Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:18 AM - Re: : VG's: VG's (Lanny Lambdin)
2. 04:16 AM - Re: Vg's for Miss P'fer!!! (Dennis Rowe)
3. 05:57 AM - Re: Kolb breakaway tailwheel (George Helton)
4. 07:07 AM - Re: : VG's: VG's (Richard Pike)
5. 08:40 AM - Re: Kolb breakaway tailwheel (Bill Berle)
6. 09:01 AM - Re: : VG's: VG's (B Young)
7. 09:15 AM - Re: : VG's: VG's (John Hauck)
8. 10:20 AM - Re: Kolb breakaway tailwheel (George Helton)
9. 10:54 AM - Re: Re: : VG's: VG's (B Young)
10. 11:18 AM - Re: Re: : VG's: VG's (Lanny Lambdin)
11. 04:37 PM - Re: : VG's: VG's (Frankd)
12. 05:14 PM - Re: Re: : VG's: VG's (John Hauck)
13. 05:28 PM - Re: Re: : VG's: VG's (Hoppy)
14. 06:15 PM - Re: Re: : VG's: VG's (John Hauck)
15. 06:26 PM - Re: Re: : VG's: VG's (B Young)
16. 06:30 PM - Re: Re: : VG's: VG's (Hoppy)
17. 06:34 PM - Re: Re: : VG's: VG's (Hoppy)
18. 06:52 PM - Vgs (B Young)
19. 07:05 PM - Vgs (B Young)
20. 07:30 PM - Re: : VG's: VG's (Richard Pike)
21. 07:40 PM - Re: Re: : VG's: VG's (Richard Girard)
22. 08:26 PM - Re: Re: : VG's: VG's (John Hauck)
23. 08:52 PM - VG's, tail stall, angle of attack (Charlie England)
24. 09:53 PM - Re: VG's, tail stall, angle of attack (Larry Cottrell)
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: : VG's: VG's |
Hey Guys,
My name is Lanny Lambdin and I have been monitoring the site for a while now. (
I
have a Challenger II that is hard for my wife to get in and out of - and as I get
older,
same goes for me-so I have been thinking about the Kolb MIII as an easier ride)
Anyway, as I have read the concerns about the tail hitting first followed by the
nose
dropping, I was reminded of my Loehle Sport Parasol flight characteristics.
It has a listed stall speed of about 30mph, but you can not land at that speed.
You can fly at 30 with lots of power and angle of attack, but it you try to land
in that configuration the tail wheel will hit first and then the nose will plop
down
harder than you'd like. Not sure if some may be experiencing something similar
in your Kolb..
Thanks for good conversation and info,
Lanny
Sent from my iPad
> On Apr 2, 2017, at 9:09 AM, Peter Cowan <cowan.phc@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello people.
> Could someone help me understand the concept of the tail stalling and how it
is recognized? I've flown for many years in many different types (although not
yet but soon in a Kolb) and admit I am confused.
>
> When the wing stalls, the nose drops. I have experienced this a few times.
> Apparently (and correctly since the tail's functions is to provide a downward
force) when the tail stalls, the nose drops.
>
> How do I tell what the cause is of the nose drop?
>
> Please help me to get this.
> thanks
> Peter
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: Vg's for Miss P'fer!!! |
Good to hear from you Don!
Dennis Rowe
Do not archive
> On Apr 1, 2017, at 9:11 PM, Don G <donghe@one-eleven.net> wrote:
>
>
> Greetings Kolbers, Long time no see! I just dropped Matronics to check the RV
list, as I bought an RV9A last month. Not much action there so I thought I would
sneek a peek at The Kolb List. Really great to see all the familiar names!
John, Richard, Larry, Denny, Herb, Geez..I feel like I am at a reunion!
> And John, putting those porcupine thingies on Miss P'fer! hehe.. finally!
> I remember when I put them on the FlagFly, and how they helped, for I built it
a bit heavy and the VG's helped her in slow flight and landing...or should I
say helped me?
> Anyway, Great to see all you guys still active in the Kolb world, and you who
are going to lakeland, have a safe flight, and a great time at the show!
>
> BTW, have nice restored Luscombe 8A for sale, as well as a 912 Kitfox speedster...PM
me if interested..and..I Might take a single seat Kolb in trade if the
deal is right!
>
> Don
>
> --------
> Don G.
> Central Illinois
> Kitfox IV Speedster
> Luscombe 8A
> RV9A
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=467935#467935
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: Kolb breakaway tailwheel |
Correct, the old tailwheels were installed by using JB weld as was the tailw
heel rod into lower vertical stabilizer/ rudder post. It's a real job drilli
ng it out. I installed the new rod with one AN bolt and coated the inside of
each receiver tube with silicone to seal out moisture.
Here's a before and after picture.
