Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:48 AM - Re: test (Dana Hague)
2. 04:48 AM - Re: Xtra Information (Dana Hague)
3. 05:08 AM - Re: Where'd they go?? (Eugene Zimmerman)
4. 05:54 AM - Re: Mutual respect (Russ Kinne)
5. 06:02 AM - Re: Dodged a small bullet, learned a lesson! (Richard Girard)
6. 06:09 AM - Re: Muffler Paint, what kind to use? (Richard Girard)
7. 06:43 AM - Re: Xtra Information (Denny Rowe)
8. 07:33 AM - Re: Re: Cracking in tubing and welds? (Jack B. Hart)
9. 07:44 AM - Re: Where'd they go?? (Vic Peters)
10. 08:02 AM - IVO Prop Revisit (beauford T)
11. 08:05 AM - Re: Xtra Information (Vic Peters)
12. 08:21 AM - Re: Cracking in tubing and welds? (Wade Lawicki)
13. 09:00 AM - I'm back! (Mike Welch)
14. 09:17 AM - Re: Re: Cracking in tubing and welds? (herbgh@juno.com)
15. 09:21 AM - Re: I'm back! (Kolbdriver)
16. 09:35 AM - Musings on Safety and the BRS (Richard Girard)
17. 09:36 AM - Re: Beautiful exhaust & awesome looking panels (Southern Reflections)
18. 10:21 AM - Re: Xtra Information (Richard & Martha Neilsen)
19. 10:42 AM - Post Mortem - Matronics List Pummeled By Spam... (Matt Dralle)
20. 11:21 AM - Cold Weather Flying In An Open Cockpit (Jack B. Hart)
21. 01:21 PM - exhaust parts treatment (Bart Morgan)
22. 01:26 PM - exhaust parts treatment (Bart Morgan)
23. 03:24 PM - Ultrastar weight, folding in wind (Dana Hague)
24. 04:00 PM - exhaust coeatings (Mike Welch)
25. 04:09 PM - Coatings C.. O..A..T..I..N..G..S (Mike Welch)
26. 04:25 PM - Phase I (Larry Cottrell)
27. 05:26 PM - Re: Cold Weather Flying In An Open Cockpit (Richard Girard)
28. 05:31 PM - Re: Xtra Information (ElleryWeld@aol.com)
29. 05:52 PM - GPS selection help? (grantr)
30. 05:53 PM - Re: Musings on Safety and the BRS (John Hauck)
31. 06:07 PM - Re: GPS selection help? (ElleryWeld@aol.com)
32. 06:17 PM - Re: GPS selection help? (Larry Cottrell)
33. 06:18 PM - Re: GPS selection help? (Richard Girard)
34. 06:21 PM - Re: GPS selection help? (The BaronVonEvil)
35. 06:27 PM - Re: GPS selection help? (Larry Cottrell)
36. 06:29 PM - Re: GPS selection help? (Dana Hague)
37. 06:31 PM - Re: Ultrastar weight, folding in wind (Denny Rowe)
38. 06:40 PM - Re: GPS selection help? (planecrazzzy)
39. 06:45 PM - Re: Ultrastar weight, folding in wind (Dana Hague)
40. 06:45 PM - Re: GPS selection help? (beauford T)
41. 06:49 PM - Re: Re: GPS selection help? (John Hauck)
42. 07:00 PM - Re: Coatings C.. O..A..T..I..N..G..S (planecrazzzy)
43. 07:05 PM - Re: Musings on Safety and the BRS (Richard Girard)
44. 07:11 PM - Re: Re: GPS selection help? (Denny Rowe)
45. 07:38 PM - Re: Re: GPS selection help? (John Hauck)
46. 07:51 PM - Re: Musings on Safety and the BRS (John Hauck)
47. 07:52 PM - Re: Musings on Safety and the BRS (John Hauck)
48. 08:00 PM - Re: Musings on Safety and the BRS (John Hauck)
49. 08:05 PM - Re: GPS selection help? (Robert Laird)
50. 08:18 PM - Re: GPS selection help? (George T. Alexander, Jr.)
51. 08:41 PM - Armistice Day (Bob Noyer)
52. 08:50 PM - Re: Musings on Safety and the BRS (Richard Girard)
53. 09:07 PM - GPS recommendations (Mike Welch)
54. 09:20 PM - Caution...error in story (Mike Welch)
55. 09:33 PM - Re: GPS recommendations (John Hauck)
56. 09:38 PM - Re: Caution...error in story (John Hauck)
57. 10:06 PM - Re: Caution...error in story (Richard Girard)
58. 10:34 PM - Re: GPS selection help? (The BaronVonEvil)
59. 10:35 PM - Re: GPS recommendations (jim)
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 |
|
At 06:38 PM 11/10/2007, Mike Welch wrote:
>This is a test message. I have not been able to post or receive any
>emails from this list.
I had a few of mine get bounced a few days ago, but no problem now...
except this morning I got a bunch of duplicates.
-Dana
do not archive
--
--
A truly wise man never plays leapfrog with a unicorn.
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: Xtra Information |
At 10:22 AM 11/10/2007, Vic Peters wrote:
>I'm thinking of building an experimental Taylorcraft. I figure once no one
>can afford a Cub anymore they will become popular.
Vic, ORIGINAL Cubs are outta sight pricewise, but a replica (experimental)
Cub should be no more expensive than a replica Taylorcraft. Not to put the
T-Craft down, I owned one for years; it's really a much better flying
airplane than the Cub (remember, C.G. Taylor designed the Cub first, then
the T-Craft as an improved design). Even an original T-Craft can be had in
the sub $20K range for a good flying example.
-Dana
do not archive
--
--
A truly wise man never plays leapfrog with a unicorn.
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Where'd they go?? |
Yeah,
Al-Qaida sabotage of the internet.
I noticed the same problem.
Gene
On Nov 9, 2007, at 11:24 PM, Mike Welch wrote:
>
>
> Earlier this afternoon I replied to Ray's request about exhaust
> coatings. Minutes later I initiated a new thread finally replying
> to whoever it was that wanted a suggestion for finishing their panel.
>
> Neither of them has shown up about 7 hours after I sent them. And
> yet I see others show up. What gives??
>
> Mike Welch
> _________________________________________________________________
> Climb to the top of the charts! Play Star Shuffle: the word
> scramble challenge with star power.
> http://club.live.com/star_shuffle.aspx?
> icid=starshuffle_wlmailtextlink_oct
>
>
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: Mutual respect |
I echo that!
On Nov 9, 2007, at 10:40 AM, Tom Deiulio wrote:
> Will those that insist on downgrading and insulting others please
> remove themselves from this list and leave us to our recreation and
> peace. I've always considered aviators individuals with above
> average intelligence and maturity.
>
> do not archive
> ============================================================ _-
> www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List_-
> ============================================================ _-
> forums.matronics.com_-
> ===========================================================
>
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: Dodged a small bullet, learned a lesson! |
Lanny, Back in the days of the Mikuni pumper carb, I was trying to get
a Zenoah to run. We were trying to get it started and I used a little
WD-40 as starting fluid. Of course I used the little tube to direct
the spray right down the carb throat.
Spray down the carb throat, the engine runs a bit then stops, repeat.
Just keep spraying, engine keeps running.
Can runs out, engine stops.
Hey, where did that tube go?
Pull the spark plug and there was a tiny piece of red tube lying on it.
All sorts of foul words directed at self and most everything else I
could think to blame for my stupidity.
Order head and base gasket and new Mikuni slide carb.
A few days later, disassemble engine and look for more pieces.
Not one to be found. Flush engine real good with WD-40 and no darn red
tube pieces.
Reassemble engine with new carb and reinstall.
Vroom.
Yeah, no little tubes anywhere near an intake, ever! :-)
Rick
On Nov 10, 2007 7:32 PM, Lanny Fetterman <donaho@uplink.net> wrote:
>
> Hi all, Just thought I would share a lesson I learned today. I was going
> to fog my 503 for winter storage today. Since the FSII was on the trailer,
> in the hanger and it was raining, I figured I would just take the carbs off
> and fog the crankcase without starting the engine. Seemed like a good idea
> at the time, but I digress.
> Anyway, I put the little plastic straw thingie on the fogging can, stuck
> the straw into the intake and pushed the button on the aerosol can. In the
> blink of an eye the plastic straw blew off the can and went into the
> crankcase, CRAP!! Who would have ever predicted that.
> I could see the very top of the plastic straw standing straight up in
the
> crankcase. I wasn`t sure if it was sitting on the bottom of the case or if
> it could fall further and disappear. Long story short, I used a four
> fingered grabbing tool to pull it back to the intake side of the cylinder,
> then grabbed it with a pair of needle nose pliers, and pulled it out. This
> all took about half an hour from the beginning of the circus to the end. I
> think I had some divine help as the straw was very slippery from the
> fogging oil.
