Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:04 AM - Re: Re: FireFly - Someday, I'd like one like this one! (Pat Ladd)
2. 03:38 AM - Re: Some success at last (Dana Hague)
3. 03:51 AM - Re: Some success at last (Pat Ladd)
4. 05:31 AM - Re: FireFly - Someday, I'd like one like this one! (Watkinsdw)
5. 06:01 AM - Re: Some success at last (kinne russ)
6. 06:28 AM - Re: Some success at last (John Hauck)
7. 06:43 AM - Re: Where to buy two stroke oil? (gyrodude)
8. 06:48 AM - Re: FireFly - Someday, I'd like one like this one! (olendorf)
9. 07:15 AM - Folding Wings and Hangar Space (Kirby, Dennis Civ USAF AFMC AFNWC/ENS)
10. 07:56 AM - Re: Folding Wings and Hangar Space (Richard Girard)
11. 08:00 AM - Re: FireFly - Someday, I'd like one like this one! (Watkinsdw)
12. 09:12 AM - Firefly under 254 - How did you do it? (Tom Stephens)
13. 02:16 PM - Re: FireFly - Someday, I'd like one like this one! (Tom Stephens)
14. 02:20 PM - Re: Folding Wings and Hangar Space (Tom Stephens)
15. 03:04 PM - Re: Folding Wings and Hangar Space (koxxy)
16. 03:22 PM - Re: Re: FireFly - Someday, I'd like one like this one! (Phil)
17. 03:37 PM - Re: Folding Wings and Hangar Space (George Alexander)
18. 03:57 PM - Re: Re: Folding Wings and Hangar Space (Martin Koxxy)
19. 04:29 PM - Re: FireFly - Someday, I'd like one like this one! (Tom Stephens)
20. 04:34 PM - Re: Some success at last (Danny)
21. 06:46 PM - Re: Re: FireFly - Someday, I'd like one like this one! (Phil)
22. 07:05 PM - Re: FireFly - Someday, I'd like one like this one! (Tom Stephens)
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: FireFly - Someday, I'd like one like this one! |
I like the Challenger I am flying so much that I'd love to have one>>
Hi Tom,
If you go for a Challenger in spite of the non folding wing be sure you get
the model with the enlarged fin and rudder. The original was much to small
and didn`t hold direction well at all. I built the original version and
later updated with a larger fin and an extension forward along the top of
the fuselage.
I didn`t put doors on and enjoyed the open cockpit feel. I also enjoyed the
superb controlled side slip possible in the Challenger. Unfortunately
approaching old age and stiffening joints meant that I could not get into
the cockpit without a struggle and a couple of drive belts shedding their
teeth and putting me sharply down in a field made up my mind. I changed her
out for the gentlemanly comfort of an Xtra which is the only Kolb available
over here. It is very nice and I enjoy it but it won`t sideslip worth a
damn. With the big flaps of course you shouldn`t need to sideslip but when
I make `bomber approaches` with half flap I sometimes miss being able to
pull the nose up, stick a wing down , give her a bootful of rudder and slide
over the hedge.
Cheers
Pat
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Some success at last |
At 09:23 PM 11/17/2011, kinne russ wrote:
>Tell me why I have to hold right rudder when applying power for takeoff?
>If there's no P=factor on the ground ?
There _is_ P-factor on the ground in a tailwheel airplane with the
tailwheel on the ground.
There are four turning effects from the propeller:
1. P-factor, or asymmetric blade thrust, whenever the axis of the prop
isn't parallel to the relative wind.
2. Spiraling slipstream from the prop, impinging more on one side of the
vertical stabilizer than the other (this may be less, or even in the
opposite direction with an engine mounted high over the rudder as in a
Kolb).
3. Direct torque (causes a roll effect as opposed to yaw).
4. Gyroscopic precession, which causes the plane to yaw while pitching, as
when you lift the tailwheel.
-Dana
--
"A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing left
to add, but when there is nothing left to take away." -- Antoine de
Saint-Exup=E9ry
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: Some success at last |
Thanks Dana, and Lanny, and Wikepedia,
I think that at last I have got it. By visualising the reductio ad
absurdum case of the airflow over the propeller if a plane is descending
vertically but in a horizontal position. The airflow in that case would
be travelling over the prop blade in the same way as the wind over a
helicopter rotor with its well known, and easily visualised, advancing
and retiring blade.
