Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 02:16 AM - Re: MK3X ENGINE OUT (Jim Ballenger)
2. 03:24 AM - Re: MK3X ENGINE OUT (pat ladd)
3. 03:29 AM - A sleepless night (Richard Girard)
4. 03:36 AM - Re: MK3X ENGINE OUT (Richard Girard)
5. 04:39 AM - Re: MK3X ENGINE OUT (Thom Riddle)
6. 06:03 AM - Re: MK3X ENGINE OUT (Denny Rowe)
7. 06:13 AM - Re: Propellers - IVO or Warp (Denny Rowe)
8. 07:59 AM - Re: Propellers - IVO or Warp (HShack@aol.com)
9. 08:10 AM - Weight and balance (Jimmy)
10. 08:39 AM - Re: Weight and balance (TheWanderingWench)
11. 08:48 AM - E-SLA N-numbering (TheWanderingWench)
12. 08:54 AM - "Jaz" modeling her "Mutt Muffs" (planecrazzzy)
13. 09:56 AM - Fuel Line accessory question (Roger Lee)
14. 10:10 AM - Re: Fuel Line accessory question (John Hauck)
15. 10:23 AM - Re: Fuel Line accessory question (Roger Lee)
16. 10:50 AM - Re: "Jaz" modeling her "Mutt Muffs" (Ralph Hoover)
17. 11:21 AM - Re: A sleepless night (Ed Chmielewski)
18. 11:54 AM - Re: A sleepless night (John Williamson)
19. 11:58 AM - Re: A sleepless night (Roger Lee)
20. 12:42 PM - Re: Propellers - IVO or Warp (Richard Pike)
21. 12:55 PM - Re: Fuel Line accessory question (Roger Lee)
22. 12:59 PM - Re: Propellers - IVO or Warp (John Hauck)
23. 01:03 PM - Re: Re: Fuel Line accessory question (John Hauck)
24. 01:28 PM - Re: Propellers - IVO or Warp (Ralph Hoover)
25. 02:07 PM - Re: Re: A sleepless night (robert bean)
26. 02:31 PM - Re: Propellers - IVO or Warp (Richard Pike)
27. 02:32 PM - Got my airworthiness certificate today (David Key)
28. 02:42 PM - Re: Got my airworthiness certificate today (john s. flannery)
29. 02:58 PM - Re: Re: Propellers - IVO or Warp (John Hauck)
30. 03:28 PM - Re: Propellers - IVO or Warp (Ralph Hoover)
31. 03:31 PM - Re: forward slip in Firestar (WillUribe@aol.com)
32. 03:37 PM - 912uls question (Rick Pearce)
33. 03:50 PM - Re: 912uls question (John Hauck)
34. 03:54 PM - Re: Got my airworthiness certificate today (Larry Bourne)
35. 05:37 PM - Re: "Jaz" modeling her "Mutt Muffs" (planecrazzzy)
36. 07:28 PM - Sport Pilot N Number (frank & margie)
37. 09:44 PM - Re: Got my airworthiness certificate today (David Key)
38. 10:28 PM - Re: Sport Pilot N Number (Roger Lee)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: MK3X ENGINE OUT |
----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Girard
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, August 25, 2006 8:27 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: MK3X ENGINE OUT
Rick,
First you didn't say how old the fuel is.( 2 weeks old)
Refineries guarantee the octane of their auto gas for two months. (OK)
If you had suffered detonation, you'd have a hole or big cavity about
to become a hole in the top of the front piston. (OK)
Second, do you premix or use oil injection? (oil injection, mounted on
the engine with rotax mount and tank that was full)
Last, never restart an engine that has siezed or that you think has
siezed. You only do more damage and may have destroyed the evidence to
evaluate what happened.( You are right about destroying evidence, but it
still has the signs of the engine seizer)
Never the less, I just wanted to pass the word to be careful with the
E10 fuel.
Jim
MK3X
Virginia Beach, VA
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: MK3X ENGINE OUT |
Hi Jim,
similar thing on my field. An Escapade with a Jabiru engine. While in
the cruise the engine ran rough and then went bang and stopped.
Jabi refused to settle under warranty blaming `contaminated fuel`. The
engine was operating on Mogas for which it is cleared, indeed it is a
major selling point. Mogas is =A31 a litre and Avgas is about =A31.30
The contamination referred to was not ` muck` as was first thought but
the additives which some companies are putting in the petrol.
The Jabi distributor is now recommending running on mogas with a
proportion of avgas added.
Jabi apparently eventually came to a compromise over accepting the costs
of the repair.
Cheers
Pat
do not archive
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: | A sleepless night |
Kolbers, As some wag once said, "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing".
There is a lot of confusion about the Sport Pilot Rule among the industry
and pilots. Many of you have written of your trip through the process of
becoming sport pilots, but I haven't seen a lot about getting your aircraft
registered.
The Sport Pilot Rule has a provision for bringing the existing fleet, i.e.
all the "fat ultralights" and aircraft that do not meet the requirements of
FAR 103, into the U.S. Registry. Simply put, you have until January 31st
2008 to get an airworthiness certificate for your aircraft. After midnight
on that date, if you cannot prove that you complied with the rules for
experimental amateur built aircraft, you cannot register your aircraft. You
will have a very expensive lawn ornament. Before then, you can provide a
receipt or fill out a form saying you own the aircraft and the receipt is
lost, the appropriate paper work to apply for an "N" number, get the
aircraft inspected and a special airworthiness certificate issued and you
have yourself a legal E-LSA.
