---------------------------------------------------------- Kolb-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Fri 01/13/12: 10 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 01:12 AM - Re: Postmortem - List Melt Down Thursday 01/12/12... (Eugene Zimmerman) 2. 08:18 AM - Re: Postmortem - List Melt Down Thursday 01/12/12... (Richard Girard) 3. 09:17 AM - Re: email test (Arksey@aol.com) 4. 09:23 AM - Re: Re: email test (william sullivan) 5. 12:33 PM - Re: Mk III max takeoff weight (Watkinsdw) 6. 02:20 PM - Re: Re: Mk III max takeoff weight (Richard Girard) 7. 03:23 PM - Re: Kolb list Malware ? (russ kinne) 8. 09:00 PM - Re: Re: Mk III max takeoff weight (Rick Neilsen) 9. 09:44 PM - Re: Re: Mk III max takeoff weight (John Hauck) 10. 11:36 PM - He assumed I knew what I was doing... (henry.voris) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 01:12:56 AM PST US Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Postmortem - List Melt Down Thursday 01/12/12... From: Eugene Zimmerman Matt, Thank you for the Kolb list fix. Keep up the good work. It is much appreciated. Gene Z On Jan 12, 2012, at 9:25 PM, Matt Dralle wrote: > > > Dear listers, > > My apologies. I thought that I had caught the auto-responder from "ctura(at)politecnica.it" first thing this morning and had unsubscribed the email address from the List. I wasn't seeing anymore posts coming in my email throughout the morning and felt proud of myself for having caught the outbreak early. > > Then about 5pm I thought it seemed kind of strange that I hadn't been getting my normal amount of List mail from the Kolb and other lists throughout the day. I went back and looked at my logs and realized that I had removed *MY* email address from all the lists instead of ctura(at)politecnica.it"! What a dork! Hey, I've had the flu all week! > > Anyway, I've removed the correct address from the List and have gone back and cleaned all of the archives, digest, listbrowse and web forums of all the bogus email so, other than your respective email boxes, things should be back to "normal". > > What was going on is that the email address "ctura(at)politecnica.it" was subscribed to the Kolb-List, but the account had been closed early this morning. Every time a post was made to the Kolb-List, the auto responder at politecnica.it would send another email back to the list saying the account was closed. Then the auto-responder would see its own message coming back from the List and dutifully send another response. Every time someone posted another message to the list with "STOP ALL THESE MESSAGES" (or whatever), it would start another thread of responses from the auto-responder, exponentially increasing the number of messages being forwarded and send. This would go on until, I guess, the world exploded. The Mayans were right, the end of the world did arrive in 2012. 327 email messages was all it took to knock the earth off its axis... "politecnica.it"'s auto-responder is broken; it should only send a single copy of "this user doesn't exist" to a given so! > urce email address. Had it functioned this way, there would have been only one message to the List and people would have mostly not noticed. > > Sorry for the hassle. > > Matt Dralle > Matronics Email List Admin > > > > Matt G Dralle | Matronics | 581 Jeannie Way | Livermore | CA | 94550 > 925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle@matronics.com Email > http://www.matronics.com/ WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 08:18:24 AM PST US Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Postmortem - List Melt Down Thursday 01/12/12... From: Richard Girard Only a minor annoyance, thanks for taking care of it. Hope you get to feeling better soon. Rick Girard do not archive On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 8:25 PM, Matt Dralle wrote: > > > Dear listers, > > My apologies. I thought that I had caught the auto-responder from > "ctura(at)politecnica.it" first thing this morning and had unsubscribed > the email address from the List. I wasn't seeing anymore posts coming in > my email throughout the morning and felt proud of myself for having caught > the outbreak early. > > Then about 5pm I thought it seemed kind of strange that I hadn't been > getting my normal amount of List mail from the Kolb and other lists > throughout the day. I went back and looked at my logs and realized that I > had removed *MY* email address from all the lists instead of ctura(at) > politecnica.it"! What a dork! Hey, I've had the flu all week! > > Anyway, I've removed the correct address from the List and have gone back > and cleaned all of the archives, digest, listbrowse and web forums of all > the bogus email so, other than your respective email boxes, things should > be back to "normal". > > What was going on is that the email address "ctura(at)politecnica.it" was > subscribed to the Kolb-List, but the account had been closed early this > morning. Every time a post was made to the Kolb-List, the auto responder > at politecnica.it would send another email back to the list saying the > account was closed. Then the auto-responder would see its own message > coming back from the List and dutifully send another response. Every time > someone posted another message to the list with "STOP ALL THESE MESSAGES" > (or whatever), it would start another thread of responses from the > auto-responder, exponentially increasing the number of messages being > forwarded and send. This would go on until, I guess, the world exploded. > The Mayans were right, the end of the world did arrive in 2012. 