I am still surprised however that the effect is noticeable in the case
of the comparatively low power and small diameter props that we
generally use. I would have just put it down to torque and coriolis
force and the tendency of a spinning disc to precess. Think of a
gyroscope.
I know better now. Thanks for your patience.
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: FireFly - Someday, I'd like one like this one! |
Hangars are very expensive at my airport, kpmp.
I'm lucky in that the flying club of which I'm a member (we have two Piper Archers
180's,) has an end unit in a row of T-hangers where we keep supplies and tools.
I rent room to slide my folded Mk III in the long side of the 1/2 "T".
This trick might be a good option for anyone seeking affordable shelter.
I pay a percentage of the rent based on the footprint of the Kolb.
On the subject of rudder trim, all private pilots learn that turning tendency is
induced by three forces- engine torque, slipstream and P-factor. My rudder trim
tab mitigates the yaw in cruise caused by slipstream (prop wash.)
In climb, the predominant turning moment is from P-factor (asymmetrical thrust
by the prop.) In a turn, drag caused by the up aileron causes adverse yaw in most
airplanes, requiring rudder to compensate. However, I haven't experienced
significant adverse yaw in my Kolb.
Hope that is helpful!
Dave Watkins
Mk III-C
Built by Steven Green.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=358353#358353
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: Some success at last |
As I understand things, if the plane/gyroscope is going straight ahead
there should be precession, no tendency to swerve. I think the plane
simply runs ahead of the helical propwash when it gains speed, so you
can ease up on your foot pressure. Is there any practical difference
between 'helical propwash' and 'P-factor'?
On Nov 17, 2011, at 10:55 PM, Danny wrote:
> Helical propwash... In most planes you soon outrun most of it and can
let off on the rudder correction. Then one more stab on them when the
tail comes up. I think that is the gyroscope influence.
>
> - DjD
> From: kinne russ <russk50@gmail.com>
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2011 8:23 PM
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Some success at last
>
> Tell me why I have to hold right rudder when applying power for
takeoff? If there's no P=factor on the ground ?
>
>
> On Nov 17, 2011, at 9:05 PM, Dana Hague wrote:
>
>> You're climbing, you have an upward vector, but the plane pitches up
by the same amount. If the airspeed is the same, then Cl and AOA have
to be the same to generate the same lift (equal to the plane's weight).
>>
>> Actually the above isn't _exactly_ true, as the gravity vector shifts
aft relative to the plane, but the effect is small for reasonable
angles.
>>
>> In a normal climb, of course, you're flying slower than cruise, thus
higher AOA, and P-factor does in fact increase.
>>
>> -Dana
>>
>> At 08:42 PM 11/17/2011, Richard Girard wrote:
>>> The minute you start to climb the relative wind direction changes as
you now have an upward vector and P factor ensues. Sorry, no free lunch.
>>>
>>> Rick
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Dana Hague <d-m-hague@comcast.net>
wrote:
>>> At 02:02 PM 11/17/2011, Richard Girard wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Dana, "If you increase power to climb", how exactly does P factor
remain the same?
>>>
>>> The flight condition we were talking about was cruise when the
relative wind is parallel to the propeller shaft, so there's no
P-factor. If you increase power to climb while maintaining the same
airspeed, the AOA will also be the same, meaning that the airflow is
still parallel to the prop shaft, i.e. still no P-factor.
>>>
>>> -Dana
>>> --
>>> Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence on
society.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _blank">www.aeroelectric.com
>>>
>>> .com" target="_blank">www.buildersbooks.com
>>>
>>> ="_blank">www.homebuilthelp.com
>>>
>>> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>
>>> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>>>
>>> tp://forums.matronics.com
>>>
>>> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Zulu Delta
>>> Mk IIIC
>>> Thanks, Homer GBYM
>>>
>>> It isn't necessary to have relatives in Kansas City in order to be
unhappy.
