Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 02:19 AM - Re: Firestar project (pj.ladd)
2. 03:55 AM - Re: Firestar project (Denny Rowe)
3. 04:21 AM - Firestar project (william sullivan)
4. 05:14 AM - Re: Firestar project (John Hauck)
5. 05:23 AM - 582 muff Brackets (Jim Kmet)
6. 05:29 AM - marvel oil (tc1917)
7. 05:42 AM - Re: 582 muff Brackets (John Hauck)
8. 05:53 AM - Re: Marvel oil (william sullivan)
9. 06:01 AM - Re: Re: 503 Teardown Report (gary aman)
10. 06:57 AM - Emergency Parachute (grantr)
11. 07:41 AM - Re: Monument Valley 2008 Photo Contest (Kirby, Dennis CTR USAF AFMC MDA/AL)
12. 08:04 AM - Re: 503 Teardown Report (Dwight)
13. 09:10 AM - Firestar project (william sullivan)
14. 09:35 AM - Re: Firestar project (boyd)
15. 11:12 AM - Re: 582 muff Brackets (Jim Kmet)
16. 11:20 AM - Re: 582 muff Brackets (N27SB@aol.com)
17. 11:25 AM - Re: Monument Valley 2008 Photo Contest (Kirby, Dennis CTR USAF AFMC MDA/AL)
18. 12:02 PM - Re: 582 muff Brackets (Jim Kmet)
19. 12:28 PM - Re: Firestar project (Richard & Martha Neilsen)
20. 02:59 PM - Re: 582 muff Brackets (planecrazzzy)
21. 03:24 PM - Firestar project (william sullivan)
22. 03:29 PM - Re: 582 muff Brackets (N27SB@aol.com)
23. 03:32 PM - Firestar project (william sullivan)
24. 04:42 PM - Re: Firestar project (John Hauck)
25. 04:47 PM - Re: Firestar project (John Hauck)
26. 05:17 PM - New engine package, ( FireFly alternate maybe) (Don G)
27. 05:44 PM - Re: New engine package, ( FireFly alternate maybe) (robert bean)
28. 06:03 PM - Re: New engine package, ( FireFly alternate maybe) (Don G)
29. 06:06 PM - Re: Firestar project (Dana Hague)
30. 06:06 PM - Re: Firestar project (Dana Hague)
31. 06:32 PM - Re: Firestar project (william sullivan)
32. 06:32 PM - Re: 582 muff Brackets (Steven Green)
33. 06:32 PM - Firestar project (william sullivan)
34. 06:38 PM - Re: New engine package, ( FireFly alternate maybe) (herb)
35. 06:39 PM - Re: Firestar project (John Hauck)
36. 06:41 PM - Re: New engine package, ( FireFly alternate maybe) (N27SB@aol.com)
37. 07:21 PM - Re: 582 muff Brackets (Jim Kmet)
38. 07:33 PM - Re: Alternate Firefly engines (grantr)
39. 07:36 PM - Re: Firestar project (Dana Hague)
40. 07:44 PM - Re: Firestar project (HShack@aol.com)
41. 08:05 PM - Re: Firestar project (Denny Rowe)
42. 08:36 PM - Re: New engine package, ( FireFly alternate maybe) (Don G)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Firestar project |
You can make them lighter, shorter, streamlined, open cockpit, doors,
control mods (Hi! Mike), shape wings and tail to suit your fancy,
re-power easily, and you name it. Or squeeze it down to fit the mission.
It's a broad playing field, all on the same design.>>
Hi Bill,
I am sure someone with a lot more Kolb experience than me will guide
you away from your chosen course.
I do have a bit of experience in other planes and I can only regard your
`make it shorter, make it lighter philosophy` with concern. Sure there
are things you can do. Doors, re engine etc., but messing with the basic
design by changing the shape and size of flying surfaces and shortening
the fuselage is playing with fire unless you have a good grounding in
aeronautics. You may finish up with a plane which fulfils the parameters
but it won`t be a Kolb. So instead of having a plane with a tried and
tested history you will have a one off machine which may or may not be
any good. Why reinvent the wheel?
.<< A lot of them (rules) are pure nonsense. For example, allowing
30 extra pounds for floats when a life jacket would do the same thing>>
I don`t think that the object of fitting floats is to support you in the
water in the case of a crash. To equate a lifejacket with floats shows
a tendency to confuse apples and oranges.
I realise that in the States you have a much more cavalier attitude to
rules and regs than we rather `button down` Brits and I applaud that ,
but it seems that you are planning to take things a bit far.
The old building adage is `Measure twice and cut once` To that I would
add `Think three times`
Good luck,
Cheers
Pat
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Firestar project |
Pat,
Please understand Bill is talking about all the variations in Kolb
models (ie: Mk-3 to Slingshot to Kolbra to X-tra, or the many Firestar
models to Firefly) as well as many of the listers slight departures from
stock. NOT about doing all these mods to his personel plane.
John H and yourself are missing his point of how flexable the basic Kolb
design has proven to be. As Bill stated more than once, he has no plans
of doing any major changes to his own bird. He is only pointing out the
obvious flexability of Homers creation.