George H.
Firestar MK1, FS#100
14GDH
gdhelton@gmail.com
Mesick, Michigan
Have a great day!
> On Apr 2, 2017, at 11:34 PM, John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com> wrote:
>
>
> The old tail wheel failed? not the new one?
>
> john h
> mkIII
> Titus, Alabama
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of George Helton
> Sent: Sunday, April 02, 2017 9:25 PM
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Kolb-List: Kolb breakaway tailwheel
>
> I'm enclosing a couple of pictures of the new tailwheel assembly available
> from Kolb Aircraft LLC. I had ordered this because I knew that Firestar 1
> that I was picking up from California and bring back home to Michigan had
> the old cookie cutter wheel w/ the old fiberglass tail rod which are prone
> to failure. This one failed the day after I unloaded the aircraft.
>
>
>
>
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: : VG's: VG's |
[quote="lambdinwilliam(at)gmail.c"]Hey Guys,
My name is Lanny Lambdin and I have been monitoring the site for a while now. (
I have a Challenger II that is hard for my wife to get in and out of - and as
I get older, same goes for me-so I have been thinking about the Kolb MIII as
an easier ride)
Anyway, as I have read the concerns about the tail hitting first followed by the
nose dropping, I was reminded of my Loehle Sport Parasol flight characteristics.
It has a listed stall speed of about 30mph, but you can not land at that
speed. You can fly at 30 with lots of power and angle of attack, but it you
try to land in that configuration the tail wheel will hit first and then the
nose will plop down harder than you'd like. Not sure if some may be experiencing
something similar in your Kolb..
Thanks for good conversation and info,
Lanny
Sent from my iPad
[quote]
With VG's on the wing, you can land tailwheel first, and the first few times you
land with VG's, you might surprise yourself into doing it, I quit doing it years
ago... didn't much care for it... but it is an option if you like that sort
of thing.
Concerning your description of your wife trying to get out of the Challenger:
before I got the MKIII, we drove to North Carolina to visit a Challenger dealer
to see one close up, and my wife eventually was able to get into it, and then
the sale was lost. A round lady with both legs around the front seat, and 4
lift struts all in the wrong place for normal egress. The expression on the dealers
face said it all, and then my friend who had gone with us stuck a fork in
it when he said "You could go to fly-in's and sell tickets to people so they
could watch her try and get out - you ought to have it paid off by next year."
--------
Richard Pike
Kolb MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
Kingsport, TN 3TN0
Forgiving is tough. Being forgiven is wonderful.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=467989#467989
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: Kolb breakaway tailwheel |
I want to have an accurate answer on this because I just received my new breakaway
tailwheel from Kolb.
George, WHICH TAILWHEEL FAILED ???
Did the old one fail or did the new one fail?
Please be specific, because I'm not nearly as smart as the rest of the people on
the Kolb list.
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, 4/3/17, George Helton <gdhelton@gmail.com> wrote:
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Kolb breakaway tailwheel
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Date: Monday, April 3, 2017, 5:57 AM
Correct, the old tailwheels were
installed by using JB weld as was the tailwheel rod into
lower vertical stabilizer/ rudder post. It's a real job
drilling it out. I installed the new rod with one AN bolt
and coated the inside of each receiver tube with silicone to
seal out moisture.
Here's a before and after picture.
George H.
Firestar MK1, FS#100
14GDH
gdhelton@gmail.com
Mesick, Michigan
Have a great day!
> On Apr 2, 2017, at 11:34 PM, John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
wrote:
>
>
> The old tail wheel failed? not the new one?
>
> john h
> mkIII
> Titus, Alabama
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com]
On Behalf Of George Helton
> Sent: Sunday, April 02, 2017 9:25 PM
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Kolb-List: Kolb breakaway tailwheel
>
> I'm enclosing a couple of pictures of the new tailwheel
assembly available
> from Kolb Aircraft LLC. I had ordered this because I
knew that Firestar 1
> that I was picking up from California and bring back
home to Michigan had
> the old cookie cutter wheel w/ the old fiberglass tail
rod which are prone
> to failure. This one failed the day after I unloaded
the aircraft.
>
>
>
>
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: : VG's: VG's |
To all, I guess the tail stall may be my ball of wax, let me make one
more stab at it.....
I have described what I have experienced as tail stall. With some
information received off list, I will make another option available.
When flying with a passenger, I could only generate enough down force to
slow my mkiii to 15 to 20 MPH above the speed the wing stalls. I've called
this tail stall. I guess to be able to defiantly call it tail stall I
should tuft the bottom of the elevators. Then there would be no
question.
The alternative possibly could be that the horizontal stabilizer and the
elevators may not be stalling, but it may be that the control surfaces
may be too small to provide the down force necessary.
