>
> rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> ==========
>
>
> --
> The
> older I get, the less tolerant I am of those who are
> intolerant of others.
> If you forward this email, or any part of
> it, please remove my email address before sending.
>
>
--
*The older I get, the less tolerant I am of those who are intolerant of
others.*
*If you forward this email, or any part of it, please remove my email
address before sending.*
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Berle <victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test |
One time I left the traffic pattern and let it "settle down" into a long distance
cruise. I spent a little time at WOT and it was able to go redline (6200).
It might have been able to go a little over but I pulled it back before it got
any farther. However I do not have a lot of faith in this test since it was only
briefly done and a lot of other stuff was going on, trim issues in the pitch
axis and yaw axis, etc.
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
--------------------------------------------
On Mon, 11/5/18, John Hauck wrote:
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Date: Monday, November 5, 2018, 5:43 AM
Hauck"
Bill B,
Did you ever do an actual in flight
prop pitch check, WOT, straight and level, just bump the red
line?
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com]
On Behalf Of Bill Berle
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2018 2:07
AM
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar
STATIC THRUST test
Bill Berle
Hi Larry,
What was the cruising speed you got
from your HKS/Firestar BEFORE the strut fairings, gear leg
fairings, etc?
I have only a few possibilities left if
the "solid" center section fairing does not get me up to 60
MPH without the fairings:
1) Modify the intake maniforlds or use
the "straight" intakes like yours, to point the carburetors
forward into the airflow. Mine are the other curved type and
my carburetors face rearward. This puts a little bit of
suction at the carb inlet from forward speed AND the inlet
be ing in the "suction" area in front of the prop.
2) Remove the entire exhaust system to
mount the stock HKS exhaust. This will be difficult because
my engine is lower on the mount plate than yours.
3) Trade my engine for another engine
that has a 2.58 gearbox
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com - safety
& performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net
- winning proposals for non-profit and
for-profit entities
--------------------------------------------
On Sun, 11/4/18, Larry Cottrell
wrote:
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar
STATIC THRUST test
To: "kolb-list(at)matronics.com"
Date: Sunday, November 4, 2018, 8:16
AM
I can't add much
of anything to what John said, since
most of my knowledge
comes from John in the first place.
One thing I can add is
that the increase in airspeed comes
from cleaning up the
drag- strut fairings, gear legs
etc.
Anxiously waiting to
hear how the plane is going to
fly.Larry
On Sun,
Nov 4, 2018 at 12:51 AM Bill Berle
wrote:
Bill Berle
Today was first engine run (after my
recent mods). My
modifications since last test flight
were:
1) Move oil cooler from top surface of
the wing down to 12
inches under the wing.
2) Move oil reservoir tank down
underneath the wing.
3) Fabricate a "solid" cover for the
center
section so that no air could "leak" or
flow
upwards form the bottom to the top of
the wing (causing drag
and bad airflow into the prop)
4) Move the fuel tank forward so it is
now under the center
of gravity, so that the aircraft CG is
not near the aft end
of the CG rrange.
On this test run, we were finally able
to do a static thrust
measurement.
At 5850 RPM on the ground, the giant
spring scale registered
250 pounds of thrust. The engine is
nominally 58-60HP at its
redline of 6200 RPM, which means I was
making 94% of max
RPM. This was with a 3 blade wide
chord propeller, 65 inch
diameter, with 11 degrees of pitch
measured at the tip.
So the purpose of this Kolb List post
is to solicit
data/opinion/experience from Kolbers
who have measured the
static thrust on their Rotax 503, 532,
and 582 engines and
similar. I have NO IDEA if 250 pounds
of thrust is a little,
a lot, average, below average, or
incredible for a Firestar
2.
Kolbers...how does 250 pounds of
thrust compare to what
static thrust YOU measured with your
503/532/582 on a Kolb?
Does 250 pounds of thrust seem correct
for a "60HP
class" engine... somewhere between the
503 and 582?
How many pounds of thrust do YOU think
is appropriate or
acceptable for Kolb being set up for
short takeoff
performance?
The next step is to finalize the
center section cover (I
made four or five of them trying to
come up with what would
work best). Finally went with thin
aluminum sheet metal and
Velcro. Once this is all finalized and
installed, I can
resume my test flying, and see if this
made enough
difference to raise the cruise speed
to 65MPH.
Once I get to 63-65 MPH I can reduce
drag using the
streamlilned strut fairings (from
Dennis Carley / U-Fly-it)
and work on all of the little drag
redusing things that Jack
Hart has documented on his Firefly.
Hopefully I can get my
Firestar up to the 68-72 MPH cruise
speed that Larry C is
getting on his Firestar / HKS setup.
Larry and I both have the same large
bush tires and Firestar
2 airframe. I have a different gearbox
and longer landing
gear legs than Larry does.
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com
- safety & performance upgrade for
light aircraft
www.grantstar.net
- winning
proposals for non-profit and for-profit
entities
==========
br>
fts!)
r>
>
e.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
==========
-List" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
==========
FORUMS -
eferrer"
target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
==========
WIKI -
errer"
target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
==========
b Site -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
--
The
older I get, the less tolerant I am of
those who are
intolerant of others.
If you forward this email, or any part
of
it, please remove my email address
before sending.
Support Your Lists This Month --
(And Get Some AWESOME FREE Gifts!)
Fund Raiser. Click on
to find out more about
Incentive Gifts provided
www.mypilotstore.com
support!
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
The Kolb-List Email Forum -
Navigator to browse
List Un/Subscription,
7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
- MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
via the Web Forums!
- NEW MATRONICS LIST WIKI -
Email List Wiki!
- List Contribution Web Site -
support!
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Berle <victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test |
Hi Rick, I did speak to Duane at Kolb a few times to verify the proper measurements
of the wing and tail incidence. My wings sit on the fuselage at the correct
angle within a small fraction. My tailboom (fuselage tube) is at the correct
angle because that is set at the factory when they weld the fuselage jig. My
horizontal tail started out at the correct angle (per Duane's measurement and
the plans) and I had to raise the tail in order for it to fly level.
Since then, John H and several other Kolbers were not happy with the LE of the
tail being raised up, so I moved the fuel tank forward, so I can start lowering
the tail back down towards the "normal" setting.
I am not certain what the "level flight" measurement is on the Firestar. I cannot
recall if anyone has an official concrete number "the bottom of the wing has
to be X degrees to the horizon for level flight".
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
--------------------------------------------
On Mon, 11/5/18, Rick Neilsen wrote:
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test
To: "kolb-list(at)matronics.com"
Date: Monday, November 5, 2018, 6:40 AM
Bill
How about adjusting the wing angle
of attack to get your plane flying level? "When you
have eliminated all other possibilities then the answer no
matter how improbable must be the answer".
Rick NeilsenRedrive VW Powered
MKIIIC
On Mon,
Nov 5, 2018 at 3:08 AM Bill Berle
wrote:
Bill Berle
Hi Larry,
What was the cruising speed you got from your HKS/Firestar
BEFORE the strut fairings, gear leg fairings, etc?
I have only a few possibilities left if the
"solid" center section fairing does not get me up
to 60 MPH without the fairings:
1) Modify the intake maniforlds or use the
"straight" intakes like yours, to point the
carburetors forward into the airflow. Mine are the other
curved type and my carburetors face rearward. This puts a
little bit of suction at the carb inlet from forward speed
AND the inlet be ing in the "suction" area in
front of the prop.
2) Remove the entire exhaust system to mount the stock HKS
exhaust. This will be difficult because my engine is lower
on the mount plate than yours.
3) Trade my engine for another engine that has a 2.58
gearbox
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com
- safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net
- winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit
entities
--------------------------------------------
On Sun, 11/4/18, Larry Cottrell
wrote:
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test
To: "kolb-list(at)matronics.com"
Date: Sunday, November 4, 2018, 8:16 AM
I can't add much
of anything to what John said, since most of my knowledge
comes from John in the first place. One thing I can add
is
that the increase in airspeed comes from cleaning up the
drag- strut fairings, gear legs etc.
Anxiously waiting to
hear how the plane is going to fly.Larry
On Sun,
Nov 4, 2018 at 12:51 AM Bill Berle
wrote:
Bill Berle
Today was first engine run (after my recent mods). My
modifications since last test flight were:
1) Move oil cooler from top surface of the wing down to
12
inches under the wing.
2) Move oil reservoir tank down underneath the wing.
3) Fabricate a "solid" cover for the center
section so that no air could "leak" or flow
upwards form the bottom to the top of the wing (causing
drag
and bad airflow into the prop)
4) Move the fuel tank forward so it is now under the
center
of gravity, so that the aircraft CG is not near the aft
end
of the CG rrange.
On this test run, we were finally able to do a static
thrust
measurement.
At 5850 RPM on the ground, the giant spring scale
registered
250 pounds of thrust. The engine is nominally 58-60HP at
its
redline of 6200 RPM, which means I was making 94% of max
RPM. This was with a 3 blade wide chord propeller, 65
inch
diameter, with 11 degrees of pitch measured at the tip.
So the purpose of this Kolb List post is to solicit
data/opinion/experience from Kolbers who have measured
the
static thrust on their Rotax 503, 532, and 582 engines
and
similar. I have NO IDEA if 250 pounds of thrust is a
little,
a lot, average, below average, or incredible for a
Firestar
2.
Kolbers...how does 250 pounds of thrust compare to what
static thrust YOU measured with your 503/532/582 on a
Kolb?
Does 250 pounds of thrust seem correct for a "60HP
class" engine... somewhere between the 503 and 582?
How many pounds of thrust do YOU think is appropriate or
acceptable for Kolb being set up for short takeoff
performance?
The next step is to finalize the center section cover (I
made four or five of them trying to come up with what
would
work best). Finally went with thin aluminum sheet metal
and
Velcro. Once this is all finalized and installed, I can
resume my test flying, and see if this made enough
difference to raise the cruise speed to 65MPH.
Once I get to 63-65 MPH I can reduce drag using the
streamlilned strut fairings (from Dennis Carley /
U-Fly-it)
and work on all of the little drag redusing things that
Jack
Hart has documented on his Firefly. Hopefully I can get
my
Firestar up to the 68-72 MPH cruise speed that Larry C is
getting on his Firestar / HKS setup.
Larry and I both have the same large bush tires and
Firestar
2 airframe. I have a different gearbox and longer landing
gear legs than Larry does.
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com
- safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net
- winning proposals for non-profit and
for-profit
entities
==========
br>
fts!)
r>
>
e.com"
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
==========
-List" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
==========
FORUMS -
eferrer"
target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
==========
WIKI -
errer"
target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
==========
b Site -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
--
The
older I get, the less tolerant I am of those who are
intolerant of others.
If you forward this email, or any part of
it, please remove my email address before sending.
==========
br>
fts!)
r>
>
e.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
==========
-List" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
==========
FORUMS -
eferrer"
target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
==========
WIKI -
errer"
target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
==========
b Site -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Berle <victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test |
Thank you! This now gives me a reasonable target for solving my "wierd" Bill-only
problems. Once I can get to this speed, I know I have a Kolb that is performing
"normally" (at least compared to aonther HKS Firestar), and THEN I can start
reducing drag with fairings and clean-up.
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
--------------------------------------------
On Mon, 11/5/18, Larry Cottrell wrote:
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test
To: "kolb-list(at)matronics.com"
Date: Monday, November 5, 2018, 7:05 AM
58 to 60 would be
the "normal" speed without any
"improvements" made to clean it up.Larry
On Mon,
Nov 5, 2018 at 1:08 AM Bill Berle
wrote:
Bill Berle
Hi Larry,
What was the cruising speed you got from your HKS/Firestar
BEFORE the strut fairings, gear leg fairings, etc?
I have only a few possibilities left if the
"solid" center section fairing does not get me up
to 60 MPH without the fairings:
1) Modify the intake maniforlds or use the
"straight" intakes like yours, to point the
carburetors forward into the airflow. Mine are the other
curved type and my carburetors face rearward. This puts a
little bit of suction at the carb inlet from forward speed
AND the inlet be ing in the "suction" area in
front of the prop.
2) Remove the entire exhaust system to mount the stock HKS
exhaust. This will be difficult because my engine is lower
on the mount plate than yours.
3) Trade my engine for another engine that has a 2.58
gearbox
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com
- safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net
- winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit
entities
--------------------------------------------
On Sun, 11/4/18, Larry Cottrell
wrote:
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test
To: "kolb-list(at)matronics.com"
Date: Sunday, November 4, 2018, 8:16 AM
I can't add much
of anything to what John said, since most of my knowledge
comes from John in the first place. One thing I can add
is
that the increase in airspeed comes from cleaning up the
drag- strut fairings, gear legs etc.
Anxiously waiting to
hear how the plane is going to fly.Larry
On Sun,
Nov 4, 2018 at 12:51 AM Bill Berle
wrote:
Bill Berle
Today was first engine run (after my recent mods). My
modifications since last test flight were:
1) Move oil cooler from top surface of the wing down to
12
inches under the wing.
2) Move oil reservoir tank down underneath the wing.
3) Fabricate a "solid" cover for the center
section so that no air could "leak" or flow
upwards form the bottom to the top of the wing (causing
drag
and bad airflow into the prop)
4) Move the fuel tank forward so it is now under the
center
of gravity, so that the aircraft CG is not near the aft
end
of the CG rrange.
On this test run, we were finally able to do a static
thrust
measurement.
At 5850 RPM on the ground, the giant spring scale
registered
250 pounds of thrust. The engine is nominally 58-60HP at
its
redline of 6200 RPM, which means I was making 94% of max
RPM. This was with a 3 blade wide chord propeller, 65
inch
diameter, with 11 degrees of pitch measured at the tip.
So the purpose of this Kolb List post is to solicit
data/opinion/experience from Kolbers who have measured
the
static thrust on their Rotax 503, 532, and 582 engines
and
similar. I have NO IDEA if 250 pounds of thrust is a
little,
a lot, average, below average, or incredible for a
Firestar
2.
Kolbers...how does 250 pounds of thrust compare to what
static thrust YOU measured with your 503/532/582 on a
Kolb?
Does 250 pounds of thrust seem correct for a "60HP
class" engine... somewhere between the 503 and 582?
How many pounds of thrust do YOU think is appropriate or
acceptable for Kolb being set up for short takeoff
performance?
The next step is to finalize the center section cover (I
made four or five of them trying to come up with what
would
work best). Finally went with thin aluminum sheet metal
and
Velcro. Once this is all finalized and installed, I can
resume my test flying, and see if this made enough
difference to raise the cruise speed to 65MPH.
Once I get to 63-65 MPH I can reduce drag using the
streamlilned strut fairings (from Dennis Carley /
U-Fly-it)
and work on all of the little drag redusing things that
Jack
Hart has documented on his Firefly. Hopefully I can get
my
Firestar up to the 68-72 MPH cruise speed that Larry C is
getting on his Firestar / HKS setup.
Larry and I both have the same large bush tires and
Firestar
2 airframe. I have a different gearbox and longer landing
gear legs than Larry does.
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com
- safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net
- winning proposals for non-profit and
for-profit
entities
==========
br>
fts!)
r>
>
e.com"
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
==========
-List" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
==========
FORUMS -
eferrer"
target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
==========
WIKI -
errer"
target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
==========
b Site -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
--
The
older I get, the less tolerant I am of those who are
intolerant of others.
If you forward this email, or any part of
it, please remove my email address before sending.
==========
br>
fts!)
r>
>
e.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
==========
-List" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
==========
FORUMS -
eferrer"
target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
==========
WIKI -
errer"
target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
==========
b Site -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
--
The
older I get, the less tolerant I am of those who are
intolerant of others.
If you forward this email, or any part of
it, please remove my email address before sending.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Fitt <jpfitt(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test |
I=99ve been struggling with getting my 503 dcdi fs ll to turn more tha
n 5900 rpm static with a 62=9D 3 blade Warpdrive pitched all the way d
own to 8 1/4 degrees. Good compression, plugs good color, good running excep
t for the low rpm. Has anyone had an ignition timing issue? Is there any adj
ustment or way to check this?
Have not done measured static thrust test but it sure pulls strong against t
he rope tied to the tail - easily puts the tail up in the air.
Previous replies to this same question were =9Creduce prop pitch till y
ou get 6200 -6300 rpm=9D
I=99m at 8-1/4deg !?!?
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 5, 2018, at 7:05 AM, Larry Cottrell wrote
:
>
> 58 to 60 would be the "normal" speed without any "improvements" made to cl
ean it up.
> Larry
>
>> On Mon, Nov 5, 2018 at 1:08 AM Bill Berle wro
te:
>>
>> Hi Larry,
>>
>> What was the cruising speed you got from your HKS/Firestar BEFORE the str
ut fairings, gear leg fairings, etc?
>>
>> I have only a few possibilities left if the "solid" center section fairin
g does not get me up to 60 MPH without the fairings:
>>
>> 1) Modify the intake maniforlds or use the "straight" intakes like yours,
to point the carburetors forward into the airflow. Mine are the other curve
d type and my carburetors face rearward. This puts a little bit of suction a
t the carb inlet from forward speed AND the inlet be ing in the "suction" ar
ea in front of the prop.
>>
>> 2) Remove the entire exhaust system to mount the stock HKS exhaust. This w
ill be difficult because my engine is lower on the mount plate than yours.
>>
>> 3) Trade my engine for another engine that has a 2.58 gearbox
>>
>> Bill Berle
>> www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
>> www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-pr
ofit entities
>>
>> --------------------------------------------
>> On Sun, 11/4/18, Larry Cottrell wrote:
>>
>> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test
>> To: "kolb-list(at)matronics.com"
>> Date: Sunday, November 4, 2018, 8:16 AM
>>
>> I can't add much
>> of anything to what John said, since most of my knowledge
>> comes from John in the first place. One thing I can add is
>> that the increase in airspeed comes from cleaning up the
>> drag- strut fairings, gear legs etc.
>> Anxiously waiting to
>> hear how the plane is going to fly.Larry
>> On Sun,
>> Nov 4, 2018 at 12:51 AM Bill Berle
>> wrote:
>> Bill Berle
>>
>>
>>
>> Today was first engine run (after my recent mods). My
>> modifications since last test flight were:
>>
>>
>>
>> 1) Move oil cooler from top surface of the wing down to 12
>> inches under the wing.
>>
>> 2) Move oil reservoir tank down underneath the wing.
>>
>> 3) Fabricate a "solid" cover for the center
>> section so that no air could "leak" or flow
>> upwards form the bottom to the top of the wing (causing drag
>> and bad airflow into the prop)
>>
>> 4) Move the fuel tank forward so it is now under the center
>> of gravity, so that the aircraft CG is not near the aft end
>> of the CG rrange.
>>
>>
>>
>> On this test run, we were finally able to do a static thrust
>> measurement.
>>
>>
>>
>> At 5850 RPM on the ground, the giant spring scale registered
>> 250 pounds of thrust. The engine is nominally 58-60HP at its
>> redline of 6200 RPM, which means I was making 94% of max
>> RPM. This was with a 3 blade wide chord propeller, 65 inch
>> diameter, with 11 degrees of pitch measured at the tip.