> What I learned is, never use the straw to inject fogging oil into the
> crankcase! All`s well that ends well. Lanny N598LF : )
>
>
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: Muffler Paint, what kind to use? |
Cermachrome is a ceramic coating. Their charges have gone up since
Mike had his done, it's up to over a $160 for a muffler. Also check
their web site, I don't think they do used parts.
Rick
On Nov 9, 2007 4:48 PM, gary aman <gaman@att.net> wrote:
> Ray,
> The high temp header paint for race cars or at Ace hardware 1500 degree
> charcoal grill paint.Works good for me for 7 years so far
> G.Aman
>
>
> jb92563 <jb92563@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> I have a Cuyuna ul II-02 2 cycle engine muffler that I would like to paint
> since it looks ugly in its natural "Rust" color(No Coating at all).
>
> What sort of paint can I use that will stand up to 2 cycle temps?
>
> I have heard of a heat proof silver paint, but I have no idea how it stands
> up to 1400 degrees F.
>
> Suggestions, comments, ideas?
>
> --------
> Ray
> Riverside County, CA
>
> Do Not Archive
>
>
> Read this topic
>
>
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: Xtra Information |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vic Peters" <vicsvinyl@verizon.net>
> My thinking was that learning to fly from scratch at 59 in a Kolb that has
> to be wheel landed at 60mph may not be the best idea since my 2D
> coordination is marginal let alone 3D.
> I'm thinking of building an experimental Taylorcraft. I figure once no one
> can afford a Cub anymore they will become popular.
>
> Vic
> Maine
> Xtra 912 do not archive
>
>
Vic,
That Kolb is going to be easier to land than a T-Craft clone, and as far as
having to wheel land it at 60 mph: Who in the heck sold you that dodo? Do
they have a wing center gap seal on their Kolb?
I don't think I have ever wheel landed my Mk-3, unless you count the times
the tailwheel hits first and bounces up before the mains touch. Come to
think of it, when the tail hits first, I don't think it even bounces up, the
mains just touch a split second later, of course I am never anywhere near 60
mph at touchdown.
You have one heck of a light plane there ready to go, I would get on with
the flight training if I were you.
$.02 please :-)
Denny Rowe
Mk-3 N616DR
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: Cracking in tubing and welds? |
At 12:25 PM 11/9/07 -0800, you wrote:
>
>
>I believe cracks are more an issue of both aluminum and 4130 parts,
>especially fuselage welds. The nature of a two stroke engine
>encourages stress cracks through high frequency vibration.
>
Ray,
What causes the shake of the cage is the reaction force caused by engine
power pulse. Since the engine is geared most of the reaction forces
transferred to the cage are caused by the flywheel reaction of the propeller.
The lighter or lower inertia propeller is more easily accelerated and
de-accelerated, therefore there is less reaction force transmitted through
the mounts and on to the cage.
If the vibration amplitude is so low that it does not exceed the cage metal
yield stress, vibration frequency is a non issue. Has anyone any
documentation that a Kolb fell out of the sky because of a cage failure?
If you are really concerned about this go with the lowest inertia propeller
you can find.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Winchester, IN
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Where'd they go?? |
Matts too busy counting his money.
Just funnin
Vic
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: | IVO Prop Revisit |
Kolbers and Kolbettes:
More grist for the recent IVO prop mill.... This may or may not be
fresh news to some of you... figured
it cannot hurt to pass it along.
....in my slightly sweaty paw this morning... IVO service bulletin
number two, which they sent me, along with the stainless steel blade
movement detection tape. For your reading enjoyment, I have quoted the
first part of the bulletin, complete with their minor syntax burps,
below... There is more to the bulletin than appears here, including a
section on how IVO blades can come loose and knurled plate instructions
and cautions for ultralight models. If you are interested, the complete
item was available on their website last time I looked...
www.ivoprop.com/servicebul2.htm
QUOTE:
IVOPROP SERVICE BULLETINS
Subject: Ivoprop ultralight & model 3:1 gearboxes or direct drive
engines or 3 cylinder engines.
Note: This service bulletin supersedes any previous operational alerts
issued by Ivoprop Corp.
Purpose: To detect blade movement inside the hub due to improper
installation and, or
harmonic resonance between prop and power plant; To prevent further
flight if this
situation is detected and develops in (sic) unsafe condition (aluminum
bushings becoming loose, breaking
bolts, blades etc...) "new blades do not have bushings"
What To Do: Prior to the next flight, accomplish the following:
Get a torque wrench and check its calibration by hanging a known weight
on its arm and multiplying the weight
in pounds by the arm length in inches. This reading should be as close
as possible to actual recommended torque
on mounting bolts. (We tried several torque wrenches and most of them
were off by a lot.)
Check torque on mounting bolts. 200 inch x lbs.
Direct drive engines only: Mark the prop position in relation to the
crankshaft. There are two positions to mount a three blade prop and
three positions to mount a two blade prop. This makes a great
difference in how the prop and engine vibrate together
and each position creates a totally new situation. It is impossible to
determine which position is best for your particular prop engine
airframe configuration without actually testing on it.
Run the engine on the ground through the full RPM range.
Check the torque on the mounting bolts and, if you are not using
locknuts, safety wire the bolts.
Cut the strips of stainless steel tape about 2" long and 1/4" wide (tape
supplied with this service bulletin) Clean
the area around the gap between blades, or gap between blades and blade
blocks with MEK solvent. Apply stainless steel tape across the gap next
and parallel to mold parting line. Use a round object to press the
stainless steel tape on the surface.
Follow this inspection schedule to check if tape is broken: After short
ground run up through full RPM range, and then first 15 min, 30 min, 1
hour, 2 hours, 4 hours, and then every preflight inspection. Also
follow this schedule from the beginning if the prop has been reinstalled
in a different position in relation to the crankshaft.
If tape breaks or cracks, remove the tape, clean the surface with MEK
solvent and apply new tape and start inspection schedule from the
beginning. If tape breaks again do not fly with the prop and contact
Ivoprop Corp.
Request to Dealers: Please forward this service bulletin and stainless
steel tape to your customers who are subject to this S.B. Keep the
record of the addresses of your customers to which this Service Bulletin
applies. Make sure that any prop being sold for the above mentioned
combinations is accompanied by this Service Bulletin.
Compliance: Mandatory
Note: Do not use prop in 2-blade configuration without blade
blocks(missing pieces of pie which fill out the big gaps bewtween the
blades.)
UNQUOTE:
...worth what ye paid fer it...
Beauford
FF-076
Brandon, FL
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: | Re: Xtra Information |
Your probably right Denny, Thing is if you land at the correct attitude the
nose is only about 12" off the runway. If the tail hits first your stalled.
Course none of that bothers Ellery.
Maybe I should get longer legs from Travis.
Vic do not archive
Xtra not Classic
Vic,
That Kolb is going to be easier to land than a T-Craft clone, and as far as
having to wheel land it at 60 mph: Who in the heck sold you that dodo? Do
they have a wing center gap seal on their Kolb?
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: | Re: Cracking in tubing and welds? |
I believe that the weld quality from the factory welded cages has never been a
concern but, where i would be concerned is the older and used Ultrastars that
were welded by the builder themselves with unknown credentials. I have seen 2
that were very bad and 1 of them did end up in a fatal crash.
Even though most of us are very competent and conscientious builders, the nature
of our small planes attracts builders of all levels of experience , even
some with none! Being extra thorough is never a bad thing.
Fly Safe, Wade
do not archive
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=145081#145081
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 |
|
Yay!! I've been restored. For several days, nothing I did got anywhere in regards
to this list. Now, I get 28 emails this morning. I was beginning to think
I had been black-balled. I know I'm a jerk, but I thought it was just my
little secret. (That's a joke!!)
Bob Bean,
Unless Jeron has changed his policy, he will NOT sell you that GEO 3 cyl. header
flange. I asked him to sell me one, and his reply was "NO", he said he doesn't
go to the work of making things, and then sell pieces to people, so that
they can undercut his profits! Anyway, that was my experience about that!!
(And I am a Bonafide Raven customer. I paid him almost $5000 to install and test
run all the redrive parts for my GEO engine.)
But, not to fear!! I got a local outfit to water-jet cut me one, along with
3 other pieces for my turbo system. All-together the 4 parts came to $100....and
that included setting up the computer design. Next time, he said, it will
be much more reasonable. If you are interested, send me a note and I'll find
out what they charge for just the flange. I had them cut my flanges out of 1/4"
stainless steel.
