---------------------------------------------------------- Kolb-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Wed 03/28/07: 54 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 12:23 AM - Re: Props and engine mount (Ron) 2. 02:00 AM - Re: NOTAM For Sun and Fun 2007 (icrashrc) 3. 02:54 AM - Re: Kolb-List Fire Star Logistics ??? (pat ladd) 4. 03:58 AM - Re: Props and engine mount (Larry Bourne) 5. 04:00 AM - Re: Kolb-List Fire Star Logistics ??? (Dana Hague) 6. 04:06 AM - Re: Kolb-List Digest: 28 Msgs - 03/27/07 (Charles Davis) 7. 05:50 AM - Re: Wanted-Kolb Instructor Pilot (joe) 8. 05:54 AM - Re: Re: NOTAM For Sun and Fun 2007 (John Hauck) 9. 05:57 AM - Re: Kolb-List Fire Star Logistics ??? (DANIEL WALTER) 10. 07:16 AM - Re: Props and engine mount (Vic Peters) 11. 07:17 AM - Attending Sun and Fun 2007 (Richard & Martha Neilsen) 12. 07:27 AM - Re: SPAM: Re: Fly-in (Terry) 13. 07:30 AM - Re: Props and engine mount (Richard & Martha Neilsen) 14. 07:39 AM - Re: Props and engine mount (John Hauck) 15. 07:40 AM - Re: SPAM: Re: Fly-in (John Hauck) 16. 07:57 AM - Props and engine mount (boyd) 17. 08:02 AM - Re: vinyl graphics vs painting (MKIIIX040) 18. 08:18 AM - Re: newbie (jb92563) 19. 08:21 AM - Southern California Kolb flyers? (jb92563) 20. 08:30 AM - E-LSA before and after 1-31-08 (Richard Girard) 21. 09:10 AM - Re: SUV (jb92563) 22. 09:34 AM - Re: E-LSA before and after 1-31-08 (John Williamson) 23. 10:01 AM - Re: Kolb-List Fire Star Logistics ??? (Ralph) 24. 10:32 AM - Re: newbie...we are all newbies (joe) 25. 10:40 AM - Re: Re: E-LSA before and after 1-31-08 (David Key) 26. 10:48 AM - Re: Re: newbie (N27SB@aol.com) 27. 10:57 AM - Re: Re: newbie (N27SB@aol.com) 28. 11:18 AM - New 912ULS Oil Fittings (John Hauck) 29. 11:42 AM - Re: newbie (JetPilot) 30. 11:51 AM - Re: newbie (jb92563) 31. 12:18 PM - Re: Re: E-LSA before and after 1-31-08 (Richard Girard) 32. 12:21 PM - Re: Props and engine mount (Ron) 33. 12:45 PM - Re: Re: newbie (knowvne@aol.com) 34. 12:55 PM - Re: Re: E-LSA before and after 1-31-08 (Vic Peters) 35. 01:02 PM - Re: Re: newbie (N27SB@aol.com) 36. 01:06 PM - Re: Re: newbie (N27SB@aol.com) 37. 01:10 PM - Re: E-LSA before and after 1-31-08 (John Williamson) 38. 02:41 PM - Re: Props and engine mount (JetPilot) 39. 02:45 PM - Re: SPAM: Re: Fly-in (Dana Hague) 40. 02:50 PM - Re: New 912ULS Oil Fittings (JetPilot) 41. 03:37 PM - Re: New 912ULS Oil Fittings (Roger Lee) 42. 03:42 PM - Re: Re: New 912ULS Oil Fittings (John Hauck) 43. 03:42 PM - Re: Re: E-LSA before and after 1-31-08 (TheWanderingWench) 44. 03:50 PM - Re: Re: newbie (Russ Kinne) 45. 03:52 PM - Re: Re: New 912ULS Oil Fittings (John Hauck) 46. 04:00 PM - Re: Attending Sun and Fun 2007 (Mark W German) 47. 05:21 PM - Re: Attending Sun and Fun 2007 (Don G) 48. 06:23 PM - Re: Props and engine mount/propeller selection (Jack B. Hart) 49. 06:48 PM - Re: Attending Sun and Fun 2007 (JetPilot) 50. 07:22 PM - Fw: Re: Attending Sun and Fun 2007 (John Hauck) 51. 07:30 PM - Re: Attending Sun and Fun 2007 (Malcolmbru@aol.com) 52. 07:34 PM - Re: Re: Props and engine mount (Ron) 53. 07:50 PM - Re: Props and engine mount/propeller selection (Ron) 54. 10:47 PM - Re: Re: E-LSA before and after 1-31-08 (Richard Girard) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 12:23:52 AM PST US From: Ron Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Props and engine mount "This gearbox was designed for aviation conversion of engines up to 160 h.p. It is in production since 2000. The available reduction ratios are 2.03, 2.34, 2.5. There is a German (BMW) rubber damper between the gear box and the engine. The propeller moment of inertia up to 9,000 kg/cm2. Rotax-style propeller hub, propeller shaft with a hole so it can be used with variable pitch prop or for glider towing. It is possible to use this gearbox for both (tractor and pusher) layouts, install it up, down and any degrees left or right. " The motor is a 105-110 hp Suzuki. The above is a quote from the vendor's web site. Ron (Arizona) =============================== ---- Richard Pike wrote: ============ What engine and reduction ratio? Richard Pike MKIII N420P (420ldpoops) do not archive ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ron" Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 10:12 PM Subject: Kolb-List: Props and engine mount > > for all the senior Kolbers here is a question. I am about to weld in place > the engine mount. I have now the option of lowering the mount a bit to > reduce thrust line. I have done some measuring and it looks like I can > reduce it some with a 2 inch prop clearance from the tail boom and have a > max size of a 68 inch prop. I figure that at best the rubber mount would > flex .5 inch which would still give me ample clearance, from the boom. Or > I could of course go to a 3 inch clearance from the boom and raise the > mount an inch. > I guess the best question to ask is what is the minimum prop I can use and > still be on par with the best performance. I know there are some more > variables I can throw into this. But some ideas from which I can work will > be real good. > The next item is the angle of the mount. I am following the original mount > bed angle on the assumption that Dennis Souder got it right when he > figured it. Any opinions about that, shell I change it and if so why? > John H what prop size and kind are you using? > Anyone using a 4 blade? > > -- kugelair.com ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 02:00:03 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: NOTAM For Sun and Fun 2007 From: "icrashrc" John, Will you have Miss Pfer back together and flying for Sun-n-Fun? -------- Scott www.ill-EagleAviation.com do not archive Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=103344#103344 ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 02:54:30 AM PST US From: "pat ladd" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Kolb-List Fire Star Logistics ??? . at which time they'll find they're flying an unregistered aircraft with no airworthiness certificate and no annual.>> ...And no insurance. Any Insurance Company will grab that as a get out. Pat do not archive ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 03:58:45 AM PST US From: "Larry Bourne" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Props and engine mount I'd be interested in more info about the redrive, Ron. Who's the manufacturer, and what's his website ?? Thanks Lar. On 3/28/07, Ron wrote: > > > "This gearbox was designed for aviation conversion of engines up to 160 > h.p. It is in production since 2000. The available reduction ratios are > 2.03, 2.34, 2.5. There is a German (BMW) rubber damper between the gear > box and the engine. The propeller moment of inertia up to 9,000 kg/cm2. > Rotax-style propeller hub, propeller shaft with a hole so it can be used > with variable pitch prop or for glider towing. It is possible to use this > gearbox for both (tractor and pusher) layouts, install it up, down and any > degrees left or right. " > > The motor is a 105-110 hp Suzuki. The above is a quote from the vendor's > web site. > > Ron (Arizona) > =============================== > > > ---- Richard Pike wrote: > > ============ > > What engine and reduction ratio? > Richard Pike > MKIII N420P (420ldpoops) > do not archive > ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 04:00:41 AM PST US From: Dana Hague Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Kolb-List Fire Star Logistics ??? At 05:54 AM 3/28/2007, pat ladd wrote: > >...And no insurance. Any Insurance Company will grab that as a get out. Around here, I don't think most ultralight (legal or not) pilots have insurance anyway. It's not required by law, and it's not inexpensive. -Dana -- -- The citizens of the United States are getting the government they deserve. The problem is that I'm also getting the government they deserve. ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 04:06:31 AM PST US From: "Charles Davis" Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Kolb-List Digest: 28 Msgs - 03/27/07 And don't forget the hotel that backs right up to the airport! Chuck ********************************************** Terry, I would like to overnight at Smoketown for the gathering at Homer's. It's a great airport three resturants within walking distance and plenty of Kolb owners nearby!! Steven Let me know if this sounds interesting and I will speak to the owner of the airport about you staying there. He's a real nice guy! Terry - FireFly #95 ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 05:50:00 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Wanted-Kolb Instructor Pilot From: "joe" >From what I've been able to gather here in Tulsa this is not as popular a sport as it was ten years ago. Maybe not everywhere, but here that is what it seems. People in the club I've joined, the only one here, say there used to be more people and they did more things together. I think it is harder now with the popularity down some and with the sport being more regulated now, people aren't teaching as much. I think it is becoming more expensive for someone to be a legal teacher and plane that is a legal trainer. I will end by saying that I know very little, this is just how it appears to be to me here in Tulsa. Joe Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=103378#103378 ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 05:54:46 AM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: NOTAM For Sun and Fun 2007 Morning Scott/Gang: Hoping to have her flying before Sun and Fun, so I can load her up and fly down. The update is going good. I am a lot slower now than 6 years ago when I swapped out lexan and did some updating and repairs. One gets very spoiled when there is little to do to maintain their airplane over the years. I started out building new center section with .016" 6061 and no lexan. Got half way through and decided that .025" was the way to go. The top and bottom are drilled and trimmed. This morning will start doing the cut outs for fit, fuel fill, access holes, etc. The .025 is much, much stronger, and still lighter than my old lexan and sheet metal center section. Soon as I get the center section finished, I'll set the engine on the airframe, do all the engine stuff, new cables, fuel line, coolant lines, oil lines, hook up the wiring, and finally install the windshield and rear quarter windows. Only priming and painting I have to do is the center section, and I'll probably shoot the gear legs while I am at it. Eager to get flying again. Have been groundbound since 22 Aug 06, except for some flying at the factory the end of Sep at the Kolb Homecoming. See you all at Lakeland. john h mkIII ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 05:57:34 AM PST US From: "DANIEL WALTER" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Kolb-List Fire Star Logistics ??? ----- Original Message ----- From: BMWBikeCrz@aol.com To: kolb-list@matronics.com Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 7:11 PM Subject: Kolb-List: Kolb-List Fire Star Logistics ??? I was talking to a couple of guys at lunch that fly Trikes and Gyro Copters Thier feeling is that The FAA is not too concerned with Single seat ultralights ... Dave, What does your Firestar weigh? You should be close to the 254 dry and putting it on a diet may be the thing to do. If you carry more than 5 gallons or are thinking of putting on a 503 than the N number is the way to go. Dan Walter Palmyra PA Ultrastar, UL202 Do not Archive ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 07:16:44 AM PST US From: "Vic Peters" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Props and engine mount Anyone, I always wondered why the plans called for 3 washers in the back and 2 in front for the 912 mount. Why not 2 in rear and 1 in front? Can 1/16" make that much difference anyway? John , I thought you were running a 74'' Warp. Vic 912 UL Extra Maine do not archive ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 07:17:20 AM PST US From: "Richard & Martha Neilsen" Subject: Kolb-List: Attending Sun and Fun 2007 I will be going to Sun N Fun 2007 and will be camping in the Ultralight campground most of the week. Is anyone else planning on going? Sounds like John H. will be there. I will be driving so I can bring supplies people might need. Is there going to be a cook out? Can I bring something for it? Do not archive Rick Neilsen Redrive VW powered MKIIIc ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 07:27:57 AM PST US From: Terry Subject: Re: SPAM: Re: Kolb-List: Fly-in Steven Green wrote: > > Terry, > > I would like to overnight at Smoketown for the gathering at Homer's. > It's a great airport three resturants within walking distance and > plenty of Kolb owners nearby!! > > Steven > > Let me know if this sounds interesting and I will speak to the owner > of the airport about you staying there. He's a real nice guy! > > Terry - FireFly #95 Steve, I know that won't be a problem! As we get closer to the date, I will take a poll and see how many are coming for Clara and Homer to be able to plan and how many might like to stay over at Smoketown. I know that some of us will probably camp out at Shreveport North's UL Fly-in Saturday night after our visit to Homer's. You might want to consider joining us there. Terry - FireFly #95 Do Not Archive ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 07:30:43 AM PST US From: "Richard & Martha Neilsen" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Props and engine mount Ron I don't know about that senior thing but.... I built my VW mount with two inch clearance for a 72 inch prop. I also set the thrust line just slightly up from being even with the bottom of the wing. I figured the wing would fly with just a bit of up angle of attack. My assumption is that the most efficient thrust angle would be straight back at cruise. A thrust line pushing the plane down would not be good and having the thrust line lifting the plane would not be as efficient as lift from the wing. Rick Neilsen Redrive VW powered MKIIIc ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ron" Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 10:12 PM Subject: Kolb-List: Props and engine mount > > for all the senior Kolbers here is a question. I am about to weld in place > the engine mount. I have now the option of lowering the mount a bit to > reduce thrust line. I have done some measuring and it looks like I can > reduce it some with a 2 inch prop clearance from the tail boom and have a > max size of a 68 inch prop. I figure that at best the rubber mount would > flex .5 inch which would still give me ample clearance, from the boom. Or > I could of course go to a 3 inch clearance from the boom and raise the > mount an inch. > I guess the best question to ask is what is the minimum prop I can use and > still be on par with the best performance. I know there are some more > variables I can throw into this. But some ideas from which I can work will > be real good. > The next item is the angle of the mount. I am following the original mount > bed angle on the assumption that Dennis Souder got it right when he > figured it. Any opinions about that, shell I change it and if so why? > John H what prop size and kind are you using? > Anyone using a 4 blade? > > > ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 07:39:34 AM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Props and engine mount Can 1/16" make that much difference anyway? John , I thought you were running a 74'' Warp. Vic Vic: 1/16" will not make any difference. I discovered many years ago the amount of engine movement with a 447 powered Firestar. Was amazed at how much the engine tilted under full power. I experimented with different angles of mounting the engine on the mkIII and came to the conclusion I was wasting my time. Now I fly with the engine as low as possible and