Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:41 AM - Re: Kolb New Pilot Question (johnjung@compusenior.com)
2. 05:09 AM - Ebay 912 (Kirk Smith)
3. 05:28 AM - Ebay 912 (Kirk Smith)
4. 08:17 AM - nose heavy mk III (boyd young)
5. 08:47 AM - Re: nose heavy mk III (CaptainRon)
6. 09:06 AM - Re: nose heavy mk III (Richard Pike)
7. 09:26 AM - Re: nose heavy mk III (Peter Volum)
8. 09:29 AM - Re: nose heavy mk III (Jack & Louise Hart)
9. 10:01 AM - history of ultralights (Erich_Weaver@URSCorp.com)
10. 10:21 AM - Re: history of ultralights (Jack & Louise Hart)
11. 10:33 AM - Re: history of ultralights (T. K. Frantz)
12. 10:58 AM - Re: history of ultralights (Richard Pike)
13. 11:09 AM - Kolb Flyer (Richard Pike)
14. 11:41 AM - Re: history of ultralights (Christopher Armstrong)
15. 11:41 AM - Re: history of ultralights (Christopher Armstrong)
16. 11:44 AM - Re: nose heavy mk III (John Hauck)
17. 11:52 AM - Re: nose heavy mk III (CaptainRon)
18. 11:53 AM - Re: nose heavy mk III (CaptainRon)
19. 12:00 PM - Re: history of ultralights (CaptainRon)
20. 12:08 PM - Re: nose heavy mk III (Jack & Louise Hart)
21. 12:11 PM - Re: nose heavy mk III (CaptainRon)
22. 12:58 PM - Re: nose heavy mk III (Christopher Armstrong)
23. 01:10 PM - Re: history of ultralights (John Hauck)
24. 01:17 PM - Re: history of ultralights (John Hauck)
25. 01:24 PM - Re: nose heavy mk III (John Hauck)
26. 01:27 PM - Re: nose heavy mk III (Guy Swenson)
27. 01:34 PM - Re: nose heavy mk III (John Hauck)
28. 01:44 PM - Re: nose heavy mk III (John Hauck)
29. 02:02 PM - Re: nose heavy mk III (Richard Pike)
30. 02:08 PM - Re: Kolb-List Digest: 12 Msgs - 02/25/03 (Cppjh@aol.com)
31. 02:11 PM - Ivoprop for sale (Bill Hocker)
32. 02:24 PM - Re: nose heavy mk III (bob n)
33. 02:25 PM - Re: Ivoprop for sale (Richard Pike)
34. 02:56 PM - Re: history of ultralights (Christopher Armstrong)
35. 03:11 PM - Re: history of ultralights (John Hauck)
36. 04:25 PM - Re: nose heavy mk III (CaptainRon)
37. 04:36 PM - Re: nose heavy mk III (CaptainRon)
38. 04:41 PM - Re: nose heavy mk III (CaptainRon)
39. 04:52 PM - Re: nose heavy mk III (CaptainRon)
40. 05:14 PM - Aero Twin Engine (Blane Cox)
41. 05:34 PM - Re: Gap Seals (Richard Harris)
42. 05:58 PM - Re: nose heavy mk III (John Hauck)
43. 05:59 PM - Re: Gap Seals (Larry Bourne)
44. 06:04 PM - Re: nose heavy mk III ()
45. 06:17 PM - Re: nose heavy mk III (John Hauck)
46. 06:23 PM - Re: nose heavy mk III (John Hauck)
47. 06:32 PM - Re: nose heavy mk III (Richard Pike)
48. 06:37 PM - Re: nose heavy mk III (Jack & Louise Hart)
49. 06:55 PM - Re: nose heavy mk III (CaptainRon)
50. 06:58 PM - Re: nose heavy mk III (John Hauck)
51. 07:24 PM - Re: nose heavy mk III (John Hauck)
52. 07:34 PM - Re: nose heavy mk III (CaptainRon)
53. 07:46 PM - Re: nose heavy mk III (John Hauck)
54. 08:15 PM - Re: Kolb-List Digest: 23 Msgs - 02/26/03 (Doug Lawton)
55. 08:44 PM - Re: nose heavy mk III (Christopher Armstrong)
56. 09:40 PM - Re: nose heavy mk III (Larry Bourne)
57. 10:08 PM - EVO/AIR (Paul Petty)
58. 10:18 PM - Re: nose heavy mk III (Ed Chmielewski)
59. 10:36 PM - Re: EVO/AIR (Larry Bourne)
60. 10:52 PM - Re: EVO/AIR (Christopher Armstrong)
61. 11:41 PM - Re: nose heavy mk III (CaptainRon)
62. 11:53 PM - Re: nose heavy mk III (CaptainRon)
Message 1
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Kolb New Pilot Question |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "johnjung@compusenior.com" <johnjung@compusenior.com>
Doug and Group,
There is one more thing that should be mentioned: grass or pavement
Landing on grass, a Kolb being a taildragger is a non-issue, but on pavement
(espessically in any crosswind), it's not as easy as a tricycle.
Taildragger is a non-issue for take-off's on either surface, IMO.
John Jung
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Doug Lawton" <skyrider2@earthlink.net <mailto:skyrider2@earthlink.net>>
One thing that I haven't seen mentioned in this thread that I would highly
recommend is to be sure that the early first taxi tests and first flights
are in absolute calm conditions.
snip......
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Kirk Smith" <snuffy@usol.com>
For anybody interested in a 912 here's one on ebay
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item2405396208&category26437
Do Not Archive
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Kirk Smith" <snuffy@usol.com>
http://listings.ebaymotors.com/aw/plistings/list/category26435/index.html
Or try this url
Do Not Archive
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "boyd young" <by0ung@brigham.net>
It seems if the 111 is balanced with a single pilot and you put in a 200 lb.
pass. And now it is nose heavy. that you may have exceeded the fwd. cg. It is
a matter to figure this out. and it would be a matter to figure out how much
weight to add at the tail wheel post to correct this. Very simple math.
Fred Brow n Mark 111 582
acording to my math i have not exceeded the front cg.... but i have been about
1 1/2 to 2 inches behind the front cg..... in this condition when i close
the throttle at altitude and put it in a glide starting at 75 or so , with no
flaps, then very slowly start to slow the plane down when i get to about 60
the nose drops.... the main wing has not stalled, rather i believe the horizontal
stabilizer stalls and quits forcing the tail down. when i apply power
and get a good airflow over the horizontal stab. i can slow it down until
the main wing stalls. my guess is that the center of lift on the wing is too
far back for the cg forward limits..
with the engine running i seem to have all the elevator authority i need..... with
the engine out i run out of elevator authority way before the stall.
boyd
ps how can i figure where the center of lift is ?????
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: CaptainRon <CaptainRon@theriver.com>
2/27/03 8:54boyd young
> the main wing has not stalled, rather i believe the horizontal stabilizer
> stalls and quits forcing the tail down.
======================
Good point, my guess is that with the up turned horizontal stabilizers as
called for in the plans, you exceed their angle of attack limit before you
should. Which makes me question why and for what reason did they dial in
such negative angle of attack in the factory. In mine I have already decided
to install another pair of hinges along the center line of the boom.
You always want to have your wings stall before your tail in a conventional
design. In a canard it the other way around.
I wonder if anyone has any idea why it was designed that way?
It seems to be wrong according to all conventional design criteria that I
know of.... which is quite alot. :-)
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Richard Pike <rwpike@charter.net>
A simple way to check your theory of the elevators stalling too soon would
be to tape over the gap between the stabilizer and the elevators. Eliminate
the airflow between them. Go fly and see what happens. If that helps, then
make some vortex generators and put them on the underside of the stabilizer
just ahead of the elevators and try it again. Those changes should increase
your elevator authority.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
At 07:54 AM 2/27/03 -0800, you wrote:
>--> Kolb-List message posted by: "boyd young" <by0ung@brigham.net>
<snip>
>the main wing has not stalled, rather i believe the horizontal stabilizer
>stalls and quits forcing the tail down. when i apply power and get a
>good airflow over the horizontal stab. i can slow it down until the main
>wing stalls. my guess is that the center of lift on the wing is too far
>back for the cg forward limits..
>
>with the engine running i seem to have all the elevator authority i
>need..... with the engine out i run out of elevator authority way before
>the stall.
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Peter Volum" <peterv@etsmiami.com>
I once had a close call with my Mk III as a result of sheer foolishness.
When I calculated my W&B, to keep things simple in the field, I included
the minimum solo pilot weight and maximum combined pilot and passenger
weights in order to remain within the acceptable CG range.
I used the original CG range that Kolb recommended for the Mk III,
(rather than the one they came up with later on that allowed for more
weight at the rear).
To stay within the CG range with full tanks, the min. solo pilot weight
was 160 Lbs (which is exactly what I weigh), and my Max was to 364 Lbs.
One day I tried to give a ride to a large (245 Lb) pilot friend. I
figured the 41 Lb excess was OK. That a short hop before take-off would
be enough to determine if the excess was going to be a problem. After
all, I knew my plane had taken up TWO large passengers in the past,
putting it in the 100 Lbs over gross range, so by comparison, here I was
only cheating "a little bit".
