---------------------------------------------------------- Kolb-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Mon 01/21/08: 20 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 03:39 AM - used 912uls (icrashrc) 2. 05:28 AM - Re: Re: Dead Stick Approaches ( Holes in the sky) (Jack B. Hart) 3. 05:30 AM - Re: Kolb-List Digest: 23 Msgs - 01/20/08 (tc1917) 4. 07:01 AM - Re: used 912uls (John Hauck) 5. 09:16 AM - Re: used 912uls (Richard Girard) 6. 09:17 AM - Re: Dead Stick Approaches ( Holes in the sky) (JetPilot) 7. 09:25 AM - Re: Credit for page 8 photo (Richard Girard) 8. 09:43 AM - Re: Here is what VG's did to my airspeed. (Vic Peters) 9. 10:13 AM - Re: Dead Stick Approaches ( Holes in the sky) (lucien) 10. 11:21 AM - Re: Re: Dead Stick Approaches ( Holes in the sky) (Richard Girard) 11. 11:57 AM - Re: Credit for page 8 photo (John Hauck) 12. 01:10 PM - Re: Re: Dead Stick Approaches ( Holes in the sky) (The Kuffels) 13. 01:34 PM - Re: Re: Dead Stick Approaches ( Holes in the sky) (Jack B. Hart) 14. 01:43 PM - FireFly Photos (Jack B. Hart) 15. 03:10 PM - Re: FireFly Photos (John Hauck) 16. 03:27 PM - Re: FireFly Photos (gary aman) 17. 08:54 PM - Re: FireFly Photos (DAquaNut@aol.com) 18. 10:52 PM - Re: Dead Stick Approaches ( Holes in the sky) (JetPilot) 19. 11:11 PM - Re: used 912uls (JetPilot) 20. 11:41 PM - Re: Re: Dead Stick Approaches ( Holes in the sky) (Ed Chmielewski) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 03:39:37 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: used 912uls From: "icrashrc" I've stumbled across a used 912uls. The owner tells me the engine has less than 50 hours on it. Is there any way to tell from the serial number that A. it is a uls and not a ul B. the age of the engine (i was told it's a 2004 vintage) C. that the gearbox is the standard ratio. I plan on looking closely down the exhaust and intake as well as pulling a few spark plugs. A close look at any fluids is also obviously on my list. Any and all suggestions that may help keep me from getting shafted would be appreciated. Thank you, -------- Scott www.ill-EagleAviation.com do not archive Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=159512#159512 ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 05:28:41 AM PST US From: "Jack B. Hart" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Dead Stick Approaches ( Holes in the sky) At 09:23 PM 1/20/08 -0800, you wrote: > >The one thing you are very wrong about is you saying that turning steeply will not put additional load on the plane and not increase stall speed. It does not matter weather you turn with power, or with altitude, it takes energy AND increased load on the wings to change the direction of the plane. There is just no way around it, going up, down or sideways, to change the direction of the plane, you must create additional lift on the wings to change the direction of the plane, which will increase the stall speed. To teach otherwise is possibly dangerous to someone that might take it to literally. > Mike, Just think about it. The engine is out and you are flying at best glide speed. Since you are gliding the wings are not generating enough lift to support the aircraft. If you enter a gliding turn at the same speed the load on the wings remains constant and you lose altitude t a faster rate than before because the lift is not perpendicular to the ground. As Tom as said the only danger is to tighten the turn with rudder until you stall the inboard wing and intiate a spin, but if the speed is constant the wing load remains constant until the spin starts. Jack B. Hart FF004 Winchester, IN ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 05:30:37 AM PST US From: "tc1917" Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Kolb-List Digest: 23 Msgs - 01/20/08 in reply to the person who wondered about my reply: "nope". I have to apologize because I was answering another email and I apparently sent the reply to the wrong sector. I was asked if I had a belt reduction unit and I replied "nope". Sorry for the confusion. Just pushed the wrong button. I am in the process or selling a couple of props. I still have a beautiful WARP left: 68" off a 582 with E box. Almost brand new. Sold 582 and updated to 912UL. Had to buy a new one, again. Want $750 but make offer. Ted Cowan, Alabama. ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 07:01:54 AM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: used 912uls > I've stumbled across a used 912uls. > > -------- > Scott Morning Scott: Obvious way to see if it is a 912ULS is green valve covers. 