---------------------------------------------------------- Kolb-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Tue 11/15/05: 36 ---------------------------------------------------------- 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 _____________________________________ Time: 06:00:44 AM PST US From: russ kinne Subject: Kolb-List: MATT DRALLE --> Kolb-List message posted by: russ kinne 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 _____________________________________ Time: 06:43:54 AM PST US From: Richard Pike Subject: Kolb-List: Re: MKIII trim --> Kolb-List message posted by: Richard Pike 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 > >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 _____________________________________ Time: 07:00:04 AM PST US From: "Izek Therrien" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Mark III vs Mark III Xtra --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Izek Therrien" 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 _____________________________________ Time: 07:12:57 AM PST US From: "pat ladd" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: a small step --> Kolb-List message posted by: "pat ladd" 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 _____________________________________ Time: 08:02:12 AM PST US From: "Chris Mallory" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: MATT DRALLE --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Chris Mallory" 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" Subject: Kolb-List: MATT DRALLE > --> Kolb-List message posted by: russ kinne > > 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 _____________________________________ Time: 08:28:53 AM PST US From: "Ed Chmielewski" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: MATT DRALLE --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Ed Chmielewski" 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" Subject: Kolb-List: MATT DRALLE > --> Kolb-List message posted by: russ kinne > > 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 _____________________________________ Time: 08:47:49 AM PST US From: bryan green Subject: Re: Kolb-List: MATT DRALLE --> Kolb-List message posted by: bryan green 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" > >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" >To: >Subject: Kolb-List: MATT DRALLE > > > > >>--> Kolb-List message posted by: russ kinne >> >>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 _____________________________________ Time: 08:54:30 AM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: MATT DRALLE/Making Unnecessary Changes --> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck" | 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 _____________________________________ Time: 09:36:21 AM PST US From: "pat ladd" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Apology to all on the Kolb list --> Kolb-List message posted by: "pat ladd" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 09:51:14 AM PST US From: "pat ladd" Subject: Kolb-List: so sue me! --> Kolb-List message posted by: "pat ladd" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 10:14:34 AM PST US From: Mitty Subject: Re: Kolb-List: so sue me! --> Kolb-List message posted by: Mitty 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 wrote: > --> Kolb-List message posted by: "pat ladd" > > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 11:00:05 AM PST US From: "Dana Labhart" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: so sue me! --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Dana Labhart" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 11:06:54 AM PST US From: Matt Dralle Subject: Kolb-List: The Do N*t Archive Flag and List Content... --> Kolb-List message posted by: Matt Dralle 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 ____________________________________ Time: 01:50:26 PM PST US From: "Jim Ballenger" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: MK lll Trim --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Jim Ballenger" 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: 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 ____________________________________ Time: 02:42:13 PM PST US From: "Silver Fern Microlights Ltd" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Aero Vee Engine Kit --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Silver Fern Microlights Ltd" 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" Subject: Kolb-List: Aero Vee Engine Kit > --> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Abbott" > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 03:24:41 PM PST US From: "Jim Ballenger" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Aero Vee Engine Kit --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Jim Ballenger" 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" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Aero Vee Engine Kit > --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Silver Fern Microlights Ltd" > > > 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" > To: > Subject: Kolb-List: Aero Vee Engine Kit > > >> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Abbott" >> >> 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 ____________________________________ Time: 03:27:00 PM PST US From: "dama" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Aero Vee Engine Kit --> Kolb-List message posted by: "dama" Do you have any pics from your trip, Mike? Sounds like a great adventure... Kip ----- Original Message ----- From: "Silver Fern Microlights Ltd" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Aero Vee Engine Kit > --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Silver Fern Microlights Ltd" > > 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" > To: > Subject: Kolb-List: Aero Vee Engine Kit > > > > --> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Abbott" > > > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 03:29:41 PM PST US From: "Jim Ballenger" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: so sue me! --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Jim Ballenger" 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" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: so sue me! > --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Dana Labhart" > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 03:57:17 PM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: MK lll Trim --> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck" |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 ____________________________________ Time: 04:16:54 PM PST US From: "Richard & Martha Neilsen" Subject: Kolb-List: MKIII Xtra Speeds --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Richard & Martha Neilsen" 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" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Aero Vee Engine Kit > --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Silver Fern Microlights Ltd" > > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 04:42:45 PM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Aero Vee Engine Kit/Comparing 912 and Jabiru --> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck" | 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 ____________________________________ Time: 04:48:36 PM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: MKIII Xtra Speeds/Jabiru and 912 Comparison/MKIIIc Speeds --> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck" | 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 ____________________________________ Time: 05:15:34 PM PST US From: bryan green Subject: Re: Kolb-List: MK lll Trim --> Kolb-List message posted by: bryan green 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" > >|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 ____________________________________ Time: 05:18:36 PM PST US From: robert bean Subject: Re: Kolb-List: MK lll Trim --> Kolb-List message posted by: robert bean 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" > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 05:27:15 PM PST US From: "Bob and Jenn B" Subject: Kolb-List: Gear Legs --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Bob and Jenn B" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 05:32:07 PM PST US From: Jim Clayton Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Mark III vs Mark III Xtra --> Kolb-List message posted by: Jim Clayton 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" --> 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 ____________________________________ Time: 05:39:22 PM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: MK lll Trim --> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 06:05:02 PM PST US From: "kfackler" Subject: Kolb-List: List contributions and a question --> Kolb-List message posted by: "kfackler" > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 06:10:33 PM PST US From: Matt Dralle Subject: Re: Kolb-List: List contributions and a question --> Kolb-List message posted by: Matt Dralle At 06:04 PM 11/15/2005 Tuesday, you wrote: >--> Kolb-List message posted by: "kfackler" > >> 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 ____________________________________ Time: 06:24:21 PM PST US From: bryan green Subject: Re: Kolb-List: MK lll Trim --> Kolb-List message posted by: bryan green Got you John, I miss read your post thanks. Bryan Green Do not archive John Hauck wrote: >--> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck" > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 06:37:20 PM PST US From: Cat36Fly@aol.com Subject: Re: Kolb-List: MK lll Trim --> 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 ____________________________________ Time: 07:11:44 PM PST US From: "frank & margie" Subject: Kolb-List: Rest of The Story --> Kolb-List message posted by: "frank & margie" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 08:19:01 PM PST US From: Jim Clayton Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Re: MKIII trim --> Kolb-List message posted by: Jim Clayton 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 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 > >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 ____________________________________ Time: 08:33:17 PM PST US From: "Richard & Martha Neilsen" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Mark III vs Mark III Xtra --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Richard & Martha Neilsen" 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" Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Mark III vs Mark III Xtra > --> Kolb-List message posted by: Jim Clayton > > 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" > --> > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 08:55:15 PM PST US 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 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 ____________________________________ Time: 09:55:02 PM PST US From: "Larry Bourne" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Web Pages --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Larry Bourne" 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: 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 > > >