I would add that one of my modifications had been the moving of the
battery into the nosecone area to move the CG forward a bit.
My attempted take off was during an 8-10 MPH crosswind. No problem
under normal circumstances, but with the added weight on board in the
nose, as soon as I opened the throttle and picked up some speed, I found
myself unable to correct for the crosswind with the rudder and was
rapidly turning left - into the wind and approaching avocado trees.
Full right brake, full right rudder, some left brake and ultimately also
some right aileron stopped me in time, but it was close.
I attributed this scare to a combination of inexperience on my part
coupled with my decision to knowingly exceed the safety limits that I
had pre-established myself. Then fact that I decided to do it on a day
with less than ideal flying conditions didn't help matters either.
I have since limited my passengers to a maximum weight of 200 Lbs. and
have not had any further ground handling problems in cross-winds.
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of boyd young
Subject: Kolb-List: nose heavy mk III
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "boyd young" <by0ung@brigham.net>
It seems if the 111 is balanced with a single pilot and you put in a
200 lb.
pass. And now it is nose heavy. that you may have exceeded the fwd. cg.
It is
a matter to figure this out. and it would be a matter to figure out how
much
weight to add at the tail wheel post to correct this. Very simple math.
Fred Brow n Mark 111 582
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Jack & Louise Hart <jbhart@ldd.net>
At 12:06 PM 2/27/03 -0500, you wrote:
>--> Kolb-List message posted by: Richard Pike <rwpike@charter.net>
>
>A simple way to check your theory of the elevators stalling too soon would
>be to tape over the gap between the stabilizer and the elevators. Eliminate
>the airflow between them. Go fly and see what happens. If that helps, then
>make some vortex generators and put them on the underside of the stabilizer
>just ahead of the elevators and try it again. Those changes should increase
>your elevator authority.
>
>Richard Pike
>MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
>
Richard,
A good point. I have them temp mounted just behind the leading edge and on the
underside of the FireFly horizontal stabilizer. They do give more back stick
control at lower speeds. I put them on because the wing was still trying to
fly when the elevator had given up on landing, and I was dropping in the last
foot or so. Also, I tried to land one day with full flaperons and I discovered
I did not have enough back stick to flair. One can tell right away if they
are going to help, because on take off, one will notice the increased pressure
on the stick.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Jackson, MO
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart@ldd.net
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | history of ultralights |
02/27/2003 12:59:34 PM
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Erich_Weaver@URSCorp.com
Not to stir up more debate, but more because I think its interesting, I
thought I would pass along the timeline presented in the Ultralight Flying!
article.
Larry Mauro (author of the article) of Ultralight Flying Machines (UFM) in
Cupertino, CA sold a kit for his Icarus II hang glider to John Moody in
September 1973. The Icarus hang gliders were swept wing biplanes. In March
of 1975, Moody reported to Mauro that he had achieved powered flight on a
frozen lakebed in Wisconsin using the Icarus and an 8 HP two-cycle
Chrysler-West Bend engine with a hand carved propeller. Apparently, take
offs at this point were substantially assisted by running as fast as
possible. By May 1975, Moody was flying the pattern at 300 ft agl at
Rainbow Airport using a McCulloch go-cart engine and he did demonstration
flights at a hang glider event in Michigan later that summer. In August
1976, Moody flew his powered hang glider at Oshkosh, reportedly doing wing
overs at 300 feet agl when he went out of control, tumbling it several
times before miraculously regaining control and landing. FAA promptly
grounded him, but reinstated his privileges after he promised to behave.
I think the Moody name is remembered because this is the point in time at
which careers were first devoted to the development and manufacturing of
ultralights. Depending on your definition of terms, there may have been
others that were first, but just being first only gets you a footnote in
the history book. Its what happens following, and as a result of, your
achievement (or debacle in some cases) that gets you remembered. And it
tends to be remembered whether you want it to or not.
That being said, I too would love to hear the Homer Kolb story.
Erich
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: history of ultralights |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Jack & Louise Hart <jbhart@ldd.net>
At 10:07 AM 2/27/03 -0800, you wrote:
>--> Kolb-List message posted by: Erich_Weaver@URSCorp.com
>That being said, I too would love to hear the Homer Kolb story.
>
>Erich
>
Erich,
If you put "homer kolb" in google.com, you will get 97 hits.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Jackson, MO
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart@ldd.net
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: history of ultralights |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "T. K. Frantz" <tkrolfe@usadatanet.net>
Erich_Weaver@URSCorp.com wrote:
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: Erich_Weaver@URSCorp.com
>
> Not to stir up more debate, but more because I think its interesting, I
> thought I would pass along the timeline presented in the Ultralight Flying!
> article.
>
> Larry Mauro (author of the article) of Ultralight Flying Machines (UFM) in
> Cupertino, CA sold a kit for his Icarus II hang glider to John Moody in
> September 1973. The Icarus hang gliders were swept wing biplanes. In March
> of 1975, Moody reported to Mauro that he had achieved powered flight on a
> frozen lakebed in Wisconsin using the Icarus and an 8 HP two-cycle
> Chrysler-West Bend engine with a hand carved propeller. Apparently, take
> offs at this point were substantially assisted by running as fast as
> possible. By May 1975, Moody was flying the pattern at 300 ft agl at
> Rainbow Airport using a McCulloch go-cart engine and he did demonstration
> flights at a hang glider event in Michigan later that summer. In August
> 1976, Moody flew his powered hang glider at Oshkosh, reportedly doing wing
> overs at 300 feet agl when he went out of control, tumbling it several
> times before miraculously regaining control and landing. FAA promptly
> grounded him, but reinstated his privileges after he promised to behave.
>
> I think the Moody name is remembered because this is the point in time at
> which careers were first devoted to the development and manufacturing of
> ultralights. Depending on your definition of terms, there may have been
> others that were first, but just being first only gets you a footnote in
> the history book. Its what happens following, and as a result of, your
> achievement (or debacle in some cases) that gets you remembered. And it
> tends to be remembered whether you want it to or not.
>
> That being said, I too would love to hear the Homer Kolb story.
>
> Erich
>
>
Erich,
If you want to see something interesting, look up the January 2000 issue of
Experimenter magazine. There a picture of Homer in his 1956 flying
contraption using four Solo chain saw engines for power. According to Dennis
Souder's comments, it was very loud and barely fly able. Homer increased the
wingspan right after that. Notice the date (1956). As John said earlier, it
wasn't until friends pressed him to offer a kit that the Ultrastar was born
around 1980.
This was posted on our list some time ago by whom I do not know.
Terry
Do not archive
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: history of ultralights |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Richard Pike <rwpike@charter.net>
Something that might be easy to overlook in the reviewing the early days of
ultralights is that there were a lot that flew, but very few that really
flew well.
In 1978, I built a Quicksilver from plans (Yes, Eipper-formance used to
sell plans) for the paltry sum of $300. That included all 6061-T6 tubing,
sailcloth and hardware. Sawed the transmission off a Yamaha dirt bike
engine and stuck it on the Quick, carved a 36" prop to bolt on the end of
the crankshaft, and foot launched it off the side of an expressway off
ramp, went almost 1/4 mile before the Yamaha seized up.
Sold it and got an Easy Riser with a Mac 101. That was better, it could
take you miles away from anywhere before it would quit.
Then I went to a fly-in at Tullahoma and saw a Kolb Flyer and Lazair
literally flying circles around the Quicksilvers, Eagles, Easy Risers,
Weedhoppers and other marginal flying machines of the time, and realized
"It's not enough just to fly, control authority is where it's at."
That's the real reason we all fly Kolbs. They fly better.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
Do Not Archive
At 10:07 AM 2/27/03 -0800, you wrote:
>--> Kolb-List message posted by: Erich_Weaver@URSCorp.com
>
>
>Not to stir up more debate, but more because I think its interesting, I
>thought I would pass along the timeline presented in the Ultralight Flying!
>article.
>
>Larry Mauro (author of the article) of Ultralight Flying Machines (UFM) in
>Cupertino, CA sold a kit for his Icarus II hang glider to John Moody in
>September 1973. The Icarus hang gliders were swept wing biplanes. In March
>of 1975, Moody reported to Mauro that he had achieved powered flight on a
>frozen lakebed in Wisconsin using the Icarus and an 8 HP two-cycle
>Chrysler-West Bend engine with a hand carved propeller. Apparently, take
>offs at this point were substantially assisted by running as fast as
>possible. By May 1975, Moody was flying the pattern at 300 ft agl at
>Rainbow Airport using a McCulloch go-cart engine and he did demonstration
>flights at a hang glider event in Michigan later that summer. In August
>1976, Moody flew his powered hang glider at Oshkosh, reportedly doing wing
>overs at 300 feet agl when he went out of control, tumbling it several
>times before miraculously regaining control and landing. FAA promptly
>grounded him, but reinstated his privileges after he promised to behave.
