Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:34 AM - Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2 (JC Gilpin)
2. 02:08 PM - Spads (Rick Neilsen)
3. 03:17 PM - Re: Spads (John Hauck)
4. 03:57 PM - Re: Kolb-List Digest: 21 Msgs - 08/09/18 (Tim Hrib)
5. 04:08 PM - Re: Spads (james.vanlaak@gmail.com)
6. 04:49 PM - Re: Spads (Bill)
7. 05:11 PM - Re: Spads (Larry Cottrell)
8. 05:50 PM - Re: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2 (Russ Kinne)
9. 06:07 PM - Spades (james.vanlaak@gmail.com)
10. 07:34 PM - Re: Spads (John Hauck)
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: | Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2 |
Sure wish folks would get into the habit of deleting the ever increasing
tail of previous posts that follow their post.......
JG
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 |
|
Hi decided to change the subject line.
See the attached. I made these Spads better than ten years ago but never
tired them. They fit in the fixture where the aileron balance weights go.
Even drilled them to allow (I think) for the wing tip vortex.
Was going to try one on one side first so if it snatched or ripped
something off the plane I might still have aileron control. Then I got
concerned and never went any further.
Thoughts
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW Powered MKIIIC
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 |
|
You might have had a problem testing with one spade.
If I decided to take on that task I'd do it with two.
Seems to me the spades need to balanced. One spade would be severely
out of balance, nothing to counteract the single spade except stick
force. Might be a hand full.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rick Neilsen
Sent: Friday, August 10, 2018 4:08 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Spads
Was going to try one on one side first so if it snatched or ripped
something off the plane I might still have aileron control. Then I got
concerned and never went any further.
Thoughts
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW Powered MKIIIC
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: Kolb-List Digest: 21 Msgs - 08/09/18 |
i weigh 260 lbs... am i too heavy for a Firestar/Firefly?
________________________________
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com <owner-kolb-list-server@matronic
s.com> on behalf of Kolb-List Digest Server <kolb-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Friday, August 10, 2018 2:36 AM
Subject: Kolb-List Digest: 21 Msgs - 08/09/18
*
========================
Online Versions of Today's List Digest Archive
========================
Today's complete Kolb-List Digest can also be found in either of the
two Web Links listed below. The .html file includes the Digest formatted
in HTML for viewing with a web browser and features Hyperlinked Indexes
and Message Navigation. The .txt file includes the plain ASCII version
of the Kolb-List Digest and can be viewed with a generic text editor
such as Notepad or with a web browser.
HTML Version:
http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=htm
l&Chapter 18-08-09&Archive=Kolb
Text Version:
http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=txt
&Chapter 18-08-09&Archive=Kolb
========================
=======================
EMail Version of Today's List Digest Archive
========================
=======================
----------------------------------------------------------
Kolb-List Digest Archive
---
Total Messages Posted Thu 08/09/18: 21
----------------------------------------------------------
Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:26 AM - Re: Firestar/HKS First Flight (Gary Aman)
2. 05:10 AM - Re: Firestar/HKS First Flight (John Hauck)
3. 10:15 AM - Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2 (Bill Berle)
4. 11:26 AM - Re: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2 (John Hauck)
5. 11:27 AM - Re: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2 (Stuart Harner)
6. 11:44 AM - Speed (Ted Cowan)
7. 11:45 AM - Re: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2 (John Hauck)
8. 11:48 AM - Re: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2 (John Hauck)
9. 12:01 PM - Re: Speed (John Hauck)
10. 12:51 PM - Re: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2 (Bill Berle)
11. 01:23 PM - Re: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2 (George Helton)
12. 01:26 PM - Re: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2 (Stuart Harner)
13. 01:51 PM - Re: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2 (John Hauck)
14. 02:35 PM - Re: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2 (John Hauck)
15. 02:47 PM - Re: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2 (Gary Aman)
16. 02:58 PM - Re: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2 (Bill Berle)
17. 03:22 PM - Re: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2 (John Hauck)
18. 03:39 PM - Re: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2 (George Helton)
19. 04:00 PM - Re: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2 (John Hauck)
20. 04:27 PM - Re: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2 (George Helton)
21. 05:58 PM - Re: Re: gear legs (Russ Kinne)
________________________________ Message 1 ______________________________
_______
Time: 04:26:42 AM PST US
From: Gary Aman <zeprep251@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firestar/HKS First Flight
Spades do counter balance each other but control ease is their intended fun
ction
Sent from my iPhone
> On Aug 9, 2018, at 12:42 AM, Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net> wrote
:
>
>
> Spades will add weight forward of the hinge line, which is usually workin
g AGAINST
flutter.
>
> Bill Berle
>
> On Wed, 8/8/18, Denny Baber <baberdk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> My understanding is that spades are for aileron flutter.
>
>
> Respectfully,
> Dennis BaberCape Coral,
> Flbaberdk@gmail.com305-814-7218
> Stay
> Curious
>
>
________________________________ Message 2 ______________________________
_______
Time: 05:10:12 AM PST US
From: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Firestar/HKS First Flight
True. Some. But not enough to get the job done, unless additional weight i
s added
to equal the out of balance aileron.
When I originally built my MKIII, before Kolb admitted there might be a pro
blem
with aileron flutter, I fabricated some really neat counter balance weights
and
attached them, very securely to 6061 plates I fixed to the inboard end of e
ach
aileron. First couple flights went well during testing. Then, entering th
e
traffic pattern at my local airport, the MKIII went into violent flutter.
Snatched the stick right out of my hand. Chopping power and corralling the
stick
as far back as I could get it, gets it out of flutter. I had learned that
exercise early on with my US and FS, but Kolb wasn't buying it. Landed and
promptly
removed my beautiful counter balance weights.
Right about 85 mph, where the airplane and I liked to cruise was right on t
he edge
of flutter. Turbulence would set it off quickly. I flew the MKIII in this
condition to Sun and Fun 1993, to Homer's to paint the Lasers, and then to
Oshkosh.
At Oshkosh I had to fly a photo shoot with a Cessna 208. He was having
trouble slowing to 85 and I was going into flutter at 85. It was a tough f
light,
but we got'er done.
I was getting ready to do my flight around CONUS and up to Alaska, wonderin
g how
I was going to make it with the flutter problem. I dreamed up all kinds of
cures to keep the aileron control linkage as tight as possible, but I was s
till
susceptible to flutter.
Finally, the next year at Sun and Fun Dick Rahill got the factory FS into s
evere
flutter. He was white as a ghost and visibly shaken when he finally got on
the ground after flying from Lakeland South to the UL strip on the edge of
a severe
thunderstorm. A week later I got a set of FS aileron counter balance weigh
ts
from Kolb, made them fit my MKIII, and never again experienced aileron flut
ter.
It was wonderful and I was a month from beginning my big flight of 1994.
I had been flying with flutter for 10 years by this time.
Don't know why my design didn't work, but Kolb's did.
My design was ahead of the hinge line with bullet shaped weights like I had
seen
on other aircraft. Guess I stuck them on the wrong end of the aileron beca
use
they aggravated the situation.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@m
atronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Berle
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2018 11:42 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firestar/HKS First Flight
Spades will add weight forward of the hinge line, which is usually working
AGAINST
flutter.
Bill Berle
On Wed, 8/8/18, Denny Baber <baberdk@gmail.com> wrote:
My understanding is that spades are for aileron flutter.
Respectfully,
Dennis BaberCape Coral,
Flbaberdk@gmail.com305-814-7218
Stay
Curious
________________________________ Message 3 ______________________________
_______
Time: 10:15:52 AM PST US
From: Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
Please let me clarify my comment so it does not accidentally cause a safety
issue
for someone. I believe that adding weight forward of the hinge line works a
gainst
flutter. BUT I did NOT mean to imply that spades would replace or equal
the Kolb tip weights. Those are there for a reason, as many of you know fro
m
experience. Flutter would scare the s*** out of me in a Kolb or any other a
ircraft.
Test Flight Report for flight #2
I flew my Firestar again yesterday morning for about 20-25 minutes. I was a
little
more confident in everything, so I took it right up to 1500 feet above the
airport and flew several laps above the runway.
