Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 07:07 AM - Re: Kolb-List Digest: 7 Msgs - 09/03/14 (b young)
2. 08:56 AM - Re: Rudder Failure on my Xtra. (Jason Omelchuck)
3. 11:21 AM - Re: Re: Rudder Failure on my Xtra. (John Hauck)
4. 02:14 PM - Re: Re: pitch? (Stuart Harner)
5. 03:17 PM - Re: Re: Rudder Failure on my Xtra. (Richard Girard)
6. 03:36 PM - Re: Re: Rudder Failure on my Xtra. (Richard Girard)
7. 05:02 PM - Re: Rudder Failure on my Xtra. (Jason Omelchuck)
8. 06:46 PM - Re: 80 or 100 hp? (alienwes)
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: Kolb-List Digest: 7 Msgs - 09/03/14 |
What concerns me is, this was a critical, safety-of-flight component that
failed.
Good thing this happened on a landing rollout, and not in flight. Why did
this steel part fail?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
as to the why part,,, I am just guessing out loud here....( only because I
have found myself guilty on occasion)
when applying heavy breaking to keep from moving during a run up or slow
down during a landing,,,, could there be too much pressure being applied to
the rudder pedals at the same time....
with heal breaks you can apply pressure to rudder, brakes, or both,,, if
you have toe brakes,,, it is always both,,,
if you are holding enough pressure to keep from moving and this pressure is
being applied to the rudder,,, you are IMHO,,, in my humble opinion,,,
over stressing the rudder linkages.
just a fifty cent guess, do not archive
boyd young
---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection
is active.
http://www.avast.com
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: Rudder Failure on my Xtra. |
I agree, it is disconcerting to have a flight critical part fail. Please remember
you are flying an experimental aircraft. It is built with non aircraft (approved)
parts and not designed and built to approved aircraft standards. Even
when planes are built with approved parts they fail. I would use this as a
wake up call to inspect every piece of steel on your aircraft for cracks. I would
mention this desire to the next person who annuals the aircraft. It is good
you have posted this on the list so others can immediately go inspect their
aircraft. Use this as an opportunity to adjust your perspective and make yourself
safer.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=429973#429973
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: Rudder Failure on my Xtra. |
Jason O/Kolbers:
The reason I bought my first Kolb aircraft kit, an Ultrastar, February 1984,
was because it was delivered with, primarily, aviation parts and material.
Even then, I had an aileron bell crank fail like the MKIIIx rudder bell
crank. Pulled the crank right out of the tube wall, weld and all. As far
as I know, I am the only one that achieved that mark of distinction. There
may have been others, but Homer Kolb kept it a secret if there was.
Kolb aircraft are built with standard aviation parts and material,
especially in flight critical areas. There are non-standard items on Kolb
aircraft, but most all of them are not used in flight critical systems.
I got a feeling our friend has a strong leg and a strong arm on the
controls. Took some work to weaken the rudder pedal bell crank and axles,
to the point they failed his last landing. I may have the heaviest MKIII in
the inventory, and probably fly with heavier loads than most. I used those
same axles and wheels for more than two thousand hours and thousands of
landings. Never broke an axle but broke the weld/tube wall from the gear
leg/axle socket. I have a feeling if I had kept on accumulating hours and
landings on those 5/8" axles, they would have failed too.
Personally, and my opinion only, the failure of a rudder pedal or bell crank
is not flight critical on a Kolb. If you were club footed enough to break
one in the air, you can fly and land the Kolb without killing yourself.
Here's where it is nice to have good differential braking, that works. Very
easy to maintain and control yaw, and steer the Kolb on the ground with
differential brakes. Because I have around 100 lbs on my tail wheel, I
depend on differential brakes most of the time to help me control my MKIII
on the ground.
Kolbs are experimental to a point. For the most part, Hauck's opinion
again, that doesn't mean much except the aircraft may have been amateur
built and has not been certified. I have an FAA Airworthiness Certificate
issued for N101AB. That's good enough for me. I like to think Homer Kolb's
airplanes have been tested with thousands and thousands of flight hours over
the past 30 plus years. Like Jason said, there are parts that wear out and
break on certified aircraft. When something like that happens to our Kolbs,
this is a good place to share so we can all make note of it and take
necessary action to fix it.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
I agree, it is disconcerting to have a flight critical part fail. Please
remember you are flying an experimental aircraft. It is built with non
aircraft (approved) parts and not designed and built to approved aircraft
standards. Even when planes are built with approved parts they fail
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 |
|
Thanks, that is where I will start too.
Stuart
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of baberdk
Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2014 4:00 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Re: pitch?
I started at 16 degrees and then adjusted for 6250 rpm static
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=429870#429870
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: Rudder Failure on my Xtra. |
Jason, The 4130 seamless steel tubing used in a Kolb IS aircraft quality,
so are the aluminum alloys that make up the spars, ribs and control
surfaces, the AN bolts that hold parts together and the cloth that covers
it all. Please take the time to think before you post such nonsense.
