Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:12 AM - Re: Re: Vortex Generators (zeprep251@aol.com)
2. 04:12 AM - Re: New tailwires installed (Richard Girard)
3. 05:37 AM - Re: Re: Vortex Generators (robert bean)
4. 05:49 AM - Re: New tailwires installed (robert bean)
5. 05:53 AM - Re: New tailwires installed (zeprep251@aol.com)
6. 06:04 AM - Re: Re: Vortex Generators (zeprep251@aol.com)
7. 06:04 AM - Re: New tailwires installed (Richard Girard)
8. 06:12 AM - Re: New tailwires installed (Richard Girard)
9. 06:48 AM - Re: New tailwires installed (John Hauck)
10. 06:51 AM - Re: New tailwires installed (John Hauck)
11. 07:27 AM - Re: New tailwires installed (Mike Welch)
12. 08:15 AM - Re: Vortex Generators (Watkinsdw)
13. 08:34 AM - Re: Vortex Generators (Thom Riddle)
14. 09:33 AM - Re: Vortex Generators (Watkinsdw)
15. 10:09 AM - Re: Vortex Generators (Thom Riddle)
16. 11:53 AM - Kolb FireStar Snow Skis/Plans (WhiskeyVictor36@aol.com)
17. 01:20 PM - New Videos to watch.... (ces308)
18. 01:54 PM - Finished gascolator (Richard Girard)
19. 02:18 PM - Re: New tailwires installed (neilsenrm@comcast.net)
20. 02:21 PM - Re: Finished gascolator (ces308)
21. 03:13 PM - Re: turnbuckles and aircraft hardware (possums)
22. 03:29 PM - Re: New tailwires installed (Jimmy Young)
23. 05:24 PM - VGs and Manuvering Speed (gliderx5@comcast.net)
24. 05:55 PM - Re: VGs and Manuvering Speed (ces308)
25. 06:51 PM - Re: Re: VGs and Manuvering Speed (gliderx5@comcast.net)
26. 07:08 PM - Re: VGs and Manuvering Speed (ces308)
27. 07:34 PM - Re: Met new Kolb owner at Vidalia EAA Fly-In (Kip)
28. 07:38 PM - Re: VGs and Manuvering Speed (ces308)
29. 07:40 PM - Re: VGs and Manuvering Speed (ces308)
30. 07:41 PM - Re: Re: VGs and Manuvering Speed (Beauford T)
31. 07:44 PM - Re: Re: VGs and Manuvering Speed (Richard Girard)
32. 07:54 PM - Re: Re: VGs and Manuvering Speed (Mike Welch)
33. 08:08 PM - Re: Re: VGs and Manuvering Speed (Mike Welch)
34. 08:09 PM - Re: Re: VGs and Manuvering Speed (gliderx5@comcast.net)
35. 08:37 PM - Re: Re: VGs and Manuvering Speed (gliderx5@comcast.net)
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: Vortex Generators |
Robert,
With the full enclosure on the MK-3 the air came back up the tube like someones
back there with a leaf blower.I made a plug out of 4" thick foam rubber about
a inch larger than the tube dia.,made some slits for the cables and inserted
it at the rear of the tube just ahead of the elevator control.No more fumes.
?? G.Aman MK3-C Jabiru 2200A
-----Original Message-----
From: robert bean <slyck@frontiernet.net>
Sent: Sat, Sep 12, 2009 9:48 pm
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Vortex Generators
?
Some of us old dogs just have fleas. D'ya think if I change the sheets on the
bed this year it would cut down on the little red spots I've been getting??
?
A recent flight of some duration, that is using more than one jug, left my lungs
tasting like sump vapors for a couple days.?
One reason is I have been drawing more power from the puny suzuki with the tweaking
over time. More power, more vapors.?
(Egad, Myrtle has the vapors!)?
?
I figure they are migrating back up the boom tube from the tail. I tried first
to block the front with semi-rigid foam.?
-Too unwieldy. I quit in drunken disgust.?
Today I stuck in some 2" thick soft, squishy stuff, cut in two with slits for the
cables. Installed at the front since?
I figure pressure would keep them there. Gave it a test ride after. I didn't
expect a 15 minute ride to confirm anything fume-wise?
but the foam is staying there ok.?
?
We will see. (seafoam?)?
?
Maybe VGs someday.?
BB?
?
On 12, Sep 2009, at 9:02 PM, Beauford T wrote:?
?
>?
> you just now figured this out ????
>?
>> Mike?
>?
>?
> Yes. I have been off the list for over a year, there's a lot I have > missed.?
> Besides, talking one on one to Beauford carries a lot of > credibility with me,
and?
> based on what he said, I have changed my mind. Even old dogs > sometimes learn
new?
> tricks.?
>?
> Richard Pike?
> MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)?
>?
> ------------------------?
>?
> .....WOOF...!?
>?
> beauford?
> FF-076?
> Do not archive?
>?
>?
>?
>?
>?
>?
>?
>?
>?
>?
?
?
?
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: New tailwires installed |
Jimmy, I thought long and hard about whether to post this to the forum or to
contact you directly. I decided to go to the forum because I believe this is
a safety related issue.I believe you need to redo your cables.
Here's why: This is from FAA publication 43.13 1B "Acceptable Methods,
Techniques, and Practices - Aircraft Inspection and Repair", Chapter 7.
Aircraft hardware, control cables, and turnbuckles, Page 33:
c. Thimble-Eye Splice. Before undertaking a thimble-eye splice, initially
position the cable so the end will extend slightly beyond the sleeve, as the
sleeve will elongate somewhat when it is compressed. If the cable end is
inside the sleeve, the splice may not hold the full strength of the cable. *It
is desirable that the oval sleeve be placed in close proximity to the
thimble points, so that when compressed, the sleeve will contact the
thimble as shown in figure 7-14. The sharp ends of the thimble may be cut
off before being used; however, make certain the thimble is firmly secured
in the cable loop after the splice has been completed. When using a sleeve
requiring three compressions, make the center compression first, the
compression next to the thimble second, and the one farthest from
the thimble last.*
(Note: Bolding and italicizing done by me for emphasis)
Compare figure 7-14 with the second photo from your post. When you installed
the Never Kinks you failed to reclose the end of the thimbles. This has
provided a place for the end of the thimble to wear the cable strands and it
is almost completely uninspectable. There is also a danger that the cable
can flex and come off the thimble entirely so that the cable will ride
directly on the hole in the tang.
Never Kinks: I would not use them. They were created originally for the
generation of hang gliders (circa 1976 / 77) with pop open setup that pulled
all the cables taught when the frame was fully extended. If the cable was
twisted on the tang the thimble would get kinked, hence the name. This is
not a concern on the tail of the Kolb because you must connect the lower
wires at the base of the vertical stabilizer. If a thimble is twisted it
becomes immediately obvious as it is impossible to assemble the tail until
the twist is removed. The problem is, like the open thimble they create an
uninspectable area in the cable assembly in the area John H. warns about,
the contact area of the thimble and the tang.
Rick Girard
On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 8:08 PM, Jimmy Young <jdy100@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> Kolbers,
>
> I installed all new tailwires after I found my cracked tang recently. The
> tangs are 12 GA single-hole stainless with a "never-kink" bushing and the
> cable is 3/32 stainless. I got the supplies from Air-Tech in New Orleans.
>
> The thicker tangs should hopefully never be a problem. I'm not sure what
> the thickness is on the 4 hole tangs, but these are about 50% thicker. I
> have never done any cable rigging before, and used a "split-bolt" to hold
> the cables after I tightened them up prior to swedging the nico-press
> connectors. I did have the turnbuckles on before, but now I don't. I'll have
> to keep an eye on them to watch for any stretching or loosening of the
> cables, as I'm not sure if they tend to stretch over time.
>
> We had a much needed rain out today here in the Houston area, so it was a
> good day to do maintenance. Also changed my break-in oil on the HKS, and may
> get to fly some tomorrow weather permitting.