For those looking at attractive panel finishes;
In case anyone missed my panel suggestions, take a look at these: (just copy
and paste them in your address bar)
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=007&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&viewitem=&item=170165175083&rd=1
http://cgi.ebay.com/carbon-fibre-adheresive-film-for-gauge-holder-body-kit_W0QQitemZ280015832957QQihZ018QQcategoryZ6775QQrdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQcmdZViewItem
On the second link I chose an example, because they have some samples using
the film. There are many other cheaper vendors, just do a search for "carbon
fiber film", or carbon vinyl, etc, etc. I have the carbon fiber film already,
but I seriously think I may change to the burled walnut look.
BFN, Mike Welch
_________________________________________________________________
Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Caf. Stop by today.
http://www.cafemessenger.com/info/info_sweetstuff2.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_OctWLtagline
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: Cracking in tubing and welds? |
Jack and all
I think an engine mount that places the lord isolators in line with the
crank shaft center would be a great help. Herb
On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 10:42:11 -0500 "Jack B. Hart"
<jbhart@onlyinternet.net> writes:
> <jbhart@onlyinternet.net>
>
> At 12:25 PM 11/9/07 -0800, you wrote:
> <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
> >
> >
> >I believe cracks are more an issue of both aluminum and 4130 parts,
>
> >especially fuselage welds. The nature of a two stroke engine
> >encourages stress cracks through high frequency vibration.
> >
>
> Ray,
>
> What causes the shake of the cage is the reaction force caused by
> engine
> power pulse. Since the engine is geared most of the reaction forces
>
> transferred to the cage are caused by the flywheel reaction of the
> propeller.
> The lighter or lower inertia propeller is more easily accelerated
> and
> de-accelerated, therefore there is less reaction force transmitted
> through
> the mounts and on to the cage.
>
> If the vibration amplitude is so low that it does not exceed the
> cage metal
> yield stress, vibration frequency is a non issue. Has anyone any
> documentation that a Kolb fell out of the sky because of a cage
> failure?
> If you are really concerned about this go with the lowest inertia
> propeller
> you can find.
>
> Jack B. Hart FF004
> Winchester, IN
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
Jaron Has not changed his policy. I asked about a balance lightened
flywheel for my 1.3 and was told the same thing.
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mike Welch
Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2007 10:58 AM
Subject: Kolb-List: I'm back!
Yay!! I've been restored. For several days, nothing I did got anywhere
in regards to this list. Now, I get 28 emails this morning. I was
beginning to think I had been black-balled. I know I'm a jerk, but I
thought it was just my little secret. (That's a joke!!)
Bob Bean,
Unless Jeron has changed his policy, he will NOT sell you that GEO 3 cyl.
header flange. I asked him to sell me one, and his reply was "NO", he said
he doesn't go to the work of making things, and then sell pieces to people,
so that they can undercut his profits! Anyway, that was my experience about
that!! (And I am a Bonafide Raven customer. I paid him almost $5000 to
install and test run all the redrive parts for my GEO engine.)
But, not to fear!! I got a local outfit to water-jet cut me one, along
with 3 other pieces for my turbo system. All-together the 4 parts came to
$100....and that included setting up the computer design. Next time, he
said, it will be much more reasonable. If you are interested, send me a
note and I'll find out what they charge for just the flange. I had them cut
my flanges out of 1/4" stainless steel.
For those looking at attractive panel finishes;
In case anyone missed my panel suggestions, take a look at these: (just
copy and paste them in your address bar)
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=007&sspagename=S
TRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&viewitem=&item=170165175083&rd=1
http://cgi.ebay.com/carbon-fibre-adheresive-film-for-gauge-holder-body-kit_W
0QQitemZ280015832957QQihZ018QQcategoryZ6775QQrdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQcmdZView
Item
On the second link I chose an example, because they have some samples
using the film. There are many other cheaper vendors, just do a search for
"carbon fiber film", or carbon vinyl, etc, etc. I have the carbon fiber
film already, but I seriously think I may change to the burled walnut look.
BFN, Mike Welch
_________________________________________________________________
Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Caf. Stop by
today.
http://www.cafemessenger.com/info/info_sweetstuff2.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_OctWL
tagline
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: | Musings on Safety and the BRS |
Unless the statistics have changed very recently, and I don't think they
have, the big three killers of pilots are:
1) Continued flight into deteriorating weather
2) Failure to fly the aircraft in an emergency
3) Failure to manage the fuel supply
As a quality control engineer I learned the Pareto Principle, which says in
essence, for the greatest improvement, attack the biggest problem first. So
let's look at number one.
If you fly into deteriorating weather, will a BRS save you. Unlikely. Why?
Who is most likely to have a problem in this situation? Answer, the pilot
who isn't sufficiently trained to fly on instruments. In that situation the
pilot has about 60 seconds to make all the right decisions to save his/her
life and those of the unlucky who are in the aircraft, too. It isn't magic.
It's just that spatial disorientation will overtake his lack of ability,
he/she will most likely put the aircraft into a graveyard spiral and the
rest is inevitable.
Would a BRS save him/her? Unlikely. Why? He/She has insufficient training to
be in that environment in the first place and doesn't recognize the danger.
Remember that 60 seconds? He/She would have to surrender control almost
immediately and pull the handle. Again, unlikely. Deteriorating weather
isn't a mugger who grabs you from behind, shoves a gun or knife in your side
and demands your money or your life. It happens, at the very worst, over
many minutes or even hours, but the pilot either forces himself to continue,
getthereitis, lulls himself, well this wasn't in the forecast so it can't
be, or started out knowing the weather was bad, scud running. The pilot who
lives to tell the tale is the pilot who recognizes the gathering danger and
reverses course or lands and waits it out. None of these are absolutes, of
course, but good rules of thumb, backed by grim statistics. So to believe a
BRS would help in this situation, you have to posit that a pilot who has
been making bad decisions for many minutes or hours will miraculously make a
good one. Again, I assert it's unlikely.
Let's look at number two. What does failure to fly the airplane mean,
anyway? It means simply that when a new situation, a fire, a rough running
or dead engine, or anything that the pilot was unprepared to handle
happened, he/she forgot the first rule of flying, Fly the airplane. Would a
BRS help? Probably not. To say it would is to defy logic. You have to
believe that a pilot who has been trained to fly the airplane, and who has
forgotten that training, will remember to do something for which he/she has
NO training. Again, unlikely.
Let's look at number three, failure to manage the fuel supply. The pilot
miscalculated how far he was going, failed to take into account changing
winds, didn't check the tanks before taking off, or failed to switch the
fuel valve to a tank containing fuel. Would a BRS help. Maybe. You again
have to assume that a pilot who was trained not to do all the things he/she
did to get into a fuel exhaustion situation, even as simple as checking to
see if there is fuel in another tank, has forgotten all this and decides to
not fly the plane but become a victim of fate. Maybe is the best I'm going
to give you an this one.
Now let's look at the 201 saves claimed by BRS Inc. First, BRS counts lives
saved, not deployments. If you count the actual deployments, there have been
158. Of these three are, to my mind, extremely suspect. Same model,
Buccaneer, same day, June 16, 1995 (my correction here, the list actually
says 1905), same cause, Classified Military Info (!!!!) Since there is an
ultralight called a Buccaneer and a report in the Ultralight News has an
article listing so many designed in deficiencies (you'll really appreciate a
Kolb of any model if you read about the problems with this POS, editorial
aside, sorry), I'm taking the liberty of reducing BRS's list of deployments
by two. Now, we're down to 156.
Applying the Pareto Principle again:
60 Loss of Control. You can find a few further explanations like weather,
aerobatics, violent air, control jams (one listed "kneeboard jammed
controls"), and one husband and wife listed "high altitude upset" at 16,000
feet (that must have been a heck of a ride), and one flying wing listed "out
of CG". It should be noted that 9 were hang gliders or paragliders.
44 Structural or Component Failure. Most have no details, but of these 16
list things like broken bolts, "joining bolt that held the spring", "failure
during aerobatics", lost propeller, "installation of wrong propeller" and
corrosion.
22 Engine out (21 listed unlandable terrain, the other was "inexperienced
pilot")
So we have 126 of 156 in these three categories.
I thought it was interesting that only 2 listed fuel problems, 2 were for
mid airs, one of which was a hang glider, and only 1 was for medical
incapacitation.
My personal favorite is a German fellow flying the same model trike, BOTH
TIMES, who made the two major causes, the earliest, in 1997 is listed as
loss of control/spiral, the later, in 2005, structural failure "after three
tuck tumbles". Hmmmmm.
Kolbs, listed directly as such or by model, Ultrastar, Firestar, Firestar
II, Firefly (this one could be a hang glider as the date was listed as 1995
and UP had a model called the Firefly, but it was sold in 1978/79. I don't
know if the Kolb Firefly was in the field in 1995) appears 8 times. 5 were
for loss of control (including the Firefly), 2 were for structural failure (
1 listed aerobatics, the other a component ) and 1 was for engine out /
unlandable terrain.