The aircraft needed a few pounds of forward pressure on the stick, as I hav
e described
before. However, this was at an indicated airspeed of only 45 miles per
hour. A lot slower than one would expect for a properly rigged aircraft. I
realized
at this point that I needed to raise the leading edge of the stabilizer
as a couple of people have mentioned. A "trim tab" for this would have been
pretty large and bent pretty far.
Also on the test flight, I paid specific attention to the rudder trim. The
aircraft
required five or six pounds (guess) of LEFT rudder in level flight, again
at the 40-45 mile an hour speeds I was flying. It also needs left rudder on
takeoff
to keep it straight. This was very surprising to me because the propeller
turns the "conventional" direction, meaning that it is turning the same dir
ection
as a Cessna or J-3 Cub, where you need right rudder on takeoff. The torque
from the engine, especially with a high ratio gearbox and a big wide propel
ler,
SHOULD be trying to roll and yaw the aircraft to the left, requiring right
rudder. But this is the opposite of how it was in flight.
I briefly let off of the rudder pressure and the airplane yawed to the righ
t significantly.
The air flow direction and the view from the seat verified this without
a doubt... so it does not seem that this problem could be caused by the
rudder pedals not being adjusted well.
So I have a QUESTION for the experienced Kolb builders/owners here: Dies th
e stock
Kolb engine mount have a thrust offset angle built into it??? The way this
aircraft is behaving would be explained by the Kolb fuselage having several
degrees
of RIGHT thrust built into the engine mounts. Perhaps this would have been
done to compensate for engines that turn the other direction . I'm having
trouble understanding how an engine that turns a "right hand" propeller is
making
it steer to the RIGHT instead of left.
One other thing I tried in flight was to slow the aircraft down. This seems
pretty
funny starting from 40 and 45 miles an hour, but I had plenty of altitude.
With the vortex generators installed, and having read the flight reports fr
om
several other Kolb owners, I fully expected the aircraft to stall at 30 MPH
.
But as I slowed down to 35 MPH it gently stalled. I repeated this again aft
er
speeding back up to 40, to make sure I had actually stalled it the first ti
me.
Once again at 35 indicated, it provided a fairly gentle stall. No significa
nt
buffeting or shaking before the break, but a pretty gentle straight-ahead s
tall
with the nose dropping 20 degrees when it did let go.
This was disappointing, since I installed the VG's specifically to get the
lower
stall speed they usually provide. To be honest, I was pretty disappointed,
since
the old Taylorcrafts and J-3 Cubs stall just under 40 MPH, and a big part
of the reason I wanted an ultralight style aircraft was to fly really slow
into
really short landings.
The last thing I tried to pay specific attention to was the heavy ailerons
getting
better at lower speeds. But again on this flight my speeds were already slo
w..I
moved the stick left and right and it has adequate roll control, but the
stick forces were far far higher than the elevator or rudder forces, and th
is
was again at only 40 and 45 indicated. Looking out at the ailerons as I mov
ed
them, they were deflecting equally along their length... meaning that the o
utboard
tip of the aileron waas moving as much as the inboard end of the ailerons
were moving. The ailerons were not "twisting" very much. Since I am not yet
familiar with the Kolb I was not able to assess whether the amount of ailer
on
movement in flight was the same as it was on the ground (with the same amou
nt
of stick movement).
I realized that I had taken too much pitch out of the propeller. The engine
RPM
was 5200-5300 when I was flying around at 40-45 miles an hour, and I specif
ically
wanted to be in the "cruising" RPM range instead of maximum continuous powe
r
(which is 5800). So I will probably put two degrees more pitch into the pro
peller
before the next test flight.
After the flight I spent the rest of the day making and installing the part
s to
raise the leading edge of the tail. I raised the leading edge of the tail b
y
3/4 of an inch. using short steel extension plates.
Again, my most important question for Kolbers is whether the Kolb Firestar
2 fuselage
is known to have tight hand thrust offset built into the welded engine
mount. Only this would explain why an engine that should be pulling the air
plane
left would actually be pulling it right.
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com<http://www.ezflaphandle.com> - safety & performance up
grade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net<http://www.grantstar.net> - winning proposals for no
n-profit and for-profit entities
--------------------------------------------
On Thu, 8/9/18, John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com> wrote:
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Firestar/HKS First Flight
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Date: Thursday, August 9, 2018, 5:10 AM
Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
True. Some. But not enough to get
the job done, unless additional weight is added to equal the
out of balance aileron.
When I originally built my MKIII,
before Kolb admitted there might be a problem with aileron
flutter, I fabricated some really neat counter balance
weights and attached them, very securely to 6061 plates I
fixed to the inboard end of each aileron. First couple
flights went well during testing. Then, entering the
traffic pattern at my local airport, the MKIII went into
violent flutter. Snatched the stick right out of my
hand. Chopping power and corralling the stick as far
back as I could get it, gets it out of flutter. I had
learned that exercise early on with my US and FS, but Kolb
wasn't buying it. Landed and promptly removed my
beautiful counter balance weights.
Right about 85 mph, where the airplane
and I liked to cruise was right on the edge of
flutter. Turbulence would set it off quickly. I
flew the MKIII in this condition to Sun and Fun 1993, to
Homer's to paint the Lasers, and then to Oshkosh. At
Oshkosh I had to fly a photo shoot with a Cessna 208.
He was having trouble slowing to 85 and I was going into
flutter at 85. It was a tough flight, but we got'er
done.
I was getting ready to do my flight
around CONUS and up to Alaska, wondering how I was going to
make it with the flutter problem. I dreamed up all
kinds of cures to keep the aileron control linkage as tight
as possible, but I was still susceptible to flutter.
Finally, the next year at Sun and Fun
Dick Rahill got the factory FS into severe flutter. He
was white as a ghost and visibly shaken when he finally got
on the ground after flying from Lakeland South to the UL
strip on the edge of a severe thunderstorm. A week
later I got a set of FS aileron counter balance weights from
Kolb, made them fit my MKIII, and never again experienced
aileron flutter. It was wonderful and I was a month
from beginning my big flight of 1994. I had been
flying with flutter for 10 years by this time.
Don't know why my design didn't work,
but Kolb's did.
My design was ahead of the hinge line
with bullet shaped weights like I had seen on other
aircraft. Guess I stuck them on the wrong end of the
aileron because they aggravated the situation.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com]
On Behalf Of Bill Berle
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2018 11:42
PM
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firestar/HKS
First Flight
Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
Spades will add weight forward of the
hinge line, which is usually working AGAINST flutter.
Bill Berle
On Wed, 8/8/18, Denny Baber <baberdk@gmail.com>
wrote:
My understanding is that spades
are for aileron flutter.
Respectfully,
Dennis BaberCape Coral,
Flbaberdk@gmail.com305-814-7218
Stay
Curious
The Kolb-List Email Forum -
Navigator to browse
List Un/Subscription,
7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
- MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
via the Web Forums!
- NEW MATRONICS LIST WIKI -
Email List Wiki!
- List Contribution Web Site -
support!
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
________________________________ Message 4 ______________________________
_______
Time: 11:26:43 AM PST US
From: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
There is in offset in the engine mount on any standard Kolb.
I spent a lot of time and effort experimenting with engine off set to corre
ct trim
my perceived trim problems in my FS. All was for naught. Best left just
like Homer Kolb designed.
I did the same with the leading edge of the upper vertical stabilizer. Aga
in,
a waste of time. Best left centered like indicated on the plan sheet.
Brother Jim fabricated the first pair of adjustable forward horizontal stab
ilizer
mounts. Had 3 choices of angle. I flew off most of the 40 hours on the or
iginal
factory MKIII. I knew what we needed to make my MKIII right. Same for
moving the main gear forward, and many other modifications that were all bl
essed
by Homer Kolb the morning after we would make them the night before. Many
of our mods were incorporated in subsequent MKIII airframes and other Kolb
models
from changes we made to mine, SN: M3-11. When I got to Homer's first of
Jan 1991, 10 air frames had been fabricated. Brother Jim had gotten to Hom
er's
around the first of Dec 1990, the help out with some welding, when both Hom
er's
welders were laid up with health problems. I experimented with all three
positions, but the center position was where the aircraft settled down and
felt
comfortable. The other two positions made the MKIII feel like it was ridin
g
on a ball. Keep wanting to fall off in all different directions. Not fun
to fly.
