---------------------------------------------------------- Kolb-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Thu 01/24/08: 49 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 04:19 AM - Firestar project (william sullivan) 2. 04:21 AM - Re: Re: Dead Stick Approaches ( Holes in the sky) (Dana Hague) 3. 04:21 AM - Re: Re: Dead Stick Approaches ( Holes in the sky) (Dana Hague) 4. 04:21 AM - Re: Re: Dead Stick Approaches ( Holes in the sky) (Dana Hague) 5. 04:40 AM - Re: Firestar project (John Hauck) 6. 05:26 AM - Re: Firestar project (Richard Pike) 7. 05:37 AM - Re: Dead Stick Approaches ( Holes in the sky) (Rex Rodebush) 8. 07:03 AM - Re: speeds (Russ Kinne) 9. 07:46 AM - Re: Re: For all 912 users (Vic Peters) 10. 07:52 AM - Seafoam Approaches (The Kuffels) 11. 07:57 AM - Re: Re: FAA Grants Extension... (Richard & Martha Neilsen) 12. 08:18 AM - Re: FAA Grants Extension... (lucien) 13. 08:20 AM - Dead Stick approaches (Jason Omelchuck) 14. 08:21 AM - Re: Re: For all 912 users (ElleryWeld@aol.com) 15. 08:56 AM - Re: Re: FAA Grants Extension... (Richard Girard) 16. 08:59 AM - 1904 photo of a biplane in Georgia (grantr) 17. 09:04 AM - Here, try this!!! (Mike Welch) 18. 10:08 AM - Re: FAA Grants Extension... (Thom Riddle) 19. 10:18 AM - Regular Unleaded (jim) 20. 10:22 AM - Re: Re: speeds (Dana Hague) 21. 10:25 AM - Re: speeds (Rex Rodebush) 22. 10:28 AM - Re: 1904 photo of a biplane in Georgia (Richard Girard) 23. 10:37 AM - Re: 1904 photo of a biplane in Georgia (beauford T) 24. 10:49 AM - Re: Regular Unleaded (herb) 25. 11:07 AM - Re: Re: speeds (Jack B. Hart) 26. 11:29 AM - Re: Regular Unleaded (John Hauck) 27. 11:34 AM - Re: Regular Unleaded (Ben Ransom) 28. 11:43 AM - Re: Re: speeds (N27SB@aol.com) 29. 12:13 PM - Re: 1904 photo of a biplane in Georgia (grantr) 30. 12:55 PM - Re: Regular Unleaded (jim) 31. 01:42 PM - Replacing Hoses on a Rotax (Kirby Dennis Contr MDA/AL) 32. 02:26 PM - Re: Replacing Hoses on a Rotax (John Hauck) 33. 02:35 PM - Re: Re: FAA Grants Extension... (Robert Laird) 34. 03:34 PM - Re: Regular Unleaded (TK) 35. 04:00 PM - Re: Regular Unleaded (Ben Ransom) 36. 05:02 PM - Re: FAA Grants Extension... (Ralph B) 37. 05:21 PM - Re: 1904 photo of a biplane in Georgia (Richard Girard) 38. 05:38 PM - Re: 1904 photo of a biplane in Georgia (Dana Hague) 39. 05:53 PM - Re: Re: FAA Grants Extension... (Dana Hague) 40. 05:56 PM - Re: 1904 photo of a biplane in Georgia (robert bean) 41. 06:08 PM - Re: Re: speeds (Dana Hague) 42. 06:08 PM - Re: Regular Unleaded (Dana Hague) 43. 06:59 PM - Re: Firestar project (DAquaNut@aol.com) 44. 07:22 PM - Re: Re: FAA Grants Extension... (Robert Laird) 45. 07:41 PM - Re: Re: Dead Stick Approaches ( Holes in the sky) (Dan G.) 46. 08:07 PM - Re: Dead Stick Approaches ( Holes in the sky) (JetPilot) 47. 08:15 PM - Re: Regular Unleaded (WhiskeyVictor36@aol.com) 48. 08:16 PM - Re: Dead Stick approaches (JetPilot) 49. 08:17 PM - Re: Re: Dead Stick Approaches ( Holes in the sky) (John Hauck) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 04:19:56 AM PST US From: william sullivan Subject: Kolb-List: Firestar project Thanks for the advice on the FAA extension, but I'm going for 103 legal, even if I have to fill the wings and tires with helium. I've had it for a week, and I finally got around to sitting in it. Strange thing is that it fits me perfectly. The previous owner was about 5" taller than me, and I have no idea where his knees were. After I tried weighing it, I started cleaning and throwing out unnecessary junk. Radio brackets, mouse nests in the cables, and who knows what else. Couldn't weigh them- no scale small enough. Weather permitting, engine work today. The local snowmobile dealer says they might have the carb mounting rubber and filter. If not, order and wait. also a gas filter and plugs. Question: On the "B" gear box there are two holes- one each side and about 3/4 of the way up. Are they supposed to be open, or plugged? Bill ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 04:21:26 AM PST US From: Dana Hague Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Dead Stick Approaches ( Holes in the sky) At 10:26 PM 1/23/2008, John Hauck wrote: >When the aircraft is flying at 1g, in a glide, it is not pitching if the >airspeed is held constant. It is if it's in a banked turn. (It pitches relative to its own lateral axis, not relative to the horizon). -Dana -- Starve a feeding bureaucrat...vote Libertarian. ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 04:21:26 AM PST US From: Dana Hague Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Dead Stick Approaches ( Holes in the sky) At 01:45 AM 1/24/2008, The Kuffels wrote: ><< Since you're _accelerating_ downward your descent rate will continue to >increase, as will your airspeed. >> > >Taint so on the second part. Your decent rate will increase slightly >until the vertical component of your drag cancels the loss of vertical >lift (if you turn long enough)... What causes this additional vertical component of drag? -Dana -- Starve a feeding bureaucrat...vote Libertarian. ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 04:21:26 AM PST US From: Dana Hague Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Dead Stick Approaches ( Holes in the sky) At 10:26 PM 1/23/2008, John Hauck wrote: >When the aircraft is flying at 1g, in a glide, it is not pitching if the >airspeed is held constant. It is if it's in a banked turn. (It pitches relative to its own lateral axis, not relative to the horizon). -Dana -- Starve a feeding bureaucrat...vote Libertarian. ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 04:40:16 AM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firestar project Bill S: Go here to get, at no charge, all the manuals for your engine. http://www.kodiakbs.com/tiintro.htm Not saying you can't do it, but I know of no one that has come close to legal ultralight weight for a Firestar. john h mkIII Question: On the "B" gear box there are two holes- one each side and about 3/4 of the way up. Are they supposed to be open, or plugged? Bill ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 05:26:22 AM PST US From: Richard Pike Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firestar project Open. Saves weight. Richard Pike MKIII N420P (420ldPoops) william sullivan wrote: > > Question: On the "B" gear box there are two holes- one each side and > about 3/4 of the way up. Are they supposed to be open, or plugged? > Bill > * > > > * ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 05:37:54 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Dead Stick Approaches ( Holes in the sky) From: "Rex Rodebush" It's been awhile but I'll add my 2 cents worth. Anytime you change directions you produce acceleration. It may not be much or enough to feel or register but it's there. Whether it's on a merry-go-round or on a bike going around a corner. If you're sitting in a centrifuge and are going around at 1 rpm you will still have slightly over 1 g on you as it is a function of radius and rpm squared. Even though your speed is constant your direction vector is changing. Rex Rodebush Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=160179#160179 ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 07:03:11 AM PST US From: Russ Kinne Subject: Kolb-List: Re: speeds Seems I've recently read an awful lot of semi-conflicting things about speed, acceleration, etc. Well FWIW, unless they've changed things since my student days, acceleration is a CHANGE in velocity. A car doing a steady 60MPH down the highway has NO acceleration. If the speed is changed, it accelerates or decelerates. An aircraft in steady cruise flight has NO acceleration or deceleration unless its speed is changed. Sure seem to be an awful lot of experts out there. ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 07:46:09 AM PST US From: "Vic Peters" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: For all 912 users Thanks to whom ever posted the tip about screwing the dial indicater into the drive reduction box to check prop flange runout. Rick I think. I thought thats not going to work (metric). I happen to have a mag base and went right out to check it out. Made in Taiwan it said and screwed right in. To bad I had already spent an hour and a half a week ago trying to mount the damn thing. Vic do not archive ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 07:52:01 AM PST US From: The Kuffels Subject: Kolb-List: Seafoam Approaches Rex, << Whether it's on a merry-go-round or on a bike >> Which are not changing altitude so there is a constant 1g load vector vertically. This is not true for an airplane in a descending turn. Take the 1g load vector on the wings at zero bank. Now rotate the wing and change nothing else. The wing is still seeing only a 1g load but now the vector is split into horizontal and vertical components to produce the turn and resist descent. Go fly and try it for yourself. And I swear any future comments by me on this topic will be off list. Tom Kuffel Whitefish, MT Building Original FireStar ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 07:57:20 AM PST US From: "Richard & Martha Neilsen" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: FAA Grants Extension... The end of the exemption for transitioning illegal airplanes to LSA kit built is drawing to a close. Does anyone know what has to be done to qualify a plane as a LSA kit built? I assume the kit builders need to certify the kits in some way. Has any kit builder certified their kits? More importantly has Kolb certified any of their kits. Do they have plans to do so? My understanding is that Kolb aircraft will have to be registered as Experimental Amateur Built after 1/31/08. The only down side of E-AB is that if you sell the plane only a certified A&E can do annuals and maintenance on the plane. Rick Neilsen Redrive VW powered MKIIIC ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rick Lewis" Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 9:21 PM Subject: Kolb-List: Re: FAA Grants Extension... > > Please educate me on this. I want to register my Kolb, that I'm now > building, in the experimental light sport aircraft catagory. Have I > missed the boat or is the extension your talking about changing the way a > completed aircraft is now registered? I do want to be able to work on the > aircraft myself and be able to fly it in the sport plane catagory. > > Rick Lewis > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=160121#160121 > > > ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 08:18:11 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: FAA Grants Extension... From: "lucien" NeilsenRM(at)comcast.net wrote: > The end of the exemption for transitioning illegal airplanes to LSA kit > built is drawing to a close. Does anyone know what has to be done to qualify > a plane as a LSA kit built? I assume the kit builders need to certify the > kits in some way. Has any kit builder certified their kits? More importantly > has Kolb certified any of their kits. Do they have plans to do so? > > My understanding is that Kolb aircraft will have to be registered as > Experimental Amateur Built after 1/31/08. The only down side of E-AB is that > if you sell the plane only a certified A&E can do annuals and maintenance on > the plane. > > Rick Neilsen > Redrive VW powered MKIIIC > > --- After the deadline, the only version of ELSA that will exist is the "approved kit" one, where the manufacturer first makes an SLSA version, etc. Basically, the requirements for making these are the same as SLSA, since manufacturers will have to go through the SLSA process to begin with. So I don't see too many of these appearing in the future or ever. There are one or two here and there, but I don't remember which they are. I don't believe Kolb is going to go the ELSA route with their kitplanes (smart move), so EAB looks like it'll remain the option with them. As for EAB, the annual condition inspection is the only thing that requires either the repairman's cert or an AnP. Any and all maintenance can be done my anyone in the usual way. This is also true for ELSA, since it's also an experimental certification. ELSA seems to give a higher resale because of the ability to do the annual CI's on them after taking the 16 hour class. SLSA is more like a dwarven Standard category with reduced certification/maint/annual requirements. The Kolb flyer looks like Kolb's SLSA entry, but the kitplanes look like they're remain EAB..... LS -------- LS FS II Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=160218#160218 ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 08:20:01 AM PST US From: "Jason Omelchuck" Subject: Kolb-List: Dead Stick approaches Larry C wrote: That aspect is one that most do not see as a problem, but it is as real as not making the runway. With 2600 feet of runway I managed to slip enough altitude that I landed in a safe spot. I have to admit that at first I "mushed" it to lose altitude, then decided that a slip would work better and be safer as well. It never occurred to me to use something as simple as your method. I will keep it in mind and utilize it when that situation comes up again. I do however doubt that I will give a RATS ASS if I do happen to exceed one G. Thanks again Larry C I own a MKIII but do not have much time in one. I have found one other option of loosing altitude is the "dive". The MKIII is so draggy that I can point the nose at the ground (no flaps) and run her up to 80mph, then when I am on glide path pull her back to my approach of 55mph and she slows right down again. Obviously this is not something that should be done from 5000 feet when trying to choose a landing spot, but if you are at 1000 feet and find your self a little high on final, it seems to work. Jason MKIII Portland OR ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 08:21:03 AM PST US From: ElleryWeld@aol.com Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: For all 912 users VIC All you have to do is ASK and you would have gotten an answer :o) do not archive In a message dated 1/24/2008 10:48:28 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, vicsvinyl@verizon.net writes: Thanks to whom ever posted the tip about screwing the dial indicater into the drive reduction box to check prop flange runout. Rick I think. I thought thats not going to work (metric). I happen to have a mag base and went right out to check it out. Made in Taiwan it said and screwed