>
> --------
> Jimmy Young
> FS II, HKS 700
> N7043P
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262735#262735
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/dscn0501_391.jpg
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/dscn0505_107.jpg
>
>
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Vortex Generators |
Gary, the aft end probably makes more sense than where I plugged it.
-for one you reduce access for critters to climb in.
For two, the gear leg sockets being welded onto the front ring makes
it complicated to use that location.
BB
On 13, Sep 2009, at 7:11 AM, zeprep251@aol.com wrote:
> Robert,
> With the full enclosure on the MK-3 the air came back up the tube
> like someones back there with a leaf blower.I made a plug out of 4"
> thick foam rubber about a inch larger than the tube dia.,made some
> slits for the cables and inserted it at the rear of the tube just
> ahead of the elevator control.No more fumes.
> G.Aman MK3-C Jabiru 2200A
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: robert bean <slyck@frontiernet.net>
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Sat, Sep 12, 2009 9:48 pm
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Vortex Generators
>
>
> Some of us old dogs just have fleas. D'ya think if I change the
> sheets on the bed this year it would cut down on the little red
> spots I've been getting?
>
> A recent flight of some duration, that is using more than one jug,
> left my lungs tasting like sump vapors for a couple days.
> One reason is I have been drawing more power from the puny suzuki
> with the tweaking over time. More power, more vapors.
> (Egad, Myrtle has the vapors!)
>
> I figure they are migrating back up the boom tube from the tail. I
> tried first to block the front with semi-rigid foam.
> -Too unwieldy. I quit in drunken disgust.
> Today I stuck in some 2" thick soft, squishy stuff, cut in two with
> slits for the cables. Installed at the front since
> I figure pressure would keep them there. Gave it a test ride after.
> I didn't expect a 15 minute ride to confirm anything fume-wise
> but the foam is staying there ok.
>
> We will see. (seafoam?)
>
> Maybe VGs someday.
> BB
>
> On 12, Sep 2009, at 9:02 PM, Beauford T wrote:
>
> <beauford173@verizon.net>
> >
> > you just now figured this out ???
> >
> >> Mike
> >
> >
> > Yes. I have been off the list for over a year, there's a lot I
> have > missed.
> > Besides, talking one on one to Beauford carries a lot of >
> credibility with me, and
> > based on what he said, I have changed my mind. Even old dogs >
> sometimes learn new
> > tricks.
> >
> > Richard Pike
> > MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
> >
> > ------------------------
> >
> > .....WOOF...!
> >
> > beauford
> > FF-076
> > Do not archive
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
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: New tailwires installed |
Rick, quite right. As an A&P I should have caught that too. _I
didn't look close at the second pic.
It won't fail today or tomorrow but it will wear faster with the nico
not snug to the thimble.
If and when I redo my tail cables I want to create tangs that don't
have a sharp wear edge on them.
BB
On 13, Sep 2009, at 7:11 AM, Richard Girard wrote:
> Jimmy, I thought long and hard about whether to post this to the
> forum or to contact you directly. I decided to go to the forum
> because I believe this is a safety related issue.
> I believe you need to redo your cables.
> Here's why: This is from FAA publication 43.13 1B "Acceptable
> Methods, Techniques, and Practices - Aircraft Inspection and
> Repair", Chapter 7. Aircraft hardware, control cables, and
> turnbuckles, Page 33:
>
> c. Thimble-Eye Splice. Before undertaking a thimble-eye splice,
> initially position the cable so the end will extend slightly beyond
> the sleeve, as the sleeve will elongate somewhat when it is
> compressed. If the cable end is inside the sleeve, the splice may
> not hold the full strength of the cable. It is desirable that the
> oval sleeve be placed in close proximity to the thimble points, so
> that when compressed, the sleeve will contact the thimble as shown
> in figure 7-14. The sharp ends of the thimble may be cut off before
> being used; however, make certain the thimble is firmly secured in
> the cable loop after the splice has been completed. When using a
> sleeve requiring three compressions, make the center compression
> first, the compression next to the thimble second, and the one
> farthest from the thimble last.
> (Note: Bolding and italicizing done by me for emphasis)
>
> Compare figure 7-14 with the second photo from your post. When you
> installed the Never Kinks you failed to reclose the end of the
> thimbles. This has provided a place for the end of the thimble to
> wear the cable strands and it is almost completely uninspectable.
> There is also a danger that the cable can flex and come off the
> thimble entirely so that the cable will ride directly on the hole
> in the tang.
> Never Kinks: I would not use them. They were created originally for
> the generation of hang gliders (circa 1976 / 77) with pop open
> setup that pulled all the cables taught when the frame was fully
> extended. If the cable was twisted on the tang the thimble would
> get kinked, hence the name. This is not a concern on the tail of
> the Kolb because you must connect the lower wires at the base of
> the vertical stabilizer. If a thimble is twisted it becomes
> immediately obvious as it is impossible to assemble the tail until
> the twist is removed. The problem is, like the open thimble they
> create an uninspectable area in the cable assembly in the area John
> H. warns about, the contact area of the thimble and the tang.
>
> Rick Girard
>
>
> On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 8:08 PM, Jimmy Young <jdy100@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
> Kolbers,
>
> I installed all new tailwires after I found my cracked tang
> recently. The tangs are 12 GA single-hole stainless with a "never-
> kink" bushing and the cable is 3/32 stainless. I got the supplies
> from Air-Tech in New Orleans.
>
> The thicker tangs should hopefully never be a problem. I'm not sure
> what the thickness is on the 4 hole tangs, but these are about 50%
> thicker. I have never done any cable rigging before, and used a
> "split-bolt" to hold the cables after I tightened them up prior to
> swedging the nico-press connectors. I did have the turnbuckles on
> before, but now I don't. I'll have to keep an eye on them to watch
> for any stretching or loosening of the cables, as I'm not sure if
> they tend to stretch over time.
>
> We had a much needed rain out today here in the Houston area, so it
> was a good day to do maintenance. Also changed my break-in oil on
> the HKS, and may get to fly some tomorrow weather permitting.
>
> --------
> Jimmy Young
> FS II, HKS 700
> N7043P
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262735#262735
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/dscn0501_391.jpg
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/dscn0505_107.jpg
>
>
> ==========
> arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
> ==========
> http://forums.matronics.com
> ==========
> le, List Admin.
> ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ==========
>
>
> <AC 43.13 1b figure 7-14.jpg>
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: New tailwires installed |
Good catch Rick,
?Looks like the Never Kinks hold the thimbles open at the tips,so its difficult
to get the tips together at? the sleeves.
???????? G.Aman
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Girard <aslsa.rng@gmail.com>
Sent: Sun, Sep 13, 2009 7:11 am
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: New tailwires installed
Jimmy, I thought long and hard about whether to post this to the forum or to contact
you directly. I decided to go to the forum because I believe this is a safety
related issue.
I believe you need to redo your cables.?
Here's why: This is from FAA publication 43.13 1B "Acceptable Methods, Techniques,
and Practices - Aircraft Inspection and Repair",?Chapter 7. Aircraft hardware,
control cables, and turnbuckles, Page 33:?
c. Thimble-Eye Splice. Before undertaking?a thimble-eye splice, initially position?the
cable so the end will extend slightly beyond?the sleeve, as the sleeve
will elongate?somewhat when it is compressed. If the cable?end is inside the
sleeve, the splice may not?hold the full strength of the cable. It is desirable?that
the oval sleeve be placed in close?proximity to the thimble points, so
that when?compressed, the sleeve will contact the thimble?as shown in figure 7-14.
The sharp ends of the?thimble may be cut off before being used;?however,
make certain the thimble is firmly?secured in the cable loop after the splice
has?been completed. When using a sleeve requiring?three compressions, make the
center compression?first, the compression next to the?thimble second, and the
one farthest from the?thimble last.
