---------------------------------------------------------- Kolb-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Sun 05/31/09: 47 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 01:31 AM - Video of John H arriving at Rock House (John Bickham) 2. 03:34 AM - harmonics (Ted Cowan) 3. 04:13 AM - Re: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. (russ kinne) 4. 04:35 AM - Re: harmonics (russ kinne) 5. 06:08 AM - Re: Video of John H arriving at Rock House (Larry Cottrell) 6. 06:29 AM - Re: Video of John H arriving at Rock House (John Hauck) 7. 06:53 AM - Re: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. (robert bean) 8. 07:10 AM - Re: harmonics (Roger Lee) 9. 07:10 AM - Re: Video of John H arriving at Rock House (Larry Cottrell) 10. 07:11 AM - MV2009 (John Hauck) 11. 07:14 AM - MV2006 (John Hauck) 12. 07:22 AM - Video of John H arriving at Rock House (Larry Cottrell) 13. 07:23 AM - MV2009 (John Hauck) 14. 07:53 AM - MV2009 (John Hauck) 15. 08:10 AM - MV2009 (John Hauck) 16. 09:10 AM - Re: MV2009 (Bruce Chaisson) 17. 09:19 AM - michigan fly in's June 7th (Arksey@aol.com) 18. 09:37 AM - Re: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. (Ron) 19. 09:47 AM - Re: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. (robert bean) 20. 09:47 AM - Re: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. (Ron @ KFHU) 21. 10:03 AM - Re: michigan fly in's June 7th (Richard & Martha Neilsen) 22. 10:04 AM - Re: harmonics (Ron @ KFHU) 23. 10:11 AM - Re: MV2009 (Ron @ KFHU) 24. 10:23 AM - Re: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. (Ron @ KFHU) 25. 10:23 AM - Re: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. (Denny Rowe) 26. 10:23 AM - Re: Re: MV2009 (Larry Cottrell) 27. 10:47 AM - Re: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. (Larry Cottrell) 28. 11:07 AM - Re: michigan fly in's June 7th (Kirkds) 29. 11:43 AM - Re: michigan fly in's June 7th (ces308) 30. 11:47 AM - Re: MV2009 (ces308) 31. 02:52 PM - Re: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. (Dana Hague) 32. 02:57 PM - Re: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. (Dana Hague) 33. 03:39 PM - Re: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. (Jack B. Hart) 34. 04:42 PM - Re: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. (John Hauck) 35. 05:03 PM - Fw: The kit has arrived! (loseyf@comcast.net) 36. 05:03 PM - Re: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. (Dana Hague) 37. 05:03 PM - Re: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. (Dana Hague) 38. 06:22 PM - Re: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. (Ron @ KFHU) 39. 07:04 PM - Re: Fw: The kit has arrived! (Richard & Martha Neilsen) 40. 07:12 PM - Re: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. (Dana Hague) 41. 07:12 PM - MV2009 (John Hauck) 42. 07:20 PM - MV2009 (John Hauck) 43. 07:20 PM - MV2009 (John Hauck) 44. 07:23 PM - MV2009 (John Hauck) 45. 07:45 PM - MV2009 (John Hauck) 46. 07:55 PM - Re: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. (robert bean) 47. 08:02 PM - Re: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. (Ron @ KFHU) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 01:31:57 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Video of John H arriving at Rock House From: "John Bickham" In case you missed it... Here is a link for the video of John H arriving at the Rock House on Tuesday. Listen for the throttle inputs. This was a lot harder than he made it look. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMYsdarPcnY -------- Thanks too much, John Bickham Mark III-C w/ 912UL St. Francisville, LA I know many pilots and a few true aviators. There is a distinct difference that I have the greatest respect for. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=246101#246101 ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 03:34:33 AM PST US From: "Ted Cowan" Subject: Kolb-List: harmonics Okay, boys and girls, it is time for a good Kolb story. I am sure all of you remember me and my little slingshot 912 with the rum rum syndrome. A good friend of mine down in Florida loaned me his just reconditioned WD prop to check the noise issue. It seemed to drop the noise in half. I contacted WD (remember I stated that I needed proof to verify the prop noise) and after a long conversation, they decided that I had the wrong blades. (duh). They sent me three brand new 68" taper tips with nickel edges. Some of the best looking and balanced blades I have ever seen come out of there. Anyway, I purchased a sound meter (db) as per suggestion of someone on this kolb list. I started taking soundings and ended up putting some serious noise reduction materials under my engine and everywhere I could behind me. This really helped. I started out with the same dbs inside as there were outside under the wing. Mike Bigelow sent me his Kiev 70" three blade on the agreement if I liked it fine, but if I did not, I could send it back. What a deal. He is certainly a great guy to do this for a fellow kolber. Anyway, after a lot of testing and readjusting both blade setups, I finally concluded that overall, the WD blade out performed the Kiev. The Kiev was definitely quieter on the ground or at low RPMs but did not have the climb and/or cruise of the taper tip WD. It WAS a lot lighter but with a four inch extension, it set my blade thrust back too far (I found this was the case with the WD blade also). So I was back to my WD 68" taper tip. I also added a perforated stainless shroud around my exhaust pipes and that was the cats meeyow. When I turned it straight up, it really made a difference. My numbers were nice. Behind me I was 104 db (started out 123 and under the wing was off the scale of 126) and was now 116 db under the wing cruising at 4800 rpm and over 80 mph indicated. That was a staggering 20 db difference from when I started!!! Mike happily agreed for me to send the Kiev set up back to him so it is now available again. If I were flying a MkIII or something, this would be the prop I would want. By the way, I still have the harmonics but it is now subdued and since I repitched my prop to add about two hundred rpms, I found that the engine is actually quieter on the wom wom at 5000 rpms than it is at 4800. All in all I now have a tolerable situation and still have my zoom zoom. If anyone wants the name of the type of insulation I used and pics of the new exhaust extension, let me know. If I could stop the wom wom, I would not even hear my engine at cruise. Cool. Oh yes, by the way, the man at Kiev told me has a rans 12 with same engine and it does the same thing and he knows of several others and no one can do anything about it. Seems Rotax doesnt want to us to know they know about this problem which means it IS in the engine. Shame on them. Sorry for the length. I appreciate what all have done and suggested. If I can help anyone with this stuff, let me know. I had a $50 reward for anyone who could solve my problem but I think between Jim Holbrook lending his blades and Mike Bigelow effectively doing the same, I will give each $25. Does that seem fair to everyone? Ted Cowan, Alabama, Slingshot, 912UL zoom zoom. ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 04:13:12 AM PST US From: russ kinne Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. BB , I like your thinking! -- long as you didn't take off or land, you'd be fine. But I wonder about gyroscopic & P-forces?? do not archive On May 30, 2009, at 9:42 PM, robert bean wrote: > > Ideally an Ultrastar should have the prop rotating around the boom > tube. Take a nice big bearing...... > BB > > On 30, May 2009, at 8:22 PM, JetPilot wrote: > >> >> For a slow flying plane like a Kolb, a larger diameter prop is far >> more efficient and provides more thrust. As you make the prop >> disc smaller, the velocity of the air that you need to move >> becomes faster... A Kolb can not take advantage of High Velocity >> thrust. Imagine putting a small jet engine on a Kolb, you would >> be using a huge amount of power and fuel just to cruise at 80 >> MPH. It is an extreme example, but its the same thing as putting >> a small prop that depended on high velocity air on a Kolb, you >> would need about 200 HP to get the same performance as we get with >> our large diameter props. >> >> A helicopter rotor is just a large prop that is very large >> diameter and optimized for slow speeds ( Lifting ). An R-22 will >> have more thrust than weight with just 160 HP and fly... If you >> took that same 160 HP engine on a helicopter and put a small high >> speed prop on it instead of a rotor, it would not even come close >> to lifting it on the ground. On the same token, the helicopter >> rotor would not fly very fast mounted on the front of a Cirrus or >> other high speed plane. >> >> The idea of getting the thrust line much lower would be great, but >> it is not practical with this type of airplane. You would need so >> much extra power to compensate for the small diameter high speed >> optimized propeller that you would create more problems than you >> would solve. There has been a lot of experimentation with props >> and thrust lines on pushers, and what we have now as about as good >> as a compromise that you will get. Again, if it were as easy as >> adding prop blades, and lowering the thrust line closer to the CG >> of the airplane, it would make a much nicer flying airplane, and >> it would have been done long ago. >> >> 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=246074#246074 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 04:35:02 AM PST US From: russ kinne Subject: Re: Kolb-List: harmonics Ted Delighted you've solved, or at least, lessened your noise problem. But I guess you realize you've guaranteed yourself a new nickname -- from, now on, it's ''ZOOM ZOOM" Cowan And thanks for sharing -- l'm sure this is useful info for many, do not forget. er, archive On May 31, 2009, at 6:33 AM, Ted Cowan wrote: > > Okay, boys and girls, it is time for a good Kolb story. I am sure > all of you remember me and my little slingshot 912 with the rum rum > syndrome. A good friend of mine down in Florida loaned me his just > reconditioned WD prop to check the noise issue. It seemed to drop > the noise in half. I contacted WD (remember I stated that I needed > proof to verify the prop noise) and after a long conversation, they > decided that I had the wrong blades. (duh). They sent me three > brand new 68" taper tips with nickel edges. Some of the best > looking and balanced blades I have ever seen come out of there. > Anyway, I purchased a sound meter (db) as per suggestion of someone > on this kolb list. I started taking soundings and ended up putting > some serious noise reduction materials under my engine and > everywhere I could behind me. This really helped. I started out > with the same dbs inside as there were outside under the wing. > Mike Bigelow sent me his Kiev 70" three blade on the agreement if I > liked it fine, but if I did not, I could send it back. What a > deal. He is certainly a great guy to do this for a fellow kolber. > Anyway, after a lot of testing and readjusting both blade setups, I > finally concluded that overall, the WD blade out performed the > Kiev. The Kiev was definitely quieter on the ground or at low RPMs > but did not have the climb and/or cruise of the taper tip WD. It > WAS a lot lighter but with a four inch extension, it set my blade > thrust back too far (I found this was the case with the WD blade > also). So I was back to my WD 68" taper tip. I also added a > perforated stainless shroud around my exhaust pipes and that was > the cats meeyow. When I turned it straight up, it really made a > difference. My numbers were nice. Behind me I was 104 db (started > out 123 and under the wing was off the scale of 126) and was now > 116 db under the wing cruising at 4800 rpm and over 80 mph > indicated. That was a staggering 20 db difference from when I > started!!! Mike happily agreed for me to send the Kiev set up back > to him so it is now available again. If I were flying a MkIII or > something, this would be the prop I would want. By the way, I > still have the harmonics but it is now subdued and since I > repitched my prop to add about two hundred rpms, I found that the > engine is actually quieter on the wom wom at 5000 rpms than it is > at 4800. All in all I now have a tolerable situation and still > have my zoom zoom. If anyone wants the name of the type of > insulation I used and pics of the new exhaust extension, let me > know. If I could stop the wom wom, I would not even hear my engine > at cruise. Cool. Oh yes, by the way, the man at Kiev told me has a > rans 12 with same engine and it does the same thing and he knows of > several others and no one can do anything about it. Seems Rotax > doesnt want to us to know they know about this problem which means > it IS in the engine. Shame on them. Sorry for the length. I > appreciate what all have done and suggested. If I can help anyone > with this stuff, let me know. I had a $50 reward for anyone who > could solve my problem but I think between Jim Holbrook lending his > blades and Mike Bigelow effectively doing the same, I will give > each $25. Does that seem fair to everyone? Ted Cowan, Alabama, > Slingshot, 912UL zoom zoom. > > ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 06:08:57 AM PST US From: "Larry Cottrell" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Video of John H arriving at Rock House John, just like I said, " 6 to 10 right down the runway" Larry Rock House ----- Original Message ----- From: John Bickham To: kolb-list@matronics.com Sent: Sunday, May 31, 2009 2:30 AM Subject: Kolb-List: Video of John H arriving at Rock House In case you missed it... Here is a link for the video of John H arriving at the Rock House on Tuesday. Listen for the throttle inputs. This was a lot harder than he made it look. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMYsdarPcnY -------- Thanks too much, John Bickham Mark III-C w/ 912UL St. Francisville, LA I know many pilots and a few true aviators. There is a distinct difference that I have the greatest respect for. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=246101#246101 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 05/30/09 05:53:00 ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 06:29:28 AM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Video of John H arriving at Rock House Yea, what's all the cause for alarm. From the video it looks like it was a piece of cake. That landing ranks right up there with one of the most demanding and dreade d landings I have ever made. I had a lot of time to think about it for the last 150 miles on the flight north from Elko, NV. When I started my approach I had to go full throttle a couple of times to m ake any progress and keep up a decent. Someone was looking out for me, the wind, although extremely high, was not turbulent at touch down. I was extremely relieved. Nothing to it! A piece of cake! ;-) john h - Remember wiping my sweaty right hand several time during that appr oach... mkIII John, just like I said, " 6 to 10 right down the runway" Larry Rock House ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 06:53:08 AM PST US From: robert bean Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. Link belt On 30, May 2009, at 10:59 PM, Dana Hague wrote: > > At 09:42 PM 5/30/2009, robert bean wrote: > >> Ideally an Ultrastar should have the prop rotating around the boom >> tube. Take a nice big bearing...... > > Y'know, I've thought of that. Suitable bearings _are_ available (I > checked). Replacing the redrive belt would be quite a procedure, > though... > > -Dana > -- > We wonder why the dogs always drink out of our toilets, but look > at it from their point of view: why do humans keep peeing into > their water bowls? > > ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 07:10:38 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: harmonics From: "Roger Lee" Have you balanced your carbs lately? That wom wom or vibration that sounds like that will show up at lower rpms and go away just as you stated if rpms are increased if they are out. Carbs need balancing every 100 hrs. or at least each annual if you don't put on 100 hrs a year. They will be out and it's too easy to do for you not to do it. The cross over tube can only help so much. Think of your 912 as a left engine and a right. You don't want the left trying to run at 5000 and the right trying to run at 5050 or worse 5100. Do the mechanical and pneumatic sync. Just doing the mechanical without doing the pneumatic is a waist of time. How do I know because I get to sync at least 30 or more sets of carbs a year and they are all out of balance by 100 hrs. or the annual, just some more than others. -------- Roger Lee Tucson, Az. Light Sport Repairman - Maintenance Rated Rotax Service Center 520-574-1080 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=246135#246135 ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 07:10:45 AM PST US From: "Larry Cottrell" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Video of John H arriving at Rock House Well, I do have to admit that the wind was up a bit on some of the days that you guys were here. It has been windy all year and the worst weather, for wind and rain, seems to always occur after Monument Valley. I don't know whether it is a natural reaction to all of those Kolbs parked in the yard, but we need the moisture bad enough to secretly not be too upset. The house and runway are down by about 100 feet under a hill that the winds predominately comes from, so the winds at about 150 to 200 feet above ground level are much more severe than that on the ground. That of course is not to say that the winds on the ground are anything to sneer about, which is why I cut in a cross wind runway. It is only about 600 feet long, 1000 if you count in a dogleg to the left. It is still a bit intimidating none the less. Where the discussion ( outright ridicule would be more like it) about my wind meter comes in, is because of the wind report that I gave John Bickham and Bruce Chaisson as they were coming in to the Rock house for their initial arrival. When I was working for the BNSF RR as a welder, we were restricted from welding outside in high winds. They gave us this cute little wind meter that you could hold to the wind to determine the strength. Needless to say there was never a day that the wind blew hard enough to curb my work production. :-) As the guys approached I went out into the wind and took readings, and the wind showed 6 to 10 MPH mostly down the runway. The winds every where else was really rocking and rolling, and these guys were white knuckled already. There were of course a few gusts that could get your attention. John's landing did look easy, but I can assure you that it was not. He had reason for sweaty palms. As I recall mine were a bit sweaty watching. Larry ----- Original Message ----- From: John Hauck To: kolb-list@matronics.com Sent: Sunday, May 31, 2009 7:26 AM Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Video of John H arriving at Rock House Yea, what's all the cause for alarm. From the video it looks like it was a piece of cake. That landing ranks right up there with one of the most demanding and dreaded landings I have ever made. I had a lot of time to think about it for the last 150 miles on the flight north from Elko, NV. When I started my approach I had to go full throttle a couple of times to make any progress and keep up a decent. Someone was looking out for me, the wind, although extremely high, was not turbulent at touch down. I was extremely relieved. Nothing to it! A piece of cake! ;-) john h - Remember wiping my sweaty right hand several time during that approach... mkIII John, just like I said, " 6 to 10 right down the runway" Larry Rock House ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 05/30/09 05:53:00 ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 07:11:08 AM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Kolb-List: MV2009 My escort, Bruce Chaisson/MKIII, over Bonneville Salt Flats, UT. john h mkIII ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 07:14:22 AM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Kolb-List: MV2006 I was pleased to out run an 18 wheeler on the Bonneville Salt Flats. john h mkIII ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 07:22:58 AM PST US From: "Larry Cottrell" Subject: Kolb-List: Video of John H arriving at Rock House For some reason my computer flags John's posts on that computer as phishing, it also marked my reply to his post as the same phishing as the original even though I "unblocked" it. Did they show up that was on other computers or is it just mine? Larry ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 07:23:45 AM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Kolb-List: MV2009 North end of the Ruby Mountains between Wells and Elko, NV. We were bless with a beautiful day of flying from Wendover, UT, and the old WWII Army Air Corps Airbase. For those interested in military history, here is a good web site on Wendover: http://www.wendoverairbase.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=168&Itemid=111 john h mkIII ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 07:53:37 AM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Kolb-List: MV2009 Bottom center of the photo, left of the trail, is the FSII and Larry Cottrell, flying down the creek to the Owyhee River Canyon. The tiny FSII puts the size of the area into prospective. john h mkIII ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 08:10:16 AM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Kolb-List: MV2009 Flying north and down stream over the Owyhee River Canyon and backwaters of the lake. One of my favorite photos of this flight. john h mkIII ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 09:10:55 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: MV2009 From: "Bruce Chaisson" Great photos John. Here's some of mine if I did it right. http://www.dropshots.com/bruce20#date/2009-05 -------- Bruce Chaisson Mark III Classic 912 ULS Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=246159#246159 ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 09:19:19 AM PST US From: Arksey@aol.com Subject: Kolb-List: michigan fly in's June 7th Hi group, wondering if any one is planning on flying to one of the following fly in's June 7th, here in Michgain, weather permitting..these are rather close to me here in Michigan and I would attend... JUNE, 7 Coldwater Branch County Memorial Airport (OEB) 7:00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m. Pancake breakfast. Sponsored by the Branch County Flying Club. Call Joe Best 517-278-8348. JUNE, 7 Ionia Ionia County Airport (Y70) 7:00 a.m. - 11:00 a.m. Dawn Patrol Sponsored by Benz Aviation. Call Tony Smit 616-527-9070 Jswan firestar ll N663S Eaton Rapids, Mi **************An Excellent Credit Score is 750. See Yours in Just 2 Easy Steps! ExcfooterNO62) ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 09:37:45 AM PST US From: Ron Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. "First, a prop creates thrust by increasing the speed