Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:00 AM - MATT DRALLE (russ kinne)
2. 06:43 AM - Re: MKIII trim (Richard Pike)
3. 07:00 AM - Re: Mark III vs Mark III Xtra (Izek Therrien)
4. 07:12 AM - Re: a small step (pat ladd)
5. 08:02 AM - Re: MATT DRALLE (Chris Mallory)
6. 08:28 AM - Re: MATT DRALLE (Ed Chmielewski)
7. 08:47 AM - Re: MATT DRALLE (bryan green)
8. 08:54 AM - Re: MATT DRALLE/Making Unnecessary Changes (John Hauck)
9. 09:36 AM - Re: Apology to all on the Kolb list (pat ladd)
10. 09:51 AM - so sue me! (pat ladd)
11. 10:14 AM - Re: so sue me! (Mitty)
12. 11:00 AM - Re: so sue me! (Dana Labhart)
13. 11:06 AM - The Do N*t Archive Flag and List Content... (Matt Dralle)
14. 01:50 PM - Re: MK lll Trim (Jim Ballenger)
15. 02:42 PM - Re: Aero Vee Engine Kit (Silver Fern Microlights Ltd)
16. 03:24 PM - Re: Aero Vee Engine Kit (Jim Ballenger)
17. 03:27 PM - Re: Aero Vee Engine Kit (dama)
18. 03:29 PM - Re: so sue me! (Jim Ballenger)
19. 03:57 PM - Re: MK lll Trim (John Hauck)
20. 04:16 PM - MKIII Xtra Speeds (Richard & Martha Neilsen)
21. 04:42 PM - Re: Aero Vee Engine Kit/Comparing 912 and Jabiru (John Hauck)
22. 04:48 PM - Re: MKIII Xtra Speeds/Jabiru and 912 Comparison/MKIIIc Speeds (John Hauck)
23. 05:15 PM - Re: MK lll Trim (bryan green)
24. 05:18 PM - Re: MK lll Trim (robert bean)
25. 05:27 PM - Gear Legs (Bob and Jenn B)
26. 05:32 PM - Re: Mark III vs Mark III Xtra (Jim Clayton)
27. 05:39 PM - Re: MK lll Trim (John Hauck)
28. 06:05 PM - List contributions and a question (kfackler)
29. 06:10 PM - Re: List contributions and a question (Matt Dralle)
30. 06:24 PM - Re: MK lll Trim (bryan green)
31. 06:37 PM - Re: MK lll Trim (Cat36Fly@aol.com)
32. 07:11 PM - Rest of The Story (frank & margie)
33. 08:19 PM - Re: Re: MKIII trim (Jim Clayton)
34. 08:33 PM - Re: Mark III vs Mark III Xtra (Richard & Martha Neilsen)
35. 08:55 PM - Re: Web Pages (GeoR38@aol.com)
36. 09:55 PM - Re: Web Pages (Larry Bourne)
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: russ kinne <kinnepix@earthlink.net>
MATT
PLEASE CHANGE THE "DO NOT ARCHIVE" TO SOMETHING MUCH SIMPLER. I
ASSUME YOU READ THE POSTS.
IF XXX OR XXXX HAS UNDESIRABLE CONNOTATIONS -- E.G, PORNO OR BOOZE; WHY
NOT MAKE IT RRR. OR OOO, 0R SOMETHING SIMILAR; YOU CHOOSE.
FOR SOMEONE WITH YOUR TALENTS THIS WOULD ONLY TAKE A MINUTE OR TWO.
PLEASE DO IT NOW!
THANKS FROM US ALL
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: Richard Pike <richard@bcchapel.org>
Sounds to me like a fine plan. One heads up: The rudder and ailerons of the
MKIII are quite susceptible to flutter. Putting my white nav light on the
trailing edge of the rudder caused it to flutter, I had to end up making a
counterweight (vulture knocker) sticking out ahead of the vertical fin to
make it quit. Likewise for the right aileron, I made a ground adjustable
trim tab for the right wingtip, and until I got the factory counterbalances
installed, I had to limit my speeds to less than 85, or the right aileron
would start to buzz.
So if your servos are installed so as to affect the weight of the control
surfaces, plan ahead.
As part of your failure mode planning, after you get things flying,
investigate how the stick pressure changes with two up and no trim assist.
A MKIII with no elevator spring boost and a passenger's weight will soon
test the endurance of your bicep...
Richard Pike
At 08:53 PM 11/14/05 -0800, you wrote:
>--> Kolb-List message posted by: Jim Clayton <jspc78@yahoo.com>
><snip>
>So back to the electric trim. It is currently a great
>idea I need to build and verify. When I have parts
>made and the geometry worked out, I will share it with
>the group. While this trim scheme suits me, several
>have recently pointed out the bungee trim works well
>(and has for 20 years+ on Kolbs) so please don't infer
>just because I mess with the design of my Kolb it's
>because the original is substandard or inferior.
>Kolbs are a stout and well designed family of planes,
>and if testing and failure mode analysis don't
>interest you, KEEP IT STOCK and you won't go wrong.
>
>Ok Scott, keep up the questions; what else you got :-)
> Good luck on your project, do keep us posted on your
>progress.
>
>-Jim
>
>Jim Clayton
>California
>Mark-3X, 912ULS.....Building
>www.quantumwrench.com/Kolb.htm
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: Mark III vs Mark III Xtra |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Izek Therrien" <kolb.list@kolbsport.com>
Hi all,
Some comments on the list have attracted my attention and I think it is
important that I make a clarification. First of all, there is no option
for a larger tail on the Mark III Xtra. The actual tail, horizontal
stabilizer and elevator, has 23 square feet. It is important to
understand that a larger tail volume will not increase stability to the
aircraft. Tail surface areas are inherent to a tight relationship
between the center of gravity, the center of lift, the reference area of
the wing and the relative tail length.
An aircraft must be seen like a system that acts like a balance. To
achieve equilibrium on a balance, the weight on each platter needs to be
identical. It is the same for an aircraft. There is only one tail volume
that will put the aircraft in an equilibrium state which is when all the
moments around the major axis are equal to zero. The tail aspect ratio
is also an important factor that we will skip for now.
The Mark III Xtra was the object of several modifications since its
first market introduction in 2000. Some of these modifications were done
to enable the aircraft in the trainer category and others were done to
ameliorate the aircraft's overall design and flight characteristics. At
Kolb we do encourage you to modify the aircraft on a cosmetic level,
including upholstery, avionics and systems. However, we do not encourage
you to modify the airframe or any of the flying surfaces.
Also, before you can compare flight characteristics between M3Xs, you
must understand that there are 3 major versions of this aircraft and it
is difficult to draw fast conclusions on what makes the aircraft more or
less stable. For instance, the latest version of the aircraft has a
lower wing angle of incidence which affected the wing's downwash and
aircraft's water line. We have also modified the tail area and angle of
incidence to what we believe to be optimum.