(Note: Bolding and italicizing done by me for emphasis)
Compare figure 7-14 with the second photo from your post. When you installed the
Never Kinks you failed to reclose the end of the thimbles. This has provided
a place for the end of the thimble to wear the cable strands and it is almost
completely uninspectable. There is also a danger that the cable can flex and
come off the thimble entirely so that the cable will ride directly on the hole
in the tang.
Never Kinks: I would not use them. They were created originally for the generation
of hang gliders (circa 1976 / 77) with pop open setup that pulled all the
cables taught when the frame was fully extended. If the cable was twisted on the
tang the thimble would get kinked, hence the name. This is not a concern on
the tail of the Kolb because you must connect the lower wires at the base of
the vertical stabilizer. If a thimble is twisted it becomes immediately obvious
as it is impossible to assemble the tail until the twist is removed. The problem
is, like the open thimble they create an uninspectable area in the cable
assembly in the area John H. warns about, the contact area of the thimble and
the tang.
Rick Girard
On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 8:08 PM, Jimmy Young <jdy100@comcast.net> wrote:
Kolbers,
I installed all new tailwires after I found my cracked tang recently. The tangs
are 12 GA single-hole stainless with a "never-kink" bushing and the cable is
3/32 stainless. I got the supplies from Air-Tech in New Orleans.
The thicker tangs should hopefully never be a problem. I'm not sure what the thickness
is on the 4 hole tangs, but these are about 50% thicker. I have never
done any cable rigging before, and used a "split-bolt" to hold the cables after
I tightened them up prior to swedging the nico-press connectors. I did have
the turnbuckles on before, but now I don't. I'll have to keep an eye on them to
watch for any stretching or loosening of the cables, as I'm not sure if they
tend to stretch over time.
We had a much needed rain out today here in the Houston area, so it was a good
day to do maintenance. Also changed my break-in oil on the HKS, and may get to
fly some tomorrow weather permitting.
--------
Jimmy Young
FS II, HKS 700
N7043P
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262735#262735
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/dscn0501_391.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/dscn0505_107.jpg
==========
arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
==========
http://forums.matronics.com
==========
le, List Admin.
="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Vortex Generators |
Robert,
?I think I used a 7" round paint can for a pattern on the foam then cut it on a
band saw.My first two attempts were less productive.
G.Aman
-----Original Message-----
From: robert bean <slyck@frontiernet.net>
Sent: Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:36 am
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Vortex Generators
Gary, the aft end probably makes more sense than where I plugged it. ?-for one
you reduce access for critters to climb in.
For two, the gear leg sockets being welded onto the front ring makes it complicated
to use that location.
BB
On 13, Sep 2009, at 7:11 AM, zeprep251@aol.com wrote:
Robert,
With the full enclosure on the MK-3 the air came back up the tube like someones
back there with a leaf blower.I made a plug out of 4" thick foam rubber about
a inch larger than the tube dia.,made some slits for the cables and inserted
it at the rear of the tube just ahead of the elevator control.No more fumes.
?? G.Aman MK3-C Jabiru 2200A
-----Original Message-----
From: robert bean <slyck@frontiernet.net>
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sat, Sep 12, 2009 9:48 pm
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Vortex Generators
?
Some of us old dogs just have fleas. D'ya think if I change the sheets on the
bed this year it would cut down on the little red spots I've been getting??
?
A recent flight of some duration, that is using more than one jug, left my lungs
tasting like sump vapors for a couple days.?
One reason is I have been drawing more power from the puny suzuki with the tweaking
over time. More power, more vapors.?
(Egad, Myrtle has the vapors!)?
?
I figure they are migrating back up the boom tube from the tail. I tried first
to block the front with semi-rigid foam.?
-Too unwieldy. I quit in drunken disgust.?
Today I stuck in some 2" thick soft, squishy stuff, cut in two with slits for
the cables. Installed at the front since?
I figure pressure would keep them there. Gave it a test ride after. I didn't
expect a 15 minute ride to confirm anything fume-wise?
but the foam is staying there ok.?
?
We will see. (seafoam?)?
?
Maybe VGs someday.?
BB?
?
On 12, Sep 2009, at 9:02 PM, Beauford T wrote:?
?
>?
> you just now figured this out ????
>?
>> Mike?
>?
>?
> Yes. I have been off the list for over a year, there's a lot I have > missed.?
> Besides, talking one on one to Beauford carries a lot of > credibility with
me, and?
> based on what he said, I have changed my mind. Even old dogs > sometimes learn
new?
> tricks.?
>?
> Richard Pike?
> MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)?
>?
> ------------------------?
>?
> .....WOOF...!?
>?
> beauford?
> FF-076?
> Do not archive?
>?
>?
>?
>?
>?
>?
>?
>?
>?
>?
?
?
?
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: New tailwires installed |
Bob, Years ago I used a sailboat tang on a glider I rewired. The tang had a
piece of tube swaged into one hole like a grommet so the contact surface
between tang and thimble was a broader area than just to edges of a hole.
Rick Girard
On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 7:48 AM, robert bean <slyck@frontiernet.net> wrote:
> Rick, quite right. As an A&P I should have caught that too. _I didn't
> look close at the second pic.It won't fail today or tomorrow but it will
> wear faster with the nico not snug to the thimble.
>
> If and when I redo my tail cables I want to create tangs that don't have a
> sharp wear edge on them.
> BB
>
>
> On 13, Sep 2009, at 7:11 AM, Richard Girard wrote:
>
> Jimmy, I thought long and hard about whether to post this to the forum or
> to contact you directly. I decided to go to the forum because I believe this
> is a safety related issue.I believe you need to redo your cables.
> Here's why: This is from FAA publication 43.13 1B "Acceptable Methods,
> Techniques, and Practices - Aircraft Inspection and Repair", Chapter 7.
> Aircraft hardware, control cables, and turnbuckles, Page 33:
>
> c. Thimble-Eye Splice. Before undertaking a thimble-eye splice, initially
> position the cable so the end will extend slightly beyond the sleeve, as the
> sleeve will elongate somewhat when it is compressed. If the cable end is
> inside the sleeve, the splice may not hold the full strength of the cable.
> *It is desirable that the oval sleeve be placed in close proximity to the
> thimble points, so that when compressed, the sleeve will contact the
> thimble as shown in figure 7-14. The sharp ends of the thimble may be cut
> off before being used; however, make certain the thimble is firmly secured
> in the cable loop after the splice has been completed. When using a sleeve
> requiring three compressions, make the center compression first, the
> compression next to the thimble second, and the one farthest from
> the thimble last.*
> (Note: Bolding and italicizing done by me for emphasis)
>
> Compare figure 7-14 with the second photo from your post. When you
> installed the Never Kinks you failed to reclose the end of the thimbles.
> This has provided a place for the end of the thimble to wear the cable
> strands and it is almost completely uninspectable. There is also a danger
> that the cable can flex and come off the thimble entirely so that the cable
> will ride directly on the hole in the tang.
> Never Kinks: I would not use them. They were created originally for the
> generation of hang gliders (circa 1976 / 77) with pop open setup that pulled
> all the cables taught when the frame was fully extended. If the cable was
> twisted on the tang the thimble would get kinked, hence the name. This is
> not a concern on the tail of the Kolb because you must connect the lower
> wires at the base of the vertical stabilizer. If a thimble is twisted it
> becomes immediately obvious as it is impossible to assemble the tail until
> the twist is removed. The problem is, like the open thimble they create an
> uninspectable area in the cable assembly in the area John H. warns about,
> the contact area of the thimble and the tang.
>
> Rick Girard
>
>
> On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 8:08 PM, Jimmy Young <jdy100@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> Kolbers,
>>
>> I installed all new tailwires after I found my cracked tang recently. The
>> tangs are 12 GA single-hole stainless with a "never-kink" bushing and the
>> cable is 3/32 stainless. I got the supplies from Air-Tech in New Orleans.