>
>I think the Moody name is remembered because this is the point in time at
>which careers were first devoted to the development and manufacturing of
>ultralights. Depending on your definition of terms, there may have been
>others that were first, but just being first only gets you a footnote in
>the history book. Its what happens following, and as a result of, your
>achievement (or debacle in some cases) that gets you remembered. And it
>tends to be remembered whether you want it to or not.
>
>That being said, I too would love to hear the Homer Kolb story.
>
>Erich
>
>
Help Stop Spam!
Delete all address information (especially mine) off everything you
forward, and make Blind Carbon Copy a way of life.
Thanks! And have a blessed day.
rp
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Richard Pike <rwpike@charter.net>
Excellent picture of a Kolb Flyer, with specs.
http://www.ultralightnews.com/antulbg/kflyer.htm
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
[DEFAULT]
BASEURL=http://www.ultralightnews.com/antulbg/kflyer.htm
[InternetShortcut]
URL=http://www.ultralightnews.com/antulbg/kflyer.htm
Modified=E09E65A393DEC201BA
Help Stop Spam!
Delete all address information (especially mine) off everything you
forward, and make Blind Carbon Copy a way of life.
Thanks! And have a blessed day.
rp
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | history of ultralights |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Christopher Armstrong" <cen33475@CenturyTel.net>
http://home.attbi.com/~kolbrapilot/KolbHistory.htm
this is about Homer, claims first flight of 1970 and entered the market in
1980
http://www.pioneerflyer.com/about.html
this is about moody, claims his first flight under power in 1975...
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | history of ultralights |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Christopher Armstrong" <cen33475@CenturyTel.net>
http://www.avnet.co.uk/bmaa/histindex.htm
this is another great history...
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
rather i believe the horizontal stabilizer
stalls and quits forcing the tail down.
> boyd
Boyd/Gang:
We overcame a similar problem when we built my MK
III. Based on experience flying the factory MK
III, I knew the MK III needed a lot of nose up
trim. Brother Jim designed and fabricated some
adjustable horizontal stabilizer leading edge
mounts. The top position is still a couple inches
lower than what the plans call for. I have three
positions to experiment with. I fly in the middle
position, where the airplane feels best.
Maybe.........dropping the leading edge of the
horizontal stabilizer will help correct your
problem.
At Sun and Fun last year, flying a reporter that
weighed 200 or so lbs, I discovered something I
had not experienced before. I was demonstrating
diving for airspeed with power off, pulling back
hard on the stick to pull G's and gain altitude,
resulting in a really nose high attitude, zeroing
out airspeed and stalling in that nose high
attitude. Finally decided to do it with full
flaps. Previously had done all of them clean, no
flaps.
At 70 mph or so we ran out of elevator authority,
period. Undoubtedly, the flaps had blanked out
the tail section, or could have gotten into an
accelerated stall brought on by the added pitch
down tendancy when the MK III is flying with full
flaps. It will do it with a chubby passenger, but
not when I am solo.
Hope that helps more than cloudy up the water.
john h
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: CaptainRon <CaptainRon@theriver.com>
2/27/03 10:06Richard Pike
> then
> make some vortex generators and put them on the ****underside**** of the
stabilizer
> just ahead of the elevators and try it again. Those changes should increase
> your elevator authority.
===================
It should read *top side of the elevator*. The elevator creates negative
lift, for a stable normal flight.
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: CaptainRon <CaptainRon@theriver.com>
2/27/03 8:54boyd young
> ps how can i figure where the center of lift is ?????
========================
Center of lift is based on the airfoil, each airfoil is different. However
in general the center of lift is 33% of mean aerodynamic cord. That is 1/3
the way from the leading edge to trailing edge.
I am pretty sure that you know that as long as your cg is forward of the CF
you should be safe. If your CG is too far forward you will not have enough
elevator authority to lift the nose. Again and in general if you can lift
your nose off the ground then you should be able to fly safely. Your margine
of stall recovery however diminishes because of the extra moment on the
nose. On the plus side the aircraft will have a more natural recovery
tendency with a nose heavy cg, than tail heavy cg.
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: history of ultralights |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: CaptainRon <CaptainRon@theriver.com>
2/27/03 11:07Erich_Weaver@URSCorp.com
> Apparently, take
> offs at this point were substantially assisted by running as fast as
> possible. By May 1975, Moody was flying the pattern at 300 ft agl at
> Rainbow Airport using a McCulloch go-cart engine and he did demonstration
> flights at a hang glider event in Michigan later that summer.
========================
Excellent!! I remember those days. I was pretty excited back then when I
read about those adventures. Was I not a broke college student at the time
(holding two part time jobs, paying for flying lessons) I would have been
right along doing that myself. :-)
I will have to go and buy that megazine, just for the article.
do not archive
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Jack & Louise Hart <jbhart@ldd.net>
At 12:47 PM 2/27/03 -0700, you wrote:
>--> Kolb-List message posted by: CaptainRon <CaptainRon@theriver.com>
>
>2/27/03 10:06Richard Pike
>
>> then
>> make some vortex generators and put them on the ****underside**** of the
>stabilizer
>> just ahead of the elevators and try it again. Those changes should increase
>> your elevator authority.
>===================
>
>It should read *top side of the elevator*. The elevator creates negative
>lift, for a stable normal flight.
>
Ron,
If you want the elevator to create negative lift (lift the nose/pull the tail down),
you need to put the vortex generators on the bottom side to enhance the
effect of up elevator.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Jackson, MO
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart@ldd.net
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: CaptainRon <CaptainRon@theriver.com>
2/27/03 12:43John Hauck
> At 70 mph or so we ran out of elevator authority,
> period. Undoubtedly, the flaps had blanked out
> the tail section, or could have gotten into an
> accelerated stall brought on by the added pitch
> down tendancy when the MK III is flying with full
> flaps.
====================
Read the message I just sent. What happened is that you stalled the tail
before the the wings. Something that should *never* happen in normal flight.
I am glad you posted your message. As it confirms my worst suspicions. Let
me say again, the Tail should *never* stall before the wings in normal
flight. I regret that we have not had this discussion before I installed the
hinges for the H-stabs, as I would not have even bothered to follow the
plans for hinge location.
Message 22
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Christopher Armstrong" <cen33475@CenturyTel.net>
Center of lift is based on the airfoil, each airfoil is different. However
in general the center of lift is 33% of mean aerodynamic cord. That is 1/3
the way from the leading edge to trailing edge.
not sure what the center of lift is but there is an aerodynamic center which
is where the pitching moment is constant and where we plie the lift and drag
forces for aerodynamic analysis. for the wing it is at the 1/4 chord for
almost all airfoils. a tail moves it aft a bit.
there is also a center of pressure (probably what you are refering to)which
moves on the wing as a function of angle of attack. for a positively
cambered wing it moves forward with increaseing aoa, for a reflexed airfoil
it moves aft with aoa.
using the center of pressure is very complicated so it is not used. lift is
applied at the AC. and the aerodynamic moment is added to account for the
pitching moment, which is almost constant until the stall.
http://wright.nasa.gov/airplane/ac.html
this describes the situation
topher
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: history of ultralights |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
> this is about Homer, claims first flight of 1970 and entered the market in
> 1980
Topher/Gang:
Yes, that was the Kolb Flyer, his first commercial
venture with ultralights. Prior to the Flyer, he
designed, built, and flew many others, to include
a four engine ultralight (although he did not call
them ultralights because the term had not been
invented). Homer liked having a lot of engines,
coupled with large ailerons to control his
airplanes at extremely slow flight, even through
and into the stall. Homer wanted to be able to
fly very slowly, right over the treetops, with the
multiple engines as backup to be able to do that
safely. He was into slow flight more than fast
flight.
Homer Kolb is a very quiet man by nature. Those
little wheels in his head are constantly turning.
He is developing airplanes every day, usually on
his bed with yellow legal pad in his old restored
1700's era home that he meticuously rebuilt.
I have been very fortunate to get to spend some
quality time with Homer, his family, and the Old
Kolb Company people. I miss that era
tremendously.
Take care,
john h
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: history of ultralights |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
> http://www.avnet.co.uk/bmaa/histindex.htm
>
> this is another great history...
Topher/Gang:
This article states Homer did not start out with
hang glider roots when he designed the Flyer.
That is absolutely wrong. Homer started out with
hanggliders, hang gliders he designed and built.
I think he got one of his ideas from Ragollo's
flex wing. That is the one he sketched for me on
a legal pad in my 5th wheel at Sun and Fun several
years ago. They launched it behind boats on the
river, behind cars, and off a hill between his
house and Lancaster, out in Amish country.
john h
Message 25
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
> It should read *top side of the elevator*. The elevator creates negative
> lift, for a stable normal flight.
Ron/Gang:
Been building a Yamaha YX426 thumper for my son.
Came up to take a break. Had to fabricate my own
valve spring compressor. Not an easy tool to
use. Have forgotten to put valve seals on the
first two valves. This single cylinder thumper
has 3 intake and 2 exhaust valves. Am building it
from the bare bones engine cases up. Everything
new and fresh. Anyhow, since I am getting more
practice installing the valves than I wanted, it
is time for a cup of coffee.
