Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 10:03 AM - Re: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y (Dennis Rowe)
2. 10:43 AM - Re: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y (Bill Berle)
3. 11:51 AM - Re: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y (Charlie England)
4. 12:31 PM - Re: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y (Stuart Harner)
5. 12:33 PM - Re: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y (Bob)
6. 01:09 PM - Re: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y (Jim Baker)
7. 01:13 PM - Re: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y (Larry Cottrell)
8. 01:19 PM - Re: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y (Rick Neilsen)
9. 01:40 PM - Re: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y (Bill Berle)
10. 01:54 PM - Re: Addendum - Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y (Bill Berle)
11. 02:14 PM - Re: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y (Bill Berle)
12. 03:09 PM - Re: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y (undoctor)
13. 03:33 PM - Re: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y (Bill Berle)
14. 04:03 PM - Re: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y (Bill Berle)
15. 04:32 PM - Re: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y (John Hauck)
16. 04:46 PM - Re: Addendum - Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y (Leland.Lam)
17. 05:31 PM - Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y (Larry Cottrell)
18. 07:37 PM - Re: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y (Bill Berle)
19. 08:52 PM - Re: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y (Richard Pike)
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: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y |
Somebody notify John Hauck, as Miss Pfer has around 4000 hours on her airframe
and has taken an eighty horse and two 100 horse Rotax 912 engines well toward
their TBO! The horizontal stabilizer must be ready to fall off at any second.
Maybe I can get a good deal on her since her demise must be imminent.
Bill, just build the dang Firestar to plans and fly it. It won't fall apart.
Dennis "Skid" Rowe
Mk-3 Rotax 690, with a stock Kolb empennage.
> On Mar 21, 2016, at 6:29 PM, Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>
> I hope I'm wrong, but my review of the plans indicated that there is no traditional
DIRECT structural connection between the rear spar tube and the fuselage
tube. All the load paths have to take a serpentine route and go rearward through
the elevator hinges first, and only then into the U-joint and pivot bolt
in the steel ring. If you removed the elevator hinges (from either the elevator
or the stabilizer), or if you took the pin out of the hinges, you could move
the stabilizer up and down freely while the elevator remained bolted to the fuselage.
>
> Even WITH all the hinges in place, all up and down movement of the stabilizer
is transmitted through the rivets that hold the hinge onto the tubes, and there
is no significant stiffness or bracing against this movement. Essentially you
could move the root end of the stabilizer up and down by hand and this movement
would bend the (un-supported section of) the hinge material. This would attempt
to pry the rivets out of the tube and/or bend the thin metal back and forth.
>
> Also, because of this design the forward stabilizer attach bolt must be a loose
fit, and the stabilizer has to be able to slide back and forth a little.
>
> The only thing that is gained by this unusual structural load path is that 4
ounces of weight for a pair of fittings (at the rear stabilizer spar) is saved.
Can any one explain to me why this was a good bargain?
>
> Bill Berle
> www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
> www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Mon, 3/21/16, Richard Girard <aslsa.rng@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y
> To: "kolb-list@matronics.com" <kolb-list@matronics.com>
> Date: Monday, March 21, 2016, 2:40 PM
>
> The rear attachment
> of the horizontal stabilizer is NOT through the hinge. It is
> through the rear folding weldments that also act as the
> inner hinge. When it is set up correctly the hinge line is
> on the same center as the swivel bolt in the weldment,
> however there is some allowance for misalignment. In that
> case the weldment in the elevator spar (forward tube of the
> elevator), can slide on the bolt in the swivel
> weldment.I've seen folding mechanisms on the Kit
> Fox and repaired the mechanism on the Highlander and in my
> HO Homer's is the most clever. All you have to do to
> fold the HS on a Kolb is to take out a single bolt that
> attaches the lower wires to the rudder post. I'm not
> sure how you would make it any simpler.
> Rick Girard
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016
> at 12:55 PM, Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
> wrote:
> Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
>
>
>
> Are there any Kolb people on this list who are qualified
> mechanical or aero-structure engineers? I want to ask a
> question about the tail attachment mechanism.
>
>
>
> Before I even mention the question, I want to assure
> everyone that I AM COMPLETELY AWARE that there are X
> thousand Kolbs flying around safely with this stabilizer
> attachment. I understand that there have not been many (or
> perhaps any) failures of this mechanism. What I am asking
> about is the theoretical "correctness" of the
> design, and whether any other "old-school"
> airplane people think that this system is a little wonky.
>
>
>
> It took a few moments to finally understand how the
> mechanism works, and after looking at everything several
> times it was clear that there is no direct structural
> attachment between the main spar tube of the stabilizer to
> the fuselage tube (tailboom). The primary structural load
> path between the root end of the main stabilizer spar tube
> and the fuselage is transmitted through the elevator
> hinge... and this hinge isn't even the aircraft style
> extruded hinge.
>
>
>
> So if the air loads try to lift up or push down on the root
> end of the stabilizer, it puts all that load through the
> hinge, into the elevator pivot, and then finally into the
> steel ring at the back of the fuselage.
>
>
>
> But that's not even the biggest issue in my head. The
> larger issue is that (according to plan) the flat hinge is
> riveted to the tubes along one thin "point of
> contact" line tangent to the tube. So the root
> stabilizer load is all acting on a hinge, which itself is
> cantilevered off of one tangent point on the tube.
>
>
>
> Now I'm not a degreed engineer, and I'm not a
> mathematician. So I called a friend of mine who is a retired
> aerospace structural engineer, with 50+ years of experience.
> I showed him the plans and explained my concern, and I was
> informed that my concerns about this system were valid. My
> Kolb will be built with a more stable attachment.
>
>
>
> My question for any real, degreed, qualified,
> aircraft-experience engineers is... has anyone looked at the
> stabilizer root attachment load path and had these same
> concerns?
>
>
>
> ONCE AGAIN, this is not an attack on Mr. Kolb or his design,
> and it is not intended to cause any panic or concern at this
> point. What I want to know is why this load path - through
> two tangent mounted hinge halves, into a movable elevator,
> and then into the fuselage - is good enough, and why it was
> not appropriate to install an attachment bracket onto the
> fuselage at the rear stabilizer spar.
>
>
>
>
>
> Bill Berle
>
> www.ezflaphandle.com
> - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
>
> www.grantstar.net
> - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit
> entities
>
>
>
>
>
> ==========
>
> br>
> fts!)
>
> r>
>>
> w.buildersbooks.com" rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">www.buildersbooks.com
>
> rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>
> ==========
>
> -List" rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>
> ==========
>
> FORUMS -
>
> eferrer"
> target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>
> ==========
>
> b Site -
>
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>
> rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> ==========
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Blessed
> are the cracked, for they shall let in the light. Groucho
> Marx
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y |
I wish I could have placed a bet in Las Vegas as to how quickly some of the people
would jump in and say that these airplanes have X number of hours and Y number
of landings without failure. I would have been able to buy another Kolb :)
With all due respect to everyone, I KNOW that these airplanes are not falling out
of the sky.
Now, also with all due respect, can someone with engineering knowledge tell me,
ON A TECHNICAL ENGINEERING level, how it could EVER be considered as good design
practice to essentially cantilever a piano hinge off of a thin wall round
tube, with one line of rivets at the tangent contact point, and with flight loads
often perpendicular to that axis, where that cantilever loaded hinge is not
only connecting two pieces of primary aircraft structure but also attaching
a primary control surface ?
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
--------------------------------------------
On Tue, 3/22/16, Dennis Rowe <rowedenny@windstream.net> wrote:
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Date: Tuesday, March 22, 2016, 9:59 AM
Dennis Rowe <rowedenny@windstream.net>
Somebody notify John Hauck, as Miss Pfer has around 4000
hours on her airframe and has taken an eighty horse and two
100 horse Rotax 912 engines well toward their TBO! The
horizontal stabilizer must be ready to fall off at any
second.
Maybe I can get a good deal on her since her demise must be
imminent.
Bill, just build the dang Firestar to plans and fly it. It
won't fall apart.
Dennis "Skid" Rowe
Mk-3 Rotax 690, with a stock Kolb empennage.
> On Mar 21, 2016, at 6:29 PM, Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
>
>
> I hope I'm wrong, but my review of the plans indicated
that there is no traditional DIRECT structural connection
between the rear spar tube and the fuselage tube. All the
load paths have to take a serpentine route and go rearward
through the elevator hinges first, and only then into the
U-joint and pivot bolt in the steel ring. If you removed the
elevator hinges (from either the elevator or the
stabilizer), or if you took the pin out of the hinges, you
could move the stabilizer up and down freely while the
elevator remained bolted to the fuselage.
>
> Even WITH all the hinges in place, all up and down
movement of the stabilizer is transmitted through the rivets
that hold the hinge onto the tubes, and there is no
significant stiffness or bracing against this movement.
Essentially you could move the root end of the stabilizer up
and down by hand and this movement would bend the
(un-supported section of) the hinge material. This would
attempt to pry the rivets out of the tube and/or bend the
thin metal back and forth.
>
> Also, because of this design the forward stabilizer
attach bolt must be a loose fit, and the stabilizer has to
be able to slide back and forth a little.
>
> The only thing that is gained by this unusual
structural load path is that 4 ounces of weight for a pair
of fittings (at the rear stabilizer spar) is saved. Can any
one explain to me why this was a good bargain?
>
> Bill Berle
> www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance
upgrade for light aircraft
> www.grantstar.net
- winning proposals for non-profit and
for-profit entities
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Mon, 3/21/16, Richard Girard <aslsa.rng@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge
ass'y
> To: "kolb-list@matronics.com"
<kolb-list@matronics.com>
> Date: Monday, March 21, 2016, 2:40 PM
>
> The rear attachment
> of the horizontal stabilizer is NOT through the hinge.
It is
> through the rear folding weldments that also act as
the
> inner hinge. When it is set up correctly the hinge line
is
> on the same center as the swivel bolt in the weldment,
> however there is some allowance for misalignment. In
that
> case the weldment in the elevator spar (forward tube of
the
> elevator), can slide on the bolt in the swivel
> weldment.I've seen folding mechanisms on the Kit
> Fox and repaired the mechanism on the Highlander and in
my
> HO Homer's is the most clever. All you have to do to
> fold the HS on a Kolb is to take out a single bolt
that
> attaches the lower wires to the rudder post. I'm not
> sure how you would make it any simpler.
> Rick Girard
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016
> at 12:55 PM, Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
> wrote:
> Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
>
>
>
> Are there any Kolb people on this list who are
qualified
> mechanical or aero-structure engineers? I want to ask
a
> question about the tail attachment mechanism.
>
>
>
> Before I even mention the question, I want to assure
> everyone that I AM COMPLETELY AWARE that there are X
> thousand Kolbs flying around safely with this
stabilizer
> attachment. I understand that there have not been many
(or
> perhaps any) failures of this mechanism. What I am
asking
> about is the theoretical "correctness" of the
> design, and whether any other "old-school"
> airplane people think that this system is a little
wonky.
>
>
>
> It took a few moments to finally understand how the
> mechanism works, and after looking at everything
several
> times it was clear that there is no direct structural
> attachment between the main spar tube of the stabilizer
to
> the fuselage tube (tailboom). The primary structural
load
> path between the root end of the main stabilizer spar
tube
> and the fuselage is transmitted through the elevator
> hinge... and this hinge isn't even the aircraft style
> extruded hinge.
>
>
>
> So if the air loads try to lift up or push down on the
root
> end of the stabilizer, it puts all that load through
the
> hinge, into the elevator pivot, and then finally into
the
> steel ring at the back of the fuselage.
>
>
>
> But that's not even the biggest issue in my head. The
> larger issue is that (according to plan) the flat hinge
is
> riveted to the tubes along one thin "point of
> contact" line tangent to the tube. So the root
> stabilizer load is all acting on a hinge, which itself
is
> cantilevered off of one tangent point on the
tube.
>
>
>
> Now I'm not a degreed engineer, and I'm not a
> mathematician. So I called a friend of mine who is a
retired
> aerospace structural engineer, with 50+ years of
experience.
> I showed him the plans and explained my concern, and I
was
> informed that my concerns about this system were valid.
My
> Kolb will be built with a more stable attachment.