right in. To bad I had already spent an hour and a half a week ago trying to mount the damn thing. Vic do not archive (http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List) (http://www.matronics.com/contribution) **************Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape. http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exercise?NCID=aolcmp00300000002489 ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 08:56:46 AM PST US From: "Richard Girard" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: FAA Grants Extension... To market a qualifying kit after 01-31-2008 the manufacturer must build one aircraft and document it per ASTM F37 requirements as an S-LSA. Then they can sell kits that can be certificated as E-LSA per FAR 21.191i(2). The kit must be presented to the DAR or FAA rep in EXACTLY the same configuration as the qualifying S-LSA. Once you have the experimental certificate in your hand, you can do anything that falls within the LSA definition All that is required is a log book entry and putting the aircraft back into phase 1 flight testing for 5 hours. I verified this with Edsel Ford, director of the Light Sport branch in Oklahoma City, a couple of months ago. At this time M-Squared and Quad City Ultralights are the only companies selling qualifying kits, I think. Vans should have the RV-12 out any time now. I don't know of any others. Rick Girard On Jan 24, 2008 9:54 AM, Richard & Martha Neilsen wrote: > NeilsenRM@comcast.net> > > The end of the exemption for transitioning illegal airplanes to LSA kit > built is drawing to a close. Does anyone know what has to be done to > qualify > a plane as a LSA kit built? I assume the kit builders need to certify the > kits in some way. Has any kit builder certified their kits? More > importantly > has Kolb certified any of their kits. Do they have plans to do so? > > My understanding is that Kolb aircraft will have to be registered as > Experimental Amateur Built after 1/31/08. The only down side of E-AB is > that > if you sell the plane only a certified A&E can do annuals and maintenance > on > the plane. > > Rick Neilsen > Redrive VW powered MKIIIC > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Rick Lewis" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 9:21 PM > Subject: Kolb-List: Re: FAA Grants Extension... > > > > > > Please educate me on this. I want to register my Kolb, that I'm now > > building, in the experimental light sport aircraft catagory. Have I > > missed the boat or is the extension your talking about changing the way > a > > completed aircraft is now registered? I do want to be able to work on > the > > aircraft myself and be able to fly it in the sport plane catagory. > > > > Rick Lewis > > > > > > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=160121#160121 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 08:59:54 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: 1904 photo of a biplane in Georgia From: "grantr" I guess this is where I get my flying from. My great grandfather is the person in front of the wing with the suit and hat on. He is the 4th person from the left. This picture information from the website says this was taken in 1904. Thats really strange and cool since the Wright brothers flew 1st in 1903. This plane has the horizontal stabilizer in the rear like modern planes vs. the front like the Wright flyer of 1903 and 1904 and 1905. I wish I could find out more abut this picture and the airplane. Any historians know anything about the picture? http://dlg.galileo.usg.edu/meta/html/dlg/vang/meta_dlg_vang_cly058-82.html?Welcome Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=160234#160234 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/1904_biplane_207.jpg ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 09:04:42 AM PST US From: Mike Welch Subject: Kolb-List: Here, try this!!! NOTE: NEW SUBJECT LINE <<>> Jason MKIII Portland O MY thoughts EXACTLY, Jason. When I was taking flight instruction years ago, I was on final once "way too high"!! At my present approach, there was just NO way I was going to be able to land. I was not sure what to do, so my instructor said "Here, try this!!", and proceeded to push the nose forward and decend immediately!! In a matter of about 4 seconds I was on a perfect glidepath to land. That moment was very inspirational to me. It was the time when I finally realized it was supposed to be me that was controlling the airplane, and not the other way around. With hundreds of hours of experience now, I have come to enjoy flying "my way" (the safe way). Mike Welch Building Kolb MkIII Do Not Archive _________________________________________________________________ Connect and share in new ways with Windows Live. http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_Wave2_sharelife_012008 ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 10:08:45 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: FAA Grants Extension... From: "Thom Riddle" Rick, ...At this time M-Squared and Quad City Ultralights are the only companies selling qualifying kits, I think. Vans should have the RV-12 out any time now. I don't know of any others.... Many, but not all, of the SLSA manufacturers are selling ELSA kits. For example, Allegro, Rans (S-7), Zlin Savage.... -------- Thom Riddle N221FA Allegro 2000 912UL N197BG FS1/447 -------------------- Believe nothing, no matter where you read it or who has said it, not even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense. - Buddha Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=160253#160253 ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 10:18:33 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Regular Unleaded From: "jim" I was tired of the spills and hassel every time I fueled my Firefly. After I bought a 100 gal gasboy tanker for fueling my cross-country bird with regular unleaded, I decided to give regular unleaded a try in the Firefly to see if I could standardize on one fuel in my hangar. Everybody I know uses Premium unleaded (91 octane) auto fuel in the Rotax 503 engines. The owner of a Rotax Repair Station said he used premium unleaded fuel, but that regular unleaded (87 octane) meets the Rotax fuel grade specification. The Rotax manual says to use minimum 90 RON fuel. But the RON method of octane measurement is not used in the United States. In the US, a different method entirely is used, called the CLC method. The number that results from this method is the average of the RON octane number and the MON octane number, so (RON + MON)/2 = CLC octane number. This is the number that you will find printed on a yellow label on gas pumps in the United States which indicate (R+M)/2. 