>>
>>
>>
>> So the purpose of this Kolb List post is to solicit
>> data/opinion/experience from Kolbers who have measured the
>> static thrust on their Rotax 503, 532, and 582 engines and
>> similar. I have NO IDEA if 250 pounds of thrust is a little,
>> a lot, average, below average, or incredible for a Firestar
>> 2.
>>
>>
>>
>> Kolbers...how does 250 pounds of thrust compare to what
>> static thrust YOU measured with your 503/532/582 on a Kolb?
>>
>>
>>
>> Does 250 pounds of thrust seem correct for a "60HP
>> class" engine... somewhere between the 503 and 582?
>>
>>
>>
>> How many pounds of thrust do YOU think is appropriate or
>> acceptable for Kolb being set up for short takeoff
>> performance?
>>
>>
>>
>> The next step is to finalize the center section cover (I
>> made four or five of them trying to come up with what would
>> work best). Finally went with thin aluminum sheet metal and
>> Velcro. Once this is all finalized and installed, I can
>> resume my test flying, and see if this made enough
>> difference to raise the cruise speed to 65MPH.
>>
>>
>>
>> Once I get to 63-65 MPH I can reduce drag using the
>> streamlilned strut fairings (from Dennis Carley / U-Fly-it)
>> and work on all of the little drag redusing things that Jack
>> Hart has documented on his Firefly. Hopefully I can get my
>> Firestar up to the 68-72 MPH cruise speed that Larry C is
>> getting on his Firestar / HKS setup.
>>
>>
>>
>> Larry and I both have the same large bush tires and Firestar
>> 2 airframe. I have a different gearbox and longer landing
>> gear legs than Larry does.
>>
>>
>>
>> Bill Berle
>>
>> www.ezflaphandle.com
>> - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
>>
>> www.grantstar.net
>> - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit
>> entities
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ==========
>>
>> br>
>> fts!)
>>
>> r>
>> >
>> e.com" rel="noreferrer"
>> target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
>>
>> rel="noreferrer"
>> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>>
>> ==========
>>
>> -List" rel="noreferrer"
>> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>>
>> ==========
>>
>> FORUMS -
>>
>> eferrer"
>> target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>>
>> ==========
>>
>> WIKI -
>>
>> errer"
>> target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
>>
>> ==========
>>
>> b Site -
>>
>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>>
>> rel="noreferrer"
>> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>> ==========
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> The
>> older I get, the less tolerant I am of those who are
>> intolerant of others.
>> If you forward this email, or any part of
>> it, please remove my email address before sending.
>>
>>
>> ==========
>> br> fts!)
>> r> > e.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
>> rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contributio
n
>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>> ==========
>> -List" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navi
gator?Kolb-List
>> ==========
>> FORUMS -
>> eferrer" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>> ==========
>> WIKI -
>> errer" target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
>> ==========
>> b Site -
>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>> rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contributio
n
>> ==========
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> The older I get, the less tolerant I am of those who are intolerant of oth
ers.
>
> If you forward this email, or any part of it, please remove my email addre
ss before sending.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick Neilsen <neilsenrm(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test |
Bill
Having to raise the horizontal stabilizer as high as you have to is the
symptom of the wing being set with the leading edge too high and/or the
trailing edge too low. Your tail has to be flying way too high to keep from
climbing. You have a bunch more fuselage and tail boom being pushed through
the air than if it were lined up with the air flow. It's a bit like putting
your plane in a slip for landing.
Sorry this all worth what you paid for it and I'm probably wrong. After 44
years of marriage my wife told me I was right for the 30th time last
night!!!!! I'm shooting for 40 before one of us dies.
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW Powered MKIIIC
On Mon, Nov 5, 2018 at 11:37 AM Bill Berle
wrote:
>
> Hi Rick, I did speak to Duane at Kolb a few times to verify the proper
> measurements of the wing and tail incidence. My wings sit on the fuselage
> at the correct angle within a small fraction. My tailboom (fuselage tube)
> is at the correct angle because that is set at the factory when they weld
> the fuselage jig. My horizontal tail started out at the correct angle (per
> Duane's measurement and the plans) and I had to raise the tail in order for
> it to fly level.
>
> Since then, John H and several other Kolbers were not happy with the LE of
> the tail being raised up, so I moved the fuel tank forward, so I can start
> lowering the tail back down towards the "normal" setting.
>
> I am not certain what the "level flight" measurement is on the Firestar. I
> cannot recall if anyone has an official concrete number "the bottom of the
> wing has to be X degrees to the horizon for level flight".
>
> Bill Berle
> www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
> www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and
> for-profit entities
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Mon, 11/5/18, Rick Neilsen wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test
> To: "kolb-list(at)matronics.com"
> Date: Monday, November 5, 2018, 6:40 AM
>
> Bill
> How about adjusting the wing angle
> of attack to get your plane flying level? "When you
> have eliminated all other possibilities then the answer no
> matter how improbable must be the answer".
> Rick NeilsenRedrive VW Powered
> MKIIIC
> On Mon,
> Nov 5, 2018 at 3:08 AM Bill Berle
> wrote:
> Bill Berle
>
>
> Hi Larry,
>
>
> What was the cruising speed you got from your HKS/Firestar
> BEFORE the strut fairings, gear leg fairings, etc?
>
>
> I have only a few possibilities left if the
> "solid" center section fairing does not get me up
> to 60 MPH without the fairings:
>
>
> 1) Modify the intake maniforlds or use the
> "straight" intakes like yours, to point the
> carburetors forward into the airflow. Mine are the other
> curved type and my carburetors face rearward. This puts a
> little bit of suction at the carb inlet from forward speed
> AND the inlet be ing in the "suction" area in
> front of the prop.
>
>
> 2) Remove the entire exhaust system to mount the stock HKS
> exhaust. This will be difficult because my engine is lower
> on the mount plate than yours.
>
>
> 3) Trade my engine for another engine that has a 2.58
> gearbox
>
>
> Bill Berle
>
> www.ezflaphandle.com
> - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
>
> www.grantstar.net
> - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit
> entities
>
>
> --------------------------------------------
>
> On Sun, 11/4/18, Larry Cottrell
> wrote:
>
>
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test
>
> To: "kolb-list(at)matronics.com"
>
>
> Date: Sunday, November 4, 2018, 8:16 AM
>
>
> I can't add much
>
> of anything to what John said, since most of my knowledge
>
> comes from John in the first place. One thing I can add
> is
>
> that the increase in airspeed comes from cleaning up the
>
> drag- strut fairings, gear legs etc.
>
> Anxiously waiting to
>
> hear how the plane is going to fly.Larry
>
> On Sun,
>
> Nov 4, 2018 at 12:51 AM Bill Berle
>
> wrote:
>
>
> Bill Berle
>
>
> Today was first engine run (after my recent mods). My
>
> modifications since last test flight were:
>
>
> 1) Move oil cooler from top surface of the wing down to
> 12
>
> inches under the wing.
>
>
> 2) Move oil reservoir tank down underneath the wing.
>
>
> 3) Fabricate a "solid" cover for the center
>
> section so that no air could "leak" or flow
>
> upwards form the bottom to the top of the wing (causing
> drag
>
> and bad airflow into the prop)
>
>
> 4) Move the fuel tank forward so it is now under the
> center
>
> of gravity, so that the aircraft CG is not near the aft
> end
>
> of the CG rrange.
>
>
> On this test run, we were finally able to do a static
> thrust
>
> measurement.
>
>
> At 5850 RPM on the ground, the giant spring scale
> registered
>
> 250 pounds of thrust. The engine is nominally 58-60HP at
> its
>
> redline of 6200 RPM, which means I was making 94% of max
>
> RPM. This was with a 3 blade wide chord propeller, 65
> inch
>
> diameter, with 11 degrees of pitch measured at the tip.
>
>
> So the purpose of this Kolb List post is to solicit
>
> data/opinion/experience from Kolbers who have measured
> the
>
> static thrust on their Rotax 503, 532, and 582 engines
> and
>
> similar. I have NO IDEA if 250 pounds of thrust is a
> little,
>
> a lot, average, below average, or incredible for a
> Firestar
>
> 2.
>
>
> Kolbers...how does 250 pounds of thrust compare to what
>
> static thrust YOU measured with your 503/532/582 on a
> Kolb?
>
>
> Does 250 pounds of thrust seem correct for a "60HP
>
> class" engine... somewhere between the 503 and 582?
>
>
> How many pounds of thrust do YOU think is appropriate or
>
> acceptable for Kolb being set up for short takeoff
>
> performance?
>
>
> The next step is to finalize the center section cover (I
>
> made four or five of them trying to come up with what
> would
>
> work best). Finally went with thin aluminum sheet metal
> and
>
> Velcro. Once this is all finalized and installed, I can
>
> resume my test flying, and see if this made enough
>
> difference to raise the cruise speed to 65MPH.
>
>
> Once I get to 63-65 MPH I can reduce drag using the
>
> streamlilned strut fairings (from Dennis Carley /
> U-Fly-it)
>
> and work on all of the little drag redusing things that
> Jack
>
> Hart has documented on his Firefly. Hopefully I can get
> my
>
> Firestar up to the 68-72 MPH cruise speed that Larry C is
>
> getting on his Firestar / HKS setup.
>
>
> Larry and I both have the same large bush tires and
> Firestar
>
> 2 airframe. I have a different gearbox and longer landing
>
> gear legs than Larry does.
>
>
> Bill Berle
>
>
> www.ezflaphandle.com
>
> - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
>
>
> www.grantstar.net
>
> - winning proposals for non-profit and
> for-profit
>
> entities
>
>
> ==========
>
>
> br>
>
> fts!)
>
>
> r>
>
> >
>
> e.com"
> rel="noreferrer"
>
> target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
>
>
> rel="noreferrer"
>
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>
>
> ==========
>
>
> -List" rel="noreferrer"
>
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>
>
> ==========
>
>
> FORUMS -
>
>
> eferrer"
>
> target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>
>
> ==========
>
>
> WIKI -
>
>
> errer"
>
> target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
>
>
> ==========
>
>
> b Site -
>
>
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>
>
> rel="noreferrer"
>
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
> ==========
>
>
> --
>
> The
>
> older I get, the less tolerant I am of those who are
>
> intolerant of others.
>
> If you forward this email, or any part of
>
> it, please remove my email address before sending.
>
>
> ==========
>
> br>
> fts!)
>
> r>
> >
> e.com" rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
>
> rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>
> ==========
>
> -List" rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>
> ==========
>
> FORUMS -
>
> eferrer"
> target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>
> ==========
>
> WIKI -
>
> errer"
> target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
>
> ==========
>
> b Site -
>
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>
> rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> ==========
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | George Helton <gdhelton(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test |
Well, John the first thing that I would do is make tachometer is reading cor
rectly.
I=99m running a different engine and prop combination( 2702 Hirth with
a 3 blade, 64=9D Powerfin)and I=99m pitched at 6.7 degrees to o
btain my maximum rpm of 5500rpm. This isn=99t apples to apples because
I=99m running a low rpm high torque engine with a single carb, rated a
t 40 hp with 2:29 ratio gearbox.
Is this a single carb engine? I=99d drop pitch to 6.5 degrees and see i
f that works. You=99re also swinging a heavy prop. I think most guys r
un a 60=9D 3 blade on that engine? I=99m not sure about that? I s
uspect your tach. If you had a timing issue it would be hard to start and pr
obably would have burned up by now. As always it=99s worth what it cos
t ya.
George H
Firestar, FS 100, 2702 Hirth
14GDH
Mesick, Michigan
gdhelton(at)gmail.com
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 5, 2018, at 12:48 PM, John Fitt wrote:
>
> I=99ve been struggling with getting my 503 dcdi fs ll to turn more t
han 5900 rpm static with a 62=9D 3 blade Warpdrive pitched all the way
down to 8 1/4 degrees. Good compression, plugs good color, good running exc
ept for the low rpm. Has anyone had an ignition timing issue? Is there any a
djustment or way to check this?
> Have not done measured static thrust test but it sure pulls strong against
the rope tied to the tail - easily puts the tail up in the air.
> Previous replies to this same question were =9Creduce prop pitch til
l you get 6200 -6300 rpm=9D
> I=99m at 8-1/4deg !?!?
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Nov 5, 2018, at 7:05 AM, Larry Cottrell wrot
e:
>>
>> 58 to 60 would be the "normal" speed without any "improvements" made to c
lean it up.
>> Larry
>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 5, 2018 at 1:08 AM Bill Berle wr
ote:
>>>
>>> Hi Larry,
>>>
>>> What was the cruising speed you got from your HKS/Firestar BEFORE the st
rut fairings, gear leg fairings, etc?
>>>
>>> I have only a few possibilities left if the "solid" center section fairi
ng does not get me up to 60 MPH without the fairings:
>>>
>>> 1) Modify the intake maniforlds or use the "straight" intakes like yours
, to point the carburetors forward into the airflow. Mine are the other curv
ed type and my carburetors face rearward. This puts a little bit of suction a
t the carb inlet from forward speed AND the inlet be ing in the "suction" ar
ea in front of the prop.
>>>
>>> 2) Remove the entire exhaust system to mount the stock HKS exhaust. This
will be difficult because my engine is lower on the mount plate than yours.
>>>
>>> 3) Trade my engine for another engine that has a 2.58 gearbox
>>>
>>> Bill Berle
>>> www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
>>> www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-p
rofit entities
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------
>>> On Sun, 11/4/18, Larry Cottrell wrote:
>>>
>>> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test
>>> To: "kolb-list(at)matronics.com"
>>> Date: Sunday, November 4, 2018, 8:16 AM
>>>
>>> I can't add much
>>> of anything to what John said, since most of my knowledge
>>> comes from John in the first place. One thing I can add is
>>> that the increase in airspeed comes from cleaning up the
>>> drag- strut fairings, gear legs etc.
>>> Anxiously waiting to
>>> hear how the plane is going to fly.Larry
>>> On Sun,
>>> Nov 4, 2018 at 12:51 AM Bill Berle
>>> wrote:
>>> Bill Berle
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Today was first engine run (after my recent mods). My
>>> modifications since last test flight were:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 1) Move oil cooler from top surface of the wing down to 12
>>> inches under the wing.
>>>
>>> 2) Move oil reservoir tank down underneath the wing.
>>>
>>> 3) Fabricate a "solid" cover for the center
>>> section so that no air could "leak" or flow
>>> upwards form the bottom to the top of the wing (causing drag
>>> and bad airflow into the prop)
>>>
>>> 4) Move the fuel tank forward so it is now under the center
>>> of gravity, so that the aircraft CG is not near the aft end
>>> of the CG rrange.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On this test run, we were finally able to do a static thrust
>>> measurement.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> At 5850 RPM on the ground, the giant spring scale registered
>>> 250 pounds of thrust. The engine is nominally 58-60HP at its
>>> redline of 6200 RPM, which means I was making 94% of max
>>> RPM. This was with a 3 blade wide chord propeller, 65 inch
>>> diameter, with 11 degrees of pitch measured at the tip.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> So the purpose of this Kolb List post is to solicit
>>> data/opinion/experience from Kolbers who have measured the
>>> static thrust on their Rotax 503, 532, and 582 engines and
>>> similar. I have NO IDEA if 250 pounds of thrust is a little,
>>> a lot, average, below average, or incredible for a Firestar
>>> 2.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Kolbers...how does 250 pounds of thrust compare to what
>>> static thrust YOU measured with your 503/532/582 on a Kolb?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Does 250 pounds of thrust seem correct for a "60HP
>>> class" engine... somewhere between the 503 and 582?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> How many pounds of thrust do YOU think is appropriate or
>>> acceptable for Kolb being set up for short takeoff
>>> performance?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The next step is to finalize the center section cover (I
>>> made four or five of them trying to come up with what would
>>> work best). Finally went with thin aluminum sheet metal and
>>> Velcro. Once this is all finalized and installed, I can
>>> resume my test flying, and see if this made enough
>>> difference to raise the cruise speed to 65MPH.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Once I get to 63-65 MPH I can reduce drag using the
>>> streamlilned strut fairings (from Dennis Carley / U-Fly-it)
>>> and work on all of the little drag redusing things that Jack
>>> Hart has documented on his Firefly. Hopefully I can get my
>>> Firestar up to the 68-72 MPH cruise speed that Larry C is
>>> getting on his Firestar / HKS setup.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Larry and I both have the same large bush tires and Firestar
>>> 2 airframe. I have a different gearbox and longer landing
>>> gear legs than Larry does.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Bill Berle
>>>
>>> www.ezflaphandle.com
>>> - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
>>>
>>> www.grantstar.net
>>> - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit
>>> entities
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ==========
>>>
>>> br>
>>> fts!)
>>>
>>> r>
>>> >
>>> e.com" rel="noreferrer"
>>> target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
>>>
>>> rel="noreferrer"
>>> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>
>>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>>>
>>> ==========
>>>
>>> -List" rel="noreferrer"
>>> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>>>
>>> ==========
>>>
>>> FORUMS -
>>>
>>> eferrer"
>>> target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>>>
>>> ==========
>>>
>>> WIKI -
>>>
>>> errer"
>>> target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
>>>
>>> ==========
>>>
>>> b Site -
>>>
>>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>>>
>>> rel="noreferrer"
>>> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>
>>> ==========
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> The
>>> older I get, the less tolerant I am of those who are
>>> intolerant of others.
>>> If you forward this email, or any part of
>>> it, please remove my email address before sending.
>>>
>>>
>>> ==========
>>> br> fts!)
>>> r> > e.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
>>> rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contributi
on
>>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>>> ==========
>>> -List" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Nav
igator?Kolb-List
>>> ==========
>>> FORUMS -
>>> eferrer" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>>> ==========
>>> WIKI -
>>> errer" target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
>>> ==========
>>> b Site -
>>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>>> rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contributi
on
>>> ==========
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> The older I get, the less tolerant I am of those who are intolerant of ot
hers.
>>
>> If you forward this email, or any part of it, please remove my email addr
ess before sending.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Fitt <jpfitt(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test |
As you recommended, I tried a =9Ctiny tach=9D with the input sen
sor wire around the spark plug wire , in several different positions and num
ber of wraps...the readings were way off- 12000 which might be some multiple
of the real rpm, but...
So I can=99t say that was useful. What other method or connection poin
t is foolproof? My rpm is now shown on a GRT EIS monitor ( making sure that t
he input is for the 503)
Kolb recommended and sold me the prop, - 12 deg. recommended pitch starting p
oint,
If I Allowed the plane to taxi and then observed that the rpm was increasin
g would this be a bad idea?
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 5, 2018, at 12:22 PM, George Helton wrote:
>
> Well, John the first thing that I would do is make tachometer is reading c
orrectly.
> I=99m running a different engine and prop combination( 2702 Hirth wi
th a 3 blade, 64=9D Powerfin)and I=99m pitched at 6.7 degrees to
obtain my maximum rpm of 5500rpm. This isn=99t apples to apples becau
se I=99m running a low rpm high torque engine with a single carb, rate
d at 40 hp with 2:29 ratio gearbox.