We cured the adverse yaw problem after many hours and a 17,200 mile flight.
On
that flight I flew a half ball out of trim the entire way. I'm still a hal
f
ball out of trim, but the MKIII flies straight and level by doubling the si
ze
of the rudder trim tab. The prop wash comes off the engine twisting, hits
the
left side of the vertical stabilizer and the top of the left horizontal sta
bilizer.
This is verified by crank case ventilation depositing oil and fuel spray
on those surfaces and no place else.
It is normal to have the aircraft want to drop the nose before some form of
pitch
trim is installed. Primarily because it is a high mounted pusher. Looks l
ike
Berle's Kolb could have raised the engine to run a longer prop. However,
there is something that needs to be tweaked to get the aircraft to fly leve
l.
A few ways to do it: 1-forced trim, 2-elevator trim tab, and horizontal st
abilizer.
On a FS I'd go with an elevator trim tab which is adjustable, simple,
and easy to install. Doesn't take a lot of trim tab to get the job done, a
nd
if it does it is a good way to correct a pitch problem. However, adverse p
itch
trim up ain't normal and should be thoroughly investigated.
Has your ASI been calibrated? Most are not very accurate at slow speeds.
I fly
out and back on reverse headings at a constant airspeed, add them together
and
divide by 2 to get ASI error. May or may not help at very slow speeds. Yo
u
can also use a GPS, which is ground speed only, on a calm day, to get a pre
tty
good idea of ASI calibration. You should be at 30 or lower before stall.
My MKIII will easily hit 30, sometimes less.
Because a Cub and your engine turn the same way does not mean that the airc
raft
response will be the same. One's a tractor and one's a pusher, IMHO.
Ailerons move very little in flight to get the results you are looking for.
They
are oversized. I reduced the area of my ailerons when I built my MKIII kno
wing
I had a lot more aileron than I needed. Homer designed his aircraft primar
ily
for safe, very slow flight, to be able to stay in contact with what was
happening in the trees and on the ground he was flying over. Cut the ailer
on
cord in half and you may get the results you are looking for.
I believe adverse yaw is caused by prop wash primarily. A rudder trim tab
corrects
that problem.
With less than an hour's flight time, if it was me, I'd get out there and l
earn
how to fly the aircraft before I decided to change anything unless it was a
bsolutely
unsafe to fly in that condition. It takes some hours to learn your Kolb.
Especially in your case where you came from GA. I came from helicopters
and had no problem flying Kolbs. To me, they were a lot like rotary wing.
Wow! My mind has a severe case of diarrhea, but the above are my thoughts
on the
situation.
john h
Titus, Alabama
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@m
atronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Berle
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2018 12:16 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
Please let me clarify my comment so it does not accidentally cause a safety
issue
for someone. I believe that adding weight forward of the hinge line works a
gainst
flutter. BUT I did NOT mean to imply that spades would replace or equal
the Kolb tip weights. Those are there for a reason, as many of you know fro
m
experience. Flutter would scare the s*** out of me in a Kolb or any other a
ircraft.
Test Flight Report for flight #2
I flew my Firestar again yesterday morning for about 20-25 minutes. I was a
little
more confident in everything, so I took it right up to 1500 feet above the
airport and flew several laps above the runway.
The aircraft needed a few pounds of forward pressure on the stick, as I hav
e described
before. However, this was at an indicated airspeed of only 45 miles per
hour. A lot slower than one would expect for a properly rigged aircraft. I
realized
at this point that I needed to raise the leading edge of the stabilizer
as a couple of people have mentioned. A "trim tab" for this would have been
pretty large and bent pretty far.
Also on the test flight, I paid specific attention to the rudder trim. The
aircraft
required five or six pounds (guess) of LEFT rudder in level flight, again
at the 40-45 mile an hour speeds I was flying. It also needs left rudder on
takeoff
to keep it straight. This was very surprising to me because the propeller
turns the "conventional" direction, meaning that it is turning the same dir
ection
as a Cessna or J-3 Cub, where you need right rudder on takeoff. The torque
from the engine, especially with a high ratio gearbox and a big wide propel
ler,
SHOULD be trying to roll and yaw the aircraft to the left, requiring right
rudder. But this is the opposite of how it was in flight.
I briefly let off of the rudder pressure and the airplane yawed to the righ
t significantly.
The air flow direction and the view from the seat verified this without
a doubt... so it does not seem that this problem could be caused by the
rudder pedals not being adjusted well.
So I have a QUESTION for the experienced Kolb builders/owners here: Dies th
e stock
Kolb engine mount have a thrust offset angle built into it??? The way this
aircraft is behaving would be explained by the Kolb fuselage having several
degrees
of RIGHT thrust built into the engine mounts. Perhaps this would have been
done to compensate for engines that turn the other direction . I'm having
trouble understanding how an engine that turns a "right hand" propeller is
making
it steer to the RIGHT instead of left.
One other thing I tried in flight was to slow the aircraft down. This seems
pretty
funny starting from 40 and 45 miles an hour, but I had plenty of altitude.
With the vortex generators installed, and having read the flight reports fr
om
several other Kolb owners, I fully expected the aircraft to stall at 30 MPH
.
But as I slowed down to 35 MPH it gently stalled. I repeated this again aft
er
speeding back up to 40, to make sure I had actually stalled it the first ti
me.
Once again at 35 indicated, it provided a fairly gentle stall. No significa
nt
buffeting or shaking before the break, but a pretty gentle straight-ahead s
tall
with the nose dropping 20 degrees when it did let go.
This was disappointing, since I installed the VG's specifically to get the
lower
stall speed they usually provide. To be honest, I was pretty disappointed,
since
the old Taylorcrafts and J-3 Cubs stall just under 40 MPH, and a big part
of the reason I wanted an ultralight style aircraft was to fly really slow
into
really short landings.
The last thing I tried to pay specific attention to was the heavy ailerons
getting
better at lower speeds. But again on this flight my speeds were already slo
w..I
moved the stick left and right and it has adequate roll control, but the
stick forces were far far higher than the elevator or rudder forces, and th
is
was again at only 40 and 45 indicated. Looking out at the ailerons as I mov
ed
them, they were deflecting equally along their length... meaning that the o
utboard
tip of the aileron waas moving as much as the inboard end of the ailerons
were moving. The ailerons were not "twisting" very much. Since I am not yet
familiar with the Kolb I was not able to assess whether the amount of ailer
on
movement in flight was the same as it was on the ground (with the same amou
nt
of stick movement).
I realized that I had taken too much pitch out of the propeller. The engine
RPM
was 5200-5300 when I was flying around at 40-45 miles an hour, and I specif
ically
wanted to be in the "cruising" RPM range instead of maximum continuous powe
r
(which is 5800). So I will probably put two degrees more pitch into the pro
peller
before the next test flight.
After the flight I spent the rest of the day making and installing the part
s to
raise the leading edge of the tail. I raised the leading edge of the tail b
y
3/4 of an inch. using short steel extension plates.
Again, my most important question for Kolbers is whether the Kolb Firestar
2 fuselage
is known to have tight hand thrust offset built into the welded engine
mount. Only this would explain why an engine that should be pulling the air
plane
left would actually be pulling it right.
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com<http://www.ezflaphandle.com> - safety & performance u
pgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net<http://www.grantstar.net> - winning proposals f
or non-profit and for-profit entities
--------------------------------------------
On Thu, 8/9/18, John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com> wrote:
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Firestar/HKS First Flight
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Date: Thursday, August 9, 2018, 5:10 AM
Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
True. Some. But not enough to get
the job done, unless additional weight is added to equal the
out of balance aileron.
When I originally built my MKIII,
before Kolb admitted there might be a problem with aileron
flutter, I fabricated some really neat counter balance
weights and attached them, very securely to 6061 plates I
fixed to the inboard end of each aileron. First couple
flights went well during testing. Then, entering the
traffic pattern at my local airport, the MKIII went into
violent flutter. Snatched the stick right out of my
hand. Chopping power and corralling the stick as far
back as I could get it, gets it out of flutter. I had
learned that exercise early on with my US and FS, but Kolb
wasn't buying it. Landed and promptly removed my
beautiful counter balance weights.
