Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:33 AM - for sale (Ted Cowan)
2. 04:31 AM - Nose Cone - Duct Tape Time (Jack B. Hart)
3. 05:36 AM - Re: Building Kolb MK III XTRA !!! (James, Ken)
4. 06:19 AM - Mark III vs. Mark IIIx (kfackler)
5. 06:56 AM - Re: Kolb-List Digest: 6 Msgs - 11/07/05 (Cppjh@aol.com)
6. 07:06 AM - Re: Building Kolb MK III XTRA !!! (Richard Pike)
7. 07:34 AM - Mark III vs Mark III Xtra (Rex Rodebush)
8. 07:39 AM - Re: Building Kolb MK III XTRA !!! (woody)
9. 08:47 AM - Re: slow day - laugh a bit (ghaley@wt.net)
10. 08:59 AM - Re: Mark III vs Mark III Xtra (John Hauck)
11. 09:01 AM - Re: Mark III vs. Mark IIIx (John Hauck)
12. 09:07 AM - Re: Building Kolb MK III XTRA !!! (John Hauck)
13. 09:27 AM - Re: Mark III vs. Mark IIIx (Michael Bigelow)
14. 09:40 AM - Re: Mark III vs Mark III Xtra (Richard & Martha Neilsen)
15. 10:11 AM - Mark III vs Mark III Xtra (Rex Rodebush)
16. 10:42 AM - Re: Building Kolb MK III XTRA !!! (Richard Pike)
17. 12:21 PM - Re: Building Kolb MK III XTRA !!!/Difference in Performance of Two and Three Blad Props (John Hauck)
18. 01:30 PM - Re: Building Kolb MK III XTRA !!! (Jim Baker)
19. 03:24 PM - flaps (Paul Petty)
20. 03:32 PM - FS II Weight and Balance (Lanny Fetterman)
21. 04:40 PM - legs (robert bean)
22. 04:48 PM - Re: Building Kolb MK III XTRA !!!/Difference in Performance of Two and Three Blad Props (Richard & Martha Neilsen)
23. 05:47 PM - FLAPS ??? Kolb MK III XTRA .... (Michael Bigelow)
24. 08:33 PM - Noise Reduction (Richard & Martha Neilsen)
25. 11:47 PM - Re: FS II Weight and Balance (Silver Fern Microlights Ltd)
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 |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Ted Cowan <trc1917@direcway.com>
Here is a great deal for someone that doesnt want to go thru the agony of
building their own. The two guys who built this are true profectionists and
it is a beautiful plane. For info go to: www.homestead.com/southernflyers
and click on "for Sale". Ted Cowan.
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 |
|
| Subject: | Nose Cone - Duct Tape Time |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Jack B. Hart" <jbhart@onlyinternet.net>
FireFlyers & Kolbers,
At the beginning of its 26th flight, I nosed the FireFly over on my first
attempt to takeoff from a grass strip on December 19, 1999.
After flight # 573 today, I did it again. Landed in a direct cross wind
with no problem, but as I tried to make a 180 on the runway I got off into
long grass beside the runway. My first mistake was that I turned into the
cross wind. Once the right main rolled into the grass and the wind struck
the right side of the vertical fin and rudder there was not enough grip by
the tail wheel to bring the FireFly the rest of the way around. My second
mistake was that I tried to move on out into the grass to bring it around
and I put it on its nose with too much throttle.
The first nose over cracked the bottom of the nose cone but it was not
noticeable. This episode left noticeable cracks and they will have to
be repaired. So until it gets warm enough to work with fiber glass, the
FireFly will have duct tape on its nose.
The plus is that I nosed over a pusher, and so I do not have the added
expense of new propeller blades.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Winchester, IN
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: | Building Kolb MK III XTRA !!! |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "James, Ken" <KDJames@berkscareer.com>
Welcome to the group .. I'm currently building a Mk III X at much much
slower pace (like watching paint dry )So any mods you make or problems you
please put the info up for all too see, and remember take lots of pics we
all like to see pics :-)
Ken James
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Bigelow [mailto:orcabonita@hotmail.com]
Subject: Kolb-List: Building Kolb MK III XTRA !!!