>>
>> The thicker tangs should hopefully never be a problem. I'm not sure what
>> the thickness is on the 4 hole tangs, but these are about 50% thicker. I
>> have never done any cable rigging before, and used a "split-bolt" to hold
>> the cables after I tightened them up prior to swedging the nico-press
>> connectors. I did have the turnbuckles on before, but now I don't. I'll have
>> to keep an eye on them to watch for any stretching or loosening of the
>> cables, as I'm not sure if they tend to stretch over time.
>>
>> We had a much needed rain out today here in the Houston area, so it was a
>> good day to do maintenance. Also changed my break-in oil on the HKS, and may
>> get to fly some tomorrow weather permitting.
>>
>> --------
>> Jimmy Young
>> FS II, HKS 700
>> N7043P
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262735#262735
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Attachments:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com//files/dscn0501_391.jpg
>> http://forums.matronics.com//files/dscn0505_107.jpg
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ==========
>> arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>> ==========
>> http://forums.matronics.com
>> ==========
>> le, List Admin.
>> ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> ==========
>>
>>
>>
>>
> <AC 43.13 1b figure 7-14.jpg>
>
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
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: New tailwires installed |
Two, two edges. I really need to get a better proof reader.
Rick
On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 8:03 AM, Richard Girard <aslsa.rng@gmail.com> wrote:
> Bob, Years ago I used a sailboat tang on a glider I rewired. The tang had a
> piece of tube swaged into one hole like a grommet so the contact surface
> between tang and thimble was a broader area than just to edges of a hole.
> Rick Girard
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 7:48 AM, robert bean <slyck@frontiernet.net>wrote:
>
>> Rick, quite right. As an A&P I should have caught that too. _I didn't
>> look close at the second pic.It won't fail today or tomorrow but it will
>> wear faster with the nico not snug to the thimble.
>>
>> If and when I redo my tail cables I want to create tangs that don't have a
>> sharp wear edge on them.
>> BB
>>
>>
>> On 13, Sep 2009, at 7:11 AM, Richard Girard wrote:
>>
>> Jimmy, I thought long and hard about whether to post this to the forum or
>> to contact you directly. I decided to go to the forum because I believe this
>> is a safety related issue. I believe you need to redo your cables.
>> Here's why: This is from FAA publication 43.13 1B "Acceptable Methods,
>> Techniques, and Practices - Aircraft Inspection and Repair", Chapter 7.
>> Aircraft hardware, control cables, and turnbuckles, Page 33:
>>
>> c. Thimble-Eye Splice. Before undertaking a thimble-eye splice, initially
>> position the cable so the end will extend slightly beyond the sleeve, as the
>> sleeve will elongate somewhat when it is compressed. If the cable end is
>> inside the sleeve, the splice may not hold the full strength of the cable.
>> *It is desirable that the oval sleeve be placed in close proximity to the
>> thimble points, so that when compressed, the sleeve will contact the
>> thimble as shown in figure 7-14. The sharp ends of the thimble may be cut
>> off before being used; however, make certain the thimble is firmly secured
>> in the cable loop after the splice has been completed. When using a sleeve
>> requiring three compressions, make the center compression first, the
>> compression next to the thimble second, and the one farthest from
>> the thimble last.*
>> (Note: Bolding and italicizing done by me for emphasis)
>>
>> Compare figure 7-14 with the second photo from your post. When you
>> installed the Never Kinks you failed to reclose the end of the thimbles.
>> This has provided a place for the end of the thimble to wear the cable
>> strands and it is almost completely uninspectable. There is also a danger
>> that the cable can flex and come off the thimble entirely so that the cable
>> will ride directly on the hole in the tang.
>> Never Kinks: I would not use them. They were created originally for the
>> generation of hang gliders (circa 1976 / 77) with pop open setup that pulled
>> all the cables taught when the frame was fully extended. If the cable was
>> twisted on the tang the thimble would get kinked, hence the name. This is
>> not a concern on the tail of the Kolb because you must connect the lower
>> wires at the base of the vertical stabilizer. If a thimble is twisted it
>> becomes immediately obvious as it is impossible to assemble the tail until
>> the twist is removed. The problem is, like the open thimble they create an
>> uninspectable area in the cable assembly in the area John H. warns about,
>> the contact area of the thimble and the tang.
>>
>> Rick Girard
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 8:08 PM, Jimmy Young <jdy100@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Kolbers,
>>>
>>> I installed all new tailwires after I found my cracked tang recently. The
>>> tangs are 12 GA single-hole stainless with a "never-kink" bushing and the
>>> cable is 3/32 stainless. I got the supplies from Air-Tech in New Orleans.
>>>
>>> The thicker tangs should hopefully never be a problem. I'm not sure what
>>> the thickness is on the 4 hole tangs, but these are about 50% thicker. I
>>> have never done any cable rigging before, and used a "split-bolt" to hold
>>> the cables after I tightened them up prior to swedging the nico-press
>>> connectors. I did have the turnbuckles on before, but now I don't. I'll have
>>> to keep an eye on them to watch for any stretching or loosening of the
>>> cables, as I'm not sure if they tend to stretch over time.
>>>
>>> We had a much needed rain out today here in the Houston area, so it was a
>>> good day to do maintenance. Also changed my break-in oil on the HKS, and may
>>> get to fly some tomorrow weather permitting.
>>>
>>> --------
>>> Jimmy Young
>>> FS II, HKS 700
>>> N7043P
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>
>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262735#262735
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Attachments:
>>>
>>> http://forums.matronics.com//files/dscn0501_391.jpg
>>> http://forums.matronics.com//files/dscn0505_107.jpg
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ==========
>>> arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>>> ==========
>>> http://forums.matronics.com
>>> ==========
>>> le, List Admin.
>>> ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>> ==========
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> <AC 43.13 1b figure 7-14.jpg>
>>
>>
>> *
>>
>> *
>>
>>
>
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: New tailwires installed |
Good Morning Gang:
It is the concensus of the Rock House Flying Club, me and Larry C, that
we would fly with Jimmy Y's tail wires.
Not to be contrary, I agree his terminals don't agree entirely with the
AC. However, I don't think they are going anywhere any time soon. In
fact, I think where will be reduced if the Never Kink reduces vibration
on the thimble and tang.
I missed Jimmy's photos initially. The main thing I would have done
differently would be to make the bends as close to the bolt and washer
as possible to reduce side bending forces. I like the cable to pull as
straight from the point of attachment as possible.
Again, my own personal opinion and worth what you all paid for it.
john h
mkIII
Rock House, Oregon, Flying Club (among other things) ;-)
Jimmy, I thought long and hard about whether to post this to the forum
or to contact you directly. I decided to go to the forum because I
believe this is a safety related issue.
I believe you need to redo your cables.
Rick Girard
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: New tailwires installed |
Hey Gang:
Shoulda proofed my previous. "where" should have been "wear".
john h
mkIII
any time soon. In fact, I think where will be reduced if the
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: | New tailwires installed |
No problem=2C John. We'll let this one slide=2C but watch it! (just kiddi
ng....weekend humor)
BTW=2C I concur that although the cable end isn't constructed exactly as it
should have been=2C in my opinion I wouldn't go to the trouble of chucking
them out and starting over just yet.
Rick is right=2C they weren't built like they should have been=2C but I thi
nk I'd just keep a close eye on them=2C and leave them alone.
Just my opinon=2C too.
Mike Welch
From: jhauck@elmore.rr.com
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: New tailwires installed
Hey Gang:
Shoulda proofed my previous. "where" should have been "wear".
john h
mkIII
any time soon. In fact=2C I think where will be reduced if the
_________________________________________________________________
Ready for Fall shows? Use Bing to find helpful ratings and reviews on digit
al tv's.
http://www.bing.com/shopping/search?q=digital+tv's&form=MSHNCB&publ=W
LHMTAG&crea=TEXT_MSHNCB_Vertical_Shopping_DigitalTVs_1x1
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Vortex Generators |
Greetings, Folks,
For what it is worth, here is our experience with Harrison Designs VGs (Landshorter.com).