Now about the break. The best thing to do is have the part analyzed to see
what caused the break. Too much heat used during the welding process?
Allowing the weld to cool too fast? There are a number of causes that a
metallurgical lab would be able to pinpoint, Then we could all make a
reasoned decision about what steps to take AFTER we know the TRUE cause.
What we don't need is incoherent raving.
My 2 cents. Carry on.
Rick Girard
do not archive
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 10:56 AM, Jason Omelchuck <jason@trek-tech.com>
wrote:
>
> I agree, it is disconcerting to have a flight critical part fail. Please
> remember you are flying an experimental aircraft. It is built with non
> aircraft (approved) parts and not designed and built to approved aircraft
> standards. Even when planes are built with approved parts they fail. I
> would use this as a wake up call to inspect every piece of steel on your
> aircraft for cracks. I would mention this desire to the next person who
> annuals the aircraft. It is good you have posted this on the list so
> others can immediately go inspect their aircraft. Use this as an
> opportunity to adjust your perspective and make yourself safer.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=429973#429973
>
>
--
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 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: Rudder Failure on my Xtra. |
As long as I'm thinking about it, here's a simple thing Brad could do that
would help start the investigation. Pull out the part that broke off and
look at the nature of the break. Is there a part that shows signs of
corrosion, i.e. rust? This would most likely be where the crack started. Is
there a portion that appears as though the weld did not penetrate both
sides of the weld line? Is there a portion of the crack that appears
polished? This would indicate that after the crack started the two parts
worked against each other as the crack grew. How much of the material
appears grainy? This would be the area that finally gave up when the last
stress was applied and the part finally failed.
>From this visual analysis reasonable ideas about whether the failure was
caused by a manufacturing defect, a design defect, or a material defect.
Anyway, that's where I'd start if it were my rudder pedal weldment.
Again, my 2 cents, or is that 3?
Rick Girard
do not archive
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 5:16 PM, Richard Girard <aslsa.rng@gmail.com> wrote:
> Jason, The 4130 seamless steel tubing used in a Kolb IS aircraft quality,
> so are the aluminum alloys that make up the spars, ribs and control
> surfaces, the AN bolts that hold parts together and the cloth that covers
> it all. Please take the time to think before you post such nonsense.
> Now about the break. The best thing to do is have the part analyzed to see
> what caused the break. Too much heat used during the welding process?
> Allowing the weld to cool too fast? There are a number of causes that a
> metallurgical lab would be able to pinpoint, Then we could all make a
> reasoned decision about what steps to take AFTER we know the TRUE cause.
> What we don't need is incoherent raving.
> My 2 cents. Carry on.
>
> Rick Girard
> do not archive
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 10:56 AM, Jason Omelchuck <jason@trek-tech.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> I agree, it is disconcerting to have a flight critical part fail. Please
>> remember you are flying an experimental aircraft. It is built with non
>> aircraft (approved) parts and not designed and built to approved aircraft
>> standards. Even when planes are built with approved parts they fail. I
>> would use this as a wake up call to inspect every piece of steel on your
>> aircraft for cracks. I would mention this desire to the next person who
>> annuals the aircraft. It is good you have posted this on the list so
>> others can immediately go inspect their aircraft. Use this as an
>> opportunity to adjust your perspective and make yourself safer.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=429973#429973
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Zulu Delta
> Mk IIIC
> Thanks, Homer GBYM
>
> It isn't necessary to have relatives in Kansas City in order to be unhappy.
> - Groucho Marx
>
>
--
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
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: Rudder Failure on my Xtra. |
Rick, your MKIII must have been different than mine because mine was not built
to any aircraft standard. I did not compare the parts I received to the engineering
drawings, I did not even receive dimensional drawings to compare the parts
to. Heck I even put a plaque in my that stated it was amateur built and did
not comply with FAA standard aircraft rules. Mine was put together with a
couple of thousand hardware store stainless steel pop rivets. The poly fiber
I used was not FAA/PMA stamped. I think you take my post the wrong way. I like
Kolbs and think they are fine aircraft and for me that is not diminished by
the fact it does not meet aircraft standards. Some of the parts I used may be
the same alloys or manufactured the same way as aircraft parts but that does
not make the airplane built to FAA aircraft standards.
FWIW
Jason
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=430012#430012
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: 80 or 100 hp? |
Thanks John. The 80 hp has some really good attributes that I did not know of.
I am used to everyone in the PPC world saying it's gotta be the 100 hp. It is
probably because the PPC wings are so ineffecient. Thanks again for your input.
Wes
--------
Wesley Elliott
Sport Pilot-PPC
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=430021#430021
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! --
|