Up untill the time I installed vgs I would have said that either
explanation was plausible. As soon as i installed the vgs on the
underside of the horizontal stabilizer,,, I instantly had enough down force
to hold the plane in a level attitude until the wing stalls. That would
indicate to me that the control surfaces were large enough. The vgs have
kept the air attached so that the elevators can work to their potential.
Had the vgs made no difference, I would have decided that the control
surfaces were too small.
I spent some time at the computer and re did my w&b. Cg limits per the
plan are 25 to 35 percent of wing cord. When experiencing insufficient
down force, my cg calculated to 26.66. within the limits.
My conclusion is that you eliminate tail stall, there are 3 ways that I
have come up with,,, (maybe 4) 1. Install larger horizontals and
elevators. 2. Install vgs. 3. Limit your passenger's weight. 4.
Add more physical weight to the tail.(thus applying more down force by
gravity in lieu of aero dynamics)
I understand that men are deep thinkers, and maybe I have over thought
this. Larry stop laughing!
Boyd
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 |
|
Add a little airspeed when flying healthy passengers.
Last thing I would do is add weight to my airplane to counteract
ineffective tail. However, I have added plenty of weight to Miss P'fer
for many other reasons. ;-)
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of B Young
Sent: Monday, April 03, 2017 11:02 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: : VG's: VG's
To all, I guess the tail stall may be my ball of wax, let me make one
more stab at it.....
I have described what I have experienced as tail stall. With some
information received off list, I will make another option available.
When flying with a passenger, I could only generate enough down force to
slow my mkiii to 15 to 20 MPH above the speed the wing stalls. I've
called this tail stall. I guess to be able to defiantly call it tail
stall I should tuft the bottom of the elevators. Then there would be
no question.
The alternative possibly could be that the horizontal stabilizer and the
elevators may not be stalling, but it may be that the control surfaces
may be too small to provide the down force necessary.
Up untill the time I installed vgs I would have said that either
explanation was plausible. As soon as i installed the vgs on the
underside of the horizontal stabilizer,,, I instantly had enough down
force to hold the plane in a level attitude until the wing stalls.
That would indicate to me that the control surfaces were large enough.
The vgs have kept the air attached so that the elevators can work to
their potential. Had the vgs made no difference, I would have
decided that the control surfaces were too small.
I spent some time at the computer and re did my w&b. Cg limits per the
plan are 25 to 35 percent of wing cord. When experiencing insufficient
down force, my cg calculated to 26.66. within the limits.
My conclusion is that you eliminate tail stall, there are 3 ways that I
have come up with,,, (maybe 4) 1. Install larger horizontals and
elevators. 2. Install vgs. 3. Limit your passenger's weight.
4. Add more physical weight to the tail.(thus applying more down force
by gravity in lieu of aero dynamics)
I understand that men are deep thinkers, and maybe I have over thought
this. Larry stop laughing!
Boyd
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: Kolb breakaway tailwheel |
It was the OLD TAILWHEEL that failed. And to make it clear, it's not the tai
lwheel itself that fails. It's the old fiberglass shaft/ rod that fails or t
he JB weld that they use to use to mount the wheel assembly. My plane was or
iginally built in 1985/86. They didn't use 7075 T7 aluminum tailwheel rods b
ack then.
George H.
Firestar MK1, #FS100
gdhelton@gmail.com
Mesick, Michigan
Have a great day!
> On Apr 3, 2017, at 11:35 AM, Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>
> I want to have an accurate answer on this because I just received my new b
reakaway tailwheel from Kolb.
>
> George, WHICH TAILWHEEL FAILED ???
>
> Did the old one fail or did the new one fail?
>
> Please be specific, because I'm not nearly as smart as the rest of the peo
ple on the Kolb list.
>
> Bill Berle
> www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
> www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-pro
fit entities
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Mon, 4/3/17, George Helton <gdhelton@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Kolb breakaway tailwheel
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Date: Monday, April 3, 2017, 5:57 AM
>
> Correct, the old tailwheels were
> installed by using JB weld as was the tailwheel rod into
> lower vertical stabilizer/ rudder post. It's a real job
> drilling it out. I installed the new rod with one AN bolt
> and coated the inside of each receiver tube with silicone to
> seal out moisture.
>
> Here's a before and after picture.
>
> George H.
> Firestar MK1, FS#100
> 14GDH
> gdhelton@gmail.com
> Mesick, Michigan
>
> Have a great day!
>
>> On Apr 2, 2017, at 11:34 PM, John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> The old tail wheel failed? not the new one?