>
>
>
> My question for any real, degreed, qualified,
> aircraft-experience engineers is... has anyone looked
at the
> stabilizer root attachment load path and had these
same
> concerns?
>
>
>
> ONCE AGAIN, this is not an attack on Mr. Kolb or his
design,
> and it is not intended to cause any panic or concern at
this
> point. What I want to know is why this load path -
through
> two tangent mounted hinge halves, into a movable
elevator,
> and then into the fuselage - is good enough, and why it
was
> not appropriate to install an attachment bracket onto
the
> fuselage at the rear stabilizer spar.
>
>
>
>
>
> Bill Berle
>
> www.ezflaphandle.com
> - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
>
> www.grantstar.net
> - winning proposals for
non-profit and for-profit
> entities
>
>
>
>
>
> ==========
>
> br>
> fts!)
>
> r>
>>
> w.buildersbooks.com" rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">www.buildersbooks.com
>
> rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> -Matt
Dralle, List Admin.
>
> ==========
>
> -List" rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>
> ==========
>
> FORUMS -
>
> eferrer"
> target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>
> ==========
>
> b Site -
>
> -Matt
Dralle, List Admin.
>
> rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> ==========
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Blessed
> are the cracked, for they shall let in the
light.Groucho
> Marx
>
>
>
>
>
>
Lists This Month --
Some AWESOME FREE Gifts!)
Raiser. Click on
more about
Gifts provided
www.buildersbooks.com
-Matt
Dralle, List Admin.
Forum -
- MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
List Contribution Web Site -
-Matt
Dralle, List Admin.
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: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y |
Any way to post a pic of the assembly, or the construction drawing, for
those of us who don't have that model to inspect? Not the entire set of
plans, of course; just the area in question.
On 3/22/2016 12:39 PM, Bill Berle wrote:
>
> I wish I could have placed a bet in Las Vegas as to how quickly some of the people
would jump in and say that these airplanes have X number of hours and Y
number of landings without failure. I would have been able to buy another Kolb
:)
>
> With all due respect to everyone, I KNOW that these airplanes are not falling
out of the sky.
>
> Now, also with all due respect, can someone with engineering knowledge tell me,
ON A TECHNICAL ENGINEERING level, how it could EVER be considered as good design
practice to essentially cantilever a piano hinge off of a thin wall round
tube, with one line of rivets at the tangent contact point, and with flight
loads often perpendicular to that axis, where that cantilever loaded hinge is
not only connecting two pieces of primary aircraft structure but also attaching
a primary control surface ?
>
> Bill Berle
> www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
> www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Tue, 3/22/16, Dennis Rowe <rowedenny@windstream.net> wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Date: Tuesday, March 22, 2016, 9:59 AM
>
> Dennis Rowe <rowedenny@windstream.net>
>
> Somebody notify John Hauck, as Miss Pfer has around 4000
> hours on her airframe and has taken an eighty horse and two
> 100 horse Rotax 912 engines well toward their TBO! The
> horizontal stabilizer must be ready to fall off at any
> second.
> Maybe I can get a good deal on her since her demise must be
> imminent.
> Bill, just build the dang Firestar to plans and fly it. It
> won't fall apart.
>
>
> Dennis "Skid" Rowe
> Mk-3 Rotax 690, with a stock Kolb empennage.
>
>
>
> > On Mar 21, 2016, at 6:29 PM, Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > I hope I'm wrong, but my review of the plans indicated
> that there is no traditional DIRECT structural connection
> between the rear spar tube and the fuselage tube. All the
> load paths have to take a serpentine route and go rearward
> through the elevator hinges first, and only then into the
> U-joint and pivot bolt in the steel ring. If you removed the
> elevator hinges (from either the elevator or the
> stabilizer), or if you took the pin out of the hinges, you
> could move the stabilizer up and down freely while the
> elevator remained bolted to the fuselage.
> >
> > Even WITH all the hinges in place, all up and down
> movement of the stabilizer is transmitted through the rivets
> that hold the hinge onto the tubes, and there is no
> significant stiffness or bracing against this movement.
> Essentially you could move the root end of the stabilizer up
> and down by hand and this movement would bend the
> (un-supported section of) the hinge material. This would
> attempt to pry the rivets out of the tube and/or bend the
> thin metal back and forth.
> >
> > Also, because of this design the forward stabilizer
> attach bolt must be a loose fit, and the stabilizer has to
> be able to slide back and forth a little.
> >
> > The only thing that is gained by this unusual
> structural load path is that 4 ounces of weight for a pair
> of fittings (at the rear stabilizer spar) is saved. Can any
> one explain to me why this was a good bargain?
> >
> > Bill Berle
> > www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance
> upgrade for light aircraft
> > www.grantstar.net
> - winning proposals for non-profit and
> for-profit entities
> >
> > --------------------------------------------
> > On Mon, 3/21/16, Richard Girard <aslsa.rng@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge
> ass'y
> > To: "kolb-list@matronics.com"
> <kolb-list@matronics.com>
> > Date: Monday, March 21, 2016, 2:40 PM
> >
> > The rear attachment
> > of the horizontal stabilizer is NOT through the hinge.
> It is
> > through the rear folding weldments that also act as
> the
> > inner hinge. When it is set up correctly the hinge line
> is
> > on the same center as the swivel bolt in the weldment,
> > however there is some allowance for misalignment. In
> that
> > case the weldment in the elevator spar (forward tube of
> the
> > elevator), can slide on the bolt in the swivel
> > weldment.I've seen folding mechanisms on the Kit
> > Fox and repaired the mechanism on the Highlander and in
> my
> > HO Homer's is the most clever. All you have to do to
> > fold the HS on a Kolb is to take out a single bolt
> that
> > attaches the lower wires to the rudder post. I'm not
> > sure how you would make it any simpler.
> > Rick Girard
> > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016
> > at 12:55 PM, Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
> > wrote:
> > Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
> >
> >
> >
> > Are there any Kolb people on this list who are
> qualified
> > mechanical or aero-structure engineers? I want to ask
> a
> > question about the tail attachment mechanism.
> >
> >
> >
> > Before I even mention the question, I want to assure
> > everyone that I AM COMPLETELY AWARE that there are X
> > thousand Kolbs flying around safely with this
> stabilizer
> > attachment. I understand that there have not been many
> (or
> > perhaps any) failures of this mechanism. What I am
> asking
> > about is the theoretical "correctness" of the
> > design, and whether any other "old-school"
> > airplane people think that this system is a little
> wonky.
> >
> >
> >
> > It took a few moments to finally understand how the
> > mechanism works, and after looking at everything
> several
> > times it was clear that there is no direct structural
> > attachment between the main spar tube of the stabilizer
> to
> > the fuselage tube (tailboom). The primary structural
> load
> > path between the root end of the main stabilizer spar
> tube
> > and the fuselage is transmitted through the elevator
> > hinge... and this hinge isn't even the aircraft style
> > extruded hinge.
> >
> >
> >
> > So if the air loads try to lift up or push down on the
> root
> > end of the stabilizer, it puts all that load through
> the
> > hinge, into the elevator pivot, and then finally into
> the
> > steel ring at the back of the fuselage.
> >
> >
> >
> > But that's not even the biggest issue in my head. The
> > larger issue is that (according to plan) the flat hinge
> is
> > riveted to the tubes along one thin "point of
> > contact" line tangent to the tube. So the root
> > stabilizer load is all acting on a hinge, which itself
> is
> > cantilevered off of one tangent point on the
> tube.
> >
> >
> >
> > Now I'm not a degreed engineer, and I'm not a
> > mathematician. So I called a friend of mine who is a
> retired
> > aerospace structural engineer, with 50+ years of
> experience.
> > I showed him the plans and explained my concern, and I
> was
> > informed that my concerns about this system were valid.
> My
> > Kolb will be built with a more stable attachment.
> >
> >
> >
> > My question for any real, degreed, qualified,
> > aircraft-experience engineers is... has anyone looked
> at the
> > stabilizer root attachment load path and had these
> same
> > concerns?
> >
> >
> >
> > ONCE AGAIN, this is not an attack on Mr. Kolb or his
> design,
> > and it is not intended to cause any panic or concern at
> this
> > point. What I want to know is why this load path -
> through
> > two tangent mounted hinge halves, into a movable
> elevator,
> > and then into the fuselage - is good enough, and why it
> was
> > not appropriate to install an attachment bracket onto
> the
> > fuselage at the rear stabilizer spar.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Bill Berle
> >
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: | Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y |
Bill,
I am not an engineer but I did stay in a Holiday Inn last night. :) No, not really,
but I do have a fundamental understanding of load transmission through a
structure.
First a question, and please don't be offended. Have you had an opportunity to
observe the structure of the Kolb tail while it was being folded and then again
when it is bolted into place? I asked this because I found a couple of things
in the plans of the Firefly that I did not understand until I was able to
actually see it live. Simply put, I had trouble visualizing it from just the plans.
One thing that I think is missing from this discussion is the loads carried by
the brace wires. I would posit that most of the forces from the tail that are
transmitted to the boom tube are carried by the braces. These, when properly tensioned
are actually pre-loaded slightly. This puts the tubes in compression
which makes the whole thing quite strong. It also transfers the loads from the
horizontals to the steel post of the verticals which in turn is transferred to
the boom tube via the steel ring which is bolted and/or riveted to the tube.
Of course some loads are transferred through the hinge points and the front hinge
must be able to slide slightly as the elevator moves through its arc of travel.
Could this be made stronger? Of course, but not without sacrificing something
else such as weight or foldability. It is actually a very clever design and
I suspect that the majority of loads that move through the rear hinge come
from the elevator and not the stabilizer.
I would also bet that the loads carried through the hinges is far below the shear
and tension limits of properly installed rivets.
I am actually more "freaked out" by the fact that everything in the tail depends
on that one little 3/16" bolt (Firefly) that holds the lower braces in place.
Really, the threads on that bolt are all there is between you and falling out
of the sky. To combat this irrationality I swap out the bolt fairly often and
the nuts even more often. If it really bothered me, I would stay on the ground.
:)
Perhaps you could send a copy of your plans to Barnaby Wainfan and ask for his
analysis. I hear he is a really nice guy. From reading his articles over the years
I am sure he could provide the answers you seek.
As Uncle Red used to say: "Remember, if women don't find you handsome, they should
at least find you handy"
Stuart
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Berle
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2016 5:30 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y
I hope I'm wrong, but my review of the plans indicated that there is no traditional
DIRECT structural connection between the rear spar tube and the fuselage
tube. All the load paths have to take a serpentine route and go rearward through
the elevator hinges first, and only then into the U-joint and pivot bolt in
the steel ring. If you removed the elevator hinges (from either the elevator
or the stabilizer), or if you took the pin out of the hinges, you could move the
stabilizer up and down freely while the elevator remained bolted to the fuselage.
Even WITH all the hinges in place, all up and down movement of the stabilizer is
transmitted through the rivets that hold the hinge onto the tubes, and there
is no significant stiffness or bracing against this movement. Essentially you
could move the root end of the stabilizer up and down by hand and this movement
would bend the (un-supported section of) the hinge material. This would attempt
to pry the rivets out of the tube and/or bend the thin metal back and forth.
Also, because of this design the forward stabilizer attach bolt must be a loose
fit, and the stabilizer has to be able to slide back and forth a little.
The only thing that is gained by this unusual structural load path is that 4 ounces
of weight for a pair of fittings (at the rear stabilizer spar) is saved.
Can any one explain to me why this was a good bargain?
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
--------------------------------------------
On Mon, 3/21/16, Richard Girard <aslsa.rng@gmail.com> wrote:
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y
To: "kolb-list@matronics.com" <kolb-list@matronics.com>
Date: Monday, March 21, 2016, 2:40 PM
The rear attachment
of the horizontal stabilizer is NOT through the hinge. It is through the rear
folding weldments that also act as the inner hinge. When it is set up correctly
the hinge line is on the same center as the swivel bolt in the weldment,
however there is some allowance for misalignment. In that case the weldment
in the elevator spar (forward tube of the elevator), can slide on the bolt in
the swivel weldment.I've seen folding mechanisms on the Kit Fox and repaired
the mechanism on the Highlander and in my HO Homer's is the most clever. All
you have to do to fold the HS on a Kolb is to take out a single bolt that
attaches the lower wires to the rudder post. I'm not sure how you would make
it any simpler.