of air passing through it. It's more efficient to accelerate a lot of air a little bit than to accelerate a little bit of air a lot. Thus a larger prop is better. " ============== above is a quote============= that's actually incorrect, it may be correct if we were talking about a Rocket motor or say a Turbo Jet but not a conventional propeller. The propulsion that a prop creates is directly proportional to how much lift the prop airfoil creates. Now if you look at the mechanic of lift you will see that to top of the prop creates a low pressure area. the air movement that you notice as the prop blast is to a large extent a stream of onrushing air filling in the low pressure area that the blades created. It can be accomplished by a large blade or many small blades. In fact the many small blades are way better at creating a vacuum in front of the propeller than a fewer blades attempting the same thing. This is not an opinion this is a fact of aerodynamics ( all else being equal ). I sense that people have some problems in letting go of some constants in their minds, one of them is notion that a large because its large creates more propulsive force than an equally sized volume disc with multiple blades. Anyway I really gave out more information then I want, since who knows I may want to have a Kolb Air Race and I want to compete against the folks who hold a different concept. :-) ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 09:47:25 AM PST US From: robert bean Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. I want a front row seat. BB On 31, May 2009, at 12:36 PM, Ron wrote: > > "First, a prop creates thrust by increasing the speed of air > passing through > it. It's more efficient to accelerate a lot of air a little bit > than to > accelerate a little bit of air a lot. Thus a larger prop is better. " > ============== above is a quote============= > that's actually incorrect, it may be correct if we were talking > about a Rocket motor or say a Turbo Jet but not a conventional > propeller. The propulsion that a prop creates is directly > proportional to how much lift the prop airfoil creates. Now if you > look at the mechanic of lift you will see that to top of the prop > creates a low pressure area. the air movement that you notice as > the prop blast is to a large extent a stream of onrushing air > filling in the low pressure area that the blades created. It can be > accomplished by a large blade or many small blades. In fact the > many small blades are way better at creating a vacuum in front of > the propeller than a fewer blades attempting the same thing. This > is not an opinion this is a fact of aerodynamics ( all else being > equal ). > I sense that people have some problems in letting go of some > constants in their minds, one of them is notion that a large > because its large creates more propulsive force than an equally > sized volume disc with multiple blades. Anyway I really gave out > more information then I want, since who knows I may want to have a > Kolb Air Race and I want to compete against the folks who hold a > different concept. :-) > > ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 09:47:25 AM PST US From: "Ron @ KFHU" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. I don't know about that,,,,, :-). I just did a quick Google search for boat props and most of them are at least 4 blades, and their cross section support 100% just what I'v been saying all along. Submarine props are very much multi blade props, they almost look like the Propjets from the 80's. ---- robcannon wrote: ============ A very good parallel for understanding the prop diameter / efficiency thing is to look at a tug boat prop. A tug has a huge diameter slow turning propeller which is what it takes to produce alot of thrust, as opposed to a speedboat's small prop turning very fast to achieve high speeds. I think it's fairly obvious that you need diameter to move alot of water or air, and create thrust. Hence, if you are limited in diameter, you will be giving up some thrust. I hope that helps, Rob Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=246096#246096 -- kugelair.com ________________________________ Message 21 ____________________________________ Time: 10:03:41 AM PST US From: "Richard & Martha Neilsen" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: michigan fly in's June 7th Jim I flew my plane for the fist time this year this morning. The flood waters dried up. I'm game for either one. If Ted and others want to make Coldwater I could do that but Ionia is closer. The weather needs to cooperate and nothing comes up with the house build. Do not archive Rick Neilsen Redrive VW Powered MKIIIC ----- Original Message ----- From: Arksey@aol.com To: kolb-list@matronics.com Sent: Sunday, May 31, 2009 12:18 PM Subject: Kolb-List: michigan fly in's June 7th Hi group, wondering if any one is planning on flying to one of the following fly in's June 7th, here in Michgain, weather permitting..these are rather close to me here in Michigan and I would attend... JUNE, 7 Coldwater Branch County Memorial Airport (OEB) 7:00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m. Pancake breakfast. Sponsored by the Branch County Flying Club. Call Joe Best 517-278-8348. JUNE, 7 Ionia Ionia County Airport (Y70) 7:00 a.m. - 11:00 a.m. Dawn Patrol Sponsored by Benz Aviation. Call Tony Smit 616-527-9070 Jswan firestar ll N663S Eaton Rapids, Mi ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- An Excellent Credit Score is 750. See Yours in Just 2 Easy Steps! ________________________________ Message 22 ____________________________________ Time: 10:04:25 AM PST US From: "Ron @ KFHU" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: harmonics Hi Ted For 50 bucks I'll help you. I am guessing that you have the regular factory kolb single tube motor mount. Obviously you get an airframe engine resonance problem. Its easy to cure, all we got to do is remove the resonating frequency above the operating rpm range of your motor. I am guessing that you already tried different rubber mounts, that's the quickest and easiest solution and should work. A harder mount will move up the resonance frequency and a softer rubber mount will lower it. If you tried that and it didn't work then the only other thing is change the tube mount resonance. The only way I can thing for you to do that is weld two parallel braces to the kolb tube which are also welded to the tray mount. That will also have the effect of increasing the frequency range above what you have right now. The stiffer the engine mount the higher the resonating frequency, Like I mentioned earlier the trick is to move the onset frequency above the operating range of the motor. You may just have been unlucky in terms of the mount tube thickness or some other minor difference from most of the others who do not report that problem. I certainly do not think its the motor itself, those are balanced and tested very carefully in their assigned rpm operating range. ========================================================================================================================================================================== ---- Ted Cowan wrote: ============ Okay, boys and girls, it is time for a good Kolb story. I am sure all of you remember me and my little slingshot 912 with the rum rum syndrome. A good friend of mine down in Florida loaned me his just reconditioned WD prop to check the noise issue. It seemed to drop the noise in half. I contacted WD (remember I stated that I needed proof to verify the prop noise) and after a long conversation, they decided that I had the wrong blades. (duh). They sent me three brand new 68" taper tips with nickel edges. Some of the best looking and