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Michael Bigelow" <orcabonita@hotmail.com>
Hi,
My name is Mike Bigelow and I am finally getting back into ultralights after
a long absence :) I had one of the first weight shift Quicksilvers back in
high school with a single cylinder 12 HP engine and I had a blast flying it
(my first solo). Ever since then I have always dreamed of getting another
ultralight... After 24 years of flying other less fun airplanes I have
finally ordered the kits for the MK III Xtra. I am having the guy by the
factory help me build it at his shop, so that way its done in a couple
months and all the building details are taken care of. I am putting a Rotax
912-S on the plane, ballistic chute, dual controls, all the factory options,
etc... I have been reading your list for months now and have gotten lots
of good information, but I still have some questions. Is there anything
else I should do on this plane that is not covered in the factory options ??
=20 I don't care to much for the mechanical trim system of the elevator and
would like a electric aerodynamic trim tab instead, has anyone ever done
this ? I would also like more than 10 gallons of fuel capacity, is there a
bigger tank available for this plane ? I have also heard some good things
about the Kiev Hot prop, so right now its a toss-up between that or the Warp
Drive prop.... I would like to get this plane done perfect the first time,
so any advice you guys have about any part of this project would be greatly
appreciated.
Thanks
Michael A. Bigelow
IMPORTANT/CONFIDENTIAL: This communication is intended solely for the use of the
individual or entity to which it is addressed. This e-mail contains information
from the Berks Career & Technology Center that may be privileged, confidential,
and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this communication
is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately
and permanently delete this message including all attachments.
Thank you.
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: | Mark III vs. Mark IIIx |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "kfackler" <kfackler@ameritech.net>
I would like to seek some input from those of you who had the opportunity when
selecting your airplane to choose between a Mark III and the Mark III Xtra.
Which one did you choose, and why?
I realize that it's probably not possible to answer in a sound byte. Having said
that, what were the two or three most compelling reasons for your decision?
-Ken Fackler
Kolb Mark II / A722KWF
Rochester MI
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: Kolb-List Digest: 6 Msgs - 11/07/05 |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Cppjh@aol.com
I am just a lurker, but I enjoy all the tips and hope I remember if I ever
get started on my own plane. Thanks Pete
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: Building Kolb MK III XTRA !!! |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Richard Pike <richard@bcchapel.org>
I have tried several props on my MKIII, Ivo 3-blade, 2-blade, Warp
3-blade, Kiev Hot Prop - I have found the best performance (on a 582,
2.58:1 B box) with an Ivo 2 blade 68" prop. I have not tried a Warp Drive
Taper prop, but would love to try a 68" 2 blade and see how it stacks up
performance wise against the Ivo. (Anybody want to loan me one for a week?)
I tried a Kiev Hot Prop 3 blade 66" - which is the recommended size for
this engine/gearbox, but it did not do as well as the Ivo, save your money.
(I posted the results to this list, they ought to be in the archives)
If your main priority is the best overall performance, go with a two blade
prop. If your main priority is smoothness rather than performance, go with
a three blade prop. If your main priority is a prop that survives parts of
your airplane coming off and going through it, get a Warp Drive.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
At 02:13 AM 11/8/05 -0500, you wrote:
>--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Michael Bigelow" <orcabonita@hotmail.com>
>
>Hi,
>
>My name is Mike Bigelow and I am finally getting back into ultralights after
>a long absence :) I had one of the first weight shift Quicksilvers back in
>high school with a single cylinder 12 HP engine and I had a blast flying it
>(my first solo). Ever since then I have always dreamed of getting another
>ultralight... After 24 years of flying other less fun airplanes I have
>finally ordered the kits for the MK III Xtra. I am having the guy by the
>factory help me build it at his shop, so that way its done in a couple
>months and all the building details are taken care of. I am putting a Rotax
>912-S on the plane, ballistic chute, dual controls, all the factory options,
>etc... I have been reading your list for months now and have gotten lots
>of good information, but I still have some questions. Is there anything
>else I should do on this plane that is not covered in the factory options ??