Even if you can prove that you built it and are entitled to register your
aircraft as experimental amateur built, there is a very good reason not to.
That is that you can teach and rent an E-LSA until January 31st, 2010, you
cannot with an experimental amateur built, which makes your aircraft worth
more.
Why am I telling you this? Some of you are putting off getting your aircraft
finished. If you can, get your aircraft done by July 1st, 2007. This is an
arbitrary date I picked out of thin air. I picked it for the reason that
there is a big fleet out there and only so many FAA staffers and DAR's to
get the job of issuing airworthiness certificates done. July 1st gives you a
cushion should you have any glitches in the process or you local DAR is busy
and can't get to you.
Obviously I can't predict everything that might cause a glitch in the
process, but here is one and it could be a big one. When your DAR comes to
inspect your aircraft he should do a conditional inspection equivalent to an
annual. Some DAR's are just there to take your money, pencil whip the
paperwork and laugh all the way to the bank. You might get this guy, but
since by signing off your aircraft he opens himself up to legal liablity,
he's an idiot if he doesn't do his job. Personally, I don't want that guy
touching any part of any of my airplanes, but that's me. If, however, he is
a stand up guy, he will do the inspection by the list contained in 14 CFR 43
Appendix D. One of the requirements is to do an INTERNAL inspection of the
wings. I would bet that most of you do not have provisions in your wing
covering to do that inspection, I know I don't. Even if he doesn't do his
job properly, the first time you need an annual, whether you do it by virtue
of having gotten your Repairman Inspector certificate, or you get someone
like me with a Repairman Maintenence certificate, the annual must contain
the statement, "I certify this aircraft has been inspected in accordance
with 14 CFR 43 Appendix D and is in condition for safe operation".
Falsifying aircraft maintenance records is a crime. At the very least the
person signing off the annual can lose his ticket. The FAA has said they are
going to make examples of those who are caught in violation so they could
ask the judge to give the person who certifyed the annual a $10,000 fine and
10 years in jail. I won't make that mistake, would you?
My advice is put in inspection rings when covering, retrofit them during
your winter layup, or take a weekend, pull your wings off, get 'er done, and
be ready.
You will, of course, do exactly as you please.
--
Rick Girard
"Ya'll drop on in"
takes on a whole new meaning
when you live at the airport.
PS Some of you may find 14 CFR 91.409 (c) which says that light sport is
exempt from annuals and 100 hour inspections. The Feds say this exemption is
necessary because, unlike those aircraft that are not exempted, light sport
is not considered airworthy, but rather in condition for safe operation.
They give you an airworthiness certificate, but your aircraft isn't
considered airworthy. This came right from Oklahoma City. My instructor
called. Go figure.
Rick
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: MK3X ENGINE OUT |
And I should have added, good on you for sharing with the group. Hopefully
your engine needs nothing more than an acid etch to get the aluminum off the
cylinder walls, a touch up with a hone, a couple of pistons and some
gaskets, and you're good to go.
Rick
PS Be sure and inspect the cable going to the oil injection pump.
On 8/26/06, Jim Ballenger <ulpilot@cavtel.net> wrote:
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Richard Girard <jindoguy@gmail.com>
> *To:* kolb-list@matronics.com
> *Sent:* Friday, August 25, 2006 8:27 PM
> *Subject:* Re: Kolb-List: MK3X ENGINE OUT
>
>
> Rick,
>
> First you didn't say how old the fuel is.( 2 weeks old)
> Refineries guarantee the octane of their auto gas for two months. (OK)
> If you had suffered detonation, you'd have a hole or big cavity about to
> become a hole in the top of the front piston. (OK)
> Second, do you premix or use oil injection? (oil injection, mounted on the
> engine with rotax mount and tank that was full)
> Last, never restart an engine that has siezed or that you think has
> siezed. You only do more damage and may have destroyed the evidence to
> evaluate what happened.( You are right about destroying evidence, but it
> still has the signs of the engine seizer)
>
> Never the less, I just wanted to pass the word to be careful with the E10
> fuel.
>
> Jim
> MK3X
> Virginia Beach, VA
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
--
Rick Girard
"Ya'll drop on in"
takes on a whole new meaning
when you live at the airport.
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: MK3X ENGINE OUT |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Thom Riddle" <jtriddle@adelphia.net>
Some points worth considering, regarding E10:
1) Rotax says 87 octane is high enough octane for the 2 stroke engines including
the 582.
2) Rotax says that their 2-stroke engines prefer no alcohol but up to 5% alcohol
is tolerable. As far as I can tell, they say nothing about what happens
or can be expected to happen if you burn E10 (10% ethanol).
3) Ethanol has higher knock resistance (higher octane rating) than gasoline
with or without MBTE.
4) Alcohol is hygroscopic meaning it is attracted to any water that may be
present and thus settles to the bottom of the tank, mixed with the water. The
gasoline thus separated from its alcohol effectively reduces the octane of the
fuel remaining. This is one of the reasons why it is even more important to
refill your tank after each flight when running gasohol than when running "pure"
gasoline. No air space, less chance for water condensation. This also a good
reason for draining a sample from your gascolator or low spot in system AFTER
a flight (as well as before flight) and before refilling tank, to get out what
ever water may be there so it does not mix with the alcohol in the fuel you
are adding.
I think the last point is the most important one if you have no choice but to burn
gasohol.
--------
Thom in Buffalo
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=57474#57474
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: MK3X ENGINE OUT |
Jim,
Glad to hear you made it through the forced landing AOK.