Rick Girard
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016
at 12:55 PM, Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
Are there any Kolb people on this list who are qualified mechanical or aero-structure
engineers? I want to ask a question about the tail attachment mechanism.
Before I even mention the question, I want to assure everyone that I AM COMPLETELY
AWARE that there are X thousand Kolbs flying around safely with this stabilizer
attachment. I understand that there have not been many (or perhaps
any) failures of this mechanism. What I am asking about is the theoretical "correctness"
of the design, and whether any other "old-school"
airplane people think that this system is a little wonky.
It took a few moments to finally understand how the mechanism works, and after
looking at everything several times it was clear that there is no direct structural
attachment between the main spar tube of the stabilizer to the fuselage
tube (tailboom). The primary structural load path between the root end of
the main stabilizer spar tube and the fuselage is transmitted through the elevator
hinge... and this hinge isn't even the aircraft style extruded hinge.
So if the air loads try to lift up or push down on the root end of the stabilizer,
it puts all that load through the hinge, into the elevator pivot, and then
finally into the steel ring at the back of the fuselage.
But that's not even the biggest issue in my head. The larger issue is that (according
to plan) the flat hinge is riveted to the tubes along one thin "point
of contact" line tangent to the tube. So the root stabilizer load is all acting
on a hinge, which itself is cantilevered off of one tangent point on the
tube.
Now I'm not a degreed engineer, and I'm not a mathematician. So I called a friend
of mine who is a retired aerospace structural engineer, with 50+ years of
experience.
I showed him the plans and explained my concern, and I was informed that my concerns
about this system were valid. My Kolb will be built with a more stable
attachment.
My question for any real, degreed, qualified, aircraft-experience engineers is...
has anyone looked at the stabilizer root attachment load path and had these
same concerns?
ONCE AGAIN, this is not an attack on Mr. Kolb or his design, and it is not intended
to cause any panic or concern at this point. What I want to know is why
this load path - through two tangent mounted hinge halves, into a movable elevator,
and then into the fuselage - is good enough, and why it was not appropriate
to install an attachment bracket onto the fuselage at the rear stabilizer
spar.
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com
- safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net
- winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
==========
br>
fts!)
r>
>
w.buildersbooks.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">www.buildersbooks.com
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
==========
-List" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
==========
FORUMS -
eferrer"
target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
==========
b Site -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
--
Blessed
are the cracked, for they shall let in the light. Groucho Marx
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: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y |
I suffer from the same 50 year malady you mentioned earlier, but would
suggest you propose to your aero/ structures engineer
friend a couple of alternate details. I would agree that the structural
configuration is non standard, with the appearance of some odd geometric
coupling, but it has clearly worked well for many years and tens of
thousands of hours fleet time regardless of the Las Vegas odd makers.
The main point is the loads are very small compared to the strength of the
hardware...arguably by more than an order of magnitude.
Flying downloads on the horizontal tail are probably in the
50 lb maybe 100 lb at the most to provide flyable static pitch and speed
stability. Low aspect ratio and taper puts the center of pressure fairly
close to the wire bracing attachments, probably forward and inboard, so most
of these downloads are taken out as tension in those wires and compression
in the vertical stabilizer tube. Smaller loads are reacted at the root
bolts and across the hinges. One would not attempt to design the structure
for full elevator deflection at
Vne, so reasonably one would only ever see relatively modest changes in the
aero down loads throughout the flight spectrum. A fairly extreme case that
would develop very high pitch rates and require elevator correction would be
full power to idle or the reverse. That would produce about 300 lb of force
at maybe 2 ft
above the cg and would require a change in tail download of about
40 lb assuming the moment arm is about 15 ft. So thats 20 lb per side.
Each of the hinge rivets assuming they are 1/8th inch is good for 120 lbs
single shear. The load is shared by lots of rivets. The bolts are I
believe 5/16 which are good for 5,500 lb single shear even if only grade 5.
I would argue that the hinges, dozens of rivets and large diameter pivoting
bolts appear
to be overdesigned for the basic small aero loads of this aircraft. Fatigue
loads from the prop wash swirl could be an issue,
but apparently not from fleet experience.
Ultimate static strength is most likely dictated by the aluminum tubing
substructure, not by the rivets, hinges, or support bolts....
I recommend not trying to improve the design!
Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Berle
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2016 10:39 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y
I wish I could have placed a bet in Las Vegas as to how quickly some of the
people would jump in and say that these airplanes have X number of hours and
Y number of landings without failure. I would have been able to buy another
Kolb :)
With all due respect to everyone, I KNOW that these airplanes are not
falling out of the sky.
Now, also with all due respect, can someone with engineering knowledge tell
me, ON A TECHNICAL ENGINEERING level, how it could EVER be considered as
good design practice to essentially cantilever a piano hinge off of a thin
wall round tube, with one line of rivets at the tangent contact point, and
with flight loads often perpendicular to that axis, where that cantilever
loaded hinge is not only connecting two pieces of primary aircraft structure
but also attaching a primary control surface ?
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and
for-profit entities
--------------------------------------------
On Tue, 3/22/16, Dennis Rowe <rowedenny@windstream.net> wrote:
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y
Dennis Rowe <rowedenny@windstream.net>
Somebody notify John Hauck, as Miss Pfer has around 4000
hours on her airframe and has taken an eighty horse and two
100 horse Rotax 912 engines well toward their TBO! The
horizontal stabilizer must be ready to fall off at any
second.
Maybe I can get a good deal on her since her demise must be
imminent.
Bill, just build the dang Firestar to plans and fly it. It
won't fall apart.
Dennis "Skid" Rowe
Mk-3 Rotax 690, with a stock Kolb empennage.
> On Mar 21, 2016, at 6:29 PM, Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
>
>
> I hope I'm wrong, but my review of the plans indicated
that there is no traditional DIRECT structural connection
between the rear spar tube and the fuselage tube. All the
load paths have to take a serpentine route and go rearward
through the elevator hinges first, and only then into the
U-joint and pivot bolt in the steel ring. If you removed the
elevator hinges (from either the elevator or the
stabilizer), or if you took the pin out of the hinges, you
could move the stabilizer up and down freely while the
elevator remained bolted to the fuselage.
>
> Even WITH all the hinges in place, all up and down
movement of the stabilizer is transmitted through the rivets
that hold the hinge onto the tubes, and there is no
significant stiffness or bracing against this movement.
Essentially you could move the root end of the stabilizer up
and down by hand and this movement would bend the
(un-supported section of) the hinge material. This would
attempt to pry the rivets out of the tube and/or bend the
thin metal back and forth.
>
> Also, because of this design the forward stabilizer
attach bolt must be a loose fit, and the stabilizer has to
be able to slide back and forth a little.
>
> The only thing that is gained by this unusual
structural load path is that 4 ounces of weight for a pair
of fittings (at the rear stabilizer spar) is saved. Can any
one explain to me why this was a good bargain?
>
> Bill Berle
> www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance
upgrade for light aircraft
> www.grantstar.net
- winning proposals for non-profit and
for-profit entities
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Mon, 3/21/16, Richard Girard <aslsa.rng@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge
ass'y
> To: "kolb-list@matronics.com"
<kolb-list@matronics.com>
> Date: Monday, March 21, 2016, 2:40 PM
>
> The rear attachment
> of the horizontal stabilizer is NOT through the hinge.
It is
> through the rear folding weldments that also act as
the
> inner hinge. When it is set up correctly the hinge line
is
> on the same center as the swivel bolt in the weldment,
> however there is some allowance for misalignment. In
that
> case the weldment in the elevator spar (forward tube of
the
> elevator), can slide on the bolt in the swivel
> weldment.I've seen folding mechanisms on the Kit
> Fox and repaired the mechanism on the Highlander and in
my
> HO Homer's is the most clever. All you have to do to
> fold the HS on a Kolb is to take out a single bolt
that
> attaches the lower wires to the rudder post. I'm not
> sure how you would make it any simpler.
> Rick Girard
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016
> at 12:55 PM, Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
> wrote:
> Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
>
>
> Are there any Kolb people on this list who are
qualified
> mechanical or aero-structure engineers? I want to ask
a
> question about the tail attachment mechanism.
>
>
> Before I even mention the question, I want to assure
> everyone that I AM COMPLETELY AWARE that there are X
> thousand Kolbs flying around safely with this
stabilizer
> attachment. I understand that there have not been many
(or
> perhaps any) failures of this mechanism. What I am
asking
> about is the theoretical "correctness" of the
> design, and whether any other "old-school"
> airplane people think that this system is a little
wonky.
>
>
> It took a few moments to finally understand how the
> mechanism works, and after looking at everything
several
> times it was clear that there is no direct structural
> attachment between the main spar tube of the stabilizer
to
> the fuselage tube (tailboom). The primary structural
load
> path between the root end of the main stabilizer spar
tube
> and the fuselage is transmitted through the elevator
> hinge... and this hinge isn't even the aircraft style
> extruded hinge.
>
>
> So if the air loads try to lift up or push down on the
root
> end of the stabilizer, it puts all that load through
the
> hinge, into the elevator pivot, and then finally into
the
> steel ring at the back of the fuselage.
>
>
> But that's not even the biggest issue in my head. The
> larger issue is that (according to plan) the flat hinge
is
> riveted to the tubes along one thin "point of
> contact" line tangent to the tube. So the root
> stabilizer load is all acting on a hinge, which itself
is
> cantilevered off of one tangent point on the
tube.
>
>
> Now I'm not a degreed engineer, and I'm not a
> mathematician. So I called a friend of mine who is a
retired
> aerospace structural engineer, with 50+ years of
experience.
> I showed him the plans and explained my concern, and I
was
> informed that my concerns about this system were valid.
My
> Kolb will be built with a more stable attachment.
>
>
> My question for any real, degreed, qualified,
> aircraft-experience engineers is... has anyone looked
at the
> stabilizer root attachment load path and had these
same
> concerns?
>
>
> ONCE AGAIN, this is not an attack on Mr. Kolb or his
design,
> and it is not intended to cause any panic or concern at
this
> point. What I want to know is why this load path -
through
> two tangent mounted hinge halves, into a movable
elevator,
> and then into the fuselage - is good enough, and why it
was
> not appropriate to install an attachment bracket onto
the
> fuselage at the rear stabilizer spar.
>
>
> Bill Berle
>
> www.ezflaphandle.com
> - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
>
> www.grantstar.net
> - winning proposals for
non-profit and for-profit
> entities
>
>
> ==========
>
> br>
> fts!)
>
> r>
>>
> w.buildersbooks.com" rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">www.buildersbooks.com
>
> rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> -Matt
Dralle, List Admin.
>
> ==========
>
> -List" rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>
> ==========
>
> FORUMS -
>
> eferrer"
> target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>
> ==========
>
> b Site -
>
> -Matt
Dralle, List Admin.
>
> rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> ==========
>
>
> --
> Blessed
> are the cracked, for they shall let in the
light. Groucho
> Marx
>
>
Lists This Month --
Some AWESOME FREE Gifts!)
Raiser. Click on
more about
Gifts provided
www.buildersbooks.com
-Matt
Dralle, List Admin.
Forum -
- MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
List Contribution Web Site -
-Matt
Dralle, List Admin.
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: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y |
Now the onus is on you. Post one single incident of horizontal stab/elevator failure.
Just one.
On the other hand, they are experimental and you, the builder, are the experimenter.
Press on. Could care less.
Jim Baker
405 426 5377
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
Sent: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 13:39
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y
I wish I could have placed a bet in Las Vegas as to how quickly some of the people
would jump in and say that these airplanes have X number of hours and Y number
of landings without failure. I would have been able to buy another Kolb :)
With all due respect to everyone, I KNOW that these airplanes are not falling out
of the sky.
Now, also with all due respect, can someone with engineering knowledge tell me,
ON A TECHNICAL ENGINEERING level, how it could EVER be considered as good design
practice to essentially cantilever a piano hinge off of a thin wall round
tube, with one line of rivets at the tangent contact point, and with flight loads
often perpendicular to that axis, where that cantilever loaded hinge is not
only connecting two pieces of primary aircraft structure but also attaching
a primary control surface ?