Keep in mind that while Jeff and I are licensed pilots, were new to the Kolb world,
and as non-builders, still ascending the technical learning curve.
Joa Harrison recommends that the VGs be set in a line in the upper side of the
wing back about 10% of the chord from the leading edge. For us, this meant striking
a chalk line at 6.5 from the leading edge. We used a carpenters square set
against the bottom surface of the wing, and measured from the leading edge
back 6.5 to where the tape met the curve of the wing. We set the front of the
VGs on this line. We put 50 on each wing, as recommended. Using the paper templates
that come with the kit, we made our own set using thin Formica, since its
inevitable that you get the glue on the template, and paper would last about
a minute.
We centered each opposing pair of VGs between two ribs at the angle prescribed
by the template. The VGs should each be 15 degrees off the airflow over the wing
(30 degrees between each pair). They recommend that the spacing be 1% of the
wingspan. We spaced the outside front corners of each pair 2.75 apart. We used
the Loctite 401 adhesive that comes in the kit. Heres an interesting point.
The bottle came about 2/3 full. I assumed wed lost a little in shipping, and
indeed there seemed to be a little residue inside the plastic bag. I was worried
that it would not be enough for the job, especially since we bought an extra
set of VGs for our horizontal stabilizer. I ordered an extra bottle, but never
had to crack the seal. We didnt finish the first bottle.
The recommendation for the horizontal stabilizer is of course, to install them
on the underside, just forward of the elevator hinge. I cant remember how many
we used, probably about 30 per side. Theyre much closer together, about 1.5 inches
as opposed to the spacing on the wing. The kit provides templates for various
spacing choices and we made a Formica replica for that, too.
Our 912ULS-powered Mk IIIC has a two-blade, 72 IVO prop.
At 1050lbs, we used to stall at 38kts IAS, no flaps.
Now at the same weight, we stall at about 32kts w/ no flaps.
One notch of flaps decreases it to 25kts.
Departure stalls were impossible, (no surprise) as we ran out of elevator at 35
kts. at 5400rpms, and the Kolb kept climbing.
These speeds are all IAS, so at higher angles of attack, we certainly are getting
an increase in error. We didnt confirm with GPS. However, despite the instrument
error, the comparison is favorable.
The stall characteristics are gentle, with a tendency to lower the left wing. Im
not sure if that reflects design tendency or my heavy left foot.
Slow flight (MCA) is comfortable with 38kts. At 3800rpm, w/ good control in shallow
bank turns.
Hope that helps to add data to the discussion pool,
Dave and Jeff
PS. I tried to attach several pics of our installation, but the file size is too
big in JPEG. If anyone can advise me on how to shrink them, I'll try again.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262789#262789
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: Vortex Generators |
Dave and Jeff,
Did you happen to document the top speed in straight and level flight before and
after the VG installation? I'd like to know if the lowered stall speed with
your installation also results in more drag at higher speeds and thus reducing
top speed.
I use an Apple iMac so if you are using a Windows PC then I can't help you directly
but I'm sure others on the list can and will help you reduce the file size.
If not, send them to me off-list and I'll reduce them for you and post them
as well as return the smaller files to you.
--------
Thom Riddle
Buffalo, NY
Kolb Slingshot SS-021
Jabiru 2200A #1574
Tennessee Prop 64x34
A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system
that works.
- John Gaule
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262793#262793
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: Vortex Generators |
Hi, Thom,
Our top speed before the VG's was 80kts.
I haven't checked for sure, but I don't believe there is a significant reduction
to this since installation. Sorry, I should have checked that, but I will next
time we're up. Lately, we've been flying for "best economy," which for us means
about 55 to 60 kts at about 4600rpm. Our fuel burn is about 3.75/hr at that
setting.
The literature in the instructions claims there isn't a significant increase in
drag, (Harrison,)"what happens is that the VG's reduce the thickness of the boundary
layer at the aft portion of the wing, which in turn offsets the drag penalty
and nets basically zero drag. Most users are noting that when the VG's
are properly placed they see no difference in cruise speed."
Highly recommended in the ad..
Dave
PS. PC user :(
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262795#262795
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Vortex Generators |
Dave Watkins sent me his VG installed photos for me to reduce. I have attached
the reduced size files herein.
--------
Thom Riddle
Buffalo, NY
Kolb Slingshot SS-021
Jabiru 2200A #1574
Tennessee Prop 64x34
A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system
that works.
- John Gaule
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262797#262797
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/p1020072_205.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/p1020071_519.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/p1020069_149.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/p1020067_169.jpg
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Kolb FireStar Snow Skis/Plans |
In a message dated 9/12/2009 8:55:55 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
ul15@juno.com writes:
Rick here are the ski plans.
I used composite water skis and didn't cut them down. The longer skis are
better for deep snow.
Ralph,
That's a very good looking set of plans. Thanks for letting all of us
have access to them.
Bill Varnes
Original Kolb FireStar
Audubon NJ
Do Not Archive
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: | New Videos to watch.... |
Hello all,
Went for a ride around the lake today and took some video...first one is leaving
our airport,then to HTL for a landing and take off,then back to our airport....Hope
you enjoy them...
chris ambrose
m3x/jab 62+ hrs
N327CS
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TT5SrANLoao
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4WZy97XSpMg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5izgk23nCdo
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262816#262816
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: | Finished gascolator |
Fired up the mill last night for the finishing operations on the gascolator.
Still a few minor details left to do and the fittings are only temporary,
but this is essentially a done project.
Rick Girard
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: New tailwires installed |
I installed never kinks on my VW powered MKIIIc years ago on my tail wires.
I also painted the tail wires with a liquid plastic used for dipping tool
handles into it.
The never kinks tend to hold the thimbles in place on the tangs=C2-so I d
oubt that they would cause any ware but when I get back to mid Michigan=C2
-I will inspect them. I currently have almost=C2-290 hours=C2-with th
e never kinks installed.
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW Powered MKIIIC
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Girard " < aslsa . rng @ gmail .com>
Sent: Sunday, September 13, 2009 7:11:58 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: Re: Kolb -List: New tailwires installed
Jimmy, I thought long and hard about whether to post this to the forum or t
o contact you directly. I decided to go to the forum because I believe this
is a safety related issue.
I believe you need to redo your cables.=C2-
Here's why: This is from FAA publication 43.13 1B " Acceptable Methods, Tec
hniques, and Practices - Aircraft Inspection and Repair",=C2- Chapter 7.
Aircraft hardware, control cables, and turnbuckles, Page 33:=C2-
c. Thimble-Eye Splice. Before undertaking=C2-a thimble-eye splice, initia
lly position=C2-the cable so the end will extend slightly beyond=C2-the
sleeve, as the sleeve will elongate=C2-somewhat when it is compressed. I
f the cable=C2-end is inside the sleeve, the splice may not=C2-hold the
full strength of the cable. It is desirable=C2-that the oval sleeve be p
laced in close=C2-proximity to the thimble points, so that when=C2-comp
ressed, the sleeve will contact the thimble=C2- as shown in figure 7-14.
The sharp ends of the=C2-thimble may be cut off before being used;=C2-h
owever, make certain the thimble is firmly=C2-secured in the cable loop a
fter the splice has=C2-been completed. When using a sleeve requiring=C2
-three compressions, make the center compression=C2-first, the compress
ion next to the=C2-thimble second, and the one farthest from the=C2-thi
mble last.
(Note: Bolding and italicizing done by me for emphasis)
Compare figure 7-14 with the second photo from your post. When you installe
d the Never Kinks you failed to reclose the end of the thimbles. This has p
rovided a place for the end of the thimble to wear the cable strands and it
is almost completely uninspectable . There is also a danger that the cable
can flex and come off the thimble entirely so that the cable will ride dir
ectly on the hole in the tang.