balanced blades I have ever seen come out of there. Anyway, I purchased a sound meter (db) as per suggestion of someone on this kolb list. I started taking soundings and ended up putting some serious noise reduction materials under my engine and everywhere I could behind me. This really helped. I started out with the same dbs inside as there were outside under the wing. Mike Bigelow sent me his Kiev 70" three blade on the agreement if I liked it fine, but if I did not, I could send it back. What a deal. He is certainly a great guy to do this for a fellow kolber. Anyway, after a lot of testing and readjusting both blade setups, I finally concluded that overall, the WD blade out performed the Kiev. The Kiev was definitely quieter on the ground or at low RPMs but did not have the climb and/or cruise of the taper tip WD. It WAS a lot lighter but with a four inch extension, it set my blade thrust back too far (I found this was the case with the WD blade also). So I was back to my WD 68" taper tip. I also added a perforated stainless shroud around my exhaust pipes and that was the cats meeyow. When I turned it straight up, it really made a difference. My numbers were nice. Behind me I was 104 db (started out 123 and under the wing was off the scale of 126) and was now 116 db under the wing cruising at 4800 rpm and over 80 mph indicated. That was a staggering 20 db difference from when I started!!! Mike happily agreed for me to send the Kiev set up back to him so it is now available again. If I were flying a MkIII or something, this would be the prop I would want. By the way, I still have the harmonics but it is now subdued and since I repitched my prop to add about two hundred rpms, I found that the engine is actually quieter on the wom wom at 5000 rpms than it is at 4800. All in all I now have a tolerable situation and still have my zoom zoom. If anyone wants the name of the type of insulation I used and pics of the new exhaust extension, let me know. If I could stop the wom wom, I would not even hear my engine at cruise. Cool. Oh yes, by the way, the man at Kiev told me has a rans 12 with same engine and it does the same thing and he knows of several others and no one can do anything about it. Seems Rotax doesnt want to us to know they know about this problem which means it IS in the engine. Shame on them. Sorry for the length. I appreciate what all have done and suggested. If I can help anyone with this stuff, let me know. I had a $50 reward for anyone who could solve my problem but I think between Jim Holbrook lending his blades and Mike Bigelow effectively doing the same, I will give each $25. Does that seem fair to everyone? Ted Cowan, Alabama, Slingshot, 912UL zoom zoom. -- kugelair.com ________________________________ Message 23 ____________________________________ Time: 10:11:04 AM PST US From: "Ron @ KFHU" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: MV2009 John that photo is really beautiful, I wouldn't mind having a poster of it hanging on the wall. ===================================== ---- John Hauck wrote: ============ Bottom center of the photo, left of the trail, is the FSII and Larry Cottrell, flying down the creek to the Owyhee River Canyon. The tiny FSII puts the size of the area into prospective. john h mkIII -- kugelair.com ________________________________ Message 24 ____________________________________ Time: 10:23:38 AM PST US From: "Ron @ KFHU" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. You got it, but they cost more. ==================================================== ---- robert bean wrote: ============ I want a front row seat. BB On 31, May 2009, at 12:36 PM, Ron wrote: > > "First, a prop creates thrust by increasing the speed of air > passing through > it. It's more efficient to accelerate a lot of air a little bit > than to > accelerate a little bit of air a lot. Thus a larger prop is better. " > ============== above is a quote============= > that's actually incorrect, it may be correct if we were talking > about a Rocket motor or say a Turbo Jet but not a conventional > propeller. The propulsion that a prop creates is directly > proportional to how much lift the prop airfoil creates. Now if you > look at the mechanic of lift you will see that to top of the prop > creates a low pressure area. the air movement that you notice as > the prop blast is to a large extent a stream of onrushing air > filling in the low pressure area that the blades created. It can be > accomplished by a large blade or many small blades. In fact the > many small blades are way better at creating a vacuum in front of > the propeller than a fewer blades attempting the same thing. This > is not an opinion this is a fact of aerodynamics ( all else being > equal ). > I sense that people have some problems in letting go of some > constants in their minds, one of them is notion that a large > because its large creates more propulsive force than an equally > sized volume disc with multiple blades. Anyway I really gave out > more information then I want, since who knows I may want to have a > Kolb Air Race and I want to compete against the folks who hold a > different concept. :-) > > -- kugelair.com ________________________________ Message 25 ____________________________________ Time: 10:23:42 AM PST US From: "Denny Rowe" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ron @ KFHU" > I don't know about that,,,,, :-). > I just did a quick Google search for boat props and most of them are at > least 4 blades, and their cross section support 100% just what I'v been > saying all along. Submarine props are very much multi blade props, they > almost look like the Propjets from the 80's. > What works in water does not directly transfer to air being that air is a lot thinner. Enter the Wright brothers, a big reason they succeded first is that they discovered Otto Ls lift tables for airfoils were incorrect, Shazzam, their wing and propeller aspect ratios went way up and away they went. Up till than, most propeller designers were basing there props on marine props and were getting nowhere. Spend all the money you want to on a 55 inch gazzillion blade prop, you will never outperform a two or three blade 66 to 72 inch prop with the proper reduction unit. The laws of physics don't bend, it is easier to accelerate a lot of air a little, than a little a lot. Seen any 55 inch wind mills lately? Denny Rowe ________________________________ Message 26 ____________________________________ Time: 10:23:46 AM PST US From: "Larry Cottrell" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: MV2009 Bruce, those are some great shots, and a easy to use format. Thanks for sharing. Larry ----- Original Message ----- From: Bruce Chaisson To: kolb-list@matronics.com Sent: Sunday, May 31, 2009 10:09 AM Subject: Kolb-List: Re: MV2009 Great photos John. Here's some of mine if I did it right. http://www.dropshots.com/bruce20#date/2009-05 -------- Bruce Chaisson Mark III Classic 912 ULS Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=246159#246159 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 05/31/09 05:53:00 ________________________________ Message 27 ____________________________________ Time: 10:47:16 AM PST US From: "Larry Cottrell" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. I want a front row seat. BB On 31, May 2009, at 12:36 PM, Ron wrote: > I sense that people have some problems in letting go of some > constants in their minds, one of them is notion that a large > because its large creates more propulsive force than an equally > sized volume disc with multiple blades. Anyway I really gave out > more information then I want, since who knows I may want to have a > Kolb Air Race and I want to compete against the folks who hold a > different concept. :-) > By all means Capt Kangaroo, show us where we are wrong. I look forward to seeing the outcome. Its only money, and worse comes to worse, you will have a spare three blade prop. Larry ________________________________ Message 28 ____________________________________ Time: 11:07:54 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: michigan fly in's June 7th From: "Kirkds" Ionia is possible but Coldwater is out. Hope the weather is better than lately. Took the plane out of the hanger yesterday to wash it and had to tie it to the tractor to keep it from blowing away. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=246188#246188 ________________________________ Message 29 ____________________________________ Time: 11:43:27 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: michigan fly in's June 7th From: "ces308" Hi Guys, For any northern pilots , there is one at HTL in Houghton Lake the 7th also...I will be at that one...have to work that weekend so I have to stay close...also the next weekend ,june 11-12 is Otsego Lake Splash - in ,in Gaylord,Mi.If you land at Otsego Co airport,they provide free bus service to the sea plane base and back again. Hope to meet some of you guys this summer somewhere ! chris ambrose m3x/jabiru n327CS Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=246190#246190 ________________________________ Message 30 ____________________________________ Time: 11:47:11 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: MV2009 From: "ces308" John, Too Cool ! what else can I say ! chris ambrose m3x/jab Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=246192#246192 ________________________________ Message 31 ____________________________________ Time: 02:52:22 PM PST US From: Dana Hague Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. At 12:36 PM 5/31/2009, Ron wrote: > >"First, a prop creates thrust by increasing the speed of air passing through >it. It's more efficient to accelerate a lot of air a little bit than to >accelerate a little bit of air a lot. Thus a larger prop is better. " >============== above is a quote============= >that's actually incorrect, it may be correct if we were talking about a >Rocket motor or say a Turbo Jet but not a conventional propeller. The >propulsion that a prop creates is directly proportional to how much lift >the prop airfoil creates. Now if you look at the mechanic of lift you will >see that to top of the prop creates a low pressure area... Which are you saying is incorrect? That a prop creates thrust by accelerating the air passing through it (true, or you can look at in the opposite direction, that the thrust accelerates the air) or that larger is better (true in most cases). It's kind of like the Bernoulli (faster moving air over the top of the wing creating low pressure) vs Newton (wing lift force from accelerating air downward) arguments of lift. There is no argument, because they're different ways of describing the same thing. The prop blade creates lift-- which is a force (thrust)-- which accelerates the air backward. At low speeds, the larger prop with less blades is more efficient, for the same reason that nearly all helicopters have large two blade rotors rather than small multi blade fans. -Dana >. the air movement that you notice as the prop blast is to a large extent >a stream of onrushing air filling in the low pressure area that the blades >created. It can be accomplished by a large blade or many small blades. In >fact the many small blades are way better at creating a vacuum in front of >the propeller than a fewer blades attempting the same thing. This is not >an opinion this is a fact of aerodynamics ( all else being equal ). >I sense that people have some problems in letting go of some constants in >their minds, one of them is notion that a large because its large creates >more propulsive force than an equally sized volume disc with multiple >blades. Anyway I really gave out more information then I want, since who >knows I may want to have a Kolb Air Race and I want to compete against the >folks who hold a different concept. :-) > -- When authorities warn you of the sinfulness of sex, there is an important lesson to be learned. Do not have sex with the authorities. ________________________________ Message 32 ____________________________________ Time: 02:57:26 PM PST US From: Dana Hague Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. At 12:45 PM 5/31/2009, Ron @ KFHU wrote: >...Submarine props are very much multi blade props, they almost look like >the Propjets from the 80's... Submarine props are optimized for minimum noise. The propfans are optimized for fuel efficiency in cruise, not max thrust at takeoff. -Dana -- When authorities warn you of the sinfulness of sex, there is an important lesson to be learned. Do not have sex with the authorities. ________________________________ Message 33 ____________________________________ Time: 03:39:26 PM PST US From: "Jack B. Hart" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. Dana. Also there is another aspect to be added. Over propping. By this I mean you can run a propeller that is too long for your combination of your aircraft drag and the available engine torque. I have run a 72" IVO on the FireFly. Climb out was impressive, but I could not get over 55 mph, due to the fact that I had reduce pitch to get engine rpm up. While working on propeller noise reduction, I used an old IVO prop 56 inch two blade IVO and by converting it to "Power Tips", it ended up at 54 inches. To limit top engine cruise speed, I had to increase the tip pitch angle from 17.25 to 18.75 degrees. Both of these props would push the FireFly over 63 mph, but climb out was not exceptional. Then I purchased a third blade, and matched it to the original two "Power Tip" blades. I had to reduce the pitch to 15.0 degrees. This set up flew just as well as the two blade. These short blade props gave very acceptable cruise performance, but they had nothing to shout about when it came to climb performance. To get away from the 72 inch low cruise speed problem, I started cutting the prop. Currently it is at 64 inches and it gives very good cruise and acceptable climb. For your interest: The noise level at 5,200 rpm for the IVO 56 inch two blade square tip - 110 db 54 inch two blade power tip - 106 db 54 inch three blade power tip - 105 db. No data has been taken on the current propeller. Jack B. Hart FF004 Winchester, IN >There are several aspects to this. > >First, a prop creates thrust by increasing the speed of air passing through >it. It's more efficient to accelerate a lot of air a little bit than to >accelerate a little bit of air a lot. Thus a larger prop is better. > >Second, there are tip losses, just like a wing. A higher aspect ratio wing >is more efficient (look at a sailplane). > >Third, the closer together the blades are, the more each blade is operating >in the air disturbed by the previous blade. This causes inefficiency in >the same way that a biplane is less efficient than a monoplane. > >The ONLY reason for more than two blades is if you don't have enough room >for a 2 blade prop that can absorb all the engine's power, or if it's >turning too fast so that you get tip losses due to sonic effects and you >can't increase the reduction ratio. > >-Dana ________________________________ Message 34 ____________________________________ Time: 04:42:34 PM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. > At low speeds, the larger prop with less blades is more efficient, for the > same reason that nearly all helicopters have large two blade rotors rather > than small multi blade fans. > > -Dana I am from the old days of helicopters, mostly two blades, except the CH-47 Chinook, which had two each three