Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:19 AM - Re: Re: sweltering summer (Tony Oldman)
2. 02:14 AM - Re: Re: Thank you (pj.ladd)
3. 02:22 AM - Re: Re: ASI (pj.ladd)
4. 03:46 AM - Re: Rotax 503 running problem (lucien)
5. 04:14 AM - Re: Re: Thank you (Dana Hague)
6. 04:14 AM - Re: Re: Thank you (Dana Hague)
7. 08:26 AM - Re: Thank you (dalewhelan)
8. 09:46 AM - Re: Rotax 503 running problem (dalewhelan)
9. 09:57 AM - Re: Rotax 503 running problem (lucien)
10. 10:20 AM - Re: A new Slant on living with your Rotax... (Blumax008@AOL.COM)
11. 10:41 AM - Re: Rotax 503 running problem (dalewhelan)
12. 11:13 AM - Re: Re: Thank you (pj.ladd)
13. 11:24 AM - Re: Re: Rotax 503 running problem (pj.ladd)
14. 11:54 AM - Re: A new Slant on living with your Rotax... (Richard Girard)
15. 11:59 AM - Re: Re: Thank you (pj.ladd)
16. 12:14 PM - Re: Re: ASI (pj.ladd)
17. 12:27 PM - Re: sweltering summer (lucien)
18. 01:46 PM - Re: Rotax 503 running problem (lucien)
19. 02:34 PM - Re: Re: Rotax Operating Parameters (Jack B. Hart)
20. 07:08 PM - Re: Rotax 503 running problem (dalewhelan)
21. 07:43 PM - Re: A new Slant on living with your Rotax... (dalewhelan)
22. 08:44 PM - Re: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. (dalewhelan)
23. 09:43 PM - Re: Re: Rotax 503 running problem (Ron @ KFHU)
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: sweltering summer |
Good here yesterday ,started at 30F and went to 44F, No wind ,no cloud, a
great day to fly. Work sucks even in winter
Downunder
MK111c
----- Original Message -----
From: "cristalclear13" <cristalclearwaters@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 1:39 AM
Subject: Kolb-List: Re: sweltering summer
> <cristalclearwaters@gmail.com>
>
> Did I hear right that some people in New York got snow yesterday? Can you
> send some of that cool weather down here to South Georgia please?
>
> --------
> Cristal Waters
> Kolb Mark II Twinstar
> Rotax 503 DCSI
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=248687#248687
>
>
>
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 |
|
I pushed the nose down and aimed at the base of the fence and flared when I
got there, as I cleared the fence I pushed forward, the plane nose over but
was done flying, I got the nose back up but it hit hard, no damage.>>
Hi Dale,
I once saw that done and like you, the pilot got away with it. Thinking
about it afterwards I came to the conclusion that continuing the glide, and
not diving was the better answer. At least in theory you cannot get higher
than you were by diving and pulling up. Where would the extra energy come
from? When you dive you exchange some of the potential energy stored in the
glider in the form of height for speed, and when you pull up you change it
back again from speed into height. Unfortunately there are losses involved.
Otherwise you would have invented a perpetual motion machine. In any case
the theoretical best you can do, disregarding any losses for the sake of
argument, is to get back to the height you were before, so you have gained
nothing. Of course you might expend all your energy getting back all the
height available and then the plane quits flying at that point and you just
fall over the fence, which is just about what happened to you.
Takes nerve to put the theory into practice and just sit there watching the
fence get higher. I think I might try to dive anyway.
I really should approach my flying in the same manner that you do. I am
afraid that I tend to think that whatever I have been doing up to now has
kept me alive so thats enough. I know that its not but I am too old to
change my habits now.
Cheers
Pat
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 |
|
Hi Dana,
very neat job.
I envy you your ability to work in metal. I grew up in a timber yard and can
make a reasonable joint in wood but never had any metalwork training.
Welding and stuff is a mystery to me. I might just about make a soldered
joint if pushed but thats it.
Nevertheless I know a man who can do some stuff in metal and I might try
that if the other simpler suggestions for a mod to my piot don`t work.