Denny Rowe
----- Original Message -----
From: pj.ladd
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 5:16 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firestar project
You can make them lighter, shorter, streamlined, open cockpit, doors,
control mods (Hi! Mike), shape wings and tail to suit your fancy,
re-power easily, and you name it. Or squeeze it down to fit the mission.
It's a broad playing field, all on the same design.>>
Hi Bill,
I am sure someone with a lot more Kolb experience than me will guide
you away from your chosen course.
I do have a bit of experience in other planes and I can only regard
your `make it shorter, make it lighter philosophy` with concern. Sure
there are things you can do. Doors, re engine etc., but messing with the
basic design by changing the shape and size of flying surfaces and
shortening the fuselage is playing with fire unless you have a good
grounding in aeronautics. You may finish up with a plane which fulfils
the parameters but it won`t be a Kolb. So instead of having a plane with
a tried and tested history you will have a one off machine which may or
may not be any good. Why reinvent the wheel?
.<< A lot of them (rules) are pure nonsense. For example, allowing
30 extra pounds for floats when a life jacket would do the same thing>>
I don`t think that the object of fitting floats is to support you in
the water in the case of a crash. To equate a lifejacket with floats
shows a tendency to confuse apples and oranges.
I realise that in the States you have a much more cavalier attitude to
rules and regs than we rather `button down` Brits and I applaud that ,
but it seems that you are planning to take things a bit far.
The old building adage is `Measure twice and cut once` To that I
would add `Think three times`
Good luck,
Cheers
Pat
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Checked by AVG.
4/16/2008 5:34 PM
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Firestar project |
Jeremy- My stainless steel cable brackets do not look like the ones in the pictures
you sent. Mine have one hole in each end. I will replace, just in case.
Re: Tail boom length- mine is a foot shorter than a regular Firestar. With
the original wings- about 25' 4", supposedly the handling was great. The former
owner had nothing but praise for it. Somebody mentioned trim tabs- My original
right wing has one, I think about 3" x 6",but I can't tell how much of a bend
in it. No tabs on the tail.
I will have an opportunity to do a side by side check of both a Firefly and
a Firestar. And also get the builder/pilots to do the same on mine. There are
a couple of very experienced people at the club.
Here is where some of the fun comes in: Trying to guess what kind of handling
performance it has, relative to a "stock" Firefly or Firestar. Anybody want
to try for some experienced speculation? The length is 19'- shorter than either
model. Wingspan is about 27' 4". Engine is what appears to be a stock 447,
with a 2 blade Warp Drive prop, pitch unknown. The wings are located 2 1/2" farther
to the rear than stock. Leverage on the controls appears to be stock.
Comments, anyone?
Bill Sullivan
FS/KX/447
Windsor Locks, Ct.
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Firestar project |
Denny:
I may be missing Bill S's point in that one msg, but I consider
relocating wings 2.5 inches aft of the prescribed position, and
shortening the tailboom, major changes.
The second tailboom in my MKIII was shortened one foot. Luckily I did
not have to fly it long before it was time to change to the correct
standard length. I would never have thought that one change would
affect the flight characteristics of my MKIII, but it did, adversely...
I'm not an aeronautical engineer, but seems to me that moving the wings
back 2.5" and moving the tail section forward by what ever the tail boom
was shortened, will drastically influence the flight characteristics of
whatever model Kolb Bill S intends to fly.
john h
mkIII
John H and yourself are missing his point of how flexable the basic
Kolb design has proven to be. As Bill stated more than once, he has no
plans of doing any major changes to his own bird. He is only pointing
out the obvious flexability of Homers creation.
Denny Rowe
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | 582 muff Brackets |
John H, Richard Pike, And anyone else that has , or had a 582 on a
MK-3C, how have you guys mounted your mufflers & with what type of
brackets without a Bracket cracking problem? (If any) Have you mounted
them above the exhaust manifold, with angle alum. like the 503 plans in
the MK-3 manual? ( If so , what thickness & dimensions) ??
Or with the brackets that LEAF & Lockwood sell that bolt to the side of
the engine under the exhaust manifold, & if so, can you do that & the
muff still clear the wing gap seal? (which I will still fly with)
Thanks, Jim, Cookeville, TN,
Self grounded ' til I eliminate this problem.
(I don`t do Crack)
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
was wondering, with the advent of the alky in our gas of late, could we
ofset the cylinder 'wash-down' of oil from alcohol by adding marvel oil to
our gas. I know it says not to put additives into our gas but it might help
a little. what do all you experts think? Ted Cowan, Alabama Slingshot 912
UL
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 582 muff Brackets |
Jim K:
I used whatever came in the kit for muffler mount on the 582. Think it
was a 4130 system designed and manufactured by old Kolb that bolted to
the side of the engine. Been to long to get a clear picture in my mind.
john h
mkIII
John H, Richard Pike, And anyone else that has , or had a 582 on a
MK-3C, how have you guys mounted your mufflers & with what type of
brackets without a Bracket cracking problem?