Right about 85 mph, where the airplane
and I liked to cruise was right on the edge of
flutter. Turbulence would set it off quickly. I
flew the MKIII in this condition to Sun and Fun 1993, to
Homer's to paint the Lasers, and then to Oshkosh. At
Oshkosh I had to fly a photo shoot with a Cessna 208.
He was having trouble slowing to 85 and I was going into
flutter at 85. It was a tough flight, but we got'er
done.
I was getting ready to do my flight
around CONUS and up to Alaska, wondering how I was going to
make it with the flutter problem. I dreamed up all
kinds of cures to keep the aileron control linkage as tight
as possible, but I was still susceptible to flutter.
Finally, the next year at Sun and Fun
Dick Rahill got the factory FS into severe flutter. He
was white as a ghost and visibly shaken when he finally got
on the ground after flying from Lakeland South to the UL
strip on the edge of a severe thunderstorm. A week
later I got a set of FS aileron counter balance weights from
Kolb, made them fit my MKIII, and never again experienced
aileron flutter. It was wonderful and I was a month
from beginning my big flight of 1994. I had been
flying with flutter for 10 years by this time.
Don't know why my design didn't work,
but Kolb's did.
My design was ahead of the hinge line
with bullet shaped weights like I had seen on other
aircraft. Guess I stuck them on the wrong end of the
aileron because they aggravated the situation.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com]
On Behalf Of Bill Berle
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2018 11:42
PM
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firestar/HKS
First Flight
Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
Spades will add weight forward of the
hinge line, which is usually working AGAINST flutter.
Bill Berle
On Wed, 8/8/18, Denny Baber <baberdk@gmail.com>
wrote:
My understanding is that spades
are for aileron flutter.
Respectfully,
Dennis BaberCape Coral,
Flbaberdk@gmail.com305-814-7218
Stay
Curious
The Kolb-List Email Forum -
Navigator to browse
List Un/Subscription,
7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
- MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
via the Web Forums!
- NEW MATRONICS LIST WIKI -
Email List Wiki!
- List Contribution Web Site -
support!
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
________________________________ Message 5 ______________________________
_______
Time: 11:27:17 AM PST US
From: "Stuart Harner" <stuart@harnerfarm.net>
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
Hi Bill,
Good to hear about your safe and successful 2nd. Flight.
First question: Do you know your ASI is accurate? You can get a speedometer
(GPS
based) app for your phone and do a straight path for a couple of miles, the
n
repeat the other direction for a quick and dirty check. Won't be perfect bu
t
is good for a quick verification.
Next, yes to the clockwise prop and left rudder. My Firefly does exactly th
e same
thing. P-factor should cause it to turn left but it does not. We had quite
a discussion about this back after my first flights. Short version of the c
onclusion
is that prop wash hitting the right side of the vertical stabilizer is
more powerful than P-factor and easily overrides it. I have confirmed this
by
observing the tail while warming up the engine. Dead bugs collect on the ri
ght
side of the vertical and the rudder deflects to the left. The pusher config
uration
with a low boom tube presents no resistance between the prop and the tail
unlike something more conventional that has all that covered fuselage to "s
traighten
out" the airflow between prop and tail.
Advice (on par with the price of it): Don't go messing with the tail until
you
get the proper cruise set up with RPM/Pitch and confirm the ASI. Also, don'
t change
more than one thing at a time between flights. You can easily confuse yours
elf
and muddy the results by trying two things at once, no matter how un-relate
d
they seem. Been there, done that.
Question two: How was the elevator pressure during the stalls, descent and
climb
out compared to "cruise"?
You're doing great! Keep it up.
Stuart
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@m
atronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Berle
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2018 12:16 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
Please let me clarify my comment so it does not accidentally cause a safety
issue
for someone. I believe that adding weight forward of the hinge line works a
gainst
flutter. BUT I did NOT mean to imply that spades would replace or equal
the Kolb tip weights. Those are there for a reason, as many of you know fro
m
experience. Flutter would scare the s*** out of me in a Kolb or any other a
ircraft.
Test Flight Report for flight #2
I flew my Firestar again yesterday morning for about 20-25 minutes. I was a
little
more confident in everything, so I took it right up to 1500 feet above the
airport and flew several laps above the runway.
The aircraft needed a few pounds of forward pressure on the stick, as I hav
e described
before. However, this was at an indicated airspeed of only 45 miles per
hour. A lot slower than one would expect for a properly rigged aircraft. I
realized
at this point that I needed to raise the leading edge of the stabilizer
as a couple of people have mentioned. A "trim tab" for this would have been
pretty large and bent pretty far.
Also on the test flight, I paid specific attention to the rudder trim. The
aircraft
required five or six pounds (guess) of LEFT rudder in level flight, again
at the 40-45 mile an hour speeds I was flying. It also needs left rudder on
takeoff
to keep it straight. This was very surprising to me because the propeller
turns the "conventional" direction, meaning that it is turning the same dir
ection
as a Cessna or J-3 Cub, where you need right rudder on takeoff. The torque
from the engine, especially with a high ratio gearbox and a big wide propel
ler,
SHOULD be trying to roll and yaw the aircraft to the left, requiring right
rudder. But this is the opposite of how it was in flight.
I briefly let off of the rudder pressure and the airplane yawed to the righ
t significantly.
The air flow direction and the view from the seat verified this without
a doubt... so it does not seem that this problem could be caused by the
rudder pedals not being adjusted well.
So I have a QUESTION for the experienced Kolb builders/owners here: Dies th
e stock
Kolb engine mount have a thrust offset angle built into it??? The way this
aircraft is behaving would be explained by the Kolb fuselage having several
degrees
of RIGHT thrust built into the engine mounts. Perhaps this would have been
done to compensate for engines that turn the other direction . I'm having
trouble understanding how an engine that turns a "right hand" propeller is
making
it steer to the RIGHT instead of left.
One other thing I tried in flight was to slow the aircraft down. This seems
pretty
funny starting from 40 and 45 miles an hour, but I had plenty of altitude.
With the vortex generators installed, and having read the flight reports fr
om
several other Kolb owners, I fully expected the aircraft to stall at 30 MPH
.
But as I slowed down to 35 MPH it gently stalled. I repeated this again aft
er
speeding back up to 40, to make sure I had actually stalled it the first ti
me.
Once again at 35 indicated, it provided a fairly gentle stall. No significa
nt
buffeting or shaking before the break, but a pretty gentle straight-ahead s
tall
with the nose dropping 20 degrees when it did let go.
This was disappointing, since I installed the VG's specifically to get the
lower
stall speed they usually provide. To be honest, I was pretty disappointed,
since
the old Taylorcrafts and J-3 Cubs stall just under 40 MPH, and a big part
of the reason I wanted an ultralight style aircraft was to fly really slow
into
really short landings.
The last thing I tried to pay specific attention to was the heavy ailerons
getting
better at lower speeds. But again on this flight my speeds were already slo
w..I
moved the stick left and right and it has adequate roll control, but the
stick forces were far far higher than the elevator or rudder forces, and th
is
was again at only 40 and 45 indicated. Looking out at the ailerons as I mov
ed
them, they were deflecting equally along their length... meaning that the o
utboard
tip of the aileron waas moving as much as the inboard end of the ailerons
were moving. The ailerons were not "twisting" very much. Since I am not yet
familiar with the Kolb I was not able to assess whether the amount of ailer
on
movement in flight was the same as it was on the ground (with the same amou
nt
of stick movement).
I realized that I had taken too much pitch out of the propeller. The engine
RPM
was 5200-5300 when I was flying around at 40-45 miles an hour, and I specif
ically
wanted to be in the "cruising" RPM range instead of maximum continuous powe
r
(which is 5800). So I will probably put two degrees more pitch into the pro
peller
before the next test flight.
After the flight I spent the rest of the day making and installing the part
s to
raise the leading edge of the tail. I raised the leading edge of the tail b
y
3/4 of an inch. using short steel extension plates.
Again, my most important question for Kolbers is whether the Kolb Firestar
2 fuselage
is known to have tight hand thrust offset built into the welded engine
mount. Only this would explain why an engine that should be pulling the air
plane
left would actually be pulling it right.
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com<http://www.ezflaphandle.com> - safety & performance u
pgrade for light aircraft www.grantstar.net<http://www.grantstar.net>
- winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
--------------------------------------------
On Thu, 8/9/18, John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com> wrote:
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Firestar/HKS First Flight
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Date: Thursday, August 9, 2018, 5:10 AM
Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
True. Some. But not enough to get
the job done, unless additional weight is added to equal the out of balan
ce aileron.