in the standard configuration with the hardest Lord mounts available. Travis sends these hard Lord mounts with the mkIII kits. 72" is largest prop I have flown with. john h mkIII ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 07:40:50 AM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Re: SPAM: Re: Kolb-List: Fly-in I know that | some of us will probably camp out at Shreveport North's UL Fly-in | Saturday night after our visit to Homer's. | You might want to consider joining us there. | | Terry - FireFly #95 Terry: Count me in on that. john h mkIII DO NOT ARCHIVE ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 07:57:49 AM PST US From: "boyd" Subject: Kolb-List: Props and engine mount for all the senior Kolbers here is a question. I am about to weld in place the engine mount. I have now the option of lowering the mount a bit to reduce thrust line. Ron I guess it depends on what engine you will be using,,, what altitude you will be flying at most,,, and what properties you want your plane to have. When I called warp drive and asked for my application. I was told 68 inch 3 blade full width tips. Darrell at warp drive told me that the full width tips were best suited for sea plane and / or high altitude applications. I have a mark III with a 912 80 hp. field elevation is 4426 ft and density altitudes in the summer of 6000 + or - and to fly over the mountains I go to 8000 ft msl on a regular basis. John H has the 912s 100 hp version. And uses a 72 inch taper tip blade. Which warp drive told me was best suited for his plane and application. In short, I think I would call Darrell at Warp Drive, explain your situation, and ask for his advice. I don't think he would steer you wrong. As for tip boom clearance,,, I think 1 1/2 to 2 inch should be ok it seems that some are using on inch or so. The biggest problem would be involved in how much shake the engine has during start up and shutdown. Boyd ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 08:02:28 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: vinyl graphics vs painting From: "MKIIIX040" Paul thanks for the "plug". You probably ordered from a girl in Fl. because she was, oh say, purtier than me. Aplication fluid works good for large surface areas. Dry is best on the rest. I use a clear aplication tape, makes it easier to see what your doing and is good for multiple color registration. The slickest way to keep your #'s or graphic in place is to tape it in the center. Peel back the aplication tape with the graphic half way and cut the backing paper. Squeege that side and your vinyl won't move from there, then remove the tape you used for positioning and the remainder of backing paper, squeege the other half remove the application tape and Presto your done! Do not apply in direct sunlight! I use high perfomance vinyl on GA just because. It's thinner, 3 times the cost, and harder to work with. The less expensive intermediate vinyl may shrink slightly after a couple years but neither one will will come off. I've put a pressure washer directly against letters on my tailgate and they didn't come off. I asked Travis about making their logos in different sizes and colors to match different aircraft. He said he didn't have any problem with it. Quite a while back I even made Kolb mugs for the crew at TNK. Vic 912 UL Extra Maine do not archive -------- MKIIIX040 912UL Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=103418#103418 ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 08:18:37 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: newbie From: "jb92563" Hi Steve, Interesting points you mentioned. What do you mean by VERY thinwalled tubing in a wet environment? Are you talking about the welded structure of the US? Is the FF welded structure of thicker tubing? Its Crome-Molly tubing on the US as far as I know from my friend. I assume those floats are ~29lbs each right? and you can use the parachute allowance? meaning that you do not have a parachute but floats instead? Pardon all the questions from a newbie, but my other aircraft are experimental category and I dont know about all the ins/out of the Part 103 category. I dont think the FF is in my budget right now...the US Im getting is only 3K with a trailer, 2 Cuyuna 430's a 2 blade and 3 blade prop. The wing has a 6" tear in the covering that I need to repair and is otherwise in decent corrosion free condition. Ray Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=103422#103422 ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 08:21:35 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Southern California Kolb flyers? From: "jb92563" I was wondering if there is a presence of Kolbs in Southern California? Perhaps I can join them for some flying sorties when my US is ready later this year, and to compare notes etc. Ray Lake Elsinore, CA Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=103425#103425 ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 08:30:06 AM PST US From: "Richard Girard" Subject: Kolb-List: E-LSA before and after 1-31-08 >From current online FAR's =A7 21.191 Experimental certificates. Experimental certificates are issued for the following purposes: (i) *Operating light-sport aircraft. *Operating a light-sport aircraft that =97 (1) Has not been issued a U.S. or foreign airworthiness certificate and doe s not meet the provisions of =A7103.1 of this chapter. An experimental certificate will not be issued under this paragraph for these aircraft afte r January 31, 2008; 2) Has been assembled=97 (i) From an aircraft kit for which the applicant can provide the informatio n required by =A721.193(e); and (ii) In accordance with manufacturer's assembly instructions that meet an applicable consensus standard; or (3) Has been previously issued a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category under =A721.190. =A7 21.193 Experimental certificates: general. An applicant for an experimental certificate must submit the following information: (e) In the case of a light-sport aircraft assembled from a kit to be certificated in accordance with =A721.191(i)(2), an applicant must provide the following: (1) Evidence that an aircraft of the same make and model was manufactured and assembled by the aircraft kit manufacturer and issued a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category. (2) The aircraft's operating instructions. (3) The aircraft's maintenance and inspection procedures. (4) The manufacturer's statement of compliance for the aircraft kit used in the aircraft assembly that meets =A721.190(c), except that instead of meeti ng =A721.190(c)(7), the statement must identify assembly instructions for the aircraft that meet an applicable consensus standard. (5) The aircraft's flight training supplement. (6) In addition to paragraphs (e)(1) through (e)(5) of this section, for an aircraft kit manufactured outside of the United States, evidence that the aircraft kit was manufactured in a country with which the United States has a Bilateral Airworthiness Agreement concerning airplanes or a Bilateral Aviation Safety Agreement with associated Implementation Procedures for Airworthiness concerning airplanes, or an equivalent airworthiness agreement. These are the rules that apply to obtaining an experimental certificate for operating an Experimental Light Sport Aircraft. Notice that 21.191(i)1 doesn't say anything about where the aircraft came from. No mention of kits, manufactured, homebuilt, nothing, nada. Just two things are required to get an experimental certificate for an E-LSA before 1-31-08. The aircraft in't legal as an ultralight, and it's never been registered before. That's it. Can you buy a kit from Kolb today and get an E-LSA experimental certificate ? YES, but you must have that experimental certificate in your hands before the stroke of midnight on the night of Jan 31, 2008. Can you buy a complete aircraft, today, and get an E-LSA experimental certificate? YES, but