---------------------------------------------------------- Kolb-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Sat 03/18/06: 15 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 04:47 AM - Re: Land Shorter VG's on Firestar II (John Jung) 2. 05:40 AM - EIS Questions (Edward Steuber) 3. 07:08 AM - Re: Land Shorter VG's on Firestar II (Thom Riddle) 4. 07:08 AM - Re: Re: Land Shorter VG's on Firestar II (possums) 5. 07:50 AM - Re: Re: Land Shorter VG's on Firestar II (John Hauck) 6. 02:16 PM - Re: Re: Land Shorter VG's on Firestar II (Jack B. Hart) 7. 02:49 PM - Re: Land Shorter VG's on Firestar II (Thom Riddle) 8. 03:07 PM - Re: Re: Land Shorter VG's on Firestar II (Earl & Mim Zimmerman) 9. 03:25 PM - Re: Re: Land Shorter VG's on Firestar II (John Hauck) 10. 03:34 PM - Re: Re: Land Shorter VG's on Firestar II (Rick Miles) 11. 04:50 PM - Upgrades to my Mark III (Roger Lee) 12. 06:00 PM - Re: Land Shorter VG's on Firestar II (John Jung) 13. 06:18 PM - Re: Re: Land Shorter VG's on Firestar II (Richard Pike) 14. 09:29 PM - Ethanol/Gasoline Mixture (Dave Bigelow) 15. 10:40 PM - Re: Ethanol/Gasoline Mixture (Carlos) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 04:47:23 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Land Shorter VG's on Firestar II From: "John Jung" --> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Jung" John Hauck wrote: > Hi John J/All: > > For the most > part, most Kolbs I have flown without VG's perform as described by > those of you that are now flying them, with the major exception of > shaving 10 mph off the indicated stall speed. > > Lot's to be learned about these little critters, VG's and Kolbs. > > john h > MKIII John H and Group, That is what I thought, too. It is hard to imagine that such great planes could be this much better. It is somewhat like the upgrade to the DRE 6000. It is one thing to read a description the difference and quite another to experience it. -------- John Jung Firestar II N6163J Surprise, AZ Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=22460#22460 ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 05:40:40 AM PST US From: "Edward Steuber" Subject: Kolb-List: EIS Questions --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Edward Steuber" Anybody know the evolution of the EIS units you all love so much ...am interested in the different models as the years went by ...pros and cons ...etc Thinking about a purchase but need an education ....and I know the answers are here... Has this come up before ....archive ? Steam Gauge Ed in Western NY ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 07:08:56 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Land Shorter VG's on Firestar II From: "Thom Riddle" --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Thom Riddle" John, I made my own VGs for the early Firestar I once had but put them back about 11" from the leading edge. I think you said yours are at about 8" back. My stall speed was definitely reduced buy not quite as much as yours, which makes sense since the high AOA at stall apparently puts your VGs prettly close to the "burble" point whereas mine were a bit aft of that point and thus less effective. Mine however had different effects to the stall characteristics. Without VGs the Firestar's stall was very gentle with mild break. With the VGs the break was quick and quite abrupt. My cruise power speeds were unaffected by the VGs, probably because at cruise AOA the VGs were aft of the highest point of the airfoil, whereas yours are at a relatively high pressure point forward of the airfoil peak. As you noted, the landing speed is unaffected because of the three point stance has an AOA well below the stall AOA. This lack of slowing the touchdown speed (landings not shorter) and the sharper break were the determinining factors for me deciding to remove them. I knew beforehand that a slower stall speed would not reduce the landing speed in any Kolb with short main gear legs but just wanted to experiment with them and am glad I did. It was fun and proved that VGs do indeed reduce stall speed. MY persoanal conclusions: 1. VGs will reduce the stall speed of a Kolb. 2. VGs may of may not changed the stall characteristics, depending upon where they are installed. 3. VGs may or may not change power required for a given cruise speed, depending upon where they are installed. 4. Kolbs with long gear legs might actually get a slower touchdown speed and thus shorter landing roll with properly installed VGs. 5. Wether you make your own or buy store bought ones, makes little difference, since all they do is twirl the air to where turbulence begins at high AOA without VGs. Question about your lower approach speed: Normal approach speed on final is (according to most authorities) 1.3 x Vs. If you were stalling at 40 IAS was your final speed about 52 IAS before and now 39 mph (1.3x30)? If so then to land three point I guess you have to speed up 1 mph to land :-). Thom in Buffalo Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=22477#22477 ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 07:08:56 AM PST US From: possums Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Land Shorter VG's on Firestar II --> Kolb-List message posted by: possums At 03:18 PM 3/17/2006, you wrote: >--> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Jung" > > >Possum said to take steep turns at 30 mph. I'm not ready to try >that, but I did try steep turns at 40 mph. Amazing! My Firestar did >a good imitation of a glider. I don't think anything bad will happen. Even when I stall the plane in one of these turns - the high wing stalls first and it just drops back to level. I know that is not what supposed to happen. It might have done that even before the VGs. But........ it is certainly easier to heard geese and follow buzzards when you don't have to run over them or do S-turns. ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 07:50:27 AM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Land Shorter VG's on Firestar II --> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck" speed and thus shorter landing roll with properly installed VGs. | | Thom in Buffalo Thom/Gang: I have never flown with VG's on a Kolb or any other aircraft, that I know of. So.....I can only speak from experience without them. However, many of the attributes claimed after addition of VG's were there, in our Kolbs, prior to VG installation. 1. Most every Kolb will climb at full power with the stick pulled all the way back to the stop. Angle of attack is extremely high. 2. Extremely tight turns at extremely high bank angles, left and right. 3. Very gentle stall characteristics. 4. Fully controllable mush/stall. Permits altitude lose quickly, while maintaining reduced airspeeds. 5. Equipped with sufficiently tall main landing gear legs, all Kolb models perform excellent 3 point landings naturally, with or without full flaps. Touch down speeds, at the break, in ground effect, are somewhat lower than Kolbs with standard gear legs. All of the above, with the exception of paragraph 5, can be performed with any standard Kolb model. The mere thought of the additional capability of my airplane with a good set of VG's, properly installed, is frightening............ ;-) john h ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 02:16:57 PM PST US From: "Jack B. Hart" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Land Shorter VG's on Firestar II --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Jack B. Hart" At 07:06 AM 3/18/06 -0800, you wrote: >--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Thom Riddle" > >4. Kolbs with long gear legs might actually get a slower touchdown speed and thus shorter landing roll with properly installed VGs. > Thom, The same is true for standard leg Kolbs. VG's increase wing lift for any speed above stall. Because of this, any Kolb with VGs can fly a little slower and generate the same lift as it did at a higher speed before the addition of VGs. For a FireFly, it is not necessary to increase leg length to enable slower touch down speeds. All one has to do is droop the flaperons a few degrees and it will three point nicely. Jack B. Hart FF004 Winchester, IN ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 02:49:45 PM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Land Shorter VG's on Firestar II From: "Thom Riddle" --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Thom Riddle" Jack, If the aircraft has flaps or flaperons (my old Firestar had neither) then the nose down pitch resulting from their use certainly would allow slower landing speeds at the same angle of attack as without the VGs. This assumes that the VGs do actually increase lift at this AOA, not merely increase the critical AOA. In my mental analysis of the situation, I can see this happening only if the point on the airfoil where the turbulence starts is changed (moved aft) at this AOA by the VGs presence, thus subjecting more of the upper camber to smooth, non-turbulent flow which could then produce more effective lift at the same AOA. I would guess that the only easy/simple way to determine if this is the case for a particular installation, is to carefully document airspeeds, power (rpm) settings, and airspeeds in smooth air. A change in any of these (outside known measurement accuracy) would indicate a change in lift per the equation: Lift = 1/2 rho x V 2 x S(wing area). The AOA at low speeds (approaching stall) varies quite rapidly with speed changes but at cruise speeds the AOA changes very little with changes in speed. Therefore the most likely speed range to detect this change in lift due to VGs would be at very slow speeds. Perhaps you or others have done this to confirm a change in lift due to VGs holding all else fixed. I did not bother to do this sort of documentation because the only location I tried the VGs on resulted in a rather unsavory abrupt break at stall. Apparently locating them somewhat more forward would have made a difference in this regard but it would also have increased drag at cruise and that was not a result I wanted. Thinking back now, I believe I noticed (didn't document) a slightly lower liftoff speed in three point with the VGs than without. That sounds like confirmation of increased lift right there because of necessity, the angle of attack is fixed. Sorry for the "thinking out loud" long winded discussion but I think I am now convinced that they do increase lift at standard Kolb 3-point AOA. Thom in