912UL has black valve covers. Of course, valve covers can be painted or swapped, so the best way is run the serial number of the engine. I'd contact a Rotax Service Center for that info, Ronnie Smith at South Mississippi Light Aircraft, Lockwood, or others. Don't know if the 2004 model 912ULS was produced with the high torque starter and slipper clutch, but this info can also be obtained from a Rotax Service Center when running the serial number. Other than that, I can't think of any other way to verify by outward appearance. Probably be a good idea to have a written agreement to the effect that if the engine is not as advertised, you will get a full and speedy refund of your money. Items that should come with the engine (items in a new engine package) are oil tank, voltage regulator/rectifier, operators manual, installation manual, and, of course, the little tool bag with a couple wrenches and a "crank shaft fixing pin" used to lock the crankshaft for certain serious maintenance procedures. Good luck with your new engine. john h mkIII ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 09:16:57 AM PST US From: "Richard Girard" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: used 912uls Scott, I agree with John, plus trying to ascertain if the engine was overheated. See if your Rotax service center can Rockwell hardness test the heads. If they test soft, run away like your feet were aflame. Four new heads for the 912 are now almost $10,000, and that doesn't include installation. I'd also recommend you remove the oil filter, cut it open and check for metallic debris. An oil analysis would be a good investment, too. Rotax engines are built like fine jewelry and it takes very little in the way of mistreatment to do major damage. As an example, the engine we worked on with Eric Tucker had been run for 10 seconds without oil pressure and had a nice big hole in the case where a rod made a hasty departure. The owner had hooked the oil lines up backward. Last, make the owner pay for all evaluation work. If he balks, be very suspicious. Rick On Jan 21, 2008 8:59 AM, John Hauck wrote: > > > > I've stumbled across a used 912uls. > > > > -------- > > Scott > > > Morning Scott: > > Obvious way to see if it is a 912ULS is green valve covers. 912UL has > black > valve covers. Of course, valve covers can be painted or swapped, so the > best way is run the serial number of the engine. I'd contact a Rotax > Service Center for that info, Ronnie Smith at South Mississippi Light > Aircraft, Lockwood, or others. > > Don't know if the 2004 model 912ULS was produced with the high torque > starter and slipper clutch, but this info can also be obtained from a > Rotax > Service Center when running the serial number. > > Other than that, I can't think of any other way to verify by outward > appearance. > > Probably be a good idea to have a written agreement to the effect that if > the engine is not as advertised, you will get a full and speedy refund of > your money. > > Items that should come with the engine (items in a new engine package) are > oil tank, voltage regulator/rectifier, operators manual, installation > manual, and, of course, the little tool bag with a couple wrenches and a > "crank shaft fixing pin" used to lock the crankshaft for certain serious > maintenance procedures. > > Good luck with your new engine. > > john h > mkIII > > ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 09:17:04 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Dead Stick Approaches ( Holes in the sky) From: "JetPilot" [quote="jbhart(at)onlyinternet.ne"]At 09:23 PM 1/20/08 -0800, you wrote: > > > Since you are gliding the wings are not generating enough lift to support the aircraft. > > Hi Jack, It does not matter if the plane is decending in a glide, or in level flight, there the same amount of load on the wings. Or in other words, a stable glide or level powered flight = same 1 G load on the wings. > > > If you enter a gliding turn at the same speed the load on the wings remains constant and you lose altitude t a faster rate than before because the lift is not perpendicular to the ground. As Tom as said the only danger is to tighten the turn with rudder until you stall the inboard wing and intiate a spin, but if the speed is constant the wing load remains constant until the spin starts. > > Jack B. Hart FF004 > Winchester, IN You can use that technique, and not load the airplane up much in a turn, but if you maintain only 1 G in the turn, your descent angle and descent rate will increase as long as you are in a 1 G banked condition, you wont be able to maintain just 1 G loading for long before you have to either level out or start pulling more G's. In all likelyhood, you would start to put some extra loading on the wings during the turn even if you dont realize you are doing it. Either way, when you level out, you will have a descent rate greater than what you started with, which will take more wing loading to arrest, AND you will be wasting more alitude by letting the nose fall and getting fast in the turn and then using that energy to stop the extra descent rate you now have going. But bottom line is, sooner or later, to change the direction of the plane, you will have to put extra loading on the wings, there is no way around it. It takes energy and lift to change the direction of a moving airplane no matter how you fly the turn. I do understand Toms point, which is to do a turn without loading up the plane to much, use the rudder correctly, and you will minimize the impact of the turn on stall speed. But in the end you never get something for nothing, and will have to put extra load on the wings to accomplish this, weather do you it durring the turn, or put the extra load on the wings while pulling out at the bottom, there has to be more than 1 G on the wings at some point to accomplish this. Mike -------- "NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could have !!! Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=159571#159571 ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 09:25:28 AM PST US From: "Richard Girard" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Credit for page 8 photo Thanks Larry, but kidding or not you're right about giving credit where due. If nothing else, it might encourage someone to submit something knowing he'll get credit in print for his submission. Besides that, it'll fill a small space in the newsletter and every little bit helps. :-) Rick On Jan 21, 2008 12:08 AM, Larry Cottrell wrote: > I do hope that you realized that my post on this subject was tongue in > cheek. However the other pilot was Gary Halley, not Richard. > Larry C > > ----- Original Message ----- > *From:* Richard Girard > *To:* kolb-list@matronics.com > *Sent:* Sunday, January 20, 2008 8:58 PM > *Subject:* Kolb-List: Credit for page 8 photo > > Okay, Karen Cottrell was the photographer and the pilots, from left to > right were John Hauck, John Williamson, and Richard Nielsen. Working from > memory here, guys, but I would like to get it right. > If you belong to an EAA chapter kindly pass my email address along to your > chapter's newsletter editor and I'll add him / her to my exchange list. > > Rick > > * > > href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List > href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com > href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c* > > ------------------------------ > Release Date: 1/20/2008 2:15 PM > > * > > * > > ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 09:43:46 AM PST US From: "Vic Peters" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Here is what VG's did to my airspeed. You seem to be mistaking your altitude with RPM which reads 3500. Jp wrote " You can see engine RPM of 2200, and a 100 FPM sink rate, and if you look outside, you can see the plane is still level, and under control. I did " Vic do not archive ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 10:13:14 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Dead Stick Approaches ( Holes in the sky) From: "lucien" > > Mike, > > Just think about it. The engine is out and you are flying at best glide speed. Since you are gliding the wings are not generating enough lift to support the aircraft. If you enter a gliding turn at the same speed the load on the wings remains constant and you lose altitude t a faster rate than before because the lift is not perpendicular to the ground. As Tom as said the only danger is to tighten the turn with rudder until you stall the inboard wing and intiate a spin, but if the speed is constant the wing load remains constant until the spin starts. > > Jack B. Hart FF004 > Winchester, IN On thing we should reemphasize here is that stall is determined by angle of attack, not airspeed. True, we think in terms of airspeed when it comes to stall, because we're often discussing the limits of lift available from the wing in lower energy situations like low airspeeds with the engine power reduced (or absent) such as during landing. So, Jack is quite right here. If the loading on the wing remains constant, there won't (need to) be any change in the AOA. In fact, no matter what lift or airspeed conditions prevail, if the wing is below the critical AOA, it is not stalled. If it is above the critical AOA, it will be stalled. Again, under landing conditions, our airspeed is typically low enough that we're near the maximum available lift from the wing to keep the airplane at the desired sink rate (in turn meaning that we're flying very close to the critical AOA). In a turn, of course, the vertical lift vector is reduced in magnitude, so the amount of actual lift required to maintain the same sink rate goes up. You have 2 choices in that situation - either generate more lift from the wing to maintain the same sink rate or keep the generated lift the same and simply accept the resulting higher sink rate induced with the turn. If you're high enough, the latter choice is perfectly acceptable. Putting it another way, going into a turn at a low airspeed does NOT mean that you're going to stall. As long as you don't exceed the critical AOA, the wing won't stall no matter what the airspeed or angle of bank is. However, if you're too low and can't afford a higher sink rate, then you have to either conserve energy or add more back - shallower bank in the turn to keep the vertical component of lift higher to prevent loss of too much altitude or adding power while in the turn to increase lift without exceeding the critical AOA. FWIW, all this is why we go out and practice steep turns, descending/ascending turns, slow flight and minimum controllable airspeed on a regular basis, so that we maintain a feel for maintaining our angle of attack in as many conditions as possible. LS -------- LS FS II Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=159589#159589 ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 11:21:01 AM PST US From: "Richard Girard" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Dead Stick