If some of you have some great ideas regarding modifications that could
improve the aircraft please feel free to communicate with me at
izek.therrien@kolbsport.com and I will be honored to discuss it with
you.
Best regards,
Izek Therrien
www.tnkolbaircraft.com
www.kolbsport.com
--
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
2005-11-15
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: a small step |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "pat ladd" <pj.ladd@btinternet.com>
The noise restrictions placed on you folks in your country would put
most of us in the States out of the flying business.>>
Hi John,
Noise regs in Germany are MUCH tighter. I don`t know how they operate at
all.
There is some talk of introducing an Experimental Cat. here, that would free
things up a bit.
Pat
do not archive
--
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
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 |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Chris Mallory" <wcm@tampabay.rr.com>
Russ,
How about just "DNA" instead of "do not archive"?
I don't think that DNA would come up otherewise on this site.
Chris Mallory
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "russ kinne" <kinnepix@earthlink.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: MATT DRALLE
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: russ kinne <kinnepix@earthlink.net>
>
> MATT
> PLEASE CHANGE THE "DO NOT ARCHIVE" TO SOMETHING MUCH SIMPLER. I
> ASSUME YOU READ THE POSTS.
> IF XXX OR XXXX HAS UNDESIRABLE CONNOTATIONS -- E.G, PORNO OR BOOZE; WHY
> NOT MAKE IT RRR. OR OOO, 0R SOMETHING SIMILAR; YOU CHOOSE.
> FOR SOMEONE WITH YOUR TALENTS THIS WOULD ONLY TAKE A MINUTE OR TWO.
> PLEASE DO IT NOW!
> THANKS FROM US ALL
>
>
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Ed Chmielewski" <edchmiel@mindspring.com>
Hi Russ,
That 'cap locks' thing is a bear too, huh? ;
)
Since we're looking for a substitute, and since it's the Kolb list,
why not 'KKK'?
Oops, never mind....
Ed in JXN (MI)
MkII/503
Do not archive.
----- Original Message -----
From: "russ kinne" <kinnepix@earthlink.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: MATT DRALLE
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: russ kinne <kinnepix@earthlink.net>
>
> MATT
> PLEASE CHANGE THE "DO NOT ARCHIVE" TO SOMETHING MUCH SIMPLER. I
> ASSUME YOU READ THE POSTS.
> IF XXX OR XXXX HAS UNDESIRABLE CONNOTATIONS -- E.G, PORNO OR BOOZE; WHY
> NOT MAKE IT RRR. OR OOO, 0R SOMETHING SIMILAR; YOU CHOOSE.
> FOR SOMEONE WITH YOUR TALENTS THIS WOULD ONLY TAKE A MINUTE OR TWO.
> PLEASE DO IT NOW!
> THANKS FROM US ALL
>
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 |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: bryan green <lgreen1@sc.rr.com>
Would it be easier to just trash everything except the post with archive
at the bottom?
Bryan Green
Do not archive
Chris Mallory wrote:
>--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Chris Mallory" <wcm@tampabay.rr.com>
>
>Russ,
>How about just "DNA" instead of "do not archive"?
>I don't think that DNA would come up otherewise on this site.
>
>Chris Mallory
>
>do not archive
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "russ kinne" <kinnepix@earthlink.net>
>To: <kolb-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: Kolb-List: MATT DRALLE
>
>
>
>
>>--> Kolb-List message posted by: russ kinne <kinnepix@earthlink.net>
>>
>>MATT
>>PLEASE CHANGE THE "DO NOT ARCHIVE" TO SOMETHING MUCH SIMPLER. I
>>ASSUME YOU READ THE POSTS.
>>IF XXX OR XXXX HAS UNDESIRABLE CONNOTATIONS -- E.G, PORNO OR BOOZE; WHY
>>NOT MAKE IT RRR. OR OOO, 0R SOMETHING SIMILAR; YOU CHOOSE.
>>FOR SOMEONE WITH YOUR TALENTS THIS WOULD ONLY TAKE A MINUTE OR TWO.
>>PLEASE DO IT NOW!
>>THANKS FROM US ALL
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
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: MATT DRALLE/Making Unnecessary Changes |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
| How about just "DNA" | Chris Mallory
|
| do not archive
Morning Gang:
I've been sitting back watching this whole thing evolve. Kinda
interesting.
All came about, if I understand correctly, because someone got their
feelings hurt cause someone made a suggestion to keep the Kolb List
running smoothly. I agree with that. We have to be self policing or
this List will go down the tubes just like a lot of other "good"
lists.
I haven't learned much since joining this List, some time ago, 1998, I
believe, the other Century. :-) But I have learned that email is one
of the most difficult mediums for corresponding, especially folks like
us. What I write and my intentions for writing it may not come across
to "all" readers the same way. Some will misinterpret something and
get their feelings hurt. Guess I am the same way, at times, when I
don't exactly understand or misinterpret what the writer intended.
As far as making changes, I recommend, as one litttle individual, that
we leave things the way they are. Doesn't make sense to me to make
change for change's sake. To type "DO NOT ARCHIVE" is not that
difficult nor time consuming, even with one finger. I have only seen
a few of the many members of this group indicate that there should be
a change. I disagree with anyone speaking for me or for the other
members of the Kolb List that have remained silent during the
discussion, by a few, of hurt feelings and changing procedures. I
personally do not think anyone is qualified to speak for anyone else
on this List, especially mine, e.g.,
"PLEASE DO IT NOW!
THANKS FROM US ALL"
Let's all try not to be so sensitive, especially me. ;-) My
understanding of the List is not that all should agree on anything or
everything, but express our experience, ideas, and what we do with our
Kolb aircraft. Then we can make our own choice of what to use,
believe, or enjoy. If there is a subject we don't particularly have
any interest in, all we have to do is hit the "delete key".
Times a wasting. Got to get ready to fly to Jackson, MS, to see my
girl friend, also Paul Petty's Kolbra in Raleigh, MS, then on out to
Beaumont, TX, to meet up with John W and Gary H to do a little Texas
flying, the Last Flight of 2005.
Ya'll play purty now, ya hear!
john h
MKIII/912ULS
Titus, AL
DO NOT ARCHIVE
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: Apology to all on the Kolb list |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "pat ladd" <pj.ladd@btinternet.com>
Apparently I've violated some secret elevator trim handshake and have left
at least one person offended>>
Hi there,
dont disappear in a cloud of smoke because someone expresses disapproval.
Its not your fault, it is the way the stupid list is set up. If you do NOT
put `do not archive` on your message it will be archived and it will make
it more difficult to make a search because of the accumulated bumph. I know.
I do it.
