Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:03 AM - Re: Northeast Radio Frequencies (Airgriff2@aol.com)
2. 07:39 AM - Re: N.E. Fly-in (Terry)
3. 11:21 AM - Re: FSII Aft CG problem and a Fix (David Paule)
4. 12:36 PM - Re: Re: FSII Aft CG problem and a Fix (Christopher Armstrong)
5. 12:39 PM - Amsoil new formulation. (Gray, Mark)
6. 01:15 PM - Re: Re: FSII Aft CG problem and a Fix (Bob Bean)
7. 01:50 PM - Re: Amsoil new formulation. (jerb)
8. 02:43 PM - Kolb Firestar II for Sale (Ken & Jeanne Vance)
9. 02:51 PM - Re: Kolb Firestar II for Sale (Ken korenek)
10. 02:58 PM - Re: FSII Aft CG problem and a Fix (Richard Pike)
11. 03:48 PM - Re: FSII Aft CG problem and a Fix (Christopher Armstrong)
12. 04:39 PM - Re: FSII Aft CG problem and a Fix (David Paule)
13. 05:26 PM - Re: Re: FSII Aft CG problem and a Fix (John Hauck)
14. 06:38 PM - Homer's (Terry)
15. 08:06 PM - Re: Re: FSII Aft CG problem and a Fix (HShack@aol.com)
16. 08:26 PM - Re: Re: FSII Aft CG problem and a Fix (Christopher Armstrong)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Northeast Radio Frequencies |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Airgriff2@aol.com
I called yesterday and found they use 122.8 as unicom. Their web site also
says they use left hand pattern for RW 6 and right hand for RW 24. We are
leaving the Albany NY area this morning for a 5 hr flight down.
Fly Safe
Bob Griffin
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: Terry <tkrolfe@usadatanet.net>
WhiskeyVictor36@aol.com wrote:
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: WhiskeyVictor36@aol.com
>
> Terry, FireFly #95 and others:
>
> I changed my plans and won't be going to the Fathers Day Fly-in at Shreveport.
>
> But, I do plan to make the flight to Homer Kolbs place on Saturday. Possibly
> 2 other Kolbs might accompany me. Alan Mancus, Original FireStar and Art
> Kruysman, KXP.
>
> The weather for Saturday is forecast to be partly cloudy and winds 5 to 10
> mph from the west/north west.
>
> Do Not Archive
>
> Bill Varnes
> Original FireStar
> Audubon NJ
>
Thanks Bill, Terry
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: FSII Aft CG problem and a Fix |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "David Paule" <dpaule@frii.com>
Even at my weight and with the 5 gallon tank currently installed, the center
of gravity, with me aboard, is considerably aft of the aft limit. It sure
looks like no more than two degrees of wing sweep will correct that.
Why do you think that the net gain will be negligible? Am I missing
something here?
Many thanks for the help,
Dave Paule
FSII,
Boulder, CO
=======================
There is not a lot of extra prop clearance without a spacer; at least not
enough to do what you are talking about.
I think your net gain as far as cg will be negligible.
My FS II is about average in weight; it flies me OK at 270 lb & it handled
a
160 lb pilot ok.
If you are 150 or more, you should be ok if you only run 5 gal,. gas [front
tank only].
Howard Shackleford
FS II
SC
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: | Re: FSII Aft CG problem and a Fix |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Christopher Armstrong" <tophera@centurytel.net>
Haven't SWAGed anything lately...
The wings are about 13 feet each, so the tip will move 13*12*sin(2)= 5.44
inches. The mac of a straight untapered swept wing moves aft about half
that much which is still 2.72 inches angle The wings don't weight too much
so their cg shift is minimal.
SO your idea may have merit. The some potential difficulties are that the
wing strut will be moving aft nearly three inches and that changes the
structural load sharing between it and the drag strut. Maybe to the point
ware the drag strut ( which is one of the higher stressed things in the
wing) is carrying enough load to be a problem. Would have to do some math
to figure that out. Also the alignment of the aileron linkages might be off
enough to bind up at the ends of the throws. You aerodynamic efficency
would go down a bit due to a slight span wise flow induced by the sweep, but
all the bumps and scallops of the ribs on a kolb wing will minimize that.