Good Job.
Denny Rowe
do not archive
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Propellers - IVO or Warp |
John,
Between the two, I would go with the Warp.
You might also consider the Powerfin, I have an F model 68" Powerfin on
my Mk-3 and it is super easy to adjust and performs well. However I do
not have the high hours on it that others have with the Warp Drive. The
Warp is surely the most well proven prop for pushers.
Denny Rowe
----- Original Message -----
From: JRatcli256@aol.com
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, August 25, 2006 7:33 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Propellers - IVO or Warp
Hi guys,
Getting on with my Mark 3 Xtra project with Flaps/Alirons and
considering a Rotax 912 ULS 100 HP and Prop.
Would like to get your input on which Prop to use. Planning on a 70",
three blade but need to make a decision on brand/model. Price for me is
a serious consideration and it would be very nice to have ease of
adjustment. Without your experience I'm sure there are many things I
haven't considered.
Ivo has two suitable units. (1) Their Ultralite (Light) for up to
100HP (2) Their Ultralite (Medium) for 100HP and higher. They also have
the Magnum for more powerful engines and higher speeds.
Warp of course has the Warp.
I understand the Warp is tougher and the Ivo much easier to adjust.
The Ivo light prop is less expensive and the Ivo Medium or Warp about
the same price.
What about maintenance? Also is the 2.5" spacer sufficient or will I
need the 4" spacer?
I live on Johns Island, SC just outside of Charleston. (lowcountry)
about sea level.
Density Altitude around 1200' - 2000' during the summer months and am
a fair weather flyer. Is there any other type in a light aircraft like
ours?
Thanks -- John Ratcliffe
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
8/25/2006
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: Propellers - IVO or Warp |
In a message dated 8/26/2006 9:14:16 AM Eastern Standard Time,
rowedl@highstream.net writes:
John,
Between the two, I would go with the Warp.
My $.02............I like a Warp Drive prop because it's the toughest prop
you can buy. It's also real heavy. So heavy that, in some configurations, it's
out of spec. for your gearbox.
Check out the Kiev or Hot prop [same thing]. It's much lighter [you can use
an extension no problem] , more efficient, smoother, quieter, prettier, &
tough. We have one on a MkIII float plane with over 800 water landings & it
almost looks like new. I also have one on my FSII.
Costs about the same as a Warp.
Howard Shackleford
FS II
SC
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: | Weight and balance |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Jimmy" <jhankin@planters.net>
Those of you that have done a weight and balance for the FAA, do they want
to see how you arrived at your figures or just the results. Does anyone
have a copy of a w/b sheet that would e-mail it to me.
Thanks,
Do Not Archive
Jimmy Hankinson
912-863-7384
Firefly 035
JYL (Sylvania)
Pegasus Field (Home)
2000 Feet X 100 Feet- Grass
Rocky Ford, Georgia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Try SPAMfighter for free now!
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Weight and balance |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: TheWanderingWench <thewanderingwench@yahoo.com>
EAA (as part of a $12.95 package on converting your
"ultralight" to E-SLA) has a W & b form to use. I'll
be glad to fax it to you if you send me a fax #. My
understanding is that the FAA wants to see the numbers
- and you should have the manufacturer's info re: the
datum point.
Arty
--- Jimmy <jhankin@planters.net> wrote:
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Jimmy"
> <jhankin@planters.net>
>
> Those of you that have done a weight and balance for
> the FAA, do they want
> to see how you arrived at your figures or just the
> results. Does anyone
> have a copy of a w/b sheet that would e-mail it to
> me.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Do Not Archive
>
> Jimmy Hankinson
> 912-863-7384
> Firefly 035
> JYL (Sylvania)
> Pegasus Field (Home)
> 2000 Feet X 100 Feet- Grass
> Rocky Ford, Georgia
>
>
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Try SPAMfighter for free now!
>
>
>
>
> browse
> Subscriptions page,
> FAQ,
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>
> Web Forums!
>
>
> Admin.
>
>
>
>
>
www.LessonsFromTheEdge.com
"Life's a daring adventure or nothing"
Helen Keller
"I refuse to tip toe through life just to arrive safely at death."
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | E-SLA N-numbering |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: TheWanderingWench <thewanderingwench@yahoo.com>
Hi folks,
Following up on Dick Girard's comments re: certifying
a "fat" ultralight as E-SLA. When you're applying for
your N-number, there is a 5"x 8" 3-part form that you
fill out. In the Ownership section, you can check
that you have a bill of sale, or that you lost the
bill of sale but declare that you really, really,
honestly do own the aircraft for which you're applying
for the N-number.
EAA recommends that you ALWAYS check the "I own it,
but lost the bill of sale" box EVEN IF you have the
bill of sale. Somehow, your application will go
through the process more quickly.
That happened here in Oregon. Of 3 people who sent in
their N-number applications at approximately the same
time, the two who checked "I have a bill of sale" had
their application sent back with a request for more
info, and the one who checked "I lost my bill of sale"
had theirs sail through. Don't ask me why...
Arty
www.LessonsFromTheEdge.com
"Life's a daring adventure or nothing"
Helen Keller
"I refuse to tip toe through life just to arrive safely at death."
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | "Jaz" modeling her "Mutt Muffs" |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "planecrazzzy" <planecrazzzy@yahoo.com>
The Company finished designing the X-small size ....I bought a set for "Jaz" my
Miniture Pincher....
They came just in time for the Fly-in tomorrow... Here's some pictures.
Gotta Fly...