Have to agree with Jack Hart on this one. I think
Ron Mason meant the other "top side of the
elevator". When we are trying to raise the nose
with up elevator, the air is seperating from the
bottom.
john h
Message 26
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Guy Swenson" <guys@rrt.net>
Captain Ron/List,
I cannot tell you who or why the leading edge of the Horizontal Stabs
are mounted with the top surface flush with the top of the boom tube,
I was informed by Kolb that in that position, I could run out of
elevator at a much higher speed than normal with a heavy passenger
and low fuel condition. The new mounting location was to be 1/4in
above the centerline of the boom tube. This was the location mine
were in for the first few flights. In a solo/full fuel configuration
I held a tremendous amount of DOWN pressure on the elevator to
maintain level flight. By adding 200 lbs os sand bags to the
passenger seat, I could release most of the down pressure on the
stick, as fuel was burned down stick pressure would reduce even more.
When I received the new brackets from Kolb I drilled three sets of
holes ( On the recommendation of Bill Futrell. Thanks Bill) I found
that in the top hole, (which is just below the original location)
solo flight in almost all loading/fuel configurations works very
well. Stick pressures can be handled with trim. But if I load in a
200 lb Passenger I need to lower the leading edge at least one hole
if the air temps are below 50 degrees F, and two holes if the temps
are above 50 degrees F. I know this is not the perfect solution to
the "runnung out of elevator" problem. but given the design and light
weight of these aircraft its a solution the works very well. I also
have the original "larger" Horizontal Stabs on my Xtra.
Hope this helps.
Guy S.
MKIII Xtra.
---- Original Message ----
From: CaptainRon@theriver.com
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: nose heavy mk III
>--> Kolb-List message posted by: CaptainRon <CaptainRon@theriver.com>
>
>2/27/03 8:54boyd young
>
>> the main wing has not stalled, rather i believe the horizontal
>stabilizer
>> stalls and quits forcing the tail down.
>======================
>
>Good point, my guess is that with the up turned horizontal
>stabilizers as
>called for in the plans, you exceed their angle of attack limit
>before you
>should. Which makes me question why and for what reason did they
>dial in
>such negative angle of attack in the factory. In mine I have already
>decided
>to install another pair of hinges along the center line of the boom.
>You always want to have your wings stall before your tail in a
>conventional
>design. In a canard it the other way around.
>I wonder if anyone has any idea why it was designed that way?
>It seems to be wrong according to all conventional design criteria
>that I
>know of.... which is quite alot. :-)
>
>
>===
>===
>===
>===
>
>
Message 27
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
> > At 70 mph or so we ran out of elevator authority,
> > period. Undoubtedly, the flaps had blanked out
> > the tail section, or could have gotten into an
> > accelerated stall brought on by the added pitch
> > down tendancy when the MK III is flying with full
> > flaps. john h
> ====================
>
> Read the message I just sent. What happened is that you stalled the tail
> before the the wings. Something that should *never* happen in normal flight.
Ron
Ron/Gents:
I did read your msg. I don't think it applies to
my airplane and my situation. I believe, as I
stated above, that the flaps (40 degrees) deployed
during a high G pull up blanked out the tail
section, losing elevator control, not stalling.
The MK III and all of Homer's designs have more
than enough elevator control authority for safe
flight. The maneuver I discribed is an
exception. I could not repeat the maneuver with
the same results solo.
> I am glad you posted your message. As it confirms my worst suspicions. Let
> me say again, the Tail should *never* stall before the wings in normal
> flight.
The tail of my airplane did not stall in normal
flight. I wasn't any where near normal flight.
Would never attempt a maneuver like that other
than at altitude for recovery purposes. We were
more into testing than normal.
john h
Message 28
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
> I cannot tell you who or why the leading edge of the Horizontal Stabs
> are mounted with the top surface flush with the top of the boom tube,
> I was informed by Kolb that in that position, I could run out of
> elevator at a much higher speed than normal with a heavy passenger
> and low fuel condition.
> Guy S.
Guy S/Gang:
The reason the leading edge of the horizontal
stabilizer is mounted in its prescribed location
is because the airplane was designed to fly tail
high. The tailboom also creates a lot of drag in
this tailhigh position. One of the reasons the MK
III is not a real speedster.
On the other hand, the Sling Shot was designed to
fly with the tailboom parallel to the flight path,
or level, to reduce drag somewhat. It has very
little angle of attack. The down side to this is
in slow flight the SS must drop its tail in an
extremely low attitude in order to get enough
angle of attack of the wings to fly slowly. It
gives one an uncomfortable feeling in this slow,
tail low attitude.
john h
Message 29
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Richard Pike <rwpike@charter.net>
I meant what I said, and said what I meant. Put the vortex generators on
the underside of the stab, just ahead of the elevator leading edge.
If the elevator is in the up position, and is failing to produce sufficient
down force because it is stalled, you say you would put the vortex
generators on the top? That would be like putting vortex generators on the
under side of a wing or other lifting surface to improve it's stall
characteristics in normal flight.
When the elevator is up and stalled, you put the vortex generators on the
curved side of the surface that is producing lift (In this case it is lift
downwards, that's what up elevator does) which means putting them on the
underside of the stab, just ahead of the leading edge of the elevator.
Since you want more down force, the generators will be on the down side.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
At 12:47 PM 2/27/03 -0700, you wrote:
>--> Kolb-List message posted by: CaptainRon <CaptainRon@theriver.com>
>
>2/27/03 10:06Richard Pike
>
> > then
> > make some vortex generators and put them on the ****underside**** of the
>stabilizer
> > just ahead of the elevators and try it again. Those changes should increase
> > your elevator authority.
>===================
>
>It should read *top side of the elevator*. The elevator creates negative
>lift, for a stable normal flight.
>
>
Message 30
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Kolb-List Digest: 12 Msgs - 02/25/03 |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Cppjh@aol.com
Ed Steuber, do I know you from Hamburg or Buffalo? Pete Hughes
Message 31
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Ivoprop for sale |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Bill Hocker" <hocker@gte.net>
Hi Kolbers,
I have an Ivoprop ground adjustable prop that went to a Kolb Firestar with a
Rotax 447 for sale. It is 68" in diameter, and is in like-new condition. It
comes with the hub and polished aluminum spinner. Price is $200 plus shipping.
I have tried to get photoshare pictures attached, but if they don't work you
can email for photos at hocker@gte.net. Thanks!
Message 32
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: bob n <ronoy@shentel.net>
While this msg concerns elevator/stabilizers on a GA plane, it does bear
on the "stalled tail" thread.
In the fall of '68 I was thinking of buying a Cessna Cardinal 177 and
putting it out on leaseback at VNY. I had a lot of experience in several
Cessnas, and the C177 looked like such a great plane that would bring me
bags of money.
Looked over the POH, walked around, got another pilot who had actually
ridden in a 177, and off we went. Pwr off stalls felt OK, then to PO
stalls--a really nose high stall had an odd feeling, like nobody home in
the tail! Now this model had an "all-flying stabilator" that gave it
somewhat different flight characteristics.
Then an almost full stall landing, at idle. Wow! Talk about no one home
in the tail light dept. At stall, you could take the yoke out and sell
it fer junk, as it felt as though an elevator cable had broken. Kinda
like you could mash potatoes with it.
Didn't buy it. Very soon Cessna came out with a big AD, The Golden Rule,
probably because it cost so much. It added slots near the LE of the
stabilator, and kept it from stalling at high angles of attack. After
the field mods came new A/C with slots done during production.
Later the weak-willy 150hp was replaced with a 180 and cs prop. Bought
that one.
Bob N.
http://www.angelfire.com/rpg/ronoy
do not archive
Message 33
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Ivoprop for sale |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Richard Pike <rwpike@charter.net>
Sold.
Where do I send the money?
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
Contact me off list at richard@bcchapel.org
or
rwpike@charter.net
At 05:03 PM 2/27/03 -0800, you wrote:
>--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Bill Hocker" <hocker@gte.net>
>
>Hi Kolbers,
> I have an Ivoprop ground adjustable prop that went to a Kolb Firestar
> with a Rotax 447 for sale. It is 68" in diameter, and is in like-new
> condition. It comes with the hub and polished aluminum spinner. Price
> is $200 plus shipping. I have tried to get photoshare pictures attached,
> but if they don't work you can email for photos at hocker@gte.net. Thanks!
>
>
Message 34
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | history of ultralights |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Christopher Armstrong" <cen33475@CenturyTel.net>
>This article states Homer did not start out with
>hang glider roots when he designed the Flyer.