>>
>> john h
>> mkIII
>> Titus, Alabama
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com]
> On Behalf Of George Helton
>> Sent: Sunday, April 02, 2017 9:25 PM
>> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Kolb-List: Kolb breakaway tailwheel
>>
>> I'm enclosing a couple of pictures of the new tailwheel
> assembly available
>> from Kolb Aircraft LLC. I had ordered this because I
> knew that Firestar 1
>> that I was picking up from California and bring back
> home to Michigan had
>> the old cookie cutter wheel w/ the old fiberglass tail
> rod which are prone
>> to failure. This one failed the day after I unloaded
> the aircraft.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
>
>
>
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: : VG's: VG's |
"""You can fly at 30 with lots of power and angle of attack, but it you
try to land in that configuration the tail wheel will hit first and then
the nose will plop down harder than you'd like. Not sure if some may be
experiencing something similar in your Kolb..'"""
Yes I experienced this a lot when I first flew my mkiii. I installed
longer landing gear, went from 600/6/15 tires to 600/6, then 800/6
tires.. each made an improvement. The vgs give me more angle of attack
when landing, and the tail wheel is easier to set down first again.
But the larger tires absorbed the bump better.
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: : VG's: VG's |
Yeah, that comment made for a certain no-deal!
Lanny
Sent from my iPad
> On Apr 3, 2017, at 10:06 AM, Richard Pike <thegreybaron@charter.net> wrote:
>
>
> [quote="lambdinwilliam(at)gmail.c"]Hey Guys,
> My name is Lanny Lambdin and I have been monitoring the site for a while now.
( I have a Challenger II that is hard for my wife to get in and out of - and
as I get older, same goes for me-so I have been thinking about the Kolb MIII as
an easier ride)
>
> Anyway, as I have read the concerns about the tail hitting first followed by
the nose dropping, I was reminded of my Loehle Sport Parasol flight characteristics.
It has a listed stall speed of about 30mph, but you can not land at that
speed. You can fly at 30 with lots of power and angle of attack, but it you
try to land in that configuration the tail wheel will hit first and then the
nose will plop down harder than you'd like. Not sure if some may be experiencing
something similar in your Kolb..
>
> Thanks for good conversation and info,
>
> Lanny
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> [quote]
>
> With VG's on the wing, you can land tailwheel first, and the first few times
you land with VG's, you might surprise yourself into doing it, I quit doing it
years ago... didn't much care for it... but it is an option if you like that
sort of thing.
>
> Concerning your description of your wife trying to get out of the Challenger:
before I got the MKIII, we drove to North Carolina to visit a Challenger dealer
to see one close up, and my wife eventually was able to get into it, and then
the sale was lost. A round lady with both legs around the front seat, and
4 lift struts all in the wrong place for normal egress. The expression on the
dealers face said it all, and then my friend who had gone with us stuck a fork
in it when he said "You could go to fly-in's and sell tickets to people so they
could watch her try and get out - you ought to have it paid off by next year."
>
> --------
> Richard Pike
> Kolb MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
> Kingsport, TN 3TN0
>
> Forgiving is tough. Being forgiven is wonderful.
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=467989#467989
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: : VG's: VG's |
Hello group,
I have been reading and learning about the topic of Tail Stall.. thank you all.
I fly a MkIII Xtra and limit my passengers to 200Lbs or less, because of the issue
with losing elevator authority during flare.
I did not think "Tail Stall" existed but maybe I am wrong. Technically, if a stall
is where the air separates from the surface of a wing (or tail) then perhaps
that is what is happening when I have a heavy passenger. This passenger moves
the CG forward and this weight shift is offset by the use of "Up" elevator.
When landing and decreasing the airspeed the airflow over the elevator in a full
"UP" position could separate from the underside of the elevator and that would
explain why adding more back stick does nothing..
All the remedies support this theory:-
a/ Add a gap seal - keeps the airflow flowing from top of Horz. Stab to bottom
of elevator
b/ Add VG's to bottom of Horz Stab - keep the air attached to the bottom of the
elevator when the stick is full back thus making the elevator more effective
c/ Land faster - the faster airflow over the elevator increases authority with
less back pressure, thus reducing airflow separation.
d/ move the CG back. Some aircraft have weight boxes in the tail so that CG is
controlled by adding a small weight on a long lever, effectively offsetting
the passenger weight somewhat , reducing the workload on the elevator and making
it more effective with smaller stick movements. (I have not tried this but
am thinking of moving one of my fuel tanks to a back position when flying passengers
to see what happens. )
I usually land a little faster and it has not been a big deal, but it is real..
Thanks again for making me think about it and visualize what may be happening in
real life.
In the end , understanding the effects and being ready makes one fly safer.
Happy landings
FrankD
N1014S, MkIII Xtra
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468002#468002
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: : VG's: VG's |
Only makes sense to land faster when your aircraft is heavier. Stall speed
is higher when carrying a passenger, take off speed has to be increased.
With the engine at idle, full flaps, there is less air moving over the tail
and what is moving is being deflected downward from the flaps and away from
the tail.