Mike in MN
Here's their Web Site :
http://www.safeandsoundpets.com/index.html
.
.
.
--------
.
.
.
.
.
Do Not Archive
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=57535#57535
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/jaz__mutt_muffs_003_760.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/jaz__mutt_muffs_001_108.jpg
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: | Fuel Line accessory question |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Roger Lee" <ssadiver1@yahoo.com>
Hi All,
I hope one of you remember the answer to this question. A while back, a long while
back, someone posted a picture of a metal bulb installed in the fuel line.
I did a search and couldn't find it. I thought it had something to do with pulsations
from the fuel pump. Does someone remember what it was called and exactlly
what it was used for? Here is a picture.
Thanks,
--------
Roger Lee
Tucson, Az.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=57549#57549
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/damper_closeup1_189.jpg
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Line accessory question |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
back, a long while back, someone posted a picture of a metal bulb
installed in the fuel line. I did a search and couldn't find it. I
thought it had something to do with pulsations from the fuel pump.
Does someone remember what it was called and exactlly what it was used
for? Here is a picture.
|
| Thanks,
|
| --------
| Roger Lee
Roger:
Is that on a 914 turbo with return fuel line?
I've been flying 912 and 912S since 1994. Never saw one of those
"blubby" thingys before.
john h
mkIII
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: Fuel Line accessory question |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Roger Lee" <ssadiver1@yahoo.com>
Hi John,
This is a 912s with no return line. I thought it might be a pulsation damper?
--------
Roger Lee
Tucson, Az.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=57554#57554
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: "Jaz" modeling her "Mutt Muffs" |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Ralph Hoover" <flht99reh@Columbus.rr.com>
Darned it man, I'm gonna turn you into the Association of pet lovers. Darned, their
way too tight and your making that dogs eyes buldge out!
Shame on you. protect his hearing and make him go blind. What a trade off!
Ralph is calling the Ohio Humaine Socieity on you right now!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=57561#57561
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: A sleepless night |
Rick,
Simply one of the best posts this year. Excellent! Thanks for
the info.
Ed in JXN (MI)
MkII/503
----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Girard
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, August 26, 2006 6:28 AM
Subject: Kolb-List: A sleepless night
Kolbers, As some wag once said, "A little knowledge is a dangerous
thing". There is a lot of confusion about the Sport Pilot Rule among the
industry and pilots. Many of you have written of your trip through the
process of becoming sport pilots, but I haven't seen a lot about getting
your aircraft registered.
(Snip)
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: A sleepless night |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Williamson" <kolbrapilot1@comcast.net>
Hi All,
"A little knowledge is a dangerous thing".
Clarification is in order here: This statement is not true!
"If, however, he is a stand up guy, he will do the inspection by the list contained
in 14 CFR 43 Appendix D. One of the requirements is to do an INTERNAL inspection
of the wings."
The Title to FAR Part 43 Appendix D tells you exactly what and when it is used:
"Appendix D to Part 43Scope and Detail of Items (as Applicable to the Particular
Aircraft) To Be Included in Annual and 100-Hour Inspections"
Here is the scope of the inspection as it pertain to the wings:
"(f) Each person performing an annual or 100-hour inspection shall inspect (where
applicable) all components of the wing and center section assembly for poor
general condition, fabric or skin deterioration, distortion, evidence of failure,
and insecurity of attachment."
As you can see, there is no reference to "One of the requirements is to do an INTERNAL
inspection of the wings."
You as the Manufacturer will be required to make an entry in the log books that
the aircraft/engine/propeller are in an "airworthy and safe condition for flight."
befoe the inspector will make his entry.
The inspector (FAA/DAR) is only required to inspect the aircraft in so far as to
determine it's eligibility for and the issuance of an Experimental Airworthiness
Certificate.
Go the regulations and look it up:
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title14/14tab_02.tpl
The following statement is true but isn't the whole answer:
"Some of you may find 14 CFR 91.409 (c) which says that light sport is exempt from
annuals and 100 hour inspections."
The FAA will issue Operating Limitation for Experimental Light Sport and Experimental
Amateur Built aircraft. Here is a partial Exerpt of:
" PHASE II Operating Limitations
Following completion of Phase I requirements and a record documenting that completion,
the aircraft may be operated in accordance with Phase II of these Operating
Limitations.
No person may operate this aircraft for other than the purpose of recreation and
education as stated in the program letter for this aircraft. In addition, this
aircraft shall be operated in accordance with applicable air traffic and general
operating rules of CFR part 91 and all additional limitations prescribed
under the provisions of CFR part 91.319(e). These operating limitations are
a part of the FAA Form 8130-7, Special Airworthiness Certificate, and are to be
carried in the aircraft at all times for availability to the pilot in command
of the aircraft.
This aircraft is prohibited from operating in congested airways or over densely
populated areas unless directed by Air Traffic Control, or unless sufficient
altitude is maintained to effect a safe emergency landing in the event of a power
unit failure, without hazard to persons or property on the surface.
After completion of Phase I flight testing, unless appropriately equipped for night
and/or instrument flight in accordance with CFR section 91.205, this aircraft
is to be operated under VFR, day only.
No person shall operate this aircraft unless within the preceding twelve (12) calendar
months it has had a condition inspection performed in accordance with
the scope and detail of appendix D to CFR part 43, or other FAA approved programs,
and found to be in a condition for safe operation. This inspection will
be recorded in the aircraft maintenance records.