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
--------------------------------------------
On Tue, 3/22/16, Dennis Rowe <rowedenny@windstream.net> wrote:
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Date: Tuesday, March 22, 2016, 9:59 AM
Dennis Rowe <rowedenny@windstream.net>
Somebody notify John Hauck, as Miss Pfer has around 4000
hours on her airframe and has taken an eighty horse and two
100 horse Rotax 912 engines well toward their TBO! The
horizontal stabilizer must be ready to fall off at any
second.
Maybe I can get a good deal on her since her demise must be
imminent.
Bill, just build the dang Firestar to plans and fly it. It
won't fall apart.
Dennis "Skid" Rowe
Mk-3 Rotax 690, with a stock Kolb empennage.
> On Mar 21, 2016, at 6:29 PM, Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
>
>
> I hope I'm wrong, but my review of the plans indicated
that there is no traditional DIRECT structural connection
between the rear spar tube and the fuselage tube. All the
load paths have to take a serpentine route and go rearward
through the elevator hinges first, and only then into the
U-joint and pivot bolt in the steel ring. If you removed the
elevator hinges (from either the elevator or the
stabilizer), or if you took the pin out of the hinges, you
could move the stabilizer up and down freely while the
elevator remained bolted to the fuselage.
>
> Even WITH all the hinges in place, all up and down
movement of the stabilizer is transmitted through the rivets
that hold the hinge onto the tubes, and there is no
significant stiffness or bracing against this movement.
Essentially you could move the root end of the stabilizer up
and down by hand and this movement would bend the
(un-supported section of) the hinge material. This would
attempt to pry the rivets out of the tube and/or bend the
thin metal back and forth.
>
> Also, because of this design the forward stabilizer
attach bolt must be a loose fit, and the stabilizer has to
be able to slide back and forth a little.
>
> The only thing that is gained by this unusual
structural load path is that 4 ounces of weight for a pair
of fittings (at the rear stabilizer spar) is saved. Can any
one explain to me why this was a good bargain?
>
> Bill Berle
> www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance
upgrade for light aircraft
> www.grantstar.net
- winning proposals for non-profit and
for-profit entities
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Mon, 3/21/16, Richard Girard <aslsa.rng@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge
ass'y
> To: "kolb-list@matronics.com"
<kolb-list@matronics.com>
> Date: Monday, March 21, 2016, 2:40 PM
>
> The rear attachment
> of the horizontal stabilizer is NOT through the hinge.
It is
> through the rear folding weldments that also act as
the
> inner hinge. When it is set up correctly the hinge line
is
> on the same center as the swivel bolt in the weldment,
> however there is some allowance for misalignment. In
that
> case the weldment in the elevator spar (forward tube of
the
> elevator), can slide on the bolt in the swivel
> weldment.I've seen folding mechanisms on the Kit
> Fox and repaired the mechanism on the Highlander and in
my
> HO Homer's is the most clever. All you have to do to
> fold the HS on a Kolb is to take out a single bolt
that
> attaches the lower wires to the rudder post. I'm not
> sure how you would make it any simpler.
> Rick Girard
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016
> at 12:55 PM, Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
> wrote:
> Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
>
>
>
> Are there any Kolb people on this list who are
qualified
> mechanical or aero-structure engineers? I want to ask
a
> question about the tail attachment mechanism.
>
>
>
> Before I even mention the question, I want to assure
> everyone that I AM COMPLETELY AWARE that there are X
> thousand Kolbs flying around safely with this
stabilizer
> attachment. I understand that there have not been many
(or
> perhaps any) failures of this mechanism. What I am
asking
> about is the theoretical "correctness" of the
> design, and whether any other "old-school"
> airplane people think that this system is a little
wonky.
>
>
>
> It took a few moments to finally understand how the
> mechanism works, and after looking at everything
several
> times it was clear that there is no direct structural
> attachment between the main spar tube of the stabilizer
to
> the fuselage tube (tailboom). The primary structural
load
> path between the root end of the main stabilizer spar
tube
> and the fuselage is transmitted through the elevator
> hinge... and this hinge isn't even the aircraft style
> extruded hinge.
>
>
>
> So if the air loads try to lift up or push down on the
root
> end of the stabilizer, it puts all that load through
the
> hinge, into the elevator pivot, and then finally into
the
> steel ring at the back of the fuselage.
>
>
>
> But that's not even the biggest issue in my head. The
> larger issue is that (according to plan) the flat hinge
is
> riveted to the tubes along one thin "point of
> contact" line tangent to the tube. So the root
> stabilizer load is all acting on a hinge, which itself
is
> cantilevered off of one tangent point on the
tube.
>
>
>
> Now I'm not a degreed engineer, and I'm not a
> mathematician. So I called a friend of mine who is a
retired
> aerospace structural engineer, with 50+ years of
experience.
> I showed him the plans and explained my concern, and I
was
> informed that my concerns about this system were valid.
My
> Kolb will be built with a more stable attachment.
>
>
>
> My question for any real, degreed, qualified,
> aircraft-experience engineers is... has anyone looked
at the
> stabilizer root attachment load path and had these
same
> concerns?
>
>
>
> ONCE AGAIN, this is not an attack on Mr. Kolb or his
design,
> and it is not intended to cause any panic or concern at
this
> point. What I want to know is why this load path -
through
> two tangent mounted hinge halves, into a movable
elevator,
> and then into the fuselage - is good enough, and why it
was
> not appropriate to install an attachment bracket onto
the
> fuselage at the rear stabilizer spar.
>
>
>
>
>
> Bill Berle
>
> www.ezflaphandle.com
> - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
>
> www.grantstar.net
> - winning proposals for
non-profit and for-profit
> entities
>
>
>
>
>
> ==========
>
> br>
> fts!)
>
> r>
>>
> w.buildersbooks.com" rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">www.buildersbooks.com
>
> rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> -Matt
Dralle, List Admin.
>
> ==========
>
> -List" rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>
> ==========
>
> FORUMS -
>
> eferrer"
> target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>
> ==========
>
> b Site -
>
> -Matt
Dralle, List Admin.
>
> rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> ==========
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Blessed
> are the cracked, for they shall let in the
light. Groucho
> Marx
>
>
>
>
>
>
Lists This Month --
Some AWESOME FREE Gifts!)
Raiser. Click on
more about
Gifts provided
www.buildersbooks.com
-Matt
Dralle, List Admin.
Forum -
- MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
List Contribution Web Site -
-Matt
Dralle, List Admin.
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: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y |
Berle wrote:
"I wish I could have placed a bet in Las Vegas as to how quickly some of th
e
people would jump in and say that these airplanes have X number of hours an
d
Y number of landings without failure. I would have been able to buy another
Kolb :)"
Not to put too fine a point on the discussion, but the reason that you
heard the phrase that you knew would be coming, is that we too have seen
this all before as well. I have at least one friend that always had to
improve every thing that he bought, simply because that was his disease.
That's ok, what ever spins your prop. If reinventing the wheel is your
thing, give er hell.
I have had VG's for years, as have quite a few of the guys. I have had 4130
longer gear legs for at least a couple of years, so have quite a few of the
guy's. Yep, it helps the plane perform better. I have also crashed at least
three times and the worst that I got besides humility was a sprained left
middle finger. So I personally am a fan of the way that Homer designed the
plane. It fits my mission perfectly.
If the one that you bought does not fit the mission as you see it, by all
means tweak it any way that makes you happy.
I have also seen several guys on the list that were convinced that a bit of
this and a bit of that would make the plane perform just fine with one of
the other types of engines. I don't think any of them are still flying them
because it turned a perfectly fine plane into something that flew like a
C150, and was about as much fun to fly as watching grass grow. Again, you
are a big boy, and apparently you have a better idea, by all mean have at
it. I know one guy that just had to have a 1/2 VW on his plane. We on the
list went through about 2 years of trying and eventually he gave up, sold
the plane and never flew again.
So you see, we too have seen some of this before. Now I personally don't
want to hurt your feelings, but the little smiley face in your message
didn't quite take all the sting out of your last post. We will see if I can
do a bit better, or at least as good. No body here cares if you can improve
your plane. It is your and yours alone, tweak it any way you like. If it is
a real improvement we might want to do the same, just try to not tell me
how stupid I am because mine does just exactly what I want and need. :-)
Larry
On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 1:33 PM, Bob <rmurrill@cox.net> wrote:
>
> I suffer from the same 50 year malady you mentioned earlier, but would
> suggest you propose to your aero/ structures engineer
> friend a couple of alternate details. I would agree that the structural
> configuration is non standard, with the appearance of some odd geometric
> coupling, but it has clearly worked well for many years and tens of
> thousands of hours fleet time regardless of the Las Vegas odd makers.
>
> The main point is the loads are very small compared to the strength of th
e
> hardware...arguably by more than an order of magnitude.
>
> Flying downloads on the horizontal tail are probably in the
> 50 lb maybe 100 lb at the most to provide flyable static pitch and speed
> stability. Low aspect ratio and taper puts the center of pressure fairly
> close to the wire bracing attachments, probably forward and inboard, so
> most
> of these downloads are taken out as tension in those wires and compressio
n
> in the vertical stabilizer tube. Smaller loads are reacted at the root
> bolts and across the hinges. One would not attempt to design the structu
re
> for full elevator deflection at
> Vne, so reasonably one would only ever see relatively modest changes in t
he
> aero down loads throughout the flight spectrum. A fairly extreme case th
at
> would develop very high pitch rates and require elevator correction would
> be
> full power to idle or the reverse. That would produce about 300 lb of
> force
> at maybe 2 ft
> above the cg and would require a change in tail download of about
> 40 lb assuming the moment arm is about 15 ft. So that=99s 20 lb pe
r side.
> Each of the hinge rivets assuming they are 1/8th inch is good for 120 lbs
> single shear. The load is shared by lots of rivets. The bolts are I
> believe 5/16 which are good for 5,500 lb single shear even if only grade
5.
> I would argue that the hinges, dozens of rivets and large diameter pivoti
ng
> bolts appear
> to be overdesigned for the basic small aero loads of this aircraft.
> Fatigue
> loads from the prop wash swirl could be an issue,
> but apparently not from fleet experience.
>
> Ultimate static strength is most likely dictated by the aluminum tubing
> substructure, not by the rivets, hinges, or support bolts....
>
> I recommend not trying to improve the design!
>
> Bob
>
>
> -----Original Message----- From: Bill Berle
> Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2016 10:39 AM
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y
>
>
> I wish I could have placed a bet in Las Vegas as to how quickly some of t
he
> people would jump in and say that these airplanes have X number of hours
> and
> Y number of landings without failure. I would have been able to buy anoth
er
> Kolb :)
>
> With all due respect to everyone, I KNOW that these airplanes are not
> falling out of the sky.
>
> Now, also with all due respect, can someone with engineering knowledge te
ll
> me, ON A TECHNICAL ENGINEERING level, how it could EVER be considered as
> good design practice to essentially cantilever a piano hinge off of a thi
n
> wall round tube, with one line of rivets at the tangent contact point, an
d
> with flight loads often perpendicular to that axis, where that cantilever
> loaded hinge is not only connecting two pieces of primary aircraft
> structure
> but also attaching a primary control surface ?
>
> Bill Berle
> www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
> www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and
> for-profit entities
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Tue, 3/22/16, Dennis Rowe <rowedenny@windstream.net> wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Date: Tuesday, March 22, 2016, 9:59 AM
>
> Dennis Rowe <rowedenny@windstream.net>
>
> Somebody notify John Hauck, as Miss Pfer has around 4000
> hours on her airframe and has taken an eighty horse and two
> 100 horse Rotax 912 engines well toward their TBO! The
> horizontal stabilizer must be ready to fall off at any
> second.
> Maybe I can get a good deal on her since her demise must be
> imminent. =F0=9F=98=89
> Bill, just build the dang Firestar to plans and fly it. It
> won't fall apart.
>
>
> Dennis "Skid" Rowe
> Mk-3 Rotax 690, with a stock Kolb empennage.=F0=9F=98=B1
>
>
> On Mar 21, 2016, at 6:29 PM, Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
>>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> I hope I'm wrong, but my review of the plans indicated
>>
> that there is no traditional DIRECT structural connection
> between the rear spar tube and the fuselage tube. All the
> load paths have to take a serpentine route and go rearward
> through the elevator hinges first, and only then into the
> U-joint and pivot bolt in the steel ring. If you removed the
> elevator hinges (from either the elevator or the
> stabilizer), or if you took the pin out of the hinges, you
> could move the stabilizer up and down freely while the
> elevator remained bolted to the fuselage.