When I originally built my MKIII,
before Kolb admitted there might be a problem with aileron flutter, I fab
ricated
some really neat counter balance weights and attached them, very securely
to 6061 plates I fixed to the inboard end of each aileron. First couple
flights
went well during testing. Then, entering the traffic pattern at my local
airport, the MKIII went into violent flutter. Snatched the stick right ou
t
of my hand. Chopping power and corralling the stick as far back as I cou
ld
get it, gets it out of flutter. I had learned that exercise early on with
my US and FS, but Kolb wasn't buying it. Landed and promptly removed my
beautiful
counter balance weights.
Right about 85 mph, where the airplane
and I liked to cruise was right on the edge of flutter. Turbulence would
set
it off quickly. I flew the MKIII in this condition to Sun and Fun 1993, t
o
Homer's to paint the Lasers, and then to Oshkosh. At Oshkosh I had to fly
a
photo shoot with a Cessna 208. He was having trouble slowing to 85 and I w
as
going into flutter at 85. It was a tough flight, but we got'er done.
I was getting ready to do my flight
around CONUS and up to Alaska, wondering how I was going to make it with
the
flutter problem. I dreamed up all kinds of cures to keep the aileron cont
rol
linkage as tight as possible, but I was still susceptible to flutter.
Finally, the next year at Sun and Fun
Dick Rahill got the factory FS into severe flutter. He was white as a gh
ost
and visibly shaken when he finally got on the ground after flying from Lak
eland
South to the UL strip on the edge of a severe thunderstorm. A week later
I got a set of FS aileron counter balance weights from Kolb, made them fit
my
MKIII, and never again experienced aileron flutter. It was wonderful and
I
was a month from beginning my big flight of 1994. I had been flying with
flutter
for 10 years by this time.
Don't know why my design didn't work,
but Kolb's did.
My design was ahead of the hinge line
with bullet shaped weights like I had seen on other aircraft. Guess I st
uck
them on the wrong end of the aileron because they aggravated the situation
.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com]
On Behalf Of Bill Berle
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2018 11:42
PM
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firestar/HKS
First Flight
Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
Spades will add weight forward of the
hinge line, which is usually working AGAINST flutter.
Bill Berle
On Wed, 8/8/18, Denny Baber <baberdk@gmail.com>
wrote:
My understanding is that spades
are for aileron flutter.
Respectfully,
Dennis BaberCape Coral,
Flbaberdk@gmail.com305-814-7218
Stay
Curious
The Kolb-List Email Forum -
Navigator to browse
List Un/Subscription,
7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
- MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
via the Web Forums!
- NEW MATRONICS LIST WIKI -
Email List Wiki!
- List Contribution Web Site -
support!
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
________________________________ Message 6 ______________________________
_______
Time: 11:44:26 AM PST US
From: Ted Cowan <tc1917@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: Speed
Howdy Hauk. Didnt mean to say my Ss was better'n yorn. Apples and organ
ges.
If I loaded mine as you do yours I wouldnt get off the ground!! I merely
meant
what I said. Been up to 110 mph indicated,
100 many times. Never tried wot straight. Would do my vne or close. Yo
u see
my friend, your driving a great big beautiful truck while I am a little fas
t
sports car. Looking to fly with you again some day. You need to go to Tho
masville
in october. Greatest flyin there is. Take care all and have fun with
your new toys. Ted cowan SS 912 zoom zoom
Sent from my iPhone
________________________________ Message 7 ______________________________
_______
Time: 11:45:04 AM PST US
From: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
First sentence should have read, "There is no offset in the engine mount on
standard
Kolb aircraft". Sorry about that. I even proof read this one a couple
times. I'll blame that on age. ;-)
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@m
atronics.com] On Behalf Of John Hauck
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2018 1:26 PM
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
There is in offset in the engine mount on any standard Kolb.
I spent a lot of time and effort experimenting with engine off set to corre
ct trim
my perceived trim problems in my FS. All was for naught. Best left just
like Homer Kolb designed.
I did the same with the leading edge of the upper vertical stabilizer. Aga
in,
a waste of time. Best left centered like indicated on the plan sheet.
Brother Jim fabricated the first pair of adjustable forward horizontal stab
ilizer
mounts. Had 3 choices of angle. I flew off most of the 40 hours on the or
iginal
factory MKIII. I knew what we needed to make my MKIII right. Same for
moving the main gear forward, and many other modifications that were all bl
essed
by Homer Kolb the morning after we would make them the night before. Many
of our mods were incorporated in subsequent MKIII airframes and other Kolb
models
from changes we made to mine, SN: M3-11. When I got to Homer's first of
Jan 1991, 10 air frames had been fabricated. Brother Jim had gotten to Hom
er's
around the first of Dec 1990, the help out with some welding, when both Hom
er's
welders were laid up with health problems. I experimented with all three
positions, but the center position was where the aircraft settled down and
felt
comfortable. The other two positions made the MKIII feel like it was ridin
g
on a ball. Keep wanting to fall off in all diffe!
rent directions. Not fun to fly.
We cured the adverse yaw problem after many hours and a 17,200 mile flight.
On
that flight I flew a half ball out of trim the entire way. I'm still a hal
f
ball out of trim, but the MKIII flies straight and level by doubling the si
ze
of the rudder trim tab. The prop wash comes off the engine twisting, hits
the
left side of the vertical stabilizer and the top of the left horizontal sta
bilizer.
This is verified by crank case ventilation depositing oil and fuel spray
on those surfaces and no place else.
It is normal to have the aircraft want to drop the nose before some form of
pitch
trim is installed. Primarily because it is a high mounted pusher. Looks l
ike
Berle's Kolb could have raised the engine to run a longer prop. However,
there is something that needs to be tweaked to get the aircraft to fly leve
l.
A few ways to do it: 1-forced trim, 2-elevator trim tab, and horizontal st
abilizer.
On a FS I'd go with an elevator trim tab which is adjustable, simple,
and easy to install. Doesn't take a lot of trim tab to get the job done, a
nd
if it does it is a good way to correct a pitch problem. However, adverse p
itch
trim up ain't normal and should be thoroughly investigated.
Has your ASI been calibrated? Most are not very accurate at slow speeds.
I fly
out and back on reverse headings at a constant airspeed, add them together
and
divide by 2 to get ASI error. May or may not help at very slow speeds. Yo
u
can also use a GPS, which is ground speed only, on a calm day, to get a pre
tty
good idea of ASI calibration. You should be at 30 or lower before stall.
My MKIII will easily hit 30, sometimes less.
Because a Cub and your engine turn the same way does not mean that the airc
raft
response will be the same. One's a tractor and one's a pusher, IMHO.
Ailerons move very little in flight to get the results you are looking for.
They
are oversized. I reduced the area of my ailerons when I built my MKIII kno
wing
I had a lot more aileron than I needed. Homer designed his aircraft primar
ily
for safe, very slow flight, to be able to stay in contact with what was
happening in the trees and on the ground he was flying over. Cut the ailer
on
cord in half and you may get the results you are looking for.
I believe adverse yaw is caused by prop wash primarily. A rudder trim tab
corrects
that problem.
With less than an hour's flight time, if it was me, I'd get out there and l
earn
how to fly the aircraft before I decided to change anything unless it was a
bsolutely
unsafe to fly in that condition. It takes some hours to learn your Kolb.
Especially in your case where you came from GA. I came from helicopters
and had no problem flying Kolbs. To me, they were a lot like rotary wing.
Wow! My mind has a severe case of diarrhea, but the above are my thoughts
on the
situation.
john h
Titus, Alabama
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@m
atronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Berle
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2018 12:16 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
Please let me clarify my comment so it does not accidentally cause a safety
issue
for someone. I believe that adding weight forward of the hinge line works a
gainst
flutter. BUT I did NOT mean to imply that spades would replace or equal
the Kolb tip weights. Those are there for a reason, as many of you know fro
m
experience. Flutter would scare the s*** out of me in a Kolb or any other a
ircraft.
Test Flight Report for flight #2
I flew my Firestar again yesterday morning for about 20-25 minutes. I was a
little
more confident in everything, so I took it right up to 1500 feet above the
airport and flew several laps above the runway.