Condition inspections shall be recorded in the aircraft maintenance records showing
the following or a similarly worded statement: "I certify that this aircraft
has been inspected on (insert date) in accordance with the scope and detail
of appendix D to CFR part 43, or other FAA-approved programs and found to be
in a condition for safe operation," The entry will include the aircraft total
time in service, and the name, signature, certificate number, and type of certificate
held by the person performing the inspection."
* * * * * *
This is where the condition inspection will be spelled out and also tell you that
your "aircraft shall be operated in accordance with applicable air traffic
and general operating rules of CFR part 91 and all additional limitations prescribed
under the provisions of CFR part 91.319(e)."
The Certification and Operating Limitations process can be found in:
FAA Order 8130.2F w/Change 2 (7/10/2006) which can can be found at this link:
http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/gen_av/light_sport/
Well, if you made to here, Thank You. Remenber that all our advise is worth the
paper we are writing on.
--------
John Williamson
Arlington, TX
Kolbra, 912ULS
http://home.comcast.net/~kolbrapilot1
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=57574#57574
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: A sleepless night |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Roger Lee" <ssadiver1@yahoo.com>
Hi All,
I registered my Kolb Mark III ELSA last year and got my LSA lic. I did not think
that getting the LSA lic. was difficult. I got the Gliem self study program
of books and CD. Studied for 2 months while I flew with the CFI for my hours and
took the written. The test of 40 questions was quite easy except for two out
in left field questions that no one seemed to know.
The FAA LSA was a little different as they didn't really know themselves what was
going on. One guy had me fill out amateur built papers and then the FAA wanted
more info. Everytime you send them something it seems to take 3 weeks to get
something back. I talked to the main honcho at the FAA for LSA and he explained
everything. Then I had to call the FAA people that were handling my file
and explain it to them. After I filled out the correct paperwork I had my ELSA
paper work from FAA in a couple of days. Then there was nobody in Az. that inspected
LSA aircraft so I brought in John Shablow out of Calif. He was great.
You also have to option of going SLSA which would allow you to train or rent your
craft. The main difference is SLSA has to have an A/P or equivilent for inspections
and to preform work on your craft. If you rent it or train in it you
have to include 100 hr. inspections. I went ELSA so I can do all my own maintenance
and I took the "Condition of Inspection" class and now I can do my own
inspections. If you buy an SLSA you can bust it back to ELSA and then you can
do your own work again, but you can not ever take it back to SLSA.
--------
Roger Lee
Tucson, Az.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=57577#57577
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: | Re: Propellers - IVO or Warp |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Richard Pike <richard@bcchapel.org>
Just to muddy the waters a bit more -
Tried a three blade Kiev Hot Prop on the FSII with 582 and it did not
perform as well as an Ivo 68" two blade. And it was noisier.
Today I delivered my old J-6 Karatoo to the grass strip where the new
owner will be keeping it, I had always flown it with a 66" two blade
Warp Drive, but after it's "incident" a while back, it got a 68" two
blade Powerfin stuck on it instead. It is now about ten mph slower than
it was with the Warp Drive. Perhaps it would still be as fast if it was
a 66" prop instead? Don't know.
IMO, a Warp is extremely efficient, and almost indestructible. An Ivo is
equally efficient, fragile compared to the Warp, and (because of it's
flexibility) runs a lot smoother, much less vibration. Those would be my
first choices for a prop. And IMO, a two blade is more efficient than a
three blade.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
HShack@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 8/26/2006 9:14:16 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> rowedl@highstream.net writes:
>
> John,
> Between the two, I would go with the Warp.
>
>
> My $.02............I like a Warp Drive prop because it's the toughest
> prop you can buy. It's also real heavy. So heavy that, in some
> configurations, it's out of spec. for your gearbox.
>
> Check out the Kiev or Hot prop [same thing]. It's much lighter [you
> can use an extension no problem] , more efficient, smoother, quieter,
> prettier, & tough. We have one on a MkIII float plane with over 800
> water landings & it almost looks like new. I also have one on my FSII.
>
> Costs about the same as a Warp.
>
> Howard Shackleford
> FS II
> SC
> *
>
>
> *
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: Fuel Line accessory question |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Roger Lee" <ssadiver1@yahoo.com>
Hi All,
I finially found the picture and info I was looking for. It was in fact on the
matronics home page of things to buy. This is in fact a fuel flow pulsation dampner.
It is a stainless steel air chamber that acts like a shock absorber. This
reduces fuel flow reading fluctuations.
Thanks,
--------
Roger Lee
Tucson, Az.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=57591#57591
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: Propellers - IVO or Warp |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
| IMO, a Warp is extremely efficient, and almost indestructible. An
Ivo is
| equally efficient, fragile compared to the Warp, and (because of
it's
| flexibility) runs a lot smoother, much less vibration. Those would
be my
| first choices for a prop. And IMO, a two blade is more efficient
than a
| three blade.
|
| Richard Pike
Richard:
Was wondering how an IVO could "run a lot smoother, much less
vibration" than a Warp Drive??
After 2,400 hours flying in front of a Warp Drive Prop, I have yet to
find any one of the several I have owned to show any signs of
"vibration".
Quite possibly, the Warp you were flying had a problem or was not
adjusted in pitch, equal in all blades.
Or maybe it is a characteristic of a two blade Warp. I do not know.
Have never flown a two blade Warp on my airplane, or any other that I
can recollect at this time.