The last few days of flying I have discovered, with my airplane, better
performance with 20 deg of flaps rather than 40 deg. About the only
advantage of 40 deg is added deceleration and increased decent, which comes
in handy when required.
I've been flying this airplane for 25 years and just now come to that
conclusion. Maybe the change in my mind is the addition of VGs. I don't
know.
Giving a demo flight in my MKIII at Lakeland some years ago, I was able to
easily lose all elevator authority, almost without trying. We were out
horsing around, I told my passenger, "Let's try a steep dive to about 85 mph
and a hard pull up with full flaps." We had already done the same clean.
To my surprise, when I pulled back on the stick the aircraft continued
straight down until I pulled up the flaps and then back on the stick. A
good demonstration of the flaps stealing air from the tail.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Frankd
Sent: Monday, April 03, 2017 6:37 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Re: : VG's: VG's
Hello group,
I have been reading and learning about the topic of Tail Stall.. thank you
all.
I fly a MkIII Xtra and limit my passengers to 200Lbs or less, because of
the issue with losing elevator authority during flare.
I did not think "Tail Stall" existed but maybe I am wrong. Technically, if
a stall is where the air separates from the surface of a wing (or tail) then
perhaps that is what is happening when I have a heavy passenger. This
passenger moves the CG forward and this weight shift is offset by the use of
"Up" elevator.
When landing and decreasing the airspeed the airflow over the elevator in a
full "UP" position could separate from the underside of the elevator and
that would explain why adding more back stick does nothing..
All the remedies support this theory:-
a/ Add a gap seal - keeps the airflow flowing from top of Horz. Stab to
bottom of elevator b/ Add VG's to bottom of Horz Stab - keep the air
attached to the bottom of the elevator when the stick is full back thus
making the elevator more effective c/ Land faster - the faster airflow over
the elevator increases authority with less back pressure, thus reducing
airflow separation.
d/ move the CG back. Some aircraft have weight boxes in the tail so that CG
is controlled by adding a small weight on a long lever, effectively
offsetting the passenger weight somewhat , reducing the workload on the
elevator and making it more effective with smaller stick movements. (I have
not tried this but am thinking of moving one of my fuel tanks to a back
position when flying passengers to see what happens. )
I usually land a little faster and it has not been a big deal, but it is
real..
Thanks again for making me think about it and visualize what may be
happening in real life.
In the end , understanding the effects and being ready makes one fly safer.
Happy landings
FrankD
N1014S, MkIII Xtra
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468002#468002
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: : VG's: VG's |
Interesting conversation all..
My problem is considering the tail as aerodynamic...on the Kolbs...
I only see separation as the air hits the leading edge... certainly not
an airfoil in the classical sense and definitely not laminar... More
like a barn door...:-) A symmetrical airfoil is common on most
planes...as in "not flat". Seems to me that an all moving elevator
would work and likely could be much smaller... and could still fold...
Herb...who talked to an aerodynamicist once... ( he likely could not
spell it either:-) )
On 04/03/2017 06:37 PM, Frankd wrote:
>
> Hello group,
> I have been reading and learning about the topic of Tail Stall.. thank you all.
> I fly a MkIII Xtra and limit my passengers to 200Lbs or less, because of the
issue with losing elevator authority during flare.
>
> I did not think "Tail Stall" existed but maybe I am wrong. Technically, if a
stall is where the air separates from the surface of a wing (or tail) then perhaps
that is what is happening when I have a heavy passenger. This passenger
moves the CG forward and this weight shift is offset by the use of "Up" elevator.
> When landing and decreasing the airspeed the airflow over the elevator in a full
"UP" position could separate from the underside of the elevator and that would
explain why adding more back stick does nothing..
>
> All the remedies support this theory:-
> a/ Add a gap seal - keeps the airflow flowing from top of Horz. Stab to bottom
of elevator
> b/ Add VG's to bottom of Horz Stab - keep the air attached to the bottom of the
elevator when the stick is full back thus making the elevator more effective
> c/ Land faster - the faster airflow over the elevator increases authority with
less back pressure, thus reducing airflow separation.
>
> d/ move the CG back. Some aircraft have weight boxes in the tail so that CG
is controlled by adding a small weight on a long lever, effectively offsetting
the passenger weight somewhat , reducing the workload on the elevator and making
it more effective with smaller stick movements. (I have not tried this
but am thinking of moving one of my fuel tanks to a back position when flying
passengers to see what happens. )
>
> I usually land a little faster and it has not been a big deal, but it is real..
>
> Thanks again for making me think about it and visualize what may be happening
in real life.
>
> In the end , understanding the effects and being ready makes one fly safer.
>
> Happy landings
> FrankD
> N1014S, MkIII Xtra
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468002#468002
>
>
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: : VG's: VG's |
Don't think we have an aircraft design problem, but "maybe" a piloting
problem.