>
>>
>> Even WITH all the hinges in place, all up and down
>>
> movement of the stabilizer is transmitted through the rivets
> that hold the hinge onto the tubes, and there is no
> significant stiffness or bracing against this movement.
> Essentially you could move the root end of the stabilizer up
> and down by hand and this movement would bend the
> (un-supported section of) the hinge material. This would
> attempt to pry the rivets out of the tube and/or bend the
> thin metal back and forth.
>
>>
>> Also, because of this design the forward stabilizer
>>
> attach bolt must be a loose fit, and the stabilizer has to
> be able to slide back and forth a little.
>
>>
>> The only thing that is gained by this unusual
>>
> structural load path is that 4 ounces of weight for a pair
> of fittings (at the rear stabilizer spar) is saved. Can any
> one explain to me why this was a good bargain?
>
>>
>> Bill Berle
>> www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance
>>
> upgrade for light aircraft
>
>> www.grantstar.net
>>
> - winning proposals for non-profit and
> for-profit entities
>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------
>> On Mon, 3/21/16, Richard Girard <aslsa.rng@gmail.com>
>>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge
>>
> ass'y
>
>> To: "kolb-list@matronics.com"
>>
> <kolb-list@matronics.com>
>
>> Date: Monday, March 21, 2016, 2:40 PM
>>
>> The rear attachment
>> of the horizontal stabilizer is NOT through the hinge.
>>
> It is
>
>> through the rear folding weldments that also act as
>>
> the
>
>> inner hinge. When it is set up correctly the hinge line
>>
> is
>
>> on the same center as the swivel bolt in the weldment,
>> however there is some allowance for misalignment. In
>>
> that
>
>> case the weldment in the elevator spar (forward tube of
>>
> the
>
>> elevator), can slide on the bolt in the swivel
>> weldment.I've seen folding mechanisms on the Kit
>> Fox and repaired the mechanism on the Highlander and in
>>
> my
>
>> HO Homer's is the most clever. All you have to do to
>> fold the HS on a Kolb is to take out a single bolt
>>
> that
>
>> attaches the lower wires to the rudder post. I'm not
>> sure how you would make it any simpler.
>> Rick Girard
>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016
>> at 12:55 PM, Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
>> wrote:
>> Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
>>
>>
>>
>> Are there any Kolb people on this list who are
>>
> qualified
>
>> mechanical or aero-structure engineers? I want to ask
>>
> a
>
>> question about the tail attachment mechanism.
>>
>>
>>
>> Before I even mention the question, I want to assure
>> everyone that I AM COMPLETELY AWARE that there are X
>> thousand Kolbs flying around safely with this
>>
> stabilizer
>
>> attachment. I understand that there have not been many
>>
> (or
>
>> perhaps any) failures of this mechanism. What I am
>>
> asking
>
>> about is the theoretical "correctness" of the
>> design, and whether any other "old-school"
>> airplane people think that this system is a little
>>
> wonky.
>
>>
>>
>>
>> It took a few moments to finally understand how the
>> mechanism works, and after looking at everything
>>
> several
>
>> times it was clear that there is no direct structural
>> attachment between the main spar tube of the stabilizer
>>
> to
>
>> the fuselage tube (tailboom). The primary structural
>>
> load
>
>> path between the root end of the main stabilizer spar
>>
> tube
>
>> and the fuselage is transmitted through the elevator
>> hinge... and this hinge isn't even the aircraft style
>> extruded hinge.
>>
>>
>>
>> So if the air loads try to lift up or push down on the
>>
> root
>
>> end of the stabilizer, it puts all that load through
>>
> the
>
>> hinge, into the elevator pivot, and then finally into
>>
> the
>
>> steel ring at the back of the fuselage.
>>
>>
>>
>> But that's not even the biggest issue in my head. The
>> larger issue is that (according to plan) the flat hinge
>>
> is
>
>> riveted to the tubes along one thin "point of
>> contact" line tangent to the tube. So the root
>> stabilizer load is all acting on a hinge, which itself
>>
> is
>
>> cantilevered off of one tangent point on the
>>
> tube.
>
>>
>>
>>
>> Now I'm not a degreed engineer, and I'm not a
>> mathematician. So I called a friend of mine who is a
>>
> retired
>
>> aerospace structural engineer, with 50+ years of
>>
> experience.
>
>> I showed him the plans and explained my concern, and I
>>
> was
>
>> informed that my concerns about this system were valid.
>>
> My
>
>> Kolb will be built with a more stable attachment.
>>
>>
>>
>> My question for any real, degreed, qualified,
>> aircraft-experience engineers is... has anyone looked
>>
> at the
>
>> stabilizer root attachment load path and had these
>>
> same
>
>> concerns?
>>
>>
>>
>> ONCE AGAIN, this is not an attack on Mr. Kolb or his
>>
> design,
>
>> and it is not intended to cause any panic or concern at
>>
> this
>
>> point. What I want to know is why this load path -
>>
> through
>
>> two tangent mounted hinge halves, into a movable
>>
> elevator,
>
>> and then into the fuselage - is good enough, and why it
>>
> was
>
>> not appropriate to install an attachment bracket onto
>>
> the
>
>> fuselage at the rear stabilizer spar.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Bill Berle
>>
>> www.ezflaphandle.com
>> - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
>>
>> www.grantstar.net
>> - winning proposals for
>>
> non-profit and for-profit
>
>> entities
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ==========
>>
>> br>
>> fts!)
>>
>> r>
>>
>>>
>>> w.buildersbooks.com" rel="noreferrer"
>> target="_blank">www.buildersbooks.com
>>
>> rel="noreferrer"
>> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>> -Matt
>>
> Dralle, List Admin.
>
>>
>> ==========
>>
>> -List" rel="noreferrer"
>> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>>
>> ==========
>>
>> FORUMS -
>>
>> eferrer"
>> target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>>
>> ==========
>>
>> b Site -
>>
>> -Matt
>>
> Dralle, List Admin.
>
>>
>> rel="noreferrer"
>> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>> ==========
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> =9CBlessed
>> are the cracked, for they shall let in the
>>
> light.=9D Groucho
>
>> Marx
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> Lists This Month --
> Some AWESOME FREE Gifts!)
> Raiser. Click on
> more about
> Gifts provided
> www.buildersbooks.com
> -Matt
> Dralle, List Admin.
> Forum -
> - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
> List Contribution Web Site -
> -Matt
> Dralle, List Admin.
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
--
*The older I get, the less tolerant I am of those who are intolerant.*
*If you forward this email, or any part of it, please remove my email
address before sending.*
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: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y |
Bill
It might be helpful to look at a completed airplane. You may not be
visualizing correctly the drawings you are looking at. The design works and
it can be folded.
Years ago we had a guy that felt he had to fix everything on the Kolb MKIII
that he was building. He made a valiant effort in completing the plane. He
must have spent 3-4 thousand extra hours working on all the changes.
Luckily he never completed the airplane. He was a great guy and is still
alive because he didn't ever fly that plane.
My advice is build the plane exactly by the plans. There are a few really
good changes that a few people have tried to tell you about but???
If you absolutely must make all the changes you are talking about get real
good insurance for your love ones and DO NOT call it a Kolb. Don't even
mention it started as a Kolb kit. Also please quit talking about all the
issues you think are wrong, somebody might think you know what you are
talking about and hurt themselves too. Sorry the proof is in the massive
hours in the fleet.
Did anyone ever tell you about one of the Kolb employees that took a plane
up and intentionally tried to tear the plane apart. He finally with
considerable effort ripped the wings off, he threw out a chute and later
fixed the point of failure. Our planes are well designed and tested.
Even with all that evidence I will still say my advice is worth what you
paid for it.
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW Powered
On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 1:39 PM, Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
>
> I wish I could have placed a bet in Las Vegas as to how quickly some of
> the people would jump in and say that these airplanes have X number of
> hours and Y number of landings without failure. I would have been able to
> buy another Kolb :)
>
> With all due respect to everyone, I KNOW that these airplanes are not
> falling out of the sky.
>
> Now, also with all due respect, can someone with engineering knowledge
> tell me, ON A TECHNICAL ENGINEERING level, how it could EVER be considere
d
> as good design practice to essentially cantilever a piano hinge off of a
> thin wall round tube, with one line of rivets at the tangent contact poin
t,
> and with flight loads often perpendicular to that axis, where that
> cantilever loaded hinge is not only connecting two pieces of primary
> aircraft structure but also attaching a primary control surface ?
>
> Bill Berle
> www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
> www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and
> for-profit entities
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Tue, 3/22/16, Dennis Rowe <rowedenny@windstream.net> wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Date: Tuesday, March 22, 2016, 9:59 AM
>
> Dennis Rowe <rowedenny@windstream.net>
>
> Somebody notify John Hauck, as Miss Pfer has around 4000
> hours on her airframe and has taken an eighty horse and two
> 100 horse Rotax 912 engines well toward their TBO! The
> horizontal stabilizer must be ready to fall off at any
> second.
> Maybe I can get a good deal on her since her demise must be
> imminent. =F0=9F=98=89
> Bill, just build the dang Firestar to plans and fly it. It
> won't fall apart.
>
>
> Dennis "Skid" Rowe
> Mk-3 Rotax 690, with a stock Kolb empennage.=F0=9F=98=B1
>
>
> > On Mar 21, 2016, at 6:29 PM, Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
> wrote:
> >
>
> >
> > I hope I'm wrong, but my review of the plans indicated
> that there is no traditional DIRECT structural connection
> between the rear spar tube and the fuselage tube. All the
> load paths have to take a serpentine route and go rearward
> through the elevator hinges first, and only then into the
> U-joint and pivot bolt in the steel ring. If you removed the
> elevator hinges (from either the elevator or the
> stabilizer), or if you took the pin out of the hinges, you
> could move the stabilizer up and down freely while the
> elevator remained bolted to the fuselage.
> >
> > Even WITH all the hinges in place, all up and down
> movement of the stabilizer is transmitted through the rivets
> that hold the hinge onto the tubes, and there is no
> significant stiffness or bracing against this movement.
> Essentially you could move the root end of the stabilizer up
> and down by hand and this movement would bend the
> (un-supported section of) the hinge material. This would
> attempt to pry the rivets out of the tube and/or bend the
> thin metal back and forth.
> >
> > Also, because of this design the forward stabilizer
> attach bolt must be a loose fit, and the stabilizer has to
> be able to slide back and forth a little.
> >
> > The only thing that is gained by this unusual
> structural load path is that 4 ounces of weight for a pair
> of fittings (at the rear stabilizer spar) is saved. Can any
> one explain to me why this was a good bargain?
> >
> > Bill Berle
> > www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance
> upgrade for light aircraft
> > www.grantstar.net
> - winning proposals for non-profit and
> for-profit entities
> >
> > --------------------------------------------
> > On Mon, 3/21/16, Richard Girard <aslsa.rng@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge
> ass'y
> > To: "kolb-list@matronics.com"
> <kolb-list@matronics.com>
> > Date: Monday, March 21, 2016, 2:40 PM
> >
> > The rear attachment
> > of the horizontal stabilizer is NOT through the hinge.
> It is
> > through the rear folding weldments that also act as
> the
> > inner hinge. When it is set up correctly the hinge line
> is
> > on the same center as the swivel bolt in the weldment,
> > however there is some allowance for misalignment. In
> that
> > case the weldment in the elevator spar (forward tube of
> the
> > elevator), can slide on the bolt in the swivel
> > weldment.I've seen folding mechanisms on the Kit
> > Fox and repaired the mechanism on the Highlander and in
> my
> > HO Homer's is the most clever. All you have to do to
> > fold the HS on a Kolb is to take out a single bolt
> that
> > attaches the lower wires to the rudder post. I'm not
> > sure how you would make it any simpler.
> > Rick Girard
> > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016
> > at 12:55 PM, Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
> > wrote:
> > Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
> >
> >
> >
> > Are there any Kolb people on this list who are
> qualified
> > mechanical or aero-structure engineers? I want to ask
> a
> > question about the tail attachment mechanism.