The aircraft needed a few pounds of forward pressure on the stick, as I hav
e described
before. However, this was at an indicated airspeed of only 45 miles per
hour. A lot slower than one would expect for a properly rigged aircraft. I
realized
at this point that I needed to raise the leading edge of the stabilizer
as a couple of people have mentioned. A "trim tab" for this would have been
pretty large and bent pretty far.
Also on the test flight, I paid specific attention to the rudder trim. The
aircraft
required five or six pounds (guess) of LEFT rudder in level flight, again
at the 40-45 mile an hour speeds I was flying. It also needs left rudder on
takeoff
to keep it straight. This was very surprising to me because the propeller
turns the "conventional" direction, meaning that it is turning the same dir
ection
as a Cessna or J-3 Cub, where you need right rudder on takeoff. The torque
from the engine, especially with a high ratio gearbox and a big wide propel
ler,
SHOULD be trying to roll and yaw the aircraft to the left, requiring right
rudder. But this is the opposite of how it was in flight.
I briefly let off of the rudder pressure and the airplane yawed to the righ
t significantly.
The air flow direction and the view from the seat verified this without
a doubt... so it does not seem that this problem could be caused by the
rudder pedals not being adjusted well.
So I have a QUESTION for the experienced Kolb builders/owners here: Dies th
e stock
Kolb engine mount have a thrust offset angle built into it??? The way this
aircraft is behaving would be explained by the Kolb fuselage having several
degrees
of RIGHT thrust built into the engine mounts. Perhaps this would have been
done to compensate for engines that turn the other direction . I'm having
trouble understanding how an engine that turns a "right hand" propeller is
making
it steer to the RIGHT instead of left.
One other thing I tried in flight was to slow the aircraft down. This seems
pretty
funny starting from 40 and 45 miles an hour, but I had plenty of altitude.
With the vortex generators installed, and having read the flight reports fr
om
several other Kolb owners, I fully expected the aircraft to stall at 30 MPH
.
But as I slowed down to 35 MPH it gently stalled. I repeated this again aft
er
speeding back up to 40, to make sure I had actually stalled it the first ti
me.
Once again at 35 indicated, it provided a fairly gentle stall. No significa
nt
buffeting or shaking before the break, but a pretty gentle straight-ahead s
tall
with the nose dropping 20 degrees when it did let go.
This was disappointing, since I installed the VG's specifically to get the
lower
stall speed they usually provide. To be honest, I was pretty disappointed,
since
the old Taylorcrafts and J-3 Cubs stall just under 40 MPH, and a big part
of the reason I wanted an ultralight style aircraft was to fly really slow
into
really short landings.
The last thing I tried to pay specific attention to was the heavy ailerons
getting
better at lower speeds. But again on this flight my speeds were already slo
w..I
moved the stick left and right and it has adequate roll control, but the
stick forces were far far higher than the elevator or rudder forces, and th
is
was again at only 40 and 45 indicated. Looking out at the ailerons as I mov
ed
them, they were deflecting equally along their length... meaning that the o
utboard
tip of the aileron waas moving as much as the inboard end of the ailerons
were moving. The ailerons were not "twisting" very much. Since I am not yet
familiar with the Kolb I was not able to assess whether the amount of ailer
on
movement in flight was the same as it was on the ground (with the same amou
nt
of stick movement).
I realized that I had taken too much pitch out of the propeller. The engine
RPM
was 5200-5300 when I was flying around at 40-45 miles an hour, and I specif
ically
wanted to be in the "cruising" RPM range instead of maximum continuous powe
r
(which is 5800). So I will probably put two degrees more pitch into the pro
peller
before the next test flight.
After the flight I spent the rest of the day making and installing the part
s to
raise the leading edge of the tail. I raised the leading edge of the tail b
y
3/4 of an inch. using short steel extension plates.
Again, my most important question for Kolbers is whether the Kolb Firestar
2 fuselage
is known to have tight hand thrust offset built into the welded engine
mount. Only this would explain why an engine that should be pulling the air
plane
left would actually be pulling it right.
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com<http://www.ezflaphandle.com> - safety & performance u
pgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net<http://www.grantstar.net> - winning proposals f
or non-profit and for-profit entities
--------------------------------------------
On Thu, 8/9/18, John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com> wrote:
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Firestar/HKS First Flight
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Date: Thursday, August 9, 2018, 5:10 AM
Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
True. Some. But not enough to get
the job done, unless additional weight is added to equal the
out of balance aileron.
When I originally built my MKIII,
before Kolb admitted there might be a problem with aileron
flutter, I fabricated some really neat counter balance
weights and attached them, very securely to 6061 plates I
fixed to the inboard end of each aileron. First couple
flights went well during testing. Then, entering the
traffic pattern at my local airport, the MKIII went into
violent flutter. Snatched the stick right out of my
hand. Chopping power and corralling the stick as far
back as I could get it, gets it out of flutter. I had
learned that exercise early on with my US and FS, but Kolb
wasn't buying it. Landed and promptly removed my
beautiful counter balance weights.
Right about 85 mph, where the airplane
and I liked to cruise was right on the edge of
flutter. Turbulence would set it off quickly. I
flew the MKIII in this condition to Sun and Fun 1993, to
Homer's to paint the Lasers, and then to Oshkosh. At
Oshkosh I had to fly a photo shoot with a Cessna 208.
He was having trouble slowing to 85 and I was going into
flutter at 85. It was a tough flight, but we got'er
done.
I was getting ready to do my flight
around CONUS and up to Alaska, wondering how I was going to
make it with the flutter problem. I dreamed up all
kinds of cures to keep the aileron control linkage as tight
as possible, but I was still susceptible to flutter.
Finally, the next year at Sun and Fun
Dick Rahill got the factory FS into severe flutter. He
was white as a ghost and visibly shaken when he finally got
on the ground after flying from Lakeland South to the UL
strip on the edge of a severe thunderstorm. A week
later I got a set of FS aileron counter balance weights from
Kolb, made them fit my MKIII, and never again experienced
aileron flutter. It was wonderful and I was a month
from beginning my big flight of 1994. I had been
flying with flutter for 10 years by this time.
Don't know why my design didn't work,
but Kolb's did.
My design was ahead of the hinge line
with bullet shaped weights like I had seen on other
aircraft. Guess I stuck them on the wrong end of the
aileron because they aggravated the situation.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com]
On Behalf Of Bill Berle
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2018 11:42
PM
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firestar/HKS
First Flight
Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
Spades will add weight forward of the
hinge line, which is usually working AGAINST flutter.
Bill Berle
On Wed, 8/8/18, Denny Baber <baberdk@gmail.com>
wrote:
My understanding is that spades
are for aileron flutter.
Respectfully,
Dennis BaberCape Coral,
Flbaberdk@gmail.com305-814-7218
Stay
Curious
The Kolb-List Email Forum -
Navigator to browse
List Un/Subscription,
7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
- MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
via the Web Forums!
- NEW MATRONICS LIST WIKI -
Email List Wiki!
- List Contribution Web Site -
support!
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
________________________________ Message 8 ______________________________
_______
Time: 11:48:29 AM PST US
From: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
Kolbs produce negligible P-factor. Can't remember where I got that tidbit.
Yaw
problems on takeoff are probably prop wash on the tail section, as you ment
ioned.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@m
atronics.com] On Behalf Of Stuart Harner
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2018 1:27 PM
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
Hi Bill,
Good to hear about your safe and successful 2nd. Flight.
First question: Do you know your ASI is accurate? You can get a speedometer
(GPS
based) app for your phone and do a straight path for a couple of miles, the
n
repeat the other direction for a quick and dirty check. Won't be perfect bu
t
is good for a quick verification.
Next, yes to the clockwise prop and left rudder. My Firefly does exactly th
e same
thing. P-factor should cause it to turn left but it does not. We had quite
a discussion about this back after my first flights. Short version of the c
onclusion
is that prop wash hitting the right side of the vertical stabilizer is
more powerful than P-factor and easily overrides it. I have confirmed this
by
observing the tail while warming up the engine. Dead bugs collect on the ri
ght
side of the vertical and the rudder deflects to the left. The pusher config
uration
with a low boom tube presents no resistance between the prop and the tail
unlike something more conventional that has all that covered fuselage to "s
traighten
out" the airflow between prop and tail.