91 RON octane is equivalent to 87 CLC octane, so the 87 CLC octane of regular unleaded exceeds the 90 RON specified by Rotax. Late last fall and during a couple short flights this winter I used Regular unleaded with no problems. Does anybody else out there use regular unleaded? Ever had any problems? -------- Jim N. Idaho Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=160256#160256 ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 10:22:06 AM PST US From: Dana Hague Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: speeds At 09:57 AM 1/24/2008, Russ Kinne wrote: > >Seems I've recently read an awful lot of semi-conflicting things >about speed, acceleration, etc. >Well FWIW, unless they've changed things since my student days, >acceleration is a CHANGE in velocity. A car doing a steady 60MPH >down the highway has NO acceleration. If the speed is changed, it >accelerates or decelerates. >An aircraft in steady cruise flight has NO acceleration or >deceleration unless its speed is changed. An object (e.g. an aircraft) traveling in a curve at a constant speed is experiencing acceleration at 90=B0 to its direction of travel at any moment. Acceleration IS a change in velocity, since velocity is a vector quantity, defined as speed in a certain direction. Speed is a scalar quantity, which doesn't include a direction vector. So technically in a turn, the velocity changes while the speed stays constant. -Dana -- When you were born, you cried and the world rejoiced... Live your life so that when you die, the world cries and you rejoice. -- Cherokee saying ________________________________ Message 21 ____________________________________ Time: 10:25:01 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: speeds From: "Rex Rodebush" Russ, You are correct if the car is going in a straight line. If you take a sharp corner keeping your speed the same you will feel side acceleration g's. You will feel g's if you slow down, go faster, or just change directions. Ask the guy who is feeling 6 g's in an Air Force centirfuge. His speed is the same but he is constantly changing directions. Rex Rodebush Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=160257#160257 ________________________________ Message 22 ____________________________________ Time: 10:28:07 AM PST US From: "Richard Girard" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: 1904 photo of a biplane in Georgia Grant, That's the Curtiss Golden Flyer built by the Curtiss-Hemming Co., or a copy of it. The year is wrong as Curtiss didn't fly until 1908 in the "June Bug" built by Alexander Graham Bell's Aerial Experiment Association. Here's a better picture of the aircraft at the 1909 air race at Reims, France: http://www.earlyaviators.com/ecurti01.htm Rick Girard On Jan 24, 2008 10:57 AM, grantr wrote: > > I guess this is where I get my flying from. > > My great grandfather is the person in front of the wing with the suit and > hat on. He is the 4th person from the left. > > This picture information from the website says this was taken in 1904. > That's really strange and cool since the Wright brothers flew 1st in 1903. > This plane has the horizontal stabilizer in the rear like modern planes vs. > the front like the Wright flyer of 1903 and 1904 and 1905. > > I wish I could find out more abut this picture and the airplane. > > Any historians know anything about the picture? > > > http://dlg.galileo.usg.edu/meta/html/dlg/vang/meta_dlg_vang_cly058-82.html?Welcome > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=160234#160234 > > > Attachments: > > http://forums.matronics.com//files/1904_biplane_207.jpg > > ________________________________ Message 23 ____________________________________ Time: 10:37:52 AM PST US From: "beauford T" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: 1904 photo of a biplane in Georgia The Airplane is a Curtiss Pusher... Read up on Glenn Curtiss and you will learn more about it. beauford FF076 Do not Archive ----- Original Message ----- Subject: Kolb-List: 1904 photo of a biplane in Georgia I wish I could find out more abut this picture and the airplane. Any historians know anything about the picture? Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/1904_biplane_207.jpg ________________________________ Message 24 ____________________________________ Time: 10:49:26 AM PST US From: herb Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Regular Unleaded Jim Regular car gas is the same as Hi test...except for "marketing Additives" and anti knock goodies(slows the burn rate) . Gotta be a very small percentage of the total. . Herb do not archive At 12:15 PM 1/24/2008, you wrote: > >I was tired of the spills and hassel every time I fueled my >Firefly. After I bought a 100 gal gasboy tanker for fueling my >cross-country bird with regular unleaded, I decided to give regular >unleaded a try in the Firefly to see if I could standardize on one >fuel in my hangar. > >Everybody I know uses Premium unleaded (91 octane) auto fuel in the >Rotax 503 engines. The owner of a Rotax Repair Station said he used >premium unleaded fuel, but that regular unleaded (87 octane) meets >the Rotax fuel grade specification. > >The Rotax manual says to use minimum 90 RON fuel. But the RON >method of octane measurement is not used in the United States. In >the US, a different method entirely is used, called the CLC method. >The number that results from this method is the average of the RON >octane number and the MON octane number, so (RON + MON)/2 = CLC >octane number. This is the number that you will find printed on a >yellow label on gas pumps in the United States which indicate (R+M)/2. > >91 RON octane is equivalent to 87 CLC octane, so the 87 CLC octane >of regular unleaded exceeds the 90 RON specified by Rotax. > >Late last fall and during a couple short flights this winter I used >Regular unleaded with no problems. Does anybody else out there use >regular unleaded? Ever had any problems? > >-------- >Jim >N. Idaho > > >Read this topic online here: > >http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=160256#160256 > > ________________________________ Message 25 ____________________________________ Time: 11:07:12 AM PST US From: "Jack B. Hart" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: speeds From: Dana Hague >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> An object (e.g. an aircraft) traveling in a curve at a constant speed is experiencing acceleration at 90 to its direction of travel at any moment. Acceleration IS a change in velocity, since velocity is a vector quantity, defined as speed in a certain direction. Speed is a scalar quantity, which doesn't include a direction vector. So technically in a turn, the velocity changes while the speed stays constant. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dana, This only so if your reference point is on the ground. But if your reference point is in the plane, it is the earth that is accelerating. This is why John's G meter read 1g over a constant speed flight path. The G meter could care less about what the earth was doing or the G meter's relation ship to the earth. It only reads what is being experienced by the aircraft. In this case the velocity vector is in a constant magnitude and direction relative to the aircraft, therefore the G meter reads a constant value and the wing experiences a constant load. This goes to support the fact that if you fly at constant speed/velocity that is best glide, there is no danger of stalling for tearing the wings off the plane. The pilot still bears the responsibility of not decelerating too rapidly upon touch down. This has been a fun subject to help combat the weather. Jack B. Hart FF004 Winchester, IN do not archive ________________________________ Message 26 ____________________________________ Time: 11:29:06 AM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Regular Unleaded > Late last fall and during a couple short flights this winter I used Regular unleaded with no problems. Does anybody else out there use regular unleaded? Ever had any problems? > > -------- > Jim Jim in Idaho All the Rotax engines except the 912 (turbo), 912ULS four strokes, 618 and 532 two strokes are authorized to operate on 87 octane auto fuel. Ain't no more power in a gal of regular than there is in a gal of super hi-test. Wish I could run 87 in my912ULS. john h mkIII ________________________________ Message 27 ____________________________________ Time: 11:34:27 AM PST US From: Ben Ransom Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Regular Unleaded Curious about this myself, and ignorant, so... How do we know that 91 RON octane is equivalent to 87 CLC octane? Looking at this strictly from the math point of view, if (RON+MON)/2=CLC, MON could be very high and RON very low to produce a nice looking CLC. i.e. CLC printed at US pumps of 87 could be RON of 86 and MON of 88, unacceptable per Rotax spec. Or, it could be RON 90, MON 84 giving CLC 87 and we're good. -Ben herb wrote: > > > Jim > > Regular car gas is the same as Hi test...except for "marketing > Additives" and anti knock goodies(slows the burn rate) . Gotta be a > very small percentage of the total. . Herb > > do not archive > > > At 12:15 PM 1/24/2008, you wrote: >> >> I was tired of the spills and hassel every time I fueled my Firefly. >> After I bought a 100 gal gasboy tanker for fueling my cross-country >> bird with regular unleaded, I decided to give regular unleaded a try >> in the Firefly to see if I could standardize on one fuel in my hangar. >> >> Everybody I know uses Premium unleaded (91 octane) auto fuel in the >> Rotax 503 engines. The owner of a Rotax Repair Station said he used >> premium unleaded fuel, but that regular unleaded (87 octane) meets >> the Rotax fuel grade specification. >> >> The Rotax manual says to use minimum 90 RON fuel. But the RON method >> of octane measurement is not used in the United States. In the US, a >> different method entirely is used, called the CLC method. The number >> that results from this method is the average of the RON octane number >> and the MON octane number, so (RON + MON)/2 = CLC octane number. This >> is the number that you will find printed on a yellow label on gas >> pumps in the United States which indicate (R+M)/2. >> >> 91 RON octane is equivalent to 87 CLC octane, so the 87 CLC octane of >> regular unleaded exceeds the 90 RON specified by Rotax. >> >> Late last fall and during a couple short flights this winter I used >> Regular unleaded with no problems. Does anybody else out there use >> regular unleaded? Ever had any problems? >> >> -------- >> Jim >> N. Idaho >> >> >> >> >> Read this topic online here: >> >> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=160256#160256 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > ________________________________ Message 28 ____________________________________ Time: 11:43:55 AM PST US From: N27SB@aol.com Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: speeds All of this Nuts and Bolts, facts and figures are interesting however, if I take my little Firefly out and stick his little nose towards the ground, wri ng him out with a bunch of bank and pull back on the stick the results are not only fun but very effective in changing direction and losing altitude with very little gain in the weight I feel in my seat. It is nice to know why th is happens by the numbers but I suggest that you go out and try it. In a message dated 1/24/2008 2:08:25 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, jbhart@onlyinternet.net writes: From: Dana Hague >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> An object (e.g. an aircraft) traveling in a curve at a constant speed is experiencing acceleration at 90=B0 to its direction of travel at any moment. Steve Firefly 007/Floats do not archive **************Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape. http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exercise?NCID=aolcmp00300000002489 ________________________________ Message 29 ____________________________________ Time: 12:13:30 PM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: 1904 photo of a biplane in Georgia From: "grantr" Wow thats really cool!! Thanks for the information. I saw where this plane cost around $4500 to $6000 new back then. I seriously doubt my great grandfather or any of the farmers in Clay county could have afforded that in 1908. My great grandfather did work at a saw mill at one time in his life losing part of his arm in an accident. Maybe some of them built the plane. No one know anything about that picture except that my great grandfather is in it. Gosh I can wait to start flying my Kolb! :D Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=160285#160285 ________________________________ Message 30 ____________________________________ Time: 12:55:43 PM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Regular Unleaded From: "jim" >From http://www.csgnetwork.com/octaneratecalc.html Gasoline pumps typically post octane numbers as an average of two different values. Often you may see the octane rating quoted as (R+M)/2. One value is the research octane number (RON), which is determined with a test engine running at a low speed of 600 rpm. The other value is the motor octane number (MON), which is determined with a test engine running at a higher speed of 900 rpm. If, for example, a gasoline has an RON of 98 and a MON of 90, then the posted octane number would be the average of the two values or 94. Because of the different measurement RPMs, I would guess that the RON will always be higher than the MON. -------- Jim N. Idaho Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=160294#160294 ________________________________ Message 31 ____________________________________ Time: 01:42:39 PM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Replacing Hoses on a Rotax From: "Kirby Dennis Contr MDA/AL" Kolb Friends - The time has come for me to replace some of the rubber fluid lines on my 912ul. This would include the fuel, oil, and coolant hoses. These are the original hoses that came with the engine from the factory over 5 years ago, and they are showing signs of deterioration (cracks, splits, etc.) Looking in the Rotax catalog, I found the following prices on replacement sets of fluid lines: "Fuel Hose Assembly" - $223. "Oil Tube" - $56. "Coolant Hose" - $53. Yikes! Are there any acceptable "Auto Parts Store equivalent" hoses that I can use instead? When Rotax warns us to only use "Genuine Rotax parts" on our engines, I can understand if they're referring to the hardware. But it seems that fuel hoses, etc., could be replaced with "generic" products, and not compromise the integrity or reliability of the engine. Does anyone agree? Has any body done this? Thanks for your opinions - Dennis Kirby Cedar Crest, NM ________________________________ Message 32 ____________________________________ Time: 02:26:09 PM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Replacing Hoses