> I don't care to much for the mechanical trim system of the elevator and
>would like a electric aerodynamic trim tab instead, has anyone ever done
>this ? I would also like more than 10 gallons of fuel capacity, is there a
>bigger tank available for this plane ? I have also heard some good things
>about the Kiev Hot prop, so right now its a toss-up between that or the Warp
>Drive prop.... I would like to get this plane done perfect the first time,
>so any advice you guys have about any part of this project would be greatly
>appreciated.
>
>Thanks
>Michael A. Bigelow
>
>
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: | Mark III vs Mark III Xtra |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Rex Rodebush" <rrodebush@tema.net>
Main reason for me is that I can sit with my feet straight in the Xtra.
Sitting angled in is hard on the old lower back.
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "kfackler" <kfackler@ameritech.net
<mailto:kfackler@ameritech.net?subjectRe:%20Mark%20III%20vs.%20Mark%20I
IIx&replyto200511081419.jA8EJaot003622@mail.matronics.com> >
I would like to seek some input from those of you who had the
opportunity when
selecting your airplane to choose between a Mark III and the Mark III
Xtra
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: Building Kolb MK III XTRA !!! |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "woody" <duesouth@govital.net>
Check the archives for Padre Pikes aileron control rod mod and for my tail
wire mod. The original Twinstar had an aerodynamic trim system built onto
the elevator in the form of a small flap that was cable activated. Works
good..
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Bigelow" <orcabonita@hotmail.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: Building Kolb MK III XTRA !!!
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Michael Bigelow"
<orcabonita@hotmail.com>
>
> Hi,
>
> My name is Mike Bigelow and I am finally getting back into ultralights
after
> a long absence :) I had one of the first weight shift Quicksilvers back
in
> high school with a single cylinder 12 HP engine and I had a blast flying
it
> (my first solo). Ever since then I have always dreamed of getting another
> ultralight... After 24 years of flying other less fun airplanes I have
> finally ordered the kits for the MK III Xtra. I am having the guy by the
> factory help me build it at his shop, so that way its done in a couple
> months and all the building details are taken care of. I am putting a
Rotax
> 912-S on the plane, ballistic chute, dual controls, all the factory
options,
> etc... I have been reading your list for months now and have gotten lots
> of good information, but I still have some questions. Is there anything
> else I should do on this plane that is not covered in the factory options
??
> I don't care to much for the mechanical trim system of the elevator and
> would like a electric aerodynamic trim tab instead, has anyone ever done
> this ? I would also like more than 10 gallons of fuel capacity, is there
a
> bigger tank available for this plane ? I have also heard some good things
> about the Kiev Hot prop, so right now its a toss-up between that or the
Warp
> Drive prop.... I would like to get this plane done perfect the first
time,
> so any advice you guys have about any part of this project would be
greatly
> appreciated.
>
> Thanks
> Michael A. Bigelow
>
>
> --
>
>
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: slow day - laugh a bit |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: ghaley@wt.net
Woody,
I forwarded this to my wife and this is her response:
"AND...the airplanes don't mind sleeping in the cold hanger with their pilots."
Quoting woody <duesouth@govital.net>:
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "woody" <duesouth@govital.net>
>
> The list is kind of slow so I thought it would be a good time to add some
> humour. This was recentley sent to me and I found it quite funny.
> Unfortunately the girlfriend didn't. Guess its a pilot thing.
>
>
> Airplanes usually kill you quickly; a woman takes her time.
> >Airplanes can be turned on by a flick of a switch.
> >Airplanes don't get mad if you do a "touch and go."
> >Airplanes don't object to a pre-flight inspection.