>>> - Groucho Marx
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> www.aeroelectric.com
>>> www.buildersbooks.com
>>> www.homebuilthelp.com
>>> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>>> Email Forum -
>>> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>>> - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
>>> http://forums.matronics.com/
>>> - List Contribution Web Site -
>>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>>> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Diplomacy: Saying "nice doggy" until you find a rock.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
> om
> >
>
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
> List
>
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
>
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
> >
>
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: | Some success at last |
On Behalf Of kinne russ
As I understand things, if the plane/gyroscope is going straight ahead
there should be precession, no tendency to swerve. I think the plane simply
runs ahead of the helical propwash when it gains speed, so you can ease up
on your foot pressure. Is there any practical difference between 'helical
propwash' and 'P-factor'?
Russ K/Kolbers:
That is what I have been sharing for a long time. The primary yaw problem
in the MKIII is the effect of helical prop wash. Take that problem away
and the adverse yaw problem goes away.
Clear evidence of where the prop wash hits the left side of the vertical
stabilizer and the top of the left horizontal stabilizer, on a 912 powered
MKIII, is enough for me to understand by I have to have a large rudder trim
tab to kick the rudder left and keep it in trim.
I have experimented with changing angle of thrust up and down, left and
right; moved the leading edge of the upper vertical stabilizer left; but
the large rudder trim tab was the fix for adverse yaw on my MKIII.
If you are ever around my airplane after I have made a long flight in
turbulent conditions you will see where the byproducts from the engine
crankcase breather hit the tail section.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
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: Where to buy two stroke oil? |
I had a friend that worked in the lab at Homelite. They tested all the oils on
the market at the time. Texaco Havoline with Royalgard won. Any good quality organic
oil is fine as long as it contains a TCW-3 which is a rust inhibitor. Do
the Amsoil products contain a rust inhibitor? I've flown behind Rotaxes for
over 25yrs now with no oil related problems.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=358360#358360
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: FireFly - Someday, I'd like one like this one! |
There is a lot of confusing adverse yaw discussion in this thread already. Adverse
yaw is caused by ailerons. The down aileron has the extra drag and yaws the
plane opposite of the intended turn. This stuff is confusing enough especially
when you are just learning. Just saying.
p.s. I also am impressed with Terry's Firefly. Nice.
Scott Olendorf
--------
Scott Olendorf
Original Firestar, Rotax 447, Powerfin prop
Schenectady, NY
http://sites.google.com/site/kolbfirestar/
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=358362#358362
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: | Folding Wings and Hangar Space |
"Tom Stephens" wrote: << . And if I'm lucky, I might be able to find space
in someone's hangar for the folded bird. Tom >>
Tom -
Welcome to the Kolb List. Sounds like you picked the right airplane (Kolb)
for your needs. Folding wings was a primary decision factor for me too, for
exactly the same reason you mention: Expensive hangar rent in your area.
The hangar in this picture rents for $180 per month - too much for me by
myself. The folding wings on my Mark-3 allow me to squeeze in a small space
in this hangar that I share with a Piper Pacer, and I consequently pay only
one-third the rent. The affordability is worth the 15 minutes it takes me
to erect the wings each time I fly.
Dennis Kirby
Mark-3, "Magic Bike" in
Sandia Park, NM
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: Folding Wings and Hangar Space |
Tom, Another option you might wish to check out is half hangars. Every row
of "T" hangars has a half hangar at each end of the building.
I had one at KPAE (Paine Field at Everett, WA where Boeing builds the 747,
767, 777 and now the 787) and the rent was less than half what a full
hangar cost. They were also quicker to get, too. There was a three year
wait on average for a full hangar, but I got a half hangar within two
months of getting on the list for them.
Rick Girard
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 9:12 AM, Kirby, Dennis Civ USAF AFMC AFNWC/ENS <
Dennis.Kirby@kirtland.af.mil> wrote:
> "Tom Stephens" wrote: << =85 And if I'm lucky, I might be able to find sp
ace
> in someone's hangar for the folded bird. Tom >>****
>
> ** **
>
> Tom '****
>
> ** **
>
> Welcome to the Kolb List. Sounds like you picked the right airplane
> (Kolb) for your needs. Folding wings was a primary decision factor for m
e
> too, for exactly the same reason you mention: Expensive hangar rent in yo
ur
> area. The hangar in this picture rents for $180 per month ' too much f
or
> me by myself. The folding wings on my Mark-3 allow me to squeeze in a
> small space in this hangar that I share with a Piper Pacer, and I
> consequently pay only one-third the rent. The affordability is worth the
> 15 minutes it takes me to erect the wings each time I fly.****
>
> ** **
>
> Dennis Kirby****
>
> Mark-3, =93Magic Bike=94 in****
>
> Sandia Park, NM****
>
> ** **
>
--
Zulu Delta
Mk IIIC
Thanks, Homer GBYM
It isn't necessary to have relatives in Kansas City in order to be unhappy.