on a Rotax > Are there any acceptable "Auto Parts Store equivalent" hoses that I can > use instead? > > Dennis Kirby Dennis K: I use 1" ID heater hose, 1/4" black neoprene fuel line. I like Gates, but other name brands are just as good. Oil line I get from Travis at TNK. He has access to that nice blue line. Remember, the oil line is primarily vacuum on the intake side and 3 to 5 psi on the outlet side. I think the most important factor is hose that can handle the temps, up to 300F working temp, not ultimate, and will hold its shape in bends without crimping. Give Travis a call on the blue hose. If you do, you can join the blue oil hose gang at Monument Valley in May. It is almost as prestigeous as the Black Hat Gang at MV. ;-) john h mkIII with blue oil hose and black hat. ________________________________ Message 33 ____________________________________ Time: 02:35:36 PM PST US From: "Robert Laird" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: FAA Grants Extension... Pure flight of fancy here, but......... .... it seems to me that if the EAA really wanted to do something useful to it's newly minted LSA crowd, they'd petition the FAA so that, once a kit plane was finished and gotten it's airworthiness and registration, that they then give the builder the option to make it an E-AB or an E-LSA (assuming it's within the LSA performance envelope). I'm sure someone will point out that a kit plane not built to ASTM spec may get an airworthiness, but the FAA will want an A&P inspecting it every year, to make sure it's safe. But, if you take a E-LSA/ASTM kit plane, get it built to spec and then get the airworthiness, from that point on, just about anything could change on it since it's experimental. So, what's the difference between an E-AB and a heavily modified E-LSA? If you say you need an A&P to inspect one kind, then why is a 16-hour class okay for the other? So, I think there's some bad faith here by the FAA (uh, -more- bad faith; I'm still pissed about how future UL pilots are gonna get trained), because the logic of it is faulty. -- Robert On 1/24/08, lucien wrote: > > > NeilsenRM(at)comcast.net wrote: > > The end of the exemption for transitioning illegal airplanes to LSA kit > > built is drawing to a close. Does anyone know what has to be done to qualify > > a plane as a LSA kit built? I assume the kit builders need to certify the > > kits in some way. Has any kit builder certified their kits? More importantly > > has Kolb certified any of their kits. Do they have plans to do so? > > > > My understanding is that Kolb aircraft will have to be registered as > > Experimental Amateur Built after 1/31/08. The only down side of E-AB is that > > if you sell the plane only a certified A&E can do annuals and maintenance on > > the plane. > > > > Rick Neilsen > > Redrive VW powered MKIIIC > > > > --- > > > After the deadline, the only version of ELSA that will exist is the "approved kit" one, where the manufacturer first makes an SLSA version, etc. > Basically, the requirements for making these are the same as SLSA, since manufacturers will have to go through the SLSA process to begin with. > > So I don't see too many of these appearing in the future or ever. > > There are one or two here and there, but I don't remember which they are. > > I don't believe Kolb is going to go the ELSA route with their kitplanes (smart move), so EAB looks like it'll remain the option with them. > > As for EAB, the annual condition inspection is the only thing that requires either the repairman's cert or an AnP. Any and all maintenance can be done my anyone in the usual way. This is also true for ELSA, since it's also an experimental certification. > > ELSA seems to give a higher resale because of the ability to do the annual CI's on them after taking the 16 hour class. > > SLSA is more like a dwarven Standard category with reduced certification/maint/annual requirements. > > The Kolb flyer looks like Kolb's SLSA entry, but the kitplanes look like they're remain EAB..... > > LS > > -------- > LS > FS II > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=160218#160218 > > ________________________________ Message 34 ____________________________________ Time: 03:34:53 PM PST US From: TK Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Regular Unleaded jim wrote: > Rotax. > > Late last fall and during a couple short flights this winter I used Regular unleaded with no problems. Does anybody else out there use regular unleaded? Ever had any problems? > > -------- > Jim > N. Idaho > > Jim, Got 775 hr.s on my FireFly using only regular octane 87 with no ethanol. Same engine, not tear down, just flying using good oil. Concerned about when the time comes and regular isn't available without ethanol where I'm at! Terry - Firefly #95 ________________________________ Message 35 ____________________________________ Time: 04:00:32 PM PST US From: Ben Ransom Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Regular Unleaded Do you have specific concerns wrt ethanol in a 2-stroke? I've been using 91 octane mogas, sometimes with ethanol. I've not been aware of any problems other than if gas gets older than a couple months the engine is hard to start and I don't trust it. I've assumed gas goes stale mostly because of other ingredients, not ethanol. -Ben TK wrote: > > jim wrote: >> Rotax. >> >> Late last fall and during a couple short flights this winter I used >> Regular unleaded with no problems. Does anybody else out there use >> regular unleaded? Ever had any problems? >> >> -------- >> Jim >> N. Idaho >> >> > > Jim, > > Got 775 hr.s on my FireFly using only regular octane 87 with no > ethanol. Same engine, not tear down, just flying using good oil. > Concerned about when the time comes and regular isn't available > without ethanol where I'm at! > > Terry - Firefly #95 > > ________________________________ Message 36 ____________________________________ Time: 05:02:29 PM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: FAA Grants Extension... From: "Ralph B" Rick Lewis wrote: > Please educate me on this. I want to register my Kolb, that I'm now building, in the experimental light sport aircraft catagory. Have I missed the boat or is the extension your talking about changing the way a completed aircraft is now registered? I do want to be able to work on the aircraft myself and be able to fly it in the sport plane catagory. > > Rick Lewis Rick, there is no deadline for Experimental Amateur Built (E-AB). If you built it, you can register and repair it without taking a repairman course. -------- Ralph B Original Firestar N91493 E-AB 21 years flying it Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=160332#160332 ________________________________ Message 37 ____________________________________ Time: 05:21:26 PM PST US From: "Richard Girard" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: 1904 photo of a biplane in Georgia A quick correction. While the aircraft is a Golden Flyer, it was made by the Herring-Curtiss Co. Rick Girard do not archive On Jan 24, 2008 12:22 PM, beauford T wrote: > > The Airplane is a Curtiss Pusher... > > Read up on Glenn Curtiss and you will learn more about it. > > beauford > FF076 > Do not Archive > > > ----- Original