> >Airplanes come with a manual to explain their operation.
> >Airplanes have strict weight and balance limitations.
> >Airplanes can be flown at any time of the month.
> >Airplanes don't come with in-laws.
> >Airplanes don't care about how many other airplanes you've flown
> >before.
> >Airplanes and pilots both arrive at the same time.
> >Airplanes don't mind if you look at other airplanes.
> >Airplanes don't mind if you buy airplane magazines.
> >Airplanes expect to be tied down.
> >Airplanes don't comment on your piloting skills.
> >Airplanes don't whine unless something is really wrong.
> >However, when airplanes go quiet, just like women, it's usually not
> >good.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: Mark III vs Mark III Xtra |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
Xtra.
| Sitting angled in is hard on the old lower back.
|
"Rex Rodebush"
Rex/Gang:
Been flying my MKIII and several others since 1992. Have accumulated
more than 2,400 hours on my airframe alone. The only time I think
about where my legs are pointing is when someone makes comments about
sitting angled. I am sure I am sitting angled, but never has bothered
me.
I prefer the MKIIIc over the Xtra, based on limited flight experience
in several iterations of the newer model. Maybe I am a little
prejudice because I have spent so much time and flown so many places
in my old MKIIIc. I do prefer my 20 and 40 degree flaps over none at
all or flaperons. I consider them to be a major safety factor,
enabling me to make more survivable landings in much smaller spaces.
These flaps are used on most all landings and have been proven to be
very beneficial during actual engine out/emergency situations,
requiring landing in spaces not meant for MKIIIc's to land in.
I think the smaller nose cone is more aerodynamic than the broad flat
nose on the Xtra.
Guess I am happy with what I have. My MKIIIc provides me with all my
aviating needs and desires. Would like to climb and cruise right up
there with John W and his 912S powered Kolbra, but for now and the
near future will be happy hauling my stuff a little slower in the
comfort of the side by side two place over the tandem seating in the
Kolbra. May be possible to get cruise up another 10 mph in my MKIIIc,
but would take a lot of work cleaning up several areas that are now
creating a lot of drag. Miss P'fer has always cruised at 80 to 85 mph
powered with the 582, 912UL, and 912ULS.
Take care,
john h
MKIIIc/912ULS
Titus, Alabama
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: Mark III vs. Mark IIIx |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
| -Ken Fackler
Ken F/Gang:
It was the only two place aircraft Kolb produced in 1991. ;-)
john h
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: Building Kolb MK III XTRA !!! |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
two blade
| prop. If your main priority is smoothness rather than performance,
go with
| a three blade prop. If your main priority is a prop that survives
parts of
| your airplane coming off and going through it, get a Warp Drive.
|
| Richard Pike
Richard P/Gang:
Does the above mean I have been flying all these hours enjoying
smoothness of my Warp Drive 3 blade taper tip 72" prop, rather than
performance?
Or does it mean that those props and combos work the way you describe
on your own particular Kolb MKIIIc which has been changes somewhat in
the center section/cabin area?
I haven't tried experiementing between the two and three blade Warp
Drive props on my airplane. Only the three blade.
Many years ago I did do a lot of testing for Warp Drive using my
original Firestar. Was quite obvious during testing that the two
blade Culver wooden prop outperformed the Warp. However, later on the
MKIII I tested the square tip and taper tip three blade Warp. The
taper tip blades performed better in cruise speed. Both were about
equal in climb.
Take care,
john h
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: | Mark III vs. Mark IIIx |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Michael Bigelow" <orcabonita@hotmail.com>
The MK III XTRA is faster, with more room inside, better visibility out the
front (more glass), and it is a much nicer looking airplane. It seems to me
that the XTRA is better in every way with no downside...