The only comment I would make about this "data" is that the reporting is
less than NTSB quality. I'd like to know about those engine outs, such as
engine make and model, what loss of control means, the amount of flight
training and experience the pilots had, or didn't have. We do know that a
BRS won't help if you fly into an apartment building.
In closing, the need for a BRS seems to be a very personal need. With these
statistics you can see why.
The one other statistic you can apply is this: BRS claims , "*More than
23,000 parachute systems have been installed" . *With only 156 recorded
deployments that's equals a .00678% of actually needing it. Personally, I
stand by my assertion that the money is better spent on maintenance and
training. Those of you reading this will, of course, do as you (or your
wife) wishes. :-)
Rick
*
*
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: Beautiful exhaust & awesome looking panels |
Mike, don't forget that the cermacoating reduces the heat in the engine
area, plus help's the reburn in the exhast gases, plus the pipes cool twice
as fast as the other parts of the engine . I think it well worth the money
and they look great .I'll try to post pict. later Joe N101HD
601XL/RAM
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Welch" <mdnanwelch7@hotmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2007 3:21 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Beautiful exhaust & awesome looking panels
>
>
> Kolb guys,
>
> I recently responded to Ray's request regarding beautifying his exhaust.
> I also commented on a nice panel finish in the same email.
>
> For some inexplicable reason I must have been kicked off the Kolb list,
> because my reply and a couple of new emails to this list have not ever
> been posted. I don't know why not.
>
> So that I don't have to completely retype my reply to Ray, here is the
> "copied and pasted" message:
>
> ( I had to rejoin the Kolb list. Does that make me a new person? )
>
>
> Mr. Ray,
>
> I would suggest "cermacoating" your exhaust parts. It gives them a
> "polished aluminum look." From what I gather, it is essentially a metallic
> looking powder-coat paint finish, except maybe more heat resistant.I had
> an outfit named Performance Coatings do my GEO engine muffler/exhaust, and
> also my GlaStar header-style custom exhaust system (pipes). They charged
> me $60 complete, for the GEO exhaust muffler unit, and I believe $100, or
> there-abouts, for the Lycoming exhaust headers. And you don't do ANYTHING.
> They do it all....from cleaning the surface, coating, and then buffing
> them shiny. I was VERY satisfied with the price and the quality. Let me go
> see if I can find their phone number................back in a minute. I'm
> back. Here is the outfit I dealt with, although I see there are a couple
> of places named "Performance Coatings."
>
> http://www.headercoatings.com/
>
> And while I'm at it, since I'm name-dropping here, someone asked about
> what to coat their panel with. I saw a couple of suggestions like krinkle
> paint, or laminate (plastic). Is anyone familiar with this process?? I saw
> them featured on "SPORT PILOT" TV show. Unbelievably beautiful work, but
> as you can imagine...not cheap.If nothing else, maybe, just maybe, an
> ingenious soul can duplicate their process on a small scale, for their own
> little flat panel surface. Anyway, it's just a suggestion.
>
> http://www.pfluegers.com/
>
> BTW. It's nice when this forum isn't bothered by General Rancor. (No one
> particular in mind!!!)
>
> Mike Welch in SW Utah, eternally working on MkIII
> project nX
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Caf. Stop
> by today.
> http://www.cafemessenger.com/info/info_sweetstuff2.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_OctWLtagline
>
>
>
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: Xtra Information |
Vic
Wow you just finished your Kolb and thinking of selling it? If money is an
issue the Kolb is pretty hard to beat. If this is your first built you can't
imagine the great feeling of flying something you built.
As for landing one it really isn't a problem. Get some training in a Kolb or
similar light plane . There is only one thing that could cause you a problem
as a new Kolb pilot and that is the plane's ability to slow down very
quickly. You can almost eliminate the issue by carrying power down to the
landing flair or even later. I try to three point all my landings. When you
three point you landings you are landing slower and you can get your tail
down and control your rollout better even in cross winds. It works for me.
I'm not sure that longer gear legs would help the landing situation you seem
concerned about. New Kolb did at least at one point require you sign a
agreement to decrease the angle of attack on the wings when you add the
longer gear legs. The short gear legs put you in almost a wheel landing
attitude and keep you from taking off before you have a extra margin of
airspeed on take off. I think it's a safety issue. There are certainly
benefits of longer gear legs but you might want to wait till you have more
experience.
Again worth what you paid for it.
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIIIC
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vic Peters" <vicsvinyl@verizon.net>
Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2007 11:05 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Xtra Information
>
> Your probably right Denny, Thing is if you land at the correct attitude
> the
> nose is only about 12" off the runway. If the tail hits first your
> stalled.
> Course none of that bothers Ellery.
> Maybe I should get longer legs from Travis.
> Vic do not archive
> Xtra not Classic
>
> Vic,
> That Kolb is going to be easier to land than a T-Craft clone, and as far
> as
> having to wheel land it at 60 mph: Who in the heck sold you that dodo? Do
> they have a wing center gap seal on their Kolb?
>
>
>
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: | Post Mortem - Matronics List Pummeled By Spam... |
Dear Listers,
Over a 3-day period, Thursday 11/8 though Saturday 11/10, the Matronics Lists were
pummeled with over 450,000 spam emails causing posting delays and a few duplicate
messages. Yeah, I really said nearly half a million spams! The good
news is that I don't believe a single one of them actually made it to the Lists
thanks to the aggressive List filtering code and the Barracuda spam filter.
The bad news was that it caused quite a back log of email messages starting Friday
and continuing until late Saturday when I noticed that delivery seemed a bit
sluggish. By about 11pm on Saturday night, I had managed to get the backlog
cleared out of the spam filter by temporarily adjusting some of the filtering.
A check of the queues this morning, and everything looks like its working great
and there are no incoming filtering delays and spam levels appear to be back
to "normal".
There were a number of people asking what was going on, so I thought that I'd send
out a follow up post mortem on the event...
November is the annual List Fund Raiser. Your contribution directly enables me
to buy systems like the Barracuda spam filter that keep the List free of that
garbage. Please make a contribution to support your Lists!
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Thank you!
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
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: | Cold Weather Flying In An Open Cockpit |
Kolbers,
I like to fly all winter. I can keep warm with insulated boots and gloves,
ski pants, and an LLBean winter jacket. To keep my face from freezing, I
wear a ski mask, under the soft flying helmet and goggles.
Normally I fly with out the ski mask if the air temperature is above 45
degrees F. The only problem with the ski mask is that when the air is not
moving to pressurize the space behind the goggles, my exhaled breath leaks
up into the space and fogs up my glasses. This makes it difficult to taxi
out and to start the take-off roll. This is a time when you need good
vision.
I inserted a bent piece of wire to make the ski mask conform to my face and
prevent the problem. I thought may be others would be interested in how it
was done. It can be seen at:
http://www.thirdshift.com/jack/firefly/firefly136.html
When I modify my heavier ski mask I will use a longer wire and curl the wire
back and up along the side of my head. This will reduce the risk of
inadvertently getting a wire end in an eye.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Winchester, IN
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: | exhaust parts treatment |
Re. exhaust parts treatment.
Try www.jethot.com .
Bart Morgan
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: | exhaust parts treatment |
Sorry, it's www.jet-hot.com instead of www.jethot.com
Bart
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: | Ultrastar weight, folding in wind |
With everybody saying "an Ultrastar will make weight no problem" or "an
Ultrastar with ANY additions will be fat", I finally weighed my US
today. Mine is pretty much stock, Cuyuna, no fairing, with the silver
coats, Freebird brakes, basic instruments (ASI, Alt, compass, CHT, and
EGT/Tach), handheld GPS and radio clipped on. Came in at 277
lbs. Allowing for the 4 gallons of fuel in the tanks, that's 253 lbs, so I
guess I'm legal!
Finally got my flying fix tonight after 3 weeks of windy weekends. The
limiting factor for me seems to be when it's too windy to fold or unfold
the wings solo, the flying is no problem. That space of time when the wing
is resting on the support while I fiddle with the rear pin and the strut
seems to be the danger zone.
-Dana
--
--
A truly wise man never plays leapfrog with a unicorn.
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: | exhaust coeatings |
Rick G.
When I priced around, trying to get a good deal on my cermachrome jobs, I did
find the price was fairly high. Except that this outfit was quite a bit less
than the others I talked to. My GEO muffler/exhaust unit was used, and had
already been painted that brownish color barbeque paint, that was useless, and
surface rusted in many places.
The guy I dealt with told me it wasn't much of a big deal being used, because
he said he had to dip the entire thing in chemical bath, anyway.
So's as I don't go giving out an old recommendation, I'll call the guy tomorrow
and see if things still are as primo as they use'ta was. BTW, I had my stuff
done a year ago.
I'll let you know if;
A) he remembers me, & B) if his prices are about the same.