Thanks,
Jim, Cookeville, TN,
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Ted- A couple of weeks back there was a discussion on the List about alcohol in
the gas. If you purchase Mogas at the airport, there is not supposed to be any
alcohol in it. I went to the local field and bought 5 gallons. No alcohol, and
the cost here was $4.00 a gallon. I have no experience with Marvel in aircraft
engines, but have seen it work wonders in aircooled 2 and 4 strokes.
do not archive
Bill Sullivan
FS/KX/447
Windsor Locks, Ct.
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 503 Teardown Report |
Just a thought here on alcohol.My tester is a test tube with graduations on it
.Fill to about 1 inch with water,add fuel to the top line and shake.The water
line has 3 or 4 marks above it marked in percentages of alcohol.That water line
rises according to the amount of alcohol in it after it sets a minute or two.It,s
a Briggs & Stratton fuel tester.If I put a pint of water in 5 gallons of
fuel ,shook it up ,let stand then poured it thru a water separating funnel,would
it effectively remove the alcohol,without removing any additives or change
anything else?
----- Original Message ----
From: Dwight <haydend@charter.net>
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 8:39:01 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Re: 503 Teardown Report
Quote
Sounds like you are burning very clean. I have a question regarding the Marvel.
Is the 2 oz of Marvel substituted for 2 oz of the Pennzoil in the mix, or added
in on top of the 50 to 1 mix?
Thanks,
Dwight
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=177341#177341
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Emergency Parachute |
John Hauck I noticed in another post that you have deployed an emergency parachute
twice during your flying time.
What were the reasons for the deployments?
My plane dose not have a emergency chute on it. I am considering getting a BRS
for it .
Has anyone else had to deploy an emergency chute?
Are there any other cheaper options that BRS besides the hand throw chutes? I would
be scared that a hand throw chute might get caught on the prop or something
else if it was just tossed out by hand.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=177404#177404
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Monument Valley 2008 Photo Contest |
<<DTKMV.JPG>>
Dennis Kirby
Cedar Crest, NM
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 503 Teardown Report |
I've heard of doing that, but by draining off the separated water first with a
siphon. Maybe then pour thru the Mr Funnel to get the last little bit.
BUT, heres the problem the way I see it. The ethanol is put there not just as
a filler (to make the tree huggers and corn farmers happy) but it also boost the
octane. So lets just say the basic mix of 10% ethanol enhanced fuel is maybe
only 84? octane before they mix in the ethanol. The ethanol brings the octane
up to the min requirement of 87 without using lead or other more expensive
additives to the blend. When you remove it, the octane is going back down, plus
you have 9/10 of the gallon of fuel you paid for, and a mess to dispose of.
Anyone out there in the refinery business that could shed some light on this?
Dwight
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=177424#177424
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Firestar project |
John- The tail boom was made that way- 1' shorter- by the original builder. I didn't
know it until the other day. The 2 1/2" wing mount was ok'd by TNK, and
mounted according to their recommendations. Weight and balance checked out. I
can't find the work sheet I used, but it fell in the bracket. With a heavier pilot,
I imagine it would be nose heavy.
do not archive
Bill Sullivan
FS/KX/447
Windsor Locks, Ct.
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Firestar project |
With a shorter boom tube, you will have a shorter moment arm for the
horizontal stabilizer and elevators, reducing their effectiveness.
With a
shorter moment arm you will need to provide more force to do the same
amount
of work, thus requiring a larger control surface, or more speed. Opps
there goes the gentile handling kolbs are known for. If the
stabilizers
stall at 10 ft, the nose will drop as will the plane, just another set
of
bent landing gear or worse. And with the wings moved back 2 =BD
inches,,,
that will make the problem even worse.
Just my 2 cents worth, and food for thought,,,, gravity does not care
who
did the mods,,, you or the original builder,,, its still the boss.
Boyd
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
John- The tail boom was made that way- 1' shorter- by the original
builder.
I didn't know it until the other day. The 2 1/2" wing mount was ok'd by
TNK,
and mounted according to their recommendations. Weight and balance
checked
out. I can't find the work sheet I used, but it fell in the bracket.
With a
heavier pilot, I imagine it would be nose heavy.
do not archive
Bill Sullivan
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 582 muff Brackets |
Thanks!
----- Original Message -----
From: John Hauck
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 7:40 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: 582 muff Brackets
Jim K:
I used whatever came in the kit for muffler mount on the 582. Think
it was a 4130 system designed and manufactured by old Kolb that bolted
to the side of the engine. Been to long to get a clear picture in my
mind.
john h
mkIII
John H, Richard Pike, And anyone else that has , or had a 582 on a
MK-3C, how have you guys mounted your mufflers & with what type of
brackets without a Bracket cracking problem?
Thanks,
Jim, Cookeville, TN,
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 582 muff Brackets |
Jim, call Bryan at 606 682 3388. He makes a very nice aluminum plate system.
steve
In a message dated 4/17/2008 8:24:02 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
jlsk1@frontiernet.net writes:
John H, Richard Pike, And anyone else that has , or had a 582 on a MK-3C,
how have you guys mounted your mufflers & with what type of brackets without a
Bracket cracking problem? (If any) Have you mounted them above the exhaust
manifold, with angle alum. like the 503 plans in the MK-3 manual? ( If so ,
what thickness & dimensions) ??