If you are flying a MKIII and hauling a big ass passenger, modify your
piloting technique to compensate for the forward cg.
The basic design of the Kolb tail section has never changed, except small
differences in size.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Hoppy
Sent: Monday, April 03, 2017 7:28 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: : VG's: VG's
Interesting conversation all..
My problem is considering the tail as aerodynamic...on the Kolbs...
I only see separation as the air hits the leading edge... certainly not an
airfoil in the classical sense and definitely not laminar... More
like a barn door...:-) A symmetrical airfoil is common on most
planes...as in "not flat". Seems to me that an all moving elevator would
work and likely could be much smaller... and could still fold...
Herb...who talked to an aerodynamicist once... ( he likely could not
spell it either:-) )
On 04/03/2017 06:37 PM, Frankd wrote:
>
> Hello group,
> I have been reading and learning about the topic of Tail Stall.. thank you
all.
> I fly a MkIII Xtra and limit my passengers to 200Lbs or less, because of
the issue with losing elevator authority during flare.
>
> I did not think "Tail Stall" existed but maybe I am wrong. Technically,
if a stall is where the air separates from the surface of a wing (or tail)
then perhaps that is what is happening when I have a heavy passenger. This
passenger moves the CG forward and this weight shift is offset by the use of
"Up" elevator.
> When landing and decreasing the airspeed the airflow over the elevator in
a full "UP" position could separate from the underside of the elevator and
that would explain why adding more back stick does nothing..
>
> All the remedies support this theory:-
> a/ Add a gap seal - keeps the airflow flowing from top of Horz. Stab to
bottom of elevator
> b/ Add VG's to bottom of Horz Stab - keep the air attached to the bottom
of the elevator when the stick is full back thus making the elevator more
effective
> c/ Land faster - the faster airflow over the elevator increases authority
with less back pressure, thus reducing airflow separation.
>
> d/ move the CG back. Some aircraft have weight boxes in the tail so that
CG is controlled by adding a small weight on a long lever, effectively
offsetting the passenger weight somewhat , reducing the workload on the
elevator and making it more effective with smaller stick movements. (I have
not tried this but am thinking of moving one of my fuel tanks to a back
position when flying passengers to see what happens. )
>
> I usually land a little faster and it has not been a big deal, but it is
real..
>
> Thanks again for making me think about it and visualize what may be
happening in real life.
>
> In the end , understanding the effects and being ready makes one fly
safer.
>
> Happy landings
> FrankD
> N1014S, MkIII Xtra
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468002#468002
>
>
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: : VG's: VG's |
""If you are flying a MKIII and hauling a big ass passenger, modify your
piloting technique to compensate for the forward cg.""
I found that to be correct, when flying a passenger, I come over the
fence at 70. Hit the numbers at 65 and maintain power till the wheels
touch. I'm going to have to practice more with the vg's, but I'm sure
changes are due.
Boyd
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: : VG's: VG's |
Me neither John..My Kolbs flew just great...no complaints...Never had to
use those wimpy stickums...!! :-)
On 04/03/2017 08:15 PM, John Hauck wrote:
>
> Don't think we have an aircraft design problem, but "maybe" a piloting
> problem.
>
> If you are flying a MKIII and hauling a big ass passenger, modify your
> piloting technique to compensate for the forward cg.
>
> The basic design of the Kolb tail section has never changed, except small
> differences in size.
>
> john h
> mkIII
> Titus, Alabama
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Hoppy
> Sent: Monday, April 03, 2017 7:28 PM
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: : VG's: VG's
>
>
> Interesting conversation all..
>
> My problem is considering the tail as aerodynamic...on the Kolbs...
> I only see separation as the air hits the leading edge... certainly not an
> airfoil in the classical sense and definitely not laminar... More
> like a barn door...:-) A symmetrical airfoil is common on most
> planes...as in "not flat". Seems to me that an all moving elevator would
> work and likely could be much smaller... and could still fold...
>
> Herb...who talked to an aerodynamicist once... ( he likely could not
> spell it either:-) )
>
>
> On 04/03/2017 06:37 PM, Frankd wrote:
>>
>> Hello group,
>> I have been reading and learning about the topic of Tail Stall.. thank you
> all.
>> I fly a MkIII Xtra and limit my passengers to 200Lbs or less, because of
> the issue with losing elevator authority during flare.
>> I did not think "Tail Stall" existed but maybe I am wrong. Technically,
> if a stall is where the air separates from the surface of a wing (or tail)
> then perhaps that is what is happening when I have a heavy passenger. This
> passenger moves the CG forward and this weight shift is offset by the use of
> "Up" elevator.