Mike Welch
_________________________________________________________________
Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Caf. Stop by today.
http://www.cafemessenger.com/info/info_sweetstuff2.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_OctWLtagline
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: | Coatings C.. O..A..T..I..N..G..S |
Oops! I should have looked up and noticed the typo. Mike Welch
Do Not Archive
_________________________________________________________________
Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Caf. Stop by today.
http://www.cafemessenger.com/info/info_sweetstuff2.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_OctWLtagline
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 |
|
Due to the excellant weather that we generally get here in the west during
the fall, I managed to fly off my 40 hour test period on 6080M in less than
30 days. I called the guy that my DAR gave me for when I completed the test
period, and I guess that I have been so focused on finishing, that I failed
to read any further than how to complete it. When I contacted him, telling
him that I had finished, he said " So you want to go to Phase II testing"? I
said, "Hell no, I am done testing. I have flown the critter for 26000 miles
already,I want my repairmans certificate". :-) You see I have a really fine
screen on my "Bullshit" filter, and I seem to be unable to process almost
anything from the goverment. Not an anarchist, just an old fart who should
do better but can't somehow. Any way I guess I am officially in "Phase Two"
testing, what ever that is???????? Oh, the process to get my "Repairman
Certificate" was the most painless part of the whole process.
do not archive
Larry C
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: | Re: Cold Weather Flying In An Open Cockpit |
Jack, try putting a coat of onion juice on the inside of you goggles
then polishing dry. Works on my welding helmet lense.
Rick
On Nov 11, 2007 1:28 PM, Jack B. Hart <jbhart@onlyinternet.net> wrote:
>
> Kolbers,
>
> I like to fly all winter. I can keep warm with insulated boots and gloves,
> ski pants, and an LLBean winter jacket. To keep my face from freezing, I
> wear a ski mask, under the soft flying helmet and goggles.
>
> Normally I fly with out the ski mask if the air temperature is above 45
> degrees F. The only problem with the ski mask is that when the air is not
> moving to pressurize the space behind the goggles, my exhaled breath leaks
> up into the space and fogs up my glasses. This makes it difficult to taxi
> out and to start the take-off roll. This is a time when you need good
> vision.
>
> I inserted a bent piece of wire to make the ski mask conform to my face and
> prevent the problem. I thought may be others would be interested in how it
> was done. It can be seen at:
>
> http://www.thirdshift.com/jack/firefly/firefly136.html
>
> When I modify my heavier ski mask I will use a longer wire and curl the wire
> back and up along the side of my head. This will reduce the risk of
> inadvertently getting a wire end in an eye.
>
> Jack B. Hart FF004
> Winchester, IN
>
>
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: Xtra Information |
Vic just because the tail hit the runway first doesnt mean you have already
stalled the airplane especially with your short gear legs
I will be up there some time soon and show you how to Land it, dont get
nervous but Im going to put the tail on the ground first every Landing so you can
get the picture
I'll help you out a Kolb is much better to fly than an old Taylorcraft
anyway
Ellery 100 miles from Vic
do not archive
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: | GPS selection help? |
Guys I want a GPS for my new plane. I have 2 in mind the Garmin 196 and the Airmap
600.
The airmap has a better price and has a color screen.
I want to be able to power the GPS with 12v power from the plane along with having
the internal backup batteries.
I talked to a guy today who was trying to rip me a new one. He has a garmin 195
and wanted $800. he then said he would take $600. Ha. I can get the new 196
fro a tad more. Anyway he told me the government turns off the satellite that
the air gps units use from time to time. Is that true?
He said the gps units will just go out no signal while flying. Has that happened
to any of you?
What are you opinions of the Garmin 196 and Airamp 600?
I am not looking for a very expensive unit. i just want a good reliable one that
I can program waypoints in and will show me airports, ground speed altitude
and more.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=145243#145243
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: Musings on Safety and the BRS |
Personally, I
| stand by my assertion that the money is better spent on maintenance
and
| training. Those of you reading this will, of course, do as you (or
your
| wife) wishes. :-)
|
| Rick
Rick:
Hope you remember that if you ever get into a situation where a
parachute might save your life.
My flying career would have been over in 1985, if I had not had a
parachute.
Again in 1990, if I had not had the same parachute, my flying career
would also have been over.
I have been hauling a Second Chantz, then a BRS around the North
American Continent since 1992. I used the Second Chantz during
initial test phase of my mkIII, but by the time I got through the big
Red Oak tree, the canopy snagged and fouled on the tree limbs. I was
also too low for a good save but I pulled the handle anyhow because I
was already through flying.
There are many situations when a parachute can and will save your life
if you train yourself to use it immediately when the time comes. I do
that and I am still alive.
Should one find himself in an IFR situation with no horizon, a
recovery parachute would be an excellent method of survival.
If I have a second to throw the chute or pull the handle, I will if
the need arises. If I have a minute to make the decision, I have a
life time.
I do not agree with your long disertation of why one should not have a
recovery parachute. I do agree in good maintenance and training
though.
Take care,
john h
Survivor of two fatal accidents.
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: GPS selection help? |
Both are great GPS units, I prefer the color screen because I can see it
better if you have great eyesight get either one and you will be happy
Oh yah every once in a while the Government sends me a note to go up and turn
off all the Satellites "Yah Right "......LOL
Ellery in Maine
do not archive
Message 32
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: GPS selection help? |
----- Original Message -----
From: "grantr" <grant_richardson25@yahoo.com>
>
> I want to be able to power the GPS with 12v power from the plane along
> with having the internal backup batteries.
Hi,
I have a 196 that I bought off Ebay that was only 6 months old for about
300 less than the list price. I can't give you any idea on the comparison
with the 600, but I found that the 196 causes a serious interference with my
radio. I power it with batteries.
LarryC
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: GPS selection help? |
Grant, I have a Lowrance 2000C and I really like it. Big display with
three brightness levels. Runs for an hour on internal battery backup.
Has a lighter plug cord for getting ships power. I cut off the plug
and connected it to ships power direct. Comes with a terrain avoidance
chip and software to create custom maps. Uses cheap SD chips for
storage. I've successfully used 1 gig chips with no problem. Very
simple to use. If you pay a nickle more you can go first class.
Rick
On Nov 11, 2007 8:06 PM, <ElleryWeld@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
> Both are great GPS units, I prefer the color screen because I can see it
> better if you have great eyesight get either one and you will be happy
> Oh yah every once in a while the Government sends me a note to go up and
> turn off all the Satellites "Yah Right "......LOL
>
> Ellery in Maine
>
> do not archive
>
>
> ________________________________
>
>
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: GPS selection help? |
Hi Grant,
I haven't noticed GPS satellites being shut off. I think the GPS sats are the same
for ground or air regardless. There maybe a time like 9-11 national emergency
when that might happen but I think everyone would know then about a shut
down of the system.
I would say buy the best one that will fit your budget. Most of the Air types
of GPS receivers need to be updated on a regular basis to keep current with changes
in terrain and obstacles. So you gotta figure on buying those updates into
the costs as well.
My suggestion would be to find a local pilot in your area with a GPS already installed
and try using it as a navigator for them on a short trip.
Or mount one in your car and try using it while you drive around to get a sense
as to how it will work for you.
Personally, I still use a map and a compass, they don't need batteries.
Best of Luck
Carlos G.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=145252#145252
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: GPS selection help? |
I should have said - With a new 503 engine and power from the plane battery
I experienced interference problems that I was not able to cure until I
powered it with batteries.
Larry C
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Cottrell" <lcottrell@fmtcblue.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2007 7:16 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: GPS selection help?
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "grantr" <grant_richardson25@yahoo.com>
>>
>> I want to be able to power the GPS with 12v power from the plane along
>> with having the internal backup batteries.
>
>
> Hi,
> I have a 196 that I bought off Ebay that was only 6 months old for about
> 300 less than the list price. I can't give you any idea on the comparison
> with the 600, but I found that the 196 causes a serious interference with
> my radio. I power it with batteries.
> LarryC
>
>
>
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: | Re: GPS selection help? |
At 08:51 PM 11/11/2007, grantr wrote:
>...he told me the government turns off the satellite that the air gps
>units use from time to time. Is that true?
>
>He said the gps units will just go out no signal while flying. Has that
>happened to any of you?
That'd be crazy. Can you imagine the fallout if the government turned the
GPS system off while airliners full of passengers were in the air relying
on it?
They DO have the ability to degrade the signal, using a system called
"selective availablity" or SA, to prevent bad guys from using it against us
, but they haven't done it in some years now, and say they won't any more.
I _have_ seen flaky GPS receivers, though, that sometimes lose the signal
for no reason... could be the case with the one he was trying to sell you.
-Dana
--
If the government doesn't trust us with our guns, why should we trust
them with theirs?