Grotty weather day today. Just off to repair the wooden floor to my hangar
Thanks
Pat
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: Rotax 503 running problem |
dalewhelan wrote:
>
> With 90 hours on the plugs and a combustion chamber that is clean, my motor disagrees
with you, as do I.
Well, as you said you do have a lot to learn - I hope you learn it without having
to put down in a field when the fan stops turning. I'll have one more go here
and hope it takes. After that, it's your motor and your plane.
If you really have the mechanical experience you say you do, you know the value
of field experience with an engine - with the 503 we got lots of it, decades
in fact, and it all points to _50:1 only_, no other ratio when running premix.
More oil, especially at the level of 32:1, is taking your chances, much like the
suggestion of running 6500 rpm all the time.
But as I said, it's your plane and motor.
Good luck,
LS
--------
LS
Titan II SS
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=248872#248872
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 |
|
At 05:13 AM 6/18/2009, pj.ladd wrote:
>At least in theory you cannot get higher than you were by diving and
>pulling up. Where would the extra energy come from? When you dive you
>exchange some of the potential energy stored in the glider in the form of
>height for speed, and when you pull up you change it back again from
>speed into height. Unfortunately there are losses involved. Otherwise you
>would have invented a perpetual motion machine. In any case the
>theoretical best you can do, disregarding any losses for the sake of
>argument, is to get back to the height you were before...
Well, yes and no. You have some kinetic energy at first as well, so you
may be able to end up higher, but at a lower airspeed than when you started.
-Dana
--
Help, I've fallen up and I can't get down
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 |
|
At 12:02 AM 6/18/2009, dalewhelan wrote:
>
>It may sound funny but when I am short my first thought is to gain speed,
>I am not one to try to extend a glide.
Well, sure. The speed for best glide _angle_ is faster than the speed for
minimum _sink_. Also the speed for best glide angle over the ground if
you're flying into the wind is faster than if you're flying
downwind. This is especially true in slow aircraft like ours, where the
wind speed may be a significant fraction of our airsped.
-Dana
--
Help, I've fallen up and I can't get down
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 |
|
Most of the time I land into the wind. If I lower the nose I progress further over
the ground.
The example I was given many years ago was was something like this.
If you stall at 30 and have a 30 MPH headwind you will never make the field flying
at 30.
If you fly 45 into a 30 MPH headwind your chances are better.
--------
Dale Whelan
503 powered Firestar II
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=248909#248909
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Rotax 503 running problem |
[quote="lucien"]
dalewhelan wrote:
>
> With 90 hours on the plugs and a combustion chamber that is clean, my motor disagrees
with you, as do I.
You do know the 503 is a Dykes ring design right?
Of course I do
And that its primary use is on _airplanes_ not bikes?
Actually the primary use is low RPM boat motors and some motorcycles. Specifically
used because of the better sealing at low RPM because of the higher cylinder
contact surface area. While they have Less tendency to flutter at high RPM
than a conventional or Keystone ring They are not generally used in High RPM motors
due to the increased friction their surface area provides against the cylinder.
How many 503's have you run to TBO at 32:1?
None yet I got mine at TBO and have flown it 100 hours.
How many past TBO at 32:1?
I am 100 past TBOon my first 503 How many times have you had to tune a motor and
have it compared against the best tuners in America?
It'd be good to review your experience on this, could be very helpful to the rest
of us who've been hanging underneath this motor for years and years and been
doing it wrong all this time.
Sarcasm, something I have been told I am very good at, I have trouble not using
it myself. My grandma used to cut the ends off the roast before she cooked it,
so did my mom, mom did it because her mom did. Grandma did it to make it fit
in the pan. Not saying you are stupid or wrong, just saying there may be something
you do not know about.