>> When landing and decreasing the airspeed the airflow over the elevator in
> a full "UP" position could separate from the underside of the elevator and
> that would explain why adding more back stick does nothing..
>> All the remedies support this theory:-
>> a/ Add a gap seal - keeps the airflow flowing from top of Horz. Stab to
> bottom of elevator
>> b/ Add VG's to bottom of Horz Stab - keep the air attached to the bottom
> of the elevator when the stick is full back thus making the elevator more
> effective
>> c/ Land faster - the faster airflow over the elevator increases authority
> with less back pressure, thus reducing airflow separation.
>> d/ move the CG back. Some aircraft have weight boxes in the tail so that
> CG is controlled by adding a small weight on a long lever, effectively
> offsetting the passenger weight somewhat , reducing the workload on the
> elevator and making it more effective with smaller stick movements. (I have
> not tried this but am thinking of moving one of my fuel tanks to a back
> position when flying passengers to see what happens. )
>> I usually land a little faster and it has not been a big deal, but it is
> real..
>> Thanks again for making me think about it and visualize what may be
> happening in real life.
>> In the end , understanding the effects and being ready makes one fly
> safer.
>> Happy landings
>> FrankD
>> N1014S, MkIII Xtra
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468002#468002
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: : VG's: VG's |
I flew only one passenger in my old MkIII...and he was pretty lite...so
I added maybe 10 mph on approach...Herb
On 04/03/2017 08:25 PM, B Young wrote:
>
> ""If you are flying a MKIII and hauling a big ass passenger, modify your
> piloting technique to compensate for the forward cg.""
>
> I found that to be correct, when flying a passenger, I come over the
> fence at 70. Hit the numbers at 65 and maintain power till the
> wheels touch. I'm going to have to practice more with the vg's, but
> I'm sure changes are due.
>
> Boyd
>
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 |
|
For 900 hours I figured I had a good handling plane... I had an expensive
lesson at 118 hours, I was too close to the ground to recover...
afterwards I modified the way I flew the plane...
For years I refused the thought of vgs. After putting them on,,, wish I
had done it long long ago. I would say don't knock it till you try it.
I truly believe that if I had had vgs on the horizontals, my expensive
lesson would have been a non event.
Boyd
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 |
|
Should have thought to add,,, if you try vgs and don't like them, I
promise to listen and try to learn. At that point let's compare notes.
If you reject vgs on principle,,, you are now where I was a few months ago.
My position is clear and have backed it up with numbers. If you are
apposed, let me see your numbers., Angles, speeds,responsiveness, etc.
Boyd
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: : VG's: VG's |
John Hauck wrote:
>
> Giving a demo flight in my MKIII at Lakeland some years ago, I was able to easily
lose all elevator authority, almost without trying. We were out
> horsing around, I told my passenger, "Let's try a steep dive to about 85 mph
and a hard pull up with full flaps." We had already done the same clean.
> To my surprise, when I pulled back on the stick the aircraft continued
> straight down until I pulled up the flaps and then back on the stick. A
> good demonstration of the flaps stealing air from the tail.
>
> john h
> mkIII
> Titus, Alabama
> --
I partially agree that the flaps do steal the airflow over the elevators, but I
think an even bigger factor is that lowering the flaps moves the center of lift
aft. We both know that lowering the flaps on a MKIII Classic requires cranking
in substantial amounts of up elevator trim, even when solo. IMO, the effect
of the flaps to move the center of lift/pressure aft is at least as significant
as what the flaps do to the airflow over the horizontal tail.
Unfortunately, it typically all comes together to conspire against us when we least
desire it...
--------
Richard Pike
Kolb MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
Kingsport, TN 3TN0
Forgiving is tough. Being forgiven is wonderful.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468011#468011
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: : VG's: VG's |
I tested a Mk IIIX to 1280 lb with cement bags in the passenger seat. With
seals on the stabilizer to boom tube gap I could hold it in a stall for
over 1000 feet and keep the wings level with the rudder. When I released
the stick she started flying again. Landing at that weight was a bit like
Pete Knight described flying the X15, "it's like milking a nervous mouse,
you just don't want to make any sudden moves".
Rick Girard
On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 8:31 PM, Hoppy <herbgh@nctc.com> wrote:
>
> I flew only one passenger in my old MkIII...and he was pretty lite...so I
> added maybe 10 mph on approach...Herb
>
>
> On 04/03/2017 08:25 PM, B Young wrote:
>
>>
>> ""If you are flying a MKIII and hauling a big ass passenger, modify your
>> piloting technique to compensate for the forward cg.""
>>
>> I found that to be correct, when flying a passenger, I come over the
>> fence at 70. Hit the numbers at 65 and maintain power till the whe
els
>> touch. I'm going to have to practice more with the vg's, but I'm sure
>> changes are due.
