---------------------------------------------------------- Kolb-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Thu 01/31/08: 61 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 02:42 AM - Re: Cleaning up a Mark-III (pj.ladd) 2. 03:23 AM - Re: Firestar project (pj.ladd) 3. 05:46 AM - Firestar project (william sullivan) 4. 06:40 AM - Re: 912ULS Mag Drop (lucien) 5. 07:12 AM - Re: Firestar project (lucien) 6. 07:22 AM - Not really kolb related (possums) 7. 07:53 AM - Re: Firestar project main spar attachment (Thom Riddle) 8. 09:19 AM - Re: Firestar project (JetPilot) 9. 09:34 AM - Re: "clip-wing Firestar/Slingshot wannabe" (JetPilot) 10. 09:39 AM - Re: 912ULS Mag Drop (JetPilot) 11. 09:44 AM - Hmmmmm (Richard Girard) 12. 09:48 AM - Re: "clip-wing Firestar/Slingshot wannabe" (Mnflyer) 13. 09:50 AM - Re: 912ULS Mag Drop (lucien) 14. 09:53 AM - Re: FAR 103.3 Inspection requirements (JetPilot) 15. 10:06 AM - Re: Re: 912ULS Mag Drop (robert bean) 16. 10:14 AM - Ramp Checks, was Re: Firestar project (Dana Hague) 17. 10:26 AM - Re: Not really kolb related (Ron) 18. 10:26 AM - Re: FAR 103.3 Inspection requirements (Ralph B) 19. 10:39 AM - Re: Re: FAR 103.3 Inspection requirements (Bob Noyer) 20. 10:40 AM - Re: Re: "clip-wing Firestar/Slingshot wannabe" (N27SB@aol.com) 21. 10:42 AM - Re: Re: 912ULS Mag Drop (John Hauck) 22. 10:44 AM - Re: Re: 912ULS Mag Drop (John Hauck) 23. 10:52 AM - Re: Hmmmmm (knowvne@aol.com) 24. 10:56 AM - Re: Re: "clip-wing Firestar/Slingshot wannabe" (robert bean) 25. 10:58 AM - Re: Re: Firestar project (Denny Rowe) 26. 11:00 AM - Re: Re: 912ULS Mag Drop (John Hauck) 27. 11:19 AM - Re: Re: "clip-wing Firestar/Slingshot wannabe" (Jeremy Casey) 28. 11:24 AM - Re: Re: 912ULS Mag Drop (John Hauck) 29. 11:25 AM - Re: FAR 103.3 Inspection requirements (Jim ODay) 30. 11:35 AM - Re: Re: FAR 103.3 Inspection requirements (Richard Girard) 31. 12:17 PM - Re: Re: Firestar project (pj.ladd) 32. 12:24 PM - Your minimum hp take off and climb? (Eugene Zimmerman) 33. 12:26 PM - Re: Re: Firestar project (pj.ladd) 34. 12:27 PM - Re: Re: FAR 103.3 Inspection requirements (knowvne@aol.com) 35. 12:33 PM - Re: Firestar project (pj.ladd) 36. 01:12 PM - Re: How Much Load does Turbulence put on a Kolb ??? (jb92563) 37. 01:16 PM - Re: Here, try this!!! (jb92563) 38. 01:17 PM - Re: How Much Load does Turbulence put on a Kolb ??? (jb92563) 39. 02:12 PM - Re: Your minimum hp take off and climb? (Bob Noyer) 40. 03:10 PM - Re: Firestar project (lucien) 41. 03:20 PM - Re: 912ULS Mag Drop (lucien) 42. 03:49 PM - Re: Not really kolb related (jb92563) 43. 04:09 PM - Re: Cable thimbles (TK) 44. 04:20 PM - Re: Big Island Volcano Flights (jb92563) 45. 04:24 PM - Re: Re: Not really kolb related (Bryan Dever) 46. 04:27 PM - Re: Cable thimbles (lucien) 47. 04:44 PM - Re: Your minimum hp take off and climb? (Eugene Zimmerman) 48. 05:01 PM - Re: Cable thimbles (Richard Girard) 49. 05:25 PM - Re: Cable thimbles (Dana Hague) 50. 05:32 PM - Re: Not really kolb related (Russ Kinne) 51. 06:06 PM - Re: Re: Not really kolb related (Bob Noyer) 52. 06:10 PM - Minimum horsepower take off? (Bob Noyer) 53. 06:10 PM - Re: Re: Not really kolb related (russ kinne) 54. 06:49 PM - Re: Re: Not really kolb related (Eugene Zimmerman) 55. 07:21 PM - Re: Cable thimbles (Richard Girard) 56. 07:30 PM - Re: Re: FAR 103.3 Inspection requirements (Ed Chmielewski) 57. 07:47 PM - Re: Re: Not really kolb related (Ed Chmielewski) 58. 08:10 PM - Re: Not really kolb related (henry.voris) 59. 09:32 PM - Re: Re: Not really kolb related (Denny Rowe) 60. 10:32 PM - Re: Not really kolb related (Ron) 61. 11:19 PM - Re: M3X update (icrashrc) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 02:42:15 AM PST US From: "pj.ladd" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Cleaning up a Mark-III Seemed to me to be an ideal place to put a big fuel tank and get some use out of that big empty space. We ended up with a nice 25 gal useable aluminum tank.>> Sounds a great idea John. Wish I could get away with that over here. What did it do to your weight and C of G? Pat ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 03:23:36 AM PST US From: "pj.ladd" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firestar project For "Light-Sport Aircraft" (comparable to your microlight category) it's 1320 lbs empty>> Hi Dana, I think our new sub 115Kg category will closely approximate your ultralight. Not completely uncontrolled but much more so than our usual `microlight`spec. Our `microlights` are still well below the Sports category weight. My Xtra has to be below 950lbs MTOW. Fascinating how different countries have dealt with this problem. Some have specified empty weight some MTOW some countries do not allow flight above a certain height some do not allow it below a certain height. Switzerland allowed no microlights at all until last year. Spain had no legal microlights a few years ago but there were plenty flying. The legal spec was so tight that no one could possible fly. Apparently all applications to fly microlights finished up on the desk of a guy in the Spanish equivalant of the FAA and he was a microlight pilot himself. He just `lost` them. Apparently in Australia until a short time ago there were many pilots with no pilots licence because they lived on large homesteads and and learned to fly in the same way that they learned to drive a car. Their Dad taught them. They were never `official` beacause they flew on and over their own land and never landed at a `proper` airfield. However when they began to fly from their own homesteads to the neighbours, and then on to the next one, and the next, in increasing numbers the authorities lowered the boom on them. Good while it lasted though. No more posts from me for a couple of weeks as I am off to supposedly `sunny` Tenerife in the morning. In fact Tenerife has rain and high winds forecast for at least the next few days. Warm though, in the 70`s so that will be OK Cheers everybody Pat ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 05:46:48 AM PST US From: william sullivan Subject: Kolb-List: Firestar project Pat, thanks for the information on the latest developments over there. I am new to this, so the term "ultralight" means something different to all of us. Keep the info coming. As far as the three mounting hole at the front of the wings, they appear to have a lot of stock around them. They are tarped in the back yard, and when the weather is good I will get some measurements. Too windy yesterday. They appear to be well made and cared for, and I don't know why they were for sale- no damage except for 4 small (under 2") holes in the ailerons from shipping damage. They are 5 rib. Some stray weight can be taken off them, like an antenna mount, and something that I think is a fancy tie-down attachment. Paint and fabric is very nice. The Millers are sending a patch kit. By the way- I weighed it with wood strips on the rudder and elevator, and an unknown weight of gas in it, maybe 4-5 gallons. Also, the wind was blowing. And the scale read differently every time I bounced it. I just wanted a rough idea how much to trim. Now I'm waiting for weather or parts. Bill Sullivan ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 06:40:18 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: 912ULS Mag Drop From: "lucien" John Hauck wrote: > Gang: > > My idea of why the mag was dropping was correct. > > After oiling the throttle clevis's, changing spark plugs, with no > improvement, I played with the enricher at 4000 rpm while performing the mag > check. Indication was lean condition at 4000 rpm. > > Today, despite the wind and cold, I got the needles raised a notch, which > puts the clip in the bottom groove of the fuel needles. It worked. Now I > am a happy camper once again. > > Proves not all 912 engines are created equal. I never encountered this > problem with my last 912ULS. > > Didn't get to test fly because it was getting late by the time I finished > up. > > These new generation Bing carbs are much easier to get to the top innards of > the carb to get at the fuel needles. The older ones were a little more work > intensive. > > Always feels good to get those little problems solved. > > john h > mkIII Sounds to me more like just some variation in the carbs rather than an engine difference? I've encountered the same thing with the bings on my 2-strokes. Same jetting and atmospheric conditions, but still slightly different resulting mixtures from motor to motor. I just adjusted them as needed.... The bings on the 912 seem to work really well. The plane originally lived at 1500' MSL and now lives at 7000' MSL; all I had to do was put the vent lines into the air filters and lean out the idle mix about 1/2 turn to get a proper looking plug.... BTW, the enrichener is a great debugging tool like you said - I used it to diagnose a carp-in-carb problem after a recent fuel line change. Saves a lot of time and head-scratching ;) LS -------- LS FS II Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161543#161543 ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 07:12:31 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Firestar project From: "lucien" My .02... My personal preference nowadays is to be legal and that's always what I suggest to others. OTOH, I