**************Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car
listings at AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp00300000002851)
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Monument Valley 2008 Photo Contest |
List - sorry for the blank message, sent by me earlier today, this
topic.
(Been taking too many keyboard lessons from Hauck!)
The following should have accompanied the picture:
"Magic Bike" N93DK over Monument Valley, May 2007 - photo taken by Arty
Trost.
Dennis K.
do not archive
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 582 muff Brackets |
Steve, I just talked to Bryan, he didn`t have anything, nor info for me,
only dealing with 912's
Thanks anyway, Jim
----- Original Message -----
From: N27SB@aol.com
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 1:17 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: 582 muff Brackets
Jim, call Bryan at 606 682 3388. He makes a very nice aluminum plate
system.
steve
In a message dated 4/17/2008 8:24:02 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
jlsk1@frontiernet.net writes:
John H, Richard Pike, And anyone else that has , or had a 582 on a
MK-3C, how have you guys mounted your mufflers & with what type of
brackets without a Bracket cracking problem? (If any) Have you mounted
them above the exhaust manifold, with angle alum. like the 503 plans in
the MK-3 manual? ( If so , what thickness & dimensions) ??
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car listings
at AOL Autos.
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Firestar project |
Boyd/all
You are right. Kolbs are more forgiving of this kind of change but be
careful.
In the early days of this list people were doing this to correct a aft
CG issue. I tried to convince them that this was the wrong way to do it
but.... It reduced the weight on the tail wheel so it must fix the
problem. Go figure. There are others out there that did the same.
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIIIC
----- Original Message -----
From: boyd
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 12:31 PM
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Firestar project
With a shorter boom tube, you will have a shorter moment arm for the
horizontal stabilizer and elevators, reducing their effectiveness.
With a shorter moment arm you will need to provide more force to do the
same amount of work, thus requiring a larger control surface, or more
speed. Opps there goes the gentile handling kolbs are known for. If
the stabilizers stall at 10 ft, the nose will drop as will the plane,
just another set of bent landing gear or worse. And with the wings
moved back 2 =BD inches,,, that will make the problem even worse.
Just my 2 cents worth, and food for thought,,,, gravity does not
care who did the mods,,, you or the original builder,,, its still the
boss.
Boyd
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
John- The tail boom was made that way- 1' shorter- by the original
builder. I didn't know it until the other day. The 2 1/2" wing mount was
ok'd by TNK, and mounted according to their recommendations. Weight and
balance checked out. I can't find the work sheet I used, but it fell in
the bracket. With a heavier pilot, I imagine it would be nose heavy.
do not archive
Bill Sullivan
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 582 muff Brackets |
Here's a style I made for mine.... Made outa Stainless Steel
It's flown about 3 seasons now.... Just made one fer somebody else too.
Gotta Fly...
Mike & "Jaz" in MN
.
.
.
RN-KMA
--------
.
.
.
.
.
Do Not Archive
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=177494#177494
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/corkys_muffler_mounting_plate_003_571.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/corkys_muffler_mounting_plate_005_168.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/muffler_mounting_plate_007_134.jpg
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Firestar project |
You all may be right about somebody changing aft CG. This this came through with
a box of bent LG legs.
do not archive
Bill Sullivan
FS/KX/447
Windsor Locks, Ct.
Message 22
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 582 muff Brackets |
Sorry, I just figured out that you were talking about a 582.
steve
In a message dated 4/17/2008 3:03:36 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
jlsk1@frontiernet.net writes:
Steve, I just talked to Bryan, he didn`t have anything, nor info for me,
only dealing with 912's
Thanks anyway, Jim
----- Original Message -----
From: _N27SB@aol.com_ (mailto:N27SB@aol.com)
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 1:17 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: 582 muff Brackets
Jim, call Bryan at 606 682 3388. He makes a very nice aluminum plate system.
steve
In a message dated 4/17/2008 8:24:02 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
_jlsk1@frontiernet.net_ (mailto:jlsk1@frontiernet.net) writes:
John H, Richard Pike, And anyone else that has , or had a 582 on a MK-3C,
how have you guys mounted your mufflers & with what type of brackets without a
Bracket cracking problem? (If any) Have you mounted them above the exhaust
manifold, with angle alum. like the 503 plans in the MK-3 manual? ( If so ,
what thickness & dimensions) ??
____________________________________
Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car listings at
_AOL Autos_ (http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp00300000002851) .
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List)
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution)
**************Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car
listings at AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp00300000002851)
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Firestar project |
John and company- I do understand the implications of changes to the basic design.
I will keep that in mind during flight tests. I have a brother-in-law who
is qualified all the way up to a B-52, and he is itching to flight test it. I
will make sure he reads all of this. Thank you. When it does fly, I will report
on it. Probably 2 weeks.
do not archive
Bill Sullivan
FS/KX/447
Windsor Locks, Ct.