You said you have a lot to learn
Thinking you know it all means the end of progress and to me the opportunity to
get taught the hard way that you don't know it all. - well, yeah, I'd say that
you do. And I hope you learn it without having to put down in a field when
the fan stops turning,
Funny, it seems that my background may be discomforting to you, The advice I get
is don't touch it you'll break it. Don't lean it you'll die. These same people
land and there plane won't restart hot using and electric starter. Mine starts
with one tug of the recoil started. In the morning I pull it 3 times and watch
them try to light off before the battery dies. They too have been hanging
under a 503 for many years. I found my flight instructors plane to be opening
the throttle only part way from the front, and I told him how to fix his charging
system. or advise someone else into doing the same. I'll have one more go
here and hope it takes. After that, it's your motor and your plane.
If you really have the mechanical experience you say you do,
That statement sounds like you are calling me a liar, hope you did not mean it
that way.
you know the value of field experience with an engine
There is much truth to what you say sadly I have seen many Harley mechanics that
think this way, my motor is so much different than any other motor that operates
on the suck squeeze bang blow method No one else but me can make the thing
run at all, ever notice how bad some of those sound? The fact is many people
working on motors are not mechanics and all they can really do is try to copy
what they think a mechanic does.
- with the 503 we got lots of it, decades in fact, and it all points to _50:1 only_,
no other ratio when running premix.
What ratios have you tried and what were your results? How did it do at 40:1 and
what specific problems did you have? What were the specific result of 60:1
More oil, especially at the level of 32:1, is taking chances you don't need to
take,
How so, what chances am I taking? The oil coking you mentioned in an earlier post
does not make sense to me, I have been told( By a technical service manager
at American Suzuki and a former Spectro employee) that oil coking was a result
of high oil temps, they had a problem with it when people left air cooled ATVs
idling for long period of time. The temperature the hit were nowhere close
to what a 503 sees.
much like the suggestion of running 6500 rpm all the time.
I read that post and you may have been in a hurry when you quoted it, you left
out how long he said to run it for, the time was 5 minutes, not all the time.
When you asked how long he had at 6,500 I thought about my limited time flying
and how I would answer that. My answer is about 300 takeoffs X 1 minute and maybe
about 100 of those at X about 4 minutes so about 700 minutes. I also thought
who would log max power time?
But it's your plane and motor.
This sounds like racing to me, I pay for all the choices I make no matter whose
advice I take, that is exactly why I experiment and test and learn and practice.
Let's all be careful out there including where we get our advice.
Many people think racer have a death wish, news flash many racers think that of
pilots. Both disciplines are very safety conscious, those who are not die, some
of those who are die too. Believe it or not I am safety conscious. While a
friend of mine calls me Mr Safety I am always trying to improve my safety. even
though my ballast does not like it, I always fly solo after working on my plane,
2 reasons, one is an FAR, the other is experience. When we were in Monument
Valley my ballast wanted a ride, the density altitude was higher than I had
taken off with her before so I had to evaluate the planes performance first.
I lean my motor out and people accuse me of trying to go faster (because of my
racing background I guess?), the reality is I don't want to run out of gas on
a cross country, lower fuel burn gives me a little insurance, too rich fouls
plugs, and I want to climb even if I am in sink.
As a side note, when I said I was going to Missouri to get my plane in July and
fly it back people told me it was a bad idea, nobody told me why. I now know
why. Another pilot/instructor/FBO voiced concerns until he talked and flew with
me. He still had concerns but was more comfortable.
Good luck,
Thanks for the reply and I hope I am not boring, or offending anyone.
--------
Dale Whelan
503 powered Firestar II
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=248923#248923
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: Rotax 503 running problem |
[quote="dalewhelan"]
lucien wrote:
>
>
> How many 503's have you run to TBO at 32:1?
> None yet I got mine at TBO and have flown it 100 hours.
>
That's what I figured. Let us know what your results are when you _do_ get a little
more experience with this motor.
Till then, folks, Caveat Emptor.
LS
--------
LS
Titan II SS
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=248931#248931
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: | Re: A new Slant on living with your Rotax... |
Just read the post / battle between Dale & whomever he's battling with.
I can't believe all this. I started flying ultralight aircraft in the
summer of '78 with a Terror-Dactyl (no canard) with a 22hp Sachs single banger.