Mike
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: | Re: Mark III vs Mark III Xtra |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Richard & Martha Neilsen" <NeilsenRM05@comcast.net>
I have a MKIIIc and bought it because that was the only one available at the
time. My thoughts on the differences are the Extra is faster and gives you
more room for your feet, the potential for a larger instrument panel, and
the panel is closer. The down side of the Extra is they don't come standard
with flaps but can be ordered and there are some who believe that there
isn't enough horizontal stabilizer area because of the wide flat nose. The
classic is 10 MPH slower and the instrument panel is too far away to reach
when strapped in. I also don't notice the foot angle except that I have
better forward and down visibility.
If I were to choose now I would likely pick the Extra but get the flap
option (no question here), make a larger horizontal stabilizer and likely
the larger panel. Check with Jim Clayton he is building one with these
changes and I think 1-3 axis electric trim.
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIIIc
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Mark III vs Mark III Xtra
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
>
> Xtra.
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: | Mark III vs Mark III Xtra |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Rex Rodebush" <rrodebush@tema.net>
I agree with John about the flaps. My Xtra was one of the first and the
standard flaps and ailerons were included. I think they still might be
available as an option and should be considered if they are.
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: Building Kolb MK III XTRA !!! |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Richard Pike <richard@bcchapel.org>
This is a topic that several friends and I have kicked around in our EAA
chapter. Some of those friends have experimented with two vs. three blade
props on their Skylanes, etc, and their consensus is that two blades give
better overall performance, and here is the rationale:
For a given amount of horsepower - let's say we have 80 HP, that is a good
compromise between several of the motors we usually use - then we have to
decide how we are going to apply it, or in this case, divide it up. If we
have a prop of any given diameter, if it is a two blade prop, then we will
end up with a certain pitch. If we have a three blade prop of the same
diameter, then it will have to have less pitch, because now we are dividing
the available power by three blades instead of two. Which means that we
will have to use less pitch so that the engine can still reach it's power
peak. Now we have a three blade prop that at max cruise speed will have a
lower pitch than the two blade prop of the same diameter.
Now we throw in a variable - if you always fly at your max cruise speed,
then you won't notice much difference in anything. But if you sometimes
want to fly at speeds less than max cruise, then the lesser pitch of the
three blade prop will not allow you to fly at rpm's substantially lower
than max cruise, the prop still needs a bunch of rpm's because it has no
"spread" it is a shallow pitch prop, optimized for one target speed. With a
three blade prop, throttling back brings your airspeed down at a faster
rate than a two blade prop does per rpm. Or to look at it another way,
flying slowly still requires a lot of rpm's.
If you pitch either a two or three blade prop for full throttle level
flight just touching the tach red line, - let's say you max out at 90 -
when you slow down to 60, the two blade prop/engine combo will be turning
slower than the three blade prop/engine combo. You can't slow down the
three blade engine/prop combo as much. So while it might not have much
effect when optimized for max cruise, it gives up a lot of efficiency
(unnecessarily high rpm's) at anything less than max cruise. On the other
hand, you usually get better acceleration out of the hole with a three
blade prop, because it is lower pitched, like a climb prop.
Example: Yesterday I took the FSII up for a while, it was smooth as glass
out, and I was not going anywhere, just looking at fall colors. With the
582 swinging a 68" two blade prop, I could easily maintain altitude and
55mph at 4350 rpm, and I found it a very mellow and delightful experience.
Since at that rpm, the 582 was burning less than three GPH, and was
comparatively very quiet, it's performance was ideal.
With a two blade prop, which is using more pitch than a same diameter three
blade for a given rpm, the prop has more "spread," or effective useful
range, not only does it have more pitch at full throttle flight, it still
has more pitch at all speeds, which is sort of like keeping your car in
high gear at all rpm's, while a three blade is like being in second gear
all the time. Fortunately, our Kolb's accelerate and climb good enough that
even a two blade prop (high gear) doesn't hurt us much.
So I guess that in your case John, since you apparently typically run at
high cruise - from what I glean from your posts - it probably is six of
one, half a dozen of another. Of course, if you have the tip clearance to
give it a try, a two blade Warp Drive prop a couple inches longer than your
three blade might give even more climb. (Like you need it! <grin>)
But for those of us not going anywhere in particular, but just going up to
poot around - like us Old Poops do - then a two blade gives better overall
performance.