- Groucho Marx
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: FireFly - Someday, I'd like one like this one! |
Thanks for catching my error, Scott. You are correct. It's the down aileron that
pulls the aircraft in the opposite direction of the intended turn.
Must be the aging process...
Dave
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=358373#358373
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: | Firefly under 254 - How did you do it? |
How many of you have/had FireFly's that were actually under 254?
How did you do it?
What motor did you use?
Is this possible?
Tom
--------
Tom Stephens
www.planeaday.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=358383#358383
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: FireFly - Someday, I'd like one like this one! |
Pat,
I'd still consider the Challenger, but NO folding wings :-(
All who are giving the FireFly flight characteristics, GREAT, thanks, I enjoy hearing!!
Phil,
What are you going to do to keep your FireFly within 103?... I'm very interested
in this... well of course, as you can tell from my other post. What was your
first Kolb and why did you decide upon the FireFly?
Tom
--------
Tom Stephens
www.planeaday.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=358403#358403
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: Folding Wings and Hangar Space |
Dennis,
Thank you for the welcome!
Your picture is worth 1000 words. Now THAT's what I am hoping will work out.
Tom
--------
Tom Stephens
www.planeaday.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=358404#358404
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: Folding Wings and Hangar Space |
I have been struggling with the same issue. Too bad we have to select our flying
machines based on the hangar situation. For me, it boils down to:
Have affordable hangar or barn: Excalibur
Have partial hangar or enclosed trailer: Kolb
No hangar: all-metal plane (Zenith)
My FBO would let me keep an enclosed trailer on the field for the tie-down fee
($35/month), whereas a T-hangar would be $250+, plus waiting list.
Martin
Beaverton, OR
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=358410#358410
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: FireFly - Someday, I'd like one like this one! |
Keeping the Firefly 103 legal, in my studies, should be a piece of cake. I'
m just going to follow the plans, and omit the nosecone and windshield to s
tart.
I'm using the CRE mz201 which is estimated at 73# including elec and pull s
tart, exhaust and muffler, and 1.77:1 belt reduc, and I don't have a firm q
uote yet, but it looks like I'll be swinging a 60-62" wooden TN prop.
I decided on the Firefly because I like the Kolb over all other airborne cr
itters I've seen, hands down, because I had a Twinstar before, I live 0.70
miles from 1a0 Dallas Bay Airpark, I don't want to go through inspections,
registrations, etc., and because I wanted to taste bugs again.
Phil H.
http://phactor.com/i/f3.jpg
--- On Fri, 11/18/11, Tom Stephens <tom@planeaday.com> wrote:
From: Tom Stephens <tom@planeaday.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: Re: FireFly - Someday, I'd like one like this one!
Pat,
I'd still consider the Challenger, but NO folding wings :-(
All who are giving the FireFly flight characteristics, GREAT, thanks, I enj
oy hearing!!
Phil,
What are you going to do to keep your FireFly within 103?... I'm very inter
ested in this... well of course, as you can tell from my other post.- Wha
t was your first Kolb and why did you decide upon the FireFly?
Tom
--------
Tom Stephens
www.planeaday.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=358403#358403
le, List Admin.
le, List Admin.
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: Folding Wings and Hangar Space |
koxxy wrote:
> I have been struggling with the same issue. Too bad we have to select our flying
machines based on the hangar situation. For me, it boils down to:
> Have affordable hangar or barn: Excalibur
> Have partial hangar or enclosed trailer: Kolb
> No hangar: all-metal plane (Zenith)
>
> My FBO would let me keep an enclosed trailer on the field for the tie-down fee
($35/month), whereas a T-hangar would be $250+, plus waiting list.