Approaches ( Holes in the sky) Jack, I've been flying with the invisible engine for 35 years. It's the only one that never ever fails. When the mechanical engines goes kaput, the invisible engine takes over. It works by way of two forms of energy. Kinetic energy, your movement through the air, and potential energy, the altitude you have available before the gentle touchdown or the impact. The speed required to keep flying at a given bank angle doesn't give a whit which engine is driving the plane. Increased bank angle requires more speed. A perfectly coordinated turn at too slow an airspeed will move toward an incipient spin just as well as a badly coordinated turn. Rick Girard On Jan 21, 2008 7:31 AM, Jack B. Hart wrote: > > At 09:23 PM 1/20/08 -0800, you wrote: > > > >The one thing you are very wrong about is you saying that turning steeply > will not put additional load on the plane and not increase stall speed. It > does not matter weather you turn with power, or with altitude, it takes > energy AND increased load on the wings to change the direction of the plane. > There is just no way around it, going up, down or sideways, to change the > direction of the plane, you must create additional lift on the wings to > change the direction of the plane, which will increase the stall speed. To > teach otherwise is possibly dangerous to someone that might take it to > literally. > > > > Mike, > > Just think about it. The engine is out and you are flying at best glide > speed. Since you are gliding the wings are not generating enough lift to > support the aircraft. If you enter a gliding turn at the same speed the > load on the wings remains constant and you lose altitude t a faster rate > than before because the lift is not perpendicular to the ground. As Tom as > said the only danger is to tighten the turn with rudder until you stall the > inboard wing and intiate a spin, but if the speed is constant the wing load > remains constant until the spin starts. > > Jack B. Hart FF004 > Winchester, IN > > ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 11:57:39 AM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Credit for page 8 photo Rick: There is a lot more to the photo than "three guys in a loose star burst". This photo was taken in May 2005, during our first flyin at the Alvord Desert in Oregon. John W, Gary H, and I, flew from Monument Valley to a set of GPS coordinates in the SE corner of Oregon, to rendezvous with Larry and Karen Cottrell, their two dogs, a cat, and a Perigrine Falcon. Roger Hankin and his nephew, and Wayne (crs his name) was also there. Highlight of the flyin was a 3,000 ft AGL bomb drop with a bowling ball. ;-) john h mkIII Thanks Larry, but kidding or not you're right about giving credit where due. If nothing else, it might encourage someone to submit something knowing he'll get credit in print for his submission. Besides that, it'll fill a small space in the newsletter and every little bit helps. :-) Rick ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 01:10:05 PM PST US From: The Kuffels Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Dead Stick Approaches ( Holes in the sky) Mike, Sigh. I said this was another saga. In fact, this point is number 1 in the series of articles I keep threatening to write entitled "The FAA Is Trying To Kill Me". The source of the worry that "increased bank angle means increased stall speed" is the diagram in the AIM, copied in every student pilot ground school book, showing increased bank angle equals increased load factor equals increased stall speed. The flaw in this diagram is insufficient emphasis that it only applies *if you maintain constant altitude*. Look at the vectors in the diagram. The total load increases to keep the vertical component constant (i.e. constant altitude). Now all this is before we are established on final so we are not talking about very low altitude maneuvering. And, for all practical purposes, keep bank angles below 90 degrees, better yet below 60 degrees to avoid aerobatic flight. With constant (here zero) power if you maintain a constant airspeed then you are maintaining a constant 1 g load on the wing no matter what your bank angle. With wings level you are descending at a stable rate, trading the potential energy of altitude for the energy needed to overcome your drag. Roll into a stable bank angle and your rate of decent will increase but then stabilize again. The change is not instantaneous because your roll is smooth (right?) and because of something called inertia. Rolling level again is the same process in reverse. You end up at the same wings level rate of decent as before. And if you've maintained a constant airspeed throughout, the load on the wings has stayed at 1 g throughout and the margin between your airspeed and stall speed has not changed. While it is true there is an additional transient load caused by changes in decent rate, it's magnitude is a secondary effect, particularly if your rolls are smooth, and your margin above stall is essentially unchanged. And the same situation applies to one or more changes in bank angle during the turn. Safety statistics say the misconception that increasing bank angle always