blade main rotors. However, today things have changed a bit. Most have gone to ridgid rotor, hingeless, multiblade main rotors of at least 4 blades. The little TH-55, or I think the civilian designation is Hughes 269 or 369, had a three main rotor blade system. The main rotor blades have become multi-blades and the rotor diameter has shrunk, but they are still pretty big props. Take care, john h mkIII ________________________________ Message 35 ____________________________________ Time: 05:03:05 PM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Fw: The kit has arrived! From: loseyf@comcast.net UmVzZW5kaW5nLi4uTWF0cm9uaWNzIGxpa2VzIHRoaXMgYWRkcmVzcy4NCg0KU2VudCBmcm9tIG15 IFZlcml6b24gV2lyZWxlc3MgQmxhY2tCZXJyeQ0KDQotLS0tLU9yaWdpbmFsIE1lc3NhZ2UtLS0t LQ0KRnJvbTogPEZyYW4uTG9zZXlAYWxiZXIuY29tPg0KDQpEYXRlOiBTdW4sIDMxIE1heSAyMDA5 IDE5OjQ4OjQ2IA0KVG86IDxsb3NleWZAY29tY2FzdC5uZXQ+DQpTdWJqZWN0OiBGdzogVGhlIGtp dCBoYXMgYXJyaXZlZCENCg0KDQoNCkZyYW4gTG9zZXkgRGlyZWN0b3Igb2YgVGVjaG5pY2FsIFNl cnZpY2VzDQoNCl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQoNCkZyb206IExvc2V5 LCBGcmFuIFtFTlAvQUxCRVJdIA0KVG86IGtvbGItbGlzdEBtYXRyb25pY3MuY29tIDxrb2xiLWxp c3RAbWF0cm9uaWNzLmNvbT4gDQpDYzogVHJhdmlzIEJyb3duIDx0cmF2aXNAdG5rb2xiYWlyY3Jh ZnQuY29tPiANClNlbnQ6IFN1biBNYXkgMzEgMTk6MzA6MTQgMjAwOQ0KU3ViamVjdDogVGhlIGtp dCBoYXMgYXJyaXZlZCEgDQoNCg0KSnVzdCBwb3N0aW5nIGEgbm90ZSB0byBzYXkgSSBoYXZlIG5v dyBzdGFydGVkIHRoZSBwcm9jZXNz4oCmLi5vZiBidWlsZGluZy4NCg0KIA0KDQpNeSBNSzNYIGtp dCBhcnJpdmVkIHllc3RlcmRheSB0aGFua3MgdG8gdGhlIGZpbmUgZm9sa3MgYXQgS29sYiwgYW5k IEJyaWFuIGFuZCBIZWxlbiB3aG8gZGVsaXZlcmVkLiAgSSB0cnVseSBlbmpveWVkIHRoZWlyIENv bXBhbnksIGFuZCBjYW4gc2F5IHRoYXQgZ29vZCBmb2xrcyBtYWtlIGFsbCB0aGUgZGlmZmVyZW5j ZSBpbiB0aGUgd29ybGQgd2hlbiBtYWtpbmcgYSBkZWNpc2lvbiBvZiB0aGlzIHR5cGUuDQoNCiAN Cg0KSSBoYXZlIGEgZ3JpbiBiaWdnZXIgdGhhbiBCb2IgdGhlIEVuenl0ZSBndXkhDQoNCiANCg0K U2luY2VyZWx5LA0KDQogDQoNCkZyYW4gTG9zZXkgTjYyRkwgKHJlc2VydmVkKQ0KDQogDQoNCg= ________________________________ Message 36 ____________________________________ Time: 05:03:05 PM PST US From: Dana Hague Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. At 07:32 PM 5/31/2009, John Hauck wrote: >I am from the old days of helicopters, mostly two blades, except the CH-47 >Chinook, which had two each three blade main rotors. > >However, today things have changed a bit. Most have gone to ridgid rotor, >hingeless, multiblade main rotors of at least 4 blades... Yes, but I suspect the multi blades are for space or controllability reasons, not aerodynamic efficiency. -Dana -- I love my country, but I fear my government. ________________________________ Message 37 ____________________________________ Time: 05:03:05 PM PST US From: Dana Hague Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. At 07:36 PM 5/31/2009, Jack B. Hart wrote: >Also there is another aspect to be added. Over propping. By this I mean >you can run a propeller that is too long for your combination of your >aircraft drag and the available engine torque. Absolutely. As in everything, there are limits. >I have run a 72" IVO on the FireFly. Climb out was impressive, but I could >not get over 55 mph, due to the fact that I had reduce pitch to get engine >rpm up. Yes, I should have mentioned that the larger slow turning prop may make more static thrust, but it has a lower efficient speed range. Big slow turning flat pitch props are great for climb, but less good for cruise. >While working on propeller noise reduction, I used an old IVO prop 56 inch >two blade IVO and by converting it to "Power Tips"... Dunno if I mentioned it to you, I did the Power Tip mod to one of my PPG props after chewing it up flying at the beach (pebbles get kicked up during takeoff). Rather than fill the damaged area, I cut it away (diameter at the trailing edge tip is unchanged). I can't say if it's any quieter, that single cylinder engine is pretty loud anyway, but I picked up maybe 1-200rpm at WOT with no loss in thrust, and (though I've made no accurate measurements) a bit better fuel consumption. A side benefit is that it's much easier to wrap the polyurethane leading edge tape around the tip! I'm debating making the mod to my UltraStar prop. -Dana -- I love my country, but I fear my government. ________________________________ Message 38 ____________________________________ Time: 06:22:14 PM PST US From: "Ron @ KFHU" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. Remember the boat prop was not my example! I just run with it because it was a good example that even in boats they went to multi blade props. but the observation is correct to the same extant as a wood screw needs much less blade length to dig its way through the way more dense wood. :-) The fact though is that propulsion is not by and large a consequence of throwing the air back to create high pressure behind the prop to Push it forward, that is false. Because for example an airplane that moves at 300 kt will never be able to throw back enough air to move it forward.. On the ground at full power the max velocity of the air that you throw back or move back is maybe 30-40 mph at most. If you are moving at say 300 kt it is obviously impossible that 30-40 mph is pushing you at 300kt. It is something else then. And that something is of course the lift that the prop is generating and not the air that it moves. Say you have a big two blade prop moving the air at 15 mph it is still impossible for it to move you forward at say 70mph. Anyway one fellow (Larry Cottrell I think he was at MV but I don't exactly remember the face with that name),, is getting irate so to make sure we don't degenerate here into negativity I am dropping this subject. :-) Or you come over to Geo group and we can continue there. There are no personal attacks allowed there, as a moderator I make sure of that. ======================================== However a fluid is a fluid, and true ---- Denny Rowe wrote: ============ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ron @ KFHU" > I don't know about that,,,,, :-). > I just did a quick Google search for boat props and most of them are at > least 4 blades, and their cross section support 100% just what I'v been > saying all along. Submarine props are very much multi blade props, they > almost look like the Propjets from the 80's. > What works in water does not directly transfer to air being that air is a lot thinner. Enter the Wright brothers, a big reason they succeded first is that they discovered Otto Ls lift tables for airfoils were incorrect, Shazzam, their wing and propeller aspect ratios went way up and away they went. Up till than, most propeller designers were basing there props on marine props and were getting nowhere. Spend all the money you want to on a 55 inch gazzillion blade prop, you will never outperform a two or three blade 66 to 72 inch prop with the proper reduction unit. The laws of physics don't bend, it is easier to accelerate a lot of air a little, than a little a lot. Seen any 55 inch wind mills lately? Denny Rowe -- kugelair.com ________________________________ Message 39 ____________________________________ Time: 07:04:07 PM PST US From: "Richard & Martha Neilsen" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Fw: The kit has arrived! Fran Congratulations. I set up a work schedule/goal of one hour a day. In the beginning it was much more than that but as time went by I would work a bunch of hours on week ends and try to get at least a hour a day during the week after work. After three years it worked out to be about one hour per day. I figured about a extra year to put the the VW on the plane so really only two years to build the plane. Now with most of the details worked out the VW should only take a extra month or so. My point is set a realistic goal and don't get burned out with to much work a one time. Don't make a bunch of changes to the plane, this can really expand the time to build. Also watch out for AIDS (aviation induced divorce syndrome). Have fun, keep us up to date on your progress, and ask questions. We are here to help. I haven't heard from you guys that are working on VW powered Kolbs for a long time. Are you still working on them?????? At home coming this year I want to see at least one more VW flying. Do not archive Rick Neilsen Redrive VW powered MKIIIC ----- Original Message ----- From: loseyf@comcast.net To: kolb-list@matronics.com Sent: Sunday, May 31, 2009 7:57 PM Subject: Kolb-List: Fw: The kit has arrived! Resending...Matronics likes this address. Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- From: Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 19:48:46 -0400 To: Subject: Fw: The kit has arrived! Fran Losey Director of Technical Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- From: Losey, Fran [ENP/ALBER] To: kolb-list@matronics.com Cc: Travis Brown Sent: Sun May 31 19:30:14 2009 Subject: The kit has arrived! Just posting a note to say I have now started the process..of building. My MK3X kit arrived yesterday thanks to the fine folks at Kolb, and Brian and Helen who delivered. I truly enjoyed their Company, and can say that good folks make all the difference in the world when making a decision of this type. I have a grin bigger than Bob the Enzyte guy! Sincerely, Fran Losey N62FL (reserved) =EF=BD=EF=BD=EF=BD~=EF=BD=EF=BD=EF=BD,=EF=BD=03g(=EF =BD=EF=BD=EF=BDM=EF=BDGq=EF=BDz=EF=BD=EF=BD ________________________________ Message 40 ____________________________________ Time: 07:12:30 PM PST US From: Dana Hague Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. At 09:21 PM 5/31/2009, Ron @ KFHU wrote: >The fact though is that propulsion is not by and large a consequence >of throwing the air back to create high pressure behind the prop to Push >it forward, that is false... The thrust produced by a propeller is equal to the mass flow rate multiplied by the change in velocity. Remember Newton's laws: For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. The propeller is pulling the plane forward; thus the propeller must be pushing the air back with equal force. If you exert a force on the air (or anything!) it will accelerate (that's the change in velocity). I didn't say that the velocity change is the _cause_ of the thrust, you could just as easily say that the velocity change is caused by the thrust, but it's an essential part of the picture. Just like wing lift, you can describe it by downwash and Newton's law or by Bernoulli's principle and air velocities and pressure distribution, but they're just two different ways of describing and calculating the same phenomenon. Using one description or method doesn't mean the other is incorrect. -Dana -- Black holes are where God is dividing by zero. ________________________________ Message 41 ____________________________________ Time: 07:12:40 PM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Kolb-List: MV2009 The Goose Necks of the San Juan River, Utah. We were on our way from MV to Blanding, UT, to meet up with Mike Marker, then fly on to Wendover, UT. john h mkIII ________________________________ Message 42 ____________________________________ Time: 07:20:11 PM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Kolb-List: MV2009 We landed at Owyhee Reservoir State Airport. Check it out: http://www.airnav.com/airport/28U This was just prior to Memorial Day Weekend. One gentleman in a Super Cub said he had been spending Memorial Day holidays here since 1981. Only way in and out is by air or boat. Larry Cottrell can correct me if I am wrong. This is a photo of Larry Cottrell and Mike Marker. Although Mike was flying his RANS S-18, he also built and flies a FSII. john h mkIII ________________________________ Message 43 ____________________________________ Time: 07:20:57 PM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Kolb-List: MV2009 Larry Cottrell and John Bickham, Owyhee Reservoir State Airport. john h MKIII ________________________________ Message 44 ____________________________________ Time: 07:23:54 PM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Kolb-List: MV2009 Roger Hankins, FS KXP, Grants Pass, Oregon. Roger has flown with us every trip since we met in the Alvord Desert in 2005. john h mkIII ________________________________ Message 45 ____________________________________ Time: 07:45:10 PM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Kolb-List: MV2009 Sorry for the boo boo. I attached 1445-1 on the previous instead of 1454-1. john h We landed at Owyhee Reservoir State Airport. Check it out: http://www.airnav.com/airport/28U This was just prior to Memorial Day Weekend. One gentleman in a Super Cub said he had been spending Memorial Day holidays here since 1981. Only way in and out is by air or boat. Larry Cottrell can correct me if I am wrong. This is a photo of Larry Cottrell and Mike Marker. Although Mike was flying his RANS S-18, he also built and flies a FSII. john h mkIII ________________________________ Message 46 ____________________________________ Time: 07:55:17 PM PST US From: robert bean Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. The larger heavy lift helicopters use more blades, especially the russians. To harness all that power while maintaining reasonable maneuverability, to avoid retreating blade stall they have to keep the rotor diameter down. -not a problem we have to contend with on our Kolbs. BB On 31, May 2009, at 7:54 PM, Dana Hague wrote: > > At 07:32 PM 5/31/2009, John Hauck wrote: > >> I am from the old days of helicopters, mostly two blades, except >> the CH-47 Chinook, which had two each three blade main rotors. >> >> However, today things have changed a bit. Most have gone to >> ridgid rotor, hingeless, multiblade main rotors of at least 4 >> blades... > > Yes, but I suspect the multi blades are for space or > controllability reasons, not aerodynamic efficiency. > > -Dana > > -- > I love my country, but I fear my government. > > ________________________________ Message 47 ____________________________________ Time: 08:02:39 PM PST US From: "Ron @ KFHU" Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. Okay fine, however that statement could also apply using your reasoning to a multi blade prop of equal volume as to one of less blades with the same total airfoil volume. ================================================= ---- Dana Hague wrote: ============ At 09:21 PM 5/31/2009, Ron @ KFHU wrote: >The fact though is that propulsion is not by and large a consequence >of throwing the air back to create high pressure behind the prop to Push >it forward, that is false... The thrust produced by a propeller is equal to the mass flow rate multiplied by the change in velocity. Remember Newton's laws: For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. The propeller is pulling the plane forward; thus the propeller must be pushing the air back with equal force. If you exert a force on the air (or anything!) it will accelerate (that's the change in velocity). I didn't say that the velocity change is the _cause_ of the thrust, you could just as easily say that the velocity change is caused by the thrust, but it's an essential part of the picture. Just like wing lift, you can describe it by downwash and Newton's law or by Bernoulli's principle and air velocities and pressure distribution, but they're just two different ways of describing and calculating the same phenomenon. Using one description or method doesn't mean the other is incorrect. -Dana -- Black holes are where God is dividing by zero. -- kugelair.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.