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Firestar project |
Bill S:
Don't know that aft cg bends gear legs. Was more prone to believe that
was a pilot's responsibility.
john h
mkIII
You all may be right about somebody changing aft CG. This this came
through with a box of bent LG legs.
Bill Sullivan
Message 25
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Firestar project |
Bill S:
That's great!
How much time does he have in a Kolb?
Don't know that a B-52 pilot has much in common with a Kolb pilot. ;-)
These are the guys that usually have all the qualifications, but end up
breaking the Kolb.
Good luck.
john h
mkIII
I have a brother-in-law who is qualified all the way up to a B-52,
and he is itching to flight test it.
Bill Sullivan
Message 26
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | New engine package, ( FireFly alternate maybe) |
Gents,
I dont know if you went down to the Sun'n'fun Gala, and even if you did you might
not have paid much attention to the runner-up to Steve's FloatFly...The second
place winner was a Buckeye powered parachute with a v-twin 32 hp generac
industrial engine on it. This is the the same kind of airframe that won the inovation
award, and something else at OshKosh last summer with the Honda V-twin
on it. I have been closely watching these guys and they are making great strides
at bringing 4 stroke industrial engines into our sport. I have spoken with
Ralph at Buckeye personally many timies over the last year, and I can tell you
he is definately going to offer this as an engine package to the entire market.
Right now...he is very close.
Let me give you some of the details on this generac package.
993cc v-twin 4 stroke. (this engine will go 2500 hours at 3600 rpms men)
PolyV belt reduction of his own design, and it looks like very high quality.
Tennessee prop. (it is swinging a 74 incher on the chute, 36 pitch I think)
Eletric start!
Static thrust numbers are in excess of 300 lbs!at 3800 rpms...This is more than
a 447 with a 2.58:1 and a 60 inch
Fuel consumption is 1.5 gallon per hour. (Industy rating for generator application)
and I am certain it is very close.
Electric start Engine, prop,reduction unit and mufflers are right at 100 lbs.
At this time, the engine is NOT modified, it is stock, so the TBO for its industrial
application will be the same.
He told me just this week he thinks he will be able to deliver the whole package
to market for about 3500 bucks.
Now, I dont know if a FireFly could stand a 100 lb powerplant package and still
make 254lbs....but I do know for certain it will fly with the weight..and fly
very well. A FireStar should be a jewell with this package.
Some of you have heard me preach before that the industrial v-twins are soon to
be a viable powerplant for our sport, and that time is very quickly approaching!
Fuel consumption will allow ranges like we have never seen before on 5 gallons...the
noise is so much less than we are used to it is unbelievable...and
electric start. Not to mention the price will be half what a rotax package will
cost, and the way Rotax is going...likely alot less than half very soon. Most
of us would never even have to consider an overhaul.....not in 2500 hours, thats
more than a lifetime for 99% of the ultralites
It has also been said that the sport pilot rule has killed the ultralight market
by so many in the industry I cannot count em all. Well, I challenge that reasoning.
I believe it is the Cost...Rotax engines have doubled in price in the
last few years, and I believe this is the biggest reason. If a manufacturer could
take 30% off an ultralite plane/engine cost to the customer, this might be
the biggest boost the market could get, and with this package...well, these developments
just might be the revival of the part 103 aircraft market. here is
another prediction...the first company that designs an aircraft around a V-twin
powerplant package and gets it to market, will have a huge success in sales!
Buckeye has done this with their DragonFly PPC and I hope someone does it with
a fixed wing.
--------
Don G.
Central Illinois
Kitfox IV Speedster
Luscombe 8A
http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=177521#177521
Message 27
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: New engine package, ( FireFly alternate maybe) |
Thanks for the report Don. New stuff is good. How do they work the
crank/rod connection?
On the same throw with a master rod? -or side by side?
BB
do not archive
On 17, Apr 2008, at 8:15 PM, Don G wrote:
>
> Gents,
> I dont know if you went down to the Sun'n'fun Gala, and even if you
> did you might not have paid much attention to the runner-up to
> Steve's FloatFly...The second place winner was a Buckeye powered
> parachute with a v-twin 32 hp generac industrial engine on it. This
> is the the same kind of airframe that won the inovation award, and
> something else at OshKosh last summer with the Honda V-twin on it.
> I have been closely watching these guys and they are making great
> strides at bringing 4 stroke industrial engines into our sport. I
> have spoken with Ralph at Buckeye personally many timies over the
> last year, and I can tell you he is definately going to offer this
> as an engine package to the entire market.
> Right now...he is very close.
> Let me give you some of the details on this generac package.
>
> 993cc v-twin 4 stroke. (this engine will go 2500 hours at 3600 rpms
> men)
> PolyV belt reduction of his own design, and it looks like very high
> quality.
> Tennessee prop. (it is swinging a 74 incher on the chute, 36 pitch
> I think)
> Eletric start!
> Static thrust numbers are in excess of 300 lbs!at 3800 rpms...This
> is more than a 447 with a 2.58:1 and a 60 inch
> Fuel consumption is 1.5 gallon per hour. (Industy rating for
> generator application) and I am certain it is very close.
> Electric start Engine, prop,reduction unit and mufflers are right
> at 100 lbs.