Never Kinks: I would not use them. They were created originally for the gen
eration of hang gliders (circa 1976 / 77) with pop open setup that pulled a
ll the cables taught when the frame was fully extended. If the cable was tw
isted on the tang the thimble would get kinked, hence the name. This is not
a concern on the tail of the Kolb because you must connect the lower wires
at the base of the vertical stabilizer. If a thimble is twisted it becomes
immediately obvious as it is impossible to assemble the tail until the twi
st is removed. The problem is, like the open thimble they create an uninspe
ctable area in the cable assembly in the area John H. warns about, the cont
act area of the thimble and the tang.
Rick Girard
On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 8:08 PM, Jimmy Young < jdy100@comcast.net > wrote:
--> Kolb -List message posted by: "Jimmy Young" < jdy100@comcast.net >
Kolbers ,
I installed all new tailwires after I found my cracked tang recently. The t
angs are 12 GA single-hole stainless with a "never-kink" bushing and the ca
ble is 3/32 stainless. I got the supplies from Air-Tech in New Orleans.
The thicker tangs should hopefully never be a problem. I'm not sure what th
e thickness is on the 4 hole tangs, but these are about 50% thicker. I have
never done any cable rigging before, and used a "split-bolt" to hold the c
ables after I tightened them up prior to swedging the nico-press connectors
. I did have the turnbuckles on before, but now I don't. I'll have to keep
an eye on them to watch for any stretching or loosening of the cables, as I
'm not sure if they tend to stretch over time.
We had a much needed rain out today here in the Houston area, so it was a g
ood day to do maintenance. Also changed my break-in oil on the HKS , and ma
y get to fly some tomorrow weather permitting.
--------
Jimmy Young
FS II, HKS 700
N7043P
Read this topic online here:
http ://forums. matronics .com/ viewtopic . php ?p=262735#262735
Attachments:
http ://forums. matronics .com//files/dscn0501_391. jpg
http ://forums. matronics .com//files/dscn0505_107. jpg
===========
arget =" _blank "> http :// www . matronics .com/Navigator? Kolb -List
===========
http ://forums. matronics .com
===========
le , List Admin.
=" _blank "> http :// www . matronics .com/contribution
===========
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: Finished gascolator |
....Very nice !!!
chris ambrose
m3x/jab
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262823#262823
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: turnbuckles and aircraft hardware |
>Possums,
>Could you please take
>a close up pic of the cable ends on both the fork and turnbuckle sides and
>post it?
>Thanks -
>Jimmy Young
>FS II, HKS 700
--------------------------------------------------------------
I just use 1/2 turnbuckle on the tail wires, whole turnbuckle
on the elevator or rudder (if you want) or 1/2 on each end if
you want - they will make them for you. Got to give
them the measurements "hole to hole". And it's
nice an clean. Aircraftspruce isn't the cheapest, lot's of
aircraft fabricators have a swaging machine.
The pictures are a little big - sorry , but I assume you want
to inspect them close up?
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/pdf/2010Individual/Cat10137.pdf
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: New tailwires installed |
Kolb gang,
I appreciate all the input on this little project.
I had a friend, Bill Terrell, look at the cables today. He's been around a while,
83 years I believe. He has built quite a few planes in his life, most recently
a Murphy Maverick that he completed in '05. He pretty much said it ain't perfect,
but it will work fine. That's good enough for me.
I like the Never-Kinks. They are not keeping the thimble from closing as someone
mentioned. The thimble isn't closed because the nicopress slipped that little
amount while I was crimping. One thing they will do is help the thimble keep
it's shape so it can't fold over the tang.
I took it up for a while today, flew great. It's so nice having an adventure machine
like this Kolb, I'm ready to take on some cross-country. Hey Nauga Field,
you may get a surprise visitor before the official Dec 6th fly-in!
--------
Jimmy Young
FS II, HKS 700
N7043P
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262829#262829
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | VGs and Manuvering Speed |
Okay guys, here=99s a question about vortex generators that I have no
t yet seen asked. Will the addition of vortex generators lower my maneuveri
ng speed? From what I remember about maneuvering speed it is the highest sp
eed at which it is safe to give abrupt, full control deflection. While trav
eling slower than this speed the wing will stall before the G load reaches
the max allowed for the wing. If going faster than maneuvering speed the G
loads on the wing could exceed the max allowed before stall occurs and unlo
ads the wing. So, since VGs delay the stall, would they allow excessive G l
oads at maneuvering speed? Should we lower maneuvering speed when equipped
with VGs. Any thoughts?
Malcolm Morrison
MKII
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: VGs and Manuvering Speed |
I don't believe it changes....the maneuvering speed on my 172 is 120 mph....that
is the speed you can still use full travel on the controls....it is what it
is....VG's only help you go slow.Your minimum controllable speed will change of
course...
chris ambrose
m3x/jab
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262848#262848
Message 25
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: VGs and Manuvering Speed |
I believe that maneuvering speed listed in the POH is at max gross. Any weight
less than max gross will lower maneuvering speed, stall speed, Vx, Vy, best glide,
etc. I guess the question is "why is maneuvering speed 120 mph?". I believe
it is related to wing stall at high G (max G load).
Malcolm Morrison
MKII
----- Original Message -----
From: "ces308" <ces308@ldaco.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 13, 2009 8:54:12 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: Kolb-List: Re: VGs and Manuvering Speed
I don't believe it changes....the maneuvering speed on my 172 is 120 mph....that
is the speed you can still use full travel on the controls....it is what it
is....VG's only help you go slow.Your minimum controllable speed will change of
course...
chris ambrose
m3x/jab
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262848#262848
Message 26
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: VGs and Manuvering Speed |
I don't believe it has anything to do with the stall....it does ,however have to
do with when the airplane could start coming apart or at least start bending
something....
chris ambrose
m3x/jab
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262863#262863
Message 27
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Met new Kolb owner at Vidalia EAA Fly-In |
Very cool, Cristal.
We have a new Mk III Xtra builder in Atlanta.
How about Thomasville this year?
Kip
--------
2000 Firestar II
R503 DCDI
VLS 750
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262869#262869
Message 28
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: VGs and Manuvering Speed |
Malcolm,
Remember ,this is for my Cessna Skyhawk it is stated in the POH that any aerobatic
maneuvers are to be done in the utility category,which is 2000 lbs gross wieght,which
is 300 lbs less than actual gross wieght. I says nothing about any
stall speeds at all. I'm not sure what the maneuvering speed is in the M3X and
will NEVER fly this airplane like I would the 172.The book also says higher
speeds can be used for the maneuvers as long as there is a slow deceleration as
to not brake the airplane...
chris ambrose
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262871#262871
Message 29
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: VGs and Manuvering Speed |
...am I making any sense at all??? lol
chris ambrose
m3x/jab
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262872#262872
Message 30
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: VGs and Manuvering Speed |
Gents:
Betcha if you dig, or if one of the aeronautrikal perfessors on the
List signs in and explains it in algebra, you will find that the
maneuvering speed is derived by applying a formula to the power off
stall speed...(power off stall speed times the square root of the
design load limit of the airframe in G's) Whatever you have specified
as the design load limit of your particular E-LSA Kolb (I use 3.5G on
my toy) will drive the outcome of your particular Kolb maneuvering
speed computation.
Regardless of what you computed for maneuvering speed, If you then
lower the power off stall speed by adding VG's , you will necessarily
also lower the maneuvering speed because you lowered the number you
used in the computation formula....but in our little machines, don't
really think it will amount to a hill of beans in practical
application...unless one is inclined to drill rifle companies (or
angels) on the head of a pin... when the air gets rough enough to be
looking for maneuvering speed in a Kolb, you'll likely be lucky to
keep the needle bounce within 5 mph anyway...
my opinion...worth what ye paid fer it...
beauford
FF-076
Brandon FL
----- Original Message -----
From: gliderx5@comcast.net
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, September 13, 2009 9:45 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: VGs and Manuvering Speed
I believe that maneuvering speed listed in the POH is at max gross.