Message ----- > Subject: Kolb-List: 1904 photo of a biplane in Georgia > > I wish I could find out more abut this picture and the airplane. > > Any historians know anything about the picture? > > > Attachments: > > http://forums.matronics.com//files/1904_biplane_207.jpg > > ________________________________ Message 38 ____________________________________ Time: 05:38:51 PM PST US From: Dana Hague Subject: Re: Kolb-List: 1904 photo of a biplane in Georgia At 01:22 PM 1/24/2008, beauford T wrote: > >The Airplane is a Curtiss Pusher... > >Read up on Glenn Curtiss and you will learn more about it. Also see http://tinyurl.com/37zdoz ; Old Rhinebeck Aerodrome still flies theirs (a very similar but later model). Twenty feet high the length of the runway is as far as they ever take it during their airshows, but it's an awesome sight. -Dana -- "A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away." -Antoine de Saint-Exup,ry ________________________________ Message 39 ____________________________________ Time: 05:53:33 PM PST US From: Dana Hague Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: FAA Grants Extension... At 05:32 PM 1/24/2008, Robert Laird wrote: >.... it seems to me that if the EAA really wanted to do something >useful to it's newly minted LSA crowd, they'd petition the FAA so >that, once a kit plane was finished and gotten it's airworthiness and >registration, that they then give the builder the option to make it an >E-AB or an E-LSA (assuming it's within the LSA performance envelope). >...If you say you need an A&P to inspect one kind, then >why is a 16-hour class okay for the other? It's hard to guess why the FAA does many things, but in this case I'd guess that they figured LSA's are slow, simple aircraft, unlikely to do much damage if they hit anything, with the basic structure originally, at least, made to some standard... and thus simple to inspect. An E-AB, OTOH, can be ANYTHING... bigger, heavier, faster, the potential to do more damage, an possibly untested structure, so they hold it to a higher standard. Note that the builder, at least, can get a repairman certificate (which, if I'm not mistaken, includes the inspection authority) for that particular aircraft without even taking the 16 hour class. -Dana -- "A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away." -Antoine de Saint-Exup,ry ________________________________ Message 40 ____________________________________ Time: 05:56:40 PM PST US From: robert bean Subject: Re: Kolb-List: 1904 photo of a biplane in Georgia Thanks for the link. For a great video of the curtiss: http://www.oldrhinebeck.org/action_footage.htm BB On 24, Jan 2008, at 8:29 PM, Dana Hague wrote: > > At 01:22 PM 1/24/2008, beauford T wrote: >> >> >> The Airplane is a Curtiss Pusher... >> >> Read up on Glenn Curtiss and you will learn more about it. > > Also see http://tinyurl.com/37zdoz ; Old Rhinebeck Aerodrome still > flies theirs (a very similar but later model). Twenty feet high > the length of the runway is as far as they ever take it during > their airshows, but it's an awesome sight. > > -Dana > -- > "A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is > nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away." - > Antoine de Saint-Exup,ry > > ________________________________ Message 41 ____________________________________ Time: 06:08:44 PM PST US From: Dana Hague Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: speeds At 02:09 PM 1/24/2008, Jack B. Hart wrote: >This only so if your reference point is on the ground. > >But if your reference point is in the plane, it is the earth that is >accelerating. This is why John's G meter read 1g over a constant speed >flight path. The G meter could care less about what the earth was doing or >the G meter's relation ship to the earth. It doesn't matter what your reference point is, you can't ignore the Earth, since the aircraft is being attracted to it by gravity. That force is part of the vector sum of forces on the aircraft, which must equal zero or else the aircraft accelerates in the direction of the imbalance-- downward and inward in the case of coordinated 1g banked turn. The laws of physics don't vary, but experimental error does. -Dana -- The gene pool has no lifeguard. ________________________________ Message 42 ____________________________________ Time: 06:08:44 PM PST US From: Dana Hague Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Regular Unleaded At 06:57 PM 1/24/2008, Ben Ransom wrote: >Do you have specific concerns wrt ethanol in a 2-stroke? >I've been using 91 octane mogas, sometimes with ethanol. I've not been >aware of any problems other than if gas gets older than a couple months >the engine is hard to start and I don't trust it. I've assumed gas goes >stale mostly because of other ingredients, not ethanol. There are concerns about ethanol's compatibility with rubber parts such as seals, fuel pumps, and carburetor parts. Gas goes stale because some of the more volatile components evaporate out. That's one reason I use avgas in my Cuyuna (that and concerns about alcohol); avgas is much better controlled as to vapor pressure so it stores much better... I believe it's supposed to remain good for 2 years. -Dana -- The gene pool has no lifeguard. ________________________________ Message 43 ____________________________________ Time: 06:59:16 PM PST US From: DAquaNut@aol.com Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firestar project Bill, You can save 2 lbs. or more going with 4" Azusa wheels ,but the ground handling wont be as forgiving. Ed D. **************Biggest Grammy Award surprises of all time on AOL Music. (http://music.aol.com/grammys/pictures/never-won-a-grammy?NCID=aolcmp003000000025 48) ________________________________ Message 44 ____________________________________ Time: 07:22:53 PM PST US From: "Robert Laird" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: FAA Grants Extension... I'm not suggesting 16-hr repairman courses for E-AB... you've concluded the opposite of what I meant... One of the main advantages of E-LSA is that you don't need an A&P, just a 16-hour course to do the annual condition inspection. A E-LSA can be bought and sold, bought and sold, bought and sold, and the current owner can do the annual inspection as long as he took the course and got his repairman cert for that current plane. What I'm saying is, if you had a kit plane -- a Kolb for example -- that didn't have an approved S-LSA "template", then you have no choice but to get it certified as an E-AB... thus depriving the owner of selling it to someone who doesn't want to pay the A&P each year, that has already taken the LSA repairman course. It would be an advantage of the original builder/owner to be able to offer it up as an E-LSA rather than an E-AB. This isn't about E-ABs, this is about E-LSAs. I'm suggesting that a kit built E-AB that falls inside the LSA category should be able to be considered an E-LSA if the builder wants it that way (but no going back). The way the FAA rules are now, you have to wonder why, say, a RV-8 kit builder should be able to get it certified as an E-AB unless Vans creates a factory-built RV-8 first. Clear as mud? :-/ -- Robert On Jan 24, 2008 7:50 PM, Dana Hague wrote: > > At 05:32 PM 1/24/2008, Robert Laird wrote: > > >.... it seems to me that if the EAA really wanted to do something > >useful to it's newly minted LSA crowd, they'd petition the FAA so > >that, once a kit plane was finished and gotten it's airworthiness and > >registration, that they then give the builder the option to make it an > >E-AB or an E-LSA (assuming it's within the LSA performance envelope). > >...If you say you need an A&P to inspect one kind, then > >why is a 16-hour class okay for the other? > > It's hard to guess why the FAA does many things, but in this case I'd guess > that they figured LSA's are slow, simple aircraft, unlikely to do much > damage if they hit anything, with the basic structure originally, at least, > made to some standard... and thus simple to inspect. > > An E-AB, OTOH, can be ANYTHING... bigger, heavier, faster, the potential to > do more damage, an possibly untested structure, so they hold it to a higher > standard. Note that the builder, at least, can get a repairman certificate > (which, if I'm not mistaken, includes the inspection authority) for that > particular aircraft without even taking the 16 hour class. > > -Dana > -- > "A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing > left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away." -Antoine de > Saint-Exup,ry > > ________________________________ Message 45 ____________________________________ Time: 07:41:16 PM PST US From: "Dan G." Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Dead Stick Approaches ( Holes in the sky) I know this one has been beat to death - I would expect nothing less from all of us on this list. Nevertheless, I still have enjoyed reading it and it made me think a lot about good piloting skills. I agree with Mike and Dana as far as the theory goes, but I also believe that Tom and John's experience shows that for moderate bank angles the additional g-load is near negligible. One thing I've noticed, by the way, is that many of us tend to over estimate our bank angle. When I've done true 30-degree banks on the gyro it sure felt a lot steeper than that. I suspect you may get the highest g-load when you pull-out of your descent on the turn to final, also when you are least likely to have your eyes on the g-meter - but a very smooth technique could minimize that. I think that maintaining constant airspeed is a very important discipline to develop. I know I will be practicing this technique next time I can get flying. Dan G. 503 F2 Tucson The Kuffels wrote: > > Dana, > > << Since you're _accelerating_ downward your descent rate will > continue to increase, as will your airspeed. >> > > Taint so on the second part. Your decent rate will increase slightly > until the vertical component of your drag cancels the loss of vertical > lift (if you turn long enough). But your airspeed is your velocity > forward, almost orthogonal to vertical. In non-aerobatic flight it is > a simple matter to adjust your airspeed and accept the resulting > descent rate. > > And I say again, your vertical accelerations are a secondary effect. > Even a 500 feet/min descent is less than 1 percent of your forward > velocity at 60 mph. And a change in descent rate from 250 to 500 > ft/min is a change in your vertical velocity of less than 3 mph. This > is well within the ability of any pilot to compensate as he maintains > constant *forward* airspeed. > > High-g pullout examples don't apply here because they involve large > changes in airspeed, power or vertical speed. > > Go try it for yourself. In a simulated turn to final, holding > constant airspeed results in a 1g maneuver no matter what bank angle > (within reason, say 60 degrees). > > Tom Kuffel > Whitefish, MT > Building Original FireStar ________________________________ Message 46 ____________________________________ Time: 08:07:51 PM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Dead Stick Approaches ( Holes in the sky) From: "JetPilot" [quote="John Hauck] Guess the only way to convince you is take you for a ride. ;-) john h mkIII[/quote] I want a Ride !!!! I would love to see how John flys his Kolb from inside his plane :) This topic has been beat to death, but in this case its a good thing. I am willing to bet there will be a lot of people practicing engine out turns to final in the coming days. I know I will be trying it the next chance I get. So if we all get some more practice, and get better and flying our Kolbs engine out, its all good. 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=160362#160362 ________________________________ Message 47 ____________________________________ Time: 08:15:33 PM PST US From: WhiskeyVictor36@aol.com Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Regular Unleaded In a message dated 1/24/2008 6:35:50 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, tkrolfe@toast.net writes: Got 775 hr.s on my FireFly Hi Terry, Wow! I know you fly a lot, but that is a lot of hours. When did you start flying that FireFly? I also use regular grade fuel per the Rotax 447 operators manual. Also, in NJ, all automobile pump gas is mandated to contain up to 10% ethanol. So far I haven't had any problems using it and it does contain ethanol. One other item about fuel for 2-strokes. Most 2-cycle engine manufacturers (leaf blowers and such) caution/recommend against using oil/mixed fuel after it has sit for a couple of weeks. Well, I found this to be impractical to do. I mean, what do you do with unused mixed fuel? You have to PAY to have it disposed of, or maybe you could use it in your OLD car (not my new one). Anyway, I disregarded the caution and used the old fuel. Guess what, in 13 years of flying, nary a problem cropped up. In fact, one buddy went on vacation for three months, and when he returned, took his Kolb out for a flight with old gas and no problem. Now, I am not recommending anyone follow our practice, but we have had trouble free performance. So Far :) Bill Varnes Original Kolb FireStar Measly 480 hrs since 94 Audubon NJ Do Not Archive **************Biggest Grammy Award surprises of all time on AOL Music. (http://music.aol.com/grammys/pictures/never-won-a-grammy?NCID=aolcmp003000000025 48) ________________________________ Message 48 ____________________________________ Time: 08:16:42 PM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Dead Stick approaches From: "JetPilot" I do the same thing with My MK III when landing, if it is looking a bit high, all I have to do is drop the nose, increase speed to 70 for a little high, 80 for way high, and it drops like a rock and before I know it I am no longer high :) On a draggy, light airplane like a Kolb, speed bleeds off almost instantly when the nose is pulled up. 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=160363#160363 ________________________________ Message 49 ____________________________________ Time: 08:17:13 PM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Dead Stick Approaches ( Holes in the sky) also when you are least likely to have your eyes on the g-meter Dan G. Dan G: With a recording needle (don't know what the actual name fo the third needle is) don't have to keep my eye on the g meter. john h mkIII ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.