> At this time, the engine is NOT modified, it is stock, so the TBO
> for its industrial application will be the same.
> He told me just this week he thinks he will be able to deliver the
> whole package to market for about 3500 bucks.
> Now, I dont know if a FireFly could stand a 100 lb powerplant
> package and still make 254lbs....but I do know for certain it will
> fly with the weight..and fly very well. A FireStar should be a
> jewell with this package.
>
> Some of you have heard me preach before that the industrial v-twins
> are soon to be a viable powerplant for our sport, and that time is
> very quickly approaching! Fuel consumption will allow ranges like
> we have never seen before on 5 gallons...the noise is so much less
> than we are used to it is unbelievable...and electric start. Not to
> mention the price will be half what a rotax package will cost, and
> the way Rotax is going...likely alot less than half very soon. Most
> of us would never even have to consider an overhaul.....not in 2500
> hours, thats more than a lifetime for 99% of the ultralites
>
> It has also been said that the sport pilot rule has killed the
> ultralight market by so many in the industry I cannot count em all.
> Well, I challenge that reasoning. I believe it is the Cost...Rotax
> engines have doubled in price in the last few years, and I believe
> this is the biggest reason. If a manufacturer could take 30% off an
> ultralite plane/engine cost to the customer, this might be the
> biggest boost the market could get, and with this package...well,
> these developments just might be the revival of the part 103
> aircraft market. here is another prediction...the first company
> that designs an aircraft around a V-twin powerplant package and
> gets it to market, will have a huge success in sales! Buckeye has
> done this with their DragonFly PPC and I hope someone does it with
> a fixed wing.
>
> --------
> Don G.
> Central Illinois
> Kitfox IV Speedster
> Luscombe 8A
>
> http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=177521#177521
>
>
Message 28
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: New engine package, ( FireFly alternate maybe) |
same throw; side by side, .All the current small industrial v=twins are designed
this way
--------
Don G.
Central Illinois
Kitfox IV Speedster
Luscombe 8A
http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=177528#177528
Message 29
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Firestar project |
At 07:19 AM 4/17/2008, william sullivan wrote:
>My stainless steel cable brackets do not look like the ones in the
>pictures you sent. Mine have one hole in each end.
The Ultrastar has the brackerts with one hole in each end. You make the
cables up with three washers under each bracket, then you remove washers as
necessary to align the surfaces and tension the cables.
> Trying to guess what kind of handling performance it has, relative to a
> "stock" Firefly or Firestar. Anybody want to try for some experienced
> speculation? The length is 19'- shorter than either model. Wingspan is
> about 27' 4". Engine is what appears to be a stock 447, with a 2 blade
> Warp Drive prop, pitch unknown. The wings are located 2 1/2" farther to
> the rear than stock.
Obviously you MUST make sure the balance is correct, relative to the
wing. Then, it'd guess it might be a bit livelier in pitch and yaw than a
stock plane, and you may have less elevator and rudder authority. Also it
may need greater wing incidence, or lower tail incidence, to fly hands off
at the same trim speed.
-Dana
--
A common mistake that people make when trying to design something
completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools.
Message 30
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Firestar project |
At 06:30 PM 4/17/2008, william sullivan wrote:
>I have a brother-in-law who is qualified all the way up to a B-52, and he
>is itching to flight test it.
But how much ultralight and/or Kolb time does he have?
My brother in law used to fly F-15's and F-106's, and now flies GA and
trains people to fly L-39's on the side. I would NOT let him fly my
Ultrastar without some ultralight dual time.
-Dana
--
A common mistake that people make when trying to design something
completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools.
Message 31
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Firestar project |
John- Brian (my brother-in-law) has flown just about everything. I am almost certain
he has never flown a Kolb. I do know that he has experience on light (if
not ultralight) aircraft, and at least keeps his private ticket up. I don't think
you can rent a B-52 for any reasonable hourly rate. I do know he is about
the most conservative pilot I've ever met. I do know, it won't be me- experience.
I'm not proud- I'll let somebody else try it. You volunteering?
do not archive
Bill Sullivan
FS/KX/447
Windsor Locks, Ct.
John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com> wrote:
Bill S:
That's great!
How much time does he have in a Kolb?
Don't know that a B-52 pilot has much in common with a Kolb pilot. ;-)
These are the guys that usually have all the qualifications, but end up breaking
the Kolb.
Good luck.
john h
mkIII
I have a brother-in-law who is qualified all the way up to a B-52, and he
is itching to flight test it.
Bill Sullivan
Message 32
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 582 muff Brackets |
Jim,
This was the muffler mount that came from Kolb for the 582 muffler. The
rubber bushings between the red brackets and the muffler bracket were
good for about 100 to 150 hours.
Steven Green
Etowah, TN
----- Original Message -----
From: Jim Kmet
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:20 AM
Subject: Kolb-List: 582 muff Brackets
John H, Richard Pike, And anyone else that has , or had a 582 on a
MK-3C, how have you guys mounted your mufflers & with what type of
brackets without a Bracket cracking problem? (If any) Have you mounted
them above the exhaust manifold, with angle alum. like the 503 plans in
the MK-3 manual? ( If so , what thickness & dimensions) ??