The real issue is that the mac of the wing is moving but that aerodynamic
center of the wing and the tail is moving less. The Kolb has the tail way
back there so it has a lot of power even though it has a fairly small area.
So moving the wing mac doesn't change the wing tail aerocenter by nearly as
much as the wing mac moves. As a rough guess the tail allows you to have an
aft cg limit of 35% when a tailless wing would have the ac at about 25% with
static margin of 10% would give a aft limit of only 15%. So the Tail gives
you 20% mac ac shift by itself. (10% is probably way more static stability
then a Kolb really has probably more like 5%.) anyway the tail moves the
cg range aft at least 15% or almost 10 inches.
Still if you do some math to find out where the wing tail combo goes not
just the wing movement I think you might find that this idea will work. I
might even use it myself as I don't weight much either.
degrees wing mac wing tip wing tail ac shift
1 1.36 2.72 ???
2 2.72 5.44 ???
3 4.08 8.16 ???
4 5.44 10.88 ???
topher
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of David Paule
Subject: Kolb-List: Re: FSII Aft CG problem and a Fix
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "David Paule" <dpaule@frii.com>
Even at my weight and with the 5 gallon tank currently installed, the center
of gravity, with me aboard, is considerably aft of the aft limit. It sure
looks like no more than two degrees of wing sweep will correct that.
Why do you think that the net gain will be negligible? Am I missing
something here?
Many thanks for the help,
Dave Paule
FSII,
Boulder, CO
=======================
There is not a lot of extra prop clearance without a spacer; at least not
enough to do what you are talking about.
I think your net gain as far as cg will be negligible.
My FS II is about average in weight; it flies me OK at 270 lb & it handled
a
160 lb pilot ok.
If you are 150 or more, you should be ok if you only run 5 gal,. gas [front
tank only].
Howard Shackleford
FS II
SC
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: | Amsoil new formulation. |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Gray, Mark" <Mark.Gray@Takata.com>
I know this is going to open a can of worms but........
I have been running Amsoil 100:1 for 5 years and am well on the way to
my second rebuild at over 450 hrs.
I was going to order a new case of oil and found they no longer offer
the Amsoil ATC 100:1 premix. It has been replaced with a new formula
with a flash point of less than half what it was. Not being a
chemical/lubricant engineer I am not sure if I am willing to try this
new blend.
Has anyone been running the new mix at 100:1?
Until I feel comfortable with the new formula I think I will switch to
50:1 Pennzoil.
Let the arguments begin!
Mark
do not archive
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: FSII Aft CG problem and a Fix |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Bob Bean <slyck@frontiernet.net>
mr. armstrong gave you a real thoughtful answer, and I also believe
it's a clever way to move your cg forward relative to the c of lift.
The MAC will effectively grow a hair/ aspect ratio diminish.
The lift strut will actually be sharing a little drag load canted slightly
back. The tip vortexes will grow slightly and slew outboard a trace.
The bottom lift strut/gearleg weldment to the forward bottom
longeron will now be slightly in tension but no more so than when
encountering a bumpy field hard landing.
-sounds like a good experiment. -BB do not archive
David Paule wrote:
>--> Kolb-List message posted by: "David Paule" <dpaule@frii.com>
>
>Even at my weight and with the 5 gallon tank currently installed, the center
>of gravity, with me aboard, is considerably aft of the aft limit. It sure
>looks like no more than two degrees of wing sweep will correct that.
>
>Why do you think that the net gain will be negligible? Am I missing
>something here?
>
>Many thanks for the help,
>Dave Paule
>FSII,
>Boulder, CO
>
>
>=======================
>There is not a lot of extra prop clearance without a spacer; at least not
>enough to do what you are talking about.
>
>I think your net gain as far as cg will be negligible.
>
>My FS II is about average in weight; it flies me OK at 270 lb & it handled
>a
>160 lb pilot ok.
>
>If you are 150 or more, you should be ok if you only run 5 gal,. gas [front
>tank only].