>That is absolutely wrong.
try reading it more carefully, here is the quote:
But before we chart the mainstream development of the sport, we must mention
three early machines which are ultralights in spirit even though they have
no hang-gliding roots - Bob Hovey's 'Whing Ding', Homer Kolb's 'Kolb Flyer'
and Michel Colomban's 'Cri Cri'. All three designers simply set out to
create a light, fun aircraft, and only later found that their machines were
attracting ultralight enthusiasts. The American 'Whing Ding', which first
made its appearance in 1970, is still available in somewhat modified form
today and was the progenitor of a whole series of Hovey designs, though
Bob's predilection for biplanes has limited their influence on the
mainstream of the sport. By contrast, Homer Kolb's 'Kolb Flyer' was a tube
and fabric ultralight in what was to become the classic American
configuration, and its influence would have been enormous had this genial,
modest man not flown it purely for his own and his neighbours' amusement for
fully 10 years. Only in 1980, by which time it was no longer revolutionary,
did the world realise what a gem he had produced.
they are referring specifically to the Kolb flyer design, not Homer as a
pilot or his past experience. The flyer is not a flexwing or derived from a
hang glider, it is a three axis control, traditional configuration plane.
Saying they are 'absolutely wrong' doesnt seem fair to me. I still think it
is a great web site.
do not archive
topher
Message 35
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: history of ultralights |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
> try reading it more carefully, here is the quote:
> Saying they are 'absolutely wrong' doesnt seem fair to me. I still think it
> is a great web site.
> topher
topher/Gang:
I agree with you absolutely. I was wrong and I
appologise for my mistake.
I might be a little bit touchy when it comes to
Kolb airplanes.
john h
Message 36
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: CaptainRon <CaptainRon@theriver.com>
2/27/03 13:06Jack & Louise Hart
> If you want the elevator to create negative lift (lift the nose/pull the tail
> down), you need to put the vortex generators on the bottom side to enhance the
> effect of up elevator.
=======================
Well that got me thinking again. I guess the question is where the
seperation occures?
It seems to me that if as the H-Stabs are inclined up' you do not exceed the
angle of attack on the bottom side of the H-stabs. Thus no seperation in
flight there. The angle of attack against the relative wing is lowest on
bottom side as it is inclined top. The angle of attack is high topside as it
is inclined up. The stall is a negative stall!! but its effect is the same,
furthermore what also happens, and that is what your post got me to realize
is that the **elevator** itself maybe stalled.
When I think of the angle that the up deflected elevator has towards the
relative wind after adding the already high angle of incidence of the
H-stabs it looks to me like its close to stall at high speed cruise whenever
you have to make any abropt up pull manuver, or at any speed when nose
heavy. Just visualize the relative wind blasting along parallal the tail
boom at 75+mph. It then hits the leading edge of the H-stabs, on the bottom
side its ok as it hits it and kinda pushes it up. On the topeside after it
clears the leading edge it instantly has to make a turn down, which means
one point of potential seperation, and certain turbulance!
On the bottom side the wind rips back and then if the elevator is in the up
position it will have to change direction again and then rip upwards!!
another seperation point. When I combine those two seperation points
together, the result is very reduced up elevator effectiveness especialy at
high speed when the air is energized++ .
Because of the up inclination of H-stabs, the normal expectation of stall as
in genavcrft do not apply for the tail surfaces.
I am also willing to bet that if someone gets an M3X to about 120mph (could
be less) and goes up elevator the tail will stall,, he will loose all tail
effectiveness till he relaxes pressure on the stick. Which is counter
intuitive when you are in a dive at past vne. The good part is that it is
the same recovery technic that we have for normal stall, it may self recover
if one cuts the power to idle, so much drag will slow it down to where the
relative wind can actually make the turns without seperating (but then if
adding excessive forward cg to the mix and doubts begin to creep in). :-)
My new hinges are going at mid boom or actually past mid boom bottom side, I
rather trim down than trim up!
Message 37
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: CaptainRon <CaptainRon@theriver.com>
2/27/03 14:24John Hauck
> When we are trying to raise the nose
> with up elevator, the air is seperating from the
> bottom.
================
The only place it can stall Bottom side (see my rather long message just a
couple of minutes ago) is the elevator itself. When I consider the angle of
seperation I doubt that small Vg's on it would do any good. Even if they did
when you make them large enough,, in normal high cruise flight they would
act as both little speed breaks, and a source of buffeting.
I would not install them.
Message 38
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: CaptainRon <CaptainRon@theriver.com>
2/27/03 14:34John Hauck
> I did read your msg. I don't think it applies to
> my airplane and my situation. I believe, as I
> stated above, that the flaps (40 degrees) deployed
> during a high G pull up blanked out the tail
> section, losing elevator control, not stalling.
=====================
John it can't blank your H-stabs when you have a high wing airplane, with
bottom placed stabs. The flow is from the bottom up, not the other way
around.
Message 39
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: CaptainRon <CaptainRon@theriver.com>
> Later the weak-willy 150hp was replaced with a 180 and cs prop. Bought
> that one.
>
> Bob N.
>
> http://www.angelfire.com/rpg/ronoy
>
> do not archive
========================
The later cardinals turned out to be superb airplanes. If I could afford it
I'd replace my Beech Sierra with a cardinal RG.
do not archive
Message 40
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Aero Twin Engine |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Blane Cox" <coxhb@hotmail.com>
The company told me they will miss SnF as production issues/dates are not final.
They expect to be showing the engine "soon" after SnF. They estimate the price
will be $6,500.00. It will have a 2:1 reduction unit (don't know what type).
There is a VTOL being developed in US that uses airbags for low altitude stall.
It's called SoloTrek. Uses twin ducted fan propulsion.
Blane
Message 41
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Richard Harris" <rharris@magnolia-net.com>
Lar, sent you the page off line, let me know if you got it . Just got
back on line, we have had a good old fashion ice storm here for the last
three days. No flying, no driving, no fishing, no FUN...
Richard Harris
MK N912RH
Lewisville, Arkansas
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Bourne" <biglar@gogittum.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: Gap Seals
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Larry Bourne" <biglar@gogittum.com>
>
> I've come up with some questions about installing the aileron & flap gap
seals on Vamoose. Could someone scan and send the appropriate pages of the
Mk III construction manual to me. Sure would appreciate it.
Lar.
>
> Larry Bourne
> Palm Springs, CA
> Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
> www.gogittum.com
>
>
Message 42
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
> > When we are trying to raise the nose
> > with up elevator, the air is seperating from the
> > bottom. john h
> The only place it can stall Bottom side (see my rather long message just a
> couple of minutes ago) is the elevator itself. Ron
Ron/Gents/Ladies:
Guess I did not make myself confusing enough.
Vortex generators might help prevent seperation
from the horizontal stab and the elevator.
Again folks, I do not know what all this concern
about "nose heavy MK III's" and "elevators
stalling"..................
If there was a design problem with the airplane, a
lot of us would have discovered this over the
years, since 1991, when the prototype MK III took
to the air.
I, for one, do not have a concern with it. It is
not an issue for me.
Boyd Young has a problem, but it is not a problem
designed into the airplane 12 years ago. I
believe he has a unique problem related to his
particular airplane, not all the other MK III's
flying around the world.
Based on experience flying passengers for Kolb at
Sun and Fun and Oshkosh, all shapes and sizes,
there is no problem with the Mark III. High
thrust line gives a definite pitch down attitude
if not properly trimmed. Reduction in power will
take the pitch down tendency away immediately for
most MK III's. If not, then you have probably
built a problem into your airplane.
Keep the thrust line as low as you can get it. I
have flown a 72" prop on the 912S and my MK III.
Yes, I could tell a good bit of difference on
takeoff when I poured the coal to it on my first
takeoff. I had raised the thrust line about an
inch over the 912 and I had a lot more power. I
didn't think I was going to get it to rotate. I
reduced power, rotated, and climbed on out of
Gantt International Airport. I might add, we do
not waste space at Gantt. Especially in airstrip
length.
Take care,
john h
Message 43
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Larry Bourne" <biglar@gogittum.com>
I got the page, and it's just what I need. Many thanks. In return, I'll
send you a pic or 2 of where I camped last Thursday night, in Baja. Hard to
picture an ice storm in this environment. Lar.
Do not Archive.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Harris" <rharris@magnolia-net.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Gap Seals
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Richard Harris"
<rharris@magnolia-net.com>
>
> Lar, sent you the page off line, let me know if you got it . Just got
> back on line, we have had a good old fashion ice storm here for the last
> three days. No flying, no driving, no fishing, no FUN...
> Richard Harris
> MK N912RH
> Lewisville, Arkansas
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Larry Bourne" <biglar@gogittum.com>
> To: <Kolb-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Kolb-List: Gap Seals
>
>
> > --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Larry Bourne" <biglar@gogittum.com>
> >
> > I've come up with some questions about installing the aileron & flap gap
> seals on Vamoose. Could someone scan and send the appropriate pages of
the
> Mk III construction manual to me. Sure would appreciate it.
> Lar.
> >
> > Larry Bourne
> > Palm Springs, CA
> > Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
> > www.gogittum.com
> >
> >
>
>
Message 44
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: <rowedl@highstream.net>
----- Original Message -----
From: John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: nose heavy mk III
John,
Don't you mean a YZ426, instead of YX426?