Obviously this does not factor in having an in-flight adjustable prop, that
is outside my experience. No comments or opinions there. Might change
everything...?
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
At 11:08 AM 11/8/05 -0600, you wrote:
>--> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
>
> | If your main priority is the best overall performance, go with a
>two blade
>| prop. If your main priority is smoothness rather than performance,
>go with
>| a three blade prop. If your main priority is a prop that survives
>parts of
>| your airplane coming off and going through it, get a Warp Drive.
>|
>| Richard Pike
>
>Richard P/Gang:
>
>Does the above mean I have been flying all these hours enjoying
>smoothness of my Warp Drive 3 blade taper tip 72" prop, rather than
>performance?
>
>Or does it mean that those props and combos work the way you describe
>on your own particular Kolb MKIIIc which has been changes somewhat in
>the center section/cabin area?
>
>I haven't tried experiementing between the two and three blade Warp
>Drive props on my airplane. Only the three blade.
>
>Many years ago I did do a lot of testing for Warp Drive using my
>original Firestar. Was quite obvious during testing that the two
>blade Culver wooden prop outperformed the Warp. However, later on the
>MKIII I tested the square tip and taper tip three blade Warp. The
>taper tip blades performed better in cruise speed. Both were about
>equal in climb.
>
>Take care,
>
>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: Building Kolb MK III XTRA !!!/Difference in Performance |
of Two and Three Blad Props
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
run at
| high cruise - from what I glean from your posts - it probably is six
of
| one, half a dozen of another. |
| |
| Richard Pike
Richard P/Gang:
I cruise the MKIII/912ULS at what I would call normal cruise for the
912UL and 912ULS, 5,000 rpm, which is about 75% power. Gives me 80 to
85 mph.
High cruise for either model 912 is max continuous, or 5,500 rpm. I
prop the airplane to just bump the red line of 5,500 rpm WOT, straight
and level flight. Gives me the best of both climb and cruise.
Recently I have made some long cross country flights at 4,000 rpm and
65 mph. My fuel burn was 3.5 instead of 5.0 gph. Can't keep CHT and
eng oil temps in the green at low power settings.
I don't understand your explanation of the difference in a two or
three blad prop, but that is ok. I am happy with the set up I have.
I haven't experimented with a two blade Warp, so have nothing to
compare my present performance with. Maybe one of these days Warp
will let me do some two blade testing. I might be surprised, and
maybe I won't be.
john h
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: Building Kolb MK III XTRA !!! |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Jim Baker" <jlbaker@telepath.com>
> their consensus is that
> two blades give better overall performance
Borrowed from Hartzell....
A two-blade propeller is capable of achieving a higher efficiency
than a three-blade propeller , but at the same time it uses less
power and produces less thrust.
If you were to operate a propeller at a lower power setting than that
for which the efficiency is at its peak, you would have a lower thrust
and also a lower efficiency. Likewise if you operate at a higher
power setting, the thrust will be higher but the efficiency is lower
there also. There is therefore an optimum power setting for each
propeller where its efficiency will be highest. If conditions require
more thrust than is available from this optimum power setting, then
the power must be increased and prop efficiency begins to fall off
from its peak value. There reaches a point where a propeller
operating at a power higher than that which results in peak
efficiency has the same efficiency as a prop with more blades
operating at less-than- optimum power. Further increases in power
favor the performance of the propeller with more blades. This is
because the propeller with fewer blades is no longer operating at its
peak efficiency.
Jim Baker
580.788.2779
'71 SV, 492TC
Elmore City, OK
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 |
|
required 4.6, BAYES_44 -0.00, HTML_60_70 0.11, HTML_MESSAGE 0.25)
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Paul Petty" <Lynnp@c-gate.net>
Hey gang,
Getting her done!