For the record, I have never had to balance a Warp since day one,
which was September 1993. My Warp Drive Props are not babied. They
get to experience flight in many different environments, many of them
quite harsh. I just took off my last Warp Drive 3 blade prop which
was installed in June 2004, just prior to my departure for Point
Barrow, Alaska. This prop came home with dings from rocks, sand, and
gravel, bathed in a lot of rain. My last flight with this prop and
the engine that pushed me to Point Barrow twice, was just as smooth as
it was when first installed.
In fact, I do not know of anyone who has ever had to balance a Warp
Drive, even after minor repair from stuff that falls off the airplane
or stuff that is thrown into the prop by the tires.
BTW: Warp Drive has a life time guarantee of satisfaction for their
product. If for any reason you want to send it back and get your
money, they are happy to oblige. Most folks don't want to give their
Warp Drive away. They are tough, efficient, and will get you there
and back home safely.
john h
mkIII
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Line accessory question |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
This reduces fuel flow reading fluctuations.
|
| Thanks,
|
| --------
| Roger Lee
Roger:
Thank goodness. I don't need to reduce the fuel flow reading
fluctuations on my engine.
The more stuff you stick on an airplane and engine, the more stuff
that can go wrong in the future, especially when you don't want it to
happen.
Ronnie Smith related a tale to me about a 912ULS with 12 hours on it.
Engine destroyed by loss of oil pressure. Seems the customer was
adamant about installing the oil temp sender in line on the oil hose.
Rotax has selected and provides an oil temp sender in the oil pump
where their engineers figure it will work best. Gentleman could not
be talked out of locating his oil temp sender in the oil feed hose.
At 12, or it may have been 17 hours, the connection failed and the
engine was history.
john h
mkIII
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Propellers - IVO or Warp |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Ralph Hoover" <flht99reh@Columbus.rr.com>
John, I just purchased an IVO 66" two blade prop for my Firestar. Are you saying
that THere may be a need or a time when I would need to balance it? I thought
because of the factory weigh-in and match as well as the torque arm warping
of the blade what took place with one side took place with both sides.
Heroic Ohio 40 landing Ralph!
(A hero in my own mind).
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=57599#57599
Message 25
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: A sleepless night |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: robert bean <slyck@frontiernet.net>
Good letter John. Did my eyes glaze over before the end?
....well, yeah, but there was some useful stuff there.
Subject: inspection covers. I have covered a few wings in my
lifetime and most general av planes have internal bellcranks, etc.
that make a tight wing impossible and also require access for
inspection, oiling, or repair of same mechanicals.
The Kolb is a breed apart with zero stuff moving about inside.
I elected to close it up forever or until something falls apart,
whichever comes first. No bees, chipmunks, hickory nuts, wood spars,
levers
and rods to worry about. It might even float!
Love it.
BB do not archive
On 26, Aug 2006, at 2:53 PM, John Williamson wrote:
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Williamson"
> <kolbrapilot1@comcast.net>
>
> Hi All,
>
> "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing".
>
> Clarification is in order here: This statement is not true!
>
> "If, however, he is a stand up guy, he will do the inspection by the
> list contained in 14 CFR 43 Appendix D. One of the requirements is to
> do an INTERNAL inspection of the wings."
>
> The Title to FAR Part 43 Appendix D tells you exactly what and when it
> is used:
> "Appendix D to Part 43Scope and Detail of Items (as Applicable to
> the Particular Aircraft) To Be Included in Annual and 100-Hour
> Inspections"
>
> Here is the scope of the inspection as it pertain to the wings:
> "(f) Each person performing an annual or 100-hour inspection shall
> inspect (where applicable) all components of the wing and center
> section assembly for poor general condition, fabric or skin
> deterioration, distortion, evidence of failure, and insecurity of
> attachment."
>
> As you can see, there is no reference to "One of the requirements is
> to do an INTERNAL inspection of the wings."
>
> You as the Manufacturer will be required to make an entry in the log
> books that the aircraft/engine/propeller are in an "airworthy and safe
> condition for flight." befoe the inspector will make his entry.
>
> The inspector (FAA/DAR) is only required to inspect the aircraft in so
> far as to determine it's eligibility for and the issuance of an
> Experimental Airworthiness Certificate.
>
> Go the regulations and look it up:
> http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/
> Title14/14tab_02.tpl
>
> The following statement is true but isn't the whole answer:
> "Some of you may find 14 CFR 91.409 (c) which says that light sport is
> exempt from annuals and 100 hour inspections."
>
> The FAA will issue Operating Limitation for Experimental Light Sport
> and Experimental Amateur Built aircraft. Here is a partial Exerpt of:
>
> " PHASE II Operating Limitations
>
> Following completion of Phase I requirements and a record documenting
> that completion, the aircraft may be operated in accordance with Phase
> II of these Operating Limitations.
>
> No person may operate this aircraft for other than the purpose of
> recreation and education as stated in the program letter for this
> aircraft. In addition, this aircraft shall be operated in accordance
> with applicable air traffic and general operating rules of CFR part 91
> and all additional limitations prescribed under the provisions of CFR
> part 91.319(e). These operating limitations are a part of the FAA Form
> 8130-7, Special Airworthiness Certificate, and are to be carried in
> the aircraft at all times for availability to the pilot in command of
> the aircraft.
>
> This aircraft is prohibited from operating in congested airways or
> over densely populated areas unless directed by Air Traffic Control,
> or unless sufficient altitude is maintained to effect a safe emergency
> landing in the event of a power unit failure, without hazard to
> persons or property on the surface.