Or with the brackets that LEAF & Lockwood sell that bolt to the side
of the engine under the exhaust manifold, & if so, can you do that & the
muff still clear the wing gap seal? (which I will still fly with)
Thanks, Jim, Cookeville, TN,
Self grounded ' til I eliminate this problem.
(I don`t do Crack)
Message 33
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Firestar project |
Re: Bent gear legs. Yup. Probably the pilot. Second thought: Kolb Drop.
do not archive
Bill Sullivan
FS/KX/447
Windsor Locks, Ct.
Message 34
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: New engine package, ( FireFly alternate maybe) |
Don
there is a Valley Engineering Big Twin with redrive on a Kolb Twin
Star . Dick Starks wife flys it.. Kansas City Dawn Patrol. Generac
engine I think..? Herb
At 07:15 PM 4/17/2008, you wrote:
>
>Gents,
>I dont know if you went down to the Sun'n'fun Gala, and even if you
>did you might not have paid much attention to the runner-up to
>Steve's FloatFly...The second place winner was a Buckeye powered
>parachute with a v-twin 32 hp generac industrial engine on it. This
>is the the same kind of airframe that won the inovation award, and
>something else at OshKosh last summer with the Honda V-twin on it. I
>have been closely watching these guys and they are making great
>strides at bringing 4 stroke industrial engines into our sport. I
>have spoken with Ralph at Buckeye personally many timies over the
>last year, and I can tell you he is definately going to offer this
>as an engine package to the entire market.
>Right now...he is very close.
>Let me give you some of the details on this generac package.
>
>993cc v-twin 4 stroke. (this engine will go 2500 hours at 3600 rpms men)
>PolyV belt reduction of his own design, and it looks like very high quality.
>Tennessee prop. (it is swinging a 74 incher on the chute, 36 pitch I think)
>Eletric start!
>Static thrust numbers are in excess of 300 lbs!at 3800 rpms...This
>is more than a 447 with a 2.58:1 and a 60 inch
>Fuel consumption is 1.5 gallon per hour. (Industy rating for
>generator application) and I am certain it is very close.
>Electric start Engine, prop,reduction unit and mufflers are right at 100 lbs.
>At this time, the engine is NOT modified, it is stock, so the TBO
>for its industrial application will be the same.
>He told me just this week he thinks he will be able to deliver the
>whole package to market for about 3500 bucks.
>Now, I dont know if a FireFly could stand a 100 lb powerplant
>package and still make 254lbs....but I do know for certain it will
>fly with the weight..and fly very well. A FireStar should be a
>jewell with this package.
>
>Some of you have heard me preach before that the industrial v-twins
>are soon to be a viable powerplant for our sport, and that time is
>very quickly approaching! Fuel consumption will allow ranges like we
>have never seen before on 5 gallons...the noise is so much less than
>we are used to it is unbelievable...and electric start. Not to
>mention the price will be half what a rotax package will cost, and
>the way Rotax is going...likely alot less than half very soon. Most
>of us would never even have to consider an overhaul.....not in 2500
>hours, thats more than a lifetime for 99% of the ultralites
>
>It has also been said that the sport pilot rule has killed the
>ultralight market by so many in the industry I cannot count em all.
>Well, I challenge that reasoning. I believe it is the Cost...Rotax
>engines have doubled in price in the last few years, and I believe
>this is the biggest reason. If a manufacturer could take 30% off an
>ultralite plane/engine cost to the customer, this might be the
>biggest boost the market could get, and with this package...well,
>these developments just might be the revival of the part 103
>aircraft market. here is another prediction...the first company that
>designs an aircraft around a V-twin powerplant package and gets it
>to market, will have a huge success in sales! Buckeye has done this
>with their DragonFly PPC and I hope someone does it with a fixed wing.
>
>--------
>Don G.
>Central Illinois
>Kitfox IV Speedster
>Luscombe 8A
>
>http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=177521#177521
>
>
Message 35
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Firestar project |
----- Original Message -----
From: william sullivan
To: kolb list
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:29 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Firestar project
Re: Bent gear legs. Yup. Probably the pilot. Second thought: Kolb
Drop.
do not archive
Bill Sullivan
FS/KX/447
Windsor Locks, Ct.
Message 36
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: New engine package, ( FireFly alternate maybe) |
In a message dated 4/17/2008 8:18:25 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
donghe@one-eleven.net writes:
Gents,
I dont know if you went down to the Sun'n'fun Gala, and even if you did you
might not have paid much attention to the runner-up to Steve's FloatFly...The
second place winner was a Buckeye powered parachute with a v-twin 32 hp
generac industrial engine on it. This is the the same kind of airframe that won
the inovation award
Don, I took a good look at it. Very nice job. Two problems for the
firefly, first it sounds about 15 to 20 lbs too heavy. Second, most belt drives
do
not offer enough extension and the thrust line is a bit high. A gear
reduction usually solves this issue but the 4 stroke harmonics drive the gears
nuts.
I wish them luck. We need some alternatives in the UL area.