means increasing stall speed kills a lot more people than holding a constant airspeed turing a turn. For example, look at turn-to-final spin fatalities. As a student pilot I kept trying to sneak the airplane around to final with excess rudder. Fortunately I had a very alert instructor who kept me from premature spin practice. Still, it took quite a while to figure out why I was afraid to steepen my bank angle and how to properly and safely increase my turn rate. But forget theory and logic, go out and try it yourself. At altitude and constant power set up your normal glide speed. Smoothly enter, wait and then exit turns of increasing bank while staying obsessed with maintaining your glide speed. You will get increasing but stable rates of decent with increasing bank but nary a stall buffet. Tom Kuffel Whitefish, MT Building Original FireStar ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 01:34:33 PM PST US From: "Jack B. Hart" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Dead Stick Approaches ( Holes in the sky) .................. Jack, I've been flying with the invisible engine for 35 years. It's the only one that never ever fails. When the mechanical engines goes kaput, the invisible engine takes over. It works by way of two forms of energy. Kinetic energy, your movement through the air, and potential energy, the altitude you have available before the gentle touchdown or the impact. The speed required to keep flying at a given bank angle doesn't give a whit which engine is driving the plane. Increased bank angle requires more speed. A perfectly coordinated turn at too slow an airspeed will move toward an incipient spin just as well as a badly coordinated turn. ................. Rick, I agree with what you have said. If you fly at constant best glide speed it limits your rate of bank and you will never stall or spin, and you have the longest, except for a straight line, glide path from were the engine quit to the flare and touch down. This is converting the potential energy or altitude into kinetic energy at an almost uniform or constant rate. One of the most difficult things I had to learn flying sailplanes and when I thought I was too low to make it back to the airport was to push the stick forward and to maintain best glide. Flying a sailplane was good training, in that, if something did not feel right, you learned to always let the stick go forward a little while you were figuring out what was going on. Jack B. Hart FF004 Winchester, IN ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 01:43:53 PM PST US From: "Jack B. Hart" Subject: Kolb-List: FireFly Photos FireFlyer's & Kolbers, A nephew took some photos of the FireFly during any annual 4th of July fly by. They are the best I have of the FireFly in flight. I thought you may like to see them. I put them up at: http://www.thirdshift.com/jack/firefly/firefly137.html If you click on the smaller images it will take you to a larger detailed image that are up to 205kb in size. I cropped them to keep the size down. Jack B. Hart FF004 Winchester, IN ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 03:10:27 PM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: FireFly Photos > A nephew took some photos of the FireFly > Jack B. Hart FF004 Jack: Those are some great photos of your FF. You look like you are enjoying yourself. john h mkIII ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 03:27:03 PM PST US From: gary aman Subject: Re: Kolb-List: FireFly Photos Jack, Nice pictures.How much did you raise the horizontal stab leading edge? FireFlyer's & Kolbers, A nephew took some photos of the FireFly during any annual 4th of July fly by. They are the best I have of the FireFly in flight. I thought you may like to see them. I put them up at: http://www.thirdshift.com/jack/firefly/firefly137.html If you click on the smaller images it will take you to a larger detailed image that are up to 205kb in size. I cropped them to keep the size down. Jack B. Hart FF004 Winchester, IN ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 08:54:24 PM PST US From: DAquaNut@aol.com Subject: Re: Kolb-List: FireFly Photos Jack, Nice pics of the fly! What is the difference in weight with the simonini instead of the 447 Rotax? Do you have to have an electric starter. How many hours do you have on the simonini ? I am contemplating putting a 37 HP 1/2 vw from Scott Cassler on my Fire fly, but I am nor sure how to get in contact with the fellow mentioned on the list who is currently flying with one on his Firefly? Ed Diebel **************Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape. http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exercise?NCID=aolcmp00300000002489 ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 10:52:51 PM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Dead Stick Approaches ( Holes in the sky) From: "JetPilot" Tom, Your advice on how to fly the turn without loading up the plane to much is a very good technique to avoid a stall spin while in the turn. It is exactly what I would do in that situation. My point here is purely technical. If you are banked lets say at a very reasonable 45 degrees at 1 G loading on the wings, you will be