>
> After completion of Phase I flight testing, unless appropriately
> equipped for night and/or instrument flight in accordance with CFR
> section 91.205, this aircraft is to be operated under VFR, day only.
>
> No person shall operate this aircraft unless within the preceding
> twelve (12) calendar months it has had a condition inspection
> performed in accordance with the scope and detail of appendix D to CFR
> part 43, or other FAA approved programs, and found to be in a
> condition for safe operation. This inspection will be recorded in the
> aircraft maintenance records.
>
> Condition inspections shall be recorded in the aircraft maintenance
> records showing the following or a similarly worded statement: "I
> certify that this aircraft has been inspected on (insert date) in
> accordance with the scope and detail of appendix D to CFR part 43, or
> other FAA-approved programs and found to be in a condition for safe
> operation," The entry will include the aircraft total time in service,
> and the name, signature, certificate number, and type of certificate
> held by the person performing the inspection."
>
> * * * * * *
>
> This is where the condition inspection will be spelled out and also
> tell you that your "aircraft shall be operated in accordance with
> applicable air traffic and general operating rules of CFR part 91 and
> all additional limitations prescribed under the provisions of CFR part
> 91.319(e)."
>
> The Certification and Operating Limitations process can be found in:
> FAA Order 8130.2F w/Change 2 (7/10/2006) which can can be found at
> this link:
> http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/gen_av/light_sport/
>
> Well, if you made to here, Thank You. Remenber that all our advise is
> worth the paper we are writing on.
>
> --------
> John Williamson
> Arlington, TX
>
> Kolbra, 912ULS
> http://home.comcast.net/~kolbrapilot1
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=57574#57574
>
>
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: | Re: Propellers - IVO or Warp |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Richard Pike <richard@bcchapel.org>
Not being an engineer, couldn't tell you why it is smoother. It is not
that the prop vibrates, or was imbalanced, or anything of that nature,
but having flown with both Ivo and Warp props, the engine/gearbox/prop
combination with an Ivo gives a distinct impression of being smoother. I
suspect the flexibility of the Ivo absorbs various harmonics,
engine/gearbox vibrations, etc., whereas the stiffness of the Warp does
not, but that is just a guess.
All of us on the list are aware you are a confirmed Warp advocate, and
you have good reason to be, but in my limited experience (having flown
only about 1,000 hours with only 4 Warp Drive props, three of them two
blades, and one of them a three blade - and having owned only 5 Ivo's,
two of them three blades and three of them two blades) an Ivo gives me a
distinct impression of providing a smoother flying experience.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
John Hauck wrote:
> Richard:
>
> Was wondering how an IVO could "run a lot smoother, much less
> vibration" than a Warp Drive??
>
> After 2,400 hours flying in front of a Warp Drive Prop, I have yet to
> find any one of the several I have owned to show any signs of
> "vibration".
>
> Quite possibly, the Warp you were flying had a problem or was not
> adjusted in pitch, equal in all blades.
>
> Or maybe it is a characteristic of a two blade Warp. I do not know.
> Have never flown a two blade Warp on my airplane, or any other that I
> can recollect at this time.
> <snip>
>
> john h
> mkIII
>
>
>
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 |
|
| Subject: | Got my airworthiness certificate today |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "David Key" <dhkey@msn.com>
While I was building it I said to myself I wish this was done so I can just
go fly it. Now that the day is here... I'm nervous.
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: | Re: Got my airworthiness certificate today |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "john s. flannery" <jsflan@valornet.com>
At least you know who built it and how, and believe me that is a major
consolation when it comes to that test flight!
jsf
Do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Key" <dhkey@msn.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 26, 2006 2:31 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Got my airworthiness certificate today
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "David Key" <dhkey@msn.com>
>
>
> While I was building it I said to myself I wish this was done so I can
> just go fly it. Now that the day is here... I'm nervous.
>
>
>
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: Propellers - IVO or Warp |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
Are you saying that THere may be a need or a time when I would need to
balance it? | Heroic Ohio 40 landing Ralph!
Ralph:
No, Sir!
I said I never had to balance a Warp Drive Prop.
I have flown IVO Props quite a bit on Kolb Factory airplanes over the
years. When the silver tape was applied correctly, and it was a new
prop, was smooth as can be. However, when the silver tape would start
to release, just a little, that little prop would wear you out.
With the Warp Drive, I like the idea of setting the prop up, then
flying 400 or 500 or more hours without touching it. No need to.
Once it is adjusted to the airplane and the engine, there isn't
anything left to do. The Warp I pulled off my airplane is still
adjusted exactly like it was in June 2004, when I installed and
adjusted it.
Yes, I am a Warp Drive kinda guy. In addition, you might call me a
Kolb kinda guy, a Rotax 912ULS kinda guy, MATCO wheels and brakes
kinda guy, among a few other items of equipment I have used for a long
time with a great deal of success, e.g., reliability.
Take care,
john h
mkIII
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Propellers - IVO or Warp |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Ralph Hoover" <flht99reh@Columbus.rr.com>
And John, Brother Kolber,
I appreciate that you didn't take my question as an attack upon your person. I
have always liked the careful way you word things, and have learned a bit of tact
from that way. Both of us having Military backgrounds and "older" men, I would
think myself as a low rank and you as an officer of merit would butt heads.
Yet we don't. I am glad for that maturity in both of us. I rely heavily upon
you're as well as others wisdom on this site. And guys, lets face it, We aren't
playing with stuff that accepts a lot of "dumb" anywhere in it's make-up.
Anytime we offer advise, it should be the best we can give because there as a
great deal of lurkers out there that will literally go out on your word and do,
because you said it worked!