Enjoy
http://www.c-gate.net/~ppetty/photos/PB060007.JPG
http://www.c-gate.net/~ppetty/photos/PB060011.JPG
http://www.c-gate.net/~ppetty/photos/PB060012.JPG
http://www.c-gate.net/~ppetty/photos/PB060016.JPG
http://www.c-gate.net/~ppetty/photos/PB060017.JPG
Back to work!
Paul Petty
Building Ms. Dixie
Kolbra/912UL/Warp
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: | FS II Weight and Balance |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Lanny Fetterman <donaho@csrlink.net>
Hi All, I am working on the W&B form for my FS II. Since the leading edge
of the wing is the datum, and the pilot sits in front of the leading edge,
is the arm a negative number? Thanks for the help. Lanny Fetterman
N598LF Do not archive
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 |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: robert bean <slyck@frontiernet.net>
If anyone has a set of TNK's optional steel legs installed
on their MkIIIc I would appreciate a close up photo or two.
-Thanks, BB do not archive
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: | Re: Building Kolb MK III XTRA !!!/Difference in Performance |
of Two and Three Blad Props
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Richard & Martha Neilsen" <NeilsenRM05@comcast.net>
John
It must be nice. I asked Power Fin to sponsor a test of their two bladed hub
on my airplane. They said sure send me $150 I will send you a two bladed
prop hub and you can keep it as long as you want. I wasn't at all happy with
the rough running two bladed prop and it perform as well. I probably need to
run a larger two blade prop to get more performance.
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIIIc
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Hauck">
Maybe one of these days Warp
> will let me do some two blade testing. I might be surprised, and
> maybe I won't be.
>
> john h
>
>
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: | FLAPS ??? Kolb MK III XTRA .... |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Michael Bigelow" <orcabonita@hotmail.com>
Thanks for everyones input on my MK III XTRA project. One very important
thing that someone mentioned is flaps... Which options are available on the
XTRA and which is the best one ? I definately want flaps if possible, but
are the flaperons better on the kolb than the normal flaps on the inside and
ailerons on the outside setup ?
MIKE...
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 |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Richard & Martha Neilsen" <NeilsenRM05@comcast.net>
I have been dealing with a noisy airplane since I lowered the thrust line
with my new engine mount. For most of the summer I have been flying with ear
plugs under my headphones. This has cut the noise but caused communication
problems. I have had some success in reducing the noise but not enough. I
have been considering updated noise canceling headphones but they are
expensive. Yesterday I bought some cheep noise reduction in you ear phones
($20). They work! They cut the noise and boy can I hear the radio. I bought
Radio Shack ear phones they are really Koss "sparkplugs" they aren't that
great but they prove that the concept works. The only problem I'm having is
only one earphone works. I need to find a mono to stereo adapter plug.
If you have a good headset but they don't reduce the noise enough you might
want to consider these ear bud style ear phones for use under the headphone.
They are designed to reduce the out side noise level so that you can hear
music. Some of them have noise canceling cercuittry. Sony makes a line of
reasonable priced units that I'm going to try next. The Sony MDR-NC11 units
are $50-150 depending on where you buy them and have noise canceling, Sony
MDR-51LP or MDR-EX71SL are in the $30-40 range. If you want to spend more
you can pay $400 plus.
Richard Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIIIc
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: FS II Weight and Balance |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Silver Fern Microlights Ltd" <kiwimick@sfmicro.fsnet.co.uk>
Hi Lanny, Yes the value needs to be a negative one.
Mike
Xtra/Jab 2200
110 hrs
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lanny Fetterman" <donaho@csrlink.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: FS II Weight and Balance
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: Lanny Fetterman <donaho@csrlink.net>
>
> Hi All, I am working on the W&B form for my FS II. Since the leading edge
> of the wing is the datum, and the pilot sits in front of the leading edge,
> is the arm a negative number? Thanks for the help. Lanny Fetterman
> N598LF Do not archive
>
>
>
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! --
|