try not to be anal retentive about the R&R's especially if they keep me completely grounded with a perfectly good flying machine. I like many of us flew illegally for a long time - I don't regret it because I feel that I used my best judgment and flew only good equipment. But these days I simply prefer to be legal for both safety and "Da Man" reasons. Much as I hate to say it, it's really quite true: many of the R&R' we fly under nowadays came about because someone flew an airplane into the ground. This especially applies to airworthiness; I hate to think of how much of AC 43.13 came about because of crashes and etc. Good designs like the kolb, titan quicksilver, RV, etc are safe designs because someone got in the things and found the bugs. A lot of what has been discovered over the years then comes down to us partially in the regs and partially in AC's like 43.13. Even weight limits have a little sanity to them, the idea behind them being the greater the "commanded kinetic energy" the more qualified the pilot should be. Finally, while I think R&R's can be a good thing, I don't want to live in a police state either. I'd hate to think that the max punishment for the most minimal infraction will always come about and I'll probably always resist that. I'll still bend regs as necessary to insure the safety of the flight or even to enhance the quality of my flying experience within what I consider to be reasonable bounds. But that's just me. As for part 103, that's still being hashed out all these years later and I can see both sides of it. LS -------- LS FS II Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161555#161555 ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 07:22:34 AM PST US From: possums Subject: Kolb-List: Not really kolb related A kolb is sitting on a runway which is actually a giant treadmill. Just as the pilot throttles up and begins to move forward, the treadmill begins running in the opposite direction. No matter how fast the airplane tries to move forward, the treadmill will match its speed in the opposite direction. Will the airplane ever take off? Finally answered --------------------------------------------------------------- do not archive http://boortz.com/more/video/mythbusters_plane_conveyor_belt.html ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 07:53:43 AM PST US From: Thom Riddle Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firestar project main spar attachment FWIW, standard design practice is to have a MINIMUM edge distance, measured from the center of the hole to the nearest edge, greater than or equal to 1.5 x hole diameter. For a 5/16 diameter hole the closest edge distance from the center of the hole, according to standard practice, would be 15/32" (.47"). Also important is that there be no sharp edge, nicks etc, where stresses concentrate. Will it fail if slightly less than .47"? Probably not due to design safety factors built into "standard practice". Thom in Buffalo ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 09:19:19 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Firestar project From: "JetPilot" Being legal is good, and most of us make every effort to follow the spirit of the law. But good judgment and safety must always your primary concern. I have never been ramp checked, these guys talk about Ramp checks, and maybe if you are flying into Oshkosh or Sun and Fun, or some other event you might get ramp checked, but chances are very low that it will you will ever get checked at the small airports that most ultralights fly out of. The other thing you need to take into account is they are probably not going to be weighing planes without cause while doing ramp checks, has anyone ever been weighted in a routine ramp check ??? ( not event related, but standard run of the mill ramp check ) I seriously doubt it... If you have 10 gallons of gas (double the limit), or 2 seats (double the limit), that will stand out like a sore thumb, and is likely to get your a violation on a ramp check, just like driving 110 MPH in a 55 MPH zone will draw attention on the highway (double the limit).... In the case of your single seat statistic, with a 5 gallon tank and a single seat, will not likely generate any any unwanted attention. No one is going to be able to look at you plane and say "its 15 pounds overweight"... So don't let some self righteous individuals tell you to go to an undue amount of work or make your plane less safe, by degrading the performance due to being 6 % overweight. I'm sure since this thread started, every one of these guys has driven 3 MPH over the speed limit. The problem here is, these guys have taken a position publicly on this list, and they are not about to let a new guy like me or anyone else point out that what they are suggesting is nothing short of stupid. We are very fortunate that Richard and a couple others here are not in positions of authority. I can see it now, " sir, you were doing 58 in a 55 zone, I am going to give you a ticket " or " Sir, your plastic fuel tank has bulged and now holds 5.25 gallons of gas, which is 6 % over the limit, I am going to have to violate you ". It does not matter how much they say " the law is the law ", or how how many "reasons" they give, worrying about 3 MPH, or .25 gallons, or even worrying about 15 pounds extra on an ultralight is just plain stupid and anal. How many of these guys do think actually tell their friends to slow down and start self righteously preaching " the law " when they drive 3 MPH over the speed limit using all the same arguments they have been using here in this thread. I'm sure the response they would get would be something to the effect of "stick it where the sun don't shine" or " get out of my car "... 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=161566#161566 ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 09:34:48 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: "clip-wing Firestar/Slingshot wannabe" From: "JetPilot" It is pretty well known that a longer wingspan results in better performance. By making the wingspan shorter, you will most likely... Reduce Climb Rate Reduce the Glide Ratio Poor performance at high altitude density Very probably reduce cruise speed Increase Takeoff and landing distances Increase stall speed You reduce a lot of safety margins by reducing the wingspan of the plane. There will be some advantages like higher roll rate and a couple others, it might not be worth all the bad effects shorter wings will have. You should research what you are dong and the effects before you do 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=161575#161575 ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 09:39:21 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: 912ULS Mag Drop From: "JetPilot" Lucien, How did you run the vent lines into the Air Filters. Can you post some pictures of that ? I have one vent that is spitting out some fuel, and I would rather not have it going all over the engine. Anyone seen what causes a vent line on the 912-s to spit some fuel, its not much, I cant see it, but its enough to discolor and leave a gooey discoloration where it hits the cylinder. 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=161579#161579 ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 09:44:44 AM PST US From: "Richard Girard" Subject: Kolb-List: Hmmmmm *RADAR'S REPLACEMENT? MAGNETIC FIELDS TRACK AIRCRAFT * New technology now being studied in Europe can track aircraft by detecting tiny changes in the Earth's magnetic field, according to a recent report in ICTWeb. Structures that cause "shadows" for today's radar systems -- a problem for ground surveillance at large, sprawling airports -- do not impair the magnetic field detectors. Recent tests of the systemin Greece and Germany showed that it could detect 100 percent of the passing aircraft, and pinpointed their location to within 7.5 meters [25 feet], a level of accuracy comparable to most existing air traffic management systems, says researcher Haibin Gao. The system uses an array of small, cheap sensor units, which could be as small as a coin in the future. They can be installed at the entry and exit points of each runway, and would be affordable even for small airports. ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 09:48:14 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: "clip-wing Firestar/Slingshot wannabe" From: "Mnflyer" The weight of the HKS is about 25 to 30 lb more than a 503 depending on accessories like starter, oil injection gearbox type etc. The HKS is a 60 hp engine thus 8 more than a dual carb dual ignition 503 burns 3 gph running it at 5700 rpms and has electric start a very quiet ignition and alternator (minimal noise in the radio) and starts almost instantly, has a 800 TBO. GB -------- GB MNFlyer Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161581#161581 ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 09:50:12 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: 912ULS Mag Drop From: "lucien" JetPilot wrote: > Lucien, > > How did you run the vent lines into the Air Filters. Can you post some pictures of that ? I have one vent that is spitting out some fuel, and I would rather not have it going all over the engine. > > Anyone seen what causes a vent line on the 912-s to spit some fuel, its not much, I cant see it, but its enough to discolor and leave a gooey discoloration where it hits the cylinder. > > Mike I'll try to get some pics of what I did ASAP. I used some brass barbs from Lowes to make the fittings, the type used to splice tubing. Barbs on each end with a small ridge in the center. I then drilled holes in the back of the air cleaners, cleaned out the debris and pushed the fitting in up to the ridge. I also smeared a little silicone adhesive to help hold it and seal up any possible leaks. Then pushed the vent lines onto the exposed barb. This leaned out the top end to where it was supposed to be even as high as 10,000' MSL, it was running a little rich at full throttle before that. If you're getting fuel spitting out of the vents, you probably have something plugged up in the carburettor somewhere or it's possible the carb is running over. My 2-stroke Bings would sometimes spit fuel out of the vents if they were running over or needed cleaning. The outside of the carburettor should be totally dry as should the vents...... LS -------- LS FS II Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161583#161583 ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 09:53:04 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: FAR 103.3 Inspection requirements From: "JetPilot" There is a big difference between being 300 Pounds + and trying to pass your plane off as an ultralight, and being only 15 pounds overweight... I have never seen a ramp check, or known anyone that has had a ramp check. I'm sure it happens, but how many get weighed in a standard run of the mill ramp check ( non event or air show related ). Its all about good judgment, if you are a bit overweight, don't fly your ultralight into an ultralight event where there is likely to be ramp checks, and likely to be weighed. If you are so far overweight that it is obviously not plausible as an ultralight, get an N Number... But 15 ( 6% )pounds overweight is a non issue in most cases. Seems that there is a lack of common sense and good judgment by some on this list. 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=161588#161588 ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 10:06:20 AM PST US From: robert bean Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: 912ULS Mag Drop How did the carp get in the fuel line? Amazing! bb do not archive On 31, Jan 2008, at 9:37 AM, lucien wrote: > > > John Hauck wrote: >> Gang: >> >> My idea of why the mag was dropping was correct. >> >> After oiling the throttle clevis's, changing spark plugs, with no >> improvement, I played with the enricher at 4000 rpm while >> performing the mag >> check. Indication was lean condition at 4000 rpm. >> >> Today, despite the wind and cold, I got the needles raised a >> notch, which >> puts the clip in the bottom groove of the fuel needles. It >> worked. Now I >> am a happy camper once again. >> >> Proves not all 912 engines are created equal. I never encountered >> this >> problem with my last 912ULS. >> >> Didn't get to test fly because it was getting late by the time I >> finished >> up. >> >> These new generation Bing carbs are much easier to get to the top >> innards of >> the carb to get at the fuel needles. The older ones were a little >> more work >> intensive. >> >> Always feels good to get those little problems solved. >> >> john h >> mkIII > > > Sounds to me more like just some variation in the carbs rather than > an engine difference? > I've encountered the same thing with the bings on my 2-strokes. > Same jetting and atmospheric conditions, but still slightly > different resulting mixtures from motor to motor. I just adjusted > them as needed.... > > The bings on the 912 seem to work really well. The plane originally > lived at 1500' MSL and now lives at 7000' MSL; all I had to do was > put the vent lines into the air filters and lean out the idle mix > about 1/2 turn to get a proper looking plug.... > > BTW, the enrichener is a great debugging tool like you said - I > used it to diagnose a carp-in-carb problem after a recent fuel line > change. Saves a lot of time and head-scratching ;) > > LS > > -------- > LS > FS II > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161543#161543 > > ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 10:14:48 AM PST US From: Dana Hague Subject: Kolb-List: Ramp Checks, was Re: Firestar project At 12:14 PM 1/31/2008, JetPilot wrote: >I have never been ramp checked, these guys talk about Ramp checks, and >maybe if you are flying into Oshkosh or Sun and Fun, or some other event >you might get ramp checked, but chances are very low that it will you will >ever get checked at the small airports that most ultralights fly out of. Seems I've heard of ultralights being weighed at ramp checks at major fly-ins, but I don't know if it was random or only if an airplane "looked" heavy. For most pilots, any thorough ramp check would likely only be if you piss somebody off, usually by what I call "impolite flying". Or, if you're flying to or from an airport that tolerates but doesn't quite "welcome" ultralights, a complaint about some offense (whether real or imaginary) might precipitate a check. An example is the airport I'm on a waiting list for hangar space at. It's 1/3 the distance from my house compared to the ultralight friendly airport I'm currently flying from... the airport owner allows ultralights (though only if the pilot has a license), but the FBO owner hates ultralights and wants no part of them on "his" airport. So far the airport owner's policy goes, but on one occasion the FBO told the pilot of a [registered] Quicksilver GT-400 "the first time I have to go around because you're too slow on final, you're out of here!" Wouldn't be too hard to picture a guy like that calling the FAA and reporting an "overweight" ultralight. -Dana -- Black holes are where God is dividing by zero. ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 10:26:00 AM PST US From: Ron Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Not really kolb related Yes, :-) Ron (Arizona) ================================ ---- possums wrote: ============ A kolb is sitting on a runway which is actually a giant treadmill. Just as the pilot throttles up and begins to move forward, the treadmill begins running in the opposite direction. No matter how fast the airplane tries to move forward, the treadmill will match its speed in the opposite direction. Will the airplane ever take off? Finally answered --------------------------------------------------------------- do not archive http://boortz.com/more/video/mythbusters_plane_conveyor_belt.html -- kugelair.com ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 10:26:22 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: FAR 103.3 Inspection requirements From: "Ralph B" JetPilot wrote: > There is a big difference between being 300 Pounds + and trying to pass your plane off as an ultralight, and being only 15 pounds overweight... > > I have never seen a ramp check, or known anyone that has had a ramp check. I'm sure it happens, but how many get weighed in a standard run of the mill ramp check ( non event or air show related ). > > Its all about good judgment, if you are a bit overweight, don't fly your ultralight into an ultralight event where there is likely to be ramp checks, and likely to be weighed. If you are so far overweight that it is obviously not plausible as an ultralight, get an N Number... > > But 15 ( 6% )pounds overweight is a non issue in most cases. Seems that there is a lack of common sense and good judgment by some on this list. > > Mike Mike, You can't always tell if it's an ultralight or not. Does this look like an ultralight to you? How much do you think it weighs? Ralph -------- Ralph B Original Firestar N91493 E-AB 21 years flying it Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161598#161598 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/at_lydia__162.jpg ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 10:39:45 AM PST US From: Bob Noyer Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: FAR 103.3 Inspection requirements Our local PeaPatch airport, Winchester (VA) Regional is only some 50 easy road miles from Dulles and its nest of faaers, but I've never see/heard of anyone (UL or UL-looking) being ramp checked during EAA fly-ins, or any other times. They (faa) can and do visit, but usually on incident/accident cks on GA. regards, Bob N. FireFly 070 Old Kolb http://www.angelfire.com/rpg/ronoy/ do not archive....or is this still in effect? ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 10:40:53 AM PST US From: N27SB@aol.com Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: "clip-wing Firestar/Slingshot wannabe" In a message dated 1/31/2008 12:35:30 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, orcabonita@hotmail.com writes: It is pretty well known that a longer wingspan results in better performance. By making the wingspan shorter, you will most likely... Yes Mike, but, What if the wing you are starting with is too long? You are assuming that the original Firestar wing is "The Right Length". As I understand it the original Firestar has almost as much wing area as Your MKIIIX. By your logic you would have to increase your wingspan to almost 60 feet. As far as a longer wing being better, It depends what the mission is. By virtue of the fact that I fly my Firefly with 60 # of float all the time, I Am 60# over weight of a standard Fly. Performance is tremendous. At one point Bryan and I thought about increasing the wingspan a tad but after flying the stock configuration for two years I see no reason to do so. As far as: Reduce Climb Rate ----------- Climbs at over 800 fpm with Floats Reduce the Glide Ratio ----------- Doubt it Poor performance at high altitude density ---------- flies nice at 8000 ft Very probably reduce cruise speed ----------doubt it Increase Takeoff and landing distances ------------Takeoff on Glassy water 150 ft/ Lands on less Increase stall speed ---------------- You might be right here, but the current stall is fine I am not trying to give you a hard time here Mike but it is pretty hard to beat the package that Dennis S and the crew put together. I suggest that you try the stew before you add Salt, The Chef may have gotten it right. 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 21 ____________________________________ Time: 10:42:12 AM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: 912ULS Mag Drop > If you're getting fuel spitting out of the vents, you probably have something plugged up in the carburettor somewhere or it's possible the carb is running over. > > My 2-stroke Bings would sometimes spit fuel out of the vents if they were > running over or needed cleaning. > > The outside of the carburettor should be totally dry as should the > vents...... > > LS Lucien: Probably that carb plugging up the works and causing the carbs to spit fuel. ;-) john h mklIII ________________________________ Message 22 ____________________________________ Time: 10:44:12 AM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: 912ULS Mag Drop > I have one vent that is spitting out some fuel, and I would rather not > have it going all over the engine. > > Anyone seen what causes a vent line on the 912-s to spit some fuel, its > not much, I cant see it, but its enough to discolor and leave a gooey > discoloration where it hits the cylinder. > > Mike Mike B: You probably have a fuel vapor stand off problem, rather than a float chamber static port blowing fuel on your engine. All engines, two and four stroke, have a little cloud of fuel vapor that stands off the intake of the carb. I don't know why gasoline engines do this, but they do, from a 2 hp B&S to my old 85 hp Ford Flat Head V8. These I can vouch for because, as a kid, I experimented with them. Rotax two strokes are set up to blow the fuel vapor stand off out the air filter because they are oriented perpendicular to the air stream. If you are running conical air filters, they are more supceptible to blowing the fuel vapor off the mouth of the carb and onto your engine since it is a pusher and the aircleaner is sitting right out there in the front of the engine. Sometimes the flat cake pan K&N air filters will cure the problem, but in my case, a pair of air filter covers did the job nicely. I also route the float chamber static tube into the cover between it and the air filter so it will read the same satic pressure as the static port on the lip of the carb. Take care, john h mkIII ________________________________ Message 23 ____________________________________ Time: 10:52:29 AM PST US Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Hmmmmm From: knowvne@aol.com Rich In time this could means we just plug in the airport identifier ( CIA) and l et the magnet drag us onto final ? hahahaha Just make damn sure the window =C2-reads to and not from or you could be f aced with one Heathy Head Field hahahahahaha Mark Interesting Technology Rich 8-) -----Original Message----- From: Richard Girard Sent: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 9:07 am Subject: Kolb-List: Hmmmmm RADAR'S REPLACEMENT? MAGNETIC FIELDS TRACK AIRCRAFT New technology now being studied in Europe can track aircraft by detecting tiny changes in the Earth's magnetic field, according to a recent report in ICTWeb. Struc tures that cause "shadows" for today's radar systems -- a problem for ground surveillance at large, sprawling airports -- do not impair the magnetic field detectors. Recent tests of the system in Greece and Germany showed that it could detect 100 percent of the passing aircraft, and pinpointed their location to within 7.5 meters [25 feet], a level of accuracy comparable to most existing air traffic management systems, says researcher Haibin Gao. The system uses an array of small, cheap sensor units, which could be as small as a coin in the future. They can be installed at the entry and exit points of each runway, and would be affordable even for small airports. ________________________________________________________________________ aol.com ________________________________ Message 24 ____________________________________ Time: 10:56:43 AM PST US From: robert bean Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: "clip-wing Firestar/Slingshot wannabe" Most of what you say is true about the clipped wings. My MkIII has the bow tips shortened by a foot. (X2) giving me about the same area as a FSII , ~ 150sq'. Since it came with one wing intact I wasn't ambitious enough to change it. There are benefits: the roll rate is much better than my old (yawn) aeronca, less drag for a blazing 65 mph cruise, space to get the left tip past an old VW beetle carcass in the shed, a little easier to install/remove the safety pins for the fold back maneuver, which I skip and take them off anyway. If I had the extra two feet I could get a fatter girlfriend. -Too late for that now. BB, MkIII, vibratin' suzuki, everything's shorter these days do not archive On 31, Jan 2008, at 12:32 PM, JetPilot wrote: > > It is pretty well known that a longer wingspan results in better > performance. By making the wingspan shorter, you will most likely... > > Reduce Climb Rate > Reduce the Glide Ratio > Poor performance at high altitude density > Very probably reduce cruise speed > Increase Takeoff and landing distances > Increase stall speed > > You reduce a lot of safety margins by reducing the wingspan of the > plane. There will be some advantages like higher roll rate and a > couple others, it might not be worth all the bad effects shorter > wings will have. You should research what you are dong and the > effects before you do 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=161575#161575 > > ________________________________ Message 25 ____________________________________ Time: 10:58:08 AM PST US From: "Denny Rowe" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Firestar project Please just drop it. As the lists DH, "Designated Hitman", :-) you just refuse to quit. You make it sound like others are suggesting we turn our wing struts down in a lathe in order to make our planes lighter. Dennis Rowe ----- Original Message ----- From: "JetPilot" Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 12:14 PM Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Firestar project > So don't let some self righteous individuals tell you to go to an undue > amount of work or make your plane less safe, by degrading the performance > due to being 6 % overweight. I'm sure since this thread started, every > one of these guys has driven 3 MPH over the speed limit. The problem here > is, these guys have taken a position publicly on this list, and they are > not about to let a new guy like me or anyone else point out that what they > are suggesting is nothing short of stupid. > > We are very fortunate that Richard and a couple others here are not in > positions of authority. I can see it now, " sir, you were doing 58 in a > 55 zone, I am going to give you a ticket " or " Sir, your plastic fuel > tank has bulged and now holds 5.25 gallons of gas, which is 6 % over the > limit, I am going to have to violate you ". > > It does not matter how much they say " the law is the law ", or how how > many "reasons" they give, worrying about 3 MPH, or .25 gallons, or even > worrying about 15 pounds extra on an ultralight is just plain stupid and > anal. > > How many of these guys do think actually tell their friends to slow down > and start self righteously preaching " the law " when they drive 3 MPH > over the speed limit using all the same arguments they have been using > here in this thread. I'm sure the response they would get would be > something to the effect of "stick it where the sun don't shine" or " get > out of my car "... > > 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=161566#161566 > > > -- > 1/30/2008 8:51 PM > > ________________________________ Message 26 ____________________________________ Time: 11:00:16 AM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: 912ULS Mag Drop >> BTW, the enrichener is a great debugging tool like you said - I >> used it to diagnose a carp-in-carb problem after a recent fuel line >> change. Saves a lot of time and head-scratching ;) >> >> LS BB/Gang: Yea, how did the carp get in there? If he won't plug up a carb, nothing will. john h mkIII ________________________________ Message 27 ____________________________________ Time: 11:19:49 AM PST US From: Jeremy Casey <1planeguy@kilocharlie.us> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: "clip-wing Firestar/Slingshot wannabe" JetPilot wrote: > > It is pretty well known that a longer wingspan results in better performance. By making the wingspan shorter, you will most likely... > > Reduce Climb Rate > Reduce the Glide Ratio > Poor performance at high altitude density > Very probably reduce cruise speed > Increase Takeoff and landing distances > Increase stall speed > > You reduce a lot of safety margins by reducing the wingspan of the plane. There will be some advantages like higher roll rate and a couple others, it might not be worth all the bad effects shorter wings will have. You should research what you are dong and the effects before you do this. > > Mike Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: 912ULS Mag Drop > Probably that carb plugging up the works and causing the carbs to spit fuel. > ;-) Gang: Blew that one, didn't I. Misspelled "carp". Drat'it. john h mkIII ________________________________ Message 29 ____________________________________ Time: 11:25:31 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: FAR 103.3 Inspection requirements From: "Jim ODay" Wow Ralph, that looks like a skinny FS! ...... I guess 254# My builders manual advised that my FS would not make the 103 weight unless built with a free air cooled Rotax motor, light fabric, minimal paint, no brakes, plastic wheels ...... bottom line it was not happening. I don't know of any ramp checking going on at fly-ins, but I know the FAA investigates anytime a plane has a un-planned off the airport or bad airport landing. If you have flying credentials (ie: Pilots license) be prepared to be grounded if you ruled to be in violation of the FAR's. By the way, I have been "ramp checked" twice. They checked the AC documents and mine. The 1st time was awful, the second was no problem with lessons learned from the first time. Neither were done at my home field but when I was traveling. (both were in factory made planes) If you want the details, send me a note. Mike, I get your point that it is OK to be kinda fat as long as you carry the weight well. If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck; it is a duck. I guess we have a different opinion here. The reality is if my plane looks to fit the 103 rule, and I want it to "pass" as a UL, I must be willing to produce false documentation and tell lies. I have an aversion to both. You can build a legal UL, but a 255# airplane without a registration is called an unregistered A/C. You can call it whatever you want, but it does not change anything. I am glad I had the opportunity to get my fat little FS set up as an E-LSA. It was not UL 103 legal, never would be, and after the SP rules were a reality, there was no more gray area to hide in. Fly safe, Jim -------- Jim O'Day Fargo, ND Firestar II Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161629#161629 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/kolb_72007_medium_131.jpg ________________________________ Message 30 ____________________________________ Time: 11:35:08 AM PST US From: "Richard Girard" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: FAR 103.3 Inspection requirements Ralph, it depends on how technical you want to be and how much you know about that tank. If it holds more than 5 gallons, not much more, but more, is enough to kick on the "Not an Ultralight" Light. Per AC 103-7, 19. *Maximum Fuel Capacity of a Powered Ultralight Vehicle*. The maximum fuel capacity for a powered ultralight vehicle is 5 U.S. gallons. Any powered ultralight with fuel tank(s) exceeding this capacity is ineligible for operation as an ultralight vehicle. a. *Determination of Fuel Capacity*. The total volume, including all available space for usable and unusable fuel in the fuel tank is the total fuel capacity. The fuel in the lines, pump, strainer, and carburetor is not considered in a calculation of total volume. b. *Use of an Artificial Means to Control Capacity*. (1) Tanks which have a permanent standpipe or venting arrangement to control capacity are permitted, but may be subject to demonstration of the capacity if there is any reason to doubt that the arrangement is effective. (2) A temporary, detachable, or voluntarily- observed method for restricting fuel capacity, such as a "fill-to" line is not acceptable. That tiny area above the 5 gallon line on the tank could be a tip off to a "by the book" inspector. He or she has only to look at the tank and ask you to demonstrate the capacity. I'm not an inspector, I have no vested interest in the ultralight argument. At the "Air Festival" in Wellington, KS last September two "volunteers" from the Wichita FSDO showed up, in addition to the fellow who was assigned to the show (and really hacked off the guy who was assigned, I might add), and started ramp checking. The president of my EAA chapter was one of those given a "stern warning" by these two. His offense? The gas tanks on his RV-6 weren't properly labeled. On Jan 31, 2008 12:24 PM, Ralph B wrote: > > > JetPilot wrote: > > There is a big difference between being 300 Pounds + and trying to pass > your plane off as an ultralight, and being only 15 pounds overweight... > > > > I have never seen a ramp check, or known anyone that has had a ramp > check. I'm sure it happens, but how many get weighed in a standard run of > the mill ramp check ( non event or air show related ). > > > > Its all about good judgment, if you are a bit overweight, don't fly > your ultralight into an ultralight event where there is likely to be ramp > checks, and likely to be weighed. If you are so far overweight that it is > obviously not plausible as an ultralight, get an N Number... > > > > But 15 ( 6% )pounds overweight is a non issue in most cases. Seems that > there is a lack of common sense and good judgment by some on this list. > > > > Mike > > > Mike, > > You can't always tell if it's an ultralight or not. Does this look like an > ultralight to you? How much do you think it weighs? > > Ralph > > -------- > Ralph B > Original Firestar > N91493 E-AB > 21 years flying it > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161598#161598 > > > Attachments: > > http://forums.matronics.com//files/at_lydia__162.jpg > > ________________________________ Message 31 ____________________________________ Time: 12:17:11 PM PST US From: "pj.ladd" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Firestar project It does not matter how much they say " the law is the law ", or how how many "reasons" they give, worrying about 3 MPH, or .25 gallons, or even worrying about 15 pounds extra on an ultralight is just plain stupid and anal. >> Oh Yeah! And how does `Well officer, I only shot him a little bit` sound as a defence. Cheers Pat (away for the next two weeks) ________________________________ Message 32 ____________________________________ Time: 12:24:44 PM PST US From: Eugene Zimmerman Subject: Kolb-List: Your minimum hp take off and climb? What is the minimum hp for take off and climb in a Kolb? http://picasaweb.google.com/imhisson2/MinimumHp ________________________________ Message 33 ____________________________________ Time: 12:26:31 PM PST US From: "pj.ladd" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Firestar project Much as I hate to say it, it's really quite true: many of the R&R' we fly under nowadays came about because someone flew an airplane into the ground. >> Thats what happened in the UK. We had a good thing going which the authorities treated merely as an extension of hang gliding. Then there were a series of fatalities and Authority swooped. Luckily we had Anne Welch, a long time gliding enthusiast who had helped fight the CAA to keep the gliding movements training, safety, licensing etc in its own hands. She realised that the microlight movement was in a similar position to gliding in the 30`s and became the Chairman of the fledgeling organisation. She did to a great extent what she and her husband had done for the Gliding fraternity and kept us `comparitively` rule free.. Pat ________________________________ Message 34 ____________________________________ Time: 12:27:04 PM PST US Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: FAR 103.3 Inspection requirements From: knowvne@aol.com Hey=C2- If =C2-they can make rules WE the people didnt vote for why can WE the peo ple make them earn their Pay checks? ahahahaha Hmmm Now =C2-I wonder how many feet of Tubing i'll need to make 5 Gallons hahahahaha 8-) Mark -----Original Message----- From: Richard Girard Sent: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 2:28 pm Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: FAR 103.3 Inspection requirements Ralph, it depends on how technical you want to be and how much you know abou t that tank. If it holds more than 5 gallons, not much more, but more, is en ough to kick on the "Not an Ultralight" Light. Per AC 103-7, 19. Maximum Fuel Capacity of a Powered Ultralight Vehicle.