>
>Howard Shackleford
>FS II
>SC
>
>
>
>
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: | Re: Amsoil new formulation. |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: jerb <ulflyer@verizon.net>
My first thought was if it were so good why 2 rebuilds in 450 hours - might
give Pennzoil a try. We have used AV2, its a 50:1 mix but found the carbon
it develop to be extremely hard making it difficult to remove during
decarboning. Have since switched to Pennzoil which we use for at least the
first 20 hours while the engine breaks in. So far were happy with the
Pennzoil.
jerb
At 03:38 PM 6/18/04 -0400, you wrote:
>--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Gray, Mark" <Mark.Gray@Takata.com>
>
>I know this is going to open a can of worms but........
>I have been running Amsoil 100:1 for 5 years and am well on the way to
>my second rebuild at over 450 hrs.
>I was going to order a new case of oil and found they no longer offer
>the Amsoil ATC 100:1 premix. It has been replaced with a new formula
>with a flash point of less than half what it was. Not being a
>chemical/lubricant engineer I am not sure if I am willing to try this
>new blend.
>
>Has anyone been running the new mix at 100:1?
>
>Until I feel comfortable with the new formula I think I will switch to
>50:1 Pennzoil.
>
>Let the arguments begin!
>
>Mark
>
>do not archive
>
>
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: | Kolb Firestar II for Sale |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Ken & Jeanne Vance" <vances@infinet.com>
Rotax 503, 4 Blade "Ultra-Prop". Full Enclosure, Streamline Struts, Brakes, Wing
Tip Strobes. Approximately 35 hours.
No damage history. Built by Rick Sine and first flown in 1996. Located about
30 miles west of Dayton, Ohio. Asking $10,750.
Ken Vance 937-456-9334
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: | Re: Kolb Firestar II for Sale |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Ken korenek <kkorenek@comcast.net>
Got Pictures?
Ken
Ken & Jeanne Vance wrote:
>--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Ken & Jeanne Vance" <vances@infinet.com>
>
>
>Rotax 503, 4 Blade "Ultra-Prop". Full Enclosure, Streamline Struts, Brakes, Wing
Tip Strobes. Approximately 35 hours.
>No damage history. Built by Rick Sine and first flown in 1996. Located about
30 miles west of Dayton, Ohio. Asking $10,750.
>Ken Vance 937-456-9334
>
>
>
>
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: FSII Aft CG problem and a Fix |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Richard Pike <richard@bcchapel.org>
I suspect that compared to you and Topher's aerodynamic knowledge, I am way
behind on the power curve, but let me throw my $.02 into the mix. Since
Kolbs are remarkable for responding very strongly to raising or lowering
the flaps or ailerons, and using them to trim for a nose heavy or tail
heavy problem is very efficient, what is the probability that drooping the
ailerons on the FSII might give satisfactory results with a lot less work?
Instead of moving the MAC by moving the wings, move the center of lift by
changing the airfoil shape, i.e. droop the ailerons.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
(Building a FSII, wings are covered, putting the floor in today)
At 08:13 PM 6/17/2004 -0600, you wrote:
>--> Kolb-List message posted by: "David Paule" <dpaule@frii.com>
>
>To correct an aft center of gravity problem my new-to-me used Firestar II
>has, that I haven't flown yet, I'm thinking of sweeping the wings back
>between one and two degrees - that's all, not quite as radical as a Boeing
>jet.
>
>What this does is shift the Mean Aerodynamic Chord (MAC) back a little bit.
>Although this naturally moves the center of gravity aft, relative to the
>wings it moves the rest of the plane forward. There's a sufficient net
>improvement to justify it.
>
>I figured out how to do this with no structural impact. So physically, it
>can be done.
>
>It looks like there's ample prop clearance to allow this. I plan to add a
>prop spacer later anyway, when I'm evaluating other propellers. Right now,
>this Firestar II has a two blade wood prop.
>
>I figure I'll need spacers for the lower strut fitting, to fill that gap and
>absorb the small kick load.
>
>I'm assuming that the reduction in tail volume is something less than 2% and
>that this is acceptable.
>
>This probably wouldn't be enough sweep to initiate a tip stall, but if that
>happened to show up on flight test, stall strips at the root would correct
>it.
>
>Does anyone have any other reasons why I shouldn't do this?
>
>There are a couple of additional characteristics that would very slightly
>change the plane in other ways. First, this adds a slight amount of dihedral
>effect and a small amount of yaw stability. Second, and of even less
>importance, it raises the limiting Mach number by a negligibly small amount.