In common with most lists with an archive facility it SHOULD be set up the
opposite way round so that messages which the sender wishes to be kept
should be marked `archive`. That way if you forget the magic instruction the
message disappears and everyone is happy.
Dont give up the ship. There is great wisdom available here at the touch of
a button.
Pat
do not archive
--
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
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 |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "pat ladd" <pj.ladd@btinternet.com>
Hi All,
the recent posts about liabilty brings this to mind.
How do you deal with taking a passenger up with you?. I usually make them sign
a `blood chit` which in effect states Flying is dangerous. If you get hurt it
is not my fault.
Heaven knows if it would hold up in a court of law but at least you have something
stating that they were warned.
Unfortunately the world today is mainly populated by idiots who have never fallen
out of a tree, played on an ashphalt playground and grazed their knees, jumped
off a roof with an umbrella or any of the normal things we did as kids, and
they do not expect Mother Nature or Isaac Newton to jump out of the woodwork
and bite them.
Talking to the CFI of my old gliding club recently he said that when we started
the club everyone assumed that someone who wanted to join was a ware that they
could get hurt. Now, he said, we have to take them into the Club Office and
explain to them that this is a dangerous sport and sometimes people get killed
and get them to sign a form stating that they have been warned.
Cheers
Pat
do not archive
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
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 |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Mitty <benny_bee_01@yahoo.com>
Dont know about jumpig off the roof with
umbrella.Where i was growing up we lived on the 4th
floor of 22 story building! lol
do not archive
--- pat ladd <pj.ladd@btinternet.com> wrote:
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "pat ladd"
> <pj.ladd@btinternet.com>
>
> Hi All,
>
> the recent posts about liabilty brings this to mind.
>
> How do you deal with taking a passenger up with
> you?. I usually make them sign a `blood chit` which
> in effect states Flying is dangerous. If you get
> hurt it is not my fault.
> Heaven knows if it would hold up in a court of law
> but at least you have something stating that they
> were warned.
> Unfortunately the world today is mainly populated by
> idiots who have never fallen out of a tree, played
> on an ashphalt playground and grazed their knees,
> jumped off a roof with an umbrella or any of the
> normal things we did as kids, and they do not expect
> Mother Nature or Isaac Newton to jump out of the
> woodwork and bite them.
>
> Talking to the CFI of my old gliding club recently
> he said that when we started the club everyone
> assumed that someone who wanted to join was a ware
> that they could get hurt. Now, he said, we have to
> take them into the Club Office and explain to them
> that this is a dangerous sport and sometimes people
> get killed and get them to sign a form stating that
> they have been warned.
>
> Cheers
>
> Pat
>
> do not archive
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>
>
>
> Click on
> about
> provided
> www.buildersbooks.com,
> Admin.
> _->
> browse
> Subscriptions page,
> FAQ,
>
>
>
>
>
>
__________________________________
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 |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Dana Labhart" <njlabhart@kih.net>
I haven't read the posts about passenger liability, but I do have
some personal insight on law suits. I was just a gnat's butt away
from being sued. I really don't understand why I wasn't. Things
I would advise...
Have insurance.
Have a will.
Make sure you have survivorship on your house deed.
Have an attorney draw up a release for passengers to sign.
As a builder, you will always be liable.
Hope this helps someone.
Dana Labhart
do not archive
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: | The Do N*t Archive Flag and List Content... |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Matt Dralle <dralle@matronics.com>
Kolb-Listers,
The Do N*t Archive flag's specific text serves multiple purposes. Obviously, the
first one is to detour messages of inconsequence around the archiving process.
But the words "do n*t archive" serve also to educate new members on the available
functionality. Since nobody seems to read the FAQ or List Usage Guidelines,
how else are people going to learn about the feature? ;-)
While I do monitor all of the Lists here on Matronics, I don't always read every
message. I also don't like to step in and "moderate" discussions that may be
getting a little out of hand (like lately). I believe there is significant
value in a discussion forum that is open to all and that polices itself. I publish
the List Usage Guidelines once a month for a reason and that reason is that
I *expect* everyone to graciously abide by them.
Guys, the power of the Internet is its global connection of people and resources.
However, its weakness is also this global culture. When you're posting a
message, stop and think about how it might sound to someone from a different part
of the country or even the world. We each have a responsibility to assure
that the messages we post are not offensive and do not contain personal attacks.
So let's get back to discussions that pertain to the aircrafts we love, and stop
nit picking each others choice of words. And one final thought on the Do N*t
Archive flag. This feature was originally conceived of to allow time-relative
messages to be kept out of the archives (e.g. fly-in at my place this coming
weekend, etc.) Frankly, if people are using the Do N*t Archive flag often,
they might do well to reconsider the content they are posting to the hundreds
of people subscribed to the List...
Best regards,
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Admin.
Matt G Dralle | Matronics | PO Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551
925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle@matronics.com Email
http://www.matronics.com/ WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft
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: "Jim Ballenger" <ulpilot@cavtel.net>
Larry
My plane acts the same way. One thing I have started to do recently, is to
remove all the trim on final so I have a better feel/control of the elevator
on landing.
Jim Ballenger
MK III X 582
Virginia Beach, VA
Do Not Archive
----- Original Message -----
From: <Cat36Fly@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: MK lll Trim
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: Cat36Fly@aol.com
>
> Jim;
>
> Got an hour tonight in calm conditions. At 5500 rpm I can hold a steady
> pitch attitude but when I throttle back to 4500-5000 the nose starts to
> rise. I'm
> sure it's a combination of engine thrust line and my weight (or lack of).
> I
> plan to add a tab and set it up for a bit of nose down when the trim
> handle is
> all the way forward (cable relaxed).
>
> Larry
>
> do not archive
>
>
>
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: Aero Vee Engine Kit |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Silver Fern Microlights Ltd" <kiwimick@sfmicro.fsnet.co.uk>
Hi John,
The AeroVee is a great engine and Sonex are excellent to deal with however I
do not think it will work too well on the Xtra.
I still feel the best option is the new Jab2200 (85hp).
I have just completed a 2300 mile trip around France displaying the Xtra.
The average air temp was 35 degC.
At Max weight it is climbing at 800 fpm, cruising at 70-75kt, there are no
over heating problems on this engine at all, I have even done a full power
climb from sea level to 6000' with no probs. I think it is quieter than a
912 just as smooth, more economical, it is lighter and cheaper and as
reliable.
Mike
Xtra/Jab2200
116 hrs and still smiling
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Abbott" <jacksbird@charter.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: Aero Vee Engine Kit
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Abbott" <jacksbird@charter.net>
>
> I am doing some research on engine options for the Mark III X I am
> building. I came across a very affordable Aero Vee Engine Kit by Aero
> Conversions, Inc.. It is a fraction of the price ( $5,700) of a Jab 2200
> ot a Rotax 912.