327 email > messages was all it took to knock the earth off its axis... " > politecnica.it"'s auto-responder is broken; it should only send a single > copy of "this user doesn't exist" to a given so! > urce email address. Had it functioned this way, there would have been > only one message to the List and people would have mostly not noticed. > > Sorry for the hassle. > > Matt Dralle > Matronics Email List Admin > > > Matt G Dralle | Matronics | 581 Jeannie Way | Livermore | CA | 94550 > 925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle@matronics.com Email > http://www.matronics.com/ WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft > > -- 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 3 _____________________________________ Time: 09:17:34 AM PST US From: Arksey@aol.com Subject: Kolb-List: RE: email test testing to see if Kolb list is working.....jim Jim Swan Kolb Firestar ll, 503 Rotax , 6147 Wilcox Rd., Eaton Rapids, Mi 48827 ph 517-663-8488 GPS GPS FOR MY RUNWAY N 42 deg 28.581 W084deg 44.825 ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 09:23:37 AM PST US From: william sullivan Subject: Re: Kolb-List: RE: email test - It works. --- On Fri, 1/13/12, Arksey@aol.com wrote: From: Arksey@aol.com Subject: Kolb-List: RE: email test =0A=0A =0A =0A=0Atesting to see if Kolb list is working.....jim =0A-=0AJi m Swan Kolb =0AFirestar ll, 503 Rotax , 6147 Wilcox Rd., Eaton Rapids, Mi 4 8827 ph 517-663-8488 =0AGPS GPS FOR MY RUNWAY N 42 deg 28.581 W084deg =0A44 ===================0A=0A ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 12:33:55 PM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Mk III max takeoff weight From: "Watkinsdw" OK, this something I've been wondering about. My Mk IIIC has gross weight listed in the log book and the ID plate as 1050. Eventually, I'd like to add an amphib system. Empty weight is 590 lbs., and a Full Lotus system plus 10 to 15 gallons of fuel starts to add up fast. I weigh in at about 195. I think the 912S will handle a bit more, but wonder how to avoid making a really expensive single place Kolb. (My wife would kinda like to come along...) How do I increase the official GW? Any other suggestions on this fantasy? Dave Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=363639#363639 ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 02:20:58 PM PST US Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Mk III max takeoff weight From: Richard Girard Dave, I actually asked this very question of my local FAA guy at the FSDO. The answer is pretty simple, you redo all your testing at the new gross weight, make a logbook entry to that effect and you're done. Rick Girard On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 2:30 PM, Watkinsdw wrote: > > OK, this something I've been wondering about. > My Mk IIIC has gross weight listed in the log book and the ID plate as > 1050. > Eventually, I'd like to add an amphib system. Empty weight is 590 lbs., > and a Full Lotus system plus 10 to 15 gallons of fuel starts to add up fast. > I weigh in at about 195. I think the 912S will handle a bit more, but > wonder how to avoid making a really expensive single place Kolb. > (My wife would kinda like to come along...) > How do I increase the official GW? Any other suggestions on this fantasy? > Dave > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=363639#363639 > > -- 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 7 _____________________________________ Time: 03:23:59 PM PST US Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Kolb list Malware ? From: russ kinne Ron I have the same problem, apparently stopped for now. Dunno what it is. Russ K On Jan 12, 2012, at 6:35 PM, Ron @ KFHU wrote: > > > ---- John Hauck wrote: > > ============ > > Block him. > He also gave in his auto reply his new email, to which I told him to delete his email address, > > > Ron & KFHU > ============== > > > Gene Z/Kolbers: > > First thing I did when I started getting the emails was forward a copy to > Matt. No reply from him, so sent the second msg. Still no contact with > Matt. > > Darn things are eating up my email service. > > john h > mkIII > Titus, Alabama > > > > From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eugene Zimmerman > Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2012 4:00 PM > To: Kolb list; Matt Dralle > Subject: Kolb-List: Kolb list Malware ? > > Today I'm getting hundreds of messages from > > From: > ctura@politecnica.it > Subject: > [Autoreply] Re: Re: Kolb-List: > > > --------. > Anyone else have this problem? > > > Matt, > > I'm forwarding several of them to you directly including full headers. > > > > > > > -- > kugelair.com > > > > > ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 09:00:39 PM PST US Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Mk III max takeoff weight From: Rick Neilsen Dave You have done well to keep the empty weight down to 590. I understand you want to increase the gross weight. Engine power isn't the limiting factor and the FAA isn't either. The important part is the air frame. The factory publishes the gross weight as 1000lbs. They do allow some margin extra and I for one have increased my MKIIIC to1050lbs. I also make a point of flying only in smooth air when near the 1050lbs. limit. At least one of our group has registered and flown at 1200lbs but he did beef up the wings to be able to safely do this. Does your plane have all those modifications? That pilot is also the test pilot on that plane every time he flies at those weights. Do you KNOW what is the limit is in your plane? Do you want to test this with your wife on board? Do you have a ballistic chute? What is the cost of a air frame failure? Food for thought. Rick Neilsen Redrive VW Powered MKIIIC On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 5:18 PM, Richard Girard wrote: > Dave, I actually asked this very question of my local FAA guy at the FSDO. > The answer is pretty simple, you redo all your testing at the new gross > weight, make a logbook entry to that effect and you're done. > > Rick Girard > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 2:30 PM, Watkinsdw wrote: > >> >> OK, this something I've been wondering about. >> My Mk IIIC has gross weight listed in the log book and the ID plate as >> 1050. >> Eventually, I'd like to add an amphib system. Empty weight is 590 lbs., >> and a Full Lotus system plus 10 to 15 gallons of fuel starts to add up fast. >> I weigh in at about 195. I think the 912S will handle a bit more, but >> wonder how to avoid making a really expensive single place Kolb. >> (My wife would kinda like to come along...) >> How do I increase the official GW? Any other suggestions on this fantasy? >> Dave >> >> >> >> >> Read this topic online here: >> >> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=363639#363639 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ========== >> arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List >> ========== >> http://forums.matronics.com >> ========== >> le, List Admin. >> ="_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 > > > * > > * > > ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 09:44:04 PM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Re: Mk III max takeoff weight At least one of our group has registered and flown at 1200lbs but he did beef up the wings to be able to safely do this. Does your plane have all those modifications? That pilot is also the test pilot on that plane every time he flies atthoseweights. Rick Neilsen Rick N/Kolbers: If that test pilot makes it until 15 March 2012, he will have flown more than a quarter million miles and 3,100.0 plus hours during the past 20 years. Almost 2,000.0 hours and 160,000 miles of that cross country, at or close to max gross weight of 1,200 lbs. He may be out of the test phase by now. The old MKIII still has a ways to go to catch his 1992 Dodge/Cummins with 388,000 plus miles and 6,500.0+ hours in 20 years. john h mkIII Titus, Alabama ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 11:36:44 PM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: He assumed I knew what I was doing... From: "henry.voris" 13jan12 Gentlemen, My pal Lance asked, So Do you wanna put the big piston in the front or the rear? I assumed he was kidding He assumed I knew what I was doing A train-wreck of assumptions. Deliberating shortly, we figured the larger piston would run hotter and should live closest to the fan. After a couple of hours of swearing, doing-it-again, and fumbling around we got the thundering 447 back together Im sure we got most of those dang needle bearings back in the wristpins Back on the plane, the engine fired right up and ran strong But the cylinder closest to the PTO (#2) was running a bit hotter than the cylinder closest to the alternator (#1). At 5,000 RPM and above, the temperature difference (both CHT and EGT) exceeded the difference allowed by the factory (36 CHT and 45 EGT). I have attached a spreadsheet that reflects the temperatures at different RPMs. I got back to Lance and he said that he had not been kidding about two sizes of pistons I was sick. Purchased a dandy little bore-scope from Aircraft Spruce and with more swearing and fumbling about I could see what I have (done) Cylinder #1, Closest to the alternator, 67.46, green dot Cylinder #2, Closest to the PTO, 67.45, red dot Cylinder #2 is hotter that shoots my theory about the bigger piston running hotter Also the top of piston #2 has accumulated a coating of carbon in only 5 hours of operation, while piston #1 is much cleaner. (Photos attached) I have run only AV-2 two-stroke oil in an effort to minimize carbon build up Im somewhat disappointed. In reviewing the spreadsheet It appears that each piston is operating within the temperature limits set by the factory for operation. The problem is the temperature difference between cylinder #1 and #2. Before installing the digital engine monitor, I only knew the temperatures on one cylinder I would have never have seen this problem and would probably be having a great time out flying, right now. When Rotax sets limits for the difference of temperature allowable between cylinders, Im pretty sure they are figuring on both pistons being the same size (Krauts are like that) A larger than normal temperature difference in an engine with matching pistons could indicate a problem However, in an engine with different sized pistons, perhaps this temperature difference should simply be expected. Comments? -------- Henry Firefly Five-Charlie-Bravo Do Not Archive Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=363707#363707 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/cht_egt_run_13jan12_269.xls http://forums.matronics.com//files/piston_2_pto_6745_red_dot_188.jpg http://forums.matronics.com//files/piston_1_alt_6746_green_dot_459.jpg ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Other Matronics Email List Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post A New Message kolb-list@matronics.com UN/SUBSCRIBE http://www.matronics.com/subscription List FAQ http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/Kolb-List.htm Web Forum Interface To Lists http://forums.matronics.com Matronics List Wiki http://wiki.matronics.com Full Archive Search Engine http://www.matronics.com/search 7-Day List Browse http://www.matronics.com/browse/kolb-list Browse Digests http://www.matronics.com/digest/kolb-list Browse Other Lists http://www.matronics.com/browse Live Online Chat! http://www.matronics.com/chat Archive Downloading http://www.matronics.com/archives Photo Share http://www.matronics.com/photoshare Other Email Lists http://www.matronics.com/emaillists Contributions http://www.matronics.com/contribution ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.