> >
> >
> >
> > Before I even mention the question, I want to assure
> > everyone that I AM COMPLETELY AWARE that there are X
> > thousand Kolbs flying around safely with this
> stabilizer
> > attachment. I understand that there have not been many
> (or
> > perhaps any) failures of this mechanism. What I am
> asking
> > about is the theoretical "correctness" of the
> > design, and whether any other "old-school"
> > airplane people think that this system is a little
> wonky.
> >
> >
> >
> > It took a few moments to finally understand how the
> > mechanism works, and after looking at everything
> several
> > times it was clear that there is no direct structural
> > attachment between the main spar tube of the stabilizer
> to
> > the fuselage tube (tailboom). The primary structural
> load
> > path between the root end of the main stabilizer spar
> tube
> > and the fuselage is transmitted through the elevator
> > hinge... and this hinge isn't even the aircraft style
> > extruded hinge.
> >
> >
> >
> > So if the air loads try to lift up or push down on the
> root
> > end of the stabilizer, it puts all that load through
> the
> > hinge, into the elevator pivot, and then finally into
> the
> > steel ring at the back of the fuselage.
> >
> >
> >
> > But that's not even the biggest issue in my head. The
> > larger issue is that (according to plan) the flat hinge
> is
> > riveted to the tubes along one thin "point of
> > contact" line tangent to the tube. So the root
> > stabilizer load is all acting on a hinge, which itself
> is
> > cantilevered off of one tangent point on the
> tube.
> >
> >
> >
> > Now I'm not a degreed engineer, and I'm not a
> > mathematician. So I called a friend of mine who is a
> retired
> > aerospace structural engineer, with 50+ years of
> experience.
> > I showed him the plans and explained my concern, and I
> was
> > informed that my concerns about this system were valid.
> My
> > Kolb will be built with a more stable attachment.
> >
> >
> >
> > My question for any real, degreed, qualified,
> > aircraft-experience engineers is... has anyone looked
> at the
> > stabilizer root attachment load path and had these
> same
> > concerns?
> >
> >
> >
> > ONCE AGAIN, this is not an attack on Mr. Kolb or his
> design,
> > and it is not intended to cause any panic or concern at
> this
> > point. What I want to know is why this load path -
> through
> > two tangent mounted hinge halves, into a movable
> elevator,
> > and then into the fuselage - is good enough, and why it
> was
> > not appropriate to install an attachment bracket onto
> the
> > fuselage at the rear stabilizer spar.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Bill Berle
> >
> > www.ezflaphandle.com
> > - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
> >
> > www.grantstar.net
> > - winning proposals for
> non-profit and for-profit
> > entities
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ==========
> >
> > br>
> > fts!)
> >
> > r>
> >>
> > w.buildersbooks.com" rel="noreferrer"
> > target="_blank">www.buildersbooks.com
> >
> > rel="noreferrer"
> > target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> >
> > -Matt
> Dralle, List Admin.
> >
> > ==========
> >
> > -List" rel="noreferrer"
> > target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
> >
> > ==========
> >
> > FORUMS -
> >
> > eferrer"
> > target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
> >
> > ==========
> >
> > b Site -
> >
> > -Matt
> Dralle, List Admin.
> >
> > rel="noreferrer"
> > target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> >
> > ==========
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > =9CBlessed
> > are the cracked, for they shall let in the
> light.=9D Groucho
> > Marx
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> Lists This Month --
> Some AWESOME FREE Gifts!)
> Raiser. Click on
> more about
> Gifts provided
> www.buildersbooks.com
> -Matt
> Dralle, List Admin.
> Forum -
> - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
> List Contribution Web Site -
> -Matt
> Dralle, List Admin.
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
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: | Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y |
Thank you all for the replies. I appreciate the opportunity to discuss this, without
people thinking that I am trashing the aircraft, or insulting Mr. Kolb's
legacy.
Yes I had considered that some part of the tail loads are carried by the brace
wires, this is why I referred to the questionable part as the stabilizer "root
loads" instead of the whole stabilizer. Of course, just like a strut braced wing
there is a large "inward" (compression) load on the tube, but since the elevator
is tapered there is still a large portion of the force generated that is
vertical at the root end.
Those rivets holding the hinge may well be capable of 120 pounds in shear, or perhaps
even in tension. I have no quarrel whatsoever with the strength of the
rivets on such a light and slow aircraft. And yes there are a lot of them.
But the angular ORIENTATION of the hinges, and the fact that the hinges are somewhat
"cantilevered" as I have called it, puts a "peel" load on those fasteners,
like a crow bar trying to peel and pop the heads off the rivets at an angle.
That is probably the worst case for those rivets. The failure mode would be
that the loads are rocking the rivets slowly back and forth, loosening them.
Also, the hinges themselves are not designed for the loads to be hanging out 3/8
or 1/2 inch from their attachment, like a diving board.
One person replied that I may not be understanding the mechanism, and how it folds,
and that the front attachment moves a little. I have taken a little time
to study the plans and try to understand this. I believe that I understand it
(whether I agree with the design or not). If the rear stabilizer attachment is
in fact located on exactly the same axis as the elevator hinge, then the front
of the stabilizer should not need to move fore and aft at all with elevator
deflection. Elevator deflection could create fore-aft (or up-down) movement ONLY
if there IS some amount of offset between the hinge axis and the rear stabilizer
mounting. If the two axes are concentric, there could not be any linear
motion by definition.
I believe that the only reason the front stabilizer attachment has to be able to
slide a little is because in reality for the average builder it is very difficult
to locate the hinges at precisely the center of the welded elevator horn/
pivot mechanism. Without any jig or fixture to guarantee the exact location
of the hinge pin in open space, it is etoo asy for the hinge pin to be a little
bit fore-aft or up-down... while the holes are drilled and the rivets are installed.
So I am guessing that to make it easier for the builder, and to prevent binding
and cracking of the parts, the front attachment was left a little loose and the
rear attachment was eliminated.
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
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: | Addendum - Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y |
With all sincerest respect to Mr. Wainfan and any other great engineers out there
who might be monitoring this discussion, the credentials and field experience
of the engineer (who I asked to review the elevator attachment) are high enough
for the purposes of settling any questions about the appropriateness of any
particular aircraft structure.
He is a graduate of the 1950's DeHavilland Aircraft Engineering program in England
(from youth apprenticeship up through engineering degree in aerostructures
and metallurgy), and I believe Arnold Schwarzenegger cannot physically lift his
aerospace resume' . Any further comment on his achievements or abilities would
sound like an infomercial, so I will leave it at that.
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
--------------------------------------------
On Tue, 3/22/16, Stuart Harner <stuart@harnerfarm.net> wrote:
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Date: Tuesday, March 22, 2016, 12:27 PM
"Stuart Harner" <stuart@harnerfarm.net>
Bill,
I am not an engineer but I did stay in a Holiday Inn last
night. :) No, not really, but I do have a fundamental
understanding of load transmission through a structure.
First a question, and please don't be offended. Have
you had an opportunity to observe the structure of the Kolb
tail while it was being folded and then again when it is
bolted into place? I asked this because I found a
couple of things in the plans of the Firefly that I did not
understand until I was able to actually see it live. Simply
put, I had trouble visualizing it from just the plans.
One thing that I think is missing from this discussion is
the loads carried by the brace wires. I would posit that
most of the forces from the tail that are transmitted to the
boom tube are carried by the braces. These, when properly
tensioned are actually pre-loaded slightly. This puts the
tubes in compression which makes the whole thing quite
strong. It also transfers the loads from the horizontals to
the steel post of the verticals which in turn is transferred
to the boom tube via the steel ring which is bolted and/or
riveted to the tube.
Of course some loads are transferred through the hinge
points and the front hinge must be able to slide slightly as
the elevator moves through its arc of travel. Could this be
made stronger? Of course, but not without sacrificing
something else such as weight or foldability. It is actually
a very clever design and I suspect that the majority of
loads that move through the rear hinge come from the
elevator and not the stabilizer.
I would also bet that the loads carried through the hinges
is far below the shear and tension limits of properly
installed rivets.
I am actually more "freaked out" by the fact that everything
in the tail depends on that one little 3/16" bolt (Firefly)
that holds the lower braces in place. Really, the threads on
that bolt are all there is between you and falling out of
the sky. To combat this irrationality I swap out the bolt
fairly often and the nuts even more often. If it really
bothered me, I would stay on the ground. :)
Perhaps you could send a copy of your plans to Barnaby
Wainfan and ask for his analysis. I hear he is a really nice
guy. From reading his articles over the years I am sure he
could provide the answers you seek.
As Uncle Red used to say: "Remember, if women don't find you
handsome, they should at least find you handy"
Stuart
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com]
On Behalf Of Bill Berle
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2016 5:30 PM
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y
I hope I'm wrong, but my review of the plans indicated that
there is no traditional DIRECT structural connection between
the rear spar tube and the fuselage tube. All the load paths
have to take a serpentine route and go rearward through the
elevator hinges first, and only then into the U-joint and
pivot bolt in the steel ring. If you removed the elevator
hinges (from either the elevator or the stabilizer), or if
you took the pin out of the hinges, you could move the
stabilizer up and down freely while the elevator remained
bolted to the fuselage.
Even WITH all the hinges in place, all up and down movement
of the stabilizer is transmitted through the rivets that
hold the hinge onto the tubes, and there is no significant
stiffness or bracing against this movement. Essentially you
could move the root end of the stabilizer up and down by
hand and this movement would bend the (un-supported section
of) the hinge material. This would attempt to pry the rivets
out of the tube and/or bend the thin metal back and forth.
Also, because of this design the forward stabilizer attach
bolt must be a loose fit, and the stabilizer has to be able
to slide back and forth a little.
The only thing that is gained by this unusual structural
load path is that 4 ounces of weight for a pair of fittings
(at the rear stabilizer spar) is saved. Can any one explain
to me why this was a good bargain?
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance
upgrade for light aircraft www.grantstar.net
- winning proposals for
non-profit and for-profit entities
--------------------------------------------
On Mon, 3/21/16, Richard Girard <aslsa.rng@gmail.com>
wrote:
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y
To: "kolb-list@matronics.com"
<kolb-list@matronics.com>
Date: Monday, March 21, 2016, 2:40 PM
The rear attachment
of the horizontal stabilizer is NOT through the hinge. It
is through the rear folding weldments that also act as
the inner hinge. When it is set up correctly the hinge
line is on the same center as the swivel bolt in the
weldment, however there is some allowance for
misalignment. In that case the weldment in the
elevator spar (forward tube of the elevator), can
slide on the bolt in the swivel weldment.I've seen
folding mechanisms on the Kit Fox and repaired the
mechanism on the Highlander and in my HO Homer's is
the most clever. All you have to do to fold the HS on
a Kolb is to take out a single bolt that attaches the
lower wires to the rudder post. I'm not sure how you
would make it any simpler.
Rick Girard
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016
at 12:55 PM, Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
Are there any Kolb people on this list who are
qualified mechanical or aero-structure engineers? I
want to ask a question about the tail attachment
mechanism.
Before I even mention the question, I want to assure
everyone that I AM COMPLETELY AWARE that there are X
thousand Kolbs flying around safely with this
stabilizer attachment. I understand that there have
not been many (or perhaps any) failures of this
mechanism. What I am asking about is the theoretical
"correctness" of the design, and whether any other
"old-school"
airplane people think that this system is a little wonky.
It took a few moments to finally understand how the
mechanism works, and after looking at everything
several times it was clear that there is no direct
structural attachment between the main spar tube of
the stabilizer to the fuselage tube (tailboom). The
primary structural load path between the root end of
the main stabilizer spar tube and the fuselage is
transmitted through the elevator hinge... and this
hinge isn't even the aircraft style extruded hinge.
So if the air loads try to lift up or push down on the
root end of the stabilizer, it puts all that load
through the hinge, into the elevator pivot, and then
finally into the steel ring at the back of the
fuselage.
But that's not even the biggest issue in my head. The
larger issue is that (according to plan) the flat hinge
is riveted to the tubes along one thin "point of
contact" line tangent to the tube. So the root
stabilizer load is all acting on a hinge, which itself
is cantilevered off of one tangent point on the
tube.