>
> 1. Does anyone have any experience with this engine and/or assembling the
> kit?
> 2 What is your experience with using it on a Mark III? Is it a good match
> for the aircraft?
>
> Thanks for your comments.
> John Abbott
> Building Mk3X
>
>
>
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: Aero Vee Engine Kit |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Jim Ballenger" <ulpilot@cavtel.net>
Mike
Have you had any overheating problems on the ground from having to wait for
landing traffic or waiting in line to take off?
Jim Ballenger
MK III X 582
Virginia Beach, VA
Do Not Archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "Silver Fern Microlights Ltd" <kiwimick@sfmicro.fsnet.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Aero Vee Engine Kit
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Silver Fern Microlights Ltd"
> <kiwimick@sfmicro.fsnet.co.uk>
>
> Hi John,
> The AeroVee is a great engine and Sonex are excellent to deal with however
> I
> do not think it will work too well on the Xtra.
> I still feel the best option is the new Jab2200 (85hp).
> I have just completed a 2300 mile trip around France displaying the Xtra.
> The average air temp was 35 degC.
> At Max weight it is climbing at 800 fpm, cruising at 70-75kt, there are no
> over heating problems on this engine at all, I have even done a full power
> climb from sea level to 6000' with no probs. I think it is quieter than a
> 912 just as smooth, more economical, it is lighter and cheaper and as
> reliable.
>
> Mike
> Xtra/Jab2200
> 116 hrs and still smiling
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Abbott" <jacksbird@charter.net>
> To: <kolb-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Kolb-List: Aero Vee Engine Kit
>
>
>> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Abbott" <jacksbird@charter.net>
>>
>> I am doing some research on engine options for the Mark III X I am
>> building. I came across a very affordable Aero Vee Engine Kit by Aero
>> Conversions, Inc.. It is a fraction of the price ( $5,700) of a Jab 2200
>> ot a Rotax 912.
>>
>> 1. Does anyone have any experience with this engine and/or assembling the
>> kit?
>> 2 What is your experience with using it on a Mark III? Is it a good match
>> for the aircraft?
>>
>> Thanks for your comments.
>> John Abbott
>> Building Mk3X
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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: Aero Vee Engine Kit |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "dama" <dama@mindspring.com>
Do you have any pics from your trip, Mike? Sounds like a great adventure...
Kip
----- Original Message -----
From: "Silver Fern Microlights Ltd" <kiwimick@sfmicro.fsnet.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Aero Vee Engine Kit
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Silver Fern Microlights Ltd"
<kiwimick@sfmicro.fsnet.co.uk>
>
> Hi John,
> The AeroVee is a great engine and Sonex are excellent to deal with however
I
> do not think it will work too well on the Xtra.
> I still feel the best option is the new Jab2200 (85hp).
> I have just completed a 2300 mile trip around France displaying the Xtra.
> The average air temp was 35 degC.
> At Max weight it is climbing at 800 fpm, cruising at 70-75kt, there are no
> over heating problems on this engine at all, I have even done a full power
> climb from sea level to 6000' with no probs. I think it is quieter than a
> 912 just as smooth, more economical, it is lighter and cheaper and as
> reliable.
>
> Mike
> Xtra/Jab2200
> 116 hrs and still smiling
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Abbott" <jacksbird@charter.net>
> To: <kolb-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Kolb-List: Aero Vee Engine Kit
>
>
> > --> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Abbott" <jacksbird@charter.net>
> >
> > I am doing some research on engine options for the Mark III X I am
> > building. I came across a very affordable Aero Vee Engine Kit by Aero
> > Conversions, Inc.. It is a fraction of the price ( $5,700) of a Jab 2200
> > ot a Rotax 912.
> >
> > 1. Does anyone have any experience with this engine and/or assembling
the
> > kit?
> > 2 What is your experience with using it on a Mark III? Is it a good
match
> > for the aircraft?
> >
> > Thanks for your comments.
> > John Abbott
> > Building Mk3X
> >
> >
> >
>
>
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 |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Jim Ballenger" <ulpilot@cavtel.net>
Dana
Thanks for the info. I am glad you were not sued. It sounds like Norm's
passenger accepted responsibility for his own decision to fly.
Jim Ballenger
MK III X 582
Virginia Beach, VA
Do Not Archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dana Labhart" <njlabhart@kih.net>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: so sue me!
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Dana Labhart" <njlabhart@kih.net>
>
> I haven't read the posts about passenger liability, but I do have
> some personal insight on law suits. I was just a gnat's butt away
> from being sued. I really don't understand why I wasn't. Things
> I would advise...
>
> Have insurance.
> Have a will.
> Make sure you have survivorship on your house deed.
> Have an attorney draw up a release for passengers to sign.
> As a builder, you will always be liable.
>
> Hope this helps someone.
>
> Dana Labhart
>
> do not archive
>
>
>
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 |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
|One thing I have started to do recently, is to
| remove all the trim on final so I have a better feel/control of the
elevator
| on landing.
| Jim Ballenger
Hi Jim B/Gang:
I do that too. Pull off all forced elevator trim when the power comes
off. I still shoot my landings with closed throttle, its a 912. This
helps me set up my approaches should I lose the engine on final. If I
do, I should be able to make my designated touch down point on the air
strip. My MKIII is not a Cessna 172, it is a home built experimental
that is slow, draggy, and willing to haul anything I can put in it.
When the power comes back in, the nose up trim also comes back in.
Seems to be caused by high thrust line pusher configuration.
Take care,
john h
MKIII/912ULS
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: | MKIII Xtra Speeds |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Richard & Martha Neilsen" <NeilsenRM05@comcast.net>
I see in the literature that the Xtra is 10MPH faster than the classic. What
are those of you that have the Xtra actually seeing, with say a Rotax 80HP?
What about wheel pants do they help any? I know our planes aren't designed
to go fast but at our speeds every little bit helps. It becomes much more of
a concern when you are flying with a group that have 100HP engines in their
Kolbs.
The attached report with a 85HP Jabru indicates the same speeds or slightly
slower than the standard 80HP Rotax in a classic. I have been saying high
RPM direct drive engines take more HP to get the same thrust. Is this a
conformation or isn't the Xtra any faster than the classic.
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIIIc
----- Original Message -----
From: "Silver Fern Microlights Ltd" <kiwimick@sfmicro.fsnet.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Aero Vee Engine Kit
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Silver Fern Microlights Ltd"
> <kiwimick@sfmicro.fsnet.co.uk>
>
> Hi John,
> The AeroVee is a great engine and Sonex are excellent to deal with however
> I
> do not think it will work too well on the Xtra.
> I still feel the best option is the new Jab2200 (85hp).
> I have just completed a 2300 mile trip around France displaying the Xtra.
> The average air temp was 35 degC.