Good motor. Somehow I've gotten along & stayed alive all that time without
BRSs too. 31 years & not a single expensive BRS purchase or expensive
repack.
Fast forward to 2009. I own a Trike for towing hang gliders with a 503, a
half partnership in a Phantom with a 503, a Kolb with a 503 & a SeaWing
Trike with a 582...only because it came with one.
What I'm getting at is that I can't believe all this incredibly complicated
technical talk you guys are doing. I fly the pee-living crap out of all my
motors & rarely do anything to them except change the plugs. And what the
hell is a TBO? Who put that imaginary time limit on it? Rotax wants you to
do it so you'll buy more parts that you "think" you need.
Do me a favor...before you go flying next time, stand close to your motor
and ask it this question..."How many hours do you have on you?" You probably
won't get an answer. The reason is that it doesn't know & can't speak
English. It has no idea.
My Trike, while towing hang gliders, flies WIDE-ASS OPEN at 6500rpm for the
entire flight up to (usually) 2,500 feet & has been wide open up to 5,500
feet. My motor has over 1,600 hours on it & is still going strong with a
solid crank. I've replaced both pistons & rings once & decarboned it 4
times. That's it & that's the truth. It'll be 12 years old come September.
My only 582 was on my Full Lotus equipped Maxair & it went 1,000 hours
(running at 6,000rpm+ most of that time) before I sold it to a guy in
California who wrecked it in the Pacific friggin' Ocean. The 582 is a good motor
too, it's just a pain in the ass to work with...anti-freeze, hoses,
radiators...for what? 12 or so extra horsepower? Try working on that damn thing
in
the field.
I really can only give you younger guys my years of experience & this
simple sentence of advice...Fly the damn things & forget all the bullshit you
read on the internet.
**************Dell Days of Deals! June 15-24 - A New Deal Everyday!
ad.doubleclick.net%2Fclk%3B215692163%3B38015526%3Be)
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: Rotax 503 running problem |
I have read many posts, many helpful. It is sad to think that some one with your
experience and background habitually expresses himself in a critical, dismissive,
and belittling manner.
When you do this fewer people want to hear from you.
I have noticed a couple of people on this site. John is one, I even met him briefly
at Monument Valley this year. He came over and said hi, he talked with Greg
about his nose gear Firestar, He took local kids for rides, he tries to help
us newbies on this forum. He seems like a kind and respectable man. I read posts
where it looked like you twisted what he said and ridiculed him. I expected
you to do the same with me and you seem to have fulfilled that promise. I like
it when people try to help others, I am disappointed when I see criticism
offered when help is asked for. It is a shame that with your greater life experience
and greater flying experience that I longer wish to hear what you have
to say. You probably have a lot to offer and could be a great mentor, I think
you prefer not to do that. Please don't offer me your type of help any longer.
--------
Dale Whelan
503 powered Firestar II
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=248941#248941
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 |
|
so you may be able to end up higher, but at a lower airspeed than when you
started.>>
Hi Dana,
thats why I said "disregarding other losses" or words to that effect.
Cheers
Pat
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: | Re: Rotax 503 running problem |
503 we got lots of it, decades in fact, and it all points to _50:1 only_, no
other ratio when running premix. >>
Why do some pilots always disagree with the manufacturer? You would have
though that it was a safe assumption that the makers have data at their
fingertips which is not generally available to the average pilot. They have
the correlated results of every engine they have ever made. Even the most
enthusiastic pilot has only his own experience or maybe `say so` gleaned
from a local `expert`.
>From some of the posts it seems that there are pilots constantly changing
jets, renewing carb. needles, leaning the settings etc. Why not just leave
well alone.
Running an engine with lower oil in the mix strikes me as being foolish.
What is the object? Saving money?
Some people are just of a nature that they love pulling engines apart and
experimenting. Fair enough, its a lot of fun if you are that way inclined
but I don`t think that individual experience outweighs the accumulated info.
which a manufacturer has.