Steve B
Firefly 007/Floats
Firefly 0040/ Floats 2008 SnF Grand Champion
do not archive
**************Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car
listings at AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp00300000002851)
Message 37
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 582 muff Brackets |
Thanks!!
Do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: Steven Green
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:24 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: 582 muff Brackets
Jim,
This was the muffler mount that came from Kolb for the 582 muffler.
The rubber bushings between the red brackets and the muffler bracket
were good for about 100 to 150 hours.
Steven Green
Etowah, TN
----- Original Message -----
From: Jim Kmet
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:20 AM
Subject: Kolb-List: 582 muff Brackets
John H, Richard Pike, And anyone else that has , or had a 582 on a
MK-3C, how have you guys mounted your mufflers & with what type of
brackets without a Bracket cracking problem? (If any) Have you mounted
them above the exhaust manifold, with angle alum. like the 503 plans in
the MK-3 manual? ( If so , what thickness & dimensions) ??
Or with the brackets that LEAF & Lockwood sell that bolt to the side
of the engine under the exhaust manifold, & if so, can you do that & the
muff still clear the wing gap seal? (which I will still fly with)
Thanks, Jim, Cookeville, TN,
Self grounded ' til I eliminate this problem.
(I don`t do Crack)
Message 38
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Alternate Firefly engines |
Here is a video of a legal eagle with the big twin
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kn_tnVaQXdo&feature=related
You can see a few more of the plane here.
http://www.youtube.com/user/HartAero
www.culverprops.com has a few videos of the kolb twinstar flying with the v twin
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=177553#177553
Message 39
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Firestar project |
At 09:26 PM 4/17/2008, william sullivan wrote:
>John- Brian (my brother-in-law) has flown just about everything. I am
>almost certain he has never flown a Kolb. I do know that he has experience
>on light (if not ultralight) aircraft...
Bill, it's not the same thing. 400 hours in Taylorcafts did NOT prepare me
to solo a Quicksilver, and Cessna (what I originally learned in) time would
have prepared me even less. 400 hours in the T-Craft and a few hours in
the (two seat) Quicksilver DID prepare me to solo my Kolb... and my Kolb
was less of an unknown, as I had seen it fly before in its current
configuration. There's also the matter of tailwheel time, does your
brother in law have any?
-Dana
--
Help, I've fallen up and I can't get down
Message 40
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Firestar project |
There is a FS II based at our field that had the tail boom shortened by 6"
by the original builder. It flies fine ; can't really tell any difference.
I am not advocating such a change, just telling what I know.
Howard Shackleford
FS II
SC
do not archive
In a message dated 4/17/2008 6:33:37 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
williamtsullivan@att.net writes:
I do understand the implications of changes to the basic design.
**************Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car
listings at AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp00300000002851)
Message 41
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Firestar project |
John,
You are right about the wing movement. You got me by the short hairs
when it comes to why and how the previous owner would move the wings
that much.
Denny
Denny:
I may be missing Bill S's point in that one msg, but I consider
relocating wings 2.5 inches aft of the prescribed position, and
shortening the tailboom, major changes.
The second tailboom in my MKIII was shortened one foot. Luckily I did
not have to fly it long before it was time to change to the correct
standard length. I would never have thought that one change would
affect the flight characteristics of my MKIII, but it did, adversely...
I'm not an aeronautical engineer, but seems to me that moving the
wings back 2.5" and moving the tail section forward by what ever the
tail boom was shortened, will drastically influence the flight
characteristics of whatever model Kolb Bill S intends to fly.
john h
mkIII
John H and yourself are missing his point of how flexable the basic
Kolb design has proven to be. As Bill stated more than once, he has no
plans of doing any major changes to his own bird. He is only pointing
out the obvious flexability of Homers creation.
Denny Rowe
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Checked by AVG.
4/16/2008 5:34 PM
Message 42
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: New engine package, ( FireFly alternate maybe) |
Steve,
The issues you point out are definitely concerns. These guys have overcome the
4 stroke pulses by using that belt drive, and a really slow prop speed that shouldn't
work according to what I was taught in school...but it does with that
big prop.
I have been considering what I was taught about tip speed and prop efficiency and
so on now for a year since I started paying attention to this deal, only to
come to the conclusion that either the books were wrong, or the propcarvers have
become magicians!
They believe they are going to get good life. The Honda powered machine at Oshkosh
now has alot of hours on it, with no belt problems, abiet, the Generac is
larger and more powerful, so it will have a stronger pulse. Time will show.
What the powerplant needs is a new airframe designed around it just as they are
putting it together, to support slow turning 74 or 76 inch prop to optimize the
thrust, and make the components last along time.
I didnt know Dick Starks had a Valley v-twin on a twinstar...sound interesting.
This assembly from Buckeye should not be confused, and only barely compared with
Valley's Generac offering. The workmanship is superb, and the engine is NOT
modified. AND it gets alot more thrust.
Jeez....if only Dennis was still designing airplanes......(grin)
--------
Don G.
Central Illinois
Kitfox IV Speedster
Luscombe 8A
http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=177566#177566
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|