=C2- The maximum fuel capacity for a powered ultralight vehicle is 5 U.S. gallons. Any power ed ultralight with fuel tank(s) exceeding this capacity is ineligible for op eration as an ultralight vehicle. =C2-=C2-=C2- a. Determination of Fuel Capacity. The total volume, incl uding all available space for usable and unusable fuel in the fuel tank is t he total fuel capacity. The fuel in the lines, pump, strainer, and carbureto r is not considered in a calculation of total volume. =C2-=C2-=C2- b. Use of an Artificial Means to Control Capacity. =C2-=C2-=C2- =C2-=C2-=C2- (1) Tanks which have a permanent stand pipe or venting arrangement to control capacity are permitted, but may be su bject to demonstration of the capacity if there is any reason to doubt that the arrangement is effective. =C2-=C2-=C2- =C2-=C2-=C2- (2) A temporary, detachable, or volunt arily- observed method for restricting fuel capacity, such as a "fill-to" li ne is not acceptable. That tiny area above the 5 gallon line on the tank could be a tip off to a " by the book" inspector. He or she has only to look at the tank and ask you t o demonstrate the capacity. I'm not an inspector, I have no vested interest in the ultralight argument. At the "Air Festival" in Wellington, KS last September two "volunteers" from the Wichita FSDO showed up, in addition to the fellow who was assigned to t he show (and really hacked off the guy who was assigned, I might add), and s tarted ramp checking. The president of my EAA chapter was one of those given a "stern warning" by these two. His offense? The gas tanks on his RV-6 were n't properly labeled. On Jan 31, 2008 12:24 PM, Ralph B wrote: JetPilot wrote: > There is a big difference between being 300 Pounds + and trying to pass yo ur plane off as an ultralight, and being only 15 pounds overweight... > > I have never seen a ramp check, or known anyone that has had a ramp check. =C2-I'm sure it happens, but how many get weighed in a standard run of th e mill ramp check ( non event or air show related ). > > Its all about good judgment, if you are =C2-a bit overweight, don't fly your ultralight into an ultralight event where there is likely to be ramp ch ecks, and likely to be weighed. =C2- If you are so far overweight that it is obviously not plausible as an ultralight, get an N Number... > > But 15 ( 6% )pounds overweight is a non issue in most cases. =C2-Seems t hat there is a lack of common sense and good judgment by some on this list. > > Mike Mike, You can't always tell if it's an ultralight or not. Does this look like an u ltralight to you? How much do you think it weighs? Ralph -------- Ralph B Original Firestar N91493 E-AB 21 years flying it Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161598#161598 ________________________________________________________________________ aol.com ________________________________ Message 35 ____________________________________ Time: 12:33:50 PM PST US From: "pj.ladd" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firestar project Good luck Bill, its nice to be appreciated. . i have no opinions about holes in spars. There are plenty on the list who are really very expert indeed. You will have to sort out which ones they are. Whatever you do, don`t believe them all. Some are , shall we say, not so clewed up as others. cheers# Pat. ________________________________ Message 36 ____________________________________ Time: 01:12:11 PM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: How Much Load does Turbulence put on a Kolb ??? From: "jb92563" G-Loading on the airframe goes up with the speed squared. Thats why slowing down even a little reduces the G loading in turbulence considerably. Ever heard of "Rough Air Speed" or "Manuvering Speed" or Va Its the design maneuvering speed, stalling speed at the maximum legal G-force, and hence the maximum speed at which abrupt, full deflection, elevator control input will not cause the aircraft to exceed its G-force limit. There is no set answer as it depends on each aircraft weight and speed, but slowing down certainly reduces the G-Loads. Turbulence can be fun, especially when you know what causes it and where it is to be found, and just as important (When you trying to eat, drink or pee in flight) where it is not typically found. Typical sources of Turbulence are Thermals(Fun), Mountain Lee rotor(Not fun), Mechanical turbulence on windy days due to ground features(Not Fun during landing), Weather System Fronts(Sometimes Fun if your belts are tight), Aircraft wake(Way not fun) etc Thats my take on it as a glider pilot and UltraStar owner. -------- Ray Kolb UltraStar (Cuyuna UL-202) Moni MotorGlider Schreder HP-11 Glider Riverside County, CA Do Not Archive Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161653#161653 ________________________________ Message 37 ____________________________________ Time: 01:16:58 PM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Here, try this!!! From: "jb92563" Funny how so few people realize that the way to get on the right glide slope is to fly up/down to it immediately. An idling prop is a surprisingly effective airbrake, and Kolbs are draggy enough to go where you want them to with to much braking on the ground. -------- Ray Kolb UltraStar (Cuyuna UL-202) Moni MotorGlider Schreder HP-11 Glider Riverside County, CA Do Not Archive Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161656#161656 ________________________________ Message 38 ____________________________________ Time: 01:17:20 PM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: How Much Load does Turbulence put on a Kolb ??? From: "jb92563" G-Loading on the airframe goes up with the speed squared. Thats why slowing down even a little reduces the G loading in turbulence considerably. Ever heard of "Rough Air Speed" or "Manuvering Speed" or Va Its the design maneuvering speed, stalling speed at the maximum legal G-force, and hence the maximum speed at which abrupt, full deflection, elevator control input will not cause the aircraft to exceed its G-force limit. There is no set answer as it depends on each aircraft weight and speed, but slowing down certainly reduces the G-Loads. Turbulence can be fun, especially when you know what causes it and where it is to be found, and just as important (When you trying to eat, drink or pee in flight) where it is not typically found. Typical sources of Turbulence are Thermals(Fun), Mountain Lee rotor(Not fun), Mechanical turbulence on windy days due to ground features(Not Fun during landing), Weather System Fronts(Sometimes Fun if your belts are tight), Aircraft wake(Way not fun) etc Thats my take on it as a glider pilot and UltraStar owner. -------- Ray Kolb UltraStar (Cuyuna UL-202) Moni MotorGlider Schreder HP-11 Glider Riverside County, CA Do Not Archive Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161657#161657 ________________________________ Message 39 ____________________________________ Time: 02:12:25 PM PST US From: Bob Noyer Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Your minimum hp take off and climb? What was missing with the Horsepower tow, was the final seconds. As the the towed plane/glider overtopped the horse, the poor horse was airlifted! This is the origin of Pegasus, the flying horse. regards, Bob N. FireFly 070 Old Kolb http://www.angelfire.com/rpg/ronoy/ do not archive ________________________________ Message 40 ____________________________________ Time: 03:10:02 PM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Firestar project From: "lucien" JetPilot wrote: > > Being legal is good, and most of us make every effort to follow the spirit of the law. But good judgment and safety must always your primary concern. > > So don't let some self righteous individuals tell you to go to an undue amount of work or make your plane less safe, by degrading the performance due to being 6 % overweight. > Mike I should add that Mike touches on a good point here, and an area where I'd willingly bend the regs (though I still wouldn't openly suggest this to others). There are cases where rules aren't appropriate and can actually impair safety. the deal with part 103 weight is, arguably, one of them. I.e. removing good metal wheels or a safety belt in order to get at or below 254lbs. In a case like this I'm with Mike - being a "little bit pregnant" is the prudent thing to do because it's a safety issue for the plane. But that's just me and how I work..... LS -------- LS FS II Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161674#161674 ________________________________ Message 41 ____________________________________ Time: 03:20:07 PM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: 912ULS Mag Drop From: "lucien" John Hauck wrote: > >> BTW, the enrichener is a great debugging tool like you said - I > > > > used it to diagnose a carp-in-carb problem after a recent fuel line > > > change. Saves a lot of time and head-scratching ;) > > > > > > LS > > > > > > > BB/Gang: > > Yea, how did the carp get in there? If he won't plug up a carb, nothing > will. > > john h > mkIII Oops, sorry about the carp.... no fish involved but "crap" for sure...... That's where I learned to finally sand down the sharp edges on any barbed fittings during a fuel line change... and to thoroughly flush the new assemblies before installation and otherwise be operating-room clean when messing with fuel lines...... LS -------- LS FS II Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161675#161675 ________________________________ Message 42 ____________________________________ Time: 03:49:55 PM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Not really kolb related From: "jb92563" I guess the prop blast over the wing and elevator make that possible! But the guy did have forward speed exceeding the rearward speed of the belt so I figure he cheated a bit by having not only full prop blast but also some additional forward speed. Still the answer remains YES however. Bernoulli effect in action! -------- Ray Kolb UltraStar (Cuyuna UL-202) Moni MotorGlider Schreder HP-11 Glider Riverside County, CA Do Not Archive Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161681#161681 ________________________________ Message 43 ____________________________________ Time: 04:09:38 PM PST US From: TK Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Cable thimbles Richard Girard wrote: > Ed, I use my Felco F-9 cable cutters to trim the ears. I cut from the > inside of the thimble out and there is no burr left to dress where the > cable touches. > If you haven't made cables before, go to AC 43.13-1B "Aircraft > Inspection, Repair and Alteration Acceptable Methods, Techniques, and > Practices" pages 7-32 and 7-33 for instruction on how to use Nicopress > ovals. Use the proper tool and inspect each swage with the proper gauge. > > Rick Girard > > On Jan 28, 2008 7:51 AM, Richard Pike > wrote: > > > > > Cut them off, dress them smooth with a small round file where the > cable > passes over the cut. > > Richard Pike > MKIII N420P (420ldPoops) > > Edward Bonsell wrote: > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > I'm making a new set of rudder cables. To those of you that made > > cables did you leave the ears on the thimbles, or did you cut or > grind > > them off? > > > > Thanks, > Guy's, Why are you cutting off the ears on your thimbles when making cables? Am I missing something here? I didn't have any problem making up my cables with the ears of the thimbles intact. Is there some mechanical advantage to removing them and if so, why do they make them with the ears in the first place? I found that they keep the nicopress sleeve at the proper distance from the loop to prevent pinching. Willing to learn!! Terry - Firefly #95 785 hr.'s ________________________________ Message 44 ____________________________________ Time: 04:20:46 PM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Big Island Volcano Flights From: "jb92563" Those shots are awesome....enjoyed them, including the gliders. A pair of motor-glider friends from my club Lake Elsinore Soaring Club have just started a business on the Big Island flying rides. They had their gliders shipped over in a container. So if you REALLY want to fly the Hawaiian islands in your Kolb... ;-) -------- Ray Kolb UltraStar (Cuyuna UL-202) Moni MotorGlider Schreder HP-11 Glider Riverside County, CA Do Not Archive Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161689#161689 ________________________________ Message 45 ____________________________________ Time: 04:24:12 PM PST US From: "Bryan Dever" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Not really kolb related It's not the prop blast. The plane is pulling itself through the air. The only thing different than a normal takeoff is the rotational speed of the wheels. The rest of the plane doesn't know it is on a belt. Bryan D do not archive On Jan 31, 2008 6:47 PM, jb92563 wrote: > > I guess the prop blast over the wing and elevator make that possible! > > But the guy did have forward speed exceeding the rearward speed of the > belt so I figure he cheated a bit by having not only full prop blast but > also some additional forward speed. > > Still the answer remains YES however. > > Bernoulli effect in action! > > -------- > Ray > > Kolb UltraStar (Cuyuna UL-202) > Moni MotorGlider > Schreder HP-11 Glider > Riverside County, CA > > Do Not Archive > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161681#161681 > > ________________________________ Message 46 ____________________________________ Time: 04:27:58 PM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Cable thimbles From: "lucien" > > Why are you cutting off the ears on your thimbles when making cables? Am I missing something here? I didn't have any problem making up my cables with the ears of the thimbles intact. Is there some mechanical advantage to removing them and if so, why do they make them with the ears in the first place? I found that they keep the nicopress sleeve at the proper distance from the loop to prevent pinching. Willing to learn!! > > Terry - Firefly #95 785 hr.'s > AC 43.13 says you can trim the ears if needed and I always do - I've found the thimble can be held in place more firmly this way and the cable is in firmer contact with the thimble ends where they go into the swage. I made some fairly ok loops with untrimmed ends, but they always were a little loosey-goosey compared to trimmed ones...... and I'm ultra-paranoid about thimbles popping out of cable ends especially on control cables... had it happen, so..... LS -------- LS FS II Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161692#161692 ________________________________ Message 47 ____________________________________ Time: 04:44:53 PM PST US From: Eugene Zimmerman Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Your minimum hp take off and climb? Bob, Perhaps he is just doing a "go around", rather than a take off. It would probably take a 40 Horse Rotax to get that kind of altitude in that short a distance with a Firefly, Whada ya think? ; ^) On Jan 31, 2008, at 3:12 PM, Eugene Zimmerman wrote: > What is the minimum hp for take off and climb in a Kolb? > > http://picasaweb.google.com/imhisson2/MinimumHp > > ________________________________ Message 48 ____________________________________ Time: 05:01:50 PM PST US From: "Richard Girard" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Cable thimbles The ears on a cable thimble are a vestige of the days of the five tuck splice. I find that leaving the ears on always makes the loop about the thimble loose. Cutting off the ears pulls the thimble ends together when the Nico sleeve is swaged. Try both methods and use the one that you like. Either is acceptable. Rick On Jan 31, 2008 6:02 PM, TK wrote: > Richard Girard wrote: > > Ed, I use my Felco F-9 cable cutters to trim the ears. I cut from the > inside of the thimble out and there is no burr left to dress where the cable > touches. > If you haven't made cables before, go to AC 43.13-1B "Aircraft Inspection, > Repair and Alteration Acceptable Methods, Techniques, and Practices" pages > 7-32 and 7-33 for instruction on how to use Nicopress ovals. Use the proper > tool and inspect each swage with the proper gauge. > > Rick Girard > > On Jan 28, 2008 7:51 AM, Richard Pike wrote: > > > > > Cut them off, dress them smooth with a small round file where the cable > > passes over the cut. > > > > Richard Pike > > MKIII N420P (420ldPoops) > > > > Edward Bonsell wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > I'm making a new set of rudder cables. To those of you that made > > > cables did you leave the ears on the thimbles, or did you cut or grind > > > them off? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Guy's, > > Why are you cutting off the ears on your thimbles when making cables? Am > I missing something here? I didn't have any problem making up my cables > with the ears of the thimbles intact. Is there some mechanical advantage to > removing them and if so, why do they make them with the ears in the first > place? I found that they keep the nicopress sleeve at the proper distance > from the loop to prevent pinching. Willing to learn!! > > Terry - Firefly #95 785 hr.'s > > * > > * > > ________________________________ Message 49 ____________________________________ Time: 05:25:09 PM PST US From: Dana Hague Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Cable thimbles At 07:58 PM 1/31/2008, Richard Girard wrote: >The ears on a cable thimble are a vestige of the days of the five tuck >splice. I find that leaving the ears on always makes the loop about the >thimble loose... Or you could just do five tuck splices instead of nico's on all your cables... :) -Dana -- "Very funny, Scotty. Now beam down my clothes." ________________________________ Message 50 ____________________________________ Time: 05:32:25 PM PST US From: Russ Kinne Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Not really kolb related I don't think so. Thwe wing has no speed through the air -- hence no lift On Jan 31, 2008, at 11:00 AM, Ron wrote: > > Yes, :-) > > Ron (Arizona) > > ================================ > ---- possums wrote: > > ============ > > > A kolb is sitting on a runway which is actually a giant treadmill. > Just as the pilot throttles up and begins to move forward, the > treadmill > begins running in the opposite direction. No matter how fast the > airplane > tries to move forward, the treadmill will match its speed in the > opposite direction. > > Will the airplane ever take off? > > Finally answered > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > do not archive > > > http://boortz.com/more/video/mythbusters_plane_conveyor_belt.html > > > -- > kugelair.com > > ________________________________ Message 51 ____________________________________ Time: 06:06:28 PM PST US From: Bob Noyer Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Not really kolb related Ray, You mentioned