> Is this a single carb engine? I=99d drop pitch to 6.5 degrees and se
e if that works. You=99re also swinging a heavy prop. I think most guy
s run a 60=9D 3 blade on that engine? I=99m not sure about that?
I suspect your tach. If you had a timing issue it would be hard to start an
d probably would have burned up by now. As always it=99s worth what it
cost ya.
> George H
> Firestar, FS 100, 2702 Hirth
> 14GDH
> Mesick, Michigan
> gdhelton(at)gmail.com
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Nov 5, 2018, at 12:48 PM, John Fitt wrote:
>>
>> I=99ve been struggling with getting my 503 dcdi fs ll to turn more t
han 5900 rpm static with a 62=9D 3 blade Warpdrive pitched all the way
down to 8 1/4 degrees. Good compression, plugs good color, good running exc
ept for the low rpm. Has anyone had an ignition timing issue? Is there any a
djustment or way to check this?
>> Have not done measured static thrust test but it sure pulls strong agains
t the rope tied to the tail - easily puts the tail up in the air.
>> Previous replies to this same question were =9Creduce prop pitch ti
ll you get 6200 -6300 rpm=9D
>> I=99m at 8-1/4deg !?!?
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>> On Nov 5, 2018, at 7:05 AM, Larry Cottrell wro
te:
>>>
>>> 58 to 60 would be the "normal" speed without any "improvements" made to c
lean it up.
>>> Larry
>>>
>>>> On Mon, Nov 5, 2018 at 1:08 AM Bill Berle w
rote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Larry,
>>>>
>>>> What was the cruising speed you got from your HKS/Firestar BEFORE the s
trut fairings, gear leg fairings, etc?
>>>>
>>>> I have only a few possibilities left if the "solid" center section fair
ing does not get me up to 60 MPH without the fairings:
>>>>
>>>> 1) Modify the intake maniforlds or use the "straight" intakes like your
s, to point the carburetors forward into the airflow. Mine are the other cur
ved type and my carburetors face rearward. This puts a little bit of suction
at the carb inlet from forward speed AND the inlet be ing in the "suction" a
rea in front of the prop.
>>>>
>>>> 2) Remove the entire exhaust system to mount the stock HKS exhaust. Thi
s will be difficult because my engine is lower on the mount plate than yours
.
>>>>
>>>> 3) Trade my engine for another engine that has a 2.58 gearbox
>>>>
>>>> Bill Berle
>>>> www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
>>>> www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-
profit entities
>>>>
>>>> --------------------------------------------
>>>> On Sun, 11/4/18, Larry Cottrell wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test
>>>> To: "kolb-list(at)matronics.com"
>>>> Date: Sunday, November 4, 2018, 8:16 AM
>>>>
>>>> I can't add much
>>>> of anything to what John said, since most of my knowledge
>>>> comes from John in the first place. One thing I can add is
>>>> that the increase in airspeed comes from cleaning up the
>>>> drag- strut fairings, gear legs etc.
>>>> Anxiously waiting to
>>>> hear how the plane is going to fly.Larry
>>>> On Sun,
>>>> Nov 4, 2018 at 12:51 AM Bill Berle
>>>> wrote:
>>>> Bill Berle
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Today was first engine run (after my recent mods). My
>>>> modifications since last test flight were:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 1) Move oil cooler from top surface of the wing down to 12
>>>> inches under the wing.
>>>>
>>>> 2) Move oil reservoir tank down underneath the wing.
>>>>
>>>> 3) Fabricate a "solid" cover for the center
>>>> section so that no air could "leak" or flow
>>>> upwards form the bottom to the top of the wing (causing drag
>>>> and bad airflow into the prop)
>>>>
>>>> 4) Move the fuel tank forward so it is now under the center
>>>> of gravity, so that the aircraft CG is not near the aft end
>>>> of the CG rrange.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On this test run, we were finally able to do a static thrust
>>>> measurement.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> At 5850 RPM on the ground, the giant spring scale registered
>>>> 250 pounds of thrust. The engine is nominally 58-60HP at its
>>>> redline of 6200 RPM, which means I was making 94% of max
>>>> RPM. This was with a 3 blade wide chord propeller, 65 inch
>>>> diameter, with 11 degrees of pitch measured at the tip.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So the purpose of this Kolb List post is to solicit
>>>> data/opinion/experience from Kolbers who have measured the
>>>> static thrust on their Rotax 503, 532, and 582 engines and
>>>> similar. I have NO IDEA if 250 pounds of thrust is a little,
>>>> a lot, average, below average, or incredible for a Firestar
>>>> 2.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Kolbers...how does 250 pounds of thrust compare to what
>>>> static thrust YOU measured with your 503/532/582 on a Kolb?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Does 250 pounds of thrust seem correct for a "60HP
>>>> class" engine... somewhere between the 503 and 582?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> How many pounds of thrust do YOU think is appropriate or
>>>> acceptable for Kolb being set up for short takeoff
>>>> performance?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The next step is to finalize the center section cover (I
>>>> made four or five of them trying to come up with what would
>>>> work best). Finally went with thin aluminum sheet metal and
>>>> Velcro. Once this is all finalized and installed, I can
>>>> resume my test flying, and see if this made enough
>>>> difference to raise the cruise speed to 65MPH.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Once I get to 63-65 MPH I can reduce drag using the
>>>> streamlilned strut fairings (from Dennis Carley / U-Fly-it)
>>>> and work on all of the little drag redusing things that Jack
>>>> Hart has documented on his Firefly. Hopefully I can get my
>>>> Firestar up to the 68-72 MPH cruise speed that Larry C is
>>>> getting on his Firestar / HKS setup.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Larry and I both have the same large bush tires and Firestar
>>>> 2 airframe. I have a different gearbox and longer landing
>>>> gear legs than Larry does.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bill Berle
>>>>
>>>> www.ezflaphandle.com
>>>> - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
>>>>
>>>> www.grantstar.net
>>>> - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit
>>>> entities
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ==========
>>>>
>>>> br>
>>>> fts!)
>>>>
>>>> r>
>>>> >
>>>> e.com" rel="noreferrer"
>>>> target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
>>>>
>>>> rel="noreferrer"
>>>> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>>
>>>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>>>>
>>>> ==========
>>>>
>>>> -List" rel="noreferrer"
>>>> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>>>>
>>>> ==========
>>>>
>>>> FORUMS -
>>>>
>>>> eferrer"
>>>> target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>>>>
>>>> ==========
>>>>
>>>> WIKI -
>>>>
>>>> errer"
>>>> target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
>>>>
>>>> ==========
>>>>
>>>> b Site -
>>>>
>>>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>>>>
>>>> rel="noreferrer"
>>>> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>>
>>>> ==========
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> The
>>>> older I get, the less tolerant I am of those who are
>>>> intolerant of others.
>>>> If you forward this email, or any part of
>>>> it, please remove my email address before sending.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ==========
>>>> br> fts!)
>>>> r> > e.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
>>>> rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribut
ion
>>>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>>>> ==========
>>>> -List" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Na
vigator?Kolb-List
>>>> ==========
>>>> FORUMS -
>>>> eferrer" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>>>> ==========
>>>> WIKI -
>>>> errer" target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
>>>> ==========
>>>> b Site -
>>>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>>>> rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribut
ion
>>>> ==========
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> The older I get, the less tolerant I am of those who are intolerant of o
thers.
>>>
>>> If you forward this email, or any part of it, please remove my email add
ress before sending.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Swiderski <i2bxtn(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test |
Bill,
John=99s procedure for setting propeller pitch will definitely help y
ou find
the best all around setting, but it won=99t tell you if your engine i
s
producing the thrust that it should be capable of.
Static thrust will not tell you everything but it will tell you a lot. For
aircraft with high cruise speed, it is possible for static thrust results
to be almost useless, but for ultralight cruise speeds where max climb and
max cruise are relatively close, your static thrust result will be a fairly
good indicator of overall performance. Also, some props might vary by
20lbs static & not vary much at all in climb & cruise. Props have a bit of
magic to them!
The way I pitched my props is similar to John. I pitched the prop until I
it is about 400 rpm below the maximum engine rpm, then fine tune it from
there. Most props will unload about 300-400 rpm from static to maximum
speed.
Regarding your question about static thrust results: My Ultrastar with
with 40hp cuyuna & 1.98:1 redrive 50=9D 2-blade got 225lbs. The 43h
p
version with a 60=9D 3-blade 2.59:1 redrive got 275 -295lbs ( the 295
lbs was
after I inlaid anti-vortex tips). If I remember correctly, my slingshot
with 64hp 582, 2.59 redrive and 66=9D 3-blade was a little over 350lb
s.
Hope this is of help. =93Richard Swiderski
--
*Click on to Richard's Blog: <http://GodStuffRichard.blogspot.com>
<http://GodStuffRichard.blogspot.com> *
*Thoughts On God And Life <http://godstuffrichard.blogspot.com> -**Prose,
*
*Prayers, Poems & Ponderings *
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | George Helton <gdhelton(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test |
If you=99re pulling 5900 rpm static, I would fly it and see what I hav
e inflight. There is a pretty good chance that you=99re going to pick u
p that extra 300 rpm. I run the same GRT 2000 EIS. With a Rotax CDI it
=99s suppose be programed for you from the factory. So I=99m guessing t
hat=99s not a problem. I know mine worked great once I changed the pu
lse input for a Hirth. You never said, if you=99re running single or d
ual carbs?
George H
Firestar
Mesick, Michigan
gdhelton(at)gmail.com
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 5, 2018, at 5:12 PM, John Fitt wrote:
>
> As you recommended, I tried a =9Ctiny tach=9D with the input s
ensor wire around the spark plug wire , in several different positions and n
umber of wraps...the readings were way off- 12000 which might be some multip
le of the real rpm, but...
> So I can=99t say that was useful. What other method or connection po
int is foolproof? My rpm is now shown on a GRT EIS monitor ( making sure tha
t the input is for the 503)
> Kolb recommended and sold me the prop, - 12 deg. recommended pitch startin
g point,
> If I Allowed the plane to taxi and then observed that the rpm was increas
ing would this be a bad idea?
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Nov 5, 2018, at 12:22 PM, George Helton wrote:
>>
>> Well, John the first thing that I would do is make tachometer is reading c
orrectly.
>> I=99m running a different engine and prop combination( 2702 Hirth w
ith a 3 blade, 64=9D Powerfin)and I=99m pitched at 6.7 degrees t
o obtain my maximum rpm of 5500rpm. This isn=99t apples to apples beca
use I=99m running a low rpm high torque engine with a single carb, rat
ed at 40 hp with 2:29 ratio gearbox.
>> Is this a single carb engine? I=99d drop pitch to 6.5 degrees and s
ee if that works. You=99re also swinging a heavy prop. I think most gu
ys run a 60=9D 3 blade on that engine? I=99m not sure about that
? I suspect your tach. If you had a timing issue it would be hard to start a
nd probably would have burned up by now. As always it=99s worth what i
t cost ya.
>> George H
>> Firestar, FS 100, 2702 Hirth
>> 14GDH
>> Mesick, Michigan
>> gdhelton(at)gmail.com
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>> On Nov 5, 2018, at 12:48 PM, John Fitt wrote:
>>>
>>> I=99ve been struggling with getting my 503 dcdi fs ll to turn more
than 5900 rpm static with a 62=9D 3 blade Warpdrive pitched all the w
ay down to 8 1/4 degrees. Good compression, plugs good color, good running e
xcept for the low rpm. Has anyone had an ignition timing issue? Is there any
adjustment or way to check this?
>>> Have not done measured static thrust test but it sure pulls strong again
st the rope tied to the tail - easily puts the tail up in the air.
>>> Previous replies to this same question were =9Creduce prop pitch t
ill you get 6200 -6300 rpm=9D
>>> I=99m at 8-1/4deg !?!?
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>>> On Nov 5, 2018, at 7:05 AM, Larry Cottrell wr
ote:
>>>>
>>>> 58 to 60 would be the "normal" speed without any "improvements" made to
clean it up.
>>>> Larry
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Nov 5, 2018 at 1:08 AM Bill Berle w
rote:
>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Larry,
>>>>>
>>>>> What was the cruising speed you got from your HKS/Firestar BEFORE the s
trut fairings, gear leg fairings, etc?
>>>>>
>>>>> I have only a few possibilities left if the "solid" center section fai
ring does not get me up to 60 MPH without the fairings:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) Modify the intake maniforlds or use the "straight" intakes like you
rs, to point the carburetors forward into the airflow. Mine are the other cu
rved type and my carburetors face rearward. This puts a little bit of suctio
n at the carb inlet from forward speed AND the inlet be ing in the "suction"
area in front of the prop.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2) Remove the entire exhaust system to mount the stock HKS exhaust. Th
is will be difficult because my engine is lower on the mount plate than your
s.
>>>>>
>>>>> 3) Trade my engine for another engine that has a 2.58 gearbox
>>>>>
>>>>> Bill Berle
>>>>> www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraf
t
>>>>> www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for
-profit entities
>>>>>
>>>>> --------------------------------------------
>>>>> On Sun, 11/4/18, Larry Cottrell wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test
>>>>> To: "kolb-list(at)matronics.com"
>>>>> Date: Sunday, November 4, 2018, 8:16 AM
>>>>>
>>>>> I can't add much
>>>>> of anything to what John said, since most of my knowledge
>>>>> comes from John in the first place. One thing I can add is
>>>>> that the increase in airspeed comes from cleaning up the
>>>>> drag- strut fairings, gear legs etc.
>>>>> Anxiously waiting to
>>>>> hear how the plane is going to fly.Larry
>>>>> On Sun,
>>>>> Nov 4, 2018 at 12:51 AM Bill Berle
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Bill Berle
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Today was first engine run (after my recent mods). My
>>>>> modifications since last test flight were:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) Move oil cooler from top surface of the wing down to 12
>>>>> inches under the wing.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2) Move oil reservoir tank down underneath the wing.
>>>>>
>>>>> 3) Fabricate a "solid" cover for the center
>>>>> section so that no air could "leak" or flow
>>>>> upwards form the bottom to the top of the wing (causing drag
>>>>> and bad airflow into the prop)
>>>>>
>>>>> 4) Move the fuel tank forward so it is now under the center
>>>>> of gravity, so that the aircraft CG is not near the aft end
>>>>> of the CG rrange.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On this test run, we were finally able to do a static thrust
>>>>> measurement.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> At 5850 RPM on the ground, the giant spring scale registered
>>>>> 250 pounds of thrust. The engine is nominally 58-60HP at its
>>>>> redline of 6200 RPM, which means I was making 94% of max
>>>>> RPM. This was with a 3 blade wide chord propeller, 65 inch
>>>>> diameter, with 11 degrees of pitch measured at the tip.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So the purpose of this Kolb List post is to solicit
>>>>> data/opinion/experience from Kolbers who have measured the
>>>>> static thrust on their Rotax 503, 532, and 582 engines and
>>>>> similar. I have NO IDEA if 250 pounds of thrust is a little,
>>>>> a lot, average, below average, or incredible for a Firestar
>>>>> 2.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Kolbers...how does 250 pounds of thrust compare to what
>>>>> static thrust YOU measured with your 503/532/582 on a Kolb?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Does 250 pounds of thrust seem correct for a "60HP
>>>>> class" engine... somewhere between the 503 and 582?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> How many pounds of thrust do YOU think is appropriate or
>>>>> acceptable for Kolb being set up for short takeoff
>>>>> performance?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The next step is to finalize the center section cover (I
>>>>> made four or five of them trying to come up with what would
>>>>> work best). Finally went with thin aluminum sheet metal and
>>>>> Velcro. Once this is all finalized and installed, I can
>>>>> resume my test flying, and see if this made enough
>>>>> difference to raise the cruise speed to 65MPH.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Once I get to 63-65 MPH I can reduce drag using the
>>>>> streamlilned strut fairings (from Dennis Carley / U-Fly-it)
>>>>> and work on all of the little drag redusing things that Jack
>>>>> Hart has documented on his Firefly. Hopefully I can get my
>>>>> Firestar up to the 68-72 MPH cruise speed that Larry C is
>>>>> getting on his Firestar / HKS setup.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Larry and I both have the same large bush tires and Firestar
>>>>> 2 airframe. I have a different gearbox and longer landing
>>>>> gear legs than Larry does.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Bill Berle
>>>>>
>>>>> www.ezflaphandle.com
>>>>> - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
>>>>>
>>>>> www.grantstar.net
>>>>> - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit
>>>>> entities
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ==========
>>>>>
>>>>> br>
>>>>> fts!)
>>>>>
>>>>> r>
>>>>> >
>>>>> e.com" rel="noreferrer"
>>>>> target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
>>>>>
>>>>> rel="noreferrer"
>>>>> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>>>
>>>>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>>>>>
>>>>> ==========
>>>>>
>>>>> -List" rel="noreferrer"
>>>>> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>>>>>
>>>>> ==========
>>>>>
>>>>> FORUMS -
>>>>>
>>>>> eferrer"
>>>>> target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>>>>>
>>>>> ==========
>>>>>
>>>>> WIKI -
>>>>>
>>>>> errer"
>>>>> target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
>>>>>
>>>>> ==========
>>>>>
>>>>> b Site -
>>>>>
>>>>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>>>>>
>>>>> rel="noreferrer"
>>>>> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>>>
>>>>> ==========
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> The
>>>>> older I get, the less tolerant I am of those who are
>>>>> intolerant of others.
>>>>> If you forward this email, or any part of
>>>>> it, please remove my email address before sending.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ==========
>>>>> br> fts!)
>>>>> r> > e.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
>>>>> rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribu
tion
>>>>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>>>>> ==========
>>>>> -List" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/N
avigator?Kolb-List
>>>>> ==========
>>>>> FORUMS -
>>>>> eferrer" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>>>>> ==========
>>>>> WIKI -
>>>>> errer" target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
>>>>> ==========
>>>>> b Site -
>>>>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>>>>> rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribu
tion
>>>>> ==========
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> The older I get, the less tolerant I am of those who are intolerant of o
thers.
>>>>
>>>> If you forward this email, or any part of it, please remove my email ad
dress before sending.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Berle <victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test |
I agree totally with the logic, but the measurements and parameters I got from
Duane at Kolb are showing that the wing is on the fuselage right. The trailing
edge of the wing is set by the location of the U-joinot welded at the factory.
The leading edge is set by where the bolt/pin hole is drilled in the spar fitting
on the wing. This hole was almost exactly where Duane said the plans call
for.
So w hat I am saying is that the airplane is behaving as if the incidences are
all wrong, but the incidence measurements are correct as far as I can see.
If John H wants to take a vacation and come out to Los Angeles, use his know ledge
and experience to get to the bottom of all this I would certainly welcome
it... but I have a feeling he pretty much has no interest in being around Los
Angeles city. Not many Kolbers here :)
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
--------------------------------------------
On Mon, 11/5/18, Rick Neilsen wrote:
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test
To: "kolb-list(at)matronics.com"
Date: Monday, November 5, 2018, 11:00 AM
Bill
Having to raise the horizontal
stabilizer as high as you have to is the symptom of the wing
being set with the leading edge too high and/or the trailing
edge too low. Your tail has to be flying way too high to
keep from climbing. You have a bunch more fuselage and tail
boom being pushed through the air than if it were lined up
with the air flow. It's a bit like putting your plane in
a slip for landing.