>
>Thanks!
>Dave Paule
>Boulder, Co
>
>
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: | FSII Aft CG problem and a Fix |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Christopher Armstrong" <tophera@centurytel.net>
This will indeed work to solve the cg issue but it will be nasty from a drag
and handling qualities point of view. The plane will be flying with a
higher lift airfoil then it needs so it will have to have a lower angle of
attack then the plane was designed for. The ailerons will feel heavy all
the time and the control linkages will be carrying a load all the time. The
plane would always be twitchy too since the dynamic stability will be
reduced even though the static stability is taken care of. ( actually I
will have to think about that for a while to be sure that's right...)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Richard Pike
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: FSII Aft CG problem and a Fix
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Richard Pike <richard@bcchapel.org>
I suspect that compared to you and Topher's aerodynamic knowledge, I am way
behind on the power curve, but let me throw my $.02 into the mix. Since
Kolbs are remarkable for responding very strongly to raising or lowering
the flaps or ailerons, and using them to trim for a nose heavy or tail
heavy problem is very efficient, what is the probability that drooping the
ailerons on the FSII might give satisfactory results with a lot less work?
Instead of moving the MAC by moving the wings, move the center of lift by
changing the airfoil shape, i.e. droop the ailerons.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
(Building a FSII, wings are covered, putting the floor in today)
At 08:13 PM 6/17/2004 -0600, you wrote:
>--> Kolb-List message posted by: "David Paule" <dpaule@frii.com>
>
>To correct an aft center of gravity problem my new-to-me used Firestar II
>has, that I haven't flown yet, I'm thinking of sweeping the wings back
>between one and two degrees - that's all, not quite as radical as a Boeing
>jet.
>
>What this does is shift the Mean Aerodynamic Chord (MAC) back a little bit.
>Although this naturally moves the center of gravity aft, relative to the
>wings it moves the rest of the plane forward. There's a sufficient net
>improvement to justify it.
>
>I figured out how to do this with no structural impact. So physically, it
>can be done.
>
>It looks like there's ample prop clearance to allow this. I plan to add a
>prop spacer later anyway, when I'm evaluating other propellers. Right now,
>this Firestar II has a two blade wood prop.
>
>I figure I'll need spacers for the lower strut fitting, to fill that gap
and
>absorb the small kick load.
>
>I'm assuming that the reduction in tail volume is something less than 2%
and
>that this is acceptable.
>
>This probably wouldn't be enough sweep to initiate a tip stall, but if that
>happened to show up on flight test, stall strips at the root would correct
>it.
>
>Does anyone have any other reasons why I shouldn't do this?
>
>There are a couple of additional characteristics that would very slightly
>change the plane in other ways. First, this adds a slight amount of
dihedral
>effect and a small amount of yaw stability. Second, and of even less
>importance, it raises the limiting Mach number by a negligibly small
amount.
>
>Thanks!
>Dave Paule
>Boulder, Co
>
>
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: FSII Aft CG problem and a Fix |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "David Paule" <dpaule@frii.com>
I think that Mr. Pike's suggestion would balance the plane and make it fly
trim-free longitudinally.
However, stability is based upon the slope of the longitudinal moment curve
with respect to angle of attack and drooping the ailerons would have no
change to that. It would just create a balancing moment.
Nice suggestion, Mr. Pike, which would solve a different problem - not mine.
And thanks for Mr. Topher's other comments, which are excellent.
Thanks for the comments, everyone.... keep 'em coming. Please remember,
everyone, that we're talking about two degrees sweep here. That's all.
Dave Paule
FSII
Boulder, CO
Mr. Topher wrote:
"The plane would always be twitchy too since the dynamic stability will be
reduced even though the static stability is taken care of. ( actually I
will have to think about that for a while to be sure that's right...)"
Mr. Pike wrote:
"what is the probability that drooping the
ailerons on the FSII might give satisfactory results with a lot less work?
Instead of moving the MAC by moving the wings, move the center of lift by
changing the airfoil shape, i.e. droop the ailerons."
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: RE: FSII Aft CG problem and a Fix |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
| Thanks for the comments, everyone.... keep 'em coming. Please
remember,
| everyone, that we're talking about two degrees sweep here. That's
all.
|
| Dave Paule
Hi Dave P/Gang:
Sometimes I get a little behind.