>>
>> Boyd
>>
>>
===========
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
--
=9CBlessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light.=9D
Groucho Marx
<http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/43244.Groucho_Marx>
Message 22
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: : VG's: VG's |
Yep, I am well aware of what takes place when the flaps are drooped. Takes
a lot more aft stick to keep the nose up. However, in an 85 mph dive,
straight down, pull back on the stick and nothing happens, no resistance, to
me, sitting in the driver's seat, got the impression there was no air on the
elevators. Soon as I pulled up flaps, I got resistance and the nose came
right up.
I got the same feel and sensation in 1990, when the leading edges of both
wings failed. There was no feeling in elevator, rudder, or ailerons. Just
like sitting on the ground dead still. At 75 mph I should have had some
resistance in the controls, unless they had all gotten blanked out by the
two new spoilers on the wings.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Richard Pike
Sent: Monday, April 03, 2017 9:30 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Re: : VG's: VG's
--> <thegreybaron@charter.net>
John Hauck wrote:
>
> Giving a demo flight in my MKIII at Lakeland some years ago, I was
> able to easily lose all elevator authority, almost without trying. We
were out horsing around, I told my passenger, "Let's try a steep dive to
about 85 mph and a hard pull up with full flaps." We had already done the
same clean.
> To my surprise, when I pulled back on the stick the aircraft continued
> straight down until I pulled up the flaps and then back on the stick.
> A good demonstration of the flaps stealing air from the tail.
>
> john h
> mkIII
> Titus, Alabama
> --
I partially agree that the flaps do steal the airflow over the elevators,
but I think an even bigger factor is that lowering the flaps moves the
center of lift aft. We both know that lowering the flaps on a MKIII Classic
requires cranking in substantial amounts of up elevator trim, even when
solo. IMO, the effect of the flaps to move the center of lift/pressure aft
is at least as significant as what the flaps do to the airflow over the
horizontal tail.
Unfortunately, it typically all comes together to conspire against us when
we least desire it...
--------
Richard Pike
Kolb MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
Kingsport, TN 3TN0
Forgiving is tough. Being forgiven is wonderful.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=468011#468011
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | VG's, tail stall, angle of attack |
Don't know about Kolbs (yet) but tail stall isn't that uncommon in other
a/c. The early Cessna Cardinal required a stabilator redesign due to
tail stall.
If answers are desired about whether there's a tail stall problem with a
particular plane, why not install an angle of attack meter? Doesn't have
to be high dollar; just an indicator that has consistent, repeatable
readings.
The wing always stalls at the same angle of attack. If the plane stalls
at some arbitrary angle indication ('x') on your AOA when the plane is
lightly loaded, and it stalls at some lower angle (y?) on the same
indicator when heavily loaded and/or at a more forward CG, then the tail
has stalled instead of the wing. If the plane stalls at the same AOA
indication but a higher airspeed, then it's the wing that's stalling.
Charlie
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: VG's, tail stall, angle of attack |
This whole thing is getting blown out of proportion. Boyd's and John's
problem concerned weight and CG change, caused by weight. I believe
that the original beginning of this thread came about concerning VG's
on the wing, but none on the elevator. Perhaps the language or
description of the reasoning for why one should also put them on the
elevator was inadequate.
The "tail stall" that did or did not occur during landing was not a
problem in any other configuration other than landings. Even when it
did occur upon landing, it was in no way any more than a Hmmm factor
of about 1. It was just that I like others before me had learned, that
the wing still had lift, with VG's, long after the tail had dropped to
the ground. Since this was occurring at 2 feet above the ground, it
was not Scary! It certainly is not a design flaw. :-) Merely that you
now had a lot more usable lift than you had before the installation of
VG's, and you could even out the lift between the wing and the
elevator by adding some of the little thingys on the elevator.
There! I hope that clears things up a bit.
Larry
On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 9:53 PM, Charlie England <ceengland7@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Don't know about Kolbs (yet) but tail stall isn't that uncommon in other
> a/c. The early Cessna Cardinal required a stabilator redesign due to tail
> stall.
>
> If answers are desired about whether there's a tail stall problem with a
> particular plane, why not install an angle of attack meter? Doesn't have to
> be high dollar; just an indicator that has consistent, repeatable readings.
>
> The wing always stalls at the same angle of attack. If the plane stalls at
> some arbitrary angle indication ('x') on your AOA when the plane is lightly
> loaded, and it stalls at some lower angle (y?) on the same indicator when
> heavily loaded and/or at a more forward CG, then the tail has stalled
> instead of the wing. If the plane stalls at the same AOA indication but a
> higher airspeed, then it's the wing that's stalling.
>
> Charlie
>
>
--
The older I get, the less tolerant I am of those who are intolerant of others.
If you forward this email, or any part of it, please remove my email
address before sending.
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! --
|