Sorry this all worth what you paid
for it and I'm probably wrong. After 44 years of
marriage my wife told me I was right for the 30th time last
night!!!!! I'm shooting for 40 before one of us
dies.
Rick NeilsenRedrive VW Powered
MKIIIC
On Mon,
Nov 5, 2018 at 11:37 AM Bill Berle
wrote:
Bill Berle
Hi Rick, I did speak to Duane at Kolb a few times to verify
the proper measurements of the wing and tail incidence. My
wings sit on the fuselage at the correct angle within a
small fraction. My tailboom (fuselage tube) is at the
correct angle because that is set at the factory when they
weld the fuselage jig. My horizontal tail started out at the
correct angle (per Duane's measurement and the plans)
and I had to raise the tail in order for it to fly level.
Since then, John H and several other Kolbers were not happy
with the LE of the tail being raised up, so I moved the fuel
tank forward, so I can start lowering the tail back down
towards the "normal" setting.
I am not certain what the "level flight"
measurement is on the Firestar. I cannot recall if anyone
has an official concrete number "the bottom of the wing
has to be X degrees to the horizon for level flight".
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com
- safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net
- winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit
entities
--------------------------------------------
On Mon, 11/5/18, Rick Neilsen
wrote:
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test
To: "kolb-list(at)matronics.com"
Date: Monday, November 5, 2018, 6:40 AM
Bill
How about adjusting the wing angle
of attack to get your plane flying level? "When you
have eliminated all other possibilities then the answer
no
matter how improbable must be the answer".
Rick NeilsenRedrive VW Powered
MKIIIC
On Mon,
Nov 5, 2018 at 3:08 AM Bill Berle
wrote:
Bill Berle
Hi Larry,
What was the cruising speed you got from your
HKS/Firestar
BEFORE the strut fairings, gear leg fairings, etc?
I have only a few possibilities left if the
"solid" center section fairing does not get me
up
to 60 MPH without the fairings:
1) Modify the intake maniforlds or use the
"straight" intakes like yours, to point the
carburetors forward into the airflow. Mine are the other
curved type and my carburetors face rearward. This puts a
little bit of suction at the carb inlet from forward
speed
AND the inlet be ing in the "suction" area in
front of the prop.
2) Remove the entire exhaust system to mount the stock
HKS
exhaust. This will be difficult because my engine is
lower
on the mount plate than yours.
3) Trade my engine for another engine that has a 2.58
gearbox
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com
- safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net
- winning proposals for non-profit and
for-profit
entities
--------------------------------------------
On Sun, 11/4/18, Larry Cottrell
wrote:
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST
test
To: "kolb-list(at)matronics.com"
Date: Sunday, November 4, 2018, 8:16 AM
I can't add much
of anything to what John said, since most of my
knowledge
comes from John in the first place. One thing I can add
is
that the increase in airspeed comes from cleaning up
the
drag- strut fairings, gear legs etc.
Anxiously waiting to
hear how the plane is going to fly.Larry
On Sun,
Nov 4, 2018 at 12:51 AM Bill Berle
wrote:
Bill Berle
Today was first engine run (after my recent mods). My
modifications since last test flight were:
1) Move oil cooler from top surface of the wing down to
12
inches under the wing.
2) Move oil reservoir tank down underneath the wing.
3) Fabricate a "solid" cover for the center
section so that no air could "leak" or flow
upwards form the bottom to the top of the wing (causing
drag
and bad airflow into the prop)
4) Move the fuel tank forward so it is now under the
center
of gravity, so that the aircraft CG is not near the aft
end
of the CG rrange.
On this test run, we were finally able to do a static
thrust
measurement.
At 5850 RPM on the ground, the giant spring scale
registered
250 pounds of thrust. The engine is nominally 58-60HP
at
its
redline of 6200 RPM, which means I was making 94% of
max
RPM. This was with a 3 blade wide chord propeller, 65
inch
diameter, with 11 degrees of pitch measured at the tip.
So the purpose of this Kolb List post is to solicit
data/opinion/experience from Kolbers who have measured
the
static thrust on their Rotax 503, 532, and 582 engines
and
similar. I have NO IDEA if 250 pounds of thrust is a
little,
a lot, average, below average, or incredible for a
Firestar
2.
Kolbers...how does 250 pounds of thrust compare to what
static thrust YOU measured with your 503/532/582 on a
Kolb?
Does 250 pounds of thrust seem correct for a "60HP
class" engine... somewhere between the 503 and
582?
How many pounds of thrust do YOU think is appropriate
or
acceptable for Kolb being set up for short takeoff
performance?
The next step is to finalize the center section cover
(I
made four or five of them trying to come up with what
would
work best). Finally went with thin aluminum sheet metal
and
Velcro. Once this is all finalized and installed, I can
resume my test flying, and see if this made enough
difference to raise the cruise speed to 65MPH.
Once I get to 63-65 MPH I can reduce drag using the
streamlilned strut fairings (from Dennis Carley /
U-Fly-it)
and work on all of the little drag redusing things that
Jack
Hart has documented on his Firefly. Hopefully I can get
my
Firestar up to the 68-72 MPH cruise speed that Larry C
is
getting on his Firestar / HKS setup.
Larry and I both have the same large bush tires and
Firestar
2 airframe. I have a different gearbox and longer
landing
gear legs than Larry does.
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com
- safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net
- winning proposals for non-profit and
for-profit
entities
==========
br>
fts!)
r>
>
e.com"
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
==========
-List" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
==========
FORUMS -
eferrer"
target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
==========
WIKI -
errer"
target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
==========
b Site -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
--
The
older I get, the less tolerant I am of those who are
intolerant of others.
If you forward this email, or any part of
it, please remove my email address before sending.
==========
br>
fts!)
r>
>
e.com"
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
==========
-List" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
==========
FORUMS -
eferrer"
target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
==========
WIKI -
errer"
target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
==========
b Site -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
==========
br>
fts!)
r>
>
e.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
==========
-List" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
==========
FORUMS -
eferrer"
target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
==========
WIKI -
errer"
target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
==========
b Site -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Craddock <craddojc(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test |
Bill,=C2-
FWIW, I measured my static thrust on my Ultrastar last year.=C2- Its Cuyu
na 430 only has 30HP at sea level, and I ran this test at 6000' altitude (I
live in Denver, CO).=C2- So it will be much lower HP than your rig, but
I wanted to give you this data for comparison.=C2-=C2-
We recorded 163 lbs of thrust on a digital scale.=C2- I confirmed the sca
le's accuracy by checking it against my body weight...=C2-=C2-
Jeff in Colorado
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test |
| From: | "Rex Rodebush" <jrrodebush(at)gmail.com> |
Bill,
Is there anything you can do to eliminate all the extraneous garbage attached to
you comments? Takes up a lot of space. Maybe a setting is wrong?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=484470#484470
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test |
Got some good friends out there in addition to Bill B, but got too much on my plate
at the moment to head back to California.
Sometimes a problem is invisible to many eyes for a long period of time, maybe
never being solved. Then on the other hand a person will walk up and say, "Hey!
Why is that part that way?" Bingo the problem is solved.
I don't know what Bill B's airplane is up to. Maybe that HKS ain't putting out
the horses the book and seller said it should. Who knows. I do know a high
mounted pusher should not push the nose up, but down. From Bill's description
he has a very sluggish FS. Why?
I don't know. ;-(
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Berle
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2018 9:13 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test
I agree totally with the logic, but the measurements and parameters I got from
Duane at Kolb are showing that the wing is on the fuselage right. The trailing
edge of the wing is set by the location of the U-joinot welded at the factory.
The leading edge is set by where the bolt/pin hole is drilled in the spar fitting
on the wing. This hole was almost exactly where Duane said the plans call
for.
So w hat I am saying is that the airplane is behaving as if the incidences are
all wrong, but the incidence measurements are correct as far as I can see.
If John H wants to take a vacation and come out to Los Angeles, use his know ledge
and experience to get to the bottom of all this I would certainly welcome
it... but I have a feeling he pretty much has no interest in being around Los
Angeles city. Not many Kolbers here :)
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
--------------------------------------------
On Mon, 11/5/18, Rick Neilsen wrote:
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test
To: "kolb-list(at)matronics.com"
Date: Monday, November 5, 2018, 11:00 AM
Bill
Having to raise the horizontal
stabilizer as high as you have to is the symptom of the wing
being set with the leading edge too high and/or the trailing
edge too low. Your tail has to be flying way too high to
keep from climbing. You have a bunch more fuselage and tail
boom being pushed through the air than if it were lined up
with the air flow. It's a bit like putting your plane in
a slip for landing.
Sorry this all worth what you paid
for it and I'm probably wrong. After 44 years of
marriage my wife told me I was right for the 30th time last
night!!!!! I'm shooting for 40 before one of us
dies.
Rick NeilsenRedrive VW Powered
MKIIIC
On Mon,
Nov 5, 2018 at 11:37 AM Bill Berle
wrote:
Bill Berle
Hi Rick, I did speak to Duane at Kolb a few times to verify
the proper measurements of the wing and tail incidence. My
wings sit on the fuselage at the correct angle within a
small fraction. My tailboom (fuselage tube) is at the
correct angle because that is set at the factory when they
weld the fuselage jig. My horizontal tail started out at the
correct angle (per Duane's measurement and the plans)
and I had to raise the tail in order for it to fly level.
Since then, John H and several other Kolbers were not happy
with the LE of the tail being raised up, so I moved the fuel
tank forward, so I can start lowering the tail back down
towards the "normal" setting.
I am not certain what the "level flight"
measurement is on the Firestar. I cannot recall if anyone
has an official concrete number "the bottom of the wing
has to be X degrees to the horizon for level flight".
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com
- safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net
- winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit
entities
--------------------------------------------
On Mon, 11/5/18, Rick Neilsen
wrote:
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test
To: "kolb-list(at)matronics.com"
Date: Monday, November 5, 2018, 6:40 AM
Bill
How about adjusting the wing angle
of attack to get your plane flying level? "When you
have eliminated all other possibilities then the answer
no
matter how improbable must be the answer".
Rick NeilsenRedrive VW Powered
MKIIIC
On Mon,
Nov 5, 2018 at 3:08 AM Bill Berle
wrote:
Bill Berle
Hi Larry,
What was the cruising speed you got from your
HKS/Firestar
BEFORE the strut fairings, gear leg fairings, etc?
I have only a few possibilities left if the
"solid" center section fairing does not get me
up
to 60 MPH without the fairings:
1) Modify the intake maniforlds or use the
"straight" intakes like yours, to point the
carburetors forward into the airflow. Mine are the other
curved type and my carburetors face rearward. This puts a
little bit of suction at the carb inlet from forward
speed
AND the inlet be ing in the "suction" area in
front of the prop.
2) Remove the entire exhaust system to mount the stock
HKS
exhaust. This will be difficult because my engine is
lower
on the mount plate than yours.
3) Trade my engine for another engine that has a 2.58
gearbox
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com
- safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net
- winning proposals for non-profit and
for-profit
entities
--------------------------------------------
On Sun, 11/4/18, Larry Cottrell
wrote:
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST
test
To: "kolb-list(at)matronics.com"
Date: Sunday, November 4, 2018, 8:16 AM
I can't add much
of anything to what John said, since most of my
knowledge
comes from John in the first place. One thing I can add
is
that the increase in airspeed comes from cleaning up
the
drag- strut fairings, gear legs etc.
Anxiously waiting to
hear how the plane is going to fly.Larry
On Sun,
Nov 4, 2018 at 12:51 AM Bill Berle
wrote:
Bill Berle
Today was first engine run (after my recent mods). My
modifications since last test flight were:
1) Move oil cooler from top surface of the wing down to
12
inches under the wing.
2) Move oil reservoir tank down underneath the wing.
3) Fabricate a "solid" cover for the center
section so that no air could "leak" or flow
upwards form the bottom to the top of the wing (causing
drag
and bad airflow into the prop)
4) Move the fuel tank forward so it is now under the
center
of gravity, so that the aircraft CG is not near the aft
end
of the CG rrange.
On this test run, we were finally able to do a static
thrust
measurement.
At 5850 RPM on the ground, the giant spring scale
registered
250 pounds of thrust. The engine is nominally 58-60HP
at
its
redline of 6200 RPM, which means I was making 94% of
max
RPM. This was with a 3 blade wide chord propeller, 65
inch
diameter, with 11 degrees of pitch measured at the tip.
So the purpose of this Kolb List post is to solicit
data/opinion/experience from Kolbers who have measured
the
static thrust on their Rotax 503, 532, and 582 engines
and
similar. I have NO IDEA if 250 pounds of thrust is a
little,
a lot, average, below average, or incredible for a
Firestar
2.
Kolbers...how does 250 pounds of thrust compare to what
static thrust YOU measured with your 503/532/582 on a
Kolb?
Does 250 pounds of thrust seem correct for a "60HP
class" engine... somewhere between the 503 and
582?
How many pounds of thrust do YOU think is appropriate
or
acceptable for Kolb being set up for short takeoff
performance?
The next step is to finalize the center section cover
(I
made four or five of them trying to come up with what
would
work best). Finally went with thin aluminum sheet metal
and
Velcro. Once this is all finalized and installed, I can
resume my test flying, and see if this made enough
difference to raise the cruise speed to 65MPH.
Once I get to 63-65 MPH I can reduce drag using the
streamlilned strut fairings (from Dennis Carley /
U-Fly-it)
and work on all of the little drag redusing things that
Jack
Hart has documented on his Firefly. Hopefully I can get
my
Firestar up to the 68-72 MPH cruise speed that Larry C
is
getting on his Firestar / HKS setup.
Larry and I both have the same large bush tires and
Firestar
2 airframe. I have a different gearbox and longer
landing
gear legs than Larry does.
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com
- safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net
- winning proposals for non-profit and
for-profit
entities
==========
br>
fts!)
r>
>
e.com"
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
==========
-List" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
==========
FORUMS -
eferrer"
target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
==========
WIKI -
errer"
target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
==========
b Site -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
--
The
older I get, the less tolerant I am of those who are
intolerant of others.
If you forward this email, or any part of
it, please remove my email address before sending.
==========
br>
fts!)
r>
>
e.com"
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
==========
-List" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
==========
FORUMS -
eferrer"
target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
==========
WIKI -
errer"
target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
==========
b Site -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
==========
br>
fts!)
r>
>
e.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
==========
-List" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
==========
FORUMS -
eferrer"
target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
==========
WIKI -
errer"
target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
==========
b Site -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Girard <aslsa.rng(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test |
Bill, Did you ever put trim tabs on your elevators? I went through all the
emails I'd saved up since last August when this thread started and I didn't
find anything from you on trim tabs other than you believed they'd have to
be big with a big deflection. Attached are pictures of the trim tabs I
added to the Mk IIIX to fix its lawn dart tendency. They were actually a
bit too much for flying solo, but just a tad and since the owner intended
to use the airplane for his personal flight training I left them that way.
Even so it only took a two finger grip and light pressure to keep the
airplane flying straight and level. I'm going from memory as I never made
a drawing of them but the deflected portion was about 6" X 1.5" and bent
about 20 degrees.The small amount that they moved the elevator made no
discernible difference to cruise speed.
Rick
On Mon, Nov 5, 2018 at 9:15 PM Bill Berle wrote
:
>
> I agree totally with the logic, but the measurements and parameters I got
> from Duane at Kolb are showing that the wing is on the fuselage right. Th
e
> trailing edge of the wing is set by the location of the U-joinot welded a
t
> the factory. The leading edge is set by where the bolt/pin hole is drille
d
> in the spar fitting on the wing. This hole was almost exactly where Duane
> said the plans call for.
>
> So w hat I am saying is that the airplane is behaving as if the incidence
s
> are all wrong, but the incidence measurements are correct as far as I can
> see.
>
> If John H wants to take a vacation and come out to Los Angeles, use his
> know ledge and experience to get to the bottom of all this I would
> certainly welcome it... but I have a feeling he pretty much has no intere
st
> in being around Los Angeles city. Not many Kolbers here :)
>
> Bill Berle
> www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
> www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and
> for-profit entities
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Mon, 11/5/18, Rick Neilsen wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test
> To: "kolb-list(at)matronics.com"
> Date: Monday, November 5, 2018, 11:00 AM
>
> Bill
> Having to raise the horizontal
> stabilizer as high as you have to is the symptom of the wing
> being set with the leading edge too high and/or the trailing
> edge too low. Your tail has to be flying way too high to
> keep from climbing. You have a bunch more fuselage and tail
> boom being pushed through the air than if it were lined up
> with the air flow. It's a bit like putting your plane in
> a slip for landing.
> Sorry this all worth what you paid
> for it and I'm probably wrong. After 44 years of
> marriage my wife told me I was right for the 30th time last
> night!!!!! I'm shooting for 40 before one of us
> dies.
> Rick NeilsenRedrive VW Powered
> MKIIIC
> On Mon,
> Nov 5, 2018 at 11:37 AM Bill Berle
> wrote:
> Bill Berle
>
>
> Hi Rick, I did speak to Duane at Kolb a few times to verify
> the proper measurements of the wing and tail incidence. My
> wings sit on the fuselage at the correct angle within a
> small fraction. My tailboom (fuselage tube) is at the
> correct angle because that is set at the factory when they
> weld the fuselage jig. My horizontal tail started out at the
> correct angle (per Duane's measurement and the plans)
> and I had to raise the tail in order for it to fly level.
>
>
> Since then, John H and several other Kolbers were not happy
> with the LE of the tail being raised up, so I moved the fuel
> tank forward, so I can start lowering the tail back down
> towards the "normal" setting.
>
>
> I am not certain what the "level flight"
> measurement is on the Firestar. I cannot recall if anyone
> has an official concrete number "the bottom of the wing
> has to be X degrees to the horizon for level flight".
>
>
> Bill Berle
>
> www.ezflaphandle.com
> - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
>
> www.grantstar.net
> - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit
> entities
>
>
> --------------------------------------------
>
> On Mon, 11/5/18, Rick Neilsen
> wrote:
>
>
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test
>
> To: "kolb-list(at)matronics.com"
>
>
> Date: Monday, November 5, 2018, 6:40 AM
>
>
> Bill
>
> How about adjusting the wing angle
>
> of attack to get your plane flying level? "When you
>
> have eliminated all other possibilities then the answer
> no
>
> matter how improbable must be the answer".
>
> Rick NeilsenRedrive VW Powered
>
> MKIIIC
>
> On Mon,
>
> Nov 5, 2018 at 3:08 AM Bill Berle
>
> wrote:
>
>
> Bill Berle
>
>
> Hi Larry,
>
>
> What was the cruising speed you got from your
> HKS/Firestar
>
> BEFORE the strut fairings, gear leg fairings, etc?