I have a YZ125 that needs gone over before spring, shall I send it down? No
valves to worry about in this one, should be a piece of cake. :-)
Denny (to busy finishing the Kolb to maintain my bike) Rowe
DO NOT ARCHIVE
> Ron/Gang:
> Been building a Yamaha YX426 thumper for my son
> john h
>
>
Message 45
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
> > I did read your msg. I don't think it applies to
> > my airplane and my situation. I believe, as I
> > stated above, that the flaps (40 degrees) deployed
> > during a high G pull up blanked out the tail
> > section, losing elevator control, not stalling. john h
> =====================
>
> John it can't blank your H-stabs when you have a high wing airplane, with
> bottom placed stabs. The flow is from the bottom up, not the other way
> around. Ron
Ron/Folks:
Yes it can, and yes it has, and yes, when put into
the right attitude it will blank out the elevator
again.
I think you are making a mistake comparing the
Mark III to "other" airplanes. Ain't the same
animal. It is a Mark III.
Doesn't have "bottom placed stabs", they are
mounted high. What you see on the ground is not
what you see when the airplane flies. I mentioned
several times today that the Firestar, Mark III,
and the Mark III Extra, fly tail high. The tail
boom is not parallel to the line of flight. A
reason for a lot of drag, dragging that big 6"
tube through the air with a longitudinal profile.
Much larger profile than the Sling Shot which
flies with the tail boom parallel to line of
flight. SS has a little 6" diameter profile for a
tail boom.
So far, during the few hours I have been able to
accumulate flying the Mark III, mine and the
factory Mark III, I have been able to blank the
elevator in two different attitudes.
1) On approach to land, power at idle, full
flaps, cross controlled trying to get the fat ole
gal to slip, and the elevator and most of the
tailsection will try to go away.
2) The maneuver I discribed this afternoon. Full
flaps, idle speed, extreme nose down dive with two
folks on board, abrupt pull up about 70 or 80 mph,
and the elevator disappears.
Number 2) I have only experienced on my airplane.
On the Old Kolb Company Mark III with 582, flying
passengers, demonstrating the airplane, I was
never able to get it into an accerated stall. I
never experienced anything like 2) above except
with my airplane. Probably because that was the
first time I executed the maneuver.
Ain't nuthin wrong with out airplanes, folks, as
far as john hauck is concerned. Yes, there are a
few little things we can tweek to make them fly a
little better and to suit our own taste. But
basically these airplanes have already been
developed, tested, and continue to be tested by
everyone out there flying them. If there was an
extremely serious problem, i.e., running out of
elevator............., folks would be dying left
and right, or at least tearing up a buncha Kolbs.
I recommend standing back, taking a good look,
maybe even listen to some folks that have been
there and done that, before redesigning something
you have not flown very much.
Hopefully, if the weather Gods will cooperate, I
am going to hop in my Mark III, serial number
M3-011, fire her up, and take off for Panama City,
Florida, and the Annual Beach Run. I believe I
can make it down there, maybe fly a few
passengers, and even make it back home Sunday
without running out of elevator. Well, I hope so
anyhow. :-)
Take care,
john h
PS: Did not use spell check. Did not proof
read. I am tired, but feel good. Got the Yamaha
thumper engine back together and only had a
handful or two parts left over. I'll save them
for the next time I tear it down. May come up
short then. hehehe
Message 46
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
> Don't you mean a YZ426, instead of YX426?
Denny/Gang:
I don't know what I mean. hehehe
Been in the "mole hole" for four days with
whatever kinda thumper I had down there. Does it
really make any difference tonight? :-)
Yea, send that weed whacker on down. I'll put a
hauck fixin' opn it for ya.
john h
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Message 47
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Richard Pike <rwpike@charter.net>
At 05:19 PM 2/27/03 -0700, you wrote:
>--> Kolb-List message posted by: CaptainRon <CaptainRon@theriver.com>
>
> Just visualize the relative wind blasting along parallal the tail
>boom at 75+mph. <snip>
This is why we are in the middle of all this fuss and turmoil. The MKIII
does not fly along with the tail boom parallel to the relative wind, the
tail boom is higher at the back while in flight.
Jack up a MKIII tail until the wing is at a slight positive angle of attack
relative to the horizon. That is what you will see in flight. Even when you
get up to about 90, it will still retain a slight positive wing angle of
attack relative to the horizon.
Now look at the boom. It is higher in back, it is only parallel to the
horizon when you are in slow flight. Now forget about the boom.
Look at the horizontal stab, (we are still looking at the airplane with the
tail jacked up and the wing at a positive angle of attack) it is roughly
parallel to the horizon, or maybe a bit front low relative to the horizon.
And meanwhile the front of the wing is still higher than the back of the
wing relative to the horizon. Which means that it is like a Guillow's toy
glider, the stab is nose low relative to the wing, and that is all you care
about.
You don't care what angle the boom is at, and you don't attach the front of
the horizontal stab to the boom below the mid point of the boom in order to
arrive at the correct decalage, you gauge it relative to the wing and the
wing only. Ignore the angle of the boom.
Prove this to yourself: I just went down to the garage (doing an annual)
and sighted along the bottom of the upper fuselage center section with gap
seal attached. The lower edge of this structure defines the angle along the
lower edge of the wing. As I sight down this, it is aligned with the
elevator pivot on the boom, which is also the horizontal stab rear point.
As I look at the front stab attach point (in it's standard position) that
point is about two inches below my line of sight. Which means that the stab
has positive decalage relative to the wing. Now go sight your MKIII and see
if the same thing is not true.
>My new hinges are going at mid boom or actually past mid boom bottom side, I
>rather trim down than trim up!
You fixin' to get a really big adrenaline rush that trim is not going to
overcome....
Do you have all your legal affairs in order?
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
Help Stop Spam!
Delete all address information (especially mine) off everything you
forward, and make Blind Carbon Copy a way of life.
Thanks! And have a blessed day.
rp
Message 48
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Jack & Louise Hart <jbhart@ldd.net>
At 05:19 PM 2/27/03 -0700, you wrote:
>--> Kolb-List message posted by: CaptainRon <CaptainRon@theriver.com>
>
>2/27/03 13:06Jack & Louise Hart
>
>> If you want the elevator to create negative lift (lift the nose/pull the tail
>> down), you need to put the vortex generators on the bottom side to enhance the
>> effect of up elevator.
>=======================
>
>Well that got me thinking again. I guess the question is where the
>seperation occures?
>
Ron,
I really do not believe that stall of the horizontal stabilizer and/or elevator
occurs. The easiest way for me to think about it is to assume the horizontal
stabilizer and elevator make up a variable shaped airfoil that can be flexed
to provide lift up or down relative to the main wing chord and they are used to
provide a stabilizing moment for the wing. If one balances out a Kolb two place
for a single person flight and then one takes up a passenger, the cg will
move forward. During this flight one will have to add additional back stick
pressure through out the flight. If one slows too much, the flow over the horizontal
stabilizer and elevator will be and may be reduced to the point that not
enough force is generated to keep the nose up. The only solution in this case
is to add additional power/speed to make the horizontal tail surfaces more
effective. This is not a stall, just not enough horizontal tail surface for
the conditions being experienced.
The same thing happened to me when I tried to land the FireFly with full flaperons.
I made a high approach, and I realized the stick was back against the stop,
and I was in a steep decent. I had to reduce the flaps before I increased
the throttle, or I would have made the decent even steeper. There was no stall,
I just ran out of elevator for that condition. And so I added vortex generators
to the bottom of the horizontal stabilizer give me a little more back stick
force on the wing.
<It should read *top side of the elevator*. The elevator creates negative
<lift, for a stable normal flight.
<When I consider the angle of
<seperation I doubt that small Vg's on it would do any good. Even if they did
<when you make them large enough,, in normal high cruise flight they would
>act as both little speed breaks, and a source of buffeting.
<I would not install them.
These statements indicate a lack of basic understanding about how VG's work. To
be effective, VG's do not have to be large. If VG's are installed at 15 degrees
to the longitudinal axis of the plane, and they offer very little drag, and
the benefits they can provide are enormous. I encourage that you try them
and let us know what the change is in your high cruise and how much buffeting
you experience.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Jackson, MO
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart@ldd.net
Message 49
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: CaptainRon <CaptainRon@theriver.com>
2/27/03 19:17John Hauck
> 1) On approach to land, power at idle, full
> flaps, cross controlled trying to get the fat ole
> gal to slip, and the elevator and most of the
> tailsection will try to go away.
>
> 2) The maneuver I discribed this afternoon. Full
> flaps, idle speed, extreme nose down dive with two
> folks on board, abrupt pull up about 70 or 80 mph,
> and the elevator disappears.
>
> Number 2) I have only experienced on my airplane.
===================
John if you wanna think of it as Blanking the H-stabs its fine with me. But
if you wanna try an experiment to see if I am right. Adjust your H-stabs to
a negative angle of incidence and see if you get that blanking out.
I think you would be pleasently surprised.
Message 50
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
> This is why we are in the middle of all this fuss and turmoil. The MKIII
> does not fly along with the tail boom parallel to the relative wind, the
> tail boom is higher at the back while in flight.