I am always amazed the differing results each individual seems to attain from "much-like"
planes, albeit the build aspect. There are "hammer" mechanics as well
as detailers that are so meticulous that appearance is almost everything, not
discounting anyone's applications. I tend to be more the kind of guy that if
a pound of steel will do the job, lets make it out of two pounds and be better.
I once baked Lasagna in the oven. The box said 350 degrees for forty five
minutes. I did it at 700 degrees in 23 minuets. It wasn't there when I went to
get it! I really enjoy this site for the tremendous detail everyone offers, as
well as the civility of the writers.
I guess that when someone has applied the time tested ways to something, there
is where one should look first for ways. The more I fly, the greater the appreciation
grows in me for the value of the trials and tribulations of the many of
you that do some serious , distance flying, while I hang so close to the nest.
Ohio Ralph
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=57626#57626
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: forward slip in Firestar |
_www.members.aol.com/willuribe/slip.wmv_
(http://www.members.aol.com/willuribe/slip.wmv)
Here is part of a video I took today performing 3 forward slips, I started
the slip at 5,000 feet MSL and held it until I was over the runway. There is
no noticeable crab angle but check out the jaw string. I dropped 1,000 fpm
and the forward airspeed was 60 mph indicated.
WARNING!!! This is a 4.09 MB video so it could take a while for dial-up
users to view it.
Enjoy,
Will Uribe
FireStar II N4GU
El Paso, TX
_http://home.elp.rr.com/airplane/_ (http://home.elp.rr.com/airplane/)
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 |
|
I think this was asked a while back but I can not find it in the
achieves. All thur the operation manual I see that the max. opposite
rotation on the 912 is 1 rotation.But I can no were it tells what
happens when the 912 is turned back ward more than one revolution?
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: 912uls question |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
But I can no were it tells what happens when the 912 is turned back
ward more than one revolution?
Rick:
That's an easy question to answer.
THE PROP FALLS OFF........... ;-)
Actually, turning the prop backwards can introduce air into the oil
system, which might then cause damage to the engine. We want our oil
system free of air. I make it a point to never turn my prop
backwards, not more than the width of a blade or two to line it up in
a "very military" mannner. hehehe
john h
mkIII
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: Got my airworthiness certificate today |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Larry Bourne" <biglar@gogittum.com>
Let us know how the day goes for you. Congratulations and Good Luck.
Lar. Do not Archive.
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Key" <dhkey@msn.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 26, 2006 2:31 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Got my airworthiness certificate today
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "David Key" <dhkey@msn.com>
>
>
> While I was building it I said to myself I wish this was done so I can
> just go fly it. Now that the day is here... I'm nervous.
>
>
>
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: "Jaz" modeling her "Mutt Muffs" |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "planecrazzzy" <planecrazzzy@yahoo.com>
Yeah, She was acting a little weird when I first put them on....
I went to the hanger today to get ready for the Wanamingo Fly-in tomorrow... I
put them on her while she was on the seat in the plane ....She was excited to
go....
I'll have to see if they stay on her ears or slip back...there's still room to
adjust the straps...
Gotta Fly...
Mike & Jaz in MN
--------
.
.
.
.
.
Do Not Archive
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=57650#57650
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 |
|
| Subject: | Sport Pilot N Number |
Ref. the below;
Have a question for the list. If you do not have a serial number of put
on
the application for a N number, what do you put there and also what do
you
put for the manufacturer,Kolb or the person who constructed the plane?
Jimmy Hankinson
912-863-7384
Firefly 035
JYL (Sylvania)
Pegasus Field (Home)
2000 Feet X 100 Feet- Grass
Rocky Ford, Georgia
Do Not Archive
-----------------------------------------------------
A recent article by Dennis Demeter, in the Aug UL Flying, says it's OK
to use the kit mfgr's name. My DAR (James Allen from Lake City) checked
this with the FAA, and was told it was true. Don't know what to tell
you about the S/N, I'm not dead sure of mine either.
Frank Clyma
Jacksonville, FL
do not archive
Message 37
| 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: Got my airworthiness certificate today |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "David Key" <dhkey@msn.com>
that's what scares me!
>From: "john s. flannery" <jsflan@valornet.com>
>To: <kolb-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Got my airworthiness certificate today
>Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2006 14:42:13 -0700
>
>--> Kolb-List message posted by: "john s. flannery" <jsflan@valornet.com>
>
>At least you know who built it and how, and believe me that is a major
>consolation when it comes to that test flight!
>
>jsf
>
>Do not archive
>----- Original Message ----- From: "David Key" <dhkey@msn.com>
>To: <kolb-list@matronics.com>
>Sent: Saturday, August 26, 2006 2:31 PM
>Subject: Kolb-List: Got my airworthiness certificate today
>
>
>>--> Kolb-List message posted by: "David Key" <dhkey@msn.com>
>>
>>
>>While I was building it I said to myself I wish this was done so I can
>>just go fly it. Now that the day is here... I'm nervous.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Message 38
| 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: Sport Pilot N Number |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Roger Lee" <ssadiver1@yahoo.com>
Hi Jim,
I was not the builder of my Mark III. I got on the FAA web site and reserved my
N number for $10. I assigned it a serial number, my birthday, and I listed myself
as the builder. The serial number will then stay with the plane for it's
life. If you constructed the plane you are the builder. Kolb Mark III is the type
and model.
--------
Roger Lee
Tucson, Az.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=57691#57691
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! --
|