>
>
> I have only a few possibilities left if the
>
> "solid" center section fairing does not get me
> up
>
> to 60 MPH without the fairings:
>
>
> 1) Modify the intake maniforlds or use the
>
> "straight" intakes like yours, to point the
>
> carburetors forward into the airflow. Mine are the other
>
> curved type and my carburetors face rearward. This puts a
>
> little bit of suction at the carb inlet from forward
> speed
>
> AND the inlet be ing in the "suction" area in
>
> front of the prop.
>
>
> 2) Remove the entire exhaust system to mount the stock
> HKS
>
> exhaust. This will be difficult because my engine is
> lower
>
> on the mount plate than yours.
>
>
> 3) Trade my engine for another engine that has a 2.58
>
> gearbox
>
>
> Bill Berle
>
>
> www.ezflaphandle.com
>
> - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
>
>
> www.grantstar.net
>
> - winning proposals for non-profit and
> for-profit
>
> entities
>
>
> --------------------------------------------
>
>
> On Sun, 11/4/18, Larry Cottrell
>
> wrote:
>
>
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST
> test
>
>
> To: "kolb-list(at)matronics.com"
>
>
>
>
> Date: Sunday, November 4, 2018, 8:16 AM
>
>
> I can't add much
>
>
> of anything to what John said, since most of my
> knowledge
>
>
> comes from John in the first place. One thing I can add
>
> is
>
>
> that the increase in airspeed comes from cleaning up
> the
>
>
> drag- strut fairings, gear legs etc.
>
>
> Anxiously waiting to
>
>
> hear how the plane is going to fly.Larry
>
>
> On Sun,
>
>
> Nov 4, 2018 at 12:51 AM Bill Berle
>
>
> wrote:
>
>
> Bill Berle
>
>
> Today was first engine run (after my recent mods). My
>
>
> modifications since last test flight were:
>
>
> 1) Move oil cooler from top surface of the wing down to
>
> 12
>
>
> inches under the wing.
>
>
> 2) Move oil reservoir tank down underneath the wing.
>
>
> 3) Fabricate a "solid" cover for the center
>
>
> section so that no air could "leak" or flow
>
>
> upwards form the bottom to the top of the wing (causing
>
> drag
>
>
> and bad airflow into the prop)
>
>
> 4) Move the fuel tank forward so it is now under the
>
> center
>
>
> of gravity, so that the aircraft CG is not near the aft
>
> end
>
>
> of the CG rrange.
>
>
> On this test run, we were finally able to do a static
>
> thrust
>
>
> measurement.
>
>
> At 5850 RPM on the ground, the giant spring scale
>
> registered
>
>
> 250 pounds of thrust. The engine is nominally 58-60HP
> at
>
> its
>
>
> redline of 6200 RPM, which means I was making 94% of
> max
>
>
> RPM. This was with a 3 blade wide chord propeller, 65
>
> inch
>
>
> diameter, with 11 degrees of pitch measured at the tip.
>
>
> So the purpose of this Kolb List post is to solicit
>
>
> data/opinion/experience from Kolbers who have measured
>
> the
>
>
> static thrust on their Rotax 503, 532, and 582 engines
>
> and
>
>
> similar. I have NO IDEA if 250 pounds of thrust is a
>
> little,
>
>
> a lot, average, below average, or incredible for a
>
> Firestar
>
>
> 2.
>
>
> Kolbers...how does 250 pounds of thrust compare to what
>
>
> static thrust YOU measured with your 503/532/582 on a
>
> Kolb?
>
>
> Does 250 pounds of thrust seem correct for a "60HP
>
>
> class" engine... somewhere between the 503 and
> 582?
>
>
> How many pounds of thrust do YOU think is appropriate
> or
>
>
> acceptable for Kolb being set up for short takeoff
>
>
> performance?
>
>
> The next step is to finalize the center section cover
> (I
>
>
> made four or five of them trying to come up with what
>
> would
>
>
> work best). Finally went with thin aluminum sheet metal
>
> and
>
>
> Velcro. Once this is all finalized and installed, I can
>
>
> resume my test flying, and see if this made enough
>
>
> difference to raise the cruise speed to 65MPH.
>
>
> Once I get to 63-65 MPH I can reduce drag using the
>
>
> streamlilned strut fairings (from Dennis Carley /
>
> U-Fly-it)
>
>
> and work on all of the little drag redusing things that
>
> Jack
>
>
> Hart has documented on his Firefly. Hopefully I can get
>
> my
>
>
> Firestar up to the 68-72 MPH cruise speed that Larry C
> is
>
>
> getting on his Firestar / HKS setup.
>
>
> Larry and I both have the same large bush tires and
>
> Firestar
>
>
> 2 airframe. I have a different gearbox and longer
> landing
>
>
> gear legs than Larry does.
>
>
> Bill Berle
>
>
> www.ezflaphandle.com
>
>
> - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
>
>
> www.grantstar.net
>
>
> - winning proposals for non-profit and
>
> for-profit
>
>
> entities
>
>
> ==========
>
>
> br>
>
>
> fts!)
>
>
> r>
>
>
> >
>
>
> e.com"
>
> rel="noreferrer"
>
>
> target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
>
>
> rel="noreferrer"
>
>
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>
>
> ==========
>
>
> -List" rel="noreferrer"
>
>
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>
>
> ==========
>
>
> FORUMS -
>
>
> eferrer"
>
>
> target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>
>
> ==========
>
>
> WIKI -
>
>
> errer"
>
>
> target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
>
>
> ==========
>
>
> b Site -
>
>
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>
>
> rel="noreferrer"
>
>
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
> ==========
>
>
> --
>
>
> The
>
>
> older I get, the less tolerant I am of those who are
>
>
> intolerant of others.
>
>
> If you forward this email, or any part of
>
>
> it, please remove my email address before sending.
>
>
> ==========
>
>
> br>
>
> fts!)
>
>
> r>
>
> >
>
> e.com"
> rel="noreferrer"
>
> target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
>
>
> rel="noreferrer"
>
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>
>
> ==========
>
>
> -List" rel="noreferrer"
>
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>
>
> ==========
>
>
> FORUMS -
>
>
> eferrer"
>
> target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>
>
> ==========
>
>
> WIKI -
>
>
> errer"
>
> target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
>
>
> ==========
>
>
> b Site -
>
>
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>
>
> rel="noreferrer"
>
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
> ==========
>
>
> ==========
>
> br>
> fts!)
>
> r>
> >
> e.com" rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
>
> rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>
> ==========
>
> -List" rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>
> ==========
>
> FORUMS -
>
> eferrer"
> target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>
> ==========
>
> WIKI -
>
> errer"
> target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
>
> ==========
>
> b Site -
>
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>
> rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> ==========
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
--
=9CBlessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light.=9D
Groucho Marx
<http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/43244.Groucho_Marx>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Fitt <jpfitt(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test |
thanks for the advice
dual carbs dual ignition, rotax exhaust, no silencer. 2.58 B reduction gear
box.carbs have been balanced,what type of scale is everyone using for stati
c thrust measurement...marlin fishing...?
john fittsebastopol,ca
On Monday, November 5, 2018 6:10 PM, George Helton
wrote:
If you=99re pulling 5900 rpm static, I would fly it and see what I h
ave inflight. There is a pretty good chance that you=99re going to pi
ck up that extra 300 rpm. I run the same GRT 2000 EIS. With a Rotax CDI it
=99s suppose be programed for you from the factory. So I=99m gu
essing that=99s not a problem. =C2-I know mine worked great once I
changed the pulse input for a Hirth. You never said, if you=99re runn
ing single or dual carbs?George HFirestar=C2-Mesick, Michigan=C2-gdhelt
on(at)gmail.com
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 5, 2018, at 5:12 PM, John Fitt wrote:
As you recommended, I tried a =9Ctiny tach=9D with the input se
nsor wire around the spark plug wire , in several different positions and n
umber of wraps...the readings were way off- 12000 which might be some multi
ple of the real rpm, but...So I can=99t say that was useful. What oth
er method or connection point is foolproof? My rpm is now shown on a GRT EI
S monitor ( making sure that the input is for the 503)Kolb recommended and
sold me the prop, - 12 deg. recommended pitch starting point,=C2-If =C2
-I Allowed the plane to taxi and then observed that the rpm was increasin
g would this be a bad idea?Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 5, 2018, at 12:22 PM, George Helton wrote:
Well, John the first thing that I would do is make tachometer is reading co
rrectly.=C2-I=99m running a different engine and prop combination(
2702 Hirth with a 3 blade, 64=9D Powerfin)and I=99m pitched at
6.7 degrees to obtain my maximum rpm of 5500rpm. This isn=99t apples
to apples because I=99m running a low rpm high torque engine with a s
ingle carb, rated at 40 hp with 2:29 ratio gearbox.=C2-Is this a single c
arb engine? I=99d drop pitch to 6.5 degrees and see if that works. Yo
u=99re also swinging a heavy prop. I think most guys run a 60
=9D 3 blade on that engine? I=99m not sure about that? I suspect your
tach. If you had a timing issue it would be hard to start and probably wou
ld have burned up by now. As always it=99s worth what it cost ya.=C2
-George HFirestar, FS 100, 2702 Hirth=C2-14GDH=C2-Mesick, Michigan=C2
-gdhelton(at)gmail.com
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 5, 2018, at 12:48 PM, John Fitt wrote:
I=99ve been struggling with getting my 503 dcdi fs ll to turn more th
an 5900 rpm static with a 62=9D 3 blade Warpdrive pitched all the way
down to 8 1/4 degrees. Good compression, plugs good color, good running ex
cept for the low rpm. Has anyone had an ignition timing issue? Is there any
adjustment or way to check this?Have not done measured static thrust test
but it sure pulls strong against the rope tied to the tail - easily puts th
e tail up in the air.=C2-Previous replies to this same question were
=9Creduce prop pitch till you get 6200 -6300 rpm=9DI=99m at
8-1/4deg !?!?=C2-
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 5, 2018, at 7:05 AM, Larry Cottrell wrote:
58 to 60 would be the "normal" speed without any "improvements" made to cle
an it up.Larry
On Mon, Nov 5, 2018 at 1:08 AM Bill Berle wrote
:
Hi Larry,
What was the cruising speed you got from your HKS/Firestar BEFORE the strut
fairings, gear leg fairings, etc?
I have only a few possibilities left if the "solid" center section fairing
does not get me up to 60 MPH without the fairings:
1) Modify the intake maniforlds or use the "straight" intakes like yours, t
o point the carburetors forward into the airflow. Mine are the other curved
type and my carburetors face rearward. This puts a little bit of suction a
t the carb inlet from forward speed AND the inlet be ing in the "suction" a
rea in front of the prop.
2) Remove the entire exhaust system to mount the stock HKS exhaust. This wi
ll be difficult because my engine is lower on the mount plate than yours.
3) Trade my engine for another engine that has a 2.58 gearbox
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com=C2- - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraf
t
www.grantstar.net =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- - winning proposals fo
r non-profit and for-profit entities
--------------------------------------------
On Sun, 11/4/18, Larry Cottrell wrote:
=C2-Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test
=C2-To: "kolb-list(at)matronics.com"
=C2-Date: Sunday, November 4, 2018, 8:16 AM
=C2-I can't add much
=C2-of anything to what John said, since most of my knowledge
=C2-comes from John in the first place. One thing I can add is
=C2-that the increase in airspeed comes from cleaning up the
=C2-drag-=C2- strut fairings, gear legs etc.
=C2-Anxiously waiting to
=C2-hear how the plane is going to fly.Larry
=C2-On Sun,
=C2-Nov 4, 2018 at 12:51 AM Bill Berle
=C2-wrote:
=C2-Bill Berle
=C2-Today was first engine run (after my recent mods). My
=C2-modifications since last test flight were:
=C2-1) Move oil cooler from top surface of the wing down to 12
=C2-inches under the wing.
=C2-2) Move oil reservoir tank down underneath the wing.
=C2-3) Fabricate a "solid" cover for the center
=C2-section so that no air could "leak" or flow
=C2-upwards form the bottom to the top of the wing (causing drag
=C2-and bad airflow into the prop)
=C2-4) Move the fuel tank forward so it is now under the center
=C2-of gravity, so that the aircraft CG is not near the aft end
=C2-of the CG rrange.
=C2-On this test run, we were finally able to do a static thrust
=C2-measurement.
=C2-At 5850 RPM on the ground, the giant spring scale registered
=C2-250 pounds of thrust. The engine is nominally 58-60HP at its
=C2-redline of 6200 RPM, which means I was making 94% of max
=C2-RPM. This was with a 3 blade wide chord propeller, 65 inch
=C2-diameter, with 11 degrees of pitch measured at the tip.
=C2-So the purpose of this Kolb List post is to solicit
=C2-data/opinion/experience from Kolbers who have measured the
=C2-static thrust on their Rotax 503, 532, and 582 engines and
=C2-similar. I have NO IDEA if 250 pounds of thrust is a little,
=C2-a lot, average, below average, or incredible for a Firestar
=C2-2.
=C2-Kolbers...how does 250 pounds of thrust compare to what
=C2-static thrust YOU measured with your 503/532/582 on a Kolb?
=C2-Does 250 pounds of thrust seem correct for a "60HP
=C2-class" engine... somewhere between the 503 and 582?
=C2-How many pounds of thrust do YOU think is appropriate or
=C2-acceptable for Kolb being set up for short takeoff
=C2-performance?
=C2-The next step is to finalize the center section cover (I
=C2-made four or five of them trying to come up with what would
=C2-work best). Finally went with thin aluminum sheet metal and
=C2-Velcro. Once this is all finalized and installed, I can
=C2-resume my test flying, and see if this made enough
=C2-difference to raise the cruise speed to 65MPH.
=C2-Once I get to 63-65 MPH I can reduce drag using the
=C2-streamlilned strut fairings (from Dennis Carley / U-Fly-it)
=C2-and work on all of the little drag redusing things that Jack
=C2-Hart has documented on his Firefly. Hopefully I can get my
=C2-Firestar up to the 68-72 MPH cruise speed that Larry C is
=C2-getting on his Firestar / HKS setup.
=C2-Larry and I both have the same large bush tires and Firestar
=C2-2 airframe. I have a different gearbox and longer landing
=C2-gear legs than Larry does.
=C2-Bill Berle
=C2-www.ezflaphandle.com=C2-
=C2-- safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
=C2-www.grantstar.net =C2- =C2-
=C2-=C2- =C2- =C2- - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profi
t
=C2-entities
=C2-==========
=C2-br>
=C2-fts!)
=C2-r>
=C2->
=C2-e.com" rel="noreferrer"
=C2-target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
=C2-rel="noreferrer"
=C2-target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
=C2-=C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
=C2-==========
=C2--List" rel="noreferrer"
=C2-target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
=C2-==========
=C2- FORUMS -
=C2-eferrer"
=C2-target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
=C2-==========
=C2-WIKI -
=C2-errer"
=C2-target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
=C2-==========
=C2-b Site -
=C2-=C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
=C2-rel="noreferrer"
=C2-target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
=C2-==========
=C2---
=C2-The
=C2-older I get, the less tolerant I am of those who are
=C2-intolerant of others.
=C2-If you forward this email, or any part of
=C2-it, please remove my email address before sending.
br>fts!)
r>>e.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
=C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
-List" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Naviga
tor?Kolb-List
FORUMS -
eferrer" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
WIKI -
errer" target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
b Site -
=C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
--
The older I get, the less tolerant I am of those who are intolerant of othe
rs.
If you forward this email, or any part of it, please remove my email addres
s before sending.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
I probably have less than 10 minutes of Kolb air time, so I can't claim
to speak with authority. But many on this list have talked about what
poor performers Kolbs are if the center section gap seal is missing, and
having an opening between the inboard end of the wings and the fuselage
(or the other wing) has proven to be very detrimental to the wing's
performance in many other planes. From what I've read, it's due to
getting 'tip drag' in four places, instead of two, and effectively
halving (or worse) the aspect ratio of the wing. If that was happening
to your plane, could the wing have had such poor efficiency that it
needed to have an abnormally high AOA relative to the tail? If that was
happening, it could account for poor top speed, as well. Just
speculating, of course. Have you tried just flying it down the runway in
ground effect since closing up the center section?
Charlie
On 11/5/2018 9:13 PM, Bill Berle wrote:
>
> I agree totally with the logic, but the measurements and parameters I got from
Duane at Kolb are showing that the wing is on the fuselage right. The trailing
edge of the wing is set by the location of the U-joinot welded at the factory.
The leading edge is set by where the bolt/pin hole is drilled in the spar
fitting on the wing. This hole was almost exactly where Duane said the plans call
for.
>
> So w hat I am saying is that the airplane is behaving as if the incidences are
all wrong, but the incidence measurements are correct as far as I can see.
>
> If John H wants to take a vacation and come out to Los Angeles, use his know
ledge and experience to get to the bottom of all this I would certainly welcome
it... but I have a feeling he pretty much has no interest in being around Los
Angeles city. Not many Kolbers here :)
>
> Bill Berle
> www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
> www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Mon, 11/5/18, Rick Neilsen wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test
> To: "kolb-list(at)matronics.com"
> Date: Monday, November 5, 2018, 11:00 AM
>
> Bill
> Having to raise the horizontal
> stabilizer as high as you have to is the symptom of the wing
> being set with the leading edge too high and/or the trailing
> edge too low. Your tail has to be flying way too high to
> keep from climbing. You have a bunch more fuselage and tail
> boom being pushed through the air than if it were lined up
> with the air flow. It's a bit like putting your plane in
> a slip for landing.
> Sorry this all worth what you paid
> for it and I'm probably wrong. After 44 years of
> marriage my wife told me I was right for the 30th time last
> night!!!!! I'm shooting for 40 before one of us
> dies.
> Rick NeilsenRedrive VW Powered
> MKIIIC
> On Mon,
> Nov 5, 2018 at 11:37 AM Bill Berle
> wrote:
> Bill Berle
>
>
>
> Hi Rick, I did speak to Duane at Kolb a few times to verify
> the proper measurements of the wing and tail incidence. My
> wings sit on the fuselage at the correct angle within a
> small fraction. My tailboom (fuselage tube) is at the
> correct angle because that is set at the factory when they
> weld the fuselage jig. My horizontal tail started out at the
> correct angle (per Duane's measurement and the plans)
> and I had to raise the tail in order for it to fly level.
>
>
>
> Since then, John H and several other Kolbers were not happy
> with the LE of the tail being raised up, so I moved the fuel
> tank forward, so I can start lowering the tail back down
> towards the "normal" setting.
>
>
>
> I am not certain what the "level flight"
> measurement is on the Firestar. I cannot recall if anyone
> has an official concrete number "the bottom of the wing
> has to be X degrees to the horizon for level flight".
>
>
>
>
>
>
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Berle <victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test |
"... many on this list have talked about what poor performers Kolbs are if the
center section gap seal is missing, and having an opening between the inboard
end of the wings and the fuselage "
" ... From what I've read, it's due to getting 'tip drag' in four places, instead
of two, and effectively halving (or worse) the aspect ratio of the wing.
If that was happening to your plane, could the wing have had such poor efficiency
that it needed to have an abnormally high AOA relative to the tail?"
"... If that was happening, it could account for poor top speed, as well. Just
speculating, of course. Have you tried just flying it down the runway in ground
effect since closing up the center section?"