> Richard Pike
Hi Richard/Gang:
Yup!!! Even I can understand that...............
I have never run out of elevator landing with a
passenger and I do full stall landings in my
airplane by habit. BTW: The original design was
changed a little in order that I could do full
stall landings. Helps me slow down more and
quicker with the bottom of the wing turned up to
the wind. Also helps it get off the ground
quicker, when her belly is not too full with all
my gear and fuel.
Power off, full stalls at altitude, the nose on my
airplane always drops, but not from a stalling
elevator.
If you fly beside a MK III at cruise, 70 or 80
mph, the elevator will normally be inline with the
horizontal stab, even when that MK III has a
passenger on board.
There is really no great deflection of any of the
controls on the Mark III, especially the elevator,
in flight. Ain't necessary cause it works great.
john h
Message 51
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
> John if you wanna think of it as Blanking the H-stabs its fine with me. But
> if you wanna try an experiment to see if I am right. Adjust your H-stabs to
> a negative angle of incidence and see if you get that blanking out.
> I think you would be pleasently surprised. Ron
Ron/Gents/Ladies/Others (if there are any):
And how do you think I will be pleasantly
surprised if I adjust my horizontal stabilizers to
a negative angle of incidence?
I have been flying with negative incidence for the
last 11 years and over 1,750 hours. I think I
have written very recently, probably even today
and in the recent past, my MK III came out of the
chute with adjustable leading edges on the
horizontal stabilizer. My highest adjustment is
about an inch or so lower than the standard
setting. Anything less than what the plans call
for is going to be negative. I fly in the middle
setting of the three settings available to me.
Miss P'fer and I like the middle setting best. I
have not idea how much from standard this setting
is negatively set. Probably two or three inches.
I haven't paid much attention to the settings as
they relate to the top of the tailboom. After
all, this was designed and fabricated in 1991 by
my brother Jim, 12 years ago.
I haven't been sitting still since I started
playing with Homer's airplanes 19 years ago. It
has been a continuous test, evaluation,
experiment, modification, etc., to get me and my
airplane where it is today. For the most part I
am particularly pleased with her. Would change
her if I could. When we built Miss P'fer, it was
from experience gained from building and flying
the Ultrastar and Firestar, plus time flown in the
Mark III prototype before I started on my
airplane. I had the honor of flying off most of
the first 40 hours of the factory Mark III.
Primarily because it was February in Spring City,
PA, and cold as Hell. Dennis and Homer didn't
want to or have time to get out in the Arctic
weather to fly the bird.
If you can come up with something new to improve,
by all means have at it. I am sure you can find
something.
I might add, there is a lot of Jim and John Hauck
in every Kolb being built and flown out there.
Most of it came from Brother Jim's ability to
improve stuff, and a little bit came from me
breaking it. hehehe Some day when you have time,
I'll show you a little Hauck in your Mark III
Extra, when you get it flying.
Take care,
john h
>
Message 52
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: CaptainRon <CaptainRon@theriver.com>
2/27/03 19:32Richard Pike
> This is why we are in the middle of all this fuss and turmoil. The MKIII
> does not fly along with the tail boom parallel to the relative wind, the
> tail boom is higher at the back while in flight.
=========================
Yes it should be higher in back, because of the positive angle of incidence
that it has. The H-stabs produce some positive lift becuase of their
positive angle of incidence, which in turn lifts up the tail as you and John
desribed. But you need to understand that there is an aerodynamic cost to
that lift, and that cost is curving of topside relative wing. The tail is
not ballanced tail high naturally, its that way because of that angle of
incidence.
Another thing that John is not considering is the large gap between where
the flaps/ailrons are and the tail. That gap that clears the prop arc should
allow prop air to the tail. The fact that he noted *blanking* out of the
tail, is not a result of his flaps.
I don't think there is any real danger unless in very forward cg and high
speed pull up.
Message 53
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
> Would change
> her if I could.
> john h
Gang:
I blew it gain........
No, I would not change her if I could.
Got to start proofing (better).
Will change her when she needs
it......................
john h
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Message 54
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Kolb-List Digest: 23 Msgs - 02/26/03 |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Doug Lawton" <skyrider2@earthlink.net>
No, not quite the right picture to paint there Fred. Many of my students
were competent and current, light single engine aircraft pilots, not
beginners by a long shot. It didn't take that long to check them out. I
was based out of a busy general aviation field (uncontrolled) near Atlanta
and pilots quite often flew their own general aviation aircraft into our
airport to get checked out in the ultralights.
I also had 2 other instructors working with me during that time that would
often fly much of the preliminary work with newer students. I didn't log
their time as instructors for myself (Wouldn't be Prudent). But, I always
flew with each student prior to solo at least one flight to make sure that
my instructors had done their job properly and that the students had
retained the knowledge. It was my business, my investment, and my ass on
the line. Never had anyone hurt in 9 full years of operation. And that's
something that I'm damned proud of.
Also, the 1600 hours doesn't include my time in "certified" general aviation
planes like my C172, Grumman Tiger, or my Mooney Executive. Nor does it
include the time in rental aircraft over the years or training that I took
for myself. Just true ultralights and the heavy ultralights that were
"experimental".
But you're right, I didn't get to just "fly for fun" very much. It's one of
the reason's that I sucumbed to burnout and soldout. I learned the hard way
that taking a hobby, turning it into a business, letting it engulf your
life, is expensive. Wanna ask about the divorce? Or the house? Or the other
business that suffered because I spread myself too thin?
From the Ultralight School of Hardknocks, better known as
(There's a fortune in the ultralight business, I know, I put it there!)
Doug Lawton
NE Georgia & Whitwell TN
Fred wrote:
From: FRED2319@aol.com
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Kolb New Pilot Question
--> Kolb-List message posted by: FRED2319@aol.com
Just looking at new pilot ??? You started 1600 tt 450 soled students, 53
diff. aircraft.
seems like it would take about 4 hrs to solo a student 450 X 4 = 1800
53 diff aircraft aprox . 30 min = 26
hrs to get for lic. approx. 60
Hrs flew just for fun ?? 100 ??
Don't seem to add up maybe a 0 was added or omitted huh?
Message 55
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Christopher Armstrong" <cen33475@CenturyTel.net>
> Just visualize the relative wind blasting along parallal the >tail
>boom at 75+mph. It then hits the leading edge of the H-stabs, >on the
bottom
>side its ok as it hits it and kinda pushes it up. On
>the topeside after it
>clears the leading edge it instantly has to make a turn down, >which means
>one point of potential seperation, and certain turbulance!
Ron....
the airflow to the tail on a mk III is not straight back along the tail
boom. it is down past the tailboom at a fairly steep angle. Both the
geometry of the plane and the downwash of the wing contribute to this. your
stab is definitely not nose up to the wind in any situation ever in a mk
III. ( unless your flying inverted in which case your already dead.)
there are indeed two possible ways for a stab and elevator combination to
stall. one is if the stab elevator combination exceeds its stall angle of
attack at a given elevator deflection. the other is if the elevator
deflection gets great enough to stall just the elevator even if the stab is
at low angle of attack. the stall on both of these would be in the form of
flow separation on the bottom surface. Again unless your flying inverted,
in which case your already dead.
if you want to know which is happening between stab stall and elevator stall
check your control stops. are they working? do you have less then 30
degrees (40? I dont remember)deflection of the elevator. if so then that is
almost certainly not the problem. also if the elevator is stalling the
stick should be shaking quite noticeably in your hand. ( might feel this
with a stab stall too but less noticeable, the wind is already gone before
it hits the elevator so the elevator doesn't shake.)
what does happen though is that as camber increases the stall aoa of the
stab elevator combination goes down, and the effective aoa of the tail is
going up. aoa is measured along the chord line from the tip to the tail of
the airfoil. as you deflect the elevator the chord line is moving, in this
case up wards. the aoa of the tail is going up (stand on your head if your
confused.)
if any of you are having tail stall, I would strongly incourage you to not
fly that heavy/forward cg ever again. because someday, when you try to
flair on landing you just might go straight into the ground. most likely
that would be bad. or you try to climb out and you can not generate any aoa
on the wing so you get very low climb rate and test the shear strength of
the trees at the end of the runway. They ussually exceed that of your plane
and your body.