Advice (on par with the price of it): Don't go messing with the tail until
you
get the proper cruise set up with RPM/Pitch and confirm the ASI. Also, don'
t change
more than one thing at a time between flights. You can easily confuse yours
elf
and muddy the results by trying two things at once, no matter how un-relate
d
they seem. Been there, done that.
Question two: How was the elevator pressure during the stalls, descent and
climb
out compared to "cruise"?
You're doing great! Keep it up.
Stuart
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@m
atronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Berle
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2018 12:16 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
Please let me clarify my comment so it does not accidentally cause a safety
issue
for someone. I believe that adding weight forward of the hinge line works a
gainst
flutter. BUT I did NOT mean to imply that spades would replace or equal
the Kolb tip weights. Those are there for a reason, as many of you know fro
m
experience. Flutter would scare the s*** out of me in a Kolb or any other a
ircraft.
Test Flight Report for flight #2
I flew my Firestar again yesterday morning for about 20-25 minutes. I was a
little
more confident in everything, so I took it right up to 1500 feet above the
airport and flew several laps above the runway.
The aircraft needed a few pounds of forward pressure on the stick, as I hav
e described
before. However, this was at an indicated airspeed of only 45 miles per
hour. A lot slower than one would expect for a properly rigged aircraft. I
realized
at this point that I needed to raise the leading edge of the stabilizer
as a couple of people have mentioned. A "trim tab" for this would have been
pretty large and bent pretty far.
Also on the test flight, I paid specific attention to the rudder trim. The
aircraft
required five or six pounds (guess) of LEFT rudder in level flight, again
at the 40-45 mile an hour speeds I was flying. It also needs left rudder on
takeoff
to keep it straight. This was very surprising to me because the propeller
turns the "conventional" direction, meaning that it is turning the same dir
ection
as a Cessna or J-3 Cub, where you need right rudder on takeoff. The torque
from the engine, especially with a high ratio gearbox and a big wide propel
ler,
SHOULD be trying to roll and yaw the aircraft to the left, requiring right
rudder. But this is the opposite of how it was in flight.
I briefly let off of the rudder pressure and the airplane yawed to the righ
t significantly.
The air flow direction and the view from the seat verified this without
a doubt... so it does not seem that this problem could be caused by the
rudder pedals not being adjusted well.
So I have a QUESTION for the experienced Kolb builders/owners here: Dies th
e stock
Kolb engine mount have a thrust offset angle built into it??? The way this
aircraft is behaving would be explained by the Kolb fuselage having several
degrees
of RIGHT thrust built into the engine mounts. Perhaps this would have been
done to compensate for engines that turn the other direction . I'm having
trouble understanding how an engine that turns a "right hand" propeller is
making
it steer to the RIGHT instead of left.
One other thing I tried in flight was to slow the aircraft down. This seems
pretty
funny starting from 40 and 45 miles an hour, but I had plenty of altitude.
With the vortex generators installed, and having read the flight reports fr
om
several other Kolb owners, I fully expected the aircraft to stall at 30 MPH
.
But as I slowed down to 35 MPH it gently stalled. I repeated this again aft
er
speeding back up to 40, to make sure I had actually stalled it the first ti
me.
Once again at 35 indicated, it provided a fairly gentle stall. No significa
nt
buffeting or shaking before the break, but a pretty gentle straight-ahead s
tall
with the nose dropping 20 degrees when it did let go.
This was disappointing, since I installed the VG's specifically to get the
lower
stall speed they usually provide. To be honest, I was pretty disappointed,
since
the old Taylorcrafts and J-3 Cubs stall just under 40 MPH, and a big part
of the reason I wanted an ultralight style aircraft was to fly really slow
into
really short landings.
The last thing I tried to pay specific attention to was the heavy ailerons
getting
better at lower speeds. But again on this flight my speeds were already slo
w..I
moved the stick left and right and it has adequate roll control, but the
stick forces were far far higher than the elevator or rudder forces, and th
is
was again at only 40 and 45 indicated. Looking out at the ailerons as I mov
ed
them, they were deflecting equally along their length... meaning that the o
utboard
tip of the aileron waas moving as much as the inboard end of the ailerons
were moving. The ailerons were not "twisting" very much. Since I am not yet
familiar with the Kolb I was not able to assess whether the amount of ailer
on
movement in flight was the same as it was on the ground (with the same amou
nt
of stick movement).
I realized that I had taken too much pitch out of the propeller. The engine
RPM
was 5200-5300 when I was flying around at 40-45 miles an hour, and I specif
ically
wanted to be in the "cruising" RPM range instead of maximum continuous powe
r
(which is 5800). So I will probably put two degrees more pitch into the pro
peller
before the next test flight.
After the flight I spent the rest of the day making and installing the part
s to
raise the leading edge of the tail. I raised the leading edge of the tail b
y
3/4 of an inch. using short steel extension plates.
Again, my most important question for Kolbers is whether the Kolb Firestar
2 fuselage
is known to have tight hand thrust offset built into the welded engine
mount. Only this would explain why an engine that should be pulling the air
plane
left would actually be pulling it right.
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com<http://www.ezflaphandle.com> - safety & performance u
pgrade for light aircraft www.grantstar.net<http://www.grantstar.net>
- winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
--------------------------------------------
On Thu, 8/9/18, John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com> wrote:
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Firestar/HKS First Flight
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Date: Thursday, August 9, 2018, 5:10 AM
Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
True. Some. But not enough to get
the job done, unless additional weight is added to equal the out of balan
ce aileron.
When I originally built my MKIII,
before Kolb admitted there might be a problem with aileron flutter, I fab
ricated
some really neat counter balance weights and attached them, very securely
to 6061 plates I fixed to the inboard end of each aileron. First couple
flights
went well during testing. Then, entering the traffic pattern at my local
airport, the MKIII went into violent flutter. Snatched the stick right ou
t
of my hand. Chopping power and corralling the stick as far back as I cou
ld
get it, gets it out of flutter. I had learned that exercise early on with
my US and FS, but Kolb wasn't buying it. Landed and promptly removed my
beautiful
counter balance weights.
Right about 85 mph, where the airplane
and I liked to cruise was right on the edge of flutter. Turbulence would
set
it off quickly. I flew the MKIII in this condition to Sun and Fun 1993, t
o
Homer's to paint the Lasers, and then to Oshkosh. At Oshkosh I had to fly
a
photo shoot with a Cessna 208. He was having trouble slowing to 85 and I w
as
going into flutter at 85. It was a tough flight, but we got'er done.
I was getting ready to do my flight
around CONUS and up to Alaska, wondering how I was going to make it with
the
flutter problem. I dreamed up all kinds of cures to keep the aileron cont
rol
linkage as tight as possible, but I was still susceptible to flutter.
Finally, the next year at Sun and Fun
Dick Rahill got the factory FS into severe flutter. He was white as a gh
ost
and visibly shaken when he finally got on the ground after flying from Lak
eland
South to the UL strip on the edge of a severe thunderstorm. A week later
I got a set of FS aileron counter balance weights from Kolb, made them fit
my
MKIII, and never again experienced aileron flutter. It was wonderful and
I
was a month from beginning my big flight of 1994. I had been flying with
flutter
for 10 years by this time.
Don't know why my design didn't work,
but Kolb's did.
My design was ahead of the hinge line
with bullet shaped weights like I had seen on other aircraft. Guess I st
uck
them on the wrong end of the aileron because they aggravated the situation
.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com]
On Behalf Of Bill Berle
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2018 11:42
PM
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firestar/HKS
First Flight
Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
Spades will add weight forward of the
hinge line, which is usually working AGAINST flutter.
Bill Berle
On Wed, 8/8/18, Denny Baber <baberdk@gmail.com>
wrote:
My understanding is that spades
are for aileron flutter.
Respectfully,
Dennis BaberCape Coral,
Flbaberdk@gmail.com305-814-7218
Stay
Curious
The Kolb-List Email Forum -
Navigator to browse
List Un/Subscription,
7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
- MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
via the Web Forums!
- NEW MATRONICS LIST WIKI -
Email List Wiki!
- List Contribution Web Site -
support!