Any weight less than max gross will lower maneuvering speed, stall
speed, Vx, Vy, best glide, etc. I guess the question is "why is
maneuvering speed 120 mph?". I believe it is related to wing stall at
high G (max G load).
Malcolm Morrison
MKII
----- Original Message -----
From: "ces308" <ces308@ldaco.com>
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, September 13, 2009 8:54:12 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada
Eastern
Subject: Kolb-List: Re: VGs and Manuvering Speed
I don't believe it changes....the maneuvering speed on my 172 is 120
mph....that is the speed you can still use full travel on the
controls....it is what it is....VG's only help you go slow.Your
minimum controllable speed will change of course...
chris ambrose
m3x/jab
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262848#262848
; &nb==================
Message 31
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: VGs and Manuvering Speed |
The maneuvering speed of a 172P loaded to gross is 99 kts IAS. As the
airplane gets lighter the maneuvering speed goes down, not up. At 2000 lb.
it is 92 IAS, at 1600 lb. it is 82. This is from the POH Section 2,
Limitations, Figure 2-1, Airspeed Limitations.
Rick Girard
do not archive
On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 9:08 PM, ces308 <ces308@ldaco.com> wrote:
>
> I don't believe it has anything to do with the stall....it does ,however
> have to do with when the airplane could start coming apart or at least start
> bending something....
>
> chris ambrose
> m3x/jab
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262863#262863
>
>
Message 32
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: VGs and Manuvering Speed |
Malcolm=2C
I believe Chris is correct9about Manuevering speed affecting stall speed)
. "Manuevering speed" is the speed at which you can make (moderately) abru
pt control inputs=2C and not bend your airplane. It must also be pointed o
ut that these abrupt inputs are limited to mild to moderate turbulence=2C i
f I recall correctly.
A "high G loading" is suggesting an absolute maximum an airplane MAY NOT
recover from=2C if you have to make a rapid control movement.
(I haven't reached for my latest copy of the Airmen Information Manual=2C
so don't make a federal case=2C if I got a detail or two wrong)
From what I have heard=2C read=2C researched=2C etc. VG's augment the slo
w end of the flying spectrum. They don't do much=2C if anything=2C for the
upper end. The VGs act on the wing's surface in a similar way the dimples
on a golf ball allow it to go MUCH further than a golf ball without dimple
s. They=2C the VGs or dimples=2C affect the boundary air going past the su
rface.
On a separate note=2C some pilots have said they don't want VGs on their
plane. Period!!! Why is this so hard for some others to accept?
For some purists=2C they do NOT want an airplane with whiskers=2C regardl
ess of what the whiskers may do. They aren't interested in any of the bene
fits=2C real or imagined=2C brought on by the addition of VGs.
I don't recall hearing from any of these pilots that VGs don't work as ad
vertised=2C they have simply said "No=2C thank you for me."
It seems=2C for some inexplicable reason=2C there are those that simply w
on't rest until everyone has VGs.
Personally =2C I DO plan on adding VGs=2C when I get back to work on my p
lane in about two months. I DO see their value=2C and am not worried about
having the annoying sharp edges on the wings. But I certainly respect ano
ther guy's decision to NOT use them!
The science behind VGs is clear. Their value is not in question when add
ed properly on "some" wings. But=2C not everyone wants them.
Mike Welch
MkIII CX
> Subject: Kolb-List: Re: VGs and Manuvering Speed
> From: ces308@ldaco.com
> Date: Sun=2C 13 Sep 2009 19:08:09 -0700
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
>
>
> I don't believe it has anything to do with the stall....it does =2Choweve
r have to do with when the airplane could start coming apart or at least st
art bending something....
>
> chris ambrose
> m3x/jab
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262863#262863
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Ready for Fall shows? Use Bing to find helpful ratings and reviews on digit
al tv's.
http://www.bing.com/shopping/search?q=digital+tv's&form=MSHNCB&publ=W
LHMTAG&crea=TEXT_MSHNCB_Vertical_Shopping_DigitalTVs_1x1
Message 33
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: VGs and Manuvering Speed |
Group=2C
Rick G. is correct. The following article explains why the Va (manueveri
ng speed) goes DOWN with a lighter airplane. (It's a little lengthy=2C but
interesting.)
Maneuvering Speed
As private pilot students=2C we learn that maneuvering speed=2C or Va=2C ge
ts lower as the plane's weight goes down. This sometimes seems unintuitive
=2C our brains want turbulence to be a bigger problem for heavy planes=2C a
s that fits in with our notion of the wings "straining" to carry the load.
So needing to slow down further when the plane is light doesn't seem to mak
e sense. Why would it work that way?
Most explanations of this phenomenon provided in print are very vague and f
ull of analogies=2C to help shield the reader from very basic simple high s
chool physics. You'll hear things about being "closer to the stall"=2C whic
h might be enough to help you remember the answer=2C but doesn't really pro
vide a satisfying demonstration. This is my attempt to lay out the answer.
Lift is a function of airspeed and angle of attack. Increase airspeed and y
ou increase lift. Increase angle of attack and you increase lift=2C until y
our angle of attack hits the "critical angle of attack"=2C at which point l
ift begins to decrease again and the wing eventually stalls.
When you're flying straight and level=2C the wings are always generating ex
actly enough lift to hold the weight of the plane. So "L = W" here. You'r
e typically not at the critical angle of attack=2C so increasing angle of a
ttack can increase lift=2C making "L > W". When you do this=2C the forces n
o longer balance=2C there's now a net force upwards=2C and any time there's
a net force=2C the plane will accelerate in that direction. We'll see the
plane's VSI jump and our track will become more vertical=2C eventually the
VSI will stabilize at some rate of climb and we'll be in balance again. (Th
e plane is only accelerating upwards when the VSI needle is "in motion"=2C
once the VSI settles into a particular position=2C i.e. we're established i
n a climb or descent or just level=2C the forces are in balance again and t
here's no acceleration. Imagine a "perfect" VSI here=2C ignoring the VSI la
g=2C etc.)
If you put the wing at the angle of attack that maximizes lift=2C the amoun
t of lift generated depends on airspeed=2C it will be greater at 120 kts th
an at 90 kts. If we were straight and level=2C and then suddenly put the wi
ng at the angle of attack that generated the most lift=2C creating a net ve
rtical force (and thus a vertical acceleration)=2C that vertical lift force
would be greater at 120kts than at 90kts. So if we jerked back on the yoke
at 120kts=2C we're going to create a greater upwards force=2C and thus a g
reater upwards acceleration=2C than if we do that same exercise at 90kts.
So=2C clearly=2C we can induce higher levels of vertical acceleration at hi
gher airspeeds=2C as we can creater higher maximum lift forces. But what el
se does acceleration depend on? Newton says "F = ma"=2C force equals mass
times acceleration=2C which can be re-written as "a = F / m". This tells
us that for a given force F=2C the acceleration that results will depend o
n the mass of the object. Apply the same force F to two objects=2C and the
lighter one will accelerate more than the heavier one.
This is the key to Va's variation with the plane's weight (which correlates
directly with its mass). Take two identical planes (same wing=2C etc.)=2C
one loaded lightly=2C one loaded heavily=2C and fly them both at the same a
irspeed=2C say 100kts. When you suddenly put the wings of those planes at m
ax angle of attack=2C either by jerking back on the stick=2C or by hitting
some turbulence that changes the direction that the air meets the wing=2C e
ach wing will generate the exact same maximum lift force F=2C as the variab
les in the lift equation are the same for both planes (same wing=2C same an
gle of attack=2C same airspeed). But due to its lower mass=2C the lighter p
lane will see a greater acceleration result from this force.