you must have that experimental certificate in your hands before the stroke of midnight on the night of Jan 31, 2008. Can you design and build an aircraft from scratch, starting today, and get an E-LSA experimental certificate? YES, but you must have that experimental certificate in your hands before the stroke of midnight on the night of Jan 31, 2008. The word registration is getting kicked around this group as though it is synonymous with getting an experimental certificate. It is not. Getting an aircraft registered is only a step in the process of getting an experimenta l certificate. If you have only your registration on February 1, 2008 your aircraft CANNOT be given an experimental certificate for E-LSA unless it meets the requirements of 21.191(i)2 or 21.191(i)3. Rick -- Rick Girard "Ya'll drop on in" takes on a whole new meaning when you live at the airport. ________________________________ Message 21 ____________________________________ Time: 09:10:18 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: SUV From: "jb92563" Personally I drive an SUV Jeep Wrangler because when the floods, landslides and Earthquates tear up the land here in California I will be able to put it in 4wd and get my self and loved ones out of harms way. Also comes in handy when roads are washed out or accidents block entire highways and you need to go around the mess. Also good for launching the Seadoos since I can drive in deep to the fenders and not have to worry about the engine quiting. Its also nice to know I can mount a .50 Cal on the Jeep if things start going to hell out here some day. I think I'll mount it next week, those road ragers are really starting to get out of hand....LOL I am able to tow a 1000lb 30' glider/trailer at 75mph no problem with this combo so I imagine that my Kolb US will not be a problem either. My commuting to work vehicle gets 50mpg (Motorcycle) Ray Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=103445#103445 ________________________________ Message 22 ____________________________________ Time: 09:34:24 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: E-LSA before and after 1-31-08 From: "John Williamson" Hi Rick and all, To use your own message quote: "(e) In the case of a light-sport aircraft assembled from a kit to be certificated in accordance with 21.191(i)(2), an applicant must provide the following: (1) Evidence that an aircraft of the same make and model was manufactured and assembled by the aircraft kit manufacturer and issued a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category. (2) The aircraft's operating instructions. (3) The aircraft's maintenance and inspection procedures. (4) The manufacturer's statement of compliance for the aircraft kit used in the aircraft assembly that meets 21.190(c), except that instead of meeting 21.190(c)(7), the statement must identify assembly instructions for the aircraft that meet an applicable consensus standard. (5) The aircraft's flight training supplement." You guys can read and interpret to your liking all you want but that isn't going to change the fact that you can't build a new TNK Kit and register it as ELSA: Why you might ask: 1. TNK does not manufacturer an airplane that has had a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category issued. 2. TNK does not issue aircraft's operating instructions with their Kits. 3. TNK does not issue aircraft's maintenance and inspection procedures. You might be able to write your own for submittal, but I doubt it. 4. TNK does not issue a manufacturer's statement of compliance or assembly instructions for the aircraft that meet an applicable consensus standard. 5. TNK does not issue an aircraft's flight training supplement. If any one of the five item are missing, it can't be done as an ELSA for a new kit construction, ever. Do Not Archive -------- John Williamson Arlington, TX Kolbra, 912ULS http://home.tx.rr.com/kolbrapilot Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=103451#103451 ________________________________ Message 23 ____________________________________ Time: 10:01:01 AM PST US From: "Ralph" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Kolb-List Fire Star Logistics ??? I numbered mine and got the license. Mine weighed in at 319 lbs and I would usually carry an extra 6 gallons in addition to the 5 gallon main tank. It takes awhile to go through the process, but it's worth it to have the freedom to take short trips. If you try to stay under 103 (which is next to impossible), 5-gallons doesn't allow any serious cross country flying. A Firestar with a 503 or larger engine certainly puts it out of the legal limits for an ultralight. Ralph Burlingame Original Firestar w/447 20 years flying it N91493 -- "DANIEL WALTER" wrote: ----- Original Message ----- From: BMWBikeCrz@aol.com To: kolb- list@matronics.com Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 7:11 PMSubject: Kolb- List: Kolb-List Fire Star Logistics ??? I was talking to a couple of guys at lunch that fly Trikes and Gyro Copters Thier feeling is that The FAA is not too concerned with Single seat ultralights ... Dave, What does your Firestar weigh? You should be close to the 254 dry and putting it on a diet may be the thing to do. If you carry more than 5 gallons or are thinking of putting on a 503 than the N number is the way to go. Dan WalterPalmyra PAUltrastar, UL202 Do not Archive_- ============================================================_- http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List_- ============================================================_- http://forums.matronics.com_- =========================================================== ________________________________________________________________________ Interested in getting caught up on today's news? Click here to checkout USA TODAY Headlines. http://track.juno.com/s/lc?s=198954&u=http://www.usatoday.com/news/front.htm?csp=24 ________________________________ Message 24 ____________________________________ Time: 10:32:56 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: newbie...we are all newbies From: "joe" Bob, Thanks, that is the type of thing I would like to hear. I really don't know the difference in all the planes. I think the folding wings has to be a huge plus. My understanding is that they are a safe plane and I sure like the way they look. I mentioned another brand in another post and got the impression I shouldn't have, but apparently that other brand, which shall remain nameless here, doesn't fly nearly as well. Does it flying better mean that it handles better, flys faster with the same engine, better fuel economy, less maintainence, pick up women better or what. What makes it better than some of the others? Joe Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=103468#103468 ________________________________ Message 25 ____________________________________ Time: 10:40:10 AM PST US From: "David Key" Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Re: E-LSA before and after 1-31-08 John W(on list) I was told that if I build a EAB I can switch it to a ELSA. Not that I would want to, but someone was comparing the two on the list and didn't mention that huge advantage of EAB, you can switch an EAB to ESLA but not the other way around. Not that anyone would want to but is this true? I was told this by the instructor in an ELSA repair man class. Thanks, David Key ________________________________ Message 26 ____________________________________ Time: 10:48:49 AM PST US From: N27SB@aol.com Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: newbie Hi Ray, According to TNK the Ultrastars were typically .028 wall chrome moly. Some early FF were also .028. All of the later FF's are either 50/50 .028 and .035 or all .035. My comment in regard to Very thin wall tubing was directed at the concern for where you attach loads and also the issue of internal rust from years of age. The configuration I saw years ago placed loads on the front