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: Ultrastar weight, folding in wind |
dana,
you can subtract the portable radio and gps frm the weight also.
denny
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dana Hague" <d-m-hague@comcast.net>
Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2007 6:18 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Ultrastar weight, folding in wind
>
> With everybody saying "an Ultrastar will make weight no problem" or "an
> Ultrastar with ANY additions will be fat", I finally weighed my US today.
> Mine is pretty much stock, Cuyuna, no fairing, with the silver coats,
> Freebird brakes, basic instruments (ASI, Alt, compass, CHT, and EGT/Tach),
> handheld GPS and radio clipped on. Came in at 277 lbs. Allowing for the
> 4 gallons of fuel in the tanks, that's 253 lbs, so I guess I'm legal!
>
> Finally got my flying fix tonight after 3 weeks of windy weekends. The
> limiting factor for me seems to be when it's too windy to fold or unfold
> the wings solo, the flying is no problem. That space of time when the
> wing is resting on the support while I fiddle with the rear pin and the
> strut seems to be the danger zone.
>
> -Dana
> --
> --
> A truly wise man never plays leapfrog with a unicorn.
>
>
> --
> 269.15.27/1121 - Release Date: 11/9/2007 7:29 PM
>
>
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: GPS selection help? |
I have the Lowrance Airmap 100 for my Firestar...( I love it )
My Next plane ( current project - Buttercup )
I'll get the Airmap 2000
Gotta Fly...
Mike & "Jaz" in MN
--------
.
.
.
.
.
Do Not Archive
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=145258#145258
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/my_x_country_flight_to_baraboo_wi_001_103.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/drilling_rib_jig_005_849.jpg
Message 39
| 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: Ultrastar weight, folding in wind |
At 09:30 PM 11/11/2007, Denny Rowe wrote:
>you can subtract the portable radio and gps frm the weight also.
I know, it'd probably save me all of one pound... though the FAA can be
stuffy about anything that's "mounted" to an aircraft. The nice thing is
to know (within the accuracy of my scale, anyway) that it's reasonably
close to the proper weight instead of 20 or 30 lbs into "fat" territory.
-Dana
--
If the government doesn't trust us with our guns, why should we trust
them with theirs?
Message 40
| 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: GPS selection help? |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dana Hague" <d-m-hague@comcast.net>
Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2007 9:27 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: GPS selection help?
At 08:51 PM 11/11/2007, grantr wrote:
>...he told me the government turns off the satellite that the air gps
>units use from time to time. Is that true?
>
>He said the gps units will just go out no signal while flying. Has that
>happened to any of you?
That'd be crazy. Can you imagine the fallout if the government turned the
GPS system off while airliners full of passengers were in the air relying
on it?
They DO have the ability to degrade the signal, using a system called
"selective availablity" or SA, to prevent bad guys from using it against us
, but they haven't done it in some years now, and say they won't any more.
I _have_ seen flaky GPS receivers, though, that sometimes lose the signal
for no reason... could be the case with the one he was trying to sell you.
-Dana
--
If the government doesn't trust us with our guns, why should we trust
them with theirs?
Message 41
| 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: GPS selection help? |
batteries.
|
| Best of Luck
|
| Carlos G.
Carlos:
Curious!
Don't quite understand why you are making GPS recommendations to a
newbie, then say you use sectional and mag compass?
john h
Las Vergas, NV (Nellis AFB)
Message 42
| 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: Coatings C.. O..A..T..I..N..G..S |
Mike,
If you "log in"......Then you can edit or delete a post...
Even the subject title....
.
..
Gotta Fly...
Mike & "Jaz" in MN
.
.
.
.
--------
.
.
.
.
.
Do Not Archive
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=145266#145266
Message 43
| 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: Musings on Safety and the BRS |
John, My point was, even taking just the raw data the chances are slim
that you will deploy it. We also have no negative data on the
aftermath of a deployment. My friend Steve deployed his chest pack
over Douglas Firs He slid over 100' through the tree canopy sustaining
numerous puncture and abrasion wounds. He broke a leg when he hit the
forest floor. An acquaintance, I only flew with him once, landed in
power lines, got accidentally grounded and was electrocuted. Don't be
so sure a deployment is a good thing. Next we have to figure the type
of flying done. You can certainly avoid aerobatics and better your
chances, avoid using engines that have a high mortality rates. Many of
the engine failures were Eagles and Eagle XT aircraft. They were
almost all West Bend gokart engine powered. I don't fly that engine or
know anyone who does. I did four times 30 years ago, but I am no
longer in shape to foot launch my powered aircraft, although I can my
hang glider. Many of the aircraft involved in loss of control
accidents were two axis control, weight shift or a combination. Throw
them out of the sample and the chances of a deployment decline
further. If the data were better you could better calculate the
specific risk and the chances would get smaller still. I have done
dozens of simulated engine outs and never missed the approach to the
field I chose. I practice engine out landings when just shooting touch
and goes. All these go to lessen the chance, too. I get recurrent
training as I advance in ratings.
Notice all the dire predictions. Other than what I have just now told
you, you know nothing else about my flying habits, my skill level,
what risks I take,other than that flying in itself is a risk, after
all. I'm just not buying the idea that BRS is essential for safety.
Too much of the data is like yours, anecdotal and unquantified. I find
it akin to the assertion that keeping the porch light on keeps the
bogey man at bay. If I leave the light on for my convenience and the
bogey man never comes, did the light keep me safer. Better to ask the
question, is there a bogey man, first, don't you think. As for
previous assertions about seat belts and airbags. I wear a much better
set of seat belt and shoulder harness in my aircraft than came in my
2006 truck. Air bags are passive safety systems, a computer makes all
the decisions to activate them, BRS parachutes are active safety
systems, the pilot has to make the decision to utilize it. If the
computer system was available to make the BRS a passive system, would
you trust the computer to make the decision for you? Would that be
safer, too?
Rick
On Nov 11, 2007 7:38 PM, John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com> wrote:
>
>
> Personally, I
> and
> your
>
> Rick:
>
> Hope you remember that if you ever get into a situation where a
> parachute might save your life.
>
> My flying career would have been over in 1985, if I had not had a
> parachute.
>
> Again in 1990, if I had not had the same parachute, my flying career
> would also have been over.
>
> I have been hauling a Second Chantz, then a BRS around the North
> American Continent since 1992. I used the Second Chantz during
> initial test phase of my mkIII, but by the time I got through the big
> Red Oak tree, the canopy snagged and fouled on the tree limbs. I was
> also too low for a good save but I pulled the handle anyhow because I
> was already through flying.
>
> There are many situations when a parachute can and will save your life
> if you train yourself to use it immediately when the time comes. I do
> that and I am still alive.
>
> Should one find himself in an IFR situation with no horizon, a
> recovery parachute would be an excellent method of survival.
>
> If I have a second to throw the chute or pull the handle, I will if
> the need arises. If I have a minute to make the decision, I have a
> life time.
>
> I do not agree with your long disertation of why one should not have a
> recovery parachute. I do agree in good maintenance and training
> though.
>
> Take care,
>
> john h
> Survivor of two fatal accidents.
>
>
Message 44
| 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: GPS selection help? |
>
>
> batteries.
>
>
> Carlos:
>
> Curious!
>
> Don't quite understand why you are making GPS recommendations to a
> newbie, then say you use sectional and mag compass?
>
> john h
> Las Vergas, NV (Nellis AFB)
>
>
> John,
Carlos did not recommend any particular GPS, just said pick the one that
fits your budget.
Than added that he finds dead reconing and pilotage to be all he himself
requires.
Did I miss something?
Denny, mk-3, Airmap 100 that I don't get to use nearly enough :-(
Message 45
| 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: GPS selection help? |
|
| Denny
Denny:
Yep, I got the part that he did not recommend a particular brand of
GPS, but was telling the newbie how he should go about deciding on
what he needed.
Based on what the Baron Von Evil wrote in his email, I took it to mean
he had no experience with GPS and was telling a newbie what he should
do to decide on one. Thought that a little peculiar.
Normally, to me, it would be more appropriate to hand out advice if
one had experience in that particular area.
john h
mkIII
Message 46
| 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: Musings on Safety and the BRS |
|
| John, My point was, even taking just the raw data the chances are
slim
| that you will deploy it.
|
| Rick:
My point is, if you need it and do not have it, you gonna wish you
did.
Slim chances of needing it are not good enough for me. I may be the
one in a million that need it.
Your friend would probably have been dead had he not had a parachute,
the one that slid more than 100' through a tree. He probably was not
flying a Kolb aircraft. Also seems strange that one could fall
through a tree, get torn apart by limbs and not have the parachute
snag and hold. I don't remember anyone, during my Army career,
including me, that made a tree landing and did not snap the parachute.
Was unfortunate your other friend hit a powerline and died. What kind
of airplane was he flying? Try to remember this is the Kolb List and
most of us are flying Kolbs. Parachute deployments should be
addressed that direction rather than hang gliders, powered parachutes,
powered paragliders, etc. I personally am not familiar with those
type aircraft and how they react and survive emergency parachute
deployment.