------------------------------
Charlie this is exactly why I chose to re-do the center gap seal first, before
assuming the engine and/or propeller was wrong. I agree 100% that the drag and
distrubed flow from a bad or missing gap seal can cause much bigger problems
than we would expect. As an old washed up glider pilot, I can personally verify
that air leakage and disturbed air flow is a big deal. In gliders it's all we
have to work with... no engine or propeller to "cheat" with :)
It's not that the Kolb needs the lift form thecenter section... the Kolb has PLENTY
of wing area to make enough lift without the center. But the disturbance
and "four wingtips" effect you mention can act like a spoiler or airbrake. Maybe
some of the experienced Kolbers can quantify just how much of a difference
it makes with and without the gap seal?
So this is why I put a lot of time and effort into fixing this problem first, then
test flying it, and seeing just how much of the problem this one thing did
or did not solve. Before I start playing around with strut fairings and other
deag reduction tweaks.
First test flight will hopefully be this week. All I need is to get the Velcro
glued on to the wing and center gap seal well enough to be sure it will be secure
and not let air flow through any "holes" or gaps.
Although I have almost zero Kolb experience, I do be lieve that I will be able
to tell immediately if this fix is making a big difference or not.
Bill
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Berle <victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | HKS / Firestar - TRIM TABS |
Hi Richard,
Yes I did put on elevator and rudder trim tabs and they are much larger than the
ones in your photos. The combination of raising the leading edge of the tail,
plus the trim tabs on each elevator, FINALLY allowed me to let go of the stick
(carefully) in level flight for a few seconds at a time. If I can remember,
next time I go to the hangar I will take photos of the tabs.
My tabs are taped on with double-stick tape, and can be removed if needed. I am
HOPING that the combination of moving the fuel forward, and fixing the wing center
section fairing, will allow me to put the stabilizerb ack in its original
position. I am happy to leave the trim tabs there if it is needed. Most Kolbs
have some sort of tab, but notmany of them have the tail jackedup an inch. So
based on strong advice from many experienced Kolbers, if I can put the tail
back where it is supposed to be then I will. If I cannot, then I cannot.
I also have a rudder trim tab taped on. This has made a good improvement in yaw
trim, not having to hold aileron and rudder at all times to make it fly straight.
Once again, NONE of this was "un-controllable" or "trying to crash". Just a moderate
out-of-trim condition. If I had let go of the elevator on the first 4 flights,
the airplane would have gone nose-up and stalled within a few seconds.
If I ever get to fly a proper, known Firestar then I can have something to compare
it to. It may be that my airplane is just fine for a Kolb, and I am not calibrated
to Kolbs.
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Pfatchantz <Pfatchantz(at)protonmail.ch> |
| Subject: | HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test |
John and all
Haven't seen it mentioned in this thread, but I am only half way through...
My Firefly,first one, had to be gotten on step for minimal cruise drag..I simply
set up cruise rpms..and gently nursed the nose down just slightly...would
see an immediate pickup in rpm's and a bit more airspeed..
Flying with a buddy who also had a Firefly: I noticed that he was dragging the
tail...and as I recall, he had previously complained about fuel burn...Just
a thought...
Herb
Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.
Original Message
On Monday, November 5, 2018 9:55 PM, John Hauck wrote:
>
> Got some good friends out there in addition to Bill B, but got too much on my
plate at the moment to head back to California.
>
> Sometimes a problem is invisible to many eyes for a long period of time, maybe
never being solved. Then on the other hand a person will walk up and say, "Hey!
Why is that part that way?" Bingo the problem is solved.
>
> I don't know what Bill B's airplane is up to. Maybe that HKS ain't putting out
the horses the book and seller said it should. Who knows. I do know a high mounted
pusher should not push the nose up, but down. From Bill's description he
has a very sluggish FS. Why?
>
> I don't know. ;-(
>
> john h
> mkIII
> Titus, Alabama
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Berle
> Sent: Monday, November 05, 2018 9:13 PM
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test
>
>
> I agree totally with the logic, but the measurements and parameters I got from
Duane at Kolb are showing that the wing is on the fuselage right. The trailing
edge of the wing is set by the location of the U-joinot welded at the factory.
The leading edge is set by where the bolt/pin hole is drilled in the spar
fitting on the wing. This hole was almost exactly where Duane said the plans call
for.
>
> So w hat I am saying is that the airplane is behaving as if the incidences are
all wrong, but the incidence measurements are correct as far as I can see.
>
> If John H wants to take a vacation and come out to Los Angeles, use his know
ledge and experience to get to the bottom of all this I would certainly welcome
it... but I have a feeling he pretty much has no interest in being around Los
Angeles city. Not many Kolbers here :)
>
> Bill Berle
> www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
> www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> On Mon, 11/5/18, Rick Neilsen neilsenrm(at)gmail.com wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test
> To: "kolb-list(at)matronics.com" kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Date: Monday, November 5, 2018, 11:00 AM
>
> Bill
> Having to raise the horizontal
> stabilizer as high as you have to is the symptom of the wing
> being set with the leading edge too high and/or the trailing
> edge too low. Your tail has to be flying way too high to
> keep from climbing. You have a bunch more fuselage and tail
> boom being pushed through the air than if it were lined up
> with the air flow. It's a bit like putting your plane in
> a slip for landing.
> Sorry this all worth what you paid
> for it and I'm probably wrong. After 44 years of
> marriage my wife told me I was right for the 30th time last
> night!!!!! I'm shooting for 40 before one of us
> dies.
> Rick NeilsenRedrive VW Powered
> MKIIIC
> On Mon,
> Nov 5, 2018 at 11:37 AM Bill Berle victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.net
> wrote:
> Bill Berle victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.net
>
> Hi Rick, I did speak to Duane at Kolb a few times to verify
> the proper measurements of the wing and tail incidence. My
> wings sit on the fuselage at the correct angle within a
> small fraction. My tailboom (fuselage tube) is at the
> correct angle because that is set at the factory when they
> weld the fuselage jig. My horizontal tail started out at the
> correct angle (per Duane's measurement and the plans)
> and I had to raise the tail in order for it to fly level.
>
> Since then, John H and several other Kolbers were not happy
> with the LE of the tail being raised up, so I moved the fuel
> tank forward, so I can start lowering the tail back down
> towards the "normal" setting.
>
> I am not certain what the "level flight"
> measurement is on the Firestar. I cannot recall if anyone
> has an official concrete number "the bottom of the wing
> has to be X degrees to the horizon for level flight".
>
> Bill Berle
>
> www.ezflaphandle.com
>
> - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
>
> www.grantstar.net
> - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit
> entities
>
>
> On Mon, 11/5/18, Rick Neilsenneilsenrm(at)gmail.com
> wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test
>
> To: "kolb-list(at)matronics.com"
> kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>
> Date: Monday, November 5, 2018, 6:40 AM
>
> Bill
>
> How about adjusting the wing angle
>
> of attack to get your plane flying level? "When you
>
> have eliminated all other possibilities then the answer
> no
>
> matter how improbable must be the answer".
>
> Rick NeilsenRedrive VW Powered
>
> MKIIIC
>
> On Mon,
>
> Nov 5, 2018 at 3:08 AM Bill Berle victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.net
>
> wrote:
>
>
> Bill Berlevictorbravo(at)sbcglobal.net
>
> Hi Larry,
>
> What was the cruising speed you got from your
> HKS/Firestar
>
> BEFORE the strut fairings, gear leg fairings, etc?
>
> I have only a few possibilities left if the
>
> "solid" center section fairing does not get me
> up
>
> to 60 MPH without the fairings:
>
> 1. Modify the intake maniforlds or use the
>
> "straight" intakes like yours, to point the
>
> carburetors forward into the airflow. Mine are the other
>
> curved type and my carburetors face rearward. This puts a
>
> little bit of suction at the carb inlet from forward
> speed
>
> AND the inlet be ing in the "suction" area in
>
> front of the prop.
>
> 2. Remove the entire exhaust system to mount the stock
> HKS
>
> exhaust. This will be difficult because my engine is
> lower
>
> on the mount plate than yours.
>
> 3. Trade my engine for another engine that has a 2.58
>
> gearbox
>
> Bill Berle
>
> www.ezflaphandle.com
>
>
> - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
>
> www.grantstar.net
>
> - winning proposals for non-profit and
> for-profit
>
> entities
>
>
> On Sun, 11/4/18, Larry Cottrelllcottrell1020(at)gmail.com
>
> wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST
> test
>
> To: "kolb-list(at)matronics.com"
>
> kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>
> Date: Sunday, November 4, 2018, 8:16 AM
>
> I can't add much
>
> of anything to what John said, since most of my
> knowledge
>
> comes from John in the first place. One thing I can add
>
> is
>
> that the increase in airspeed comes from cleaning up
> the
>
> drag- strut fairings, gear legs etc.
>
> Anxiously waiting to
>
> hear how the plane is going to fly.Larry
>
> On Sun,
>
> Nov 4, 2018 at 12:51 AM Bill Berle victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.net
>
> wrote:
>
>
> Bill Berlevictorbravo(at)sbcglobal.net
>
> Today was first engine run (after my recent mods). My
>
> modifications since last test flight were:
>
> 1. Move oil cooler from top surface of the wing down to
>
> 12
>
> inches under the wing.
>
> 2. Move oil reservoir tank down underneath the wing.
>
> 3. Fabricate a "solid" cover for the center
>
> section so that no air could "leak" or flow
>
> upwards form the bottom to the top of the wing (causing
>
> drag
>
> and bad airflow into the prop)
>
> 4. Move the fuel tank forward so it is now under the
>
> center
>
> of gravity, so that the aircraft CG is not near the aft
>
> end
>
> of the CG rrange.
>
> On this test run, we were finally able to do a static
>
> thrust
>
> measurement.
>
> At 5850 RPM on the ground, the giant spring scale
>
> registered
>
> 250 pounds of thrust. The engine is nominally 58-60HP
> at
>
> its
>
> redline of 6200 RPM, which means I was making 94% of
> max
>
> RPM. This was with a 3 blade wide chord propeller, 65
>
> inch
>
> diameter, with 11 degrees of pitch measured at the tip.
>
> So the purpose of this Kolb List post is to solicit
>
> data/opinion/experience from Kolbers who have measured
>
> the
>
> static thrust on their Rotax 503, 532, and 582 engines
>
> and
>
> similar. I have NO IDEA if 250 pounds of thrust is a
>
> little,
>
> a lot, average, below average, or incredible for a
>
> Firestar
>
>
> 2.
>
> Kolbers...how does 250 pounds of thrust compare to what
>
> static thrust YOU measured with your 503/532/582 on a
>
> Kolb?
>
> Does 250 pounds of thrust seem correct for a "60HP
>
> class" engine... somewhere between the 503 and
> 582?
>
> How many pounds of thrust do YOU think is appropriate
> or
>
> acceptable for Kolb being set up for short takeoff
>
> performance?
>
> The next step is to finalize the center section cover
> (I
>
> made four or five of them trying to come up with what
>
> would
>
> work best). Finally went with thin aluminum sheet metal
>
> and
>
> Velcro. Once this is all finalized and installed, I can
>
> resume my test flying, and see if this made enough
>
> difference to raise the cruise speed to 65MPH.
>
> Once I get to 63-65 MPH I can reduce drag using the
>
> streamlilned strut fairings (from Dennis Carley /
>
> U-Fly-it)
>
> and work on all of the little drag redusing things that
>
> Jack
>
> Hart has documented on his Firefly. Hopefully I can get
>
> my
>
> Firestar up to the 68-72 MPH cruise speed that Larry C
> is
>
> getting on his Firestar / HKS setup.
>
> Larry and I both have the same large bush tires and
>
> Firestar
>
> 2 airframe. I have a different gearbox and longer
> landing
>
> gear legs than Larry does.
>
> Bill Berle
>
> www.ezflaphandle.com
>
> - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
>
> www.grantstar.net
>
> - winning proposals for non-profit and
>
> for-profit
>
> entities
>
> ==========
>
> br>
>
>
> fts!)
>
> r>
>
> >
>
> e.com"
>
> rel="noreferrer"
>
> target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
>
> rel="noreferrer"
>
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>
>
> ============================
>
> -List" rel="noreferrer"
>
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>
> =
>
> FORUMS -
>
> eferrer"
>
> target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>
> =
>
> WIKI -
>
> errer"
>
> target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
>
> =
>
> b Site -
>
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>
> rel="noreferrer"
>
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> =
>
> --
>
> The
>
> older I get, the less tolerant I am of those who are
>
> intolerant of others.
>
> If you forward this email, or any part of
>
> it, please remove my email address before sending.
>
>
> ==================================================================================================================================================================================
>
> br>
>
> fts!)
>
> r>
>
> >
>
> e.com"
> rel="noreferrer"
>
> target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
>
> rel="noreferrer"
>
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>
>
> ============================
>
> -List" rel="noreferrer"
>
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>
> =
>
> FORUMS -
>
> eferrer"
>
> target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>
> =
>
> WIKI -
>
> errer"
>
> target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
>
> =
>
> b Site -
>
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>
> rel="noreferrer"
>
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> =
>
> =
>
> br>
> fts!)
>
> r>
>
> >
>
> e.com" rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
>
> rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>
> ===========================
>
> -List" rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>
> =
>
> FORUMS -
>
> eferrer"
> target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>
> =
>
> WIKI -
>
> errer"
> target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
>
> =
>
> b Site -
>
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>
> rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> =
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test |
Bingo! The light bulb just went off!!!
Thanks for reminding me, Herb.
Way back when, 1985, the original Firestar kits came with extremely soft Lord Mounts.
During the early days of my Firestar I was constantly trying to learn
about and tweak my FS to improve performance and to make it a safer airplane to
accomplish long cross country flights. Normally, my FS would fly 80 mph straight
and level. One day I took off, WOT, leveled out and the FS would only fly
about 60 or so mph??? Couldn't figure out what was wrong. Slowly came back
on the power and the FS accelerated. Slowly increased power and it accelerated
right on up to 80.
During a static run up I noticed the engine twisted left and down, putting most
of the pressure on the left front Lord Mount. The thrust line was way out of
whack. Came back on the power, the engine would straighten back up again. The
Lord Mounts were too soft. Little Mike at Old Kolb Aircraft sent me a set
of harder Lord Mounts. Problem solved.
I can't remember any adverse trim problems when the offset engine problem occurred,
but when it did it was just like I was dragging an anchor. As I eased off
the power from WOT the aircraft would begin to accelerate. Then I could ease
the power on very slowly and get the aircraft to continue to accelerate to normal
speed.
Maybe Bill B needs stiffer Lord Mounts. One way to check is tie the FS down and
play with the throttle while watching what the engine does. Might surprise
you.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Pfatchantz
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2018 11:52 PM
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test
John and all
Haven't seen it mentioned in this thread, but I am only half way through...
My Firefly,first one, had to be gotten on step for minimal cruise drag..I simply
set up cruise rpms..and gently nursed the nose down just slightly...would
see an immediate pickup in rpm's and a bit more airspeed..
Flying with a buddy who also had a Firefly: I noticed that he was dragging the
tail...and as I recall, he had previously complained about fuel burn...Just
a thought...
Herb
Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.
Original Message
On Monday, November 5, 2018 9:55 PM, John Hauck wrote:
>
> Got some good friends out there in addition to Bill B, but got too much on my
plate at the moment to head back to California.
>
> Sometimes a problem is invisible to many eyes for a long period of time, maybe
never being solved. Then on the other hand a person will walk up and say, "Hey!
Why is that part that way?" Bingo the problem is solved.
>
> I don't know what Bill B's airplane is up to. Maybe that HKS ain't putting out
the horses the book and seller said it should. Who knows. I do know a high mounted
pusher should not push the nose up, but down. From Bill's description he
has a very sluggish FS. Why?
>
> I don't know. ;-(
>
> john h
> mkIII
> Titus, Alabama
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Berle
> Sent: Monday, November 05, 2018 9:13 PM
> To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test
>
>
> I agree totally with the logic, but the measurements and parameters I got from
Duane at Kolb are showing that the wing is on the fuselage right. The trailing
edge of the wing is set by the location of the U-joinot welded at the factory.
The leading edge is set by where the bolt/pin hole is drilled in the spar
fitting on the wing. This hole was almost exactly where Duane said the plans call
for.
>
> So w hat I am saying is that the airplane is behaving as if the incidences are
all wrong, but the incidence measurements are correct as far as I can see.
>
> If John H wants to take a vacation and come out to Los Angeles, use his know
ledge and experience to get to the bottom of all this I would certainly welcome
it... but I have a feeling he pretty much has no interest in being around Los
Angeles city. Not many Kolbers here :)
>
> Bill Berle
> www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
> www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------!
---
>
> On Mon, 11/5/18, Rick Neilsen neilsenrm(at)gmail.com wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test
> To: "kolb-list(at)matronics.com" kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> Date: Monday, November 5, 2018, 11:00 AM
>
> Bill
> Having to raise the horizontal
> stabilizer as high as you have to is the symptom of the wing
> being set with the leading edge too high and/or the trailing
> edge too low. Your tail has to be flying way too high to
> keep from climbing. You have a bunch more fuselage and tail
> boom being pushed through the air than if it were lined up
> with the air flow. It's a bit like putting your plane in
> a slip for landing.
> Sorry this all worth what you paid
> for it and I'm probably wrong. After 44 years of
> marriage my wife told me I was right for the 30th time last
> night!!!!! I'm shooting for 40 before one of us
> dies.
> Rick NeilsenRedrive VW Powered
> MKIIIC
> On Mon,
> Nov 5, 2018 at 11:37 AM Bill Berle victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.net
> wrote:
> Bill Berle victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.net
>
> Hi Rick, I did speak to Duane at Kolb a few times to verify
> the proper measurements of the wing and tail incidence. My
> wings sit on the fuselage at the correct angle within a
> small fraction. My tailboom (fuselage tube) is at the
> correct angle because that is set at the factory when they
> weld the fuselage jig. My horizontal tail started out at the
> correct angle (per Duane's measurement and the plans)
> and I had to raise the tail in order for it to fly level.
>
> Since then, John H and several other Kolbers were not happy
> with the LE of the tail being raised up, so I moved the fuel
> tank forward, so I can start lowering the tail back down
> towards the "normal" setting.
>
> I am not certain what the "level flight"
> measurement is on the Firestar. I cannot recall if anyone
> has an official concrete number "the bottom of the wing
> has to be X degrees to the horizon for level flight".
>
> Bill Berle
>
> www.ezflaphandle.com
>
> - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
>
> www.grantstar.net
> - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit
> entities
>
>
> On Mon, 11/5/18, Rick Neilsenneilsenrm(at)gmail.com
> wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test
>
> To: "kolb-list(at)matronics.com"
> kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>
> Date: Monday, November 5, 2018, 6:40 AM
>
> Bill
>
> How about adjusting the wing angle
>
> of attack to get your plane flying level? "When you
>
> have eliminated all other possibilities then the answer
> no
>
> matter how improbable must be the answer".