>
> Martin
> Beaverton, OR
Many select the Kolb for other reasons (not the least of which is that it's a great
airplane) and then get the added benefits of lower berthing costs and portability.
--------
George Alexander
FS II R503 N709FS
http://www.oh2fly.net
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=358413#358413
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: Folding Wings and Hangar Space |
Yes, of course. All these airplanes have their strengths and weaknesses.
And the builder's budget plays a big role. But that's the point I am
making: the hangar situation should not be the deciding factor, but for
many of us, it is. If I cannot find a place to store the plane under some
sort of cover, I'll have to pass on anything that is fabric covered, no
matter how good the plane is otherwise.
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 3:35 PM, George Alexander <gtalexander@att.net>wrote:
>
>
> koxxy wrote:
> > I have been struggling with the same issue. Too bad we have to select
> our flying machines based on the hangar situation. For me, it boils down to:
> > Have affordable hangar or barn: Excalibur
> > Have partial hangar or enclosed trailer: Kolb
> > No hangar: all-metal plane (Zenith)
> >
> > My FBO would let me keep an enclosed trailer on the field for the
> tie-down fee ($35/month), whereas a T-hangar would be $250+, plus waiting
> list.
> >
> > Martin
> > Beaverton, OR
>
>
> Many select the Kolb for other reasons (not the least of which is that
> it's a great airplane) and then get the added benefits of lower berthing
> costs and portability.
>
> --------
> George Alexander
> FS II R503 N709FS
> http://www.oh2fly.net
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=358413#358413
>
>
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: FireFly - Someday, I'd like one like this one! |
Phil,
"and because I wanted to taste bugs again" Ahhh, the most important reason ;-)
How are you going to mount the MZ201?
Tom
--------
Tom Stephens
www.planeaday.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=358418#358418
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: Some success at last |
Take the front wheel off the nearest "English Racer", hold it by the axle a
nd spin it up.- Now tilt it as if it were your prop disc when the tail co
mes up.- The effect is quite strong but brief... =0AClick here to read mo
re...=0A-=0A=0ATo: kolb-list@matronics.com =0ASent: Friday, November 18,
2011 7:59 AM=0ASubject: Re: Kolb-List: Some success at last=0A=0A=0AAs I un
derstand things, if the plane/gyroscope is going straight ahead there shoul
d be precession, no tendency to swerve. I think the plane simply runs ahead
of the helical propwash when -it gains speed, so you can ease up on your
foot pressure. Is there any practical difference between 'helical propwash
' and 'P-factor'? =0A=0A=0AOn Nov 17, 2011, at 10:55 PM, Danny wrote:=0A=0A
Helical propwash... In most planes you soon outrun most of it and can let o
ff on the rudder correction.- Then one more stab on them when the tail co
mes up.- I think that is the gyroscope influence.=0A>=0A>=0A>- DjD=0A>=0A
>=0A>________________________________=0A>From: kinne russ <russk50@gmail.co
m>=0A>To: kolb-list@matronics.com =0A>Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2011 8:2
3 PM=0A>Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Some success at last=0A>=0A>=0A>Tell me why
I have to hold right rudder when applying -power for takeoff? If there's
no P=factor on the ground ? =0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>On Nov 17, 2011, at 9:05
PM, Dana Hague wrote:=0A>=0A>You're climbing, you have an upward vector, b
ut the plane pitches up by the same amount.- If the airspeed is the same,
then Cl and AOA have to be the same to generate the same lift (equal to th
e plane's weight).=0A>>=0A>>Actually the above isn't _exactly_ true, as the
gravity vector shifts aft relative to the plane, but the effect is small f
or reasonable angles.=0A>>=0A>>In a normal climb, of course, you're flying
slower than cruise, thus higher AOA, and P-factor does in fact increase.=0A
>>=0A>>-Dana=0A>>=0A>>At 08:42 PM 11/17/2011, Richard Girard wrote:=0A>>=0A
>>The minute you start to climb the relative wind direction changes as you
now have an upward vector and P factor ensues. Sorry, no free lunch.=0A>>>
=0A>>>Rick=0A>>>=0A>>>On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Dana Hague <d-m-hagu
e@comcast.net> wrote: =0A>>>At 02:02 PM 11/17/2011, Richard Girard wrote:
=0A>>>Dana, "If you increase power to climb", how exactly does P factor rem
ain the same?=0A>>>The flight condition we were talking about was cruise wh
en the relative wind is parallel to the propeller shaft, so there's no P-fa
ctor.- If you increase power to climb while maintaining the same airspeed
, the AOA will also be the same, meaning that the airflow is still parallel
to the prop shaft, i.e. still no P-factor.=0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>>>-Dana =0A>>>--
=0A>>>Clothes make the man.- Naked people have little or no influence on
society. =0A>>>_blank">www.aeroelectric.com =0A>>>.com" target="_blank">
www.buildersbooks.com =0A>>>="_blank">www.homebuilthelp.com =0A>>>_blank"
>http://www.matronics.com/contribution =0A>>>get="_blank">http://www.matr
onics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List =0A>>>tp://forums.matronics.com =0A>>>_blank"
>http://www.matronics.com/contribution =0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>>>-- =0A>>>Zulu Delt
a=0A>>>Mk IIIC=0A>>>Thanks, Homer GBYM=0A>>>=0A>>>It isn't necessary to hav
e relatives in Kansas City in order to be unhappy.=0A>>>- - Groucho Marx
=0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>>>www.aeroelectric.com www.buildersbooks.com ww
w.homebuilthelp.com http://www.matronics.com/contribution-Matt Dralle, L
ist Admin.Email Forum -http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
- MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -http://forums.matronics.com/- List Contrib
ution Web Site --Matt Dralle, List Admin. http://www.matronics.com/contr
ibution =0A>>=0A>>--=0A>>Diplomacy: Saying "nice doggy" until you find a ro
ck.-- =0A>=0A>3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3Dom>3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3DList3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D>3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =0A>=0A>=0A>h
ref="http://www.aeroelectric.com/">www.aeroelectric.comhref="http://
www.buildersbooks.com/">www.buildersbooks.comhref="http://www.homebuil
thelp.com/">www.homebuilthelp.comhref="http://www.matronics.com/contri
bution">http://www.matronics.com/contributionhref="http://www.matronic
s.com/Navigator?Kolb-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-Listh
ref="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.comhref="
http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contributio
= Archive Search & Download, 7-Day
========================
======
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: FireFly - Someday, I'd like one like this one! |
Absolutely. You aren't really flying unless you're eatin' bugs.
I plan to mount the mz201 upright with the belt reduc down. The bolt patter
n is 102 sts (side-to-side) x 202 ftb (front-to-back). I don't have the Rot
ax 447 and 503 sts dimensions, but ftb looks to be 143 and 153, respectivel
y.
201- 102mm x 202mm
447- ???mm x 143mm
503- ???mm x 153mm
I also really hope I'm able to hang the muffler down in between the aileron
pushpull rods, similar to the way this gentlemen did. I don't know where I
got this pic, but I really like the idea!
http://phactor.com/Kolb/DownExhaust.jpg
I've yet to determine where to align the reduc, but I'm certainly going to
attempt a left-of-center PTO. Jack Hart goes into a great discussion on P-f
actor, trimming, and offset thrust by moving the PTO left-of-center by rota
ting the reduc to the 305, 270 and 235 degree positions (roughly 10:30, 9:0
0 and 7:30 positions), here:
http://jackbhart.com/firefly/firefly56.html
http://jackbhart.com/firefly/firefly129.html
http://jackbhart.com/firefly/firefly101.html
Jack, if you're listening, please chime in!
Phil
--- On Fri, 11/18/11, Tom Stephens <tom@planeaday.com> wrote:
From: Tom Stephens <tom@planeaday.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: Re: FireFly - Someday, I'd like one like this one!
Phil,
"and because I wanted to taste bugs again"- Ahhh, the most important reas
on ;-)
How are you going to mount the MZ201?
Tom
--------
Tom Stephens
www.planeaday.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=358418#358418
le, List Admin.
le, List Admin.
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: FireFly - Someday, I'd like one like this one! |
Phil,
I am used to the MZ-34 with the mount in back. Sorry about that. I see that the 201 is "normal": http://www.compactengines.com/MZ-201-lite1.jpg
Tom
--------
Tom Stephens
www.planeaday.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=358431#358431
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! --
|