No matter how it happens or why it happens, there may be situations
that are not survivable any other way except a parachute recovery
system. I don't care how many studies you do and how many numbers you
have. When the time comes and you ain't ready, put your head between
your legs and kiss your butt goodbye.
john h
mkIII - firm believer and user of parachute recovery systems.
Message 47
| 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: Musings on Safety and the BRS |
|
| John, My point was, even taking just the raw data the chances are
slim
| that you will deploy it.
|
| Rick:
My point is, if you need it and do not have it, you gonna wish you
did.
Slim chances of needing it are not good enough for me. I may be the
one in a million that need it.
Your friend would probably have been dead had he not had a parachute,
the one that slid more than 100' through a tree. He probably was not
flying a Kolb aircraft. Also seems strange that one could fall
through a tree, get torn apart by limbs and not have the parachute
snag and hold. I don't remember anyone, during my Army career,
including me, that made a tree landing and did not snap the parachute.
Was unfortunate your other friend hit a powerline and died. What kind
of airplane was he flying? Try to remember this is the Kolb List and
most of us are flying Kolbs. Parachute deployments should be
addressed that direction rather than hang gliders, powered parachutes,
powered paragliders, etc. I personally am not familiar with those
type aircraft and how they react and survive emergency parachute
deployment.
No matter how it happens or why it happens, there may be situations
that are not survivable any other way except a parachute recovery
system. I don't care how many studies you do and how many numbers you
have. When the time comes and you ain't ready, put your head between
your legs and kiss your butt goodbye.
john h
mkIII - firm believer and user of parachute recovery systems.
Message 48
| 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: Musings on Safety and the BRS |
I don't remember anyone, during my Army career,
| including me, that made a tree landing and did not snap the
parachute.
|
Gang:
Need to correct a typo above. "snap" should read "snag".
Thanks,
john h
mkIII
Message 49
| 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: GPS selection help? |
Grant --
I currently fly with the Garmin 196... prior to that, had an Airmap 100...
my brother flew with the Airmap 500 (the b&w version of the 600). Each
advance is better than the one before, for sure. The larger screen of the
196 is terrific, but I really liked the Airmap 100, too. I use it for a
backup now. As long as the color is viewable in daylight, I'd probably lean
toward the 600 as I know it has more-or-less the same features and
capabilities of the 196. You can find out about it's battery use on the
Lowrance web site.
-- Robert
On 11/11/07, grantr <grant_richardson25@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> Guys I want a GPS for my new plane. I have 2 in mind the Garmin 196 and
> the Airmap 600.
>
> The airmap has a better price and has a color screen.
>
> I want to be able to power the GPS with 12v power from the plane along
> with having the internal backup batteries.
>
> I talked to a guy today who was trying to rip me a new one. He has
> a garmin 195 and wanted $800. he then said he would take $600. Ha. I can
> get the new 196 fro a tad more. Anyway he told me the government turns off
> the satellite that the air gps units use from time to time. Is that true?
>
> He said the gps units will just go out no signal while flying. Has that
> happened to any of you?
>
> What are you opinions of the Garmin 196 and Airamp 600?
>
> I am not looking for a very expensive unit. i just want a good reliable
> one that I can program waypoints in and will show me airports, ground speed
> altitude and more.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=145243#145243
>
>
Message 50
| 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: | GPS selection help? |
Grant, Larry et al:
Used 196s have been running $425-$475 pretty consistently on eBay. There
are also several outfits that sell reconditioned ones that they took in on
trade. That's where I got mine just after the 296 came out.
The 196 provides information that is helpful. Has many features that I
never get to with the kind of flying that I do. I find that I mostly use it
for watching ground speed. Helps, too, for some precision in location for
radio calls. ("Hey Beauford, I'm 5 miles east of the field.") Has a
credible land feature that I use in the car, very often. (Probably got my
money's worth out of it in the car.) It also has marine if you are into
boating. If you think you will be into long haul X-Ctry, it is a great
unit. If you are just boring holes close to home, may be more than you
need. Even though I fit in the latter category, I like gadgets!
Larry..... radio interference. Found that if I physically separated the
radio and gps, including all wires (antenna, power, headset adapter,
particularly the hs adapter, etc...) as much as possible, the interference
went away. May try some of the ferrite peanuts/modules to see if they have
any effect.
My .02 worth.
George Alexander
http://gtalexander.home.att.net
-----Original Message-----
--> <lcottrell@fmtcblue.com>
----- Original Message -----
From: "grantr" <grant_richardson25@yahoo.com>
>
> I want to be able to power the GPS with 12v power from the plane along
> with having the internal backup batteries.
Hi,
I have a 196 that I bought off Ebay that was only 6 months old for about
300 less than the list price. I can't give you any idea on the comparison
with the 600, but I found that the 196 causes a serious interference with my
radio. I power it with batteries.
LarryC
Message 51
| 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 |
|
Off subject, but an arthritic hand salute to all who went to The
Colors, whether willingly or otherwise. And to the families of those
who did not return.
Take heart, though...tomorrow must be the real Armistice Day,
according to the sales ads.
Bob N.
do not archive
Message 52
| 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: Musings on Safety and the BRS |
Okay, I agree, let's just talk about Kolbs since this is the Kolb
list. We have 8 deployments. One was for aerobatic induced failure.
Don't do aerobatics. The other structural issue was a component
failure, do good maintenance and preflights and eliminate that one.
One was for engine failure over unlandable terrain. What engine? What
maintenance? How much time on the engine? All stock parts or not? What
caused the engine failure? Was it engine components, or support
equipment like throttle cables, kill switches, or master switches?
Ignition failure? Many questions we need to know to assess the risk,
and we just don't. The last 5 are loss of control. What's the
definition of loss of control? What were the meteorological
conditions? The total experience of the pilot? Time in type? Currency
of experience of the pilot? Only one loss of control statistic gives
us a clue. Spin. Was the pilot trained for spins? Doesn't seem like
it, but we don't know. Did the spin go flat? if so what was the CG
location? Did it actually spin, or did the pilot just fear it would?
Did he regularly practice stall recovery? More questions for which we
have no answers? Without answers to these questions, in the least, and
we can make no meaningful risk assessment.
Insisting that if I need it I'll wish I had it seems more like a
religious evaluation than a risk / value assessment.
Another area we haven't touched upon is the effect of incorrect BRS
installation. I have three aircraft with a BRS installed. I did not do
the original installation on any of them. Two out of three directly
ignored the installation manual warning that the rocket will not
penetrate polyester fabric. How many of those 23,000 installations are
improperly installed. My personal statistical sample says that 2/3,
ie. 15,333 are done wrong and will not work if the attempt is made. Is
that reasonable? How does that affect the safety aspect of the BRS?
How does it skew the statistics?
I don't care whether anyone wants a BRS for whatever reason, just say
I believe it makes me safer. It's your belief, you have a right to it.
Don't make claims that you can somehow prove it, within any reasonable
examination of the vague and unquantifed "data", you can't.
As for my friend Steve, he died in a motorcycle last July and I can't
get that info.
I know I keep pushing the point, but how many of your tree landings
were done form a low altitude deployment? Was the canopy fully
inflated? Was it a streamer? Steve's reserve was a hand deploy model
with a deployment bag, It was not a primary. How many of your tree
landings were with a hand deployed reserve? More questions, less
quantifiable data.
Rick
Rick
On Nov 11, 2007 9:49 PM, John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com> wrote:
>
>
> |
> slim
> |
>
> My point is, if you need it and do not have it, you gonna wish you
> did.
>
> Slim chances of needing it are not good enough for me. I may be the
> one in a million that need it.
>
> Your friend would probably have been dead had he not had a parachute,
> the one that slid more than 100' through a tree. He probably was not
> flying a Kolb aircraft. Also seems strange that one could fall
> through a tree, get torn apart by limbs and not have the parachute
> snag and hold. I don't remember anyone, during my Army career,
> including me, that made a tree landing and did not snap the parachute.
>
> Was unfortunate your other friend hit a powerline and died. What kind
> of airplane was he flying? Try to remember this is the Kolb List and
> most of us are flying Kolbs. Parachute deployments should be
> addressed that direction rather than hang gliders, powered parachutes,
> powered paragliders, etc. I personally am not familiar with those
> type aircraft and how they react and survive emergency parachute
> deployment.
>
> No matter how it happens or why it happens, there may be situations
> that are not survivable any other way except a parachute recovery
> system. I don't care how many studies you do and how many numbers you
> have. When the time comes and you ain't ready, put your head between
> your legs and kiss your butt goodbye.
>
> john h
> mkIII - firm believer and user of parachute recovery systems.