> At Max weight it is climbing at 800 fpm, cruising at 70-75kt, there are no
> over heating problems on this engine at all, I have even done a full power
> climb from sea level to 6000' with no probs. I think it is quieter than a
> 912 just as smooth, more economical, it is lighter and cheaper and as
> reliable.
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: Aero Vee Engine Kit/Comparing 912 and Jabiru |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
| I still feel the best option is the new Jab2200 (85hp).
|I have even done a full power
| climb from sea level to 6000' with no probs.
I think it is quieter than a
| 912 just as smooth, more economical, it is lighter and cheaper and
as
| reliable.
|
| Mike
| Xtra/Jab2200
| 116 hrs and still smiling
Hi Mike/Gang:
Good to hear from our neighbor across the pond.
Sorry, but I feel the best option for the MKIIIx is the 912ULS and
then the 912UL. Unfortunately, I have no experience flying the Jabiru
on a Kolb. However, I have had the opportunity to fly my buddy John
W's wing many hours when his Kolbra was powered by a Jabiru. Our
cruise speeds were about the same. However, take off and climb out,
there was no comparison between his Jabiru powered Kolbra and my
912ULS powered MKIIIc. Remembering, the Kolbra, MKIIIc, and the
MKIIIx, all utilize the same wing section, if we don't include
ailerons and flaps. All that changed when John W saw the light and
installed a 912ULS on his Kolbra. Woe is me. I am now left in his
dust, on take offs and cruise. Amazing, the difference in performance
between the two power packages.
It is not unusual for John W and I to take off and climb WOT for one
or two hours while crossing the Rocky Mountains. We do not
necessarily find it necessary to seek out passes to cross most any
mountain range in the Lower 48, Canada, or Alaska. Out in the Western
part of the US, field elevations are usually over 6,000 feet. The
field elevation of our Monument Valley Flyin airstrip is around 6,000
feet. Normal altitude for crossing the Rockies is 14,000 to 15,000
feet MSL. I might add, on take off my MKIII is pushing 1,200 lbs take
off weight.
I think the prop dictates the degree of "smoothness" in our engines.
Warp Drive props do a really good job in this area. They also seem to
be maintainence free. Once I get mine dialed in, there isn't anything
else to do but fly.
I mentioned I have never flown a Jabiru powered aircraft, so I don't
have any experience except what I have observed. One morning in
particular comes to mind. There were five of us on a flight to Kitty
Hawk, NC. We spent the night at Wallace, NC, not far from the
Atlantic Ocean. The airport was locked solid in fog and very heavy
due when we got out of our tents the next morning. When we got ready
to crank and depart for Kitty Hawk, all the Rotax powered aircraft, to
include one 582, fired up, waiting for the engine oil temps to hit
120. The one Jabiru powered Kolbra seemed to have a slight problem.
Would not start. Absolutely did not fire the first time. Seems the
heavy moisture laden air had caused condensation in the two
distributor caps of the Jabiru. John W had to pull them both, dry
them out, then we were ready to proceed on our flight.
From what I read, the Jabiru is a far more maintenance intensive
engine than the 912 series engines. That for me is a negative point.
On some of my longer flights I would have to take time off to adjust
valves, retorque heads, etc. These maintenance items arre not
required by the 912's.
I believe I heard the 912 was not approved for use on your homebuilt
aircraft in Great Britain. This means you must use another power
system. I do not think any power system that does not utilize a power
reduction system will ever match the performance of the 912 series
engines.
Please understand I am not trying to pick your engine apart, but
simply proud to tell folks about my power plant, showing differences
between the two.
I do not know if you have flown a Kolb with a 912UL or a 912ULS. No
comparison to anything else available.
john h
MKIII - 2,400+ hours
912ULS - 1,050+ hours
912UL - 1,135+ hours
582 - 220 hours
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: MKIII Xtra Speeds/Jabiru and 912 Comparison/MKIIIc Speeds |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
| I see in the literature that the Xtra is 10MPH faster than the
classic.
| The attached report with a 85HP Jabru indicates the same speeds or
slightly
| slower than the standard 80HP Rotax in a classic.
|
| Rick Neilsen
Hi Rick/Gang:
Seems Mike's Jabiru powered Xtra cruises about the same as my old
MKIIIc, 70 to 75 knots. Of course, my old bird is carrying a little
more weight than Mike's, I am sure. Take off weight of 1,200 lbs when
fuel is topped off, all my gear is aboard, and me.
I haven't had a chance to fly with Xtras here in the States, but I
imagine they will fly circles around me. Only one way to find out.
Find some that will fly with me and Miss P'fer. ;-)
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 |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: bryan green <lgreen1@sc.rr.com>
Hi John and all,
When I trim a 172 for best glide with power off I roll the trim
almost all way nose up upon adding power you have to hold the nose down
till you get the trim out. If I remember correctly on my Firestar the
power would force the nose down more and I thought it would be the same
on the mark III. Can you educate me when you get time.
Bryan Green Elgin SC
Firestar 447 BRS Soon to be flying again
John Hauck wrote:
>--> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
>
>|One thing I have started to do recently, is to
>| remove all the trim on final so I have a better feel/control of the
>elevator
>| on landing.
>| Jim Ballenger
>
>Hi Jim B/Gang:
>
>I do that too. Pull off all forced elevator trim when the power comes
>off. I still shoot my landings with closed throttle, its a 912. This
>helps me set up my approaches should I lose the engine on final. If I
>do, I should be able to make my designated touch down point on the air
>strip. My MKIII is not a Cessna 172, it is a home built experimental
>that is slow, draggy, and willing to haul anything I can put in it.
>
>When the power comes back in, the nose up trim also comes back in.
>Seems to be caused by high thrust line pusher configuration.
>
>Take care,
>
>john h
>MKIII/912ULS
>
>
>
>
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: robert bean <slyck@frontiernet.net>
So far I've left the trim at zero and had only a slight pull (back) on
the stick to maintain
level with the exception of the 80 lb salt bag test. In that case I
guessed at about
3 notches and was right on. My only problem is that with my seat in
the "way back"
position and my harness where it should be, there's no way I can reach
the
stock lever handle. -Better guess right before I leave.
I noticed Izek's mention that the newer Xtras have less incidence in
the wings.
If this does give any improvement my guess is that the cabin shape
fights
the wing in the earlier config and this improves total lift. The only
other way
to combat this thrust line departure would be a small fixed lifting
canard stuck
through the nose bowl.
-BB, world's slowest, cheapest MkIII :)
archive if you like
On 15, Nov 2005, at 6:57 PM, John Hauck wrote:
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
>
> elevator
>
> Hi Jim B/Gang:
>
> I do that too. Pull off all forced elevator trim when the power comes
> off. I still shoot my landings with closed throttle, its a 912. This
> helps me set up my approaches should I lose the engine on final. If I
> do, I should be able to make my designated touch down point on the air
> strip. My MKIII is not a Cessna 172, it is a home built experimental
> that is slow, draggy, and willing to haul anything I can put in it.