>
> Rick NeilsenRedrive VW Powered
>
> MKIIIC
>
> On Mon,
>
> Nov 5, 2018 at 3:08 AM Bill Berle victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.net
>
> wrote:
>
>
> Bill Berlevictorbravo(at)sbcglobal.net
>
> Hi Larry,
>
> What was the cruising speed you got from your
> HKS/Firestar
>
> BEFORE the strut fairings, gear leg fairings, etc?
>
> I have only a few possibilities left if the
>
> "solid" center section fairing does not get me
> up
>
> to 60 MPH without the fairings:
>
> 1. Modify the intake maniforlds or use the
>
> "straight" intakes like yours, to point the
>
> carburetors forward into the airflow. Mine are the other
>
> curved type and my carburetors face rearward. This puts a
>
> little bit of suction at the carb inlet from forward
> speed
>
> AND the inlet be ing in the "suction" area in
>
> front of the prop.
>
> 2. Remove the entire exhaust system to mount the stock
> HKS
>
> exhaust. This will be difficult because my engine is
> lower
>
> on the mount plate than yours.
>
> 3. Trade my engine for another engine that has a 2.58
>
> gearbox
>
> Bill Berle
>
> www.ezflaphandle.com
>
>
> - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
>
> www.grantstar.net
>
> - winning proposals for non-profit and
> for-profit
>
> entities
>
>
> On Sun, 11/4/18, Larry Cottrelllcottrell1020(at)gmail.com
>
> wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST
> test
>
> To: "kolb-list(at)matronics.com"
>
> kolb-list(at)matronics.com
>
> Date: Sunday, November 4, 2018, 8:16 AM
>
> I can't add much
>
> of anything to what John said, since most of my
> knowledge
>
> comes from John in the first place. One thing I can add
>
> is
>
> that the increase in airspeed comes from cleaning up
> the
>
> drag- strut fairings, gear legs etc.
>
> Anxiously waiting to
>
> hear how the plane is going to fly.Larry
>
> On Sun,
>
> Nov 4, 2018 at 12:51 AM Bill Berle victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.net
>
> wrote:
>
>
> Bill Berlevictorbravo(at)sbcglobal.net
>
> Today was first engine run (after my recent mods). My
>
> modifications since last test flight were:
>
> 1. Move oil cooler from top surface of the wing down to
>
> 12
>
> inches under the wing.
>
> 2. Move oil reservoir tank down underneath the wing.
>
> 3. Fabricate a "solid" cover for the center
>
> section so that no air could "leak" or flow
>
> upwards form the bottom to the top of the wing (causing
>
> drag
>
> and bad airflow into the prop)
>
> 4. Move the fuel tank forward so it is now under the
>
> center
>
> of gravity, so that the aircraft CG is not near the aft
>
> end
>
> of the CG rrange.
>
> On this test run, we were finally able to do a static
>
> thrust
>
> measurement.
>
> At 5850 RPM on the ground, the giant spring scale
>
> registered
>
> 250 pounds of thrust. The engine is nominally 58-60HP
> at
>
> its
>
> redline of 6200 RPM, which means I was making 94% of
> max
>
> RPM. This was with a 3 blade wide chord propeller, 65
>
> inch
>
> diameter, with 11 degrees of pitch measured at the tip.
>
> So the purpose of this Kolb List post is to solicit
>
> data/opinion/experience from Kolbers who have measured
>
> the
>
> static thrust on their Rotax 503, 532, and 582 engines
>
> and
>
> similar. I have NO IDEA if 250 pounds of thrust is a
>
> little,
>
> a lot, average, below average, or incredible for a
>
> Firestar
>
>
> 2.
>
> Kolbers...how does 250 pounds of thrust compare to what
>
> static thrust YOU measured with your 503/532/582 on a
>
> Kolb?
>
> Does 250 pounds of thrust seem correct for a "60HP
>
> class" engine... somewhere between the 503 and
> 582?
>
> How many pounds of thrust do YOU think is appropriate
> or
>
> acceptable for Kolb being set up for short takeoff
>
> performance?
>
> The next step is to finalize the center section cover
> (I
>
> made four or five of them trying to come up with what
>
> would
>
> work best). Finally went with thin aluminum sheet metal
>
> and
>
> Velcro. Once this is all finalized and installed, I can
>
> resume my test flying, and see if this made enough
>
> difference to raise the cruise speed to 65MPH.
>
> Once I get to 63-65 MPH I can reduce drag using the
>
> streamlilned strut fairings (from Dennis Carley /
>
> U-Fly-it)
>
> and work on all of the little drag redusing things that
>
> Jack
>
> Hart has documented on his Firefly. Hopefully I can get
>
> my
>
> Firestar up to the 68-72 MPH cruise speed that Larry C
> is
>
> getting on his Firestar / HKS setup.
>
> Larry and I both have the same large bush tires and
>
> Firestar
>
> 2 airframe. I have a different gearbox and longer
> landing
>
> gear legs than Larry does.
>
> Bill Berle
>
> www.ezflaphandle.com
>
> - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
>
> www.grantstar.net
>
> - winning proposals for non-profit and
>
> for-profit
>
> entities
>
> ==========
>
> br>
>
>
> fts!)
>
> r>
>
> >
>
> e.com"
>
> rel="noreferrer"
>
> target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
>
> rel="noreferrer"
>
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>
>
> ============================
>
> -List" rel="noreferrer"
>
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>
> =
>
> FORUMS -
>
> eferrer"
>
> target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>
> =
>
> WIKI -
>
> errer"
>
> target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
>
> =
>
> b Site -
>
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>
> rel="noreferrer"
>
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> =
>
> --
>
> The
>
> older I get, the less tolerant I am of those who are
>
> intolerant of others.
>
> If you forward this email, or any part of
>
> it, please remove my email address before sending.
>
>
> ==================================================================================================================================================================================
>
> br>
>
> fts!)
>
> r>
>
> >
>
> e.com"
> rel="noreferrer"
>
> target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
>
> rel="noreferrer"
>
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>
>
> ============================
>
> -List" rel="noreferrer"
>
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>
> =
>
> FORUMS -
>
> eferrer"
>
> target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>
> =
>
> WIKI -
>
> errer"
>
> target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
>
> =
>
> b Site -
>
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>
> rel="noreferrer"
>
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> =
>
> =
>
> br>
> fts!)
>
> r>
>
> >
>
> e.com" rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
>
> rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>
> ===========================
>
> -List" rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>
> =
>
> FORUMS -
>
> eferrer"
> target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>
> =
>
> WIKI -
>
> errer"
> target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
>
> =
>
> b Site -
>
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>
> rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> =
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Berle <victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test |
On Tue, 11/6/18, John Hauck wrote:
One day I took off, WOT, leveled out and the FS would only fly about 60 or so mph???
Couldn't figure
out what was wrong. Slowly came back on the power and the FS accelerated. Slowly
increased power and it
accelerated right on up to 80.
During a static run up I noticed the engine twisted left and down, putting most
of the pressure on the left front Lord Mount. The thrust line was way out of
whack. Came back on the power, the engine would straighten back up again. The
Lord Mounts were too soft. Little Mike at Old Kolb Aircraft sent me a set of
harder Lord Mounts.
Maybe Bill B needs stiffer Lord Mounts. One way to check is tie the FS down and
play with the throttle while watching what the engine does. Might surprise you.
-------------------------------------------------
Well, that is one test that I can do without too much of a problem, and it is a
test that can be done at exactly my desired cost... zero! So next time I have
someone who can observe this, or measure it, or photograph it, I will try to
do so.
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test |
You can handle that job all by yourself. After you get the tail tied, stand on
the right side of the cockpit, watch how the position of the engine reacts when
you go WOT and when you manipulate the throttle. Easy job.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
-------------------------------------------------
Well, that is one test that I can do without too much of a problem, and it is a
test that can be done at exactly my desired cost... zero! So next time I have
someone who can observe this, or measure it, or photograph it, I will try to
do so.
Bill Berle
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | [PLEASE READ] Why I Have A Fund Raiser... |
Since the beginning, the Matronics List and Forum experience has been free from
advertising. I have been approached by fair number of vendors wanting to tap
into the large volume of activity across the various lists hosted here, but have
always flatly refused. Everywhere you go on the Internet these days, a user
is pummeled with flashing banners and videos and ads for crap that they don't
want. Yahoo, Google and that ilk are not "free". The user must constantly
endure their barrage of commercialism thrust into their face at an ever increasing
rate. Enough is enough, and the Lists at Matronics choose not to succumb
to that.
That being said, running a service of this size is not "free". It costs a lot
of money to maintain the hardware, pay for the electricity, Commercial-greade
Internet Connection, air conditioning, maintenance contracts, etc, etc. etc.
I choose to hold a PBS-like fund raiser each year during the month of November
where I simply send out a short email every other day asking the members to make
a small contribution to support the operation. That being said, that contribution
is completely voluntary and non-compulsory. Many members choose not
to contribute and that's fine.
However, a very modest percentage of the members do choose to make a contribution
and it is that financial support that keeps the Lists running. And that's
it. To my way of thinking, it is a much more pleasant way of maintaining the
Lists and Forums. The other 11 months of the year, you don't see a single advertisement
or request for support. That's refreshing and that is a List and Forum
that I want to belong to. I think other people feel the same way.
Won't you please take a minute to make your Contribution today and support these
Lists?
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Or, drop a personal check in the mail to:
Matt Dralle / Matronics
581 Jeannie Way
Livermore CA 94550
USA
Thank you for your support!
Matt Dralle
Email List Admin.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Swiderski <i2bxtn(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test |
Bill,
May I suggest you re-examine your logic tree. I personally have many
times fell victim to a faulty logic tree while attempting to solve a
problem.
If I was encountering your problem, I would first establish that I had a
problem. The prop pitch must be set as per the earlier posts, then
establish the fact that my climb rate and cruise speed is problematic. If
you don=99t have a rate of climb instrument, just time how long it ta
kes to
go from take off to 1000=99 (this assumes you have an altimeter.) Co
nfirm
your airspeed by going over a known, measured distance, say 2 miles, and
time it in both directions to eliminate tail/head wind. Do it a few times
and take an average. (This is all free!) With my 43hp Cuyuna Ultrastar, I
got 1000fpm, plus or minus 200fpm depending on load and weather (a full
length flaperon mod was also a factor here) . The 65 hp 582 Slingshot was
900-1000fpm, but it was heavy and only has 22ft wings.
If your performance is in fact problematic, then you must determine if the
cause is in the power system or the aircraft, or both. If you don=99
t have
the power and thrust, you can=99t have the climb and speed, so my sec
ond step
would be to see if I am getting 60hp of thrust from my
engine/redrive/propeller system. I can think of 2 ways to acquire this
result: 1) Static thrust test with pull scale; or, 2) a timed acceleration
run from minimum flight speed to maximum. #2 requires googling the formula
to convert acceleration to thrust (also in a recent issue of Kitplane), a
little math, and a gps, so I would go with the simpler #1 & find static
thrust using a pull scale.
To find accurate static thrust, the main wheels must be on a hard surface
and the tail lifted to about a foot above the ground. If you do not have
pull scale with in the 350 lbs range, you can buy a 500# game scale for $15
at academy.com . Once you get you result, call your prop manufacturer &
ask them what static thrust a dual carb 503 and 582 should get. If your
result is significantly below their figures, then you know that your
aircraft=99s performance is proportionally lower as well. If your r
esults
are not above the 50hp 503 or a little lower than the 65hp 582, then your
motor is either over rated by the manufacturer, or it is underperforming
due to some issue. If the static thrust is in the ballpark, then you must
look into the other branch of the logic tree, namely aircraft setup.
I don=99t know all the steps you have taken, but confirming the statu
s of the
power system is first priority.
--
*Click on to Richard's Blog: <http://GodStuffRichard.blogspot.com>
<http://GodStuffRichard.blogspot.com> *
*Thoughts On God And Life <http://godstuffrichard.blogspot.com> -**Prose,
*
*Prayers, Poems & Ponderings *
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rex Rodebush" <jrrodebush(at)gmail.com> |
This is a flight up the James River in Missouri. Click on https://youtu.be/Uz4EOpVMYDk
or go to Youtube and type in "Kolb flight up the James River."
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=484574#484574
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | George Helton <gdhelton(at)gmail.com> |
Beautiful country. A pleasant flight. Thank you, my flying is over for the year
up here in Michigan, so thanks for the ride along.
George H.
Firestar, FS100, 2702 Hirth
14GDH
Mesick, Michigan
gdhelton(at)gmail.com
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 7, 2018, at 3:17 PM, Rex Rodebush wrote:
>
>
> This is a flight up the James River in Missouri. Click on https://youtu.be/Uz4EOpVMYDk
or go to Youtube and type in "Kolb flight up the James River."
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=484574#484574
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
I ran across a few photos of my original Firestar, 1985, during a complete
rebuild winter 1987/88. If you notice, that is an 18 gal 5052 aluminum fuel
tank situated behind the main bulkhead. Guessing about 125 lbs total fuel,
tank, and Facet Pump. On long cross country flights a lot of gear was
shoved under the tank in my now available cargo compartment, all behind the
main bulkhead.
No, I didn't put a heavy battery in the nose (not installed) or lead weight
to counterbalance the fuel tank. Aircraft was perfectly balanced and a joy
to fly. All flying surfaces were built to plans. Also had a ton of two
part Aerothane paint and dope on it. Have no idea where the paper CG was.
Never did a weight and balance on the FS.
No adverse pitch problems 30 years ago.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | List Contribution - 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 $20 or $30
worth of Entertainment from the Lists each year. You'd pay twice that for a
subscription to some 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 these
Lists?
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Or, drop a personal check in the mail to:
Matt Dralle / Matronics
581 Jeannie Way
Livermore CA 94550
USA
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.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "west1m" <west1m(at)hotmail.com> |
Great fall flight. thanks!
As above, the flying is done here in Minnesota as well. I just ordered a full enclosure
set for my Firefly from Kolb. Maybe that will let me get out a bit earlier
next year.
--------
West1m
Hastings, MN
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=484731#484731
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Cottrell <lcottrell1020(at)gmail.com> |
Your findings may be a bit different than mine, but I don't use the plastic
part that goes around the cockpit. I found that it cut down on my speed by
a lot and was just as comfortable with just the wrap around windscreen. It
seemed to me that it made a lot of drag and cut my speed to 60 miles per
hour max. Unless you have a heater it doesn't stay all that warmer. If you
have a two stroke I can show you want I did to make a heater that seemed to
work pretty well. Feet still got cold though. I just bought a "Chilly
Vest", wrapped a scarf around my neck, and did just as well.
Larry
On Fri, Nov 9, 2018 at 6:56 PM west1m wrote:
>
> Great fall flight. thanks!
> As above, the flying is done here in Minnesota as well. I just ordered a
> full enclosure set for my Firefly from Kolb. Maybe that will let me get out
> a bit earlier next year.
>
> --------
> West1m
> Hastings, MN
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=484731#484731
>
>
--
*The older I get, the less tolerant I am of those who are intolerant of
others.*
*If you forward this email, or any part of it, please remove my email
address before sending.*
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: My Firestar 2 Build |
| From: | "loctupdave" <loctupdave(at)att.net> |
does anyone know what purpose this tab serves. I plan to cover this into a full
canopy and it will be in the way. My thought is to cut it off.
distant pic
(http://s275.photobucket.com/user/dngspot/media/tab_zpsstruv6nl.jpg.html)
up close
(http://s275.photobucket.com/user/dngspot/media/tab%20close%20up_zpsslfb55xw.jpg.html)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=484742#484742
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Cottrell <lcottrell1020(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: My Firestar 2 Build |
I believe that it was intended for the enrichner lever.
Larry
On Sat, Nov 10, 2018 at 9:05 AM loctupdave wrote:
>
> does anyone know what purpose this tab serves. I plan to cover this into a
> full canopy and it will be in the way. My thought is to cut it off.
>
> distant pic
>
> (http://s275.photobucket.com/user/dngspot/media/tab_zpsstruv6nl.jpg.html)
>
> up close
>
> (
> http://s275.photobucket.com/user/dngspot/media/tab%20close%20up_zpsslfb55xw.jpg.html
> )
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=484742#484742
>
>
--
*The older I get, the less tolerant I am of those who are intolerant of
others.*
*If you forward this email, or any part of it, please remove my email
address before sending.*
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Fitt <jpfitt(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: My Firestar 2 Build |
I think this was meant for a remote choke lever.
After painting and covering my fs ll fuselage cage I then began adding all the
interior items... and then wished that I had planned ahead. Small tabs could
have been added for mounting floor panels, windscreen and windows, etc. I used
a throttle quadrant that really would have been a simpler install if only there
was a mounting tab...
Is yours a fs l or ll ? The fs ll has a 1/2 horizontal tube that runs just in front
of where the 5tail boom spar attaches; the fabric seat swoops under this.
I was contacted by Kolb Co. several years ago advising that the tube welds were
cracking and a sliding splice would allow movement but still support the fabric.
I saw a need for 4 additional pulleys to raise the rudder/elevator cables
as they entered the tail boom. This sliding splice was part of my new pulley
housing...much easier before paint and fabric. Also, the center wing gap seal
would be a good place to look at.
Check with Kolb regarding the horizontal tube modification.
John Fitt
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 10, 2018, at 8:01 AM, loctupdave wrote:
>
>
> does anyone know what purpose this tab serves. I plan to cover this into a full
canopy and it will be in the way. My thought is to cut it off.
>
> distant pic
>
> (http://s275.photobucket.com/user/dngspot/media/tab_zpsstruv6nl.jpg.html)
>
> up close
>
> (http://s275.photobucket.com/user/dngspot/media/tab%20close%20up_zpsslfb55xw.jpg.html)
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=484742#484742
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Fitt <jpfitt(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: My Firestar 2 Build |
I think this was meant for a remote choke lever.
After painting and covering my fs ll fuselage cage I then began adding all the
interior items... and then wished that I had planned ahead. Small tabs could
have been added for mounting floor panels, windscreen and windows, etc. I used
a throttle quadrant that really would have been a simpler install if only there
was a mounting tab...
Is yours a fs l or ll ? The fs ll has a 1/2 horizontal tube that runs just in front
of where the 5tail boom spar attaches; the fabric seat swoops under this.
I was contacted by Kolb Co. several years ago advising that the tube welds were
cracking and a sliding splice would allow movement but still support the fabric.
I saw a need for 4 additional pulleys to raise the rudder/elevator cables
as they entered the tail boom. This sliding splice was part of my new pulley
housing...much easier before paint and fabric. Also, the center wing gap seal
would be a good place to look at.
Check with Kolb regarding the horizontal tube modification.
John Fitt
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 10, 2018, at 8:01 AM, loctupdave wrote:
>
>
> does anyone know what purpose this tab serves. I plan to cover this into a full
canopy and it will be in the way. My thought is to cut it off.
>
> distant pic
>
> (http://s275.photobucket.com/user/dngspot/media/tab_zpsstruv6nl.jpg.html)
>
> up close
>
> (http://s275.photobucket.com/user/dngspot/media/tab%20close%20up_zpsslfb55xw.jpg.html)
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=484742#484742
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Pfatchantz <Pfatchantz(at)protonmail.ch> |
| Subject: | Re: My Firestar 2 Build/choke tab../enclosure |
Manual choke...attaches there..