Now I'm not a degreed engineer, and I'm not a
mathematician. So I called a friend of mine who is a
retired aerospace structural engineer, with 50+ years
of experience.
I showed him the plans and explained my concern, and I
was informed that my concerns about this system were
valid. My Kolb will be built with a more stable
attachment.
My question for any real, degreed, qualified,
aircraft-experience engineers is... has anyone looked at
the stabilizer root attachment load path and had these
same concerns?
ONCE AGAIN, this is not an attack on Mr. Kolb or his
design, and it is not intended to cause any panic or
concern at this point. What I want to know is why this
load path - through two tangent mounted hinge halves,
into a movable elevator, and then into the fuselage -
is good enough, and why it was not appropriate to
install an attachment bracket onto the fuselage at the
rear stabilizer spar.
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com
- safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net
- winning proposals for
non-profit and for-profit entities
==========
br>
fts!)
r>
>
w.buildersbooks.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">www.buildersbooks.com
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-Matt Dralle,
List Admin.
==========
-List" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
==========
FORUMS -
eferrer"
target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
==========
b Site -
-Matt Dralle,
List Admin.
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
--
Blessed
are the cracked, for they shall let in the
light.Groucho Marx
Lists This Month --
Some AWESOME FREE Gifts!)
Raiser. Click on
more about
Gifts provided
www.buildersbooks.com
-Matt
Dralle, List Admin.
Forum -
- MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
List Contribution Web Site -
-Matt
Dralle, List Admin.
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: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y |
Wow. Please forgive me if anyone thought that I was being too aggressive or questioning.
Holy Mackerel, I was discussing innovation, experimentation, and individuality
in light aircraft construction.
Apparently there is no room for improvement in the design, and there were no compromises
made in manufacturing the kits. Thankfully, none of this reliance on
status quo was in force back when Mr. Kolb was experimenting with a new way to
build and improve on his personal aircraft designs.
My sincerest apology for the unintended effect of there being a "Sting" in any
of my comments. Absolutely unintentional.
>From this point I will try to constrain my questions and comments within direct
relevance to the existing design, or what has been done (or modified) already.
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
--------------------------------------------
On Tue, 3/22/16, Rick Neilsen <neilsenrm@gmail.com> wrote:
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y
To: "kolb-list@matronics.com" <kolb-list@matronics.com>
Date: Tuesday, March 22, 2016, 1:19 PM
Bill
It might be helpful to look at a
completed airplane. You may not be visualizing correctly the
drawings you are looking at. The design works and it can be
folded.
Years ago we had a guy that felt he
had to fix everything on the Kolb MKIII that he was
building. He made a valiant effort in completing the plane.
He must have spent 3-4 thousand extra hours working on all
the changes. Luckily he never completed the airplane. He was
a great guy and is still alive because he didn't ever
fly that plane.
My advice is build the plane
exactly by the plans. There are a few really good changes
that a few people have tried to tell you about
but???
If you absolutely must make all the
changes you are talking about get real good insurance for
your love ones and DO NOT call it a Kolb. Don't even
mention it started as a Kolb kit. Also please quit talking
about all the issues you think are wrong, somebody might
think you know what you are talking about and hurt
themselves too. Sorry the proof is in the massive hours in
the fleet.
Did anyone ever tell you about one
of the Kolb employees that took a plane up and intentionally
tried to tear the plane apart. He finally with considerable
effort ripped the wings off, he threw out a chute and later
fixed the point of failure. Our planes are well designed and
tested.
Even with all that evidence I will
still say my advice is worth what you paid for it.
Rick NeilsenRedrive VW Powered
On Tue, Mar 22, 2016
at 1:39 PM, Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
I wish I could have placed a bet in Las Vegas as to
how quickly some of the people would jump in and say that
these airplanes have X number of hours and Y number of
landings without failure. I would have been able to buy
another Kolb :)
With all due respect to everyone, I KNOW that these
airplanes are not falling out of the sky.
Now, also with all due respect, can someone with engineering
knowledge tell me, ON A TECHNICAL ENGINEERING level, how it
could EVER be considered as good design practice to
essentially cantilever a piano hinge off of a thin wall
round tube, with one line of rivets at the tangent contact
point, and with flight loads often perpendicular to that
axis, where that cantilever loaded hinge is not only
connecting two pieces of primary aircraft structure but also
attaching a primary control surface ?
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com
- safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net
- winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit
entities
--------------------------------------------
On Tue, 3/22/16, Dennis
Rowe <rowedenny@windstream.net>
wrote:
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge
ass'y
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Date: Tuesday, March 22, 2016, 9:59 AM
Dennis Rowe <rowedenny@windstream.net>
Somebody notify John Hauck, as Miss Pfer has around 4000
hours on her airframe and has taken an eighty horse and
two
100 horse Rotax 912 engines well toward their TBO! The
horizontal stabilizer must be ready to fall off at any
second.
Maybe I can get a good deal on her since her demise must
be
imminent.
Bill, just build the dang Firestar to plans and fly it.
It
won't fall apart.
Dennis "Skid" Rowe
Mk-3 Rotax 690, with a stock Kolb empennage.
> On Mar 21, 2016, at 6:29 PM, Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
>
>
> I hope I'm wrong, but my review of the plans
indicated
that there is no traditional DIRECT structural connection
between the rear spar tube and the fuselage tube. All the
load paths have to take a serpentine route and go
rearward
through the elevator hinges first, and only then into the
U-joint and pivot bolt in the steel ring. If you removed
the
elevator hinges (from either the elevator or the
stabilizer), or if you took the pin out of the hinges,
you
could move the stabilizer up and down freely while the
elevator remained bolted to the fuselage.
>
> Even WITH all the hinges in place, all up and down
movement of the stabilizer is transmitted through the
rivets
that hold the hinge onto the tubes, and there is no
significant stiffness or bracing against this movement.
Essentially you could move the root end of the stabilizer
up
and down by hand and this movement would bend the
(un-supported section of) the hinge material. This would
attempt to pry the rivets out of the tube and/or bend the
thin metal back and forth.
>
> Also, because of this design the forward stabilizer
attach bolt must be a loose fit, and the stabilizer has
to
be able to slide back and forth a little.
>
> The only thing that is gained by this unusual
structural load path is that 4 ounces of weight for a
pair
of fittings (at the rear stabilizer spar) is saved. Can
any
one explain to me why this was a good bargain?
>
> Bill Berle
> www.ezflaphandle.com
- safety & performance
upgrade for light aircraft
> www.grantstar.net
- winning proposals for non-profit and
for-profit entities
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Mon, 3/21/16, Richard Girard <aslsa.rng@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge
ass'y
> To: "kolb-list@matronics.com"
<kolb-list@matronics.com>
> Date: Monday, March 21, 2016, 2:40 PM
>
> The rear attachment
> of the horizontal stabilizer is NOT through the
hinge.
It is
> through the rear folding weldments that also act as
the
> inner hinge. When it is set up correctly the hinge
line
is
> on the same center as the swivel bolt in the
weldment,
> however there is some allowance for misalignment. In
that
> case the weldment in the elevator spar (forward tube
of
the
> elevator), can slide on the bolt in the swivel
> weldment.I've seen folding mechanisms on the Kit
> Fox and repaired the mechanism on the Highlander and
in
my
> HO Homer's is the most clever. All you have to do
to
> fold the HS on a Kolb is to take out a single bolt
that
> attaches the lower wires to the rudder post. I'm
not
> sure how you would make it any simpler.
> Rick Girard
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016
> at 12:55 PM, Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
> wrote:
> Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
>
>
>
> Are there any Kolb people on this list who are
qualified
> mechanical or aero-structure engineers? I want to
ask
a
> question about the tail attachment mechanism.
>
>
>
> Before I even mention the question, I want to assure
> everyone that I AM COMPLETELY AWARE that there are X
> thousand Kolbs flying around safely with this
stabilizer
> attachment. I understand that there have not been
many
(or
> perhaps any) failures of this mechanism. What I am
asking
> about is the theoretical "correctness" of
the
> design, and whether any other "old-school"
> airplane people think that this system is a little
wonky.
>
>
>
> It took a few moments to finally understand how the
> mechanism works, and after looking at everything
several
> times it was clear that there is no direct
structural
> attachment between the main spar tube of the
stabilizer
to
> the fuselage tube (tailboom). The primary structural
load
> path between the root end of the main stabilizer
spar
tube
> and the fuselage is transmitted through the elevator
> hinge... and this hinge isn't even the aircraft
style
> extruded hinge.
>
>
>
> So if the air loads try to lift up or push down on
the
root
> end of the stabilizer, it puts all that load through
the
> hinge, into the elevator pivot, and then finally
into
the
> steel ring at the back of the fuselage.
>
>
>
> But that's not even the biggest issue in my head.
The
> larger issue is that (according to plan) the flat
hinge
is
> riveted to the tubes along one thin "point of
> contact" line tangent to the tube. So the root
> stabilizer load is all acting on a hinge, which
itself
is
> cantilevered off of one tangent point on the
tube.
>
>
>
> Now I'm not a degreed engineer, and I'm not
a
> mathematician. So I called a friend of mine who is a
retired
> aerospace structural engineer, with 50+ years of
experience.
> I showed him the plans and explained my concern, and
I
was
> informed that my concerns about this system were
valid.
My
> Kolb will be built with a more stable attachment.
>
>
>
> My question for any real, degreed, qualified,
> aircraft-experience engineers is... has anyone
looked
at the
> stabilizer root attachment load path and had these
same
> concerns?
>
>
>
> ONCE AGAIN, this is not an attack on Mr. Kolb or his
design,
> and it is not intended to cause any panic or concern
at
this
> point. What I want to know is why this load path -
through
> two tangent mounted hinge halves, into a movable
elevator,
> and then into the fuselage - is good enough, and why
it
was
> not appropriate to install an attachment bracket
onto
the
> fuselage at the rear stabilizer spar.
>
>
>
>
>
> Bill Berle
>
> www.ezflaphandle.com
> - safety & performance upgrade for light
aircraft
>
> www.grantstar.net
> - winning proposals for
non-profit and for-profit
> entities
>
>
>
>
>
> ==========
>
> br>
> fts!)
>
> r>
>>
> w.buildersbooks.com"
rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">www.buildersbooks.com
>
> rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> -Matt
Dralle, List Admin.
>
> ==========
>
> -List" rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>
> ==========
>
> FORUMS -
>
> eferrer"
> target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>
> ==========
>
> b Site -
>
> -Matt
Dralle, List Admin.
>
> rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> ==========
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Blessed
> are the cracked, for they shall let in the
light.Groucho
> Marx
>
>
>
>
>
>
Lists This Month --
Some AWESOME FREE Gifts!)
Raiser. Click on
more about
Gifts provided
www.buildersbooks.com
-Matt
Dralle, List Admin.
Forum -
- MATRONICS WEB FORUMS
-
List Contribution Web
Site -
-Matt
Dralle, List Admin.
==========
br>
fts!)
r>
>
w.buildersbooks.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">www.buildersbooks.com
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
==========
-List" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
==========
FORUMS -
eferrer"
target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
==========
b Site -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
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: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y |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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: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y |
Thank you Dave,
There was and is no intention of coming across like nobody else had thought this
through. Quite the contrary; if I remember correctly, my first post on the subject
that started all this turmoil was actually asking about whether other people
had questioned this before I came along, and what the reasons were for designing
that mechanism in a counter-intuitive manner. I was more surprised than
anyone to find that I appeared to be the first person who asked about it.
Bill
On Tue, 3/22/16, undoctor <undoctor@rcn.com> wrote:
I believe the problem lies in that, whether or not you realize it, you come across
as having the opinion that before you
came on the scene there was never anyone who could think things through as thoroughly
and analytically as
you.Trust me when I tell you that that's a huge error.
Dave Kulp Bethlehem, PA
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: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y |
On Tue, 3/22/16, Larry Cottrell <lcottrell1020@gmail.com> wrote:
I have also seen several guys on the list that were convinced that a bit of this
and a bit of that would
make the plane perform just fine with one of the other types of engines.
Again, you are a big boy, and apparently you have a better idea, by all mean have
at it.
Nobody here cares if you can improve your plane.
just try to not tell me how stupid I am because mine does just exactly what I want
and need.