>
> When the power comes back in, the nose up trim also comes back in.
> Seems to be caused by high thrust line pusher configuration.
>
> Take care,
>
> john h
> MKIII/912ULS
>
>
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 |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Bob and Jenn B" <tabberdd@hotmail.com>
Ok, time for some more help. A good point was brought up about when I
replace the gear legs and axle assemblies on my Mk II that the angle be
correct for the wheels. The 1 1/4" gear legs are from the firestar and the
standard axle assemblies from Kolb are welded at too much of an angle
because the mk II sits low compared to the firestar. Travis at TNK said he
would weld whatever angle I wanted. What do I want?
It was suggested that I use the Mk III angle. I never looked closely
before, does a standard Mk III sit at the same height as the Mk II? If
someone with a Mk III could measure the distance between the gear at the
axles and the height from one socket perpendicular to the ground, I would
appreciate it. That would give me an idea of how the two compare and if it
would be close enough. I'm also looking at the length of the gear leg from
the socket to the axle.
Thanks (I believe I will archive so others may benefit in the future even if
I do get attacked by a certain few)
Bob
Mk II SCSI
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: | Mark III vs Mark III Xtra |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Jim Clayton <jspc78@yahoo.com>
Hi Izek/all,
Not sure where you get your information, but I have a
horizontal stabilizer that is larger than the standard
triangle shaped stab. I got the drawings from TNK. I
am *only* talking about a larger horizontal stabilizer
(NOT the elevator!). No other flight, or control
surface has been changed. When Barnaby Wainfan was
commissioned to design the Xtra, he added more wetted
area at the front of the fuse since the new nose is
larger. For that and several other reasons he chose
to increase the area of the horizontal stabilizer.
When I met him at Oshkosh in 2003 he was teaching the
aerodynamics class some on this list have taken,
dealing with very basic aerodynamic principles. I
asked him about his choice of larger horizontal
stabilizer, and he explained his reasoning that
brought him to increasing the area of the stab. As a
former flight instructor I applied my experience to
his statements, then consulted a copy of "Aerodynamics
For Naval Aviators" (most CFI's keep a copy) and I
found his statements and reasoning on this topic to be
cogent and applicable.
As the CG moves aft, closer to the limit (and
beyond!), both static and dynamic pitch stability
become more of a factor to the pilot, and important to
the designer, and can be positively managed through a
variety of changes in the airframe proportions. Since
I like the proportions of kolbs, I looked for a tested
way to increase pitch stability since several folks
having flown both stab sizes agreed the smaller stab
was a little more work to fly (less static stability),
and looking at the stab, I found the stab "seemed to
small" to provide the stability I wanted. I looked
for scientific corroboration, and found it in my
conversations with Barnaby, and consulting my texts,
which both agreed with my hunch.
Because of that I chose to make the stab larger, using
TNK drawings. I can only guess at why TNK chose to
change some of Barnaby's design, but a careful and
detailed inquiry on stab size failed to turn up any
sound aerodynamic principles in the decision making
process. In my line of work I often see large
organizations follow practices and procedures that
don't stand up to scrutiny, but still continue to
occur because "we have always done it that way". I
appreciate TNK keeping our planes viable and kits
available, and admire the folks I've met, working at
TNK, for their honesty, and desire to help.
What is the downside to enlarging the stab?
Increasing the wetted area will increase drag. On an
aircraft going less than 100mph, this should be
trivial (this is a guess, but flight testing will
verify). Small increase in weight. That will move
the CG aft some tiny fraction, easily managed since I
can move things around in the plane once weighted.
The plane becomes less capable of aerobatic
maneuvers...ok with me ;-)
In summary, I completely agree changing any aspect of
the flight surfaces, or affecting the balance of the
flight and control surfaces requires much research and
diligence on the part of the factory, or builder, and
should never be undertaken lightly. After a careful
and detailed inquiry in the question of the Stab size,
I chose to go with the stab as designed by the
designer of the plane.
Izek: If you would like to take issue with my
assertions regarding aerodynamic theory and it's
application, feel free to contact me directly since I
suspect we have taken up enough of our fellow listers
time with this :-)
-Jim
Jim Clayton
California
Mark-3X, 912ULS.....Building
www.quantumwrench.com/Kolb.htm
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com] On
Behalf Of Izek Therrien
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Mark III vs Mark III Xtra
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Izek Therrien"
--> <kolb.list@kolbsport.com>
Hi all,
Some comments on the list have attracted my attention
and I think it is important that I make a
clarification. First of all, there is no option for a
larger tail on the Mark III Xtra. The actual tail,
horizontal stabilizer and elevator, has 23 square
feet. It is important to understand that a larger tail
volume will not increase stability to the aircraft.
Tail surface areas are inherent to a tight
relationship between the center of gravity, the center
of lift, the reference area of the wing and the
relative tail length.
An aircraft must be seen like a system that acts like
a balance. To achieve equilibrium on a balance, the
weight on each platter needs to be identical. It is
the same for an aircraft. There is only one tail
volume that will put the aircraft in an equilibrium
state which is when all the moments around the major
axis are equal to zero. The tail aspect ratio is also
an important factor that we will skip for now.
The Mark III Xtra was the object of several
modifications since its first market introduction in
2000. Some of these modifications were done to enable
the aircraft in the trainer category and others were
done to ameliorate the aircraft's overall design and
flight characteristics. At Kolb we do encourage you to
modify the aircraft on a cosmetic level, including
upholstery, avionics and systems. However, we do not
encourage you to modify the airframe or any of the
flying surfaces.
Also, before you can compare flight characteristics
between M3Xs, you must understand that there are 3
major versions of this aircraft and it is difficult to
draw fast conclusions on what makes the aircraft more
or less stable. For instance, the latest version of
the aircraft has a lower wing angle of incidence which
affected the wing's downwash and aircraft's water
line. We have also modified the tail area and angle of
incidence to what we believe to be optimum.
If some of you have some great ideas regarding
modifications that could improve the aircraft please
feel free to communicate with me at
izek.therrien@kolbsport.com and I will be honored to
discuss it with you.
Best regards,
Izek Therrien
www.tnkolbaircraft.com
www.kolbsport.com
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 |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
If I remember correctly on my Firestar the
| power would force the nose down more and I thought it would be the
same
| on the mark III.
| Bryan Green Elgin SC
| | >I do that too. Pull off all forced elevator trim when the power
comes
| >off.
| >Seems to be caused by high thrust line pusher configuration.
Bryan/Gang:
Thought that is what I said in my post. Power off I need no "nose up
trim". Power on I need to compensate for the high thrust line pushing
the nose down by adding "nose up trim".