Cheers
Pat
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: | Re: A new Slant on living with your Rotax... |
Bravo!
Rick
*Never forget 2/3 of BRS is BS*
do not archive
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 12:13 PM, <Blumax008@aol.com> wrote:
> Just read the post / battle between Dale & whomever he's battling with.
>
> I can't believe all this. I started flying ultralight aircraft in the
> summer of '78 with a Terror-Dactyl (no canard) with a 22hp Sachs single
> banger. Good motor. Somehow I've gotten along & stayed alive all that
> time without BRSs too. 31 years & not a single expensive BRS purchase or
> expensive repack.
>
> Fast forward to 2009. I own a Trike for towing hang gliders with a 503, a
> half partnership in a Phantom with a 503, a Kolb with a 503 & a SeaWing
> Trike with a 582...only because it came with one.
>
> What I'm getting at is that I can't believe all this incredibly complicated
> technical talk you guys are doing. I fly the pee-living crap out of all my
> motors & rarely do anything to them except change the plugs. And what the
> hell is a TBO? Who put that imaginary time limit on it? Rotax wants you to
> do it so you'll buy more parts that you "think" you need.
>
> Do me a favor...before you go flying next time, stand close to your motor
> and ask it this question..."How many hours do you have on you?" You probably
> won't get an answer. The reason is that it doesn't know & can't speak
> English. It has no idea.
>
> My Trike, while towing hang gliders, flies WIDE-ASS OPEN at 6500rpm for the
> entire flight up to (usually) 2,500 feet & has been wide open up to 5,500
> feet. My motor has over 1,600 hours on it & is still going strong with a
> solid crank. I've replaced both pistons & rings once & decarboned it 4
> times. That's it & that's the truth. It'll be 12 years old come September.
>
> My only 582 was on my Full Lotus equipped Maxair & it went 1,000 hours
> (running at 6,000rpm+ most of that time) before I sold it to a guy in
> California who wrecked it in the Pacific friggin' Ocean. The 582 is a good
> motor too, it's just a pain in the ass to work with...anti-freeze, hoses,
> radiators...for what? 12 or so extra horsepower? Try working on that damn
> thing in the field.
>
> I really can only give you younger guys my years of experience & this
> simple sentence of advice...Fly the damn things & forget all the bullshit
> you read on the internet.
>
> ------------------------------
> Dell Days of Deals! June 15-24 - A New Deal Everyday!<http:%2F%2Fad.doubleclick.net%2Fclk%3B215692163%3B38015526%3Be>
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
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 |
|
If you stall at 30 and have a 30 MPH headwind you will never make the field
flying at 30. >>
Don`t understand. What has stalling to do with it?
Cheers
Pat
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 |
|
Aircraft Spruce lists a couple of the single tube designs,>>
Thanks Bill.
Pat
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: sweltering summer |
aoldman(at)xtra.co.nz wrote:
> Good here yesterday ,started at 30F and went to 44F, No wind ,no cloud, a
> great day to fly. Work sucks even in winter
>
> Downunder
> MK111c
> ---
The monsoon season is almost upon us here. Even with that and the stronger winds
and convective activity, I don't miss that heat down on the gulf coast where
I lived the last 30 years.
Only other bummer is the density altitude. Back when I had my FSII, my max climb
rate was only about 400fpm in 10F temperatures. On a summer morning or evening,
300 was about all I could do. That was with the 503 3.47:1 C box cranking
that big ol warp drive taper tip too......
LS
--------
LS
Titan II SS
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=248973#248973
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: Rotax 503 running problem |
pj.ladd(at)btinternet.com wrote:
>
> well alone.
> Running an engine with lower oil in the mix strikes me as being foolish.
> What is the object? Saving money?
>
> Some people are just of a nature that they love pulling engines apart and
> experimenting. Fair enough, its a lot of fun if you are that way inclined
> but I don`t think that individual experience outweighs the accumulated info.
> which a manufacturer has.
>
> Cheers
>
> Pat
It's worth noting that the 50:1 requirement is originally Rotax's requirement and
it still is.