Bernoulli...is that the same gent that furnishes only maybe 10% of the wing's lift? I'm a firm Newton guy! regards, Bob N. FireFly 070 Old Kolb http://www.angelfire.com/rpg/ronoy/ do not rchive ________________________________ Message 52 ____________________________________ Time: 06:10:19 PM PST US From: Bob Noyer Subject: Kolb-List: Minimum horsepower take off? Eugene, Or maybe the glider was just taking the horse out fer a run, like a dawg ona leash? regards, Bob N. FireFly 070 Old Kolb http://www.angelfire.com/rpg/ronoy/ do note archive ________________________________ Message 53 ____________________________________ Time: 06:10:20 PM PST US From: russ kinne Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Not really kolb related Got to have air moving OVER THE WINGS to fly. I rest my case. The answer remains NO. No time for this foolishness! On Jan 31, 2008, at 6:47 PM, jb92563 wrote: > > I guess the prop blast over the wing and elevator make that possible! > > But the guy did have forward speed exceeding the rearward speed of > the belt so I figure he cheated a bit by having not only full prop > blast but also some additional forward speed. > > Still the answer remains YES however. > > Bernoulli effect in action! > > -------- > Ray > > Kolb UltraStar (Cuyuna UL-202) > Moni MotorGlider > Schreder HP-11 Glider > Riverside County, CA > > Do Not Archive > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161681#161681 > > ________________________________ Message 54 ____________________________________ Time: 06:49:04 PM PST US From: Eugene Zimmerman Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Not really kolb related On Jan 31, 2008, at 9:06 PM, russ kinne wrote: > No time for this foolishness! Sorry Russ, Ya could have fooled me. You took the possum's bait. What moves your plane forward, the wheels or the prop? ________________________________ Message 55 ____________________________________ Time: 07:21:47 PM PST US From: "Richard Girard" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Cable thimbles That would be the blood donor method, thanks, but no. ;-) Rick On Jan 31, 2008 7:19 PM, Dana Hague wrote: > > At 07:58 PM 1/31/2008, Richard Girard wrote: > >The ears on a cable thimble are a vestige of the days of the five tuck > >splice. I find that leaving the ears on always makes the loop about the > >thimble loose... > > Or you could just do five tuck splices instead of nico's on all your > cables... :) > > -Dana > > -- > "Very funny, Scotty. Now beam down my clothes." > > ________________________________ Message 56 ____________________________________ Time: 07:30:10 PM PST US From: "Ed Chmielewski" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: FAR 103.3 Inspection requirements Mike, Ramp checks are like car accidents: they happen when you least expect. I admire the restraint of 99% of the Kolb list. Your pomposity in answering some of the recent posts is tiring at best. Reminds me of what my Dad used to say, "An empty wagon makes the most noise". Please quit the insults and the patronizing tone. Your constant derision ("Seems that there is a lack of common sense and good judgment by some...") is insulting and immature. Try and listen to some of the responses, and take them to heart. 100 other pilots can't all be wrong.... At any rate, I've had ramp checks at small, uncontrolled airfields as well as large airports, and know of other airman who have been imposed upon likewise. Have had the boys show up unannounced in a corporate flight department, and in a local small-town FBO. But then, that's been over the course of 30+ years of flying. And the feds ARE concerned about W&B, as well as all other required aircraft documentation. I even had one Fed ask to be taken up, until I asked how he'd be paying for the trip around the pattern. The big thing about being at proper weight is as much about insurance and liability as legality. Try having even a tiny scrape with an aircraft, the insurer will try and prove you violated some reg, forget about the Feds. Had a bird strike a couple years ago, the insuring agent asked 10 times the questions as the FAA guys. Ed in JXN MkII/503 ----- Original Message ----- From: "JetPilot" Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 12:50 PM Subject: Kolb-List: Re: FAR 103.3 Inspection requirements > > There is a big difference between being 300 Pounds + and trying to pass > your plane off as an ultralight, and being only 15 pounds overweight... > > I have never seen a ramp check, or known anyone that has had a ramp check. > I'm sure it happens, but how many get weighed in a standard run of the > mill ramp check ( non event or air show related ). > > Its all about good judgment, if you are a bit overweight, don't fly your > ultralight into an ultralight event where there is likely to be ramp > checks, and likely to be weighed. If you are so far overweight that it > is obviously not plausible as an ultralight, get an N Number... > > But 15 ( 6% )pounds overweight is a non issue in most cases. Seems that > there is a lack of common sense and good judgment by some on this list. > > 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=161588#161588 > > > ________________________________ Message 57 ____________________________________ Time: 07:47:34 PM PST US From: "Ed Chmielewski" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Not really kolb related Hey Bob, Yeah, soggy Newtons (fig?...) aren't much fun. Ed in JXN ----- Original Message ----- From: Bob Noyer To: kolb-list@matronics.com Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 9:02 PM Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Not really kolb related Ray, You mentioned Bernoulli...is that the same gent that furnishes only maybe 10% of the wing's lift? I'm a firm Newton guy! regards, Bob N. FireFly 070 Old Kolb http://www.angelfire.com/rpg/ronoy/ do not rchive ________________________________ Message 58 ____________________________________ Time: 08:10:07 PM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Not really kolb related From: "henry.voris" What nonsense... Don't listen to the hype, look at the tape... That plane is moving forward, past the road cones, etc. And it was able to take off, when it was moving through the air fast enough for the wings to generate the necessary lift... Just look at the tape. Aloha, -------- Henry Firefly Five-Charlie-Bravo Do Not Archive Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161761#161761 ________________________________ Message 59 ____________________________________ Time: 09:32:10 PM PST US From: "Denny Rowe" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Not really kolb related > > Don't listen to the hype, look at the tape... That plane is moving > forward, past the road cones, etc. And it was able to take off, when it > was moving through the air fast enough for the wings to generate the > necessary lift... > > Just look at the tape. > > Aloha, > > -------- > Henry > Firefly Five-Charlie-Bravo > > Do Not Archive > > > Henry, I totally agree, that show just lost my respect in a big way, what a bill of goods they sold folks there. They should have had a bicycle speedo on a main wheel, and maintained the speed the car was going. I'll bet the house the wheels were turning about 50-60mph when it lifted off. Park a car next to the bird and keep the plane stationary to it as the tarp is pulled and it will stay right where it started, on the ground. Denny Rowe, Mk3 N616DR ________________________________ Message 60 ____________________________________ Time: 10:32:01 PM PST US From: Ron Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Not really kolb related The Rwy sliding back has no effect on the thrust that the engine produces, consequently the aircraft will move forward anyway. The only difference on take off this time than at other time, is that the wheels will be turning twice as fast as normal. Ron (Arizona) ======================== ---- Russ Kinne wrote: ============ I don't think so. Thwe wing has no speed through the air -- hence no lift On Jan 31, 2008, at 11:00 AM, Ron wrote: > > Yes, :-) > > Ron (Arizona) > > ================================ > ---- possums wrote: > > ============ > > > A kolb is sitting on a runway which is actually a giant treadmill. > Just as the pilot throttles up and begins to move forward, the > treadmill > begins running in the opposite direction. No matter how fast the > airplane > tries to move forward, the treadmill will match its speed in the > opposite direction. > > Will the airplane ever take off? > > Finally answered > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > do not archive > > > http://boortz.com/more/video/mythbusters_plane_conveyor_belt.html > > > -- > kugelair.com > > -- kugelair.com ________________________________ Message 61 ____________________________________ Time: 11:19:19 PM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: M3X update From: "icrashrc" Due to many back channel emails I've added a page to the site with some info on the composite layups Paul and I have been doing. http://www.ill-eagleaviation.com/composites.htm -------- Scott www.ill-EagleAviation.com do not archive Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161779#161779 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.