:-)
Larry
--------------------------------------------
This aircraft will be flying over a densely populated area. I believe the vast
majority of Kolbs are not being flown over populated areas... am I right about
this? The majority of people who have flown with 2 stroke engines over time have
had emergency landings due to inflight failures. Even the people who have
figured out how to reliably operate the 2 strokes recommend against it when I
say that I'm based out of a big city municipal airport. So my discussion about
alternate engines was based on this reality. Believe me, it would be quick, cheap
and easy to just bolt a 503 on the FireStar like it was designed for.
I'd be absolutely thankful if you would be able to recommend a truly reliable engine
for this aircraft (for safe flying over a densely populated area) that is
as affordable as a used 503 2 stroke. I already know where to look for engines
that are not affordable.
I do NOT "have a better idea", I just have a different priority requirement than
most of the Kolb operators do. I need something that is more reliable than the
Rotax 2 strokes.
Did me or anyone else tell you that you were stupid, at any time, inferred or expressed?
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: | Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y |
Bill B/Kolbers:
I'll tell you if there was a cheap, reliable, alternate four stroke power plant
for a Kolb aircraft, it would be flying on a lot of Kolbs and other makes of
ULs and home builts.
Sometimes one must pay for what he wants. I have. Haven't had an engine out in
well over 3,000 hours. Did have a couple engine outs caused by bad fuel, but
that was pilot error and had nothing to do with engine reliability.
Some of us have tried to share with you a little of our experience, but it seems
you don't want to hear what we have to say.
By now you should recognize there is no elevator hinge problem. If you want to
change yours when you get around to getting your hands dirty and actually building
a Kolb, have at it.
john h
mkIII
Fort Campbell, Kentucky
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Berle
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2016 6:03 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y
On Tue, 3/22/16, Larry Cottrell <lcottrell1020@gmail.com> wrote:
I have also seen several guys on the list that were convinced that a bit of this
and a bit of that would make the plane perform just fine with one of the
other types of engines.
Again, you are a big boy, and apparently you have a better idea, by all mean have
at it.
Nobody here cares if you can improve your plane.
just try to not tell me how stupid I am because mine does just exactly what I want
and need.
:-)
Larry
--------------------------------------------
This aircraft will be flying over a densely populated area. I believe the vast
majority of Kolbs are not being flown over populated areas... am I right about
this? The majority of people who have flown with 2 stroke engines over time have
had emergency landings due to inflight failures. Even the people who have
figured out how to reliably operate the 2 strokes recommend against it when I
say that I'm based out of a big city municipal airport. So my discussion about
alternate engines was based on this reality. Believe me, it would be quick, cheap
and easy to just bolt a 503 on the FireStar like it was designed for.
I'd be absolutely thankful if you would be able to recommend a truly reliable engine
for this aircraft (for safe flying over a densely populated area) that is
as affordable as a used 503 2 stroke. I already know where to look for engines
that are not affordable.
I do NOT "have a better idea", I just have a different priority requirement than
most of the Kolb operators do. I need something that is more reliable than the
Rotax 2 strokes.
Did me or anyone else tell you that you were stupid, at any time, inferred or expressed?
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: Addendum - Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y |
I think a question you might want to consider is are your credentials of being
a test pilot strong enough that you can make a design change that can result in
an uncertain outcome?
I have spent 25 years in engineering, testing and manufacturing. I am hesitant
to stray to far from a known and working design.... at least when I am the test
pilot.
Just food for thought.
:D
--------
Kolb Mark III Classic
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=454005#454005
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: | Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y |
Bill, I am not interested in getting into a pissing match.
You wrote-"This aircraft will be flying over a densely populated area. I
believe the vast majority of Kolbs are not being flown over populated
areas."
I am under the impression that you intended this for back country use. This
is the first I have heard of heavily populated areas.
Even so, I don't see a problem either way. I flew a 503 to Demming NM and
back to Oregon on a 503. The only problem I had was the amount of gas that
it took. I have had one forced landing while flying a two stroke. I got
into a situation that I needed to fly my plane after a long lay off, and
before I had done an annual. I lost a spark plug cap on my way back home. I
was flying a 447 at the time (single ignition) That was when I sprained my
middle finger. Other than that I never had a problem. I am afraid that the
reputation of the two strokes is for the most part put forth by the Spam
can pilots who shudder at the thought of flying any thing uncertified much
less one of our toys. Or people who are unable to maintain their engines as
they should. What ever, it doesn't matter.
So far you have had good advice, that is one of the things that we on the
list pride ourselves about. It is not apparent to me that you are accepting
any of it. The Kolb with the proper engine is a fun reliable airplane even
if built to standard plans. VG's help a lot, making it even safer and more
fun to fly. Longer gear legs help as well. In my opinion the stock alum.
legs is the only weak spot on the plane, but then again Homer intended it
to be a weak spot so as to fail before the cage was damaged. In my case it
appeared, at least to me, to cause more damage than it prevented, therefore
the 4130 spring steel gear legs.
If there is one thing that I have learned, its that it is by far the best
to only do something once, and do it right the first time. I borrowed from
my 401 K to buy an HKS. I then paid myself back with interest. I didn't buy
it for the reliability, I bought it because a 503 would not get me to
another airport without taking extra gas with me. It has been a bit of
work, but it has been worth it. I do not intend to scrimp on my safety, for
the sake of saving a few pennies. Of course I have been flying a Firestar
for 19 years, so I am pretty happy with it.
There are a hell of a lot of very smart and handy guys on this list. I
would hazard a guess that we have managed to screw up a few times and in
the process learned a hell of a lot. All that experience is available to
you, and almost all of us will make the effort to pass it on to you, If you
appear to listen. Perhaps I am wrong, but I haven't noticed much listening
on your part.
I would guess the closest thing to an engineer on this list would be Jack
Hart. Personally from my experience that may be a good thing.
You wrote- "Did me or anyone else tell you that you were stupid, at any
time, inferred or expressed?"
Perhaps I am an overly sensitive person, but as they say "paranoia is
merely an heightened sense of reality".
If you haven't done much to the Kit that you received, perhaps Kolb would
consider taking it back. That is if you are not happy with it or think it
is unsafe. If you do decide to keep it, make what ever changes you think
best. It is "experimental" after all. You are free to make any changes you
see fit.
Now I don't know about you, but this is my last comment on the subject.
Respectfully,
Larry
--
*The older I get, the less tolerant I am of those who are intolerant.*
*If you forward this email, or any part of it, please remove my email
address before sending.*
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: | Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y |
Guys, I cannot believe what has happened here. The moment I asked a couple of technical
questions, and then explained my reasoning for simply asking the question,
people panicked, got insulted, and painted me as the bad guy who's trashing
a good airplane, or not wanting to hear what anyone else said, etc. A Heathen
!!!
I came to this list respectfully, asking for discussion and correspondence, and
perhaps even friendly debate about this stuff, NEVER ONCE saying I was smarter
than anyone, and NEVER ONCE saying I didn't want to hear about the experiences
of more experienced Kolbers. I had/have all sorts of ideas about modifications,
and adjustments, and upgrades and what not. I was just looking for a place
to discuss them, de-bunk them, argue the pros and cons of any given idea, and
brainstorm with like-minded Kolbers, etc.
The aircraft is indeed intended to be operated as a back country or off-airport
fun machine, but I am still based at a city municipal airport that requires me
to fly over solid city and houses to get into or out from that airport. So for
at least the first and last 10 minutes of every flight, I need a high level
of reliability. I also don't want to get stuck out in the middle of the desert
either, even with no houses below me. There's !(#*% rattlesnakes out there.
There is a good chance that my home airport won't even want me to fly this aircraft
there if I used a 2 stroke.
Like I said, I will limit my future questions on this list to things that relate
to the original Kolb plans and design. Any creative ideas, or new approaches,
or innovtive thinking stuff... I'll have to go back and discuss that on HBA
where people are not offended.
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
--------------------------------------------
On Tue, 3/22/16, John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com> wrote:
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Date: Tuesday, March 22, 2016, 4:31 PM
"John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
Bill B/Kolbers:
I'll tell you if there was a cheap, reliable, alternate four
stroke power plant for a Kolb aircraft, it would be flying
on a lot of Kolbs and other makes of ULs and home builts.
Sometimes one must pay for what he wants. I
have. Haven't had an engine out in well over 3,000
hours. Did have a couple engine outs caused by bad
fuel, but that was pilot error and had nothing to do with
engine reliability.
Some of us have tried to share with you a little of our
experience, but it seems you don't want to hear what we have
to say.
By now you should recognize there is no elevator hinge
problem. If you want to change yours when you get
around to getting your hands dirty and actually building a
Kolb, have at it.
john h
mkIII
Fort Campbell, Kentucky
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com]
On Behalf Of Bill Berle
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2016 6:03 PM
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y
On Tue, 3/22/16, Larry Cottrell <lcottrell1020@gmail.com>
wrote:
I have also seen several guys on the list that were
convinced that a bit of this and a bit of that would
make the plane perform just fine with one of the other
types of engines.
Again, you are a big boy, and apparently you have a better
idea, by all mean have at it.
Nobody here cares if you can improve your plane.
just try to not tell me how stupid I am because mine does
just exactly what I want and need.
:-)
Larry
--------------------------------------------
This aircraft will be flying over a densely populated area.
I believe the vast majority of Kolbs are not being flown
over populated areas... am I right about this? The majority
of people who have flown with 2 stroke engines over time
have had emergency landings due to inflight failures. Even
the people who have figured out how to reliably operate the
2 strokes recommend against it when I say that I'm based out
of a big city municipal airport. So my discussion about
alternate engines was based on this reality. Believe me, it
would be quick, cheap and easy to just bolt a 503 on the
FireStar like it was designed for.
I'd be absolutely thankful if you would be able to recommend
a truly reliable engine for this aircraft (for safe flying
over a densely populated area) that is as affordable as a
used 503 2 stroke. I already know where to look for engines
that are not affordable.
I do NOT "have a better idea", I just have a different
priority requirement than most of the Kolb operators do. I
need something that is more reliable than the Rotax 2
strokes.
Did me or anyone else tell you that you were stupid, at any
time, inferred or expressed?
Lists This Month --
Some AWESOME FREE Gifts!)
Raiser. Click on
more about
Gifts provided
www.buildersbooks.com
-Matt
Dralle, List Admin.
Forum -
- MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
List Contribution Web Site -
-Matt
Dralle, List Admin.
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: Elevator/Stabilizer hinge ass'y |
Bill - take a deep breath. Prop your feet up. Relax. Nobody is mad, it's just that
you are amongst a bunch of old curmudgeons and we are doing what we do.
Having said that, I noticed something in your last post that says volumes to
me; "There is a good chance that my home airport won't even want me to fly this
aircraft there if I used a 2 stroke." OK.... I think I see the problem
I have a beloved daughter who is married to a nice guy who lives in LA. I raised
that child right, she has her head on straight, but after several years of living
in LA, she has adopted some really odd concepts, probably to get along with
her fruits and nuts peer group. Peer pressure can be tough.
Brother Bill, I have said all that to say this: if you get a Kolb, you will be
really out of the mainstream at a GA airport that expects you to be a conformist,
and you have 2 options: try to conform to their expectations, stay frustrated,
and look at your really neat little airplane like they do - with a critical
and jaundiced eye - always looking for and finding something else to criticize.
Or...
Stand up for yourself and your airplane and take no prisoners. I went out to the
hangar today and looked at the tail and the elevator hinge. I looked at the
rivits. I moved the elevator up and down, I looked at the cables, I thought about
it a bit. I decided that while I have a number of problems in my life, the
tail of my Kolb ain't one of them.
When I transferred to TRI and started training here, my instructor Joe was half
Indian, and had the worst temper of any man I ever knew. Ask any air traffic
controller, they will tell you that some days are just "dummy days." Everybody
on frequency is acting stupid. Joe had the solution to dummy days; he told me
"Pick somebody at random and just chew his ass unmercifully: the rest of them
will smarten up."
Try that at you GA airport and I suspect the rest of them will not say a peep regardless
of what engine you use or what your airplane looks like. And you will
be a lot happier, even if people do think of you as an old curmudgeon.
--------
Richard Pike
Kolb MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
Kingsport, TN 3TN0
Would you consider yourself to be a good person?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWcDXT6pH7A
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=454011#454011
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! --
|