There are some mistakes here and there in the 2-stroke manuals (such as the infamous
max CHT limit) but the rest is reliable for sure, including the premix oil
ratio.
I like to let the other guys do the experimenting as I generally can't afford the
mishaps, dealing with FSDO and FAA, etc., that come from going it on your own
and ignoring correct advice. So I just tow the line on what we know to be the
most reliable running configuration, rpms, installation, etc. and fly instead....
LS
--------
LS
Titan II SS
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=249004#249004
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: Rotax Operating Parameters |
At 02:31 PM 6/17/09 -0700, you wrote:
>I am interested in Kolbs that are 103 compliant. I was totally impressed
with a Firefly I saw at Brians Ranch fly-in. Just looking at pictures the
Ultrastar caught my eye. I want something to learn on and not die too
soon.
>
GeoB,
You may want to check out:
http://www.jackbhart.com/firefly/fireflylegal.html
It is a page describing the design parameters that determine if an aircraft
can be flown as an ultralight vehicle. There are two bits of info that are
difficult to dismiss and they are empty weight and fuel tank volume. If you
can meet these two requirements and you can calculate enough drag and low
enough wing loading, the air craft is declared an ultralight, no matter how
fast it will fly or at what speed it will stall.
If the UltraStar can meet the empty weight limit, surely it has more drag
that a FireFly.
For your interest, I invite you to look at:
http://www.jackbhart.com/firefly/firefly.html
and:
http://www.jackbhart.com/firefly/fireflyindex.html
Jack B. Hart FF004
Winchester, IN
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: Rotax 503 running problem |
Not that this was the intent of this thread but, Is there anyone on this board
other than myself that has tried running more than the recommended amount of
oil and willing to share with me what they found.
Just for fun, even though I have no inclination to do so, is there anyone on this
board that has run less oil than 50:1, ( I once saw a company claim you could
run their oil at 150:1) If so would you share your results with me?
--------
Dale Whelan
503 powered Firestar II
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=249046#249046
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: | Re: A new Slant on living with your Rotax... |
Sorry if I wasted your time, I just have a love for making motors work. I can drop
it or start a new thread called big egos, childish behavior if you like.
--------
Dale Whelan
503 powered Firestar II
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=249049#249049
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: WRT M3X prop boom measurements. |
After reading all the posts I really don't know anything about props.
I think the next prop I buy will be another 2 blade ground adjustable IVO.
It is just so easy to adjust.
I have a Firestar II with a 503 DCDI
--------
Dale Whelan
503 powered Firestar II
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=249057#249057
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 |
|
From: | "Ron @ KFHU" <captainron1@cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: Rotax 503 running problem |
To oil ratio I think giving it a bit more oil will improve its reliability. There
is of course a point where the oil is detrimental. For example the octane level
may (?) start dropping and rapidly ( I need more data on that though, as
the oil may have somewhat of a retardant effect on burning efficiency thus preventing
detonation), burning efficiency starts falling and so on. But with some
experimentation I suppose I can find that point just before the decreased ratio
is becoming detrimental. At 35 / 1 the Cyuna seems happy so far. I may try
later to 30 to 1 and see if its good. I guess I could try 15-1 on the ground
only and see what happens just for the curiosity of it, but oil is more expensive
than 91 octane so I guess you can wonder if there is any point to it, to make
more smoke and less power. Once you reach the point where the motor gets all
the lube it needs then we ain't doing it anymore good tossing more oil into
it.
We just need to be careful.
Ron @ KFHU
=========================
---- dalewhelan <dalewhelan@earthlink.net> wrote:
============
Not that this was the intent of this thread but, Is there anyone on this board
other than myself that has tried running more than the recommended amount of
oil and willing to share with me what they found.
Just for fun, even though I have no inclination to do so, is there anyone on this
board that has run less oil than 50:1, ( I once saw a company claim you could
run their oil at 150:1) If so would you share your results with me?
--------
Dale Whelan
503 powered Firestar II
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=249046#249046
--
kugelair.com
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! --
|