Don't know what else to say about that. ;-)
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: | List contributions and a question |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "kfackler" <kfackler@ameritech.net>
> Won't you take a moment and assure that your name is on that List of
> Contributors (LOC)?
Okey dokey, check's in the mail to the Livermore address.
In the meantime, do you ever create new list groups on request? If so, what
are the requirements for that?
-Ken Fackler
Kolb Mark II / A722KWF
Rochester MI
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: List contributions and a question |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Matt Dralle <dralle@matronics.com>
At 06:04 PM 11/15/2005 Tuesday, you wrote:
>--> Kolb-List message posted by: "kfackler" <kfackler@ameritech.net>
>
>> Won't you take a moment and assure that your name is on that List of
>> Contributors (LOC)?
>
>Okey dokey, check's in the mail to the Livermore address.
>
>In the meantime, do you ever create new list groups on request? If so, what
>are the requirements for that?
>
>-Ken Fackler
>Kolb Mark II / A722KWF
>Rochester MI
Thank you for the Contribution, Ken. Much appreciated!
Yes, I do add new Lists upon request. Well, within reason, of course. If you're
looking to add a List for a design or manufacture that isn't currently represented,
let me know and we'll see what we can work out.
Thanks again for the List Contribution!
Matt Dralle
List Admin.
Matt G Dralle | Matronics | PO Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551
925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle@matronics.com Email
http://www.matronics.com/ WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft
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 |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: bryan green <lgreen1@sc.rr.com>
Got you John, I miss read your post thanks.
Bryan Green
Do not archive
John Hauck wrote:
>--> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
>
> If I remember correctly on my Firestar the
>| power would force the nose down more and I thought it would be the
>same
>| on the mark III.
>| Bryan Green Elgin SC
>
>| | >I do that too. Pull off all forced elevator trim when the power
>comes
>| >off.
>
>| >Seems to be caused by high thrust line pusher configuration.
>
>
>Bryan/Gang:
>
>Thought that is what I said in my post. Power off I need no "nose up
>trim". Power on I need to compensate for the high thrust line pushing
>the nose down by adding "nose up trim".
>
>Don't know what else to say about that. ;-)
>
>john h
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Cat36Fly@aol.com
Jim:
Added a tab to the elevator today (probably much bigger than I need) that I
can trim down. Also repitched my prop down to 9 degrees from 9.5. Now I'm
waiting for the winds to die. It blew a ton up here today so there was no flying.
Larry Tasker
do not archive
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: | Rest of The Story |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "frank & margie" <frank-margie@worldnet.att.net>
He's a better stick than I am too, I wouldn't try it either. He's also very current,
flies more than probably anybody on the field. And he's only 140 lbs,
which helps. But the outcome probably would have been different with anything
but a Kolb. (My Flightstar won't climb like that!) Check your splitters------
Frank
--------------------------------------------------
He did a wing-over at low altitude with an engine stuck at 3/4 throttle ??
(did I remember that part right ??) Hooo-eeeee...........better man than I
am, Charley Brown. Lar. 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 |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Jim Clayton <jspc78@yahoo.com>
Hi Richard/all,
Thanks for the info: I have been considering only
electric trimming the elevator to avoid the risk of
flutter on the rudder. Has anyone experienced flutter
in a Kolb elevator? I do have the balance weights on
the ailerons. I am very impressed with your website,
and do recall the pictures of the balance weight on
the rudder. Good point on the failure of the trim,
and maintaining attitude with arm strength. I have
considered some stipped down version of the bungee
trim in case of electric trim failure...not sure yet
what makes the most sense.
-Jim
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com] On
Behalf Of Richard Pike
Subject: Kolb-List: Re: MKIII trim
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Richard Pike
<richard@bcchapel.org>
Sounds to me like a fine plan. One heads up: The
rudder and ailerons of the
MKIII are quite susceptible to flutter. Putting my
white nav light on the
trailing edge of the rudder caused it to flutter, I
had to end up making a
counterweight (vulture knocker) sticking out ahead of
the vertical fin to
make it quit. Likewise for the right aileron, I made a
ground adjustable
trim tab for the right wingtip, and until I got the
factory counterbalances
installed, I had to limit my speeds to less than 85,
or the right aileron
would start to buzz.
So if your servos are installed so as to affect the
weight of the control
surfaces, plan ahead.
As part of your failure mode planning, after you get
things flying,
investigate how the stick pressure changes with two up
and no trim assist.
A MKIII with no elevator spring boost and a
passenger's weight will soon
test the endurance of your bicep...
Richard Pike
At 08:53 PM 11/14/05 -0800, you wrote:
>--> Kolb-List message posted by: Jim Clayton
<jspc78@yahoo.com>
><snip>
>So back to the electric trim. It is currently a
great
>idea I need to build and verify. When I have parts
>made and the geometry worked out, I will share it
with
>the group. While this trim scheme suits me, several
>have recently pointed out the bungee trim works well
>(and has for 20 years+ on Kolbs) so please don't
infer
>just because I mess with the design of my Kolb it's
>because the original is substandard or inferior.
>Kolbs are a stout and well designed family of planes,
>and if testing and failure mode analysis don't
>interest you, KEEP IT STOCK and you won't go wrong.
>
>Ok Scott, keep up the questions; what else you got
:-)
> Good luck on your project, do keep us posted on
your progress.
>
>-Jim
>
>Jim Clayton
>California
>Mark-3X, 912ULS.....Building
>www.quantumwrench.com/Kolb.htm
on
about
provided
www.buildersbooks.com,
Admin.
browse
page,
FAQ,
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: | Re: Mark III vs Mark III Xtra |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Richard & Martha Neilsen" <NeilsenRM05@comcast.net>
Jim/All
Well said. I attended that same aerodynamics forum that Barnaby gave and I
agree with your decision to enlarge the horizontal stabilizer 100%.
I was tempted to respond as you did (you said it much better) but I had one
concern that someone might think their idea might work better than Kolb's
design and not research the issue as well as you did. The general rule
should still be... don't make any changes other than cosmetic. You could be
betting you life on those changes.
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIIIc
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Clayton" <jspc78@yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Mark III vs Mark III Xtra
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: Jim Clayton <jspc78@yahoo.com>
>
> Hi Izek/all,
>
> Not sure where you get your information, but I have a
> horizontal stabilizer that is larger than the standard
> triangle shaped stab. I got the drawings from TNK. I
> am *only* talking about a larger horizontal stabilizer
> (NOT the elevator!). No other flight, or control
> surface has been changed. When Barnaby Wainfan was
> commissioned to design the Xtra, he added more wetted
> area at the front of the fuse since the new nose is
> larger. For that and several other reasons he chose
> to increase the area of the horizontal stabilizer.