of the cage. I do not believe it was designed for that. The Ultrastar looks to be challenging for float mounting. If you have a BRS that weighs less than 24 lbs you can use the overage but the chute has to be on. Part 103 gives you up to 60 lbs total for the floats but if your floats weigh less you cannot keep the extra and it does not apply to the mounting gear or spreader bars. This is not much of a factor though because you will have a hard time finding floats that weigh less than 30 lbs each. Good luck on your project. Steve do not archive ________________________________ Message 27 ____________________________________ Time: 10:57:49 AM PST US From: N27SB@aol.com Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: newbie Ray Also wanted to mention that the key here is to keep your mounting hardware lighter than your existing gear legs, tires, wheels and brakes. It is easy to do on the FF and you actually end up with a little extra weight loss to play with. On a Firefly you need to keep it simple and drop the frills and add BRS to stay in weight in a Float configuration. Steve do not archive ________________________________ Message 28 ____________________________________ Time: 11:18:59 AM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Kolb-List: New 912ULS Oil Fittings Hi Gang: Need some help with the new, push on type, oil line fittings used on the 912ULS oil tank and engine. What is the prescribed procedure for installation and security? Also, prescribed procedure for removal. I found some info last night on the internet. From what I could make out, it is a simple push on fit with no securing hose clamp. Thanks, john h mkIII ________________________________ Message 29 ____________________________________ Time: 11:42:55 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: newbie From: "JetPilot" I would defintely go for the Firefly, its an updated and improved design... If you cannot afford it, then it will have to be the older ultrastar, but they are old and I would check for rust, corrosion, etc. very carefully. Why are you so worried about weight ? The ultrastar and the firefly are 103 airplanes, I dont think anyone is going to come out and weigh you on the lake or grass field to see if you are 5 pounds over or not. Dont get too anal about the weight. If I needed a chute, and it put me 5 pounds over weight, i would sure as hell put it on. Maybe some guys would feel good about getting killed "legally" after a structural failure because they were not 5 pounds over weight, but not me. I would put on a BRS, period. If my 103 plane needed something to make it safer, whatever it may be, I would sure as heck put it on and not worry about 5 or 10 pounds that will never make any difference to anyone. Mike -------- "NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could have !!! Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=103484#103484 ________________________________ Message 30 ____________________________________ Time: 11:51:55 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: newbie From: "jb92563" I just want to keep it light so I get decent performance with floats on an US with Cuyuna 430. I plan on WEARING my chute, as I'd rather not be in the seat with the engine and wings behind or above my head if I crash. I'll take my chances with the tree branches....LOL (No rhyming intended) -------- Ray do not archive Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=103487#103487 ________________________________ Message 31 ____________________________________ Time: 12:18:51 PM PST US From: "Richard Girard" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: E-LSA before and after 1-31-08 David, No you can't. 21.191(i)1 says not previously registered so you can't switch back and forth. John, Those regulations do not go into effect until Feb 1, 2008. I registered my store boughten trike in January, no problems. Go take a look at Form 8050-88A "Affidavit of Ownership". If, as you say, you can't register an E-LSA why does this form have so many ways to account for ownership when registering. Notice that this form, too, expires on Jan 31, 2008. You just don't seem to understand 21.191(i)1. If it meets the definition of an LSA (FAR 1 Definitions), hasn't been registered before, and doesn't qualify as an ultraltlight you can obtain an E-LSA experimental certificate until Jan 1, 2008. Period. After Jan 31, 2008 you have to meet the requirements of 21.191(i) 2 or 3. Rick On 3/28/07, David Key wrote: > > > John W(on list) > I was told that if I build a EAB I can switch it to a ELSA. Not that I > would > want to, but someone was comparing the two on the list and didn't mention > that huge advantage of EAB, you can switch an EAB to ESLA but not the > other > way around. Not that anyone would want to but is this true? I was told > this > by the instructor in an ELSA repair man class. > > Thanks, > David Key > > -- Rick Girard "Ya'll drop on in" takes on a whole new meaning when you live at the airport. ________________________________ Message 32 ____________________________________ Time: 12:21:30 PM PST US From: Ron Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Props and engine mount I think I want to stay with the 2 inch clearance that is mandated for standard airworthiness aircraft. It specifies a 2 inch clearance as a minimum. I suppose with super rigid mounts less would be safe, but I am not sure vibration was the only reason for the clearance. I've wanted a 4 blade prop for some time, I think it probably gives better thrust effect (I don't want to start up the old debate of how many blades are better). I mostly want to do it for my own gratification and to validate my theory. That is why I figure a 68" would be fine. But if it does not work out I certainly want the option of going to a larger diameter prop. I think JH probably experimented with most of that stuff, but I would want to know if there was any side by side comparisons. I think that lowering back drag from the rear engine mount supports and prop eficiency all else equal may give the best return on effort spent. I will call the fellow at Warp Drive and see what he has to say. Ron (Arizona) ---- boyd wrote: ============ for all the senior Kolbers here is a question. I am about to weld in place the engine mount. I have now the option of lowering the mount a bit to reduce thrust line. Ron I guess it depends on what engine you will be using,,, what altitude you will be flying at most,,, and what properties you want your plane to have. When I called warp drive and asked for my application. I was told 68 inch 3 blade full width tips. Darrell at warp drive told me that the full width tips were best suited for sea plane and / or high altitude applications. I have a mark III with a 912 80 hp. field elevation is 4426 ft and density altitudes in the summer of 6000 + or - and to fly over the mountains I go to 8000 ft msl on a regular basis. John H has the 912s 100 hp version. And uses a 72 inch taper tip blade. Which warp drive told me was best suited for his plane and application. In short, I think I would call Darrell at Warp Drive, explain your situation, and ask for his advice. I don't think he would steer you wrong. As for tip boom clearance,,, I think 1 1/2 to 2 inch should be ok it seems that some are using on inch or so. The biggest problem would be involved in how much shake the engine has during start up and shutdown. Boyd -- kugelair.com ________________________________ Message 33 ____________________________________ Time: 12:45:19 PM PST US Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: newbie From: knowvne@aol.com The weight of the BRS or any other recover system is a NON issue for part 103........ Your legal with or without it regardless of its weight... Put one on the plane... 