Now think of how our planes specify their load limits=2C it's not a particu
lar force=2C it's a particular acceleration. We say our plane's load limit
is "3.8 positive Gs"=2C that's a maximum acceleration. For our two planes a
bove=2C if the lighter one has half the mass of the heavier one=2C when bot
h planes see the same lift force=2C that can result in the heavy plane acce
lerating at 2 Gs while the lighter plane will accelerate at 4Gs.
How do we protect a plane from exceeding it's load limit acceleration? The
only way is to ensure that we're flying at an airspeed that's slow enough t
hat the lift produced by the wing=2C when suddenly put at max angle of atta
ck=2C is small enough that the resulting vertical acceleration is no greate
r than our load limit. In other words=2C we have to ensure that the wings c
an't generate an "F" great enough that our "a = F/m" is more than=2C say
=2C 3.8g for our current mass 'm'. How can we limit that max lift force "F"
? The max lift force will be a function of airspeed=3B if you slow the wing
down=2C the max force it is capable of generating is lower=2C so you can e
nsure the wing isn't capable of generating a force great enough to create a
n acceleration that exceeds our load limit by limiting our airspeed.
Our heavy and light planes are both flying with the same wings=2C and so bo
th can see that max lift force if the wing's suddenly put at max angle of a
ttack=2C but the lighter one can't sustain the same wing forces as the heav
ier one=2C as it's easier to accelerate. So we have to limit the max lift f
orce on our lighter plane even more than our heavier plane=2C and we do thi
s by limiting our airspeed in that lighter plane even more than our heavier
plane=2C i.e. by setting Va even lower on the lighter plane.
Harry Mantakos / harry@meretrix.com
Mike Welch
MkIII CX
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: VGs and Manuvering Speed
From: aslsa.rng@gmail.com
The maneuvering speed of a 172P loaded to gross is 99 kts IAS. As the airpl
ane gets lighter the maneuvering speed goes down=2C not up. At 2000 lb. it
is 92 IAS=2C at 1600 lb. it is 82. This is from the POH Section 2=2C Limita
tions=2C Figure 2-1=2C Airspeed Limitations.
Rick Girard
do not archive
On Sun=2C Sep 13=2C 2009 at 9:08 PM=2C ces308 <ces308@ldaco.com> wrote:
I don't believe it has anything to do with the stall....it does =2Chowever
have to do with when the airplane could start coming apart or at least star
t bending something....
chris ambrose
m3x/jab
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262863#262863
arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
http://forums.matronics.com
le=2C List Admin.
="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Powerful Free email with security by Microsoft.
Message 34
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: VGs and Manuvering Speed |
Thanks Beauford
That's what I suspected. I guess it was more of an academic question anyway
. If you are correct, then maneuvering speed would drop proportional to the
drop in stall speed. Therefore, a 15% drop in stall speed would result in
a 15% drop in maneuvering speed. At 50 mph we're only talking about 7 mph,
no big deal in reality I suppose.
Malcolm Morrison
MKII
----- Original Message -----
From: "Beauford T" <beauford173@verizon.net>
Sent: Sunday, September 13, 2009 10:44:27 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: VGs and Manuvering Speed
=EF=BB
Gents:
Betcha if you dig, or if one of the aeronautrikal perfessors on the List si
gns in and explains it in algebra, you will find that the maneuvering speed
is derived by applying a formula to the power off stall speed...(power off
stall speed times the square root of the design load limit of the airframe
in G's) Whatever you have specified as the design load limit of your parti
cular E-LSA Kolb (I use 3.5G on my toy) will drive the outcome of your part
icular Kolb maneuvering speed computation.
Regardless of what you computed for maneuvering speed, If you then lower th
e power off stall speed by adding VG's , you will necessarily also lower th
e maneuvering speed because you lowered the number you used in the computat
ion formula....but in our little machines, don't really think it will amoun
t to a hill of beans in practical application...unless one is inclined to d
rill rifle companies (or angels) on the head of a pin... when the air gets
rough enough to be looking for maneuvering speed in a Kolb, you'll likely b
e lucky to keep the needle bounce within 5 mph anyway...
my opinion...worth what ye paid fer it...
beauford
FF-076
Brandon FL
----- Original Message -----
From: gliderx5@comcast.net
Sent: Sunday, September 13, 2009 9:45 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: VGs and Manuvering Speed
I believe that maneuvering speed listed in the POH is at max gross. Any wei
ght less than max gross will lower maneuvering speed, stall speed, Vx, Vy,
best glide, etc. I guess the question is "why is maneuvering speed 120 mph?
". I believe it is related to wing stall at high G (max G load).
Malcolm Morrison
MKII
----- Original Message -----
From: "ces308" <ces308@ldaco.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 13, 2009 8:54:12 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: Kolb-List: Re: VGs and Manuvering Speed
I don't believe it changes....the maneuvering speed on my 172 is 120 mph...
.that is the speed you can still use full travel on the controls....it is w
hat it is....VG's only help you go slow.Your minimum controllable speed wil
l change of course...
chris ambrose
m3x/jab
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262848#262848
; &nb===================
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List">http://www.matronics.
com/Navigator?Kolb-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c _
-========================
==
Message 35
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: VGs and Manuvering Speed |
Hi Mike
I think VGs actually help out at high angles of attack. The speed at which you
reach high angles of attack depends on wing loading (weight, bank angle, etc).
In general we talk about VGs helping at slow speeds, but it is the high G, high
wing loading arena that prompted my initial question. I had not seen this discussed
but I knew the group would have opinions. Anything to do with VGs is
always interesting. BTW, I just removed my homemade VGs from my MKII tonight.
I made them the same as Jack Hart, but I never liked the way I mounted them. The
double sided tape caused them to stick up off he wing, so I'm making new ones
that I will glue on. I like the VGs and look forward to installing the new
ones.
Malcolm Morrison
MKII
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Welch" <mdnanwelch7@hotmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 13, 2009 10:50:52 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Re: VGs and Manuvering Speed
Malcolm,
I believe Chris is correct9about Manuevering speed affecting stall speed). "Manuevering
speed" is the speed at which you can make (moderately) abrupt control
inputs, and not bend your airplane. It must also be pointed out that these abrupt
inputs are limited to mild to moderate turbulence, if I recall correctly.
A "high G loading" is suggesting an absolute maximum an airplane MAY NOT recover
from, if you have to make a rapid control movement.
(I haven't reached for my latest copy of the Airmen Information Manual, so don't
make a federal case, if I got a detail or two wrong)
>From what I have heard, read, researched, etc. VG's augment the slow end of the
flying spectrum. They don't do much, if anything, for the upper end. The VGs
act on the wing's surface in a similar way the dimples on a golf ball allow it
to go MUCH further than a golf ball without dimples. They, the VGs or dimples,
affect the boundary air going past the surface.
On a separate note, some pilots have said they don't want VGs on their plane. Period!!!
Why is this so hard for some others to accept?
For some purists, they do NOT want an airplane with whiskers, regardless of what
the whiskers may do. They aren't interested in any of the benefits, real or
imagined, brought on by the addition of VGs.
I don't recall hearing from any of these pilots that VGs don't work as advertised,
they have simply said "No, thank you for me."
It seems, for some inexplicable reason, there are those that simply won't rest
until everyone has VGs.
Personally , I DO plan on adding VGs, when I get back to work on my plane in about
two months. I DO see their value, and am not worried about having the annoying
sharp edges on the wings. But I certainly respect another guy's decision
to NOT use them!
The science behind VGs is clear. Their value is not in question when added properly
on "some" wings. But, not everyone wants them.
Mike Welch
MkIII CX
> Subject: Kolb-List: Re: VGs and Manuvering Speed
> From: ces308@ldaco.com
> Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2009 19:08:09 -0700
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
>
>
> I don't believe it has anything to do with the stall....it does ,however have
to do with when the airplane could start coming apart or at least start bending
something....
>
> chris ambrose
> m3x/jab
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262863#262863
>
>
Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
>==
>
>
>
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! --
|