>
>
Message 53
| 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: | GPS recommendations |
Kolb guys,
Has anyone ever lost GPS coverage? YES!! ME! As I stated a few months back,
while flying my Cessna over the Cascades and in heavy turbulence, I briefly
(6-10 minutes...twice) lost coverage. The screen went blank, then said "Poor
GPS Coverage" When the bumbs went away, we were back in business.
Now, as I also previously stated, this was an antiquated Garmin 95XL. If I got
4 satelites, I was doing good. The newer GPSes would most likely NOT go out
on you, if faced with the same shaking.
My present handheld is a Garmin 296. I can't believe how fantastic this model
is, compared to the older 95XL. When I flew my Cessna last winter to Utah,
from Sacramento, it was a pleasure to have the modern functions of this GPS.
One feature that I had never used before was the "waypoint" function. I programmed
a waypoint to fly around a MOA. I was amazed how the GPS directed me to
a "spot", and after I arrived, it then altered the path to a new direction.
So cool!! (In the past I guess all I had to do is put in my destination, none
of that ...first go here, then go there...)
One thing that surprised me, though, is I also used my Garmin GNS300XL in my
plane (built-in panel GPS/com). I set it to fly the course, but I really didn't
think I'd look at it. I did not think that I would have any "need" of it,
since I had the handheld fastened to the yoke. I actually did use both!!
Along with the two GPSes, I also used complete and thorough sectional charts,
and flight data sheets. I knew where I was on the map, at all times.
Back to my recommendation. While I would choose the Garmin over the other brands
(mostly 'cause I haven't owned the other ones), I really would suggest the
296, because of the improvements and added features over the 196. Basically....the
196 is nice, but the 296 is nicer.
Just my opinion, Mike Welch
_________________________________________________________________
Peek-a-boo FREE Tricks & Treats for You!
http://www.reallivemoms.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM&loc=us
Message 54
| 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: | Caution...error in story |
Ah ha!! While rereading my last post, I noticed an error in my description of
the airspace I was trying to avoid. I accidently referred to it as a MOA. Oops!
You know you don't have to fly around MOA's. It was Restricted Airspace
(north of the Mojave airport).
BTW. I am enjoying this friendly argument between John & Rick. The problem is,
though, I still don't know whether I should have a BRS or not. I'm listening
intently to BOTH arguments. Please proceed, I AM interested.
Mike W.
_________________________________________________________________
Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Caf. Stop by today.
http://www.cafemessenger.com/info/info_sweetstuff2.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_OctWLtagline
Message 55
| 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: GPS recommendations |
| Back to my recommendation. While I would choose the Garmin over
the other brands (mostly 'cause I haven't owned the other ones), I
really would suggest the 296, because of the improvements and added
features over the 196. Basically....the 196 is nice, but the 296 is
nicer.
|
| Just my opinion,
Mike Welch
Hi Mike:
Not all of us can afford a 296, even though it is much "nicer" than my
196.
However, I have been able to fly all over the lower 48, much of Canada
and Alaska, and get back home with the 196.
Fact is, I use the 196 more in the truck than I do in the airplane.
Don't leave home without it.
Made the first flight around CONUS and up to Alaska with a Garmin
55AVD. Never lost coverage in 17,400 miles and 232 flight hours.
Next flight to Alaska was with a 95XL. It also worked great. Took me
north of Point Barrow and the North American Continent and back home.
To me the most important aspect of GPS is the ability to have the
Jeppesen Data Base of airport info so I can punch in destinations and
waypoints, radio frequencies, fuel availability, runways, etc.,
without going through the hassle of pulling them off a sectional or
other means.
Occasionally lose GPS coverage for no explained reason, but does not
usually last long.
I think the 196 is the best bang for the buck. I paid 825.00 for mine
in 1993. Now you can get one for half that price. It has more than
enough capability for me to fly anytime/anywhere.
john h
mkIII
Message 56
| 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: Caution...error in story |
The problem is, though, I still don't know whether I should have a BRS
or not. I'm listening intently to BOTH arguments. Please proceed, I
AM interested.
| Mike W.
Mike:
I really have nothing to add.
I was saved twice by a $500.00 hand deployed Jim Handbury parachute.
That is $250.00 a whack. Got my money's worth out of it and it has
been retired since March 1990.Dennis Souder was saved by a Jim
Handbury hand deployed parachute. In these three cases, had we not
had them and used them, we would not have survived.
I could care less about numbers, studies, and all the rest of that
horse manure. Fact is, when you need, hope you have it.
I have flown this mkIII for more than 2,700 hours without nary a hint
of needing a parachute. Hope I can fly another 2,700 hours and still
not need it.
john h
mkIII
Message 57
| 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: Caution...error in story |
Just to make the argument completely contradictory. I, too, have been
saved by a reserve parachute. I would not fly my hang glider without
it. I am a thermal flyer and have had to deal with 3000 fpm + shears
transiting thermal boundaries in a weight shift control flying wing.
Knowing it's there on my chest lets me enjoy the roller coaster ride.
I am trained to use my reserve, I've had a deployment and lived to
pester John. :-) I BELIEVE I am safer having the 'chute.
My advice to anyone about BRS or any other reserve system is this: If
it gives you piece of mind while flying, get one. Install it properly,
have your installation blessed by the good folks at BRS, do all your
maintenance and preflights, and fly like you don't have it. Since
training isn't available, take the time to think through possible
deployment situations and evaluate the effectiveness of those
procedures until you're satisfied that it will produce the results you
want.
Another anecdote and I'll stop. Years ago, there was a report in
Soaring Magazine about a death resulting from a bail out following a
mid air. The unfortunate pilot always flew with a parachute. Each time
he landed, he undid his harness, undid his parachute harness and got
out of his sailplane. When he had the mid air, he did exactly as he'd
trained himself. He unbuckled his harness, unbuckled his parachute and
went over the side. He had two thousand feet to reflect on the
effectiveness of his training.
Rick
On Nov 11, 2007 11:37 PM, John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com> wrote:
>
>
> | BTW. I am enjoying this friendly argument between John & Rick.
> The problem is, though, I still don't know whether I should have a BRS
> or not. I'm listening intently to BOTH arguments. Please proceed, I
> AM interested.
>
> Mike:
>
> I really have nothing to add.
>
> I was saved twice by a $500.00 hand deployed Jim Handbury parachute.
> That is $250.00 a whack. Got my money's worth out of it and it has
> been retired since March 1990.Dennis Souder was saved by a Jim
> Handbury hand deployed parachute. In these three cases, had we not
> had them and used them, we would not have survived.
>
> I could care less about numbers, studies, and all the rest of that
> horse manure. Fact is, when you need, hope you have it.
>
> I have flown this mkIII for more than 2,700 hours without nary a hint
> of needing a parachute. Hope I can fly another 2,700 hours and still
> not need it.
>
> john h
> mkIII
>
>
Message 58
| 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: GPS selection help? |
Hi John,
I have used GPS systems in the past. They were early versions and were somewhat
clumsy to use, i.e. scrolling thru menus to get to the correct screens and so
on. I have flown in planes equipped with the latest systems and they are impressive
but, oh so expensive .
They are packed with features that make long distance travel allot more precise
and can keep you out of airspace that you shouldn't be in as well.
For the type of flying I do (Low and Slow) a current sectional and an properly
swung (Calibrated to the plane) compass is plenty good for my own needs.
Its all in what you want to get out of flying I guess. I prefer simplicity.
Grant was asking for an opinion and I offered mine.
Best Regards
Carlos
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=145315#145315
Message 59
| 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: GPS recommendations |
I have been flying with my Garmin GPSmap 196 for about 3 years. I love it and
it has been great. However, a few months ago I flew up to Alaska at the end of
May. Weather was terrible. We flew hundreds of miles at 500 feet because
we couldn't get to 550 feet. When we couldn't maintain VFR flying into Anchorage
we climbed. I didn't have IFR charts with me and my "copilot" was having
trouble determining how high the terrain was that we needed to avoid. It was
then that I decided that I wanted terrain in my GPS. However, on that same trip
I saw a 3-mile long island with a 2180' high peak on it that was not in the
196 database. When I get my 296 I think I'll check to see if it's in that db.
For ultralights and other VFR flying I still think the 196 is great. I only decided
to upgrade to the 296 because I plan to do more IFR flying. The 296 also
has a rechargable LiOn battery.
The only problem I have had with the 196 was that it goes through batteries fast.
Also the spring tension against the batteries was inadequate and on my Quicksilver
the vibration kept causing power outages. I never had that problem in
the Kolb and now always use external power.
As much as I like the Garmins, they're probably not really needed in most UltraLight
flying where direct to is sufficient. But if you can affort it ($400+ used)
or if you do GA flying to, the Garmins are great.
--------
Jim
N. Idaho
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=145316#145316
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! --
|