Interestingly I took the semi enclosure off of the James Tripp Firestar I
I and am pondering a similar notion..The problem I see with the very simple
Firefly design on the FSII is the fuselage angle change near the front sea
t..
About a hundred bucks is the usual cost of making the Firefly semi full
enclosure. Quite simple to do..Build the bow and supports then lay the lexa
n over the nose cone and the bow...mark the cuts and get rid of the excess
so the sheet is easier to handle..cut it with straight tin snips..good pair
..Once the fit is established, then use an angle grinder to smooth the edge
s...attach the rubber weather seal to the front with black 3m weather seala
nt..I think that is what it is called ...nasty stuff...so dry fit the rubbe
r seal and run masking tape just above to protect getting the goo where it
is not wanted..Remember that the canopy is not attached anywhere save the a
ngle aluminum on the left side..angle al that runs along the top longeron..
also attach to the nose cone..but no further than about 10 am so the canop
y can be raised to get in...lastly attach the second angle al to the right
side of the lexan , running front to the end of the lexan...to that angle i
n the front ...attach a tab to which you have welded a tapered rod of an i
nch or so...then drill a hole in the tab that holds the nose cone ..the tap
ered rod slides in there for the lexan sheet will flex enough to allow it
to fit..make a latch near the rear...and some sort of rod to hold the canop
y up when entering...I did not and simply allow my head to hold it open for
entry and exit on one build but added the rod on the second...
Clear as mud??? Pics enclosed..also one of my mountain bike brake assy..
and I kept making axle attach brackets til I got the wheels to stand tall a
nd not splayed...though they may look splayed in the pics... Remember also
that the canopy needs to clear the wing leading edge...a little trimming ma
y be necessary.. Gear legs were straight...
I say semi/full for it is not total but very good for the purpose given
the need to hold weight. Last time I bought a 1/16th(do not think it was 1/
32 nd? ) inch sheet of lexan , it was in the 70 to 80 dollar range..and the
aluminum bow was from scrap and the angle that ridges the top of the fusel
age from the instrument panel to the back was from the salvage yard.. By th
e way, I passed my supplier, then Bruce Plastic in Gallatin,Tenn.. on to Tr
avis..while it was not convenient , he used their prices to leverage better
ones from his supplier...
Herb
Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.
=90=90=90=90=90=90=90 Original Me
ssage =90=90=90=90=90=90=90
On Saturday, November 10, 2018 10:01 AM, loctupdave wr
ote:
>
> does anyone know what purpose this tab serves. I plan to cover this into
a full canopy and it will be in the way. My thought is to cut it off.
>
> distant pic
>
> (http://s275.photobucket.com/user/dngspot/media/tab_zpsstruv6nl.jpg.html)
>
> up close
>
> (http://s275.photobucket.com/user/dngspot/media/tab close up_zpsslfb55xw.
jpg.html)
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=484742#484742
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "west1m" <west1m(at)hotmail.com> |
Larry, thanks for the insite. I just finished making a piece for behind the seat
while waiting to hear from Kolb. I will have to try it out with just the windshield
first before I mount the back and sides. Maybe that is all I need.
I do have pictures of a heat system for the rotax that someone (you?) posted in
the past that I would use.
--------
West1m
Hastings, MN
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=484751#484751
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: My Firestar 2 Build |
| From: | "loctupdave" <loctupdave(at)att.net> |
Thanks John.
My Firestar is a fs2. As for the choke, my engine has them, but they will not be
used, as there is a priming system. I have a Quick Silver that has this system,
when I built the engine and carb, I removed the choke and used gasket maker
to plug the hole. With the priming system give it a couple squirts and she starts
up in a couple of pulls. As for the floor the front is done. Im not sure
if I will floor the back.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=484752#484752
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: My Firestar 2 Build/choke tab../enclosure |
| From: | "loctupdave" <loctupdave(at)att.net> |
looks pretty good to me.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=484753#484753
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: My Firestar 2 Build |
| From: | "George Alexander" <gtalexander(at)att.net> |
loctupdave wrote:
> does anyone know what purpose this tab serves. I plan to cover this into a full
canopy and it will be in the way. My thought is to cut it off.
>
> distant pic
>
>
It would seem to be the attach point for the pulley for the pull start.
See attached photo.
--------
George Alexander
FS II R503
E-LSA N709FS
http://www.oh2fly.net
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=484757#484757
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/20150528_104046_medium_126.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | A List Contribution - It's Your Personal Squelch Button... |
There is an automatic "squelch button" of sorts for the Fund Raiser messages.
Here's how it works... As soon as a List member makes a Contribution through
the Matronics Fund Raiser web site, their email address is automatically added
to this year's Contributor List and they instantly cease to receive further Fund
Raiser messages for the rest of the month! Its just that simple! :-)
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 such as this one. It also goes
to pay for the commercial-grade Internet connection and to pay the huge electric
bill to keep the computer gear running and the air conditioner powered
on. 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 commercials that are
so prevalent on the Internet these days and I particularly don't want to have
it on my Email List sites.
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
or, you can send a personal check to the following address:
Matronics / Matt Dralle
581 Jeannie Way
Livermore, CA 94550
Thank you!
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
[Note that there are certain circumstances where you might still see a Contribution
related message. For example, if someone replies to one of the messages,
when using the List Browse feature, or when accessing List message via the Forum.
The system keys on the given email address and since most of these are anonymous
public access methods, there is no simple way to filter them.]
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: My Firestar 2 Build |
| From: | "loctupdave" <loctupdave(at)att.net> |
Ritchard
I have been looking at your Kolb with a full enclosure, I was looking for ideas
on how I was going to do just that. The question is what kind of cruse speed
you are getting on that bird with wheel pants, enclosure, strut and wheel leg
fairings, and what engine are you using? A question from a newbie to the site.
Richard Pike wrote:
>
> loctupdave wrote:
> > I have to fix it. The bar that is broken is the bar that the pilot seat back
rest on.
>
>
> Roger that! That is not the one I am referring to, the one that needs to be cut
is several inches lower and about 14" further back. Call Kolb and ask them.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=484859#484859
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Bing 54s & primers |
My ancient Rotax 503 was modified by the previous owner from one Bing to a
pair of Bings. The original Bing has a cable to the enricher, but the other
only has the little handle to activate, and it's really cranky about
starting even with both activated. The previous owner said that it will
start easier if I install a primer (and the engine seems to agree, based on
'dribble priming' it).
So, I just ordered a primer plunger kit (made for Mikunis) , but only one
of the carbs has the primer port in the body. Anyone out there with any
experience using manual primers that can tell me if priming both carbs will
materially improve starting? Should I just bite the bullet & drill the
other carb for a primer fitting?
Thanks,
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | George Helton <gdhelton(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Bing 54s & primers |
I=99m not sure Charlie, but I would think once the primed cylinder fir
es the other would quickly follow. My Hirth uses a Mikuni and starts well wi
th just enrichment.
George H
Firestar
Mesick, Michigan
gdhelton(at)gmail.com
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 11, 2018, at 3:12 PM, Charlie England wrote:
>
> My ancient Rotax 503 was modified by the previous owner from one Bing to a
pair of Bings. The original Bing has a cable to the enricher, but the other
only has the little handle to activate, and it's really cranky about starti
ng even with both activated. The previous owner said that it will start easi
er if I install a primer (and the engine seems to agree, based on 'dribble p
riming' it).
>
> So, I just ordered a primer plunger kit (made for Mikunis) , but only one o
f the carbs has the primer port in the body. Anyone out there with any exper
ience using manual primers that can tell me if priming both carbs will mater
ially improve starting? Should I just bite the bullet & drill the other carb
for a primer fitting?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Girard <aslsa.rng(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Bing 54s & primers |
Charlie, I think you'll be fine with a single carb having a primer port
since all the primer does is get fuel to the engine before start up so you
don't have to wait for the pressure pulse fuel pump to move fuel to the
engine. At worst the engine might run a little rough for one or two
seconds. Are you going to convert the other carb to a cable pull enrichener
?
Rick Girard
On Sun, Nov 11, 2018 at 2:14 PM Charlie England
wrote:
> My ancient Rotax 503 was modified by the previous owner from one Bing to
a
> pair of Bings. The original Bing has a cable to the enricher, but the oth
er
> only has the little handle to activate, and it's really cranky about
> starting even with both activated. The previous owner said that it will
> start easier if I install a primer (and the engine seems to agree, based
on
> 'dribble priming' it).
>
> So, I just ordered a primer plunger kit (made for Mikunis) , but only one
> of the carbs has the primer port in the body. Anyone out there with any
> experience using manual primers that can tell me if priming both carbs wi
ll
> materially improve starting? Should I just bite the bullet & drill the
> other carb for a primer fitting?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Charlie
>
--
=9CBlessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light.=9D
Groucho Marx
<http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/43244.Groucho_Marx>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Bing 54s & primers |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
It's hard to start even when the enrichment cable is activated, and the
enrichment lever is flipped on the one without a cable. Also, the
airframe was set up for only one cable, so it seemed more sensible to
just add a primer. Maybe I'll try putting the enricher cable on the
non-primer carb, and feed the primer to the one with the port.
Thanks,
Charlie
On 11/11/2018 3:40 PM, Richard Girard wrote:
> Charlie, I think you'll be fine with a single carb having a primer
> port since all the primer does is get fuel to the engine before start
> up so you don't have to wait for the pressure pulse fuel pump to move
> fuel to the engine. At worst the engine might run a little rough for
> one or two seconds. Are you going to convert the other carb to a cable
> pull enrichener?
>
> Rick Girard
>
> On Sun, Nov 11, 2018 at 2:14 PM Charlie England > wrote:
>
> My ancient Rotax 503 was modified by the previous owner from one
> Bing to a pair of Bings. The original Bing has a cable to the
> enricher, but the other only has the little handle to activate,
> and it's really cranky about starting even with both activated.
> The previous owner said that it will start easier if I install a
> primer (and the engine seems to agree, based on 'dribble priming'
> it).
>
> So, I just ordered a primer plunger kit (made for Mikunis) , but
> only one of the carbs has the primer port in the body. Anyone out
> there with any experience using manual primers that can tell me if
> priming both carbs will materially improve starting? Should I just
> bite the bullet & drill the other carb for a primer fitting?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Charlie
>
>
> --
>
>
> Blessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light. Groucho
> Marx <http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/43244.Groucho_Marx>
>
>
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | George Helton <gdhelton(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Bing 54s & primers |
Sounds like a plan. I doubt you=99ll need the enrichment with the prim
er. But it can=99t hurt to have it available.
George H
Firestar
Mesick, Michigan
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 11, 2018, at 6:01 PM, Charlie England wrote:
>
> It's hard to start even when the enrichment cable is activated, and the en
richment lever is flipped on the one without a cable. Also, the airframe was
set up for only one cable, so it seemed more sensible to just add a primer.
Maybe I'll try putting the enricher cable on the non-primer carb, and feed t
he primer to the one with the port.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Charlie
>
>> On 11/11/2018 3:40 PM, Richard Girard wrote:
>> Charlie, I think you'll be fine with a single carb having a primer port s
ince all the primer does is get fuel to the engine before start up so you do
n't have to wait for the pressure pulse fuel pump to move fuel to th
e engine. At worst the engine might run a little rough for one or two second
s. Are you going to convert the other carb to a cable pull enrichener?
>>
>> Rick Girard
>>
>>> On Sun, Nov 11, 2018 at 2:14 PM Charlie England w
rote:
>>> My ancient Rotax 503 was modified by the previous owner from one Bing to
a pair of Bings. The original Bing has a cable to the enricher, but the oth
er only has the little handle to activate, and it's really cranky about star
ting even with both activated. The previous owner said that it will start ea
sier if I install a primer (and the engine seems to agree, based on 'dribble
priming' it).
>>>
>>> So, I just ordered a primer plunger kit (made for Mikunis) , but only on
e of the carbs has the primer port in the body. Anyone out there with any ex
perience using manual primers that can tell me if priming both carbs will ma
terially improve starting? Should I just bite the bullet & drill the other c
arb for a primer fitting?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Charlie
>>
>>
>> --
>> =9CBlessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light.=9D
Groucho Marx
>>
>>
>
>
> Virus-free. www.avast.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test |
| From: | "wakataka" <wakataka(at)charter.net> |
I measured 290 pounds static with a Rotax 377 turning a 72" IVO prop. There was
a slight amount of tailwind that day, so I suspect that number is slightly inflated,
but I'm sure it produces at least 250 pounds. It jumps right off the ground.
--------
There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of
conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact.
Mark Twain
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=484870#484870
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Bing 54s & primers |
I never had the need for a primer on my two strokes, both Cuyuna and
Rotax. Engines would start with no problem well below freezing. Same
or similar carbs as mounted on snow machines (snowmobiles). Reckon it
gets pretty cold, in their environment, at times.
If the engine and fuel system is in good shape, it will start with the
enricher in a couple pulls, and even quicker with an electric starter.
When the enricher is pulled it opens a valve to dump the fuel stored in
the enricher well, doing same thing a primer does. Then the engine is
pulling fuel from the idle jet and the enricher jet plus allows a little
more air through the carb.
Before I'd spend the money and hang another gadget on my airplane I'd
make sure that the carb is doing what it is supposed to do, especially
the enricher system. Could be you aren't getting that initial dump of
fuel from the enricher well on start up.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Charlie
England
Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2018 2:13 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Bing 54s & primers
My ancient Rotax 503 was modified by the previous owner from one Bing to
a pair of Bings. The original Bing has a cable to the enricher, but the
other only has the little handle to activate, and it's really cranky
about starting even with both activated. The previous owner said that it
will start easier if I install a primer (and the engine seems to agree,
based on 'dribble priming' it).
So, I just ordered a primer plunger kit (made for Mikunis) , but only
one of the carbs has the primer port in the body. Anyone out there with
any experience using manual primers that can tell me if priming both
carbs will materially improve starting? Should I just bite the bullet &
drill the other carb for a primer fitting?
Thanks,
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Bing 54s & primers |
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland7(at)gmail.com> |
That's a good data point to know. None of the docs I've read mention the
enricher acting like an accelerator pump when it's activated; they just
talk about the plunger opening up a second, richer fuel path when the
throttle is closed. I'll pull the filter assy & look for a squirt of
fuel when it's activated.
Thanks,
Charlie
On 11/11/2018 7:34 PM, John Hauck wrote:
>
> I never had the need for a primer on my two strokes, both Cuyuna and
> Rotax. Engines would start with no problem well below freezing. Same
> or similar carbs as mounted on snow machines (snowmobiles). Reckon it
> gets pretty cold, in their environment, at times.
>
> If the engine and fuel system is in good shape, it will start with the
> enricher in a couple pulls, and even quicker with an electric starter.
>
> When the enricher is pulled it opens a valve to dump the fuel stored
> in the enricher well, doing same thing a primer does. Then the engine
> is pulling fuel from the idle jet and the enricher jet plus allows a
> little more air through the carb.
>
> Before I'd spend the money and hang another gadget on my airplane I'd
> make sure that the carb is doing what it is supposed to do, especially
> the enricher system. Could be you aren't getting that initial dump of
> fuel from the enricher well on start up.
>
> john h
>
> mkIII
>
> Titus, Alabama
>
> *From:*owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Charlie
> England
> *Sent:* Sunday, November 11, 2018 2:13 PM
> *To:* kolb-list(at)matronics.com
> *Subject:* Kolb-List: Bing 54s & primers
>
> My ancient Rotax 503 was modified by the previous owner from one Bing
> to a pair of Bings. The original Bing has a cable to the enricher, but
> the other only has the little handle to activate, and it's really
> cranky about starting even with both activated. The previous owner
> said that it will start easier if I install a primer (and the engine
> seems to agree, based on 'dribble priming' it).
>
> So, I just ordered a primer plunger kit (made for Mikunis) , but only
> one of the carbs has the primer port in the body. Anyone out there
> with any experience using manual primers that can tell me if priming
> both carbs will materially improve starting? Should I just bite the
> bullet & drill the other carb for a primer fitting?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Charlie
>
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Bing 54s & primers |
Been 25 years since I had a Rotax 2 stroke. Forgot to mention a couple
things that are important:
-In order for the enricher system to work correctly, the throttle must
be closed. If the throttle is cracked it defeats the enricher system.
-Make sure the enricher seal is in good shape. They didn't last long
back in my day. If they leak they'll drive you nuts trying to figure
out why your engine ain't runnin' right.
-The carb float bowl should be full prior to attempting a cold start.
Fill with the primer bulb or an electric fuel pump. Getting rid of the
primer bulb and installing a Facet pump will take care of filling the
float bowl and eliminate a probable problem.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Hauck
Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2018 7:35 PM
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Bing 54s & primers
I never had the need for a primer on my two strokes, both Cuyuna and
Rotax. Engines would start with no problem well below freezing. Same
or similar carbs as mounted on snow machines (snowmobiles). Reckon it
gets pretty cold, in their environment, at times.
If the engine and fuel system is in good shape, it will start with the
enricher in a couple pulls, and even quicker with an electric starter.
When the enricher is pulled it opens a valve to dump the fuel stored in
the enricher well, doing same thing a primer does. Then the engine is
pulling fuel from the idle jet and the enricher jet plus allows a little
more air through the carb.
Before I'd spend the money and hang another gadget on my airplane I'd
make sure that the carb is doing what it is supposed to do, especially
the enricher system. Could be you aren't getting that initial dump of
fuel from the enricher well on start up.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
From: owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Charlie
England
Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2018 2:13 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Bing 54s & primers
My ancient Rotax 503 was modified by the previous owner from one Bing to
a pair of Bings. The original Bing has a cable to the enricher, but the
other only has the little handle to activate, and it's really cranky
about starting even with both activated. The previous owner said that it
will start easier if I install a primer (and the engine seems to agree,
based on 'dribble priming' it).
So, I just ordered a primer plunger kit (made for Mikunis) , but only
one of the carbs has the primer port in the body. Anyone out there with
any experience using manual primers that can tell me if priming both
carbs will materially improve starting? Should I just bite the bullet &
drill the other carb for a primer fitting?
Thanks,
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | B Young <byoungplumbing(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Bing 54s & primers |
>
> I'll pull the filter assy & look for a squirt of fuel when it's activated.
>
> You won't get a squirt.... The fuel goes from the float bowl through an
enrichner jet into a small resivour in the corner of the float bowl. When
the enrichner is activated a suction tube that goes to the bottom of the
enrichner resivour quickly drains the resivour providing a slug of fuel.
If the enrichner is left on the only fuel that can get to the enrichner
circuit has to go through the jet. If the engine does not start, let the
starter rest. The jet will allow the enrichner resivour to fill again.
Cranking the engine again will again supply another slug of fuel.
It has always worked for me.
Boyd Young
Mkiii with 912 Utah
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Bing 54s & primers |
Yeah! Make sure the enricher jet is not blocked.
If the enricher jet is blocked, fuel cannot fill the enricher bowl.
john h
mkIII
October 29, 2018 - November 11, 2018
Kolb-Archive.digest.vol-pe