> When I met him at Oshkosh in 2003 he was teaching the
> aerodynamics class some on this list have taken,
> dealing with very basic aerodynamic principles. I
> asked him about his choice of larger horizontal
> stabilizer, and he explained his reasoning that
> brought him to increasing the area of the stab. As a
> former flight instructor I applied my experience to
> his statements, then consulted a copy of "Aerodynamics
> For Naval Aviators" (most CFI's keep a copy) and I
> found his statements and reasoning on this topic to be
> cogent and applicable.
>
> As the CG moves aft, closer to the limit (and
> beyond!), both static and dynamic pitch stability
> become more of a factor to the pilot, and important to
> the designer, and can be positively managed through a
> variety of changes in the airframe proportions. Since
> I like the proportions of kolbs, I looked for a tested
> way to increase pitch stability since several folks
> having flown both stab sizes agreed the smaller stab
> was a little more work to fly (less static stability),
> and looking at the stab, I found the stab "seemed to
> small" to provide the stability I wanted. I looked
> for scientific corroboration, and found it in my
> conversations with Barnaby, and consulting my texts,
> which both agreed with my hunch.
>
> Because of that I chose to make the stab larger, using
> TNK drawings. I can only guess at why TNK chose to
> change some of Barnaby's design, but a careful and
> detailed inquiry on stab size failed to turn up any
> sound aerodynamic principles in the decision making
> process. In my line of work I often see large
> organizations follow practices and procedures that
> don't stand up to scrutiny, but still continue to
> occur because "we have always done it that way". I
> appreciate TNK keeping our planes viable and kits
> available, and admire the folks I've met, working at
> TNK, for their honesty, and desire to help.
>
> What is the downside to enlarging the stab?
> Increasing the wetted area will increase drag. On an
> aircraft going less than 100mph, this should be
> trivial (this is a guess, but flight testing will
> verify). Small increase in weight. That will move
> the CG aft some tiny fraction, easily managed since I
> can move things around in the plane once weighted.
> The plane becomes less capable of aerobatic
> maneuvers...ok with me ;-)
>
> In summary, I completely agree changing any aspect of
> the flight surfaces, or affecting the balance of the
> flight and control surfaces requires much research and
> diligence on the part of the factory, or builder, and
> should never be undertaken lightly. After a careful
> and detailed inquiry in the question of the Stab size,
> I chose to go with the stab as designed by the
> designer of the plane.
>
> Izek: If you would like to take issue with my
> assertions regarding aerodynamic theory and it's
> application, feel free to contact me directly since I
> suspect we have taken up enough of our fellow listers
> time with this :-)
>
> -Jim
>
> Jim Clayton
> California
> Mark-3X, 912ULS.....Building
> www.quantumwrench.com/Kolb.htm
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com] On
> Behalf Of Izek Therrien
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Mark III vs Mark III Xtra
>
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Izek Therrien"
> --> <kolb.list@kolbsport.com>
>
> Hi all,
>
> Some comments on the list have attracted my attention
> and I think it is important that I make a
> clarification. First of all, there is no option for a
> larger tail on the Mark III Xtra. The actual tail,
> horizontal stabilizer and elevator, has 23 square
> feet. It is important to understand that a larger tail
> volume will not increase stability to the aircraft.
> Tail surface areas are inherent to a tight
> relationship between the center of gravity, the center
> of lift, the reference area of the wing and the
> relative tail length.
>
> An aircraft must be seen like a system that acts like
> a balance. To achieve equilibrium on a balance, the
> weight on each platter needs to be identical. It is
> the same for an aircraft. There is only one tail
> volume that will put the aircraft in an equilibrium
> state which is when all the moments around the major
> axis are equal to zero. The tail aspect ratio is also
> an important factor that we will skip for now.
>
> The Mark III Xtra was the object of several
> modifications since its first market introduction in
> 2000. Some of these modifications were done to enable
> the aircraft in the trainer category and others were
> done to ameliorate the aircraft's overall design and
> flight characteristics. At Kolb we do encourage you to
> modify the aircraft on a cosmetic level, including
> upholstery, avionics and systems. However, we do not
> encourage you to modify the airframe or any of the
> flying surfaces.
>
> Also, before you can compare flight characteristics
> between M3Xs, you must understand that there are 3
> major versions of this aircraft and it is difficult to
> draw fast conclusions on what makes the aircraft more
> or less stable. For instance, the latest version of
> the aircraft has a lower wing angle of incidence which
> affected the wing's downwash and aircraft's water
> line. We have also modified the tail area and angle of
> incidence to what we believe to be optimum.
>
> If some of you have some great ideas regarding
> modifications that could improve the aircraft please
> feel free to communicate with me at
> izek.therrien@kolbsport.com and I will be honored to
> discuss it with you.
>
> Best regards,
>
>
> Izek Therrien
> www.tnkolbaircraft.com
> www.kolbsport.com
>
>
>
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 |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: GeoR38@aol.com
In a message dated 10/27/2005 12:29:12 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
biglar@gogittum.com writes:
You can access the new pages by clicking on my website link in my signature,
below, and going thru the "Traveling" menu, or access it directly by going
to highlight when I put "http" in front of it. I hope you all enjoy - that
trip, and others I've made in the last few years have really highlighted how
enjoyable meeting people from the Kolb List can be. Lar.
Do not Archive.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Building Kolb Mk III
N78LB Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
you write a great story Larry Biglar, sorry I missed you when you visited
Rich Swiderski. I am 12 miles away.
George Randolph
Firestar driver in the Villages, Fl
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 |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Larry Bourne" <biglar@gogittum.com>
I'm sorry, too, George. I would've enjoyed that. I was unable to get enuf
time off to repeat the trip this year and went to Canada instead, but hope
to go again next year. I'll be sure to let you know. The visiting is great
fun - for me, at least - and has really "made" my trips for the last few
years. Lar. Do not Archive.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Building Kolb Mk III
N78LB Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: <GeoR38@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Web Pages
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: GeoR38@aol.com
>
>
> In a message dated 10/27/2005 12:29:12 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
> biglar@gogittum.com writes:
>
>
> You can access the new pages by clicking on my website link in my
> signature,
> below, and going thru the "Traveling" menu, or access it directly by going
> to: www.webpictures.homestead.com/florida04.html . Sorry, I couldn't
> get it
> to highlight when I put "http" in front of it. I hope you all enjoy -
> that
> trip, and others I've made in the last few years have really highlighted
> how
> enjoyable meeting people from the Kolb List can be.
> Lar.
> Do not Archive.
>
> Larry Bourne
> Palm Springs, CA
> Building Kolb Mk III
> N78LB Vamoose
> www.gogittum.com
>
>
> you write a great story Larry Biglar, sorry I missed you when you visited
> Rich Swiderski. I am 12 miles away.
>
> George Randolph
> Firestar driver in the Villages, Fl
>
>
>
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! --
|