We are going to change an airplane we have not flown yet.
Would it not be a good idea to fly the airplane first, then decide
what needs to be done to fix whatever is wrong with it, if anything?
Most all the Kolbs fly well right off the drawing board. If all the
controls are rigged correctly, the wings and tail are rigged
correctly, then a little "forced trim" or a trim tab here and there
will usually fix a Kolb that wants to fly with a little stick
pressure, fore or aft, left or right.
The biggest problem we usually have with the Firestar, MKIII and
Kolbra, is probably nose pitch down when under power. I think we will
find that this is usually caused by the high thrust line of these
model Kolbs. We didn't have that problem with the Ultrastar, and its
lower thrust line.
Most all certified aircraft, including fixed and rotary wing, have
some type trim system to compensate for changes in load, speed, power
settings, etc.
I used forced trim for pitch and roll on my MKIII. Works good.
Take care,
john h
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 |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Terry <tkrolfe@usadatanet.net>
Kolbers
Looking forward to as many of you as can make it tomorrow, Saturday, at Homer and
Clara Kolb's
farm. They are looking forward to a nice gathering.
Any time after 9:00 am would be good. Make it when you can! They insist on putting
on a
picnic for those that make it. Couldn't talk them out of it.
Let's look for decent weather and I'll see you there. A group of us are getting
together at
Smoketown at 8:00/8:30 am to make a joint flight there. Feel free to join us.
Terry FireFly - #95
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: | Re: FSII Aft CG problem and a Fix |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: HShack@aol.com
In a message dated 6/18/2004 2:22:37 PM Eastern Standard Time,
dpaule@frii.com writes:
Even at my weight and with the 5 gallon tank currently installed, the center
of gravity, with me aboard, is considerably aft of the aft limit
What is your weight?
Howard Shackleford
FS II
SC
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: FSII Aft CG problem and a Fix |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Christopher Armstrong" <tophera@centurytel.net>
I am sure you are not suggesting he fly his plane aft of the aft cg limit
are you? Seems to me that he absolutely has to put weight in it to get it
inside the cg limits. What is being discussed is a possible alternative to
carrying weight in the nose. Certainly weight in the nose will get it to a
situation where it would fly like any of the other Kolbs you have flown.
But Flying aft of the rear cg limit would result in a plane that flies
nothing at all like all the Kolbs that you have flown. It would be really
dangerous, very prone to dramatic over controlling and Pilot Induced
Oscillation, perhaps completely uncontrollable.
So yes he does need to change a plane he has never flown because it is not
safe to fly without a change. Weight in the nose is the easiest and surest
solution, and I agree that is the first thing he should do. His idea might
work, and if he is willing to do the work and take the time to test the idea
safely it might trim his plane without the weight. Might suck. Only one
way to tell for sure (at least without a couple hundred grand worth of super
computer CFD or wind tunnel test time). Same way you did with all the
numerous changes on your planes, try it and fly it.
Topher
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Hauck
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: RE: FSII Aft CG problem and a Fix
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
| Thanks for the comments, everyone.... keep 'em coming. Please
remember,
| everyone, that we're talking about two degrees sweep here. That's
all.
|
| Dave Paule
Hi Dave P/Gang:
Sometimes I get a little behind.
We are going to change an airplane we have not flown yet.
Would it not be a good idea to fly the airplane first, then decide
what needs to be done to fix whatever is wrong with it, if anything?
Most all the Kolbs fly well right off the drawing board. If all the
controls are rigged correctly, the wings and tail are rigged
correctly, then a little "forced trim" or a trim tab here and there
will usually fix a Kolb that wants to fly with a little stick
pressure, fore or aft, left or right.
The biggest problem we usually have with the Firestar, MKIII and
Kolbra, is probably nose pitch down when under power. I think we will
find that this is usually caused by the high thrust line of these
model Kolbs. We didn't have that problem with the Ultrastar, and its
lower thrust line.
Most all certified aircraft, including fixed and rotary wing, have
some type trim system to compensate for changes in load, speed, power
settings, etc.
I used forced trim for pitch and roll on my MKIII. Works good.
Take care,
john h
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! --
|