falling into the turn at a pretty good rate. IF you never load the plane to more than one G during a 45 degree turn, or after the turn, your descent rate would be so high that it would be fatal to hit the ground at that rate. What is happening is that you are doing your pullout so smoothly, you are probably not aware of the increased G loading, which is exactly the way you should do it. But in the end, you are putting more than the 1 G load on the wing either during the turn, or during the pull out to arrest your descent, even if its so smooth and gradual that you are not aware of it. Like I said, this is purely a technical point. Your technique sounds good to me. Engine shut off is something everyone should practice while you are ready for it and over a long runway, rather than practice for the first time when the engine fails. A cold hard facts of ultralights and experimental airplanes is that our engines are far more likely to fail than Certified aircraft. We should all be proficient in real engine out landings. Mike -------- "NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could have !!! Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=159711#159711 ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 11:11:55 PM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: used 912uls From: "JetPilot" jindoguy(at)gmail.com wrote: > > > As an example, the engine we worked on with Eric Tucker had been run for 10 seconds without oil pressure and had a nice big hole in the case where a rod made a hasty departure. The owner had hooked the oil lines up backward. > Last, make the owner pay for all evaluation work. If he balks, be very suspicious. > > Rick > 10 seconds without oil pressure is just at the limits for the 912-s after an oil change, but still in limits. I don't believe for a second that a rod went through the case in just 10 seconds of being started without an oil supply. According to the Rotax manual, 10 seconds is where you shut down the engine if you don't get an oil pressure rise. Someone either got their 3rd hand story wrong, or downright lied about what happened there. Either way, if you knew much about the Rotax 912 engine, you should have known this instead of passing along and putting into writing a BS story that is so obviously wrong. As far as the tests on the engine, if I were selling the engine, I would not pay to have hardness tested, oil tested, etc. etc. Especially if the price were good, I would tell you to go take a hike and sell to a buyer that was not such a pain in the butt to deal with. Nothing worse than to do business with someone that makes unreasonable demands. Just like buying an airplane, if you want to get the engine inspected, it is customary for the BUYER to pay the mechanic to do the inspection. If I were the seller, would not pay for inspections, just to have the buyer change his mind and leave me with the inspection bill. Mike -------- "NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could have !!! Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=159712#159712 ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 11:41:37 PM PST US From: "Ed Chmielewski" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Dead Stick Approaches ( Holes in the sky) Hi Tom, I'm afraid the FAA isn't 'trying to kill' us. The diagram you reference does emphasize 'constant altitude'. ----- Original Message ----- From: "The Kuffels" Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 4:07 PM Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Dead Stick Approaches ( Holes in the sky) > > Mike, > (Snip) With constant (here > zero) power if you maintain a constant airspeed then you are maintaining a > constant 1 g load on the wing no matter what your bank angle. Not true. Think about it. To maintain a 1-G load at different bank angles, airspeed must change. > (Snip) > Rolling level again is the same process in reverse. You end up at the > same wings level rate of decent as before. And if you've maintained a > constant airspeed throughout, the load on the wings has stayed at 1 g > throughout and the margin between your airspeed and stall speed has not > changed. This sounds like 'seat-of-the-pants' flying - and logic. > While it is true there is an additional transient load caused by changes > in decent rate, it's magnitude is a secondary effect, particularly if your > rolls are smooth, and your margin above stall is essentially unchanged. > And the same situation applies to one or more changes in bank angle during > the turn. What you're describing defies physics. One airspeed is not necessarily safe at all bank angles. > Safety statistics say the misconception that increasing bank angle always > means increasing stall speed kills a lot more people than holding a > constant airspeed turing a turn. Just the opposite is true. Increasing airspeed with increasing bank angle keeps the stall safety margin the same, and trying to hold an arbitrary airspeed with increasing bank angle may just make one a statistic. (Snip) > > But forget theory and logic, No thanks, theory and logic seem to work fine. Don't forget the laws of physics, too. Ed in JXN MkII/503 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.