103.1 Applicability. This part prescribes rules governing the operation of ultralight vehicles in the United States. For the purposes of this part, an ultralight vehicle is a vehicle that: (a) Is used or intended to be used for manned operation in the air by a single occupant; (b) Is used or intended to be used for recreation or sport purposes only; (c) Does not have any U.S. or foreign airworthiness certificate; and (d) If unpowered, weighs less than 155 pounds; or (e) If powered: (1) Weighs less than 254 pounds empty weight, excluding floats and safety devices which are intended for deployment in a potentially catastrophic situation; (2) Has a fuel capacity not exceeding 5 U.S. gallons; (3) Is not capable of more than 55 knots calibrated airspeed at full power in level flight; and (4) Has a power-off stall speed which does not exceed 24 knots calibrated airspeed. Mark Why are you so worried about weight ? The ultrastar and the firefly are 103 airplanes, I dont think anyone is going to come out and weigh you on the lake or grass field to see if you are 5 pounds over or not. Dont get too anal about the weight. If I needed a chute, and it put me 5 pounds over weight, i would sure as hell put it on. Maybe some guys would feel good about getting killed "legally" after a structural failure because they were not 5 pounds over weight, but not me. I would put on a BRS, period. If my 103 plane needed something to make it safer, whatever it may be, I would sure as heck put it on and not worry about 5 or 10 pounds that will never make any difference to anyone. Mike ________________________________________________________________________ from AOL at AOL.com. =0 ________________________________ Message 34 ____________________________________ Time: 12:55:08 PM PST US From: "Vic Peters" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: E-LSA before and after 1-31-08 Now you've all got me confused. I've never understood lawyer speak or FAR's If I don't finish my Extra by Feb. 08 besides hanging myself what are my options then? Does it have to be finished to be documented? Vic 912 UL Extra Maine do not archive ________________________________ Message 35 ____________________________________ Time: 01:02:29 PM PST US From: N27SB@aol.com Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: newbie In a message dated 3/28/2007 1:43:37 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, orcabonita@hotmail.com writes: Why are you so worried about weight ? The ultrastar and the firefly are 103 airplanes, I dont think anyone is going to come out and weigh you on the lake or grass field to see if you are 5 pounds over or not. Dont get too anal about the weight. If I needed a chute, and it put me 5 pounds over weight, i would sure as hell put it on. Maybe some guys would feel good about getting killed "legally" after a structural failure because they were not 5 pounds over weight, but not me. I would put on a BRS, period. If my 103 plane needed something to make it safer, whatever it may be, I would sure as heck put it on and not worry about 5 or 10 pounds that will never make any difference to anyone. Mike Hi Mike, The issue with weight is important to me for several reasons, At times I put my FF on display at the Kolb Booth And it should be legal at that time The BRS is a non issue because the one I am using weighs less than 24 lbs. You do not get the 24 lbs if it is not on the plane. If yours for example weighed 15 lbs then you get the extra 9 lbs free to use. I also like the personal challenge to play by the rules and win. Probably most important though is that a Legal Firefly on Floats with a pilot that weighs less than 180 lbs really performs. If I was interested in traveling greater distances I would register EAB. Steve B do not archive ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________ Message 36 ____________________________________ Time: 01:06:25 PM PST US From: N27SB@aol.com Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: newbie Mark, I see you beat me to the Punch, Well said, a BRS is a Win Win, except on the checkbook steve do not archive ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________ Message 37 ____________________________________ Time: 01:10:44 PM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: E-LSA before and after 1-31-08 From: "John Williamson" Rick and All, I stand corrected. Thank you Rick. Here is the section of FAR 21.191 that allows you to build and register your Kit Built or already built non-ultralight Kolb as as ELSA: "Experimental certificates are issued for the following purposes: (i) Operating light-sport aircraft. Operating a light-sport aircraft that (1) Has not been issued a U.S. or foreign airworthiness certificate and does not meet the provisions of 103.1 of this chapter. An experimental certificate will not be issued under this paragraph for these aircraft after January 31, 2008;" Here are some links for those that are interested in what this thread has been about: Fat Ultralights Deadline Looming http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/gen_av/light_sport/media/FatUltralights.doc Light Sport Aircraft Registration http://www.faa.gov/licenses_certificates/aircraft_certification/aircraft_registry/light_sport_aircraft/ Affidavit of Ownership for Experimental or Special Light-Sport Aircraft, AC Form 8050-88A http://www.faa.gov/licenses_certificates/aircraft_certification/aircraft_registry/media/8050-88a.pdf Thanks again Rick for keeping me straight. No Not Archive -------- John Williamson Arlington, TX Kolbra, 912ULS http://home.tx.rr.com/kolbrapilot Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=103508#103508 ________________________________ Message 38 ____________________________________ Time: 02:41:15 PM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Props and engine mount From: "JetPilot" Why would anyone want a 4 blade prop on a Kolb ? The climb would be horrible. With a 4 blade prop, you have less area producing a faster airstream, so IF you had a plane with a high top speed, 4 blades would make it faster. A Kolb is so slow, that you would never see any advantage of the higher velocity from the prop. Its kind of like putting a small jet engine on a Kolb, you would have a huge amount of air velocity out of the enigne, but not that much thrust in pounds.. All that HP with a low static thrust would be wasted on a slow and draggy plane. With a 4 bladed prop, you will be lucky if you dont lose so much thrust that the plane not only climbs horribly, but will be acutally slower than the 3 bladed prop. It looks like you have been looking at to many fast GA airplanes with 4 bladed prop, and not understanding that it just wont work well on a Kolb. But Im all for having real life testing over theory, as long as its someone else paying for the testing :) I look foward to seeing the results. Mike -------- "NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could have !!! Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=103528#103528 ________________________________ Message 39 ____________________________________ Time: 02:45:44 PM PST US From: Dana Hague Subject: Re: SPAM: Re: Kolb-List: Fly-in At 10:27 AM 3/28/2007, Terry wrote: >Steven Green wrote: > >I know that won't be a problem! As we get closer to the date, I will take >a poll and see how many are coming for Clara and Homer to be able to plan >and how many might like to stay over at Smoketown. I know that some of us >will probably camp out at Shreveport North's UL Fly-in Saturday night >after our visit to Homer's. >You might want to consider joining us there. For me, trailering to Smoketown and flying from there to Homer's sounds like the most practical plan... perhaps flying over to Shreveport and back on Sunday before heading home. Depending, of course, on whether I can get away that weekend at all (and if I have a flyable US, a roadable trailer, and a truck to pull it, none of which are true at the moment...) -Dana do not archive -- -- The citizens of the United States are getting the government they deserve. The problem is that I'm also getting the government they deserve. ________________________________ Message 40 ____________________________________ Time: 02:50:36 PM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: New 912ULS Oil Fittings From: "JetPilot" Here is a pictre of mine. -------- "NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could have !!! Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=103531#103531 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/ultralightmikekolbdetail12_27_2006_055_136.jpg ________________________________ Message 41 ____________________________________ Time: 03:37:15 PM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: New 912ULS Oil Fittings From: "Roger Lee" Hi John, With the correct push-on fittings and correct hose (special hose for push on only) you are technically right that they are push on only, but Rotax would like those backed up with a clamp. If they were enclosed in a cowling then they would like fire sleveing , too. But I know your plane is an open engine mounting. I can only guess that they want a clamp because we don't drive on the ground? -------- Roger Lee Tucson, Az. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=103539#103539 ________________________________ Message 42 ____________________________________ Time: 03:42:05 PM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: New 912ULS Oil Fittings Thanks, Mike B: But..............your fittings are the old style, like I had on my last engine. john h mkIII ________________________________ Message 43 ____________________________________ Time: 03:42:10 PM PST US From: TheWanderingWench Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: E-LSA before and after 1-31-08 Yes, Vic, it has to be finished to be "documented" (e.g. get its airworthiness certificate.) It has to be completely finished and have received its airworthiness certificate by 1-31-08. Apparently the FAA is expecting a flood of applications for airworthiness inspections in Dec. and Jan., and they are saying that if you apply for your airworthiness certificate inspection by November (and I'm not sure of the exact date in November - it's been on this list) they will still grant you a certificate (assuming it's airworthy) even if they can't get to you by 1-31-08. BUT - that's only if they aren't able to complete the process - not if you're not ready for them to do the inspection. Arty Trost --- Vic Peters wrote: > Now you've all got me confused. I've never > understood lawyer speak or FAR's > If I don't finish my Extra by Feb. 08 besides > hanging myself > what are my options then? > Does it have to be finished to be documented? > > Vic > 912 UL Extra > Maine > do not archive 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 44 ____________________________________ Time: 03:50:17 PM PST US From: Russ Kinne Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: newbie Ray You might want to do some re-thinking. I doubt you'd be able to get out of a Kolb in time, if something suddenly happened, esp at a low altitude. I've done some jumping, but never had the luxury of flying a chute- equipped aircraft. I consider it a HUGE advantage. You could deploy it in a second or less if you had to. If a wing folds do you want to try opening a door & getting out in anything like that time? If the price were double or even triple I'd still buy a BRS. My life is worth it to me. FWIW On Mar 28, 2007, at 2:51 PM, jb92563 wrote: > > I just want to keep it light so I get decent performance with > floats on an US with Cuyuna 430. > > I plan on WEARING my chute, as I'd rather not be in the seat with > the engine and wings behind or above my head if I crash. > > I'll take my chances with the tree branches....LOL (No rhyming > intended) > > -------- > Ray > > do not archive > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=103487#103487 > > ________________________________ Message 45 ____________________________________ Time: 03:52:42 PM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: New 912ULS Oil Fittings | With the correct push-on fittings and correct hose (special hose for push on only) you are technically right that they are push on only, but Rotax would like those backed up with a clamp. | Roger Lee Hi Roger: No problem with the push on fitting. The 912 series engines are operating on a vacuum for the feed line from the oil tank, and 3 to 5 psi on the return line to the tank. I may use a narrow SS hose clamp as backup, or a couple wraps of safety wire, just to make an old man feel better. ;-) Take care, john h mkIII ________________________________ Message 46 ____________________________________ Time: 04:00:33 PM PST US From: "Mark W German" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Attending Sun and Fun 2007 Hi Rick: I will be coming down to take the Lockwood 912 training class at the show. Two days 17-18 but will be around all week. will have a car and am staying in a hotel. Hope to see you all. Mark German Kolbra 912 280 hrs. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard & Martha Neilsen" Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 7:16 AM Subject: Kolb-List: Attending Sun and Fun 2007 > > > I will be going to Sun N Fun 2007 and will be camping in the Ultralight > campground most of the week. Is anyone else planning on going? Sounds like > John H. will be there. > > I will be driving so I can bring supplies people might need. Is there > going to be a cook out? Can I bring something for it? > > Do not archive > > Rick Neilsen > Redrive VW powered MKIIIc > > > ________________________________ Message 47 ____________________________________ Time: 05:21:02 PM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Attending Sun and Fun 2007 From: "Don G" I will be there but for one day, either tues or wed, not sure yet. I will of course be looking for other Kolb-benders...and even those who havent bent one! Hope to see many of you there! -------- Don G FireFly#098 http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=103561#103561 ________________________________ Message 48 ____________________________________ Time: 06:23:44 PM PST US From: "Jack B. Hart" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Props and engine mount/propeller selection From: Ron ................... > I've wanted a 4 blade prop for some time, I think it probably gives better thrust effect (I don't want to start up the old debate of how many blades are better). I mostly want to do it for my own gratification and to validate my theory. That is why I figure a 68" would be fine. ................ Ron, In making propeller decisions look at: http://www.gylesaero.com/freeware/propcalc.shtml Using this software I input for a 63 mphi, 2,222 propeller rpm, and 68 inch diameter propeller for the FireFly. Then I changed the pitch for a two blade propeller until the engine was putting out 38 hp. This produced a thrust of 166.5 pounds with a propeller efficiency of 73.6%. Leaving all other inputs constant I changed from a two to a three blade propeller and adjusted the pitch until three blade propeller produced the same thrust. Propeller efficiency fell to 69.6% and the engine power to produce the same thrust went up to 40.2 hp. Adding another blade to propeller produced an efficiency of 64.3% and an engine hp requirement of 43.5 hp. Then I changed tactics. I kept the initial conditions, thrust and efficiencies constant as I added blades. To do this you have to shorten the blade length and adjust pitch. What I found was that to maintain 73.6% at 166.5 pounds of thrust the three blade propeller diameter turned out to be 57.6 inches and the four blade came out at 52 inches. To go the constant 68 inch diameter route, it indicates a 4.1 to 9.3% increase in fuel burn. To go with constant efficiency with no increase in fuel burn, one must be prepared to shorten the blades. If length can absorb max engine hp, it is difficult to beat a two blade propeller. The inertia is lower, weighs less, and in most cases is less expensive. Try the program for your intended setup and see how it comes out. For what it is worth. Jack B. Hart FF004 Winchester, IN ________________________________ Message 49 ____________________________________ Time: 06:48:29 PM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Attending Sun and Fun 2007 From: "JetPilot" My wife and I are planning on going, dont know which days yet. With a little luck I will be flying my MK-III to lakeland this year instead of having to borrow John's ! Mike -------- "NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could have !!! Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=103583#103583 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/rosafloridalakelandairshow04_04_2006_014_192.jpg ________________________________ Message 50 ____________________________________ Time: 07:22:31 PM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Fw: Kolb-List: Re: Attending Sun and Fun 2007 With a little luck I will be flying my MK-III to lakeland this year instead of having to borrow John's ! | | Mike Mike: Hope you get to fly your Kolb to Lakeland this year. However, Rosa is always welcome to borrow my chair and my wing any time she desires. Thanks for the photo. Good shot of my camp. john h mkIII ________________________________ Message 51 ____________________________________ Time: 07:30:07 PM PST US From: Malcolmbru@aol.com Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Attending Sun and Fun 2007 Rick I will be camping behind the big bus near the headquarters tent and working the UL camper registration if they still call it that Paradise city has ben re named sport pilot something I will be there all week just ask for. Malcolm ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________ Message 52 ____________________________________ Time: 07:34:54 PM PST US From: Ron Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Props and engine mount :-DIf I ever wanted proof that I never get what I want here it is. I did not want a debate about props. But I must say and I will not explain as I am holding out for consultation fees, that a 4 blader will be better especially in climb and throughout the range. We shall see stay tuned, mmm unless I run out of money first. I will borrow a 3 blader from whoever, whenever install it on my flyer and will do both time to climb and cruise. That is the only way to do it. Maybe next year at Monument V we can test it. ,Ron (Arizona) ======================================= ---- JetPilot wrote: ============ Why would anyone want a 4 blade prop on a Kolb ? The climb would be horrible. With a 4 blade prop, you have less area producing a faster airstream, so IF you had a plane with a high top speed, 4 blades would make it faster. A Kolb is so slow, that you would never see any advantage of the higher velocity from the prop. Its kind of like putting a small jet engine on a Kolb, you would have a huge amount of air velocity out of the enigne, but not that much thrust in pounds.. All that HP with a low static thrust would be wasted on a slow and draggy plane. With a 4 bladed prop, you will be lucky if you dont lose so much thrust that the plane not only climbs horribly, but will be acutally slower than the 3 bladed prop. It looks like you have been looking at to many fast GA airplanes with 4 bladed prop, and not understanding that it just wont work well on a Kolb. But Im all for having real life testing over theory, as long as its someone else paying for the testing :) I look foward to seeing the results. Mike -------- "NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could have !!! Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=103528#103528 ________________________________ Message 53 ____________________________________ Time: 07:50:24 PM PST US From: Ron Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Props and engine mount/propeller selection I have no doubt that Induced drag and Parasitic drag on a 4 blader will be higher, however I also think that I will get more thrust out of it with my set up. It is obvious to me and I measured again today that my max prop can be 68 inches. So working with that, and all the turbulation that a pusher prop experiences I want as much air grabbing, thrust sucking, as I can garner out of that 105 hp in back there. I don't mind being proven wrong on this, I think its fun. Ron (Arizona) ========================================= ---- "Jack B. Hart" wrote: ============ From: Ron ................... > I've wanted a 4 blade prop for some time, I think it probably gives better thrust effect (I don't want to start up the old debate of how many blades are better). I mostly want to do it for my own gratification and to validate my theory. That is why I figure a 68" would be fine. ................ Ron, In making propeller decisions look at: http://www.gylesaero.com/freeware/propcalc.shtml Using this software I input for a 63 mphi, 2,222 propeller rpm, and 68 inch diameter propeller for the FireFly. Then I changed the pitch for a two blade propeller until the engine was putting out 38 hp. This produced a thrust of 166.5 pounds with a propeller efficiency of 73.6%. Leaving all other inputs constant I changed from a two to a three blade propeller and adjusted the pitch until three blade propeller produced the same thrust. Propeller efficiency fell to 69.6% and the engine power to produce the same thrust went up to 40.2 hp. Adding another blade to propeller produced an efficiency of 64.3% and an engine hp requirement of 43.5 hp. Then I changed tactics. I kept the initial conditions, thrust and efficiencies constant as I added blades. To do this you have to shorten the blade length and adjust pitch. What I found was that to maintain 73.6% at 166.5 pounds of thrust the three blade propeller diameter turned out to be 57.6 inches and the four blade came out at 52 inches. To go the constant 68 inch diameter route, it indicates a 4.1 to 9.3% increase in fuel burn. To go with constant efficiency with no increase in fuel burn, one must be prepared to shorten the blades. If length can absorb max engine hp, it is difficult to beat a two blade propeller. The inertia is lower, weighs less, and in most cases is less expensive. Try the program for your intended setup and see how it comes out. For what it is worth. Jack B. Hart FF004 Winchester, IN -- kugelair.com ________________________________ Message 54 ____________________________________ Time: 10:47:29 PM PST US From: "Richard Girard" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: E-LSA before and after 1-31-08 Vic, Let's start from the beginning. Have you registered your aircraft? Rick On 3/28/07, Vic Peters wrote: > > Now you've all got me confused. I've never understood lawyer speak or > FAR's > If I don't finish my Extra by Feb. 08 besides hanging myself > what are my options then? > Does it have to be finished to be documented? > > Vic > 912 UL Extra > Maine > do not archive > > * > > > * > > -- Rick Girard "Ya'll drop on in" takes on a whole new meaning when you live at the airport. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Other Matronics Email List Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post A New Message kolb-list@matronics.com UN/SUBSCRIBE http://www.matronics.com/subscription List FAQ http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/Kolb-List.htm Web Forum Interface To Lists http://forums.matronics.com Matronics List Wiki http://wiki.matronics.com Full Archive Search Engine http://www.matronics.com/search 7-Day List Browse http://www.matronics.com/browse/kolb-list Browse Digests http://www.matronics.com/digest/kolb-list Browse Other Lists http://www.matronics.com/browse Live Online Chat! http://www.matronics.com/chat Archive Downloading http://www.matronics.com/archives Photo Share http://www.matronics.com/photoshare Other Email Lists http://www.matronics.com/emaillists Contributions http://www.matronics.com/contribution ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.