John H is probably right, as Ussual, that what he and most of you are
feeling is tail blanking more then stall. ( cause you would be dead if it
was tail stall) the tail in the mk III and the firestar are actually fairly
close in line with the wing. have a look at it. the flow comes off the
wing downwards also ( downwash ya know ya gotta make that air go down if you
want the plane to stay up.) when your heavy your making more lift and more
downwash, if you add some g's in a turn or flair you pull more lift and al
of a sudden dead messy turbulent air ( from the just stalling inboard end of
the wing most likely)hits your tail. The big fan blowing right at the tail
helps here quite a bit but still possible if ya get every thing just wrong.
at least thats one guess.
topher
Message 56
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Larry Bourne" <biglar@gogittum.com>
I've been following this thread with interest, & rising concern. For those
of you with a lot of experience, and/or a lot of specialized training, all
this is of interest, and may possibly lead to experimentation. Most of us
are, I hope, going to build to the plans, and fly our planes with pleasure
and success. (Even Vamoose is built EXactly to plans - all the changes
I've made are to other than the - well proven - flying structure. That fine
reputation is what led me to finally choose the Kolb 6 yrs ago, after a year
of research...........and I've neither seen nor heard anything since to make
me regret that decision.) My concern is for the possible few who may decide
to do some experimenting on their own, based on this discussion, without the
proper training, experience, or education. To those people, I would suggest
building to the plans, flying your Kolb, then, if you feel it necessary,
make small changes - one at a time, and see what effect they have. Things
can always be made better, and our sport is a good example of that. On the
other hand...............if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Concerned Lar.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Armstrong" <cen33475@centurytel.net>
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: nose heavy mk III
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Christopher Armstrong"
<cen33475@CenturyTel.net>
>
> > Just visualize the relative wind blasting along parallal the >tail
> >boom at 75+mph. It then hits the leading edge of the H-stabs, >on the
> bottom
> >side its ok as it hits it and kinda pushes it up. On
Message 57
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
SPAM_PHRASE_00_01, USER_AGENT_OE, USER_IN_WHITELIST)
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Paul Petty" <ppetty@c-gate.net>
Kolbers,
I am in the process of testing a Harley Davidson 1340cc 80CID engine as a possible
candidate for a Kolb aircraft engine. I have tossed this idea out to the list
previously, and have had negative replies because of weight and vibration
issues.
I am happy to report that after my first test start up of the engine that vibration
levels were low and that because a HD works on a single pin crank method
of rotation and a gap of firing order between strokes is at this point not an
issue due to the offset of it's counter weights of it's crankshaft. In addition,
it works much like a radial engine, just less odd cylinder firing order. It's
kind like a two of a seven cylinder radial working on it's own. Anyway... Here
are than bare bone facts at this point.
1. 118 lbs.
2. 80 hp.
3. Dry sump
4. Fully self contained I.e. Alt,Ignition,Fuel delivery via CV altitude compensating
crab
5. Cost brand new $2900.00
6. upgrade with ignition/heads to get 110 hp for another grand
7. Sound? oh my god!
Down side. Who knows we will have to see. Fuel consumption may be out or wack as
well as TBMO. And also dual ignition is only available as a back up at this
point....
See guys, It's like this. I have only time to spend at this point as I am waiting
for warmer weather to appear, and the sell of my other two Harley Davidson's
to order kit 1 of what I hope to be my Kolb MIII-Xtra/HD powered/John/Jim Hauck
modified airplane!
dubbed "The Screaming Eagle"
For now just learning and training to be a pilot.
for photos e-mail me
I need a prop please!
pp....
N4958P
Do not archive
Message 58
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Ed Chmielewski" <edchmiel@mindspring.com>
Hi Kolbers,
Sorry Ron, but a lot of aero engineers and development time would not
agree. VG's are indeed placed on the bottom of the horizontal stab, and
even on both sides of the rudder on some twins with the Micro or RAM VG
setups. At normal cruise, they provide no discernible drag.
Ed In JXN
MkII/503
----- Original Message -----
From: "CaptainRon" <CaptainRon@theriver.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: nose heavy mk III
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: CaptainRon <CaptainRon@theriver.com>
>
> 2/27/03 14:24John Hauck
>
> > When we are trying to raise the nose
> > with up elevator, the air is seperating from the
> > bottom.
> ================
>
> The only place it can stall Bottom side (see my rather long message just a
> couple of minutes ago) is the elevator itself. When I consider the angle
of
> seperation I doubt that small Vg's on it would do any good. Even if they
did
> when you make them large enough,, in normal high cruise flight they would
> act as both little speed breaks, and a source of buffeting.
> I would not install them.
Message 59
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Larry Bourne" <biglar@gogittum.com>
Sounds VERY interesting, Paul, but why don't you post some pics to
photoshare, or even build a web page, and save yourself a lot of work ?? I
know I'd sure like to see them. Too bad we can't hear
it.................Harleys have "that" sound, for sure. Lar.
Do not Archive.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Petty" <ppetty@c-gate.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: EVO/AIR
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Paul Petty" <ppetty@c-gate.net>
>
> Kolbers,
> I am in the process of testing a Harley Davidson 1340cc 80CID engine as a
possible candidate for a Kolb aircraft engine. I have tossed this idea out
to the list previously, and have had negative replies because of weight and
vibration issues.
> I am happy to report that after my first test start up of the engine that
vibration levels were low and that because a HD works on a single pin crank
method of rotation and a gap of firing order between strokes is at this
point not an issue due to the offset of it's counter weights of it's
crankshaft. In addition, it works much like a radial engine, just less odd
cylinder firing order. It's kind like a two of a seven cylinder radial
working on it's own. Anyway... Here are than bare bone facts at this point.
> 1. 118 lbs.
> 2. 80 hp.
> 3. Dry sump
> 4. Fully self contained I.e. Alt,Ignition,Fuel delivery via CV altitude
compensating crab
> 5. Cost brand new $2900.00
> 6. upgrade with ignition/heads to get 110 hp for another grand
> 7. Sound? oh my god!
>
> Down side. Who knows we will have to see. Fuel consumption may be out or
wack as well as TBMO. And also dual ignition is only available as a back up
at this point....
>
> See guys, It's like this. I have only time to spend at this point as I am
waiting for warmer weather to appear, and the sell of my other two Harley
Davidson's to order kit 1 of what I hope to be my Kolb MIII-Xtra/HD
powered/John/Jim Hauck modified airplane!
>
> dubbed "The Screaming Eagle"
> For now just learning and training to be a pilot.
>
> for photos e-mail me
>
> I need a prop please!
>
> pp....
> N4958P
>
> Do not archive
>
>
Message 60
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Christopher Armstrong" <cen33475@CenturyTel.net>
1. 118 lbs.
2. 80 hp.
3. Dry sump
4. Fully self contained I.e. Alt,Ignition,Fuel delivery via CV altitude
compensating crab
5. Cost brand new $2900.00
6. upgrade with ignition/heads to get 110 hp for another grand
7. Sound? oh my god!
80 hp at what rpm?
What are you going to do for a reduction drive? DO not even consider using
a rotax gearbox... it would be utterly destroyed by the power pulses of this
engine. (half the power pulses in a 4 stroke turing the same rpm means the
each pulse is twice as large. Thats why the 4 stroke rotaxs have 4
cylinders)
is the above weight with a reduction drive?
Message 61
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: CaptainRon <CaptainRon@theriver.com>
2/27/03 23:33Ed Chmielewski
> VG's are indeed placed on the bottom of the horizontal stab,
============================
In a normally configured H-stab they would be... as the low pressure side is
bottom side!! (but notice that Cessna placed slates on their Cardinal not
vg's). On the M3X low pressure side is up top, and to counter act it the
elevator control is used. placing the vg's on the bottom side of the H-stabs
will be of no ( indeed contrary to..) benafit on the M3X. The VG's have to
be on the low pressure side,, which weird enough is topside on the M3X.
Well I am getting tired of this, been beating this aero donkey all day. :-)
Message 62
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: nose heavy mk III |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: CaptainRon <CaptainRon@theriver.com>
I agree, the esoterica we are/were engeged in, should be of little
consequence to all who fly their craft within its box, and proper CG.
To those who are investigating the Kolb craft by reading this list I suggest
that you realize that I and others here are building and flying Kolbs. If I
thought that there was something less than excellent with the Kolb I would
be elsewhere. :-)
=====================
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Larry Bourne" <biglar@gogittum.com>
>
> I've been following this thread with interest, & rising concern. For those
> of you with a lot of experience, and/or a lot of specialized training, all
> this is of interest, and may possibly lead to experimentation. Most of us
> are, I hope, going to build to the plans, and fly our planes with pleasure
> and success. (Even Vamoose is built EXactly to plans - all the changes
> I've made are to other than the - well proven - flying structure. That fine
> reputation is what led me to finally choose the Kolb 6 yrs ago, after a year
> of research...........and I've neither seen nor heard anything since to make
> me regret that decision.) My concern is for the possible few who may decide
> to do some experimenting on their own, based on this discussion, without the
> proper training, experience, or education. To those people, I would suggest
> building to the plans, flying your Kolb, then, if you feel it necessary,
> make small changes - one at a time, and see what effect they have. Things
> can always be made better, and our sport is a good example of that. On the
> other hand...............if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
> Concerned Lar.
>
> Larry Bourne
> Palm Springs, CA
> Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
> www.gogittum.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Christopher Armstrong" <cen33475@centurytel.net>
> To: <kolb-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: RE: Kolb-List: nose heavy mk III
>
>
>> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Christopher Armstrong"
> <cen33475@CenturyTel.net>
>>
>>> Just visualize the relative wind blasting along parallal the >tail
>>> boom at 75+mph. It then hits the leading edge of the H-stabs, >on the
>> bottom
>>> side its ok as it hits it and kinda pushes it up. On
>
>
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|