Buffalo Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=22540#22540 ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 03:07:02 PM PST US From: Earl & Mim Zimmerman Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Land Shorter VG's on Firestar II --> Kolb-List message posted by: Earl & Mim Zimmerman John Hauck wrote: > > I have never flown with VG's on a Kolb or any other aircraft, that I > know of. So.....I can only speak from experience without them. Any volunteers out there to sneak out to Hauck's Holler some night and stick a set of VG's on Mr. Hauck's Kolb so that he can enhance his experience. :-) ~ Earl P.S. He still might not believe so just put them on the left wing only! :-) ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 03:25:52 PM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Land Shorter VG's on Firestar II --> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck" only! :-) Will it spin better with VGs on top of left wing, and bottom of right wing? Did we ever get a comprehensive report of the experimentation Beauford T was doing with VGs on the bottom of his wings and top of his helmet? Got my silencers welded up and ready to reinstall on the MKIII. Was going to get over and get it done this afternoon, but a gut bug persuaded me to stay close to the house. Tomorrow is rain. Soon, I hope to get the old gal flying again to see if I can still fly. Take care, john h DO NOT ARCHIVE ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 03:34:04 PM PST US From: Rick Miles Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Land Shorter VG's on Firestar II --> Kolb-List message posted by: Rick Miles nice artical on vgs http://www.avweb.com/news/reviews/182564-1.html Earl & Mim Zimmerman wrote: --> Kolb-List message posted by: Earl & Mim Zimmerman John Hauck wrote: > > I have never flown with VG's on a Kolb or any other aircraft, that I > know of. So.....I can only speak from experience without them. Any volunteers out there to sneak out to Hauck's Holler some night and stick a set of VG's on Mr. Hauck's Kolb so that he can enhance his experience. :-) ~ Earl P.S. He still might not believe so just put them on the left wing only! :-) --------------------------------- Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze. ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 04:50:57 PM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Upgrades to my Mark III From: "Roger Lee" --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Roger Lee" Hi Everyone, These are some upgrades that I have done to my Mark III that I thought were worth while and mentioning. My Mark III was built in 2000 with a Rotax 912S. It now has 700 hrs. 1. Got rid of the tapered 1 3/8" to 3/4 "diameter 7075 aluminum gear legs. I installed 7075 aluminum, but used 1 3/8" all the way down. I also added 4" to each leg. Works out very well and makes for nice landings. Mains first. 2. Got rid of the standard electric start and put on a heavy duty high torque starter. I also got rid of my 18 ah battery and went to a 28 ah battery. Now even when it is 32 degrees out mt Kolb starts just like my truck. Touch the key and your running. It never cranks. Just instant starting. 3. Installed TNK's adjustable horizontal stabilizer brackets. These are alot stronger than the original stainless steel "L" brackets. If you remember I'm the one that had one of the original "L" brackets break in flight. You can also adjust each side of the horizontal stabilizer if need be for little trim issues. There are three holes for adjustment. 4. Just installed a 9 gal. reserve bladder tank from IMTRA. This was another good addition. I did not want to tear apart the back end of my Kolb and manufacture a tank and then rebuild the back end. The bladder tank fits in a couple of different locations. It is more or less a permanent mount, easy access for fueling and can be removed easly. 5. I also have my Warp drive prop set to max out at 5550 rpm. I have found that if you make the engine work some it does get better fuel economy. I cruise at approximately 4800 rpm (give or take a few rpm) at 80 mph. I get right at 4 to 4.2 gal per hr. I have checked this for a few hundred hours and it really doesn't change. 6. I installed a Navman 2100 fuel flow meter. This also works very well and helps me check on fuel burn and keeps track of all of my fuel usages and it has low fuel alarms. I have learned alot from the people on this site and I hope this information may help someone else. Thanks to all, Roger Lee :D Tucson, Az. p.s. I just got back from a 620 mile round trip from Tucson to Bullhead City / Laughlin, NV. What a great trip up the Colorado River. Hope to see everyone in M.V. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=22560#22560 ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 06:00:37 PM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Land Shorter VG's on Firestar II From: "John Jung" --> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Jung" Thom Riddle wrote: > John, > > Question about your lower approach speed: > Normal approach speed on final is (according to most authorities) 1.3 x Vs. If you were stalling at 40 IAS was your final speed about 52 IAS before and now 39 mph (1.3x30)? If so then to land three point I guess you have to speed up 1 mph to land :-). > > Thom in Buffalo Thom, I used to approach at 50. How the plane acts just over the runway at speeds below 40 is something I'll have to learn. I'm sure that the tail will touch first (it did before). Will the mains hit hard if I get too sow. I doubt it but I don't know yet. If my first three landing are an indication, I going to like it. -------- John Jung Firestar II N6163J Surprise, AZ Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=22571#22571 ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 06:18:44 PM PST US From: Richard Pike Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Land Shorter VG's on Firestar II --> Kolb-List message posted by: Richard Pike I can now shoot approaches solo in the MKIII at 45 and do pretty good. Below that and it gets iffy. Richard Pike MKIII N420P (420ldPoops) do not archive John Jung wrote: > --> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Jung" > > > I used to approach at 50. How the plane acts just over the runway at speeds below 40 is something I'll have to learn. I'm sure that the tail will touch first (it did before). Will the mains hit hard if I get too sow. I doubt it but I don't know yet. If my first three landing are an indication, I going to like it. > > -------- > John Jung > Firestar II N6163J > Surprise, AZ > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=22571#22571 > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 09:29:34 PM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Ethanol/Gasoline Mixture From: "Dave Bigelow" --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Dave Bigelow" The State of Hawaii Legislature (in their infinte wisdom/ignorance) has passed a law that mandates all automotive gas sold in the state after April 1st will consist of 10% ethanol. This sounds like a nice green thing to do, but from a technical standpoint is bogus. First thing is that it takes more energy to produce a gallon of ethanol than the gallon of ethanol will produce. Add to that the fact that a gallon of ethanol has only 75% of the engergy of a gallon of gas, and also has a fuel system damaging affinity for absorbing water. The whole thing is a feel good tax payer subsidy of the local sugar industry. End of rant! Now, the reason for this post is tap some of the great amount of experience on this list. What kind of experience have you had running a gas/ethanol blend in two stroke engines? Is the power loss noticible? Is re-jetting needed? Have you had problems with water laden fuel gumming up the carbs? Maybe "Sea Foam" will solve the whole problem. :P -------- Dave Bigelow Kamuela, Hawaii FS2, Rotax 503 DCDI Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=22593#22593 ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 10:40:22 PM PST US From: "Carlos" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Ethanol/Gasoline Mixture --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Carlos" Hi Dave, I work in the recreational boating industry and have seen first hand what alcohol and water can do to fuel systems. Gasohol is not a good thing. The alcohol in gasoline can damage rubber components in your fuel system, i.e the diaphragm in the fuel pump for one example. It might cost a bit more but, you may have to use 100LL av-gas to stay away from the alcohol. This my require a re-jetting of the carb, slightly leaner I believe. If you must use gasohol then I suggest you check your fuel system components very frequently to make sure the rubber parts of your plane are in good condition. The gasohol will attack the rubber parts and cause little bits of rubber to break off and clog your fuel system. I imagine you have to fly over water alot because of your island location. Avgas may be your only practical solution to keep your peace of mind over water. Good luck Carlos G. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Bigelow" Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2006 9:27 PM Subject: Kolb-List: Ethanol/Gasoline Mixture > --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Dave Bigelow" > > The State of Hawaii Legislature (in their infinte wisdom/ignorance) has > passed a law that mandates all automotive gas sold in the state after > April 1st will consist of 10% ethanol. This sounds like a nice green > thing to do, but from a technical standpoint is bogus. First thing is > that it takes more energy to produce a gallon of ethanol than the gallon > of ethanol will produce. Add to that the fact that a gallon of ethanol > has only 75% of the engergy of a gallon of gas, and also has a fuel system > damaging affinity for absorbing water. The whole thing is a feel good tax > payer subsidy of the local sugar industry. End of rant! > > Now, the reason for this post is tap some of the great amount of > experience on this list. What kind of experience have you had running a > gas/ethanol blend in two stroke engines? Is the power loss noticible? Is > re-jetting needed? Have you had problems with water laden fuel gumming up > the carbs? > > Maybe "Sea Foam" will solve the whole problem. :P > > -------- > Dave Bigelow > Kamuela, Hawaii > FS2, Rotax 503 DCDI > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=22593#22593 > > >