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
________________________________ Message 9 ______________________________
_______
Time: 12:01:21 PM PST US
From: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Speed
I flew Gantt International Airport, Titus, AL, to Tallahassee to
Thomasville, back to Tallahassee, then home to Alabama, in 1984, in my
Ultrastar. Was my first long cross country in an UL, 600 sm. You couldn't
wipe the grin off my face. I had to read my map, remember heading, time to
fly, land marks, etc., before I took off because I had to sit on my
sectional to keep it from blowing away. Those flights in the US were made
with mag compass and my watch, until I landed and refreshed my memory for
the next leg. It was very exciting to being doing this in that little
airplane. Never forget the feeling.
You got that right about the truck. Just need to add flying truck. Miss
P'fer is like a UH-1 Huey. When necessary, sometimes, they can be coached
into the air loaded far greater than authorized gross weight. Never had a
problem getting my MKIII to fly not matter how she is loaded.
I am very much aware of what it feels like to fly a MKIII and a SS. I
always had a ball flying the SS. Brother Jim and I had a similar aircraft
designed many years before Kolb Aircraft developed the SS. We just didn't
have the time or money to get it done. Now I'm too old to mess with it.
;-)
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ted Cowan
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2018 1:44 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Speed
Howdy Hauk. Didnt mean to say my Ss was better'n yorn. Apples and
organges. If I loaded mine as you do yours I wouldnt get off the ground!!
I merely meant what I said. Been up to 110 mph indicated,
100 many times. Never tried wot straight. Would do my vne or close. Yo
u
see my friend, your driving a great big beautiful truck while I am a little
fast sports car. Looking to fly with you again some day. You need to go t
o
Thomasville in october. Greatest flyin there is. Take care all and have
fun with your new toys. Ted cowan SS 912 zoom zoom
Sent from my iPhone
________________________________ Message 10 _____________________________
_______
Time: 12:51:11 PM PST US
From: Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
First sentence should have read, "There is no offset in the engine mount o
n standard
Kolb aircraft".
Thank you for that information, that allows me to eliminate one possible ca
use.
I was really hoping that I didn't have to make another offset engine mount
plate
to straighten out a built-in offset..
The explanation about the air swirling around from the prop and hitting one
side
of the tail more than the other makes sense to me, I can see that as being
a
possibility. What I have to do in order to verify that is to make a power-o
ff
glide. My model airplane experience tells me that if it glides straight the
n
it's an engine thrust offset problem, and if it needs the rudder in the gli
de
then it's some kind of an airframe construction/damage/repair/warp issue.
To answer a question that was raised about the elevator force during the st
all,
it was almost the same as in level flight. I allowed the speed to drop off
very
slowly, so I was holding the same amount of pressure, maybe just a tiny lit
tle
bit less, in order to reach stall speed. I can 100% say that I did not have
to "pull" the stick back to stall it like you have to do on a C-172. What I
did was the exact opposite of the dramatic exaggerated "airshow" stall wher
e you
make the airplane rear up like a horse and then stop in mid-air. This was a
level flight textbook stall.
If I am remembering correctly, I believe it was Rex and Richard who mention
ed they
had successfully raised the front of the stabilizer to re-rig the pitch on
the aircraft. I think it was Richard's EXCELLENT "Old Poops" website that I
researched
on this as well (THANK YOU for this website).The figure of 7/8 of an
inch was mentioned, and I purposely went just a little less than that to be
conservative.
I have reasonably high confidence that the aircarft will still be
very controllable with this change. The Cessna 180 / 182 and the Piper fabr
ic
aircraft all use the leading edge of the stabilizer for pitch trim, and the
stabilizer
travels far more than 3/4 of an inch. But I'll make sure I am paying
attention during the takeoff roll to see if it is trying to nose over. If i
t
is doing that excessively I will abort the takeoff roll.
John H mentioned reducing the chord of the ailerons. I would try to not hav
e to
do that, because it creates the possibility of not having enough control in
an
emergency. After all the discussion about the Kolb's heavy ailerons, and ha
ving
read a lot about it by now, my question is why are the ailerons still heavy
at very low speeds? I understand 100% that the big ailerons will tend to ge
t
difficult at 70-80 MPH, and that it is just part of the design. Got that lo
ud
and clear.
But several experienced Kolbers have said that slowing the airplane down wi
ll make
most of this problem go away. My Firestar ailerons are not as heavy as Jimm
y
O'Neal's Mark 3 was, but they are still somewhat heavy, even down at 40 MPH
.
Once again, thanks to everyone for taking time and energy to participate in
this
discussion and offer their opinion/experience.
Bill Berle
Los Angeles
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com]
On Behalf Of John Hauck
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2018 1:26
PM
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Flutter /
Firestar Test Flight #2
"John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
There is in offset in the engine mount
on any standard Kolb.
I spent a lot of time and effort
experimenting with engine off set to correct trim my
perceived trim problems in my FS. All was for
naught. Best left just like Homer Kolb designed.
I did the same with the leading edge of
the upper vertical stabilizer. Again, a waste of
time. Best left centered like indicated on the plan
sheet.
Brother Jim fabricated the first pair
of adjustable forward horizontal stabilizer mounts.
Had 3 choices of angle. I flew off most of the 40
hours on the original factory MKIII. I knew what we
needed to make my MKIII right. Same for moving
the main gear forward, and many other modifications that
were all blessed by Homer Kolb the morning after we would
make them the night before. Many of our mods were
incorporated in subsequent MKIII airframes and other Kolb
models from changes we made to mine, SN: M3-11.
When I got to Homer's first of Jan 1991, 10 air frames had
been fabricated. Brother Jim had gotten to Homer's
around the first of Dec 1990, the help out with some
welding, when both Homer's welders were laid up with health
problems. I experimented with all three positions, but
the center position was where the aircraft settled down and
felt comfortable. The other two positions made the
MKIII feel like it was riding on a ball. Keep wanting
to fall off in all diffe!
rent directions. Not fun to
fly.
We cured the adverse yaw problem after
many hours and a 17,200 mile flight. On that flight I
flew a half ball out of trim the entire way. I'm still
a half ball out of trim, but the MKIII flies straight and
level by doubling the size of the rudder trim tab. The
prop wash comes off the engine twisting, hits the left side
of the vertical stabilizer and the top of the left
horizontal stabilizer. This is verified by crank case
ventilation depositing oil and fuel spray on those surfaces
and no place else.
It is normal to have the aircraft want
to drop the nose before some form of pitch trim is
installed. Primarily because it is a high mounted
pusher. Looks like Berle's Kolb could have raised the
engine to run a longer prop. However, there is
something that needs to be tweaked to get the aircraft to
fly level. A few ways to do it: 1-forced trim,
2-elevator trim tab, and horizontal stabilizer. On a
FS I'd go with an elevator trim tab which is adjustable,
simple, and easy to install. Doesn't take a lot of
trim tab to get the job done, and if it does it is a good
way to correct a pitch problem. However, adverse pitch
trim up ain't normal and should be thoroughly investigated.
Has your ASI been calibrated?
Most are not very accurate at slow speeds. I fly out
and back on reverse headings at a constant airspeed, add
them together and divide by 2 to get ASI error. May or
may not help at very slow speeds. You can also use a
GPS, which is ground speed only, on a calm day, to get a
pretty good idea of ASI calibration. You should be at
30 or lower before stall. My MKIII will easily hit 30,
sometimes less.
Because a Cub and your engine turn the
same way does not mean that the aircraft response will be
the same. One's a tractor and one's a pusher, IMHO.
Ailerons move very little in flight to
get the results you are looking for. They are
oversized. I reduced the area of my ailerons when I
built my MKIII knowing I had a lot more aileron than I
needed. Homer designed his aircraft primarily for
safe, very slow flight, to be able to stay in contact with
what was happening in the trees and on the ground he was
flying over. Cut the aileron cord in half and you may
get the results you are looking for.
I believe adverse yaw is caused by prop
wash primarily. A rudder trim tab corrects that
problem.
With less than an hour's flight time,
if it was me, I'd get out there and learn how to fly the
aircraft before I decided to change anything unless it was
absolutely unsafe to fly in that condition. It takes
some hours to learn your Kolb. Especially in your case
where you came from GA. I came from helicopters and
had no problem flying Kolbs. To me, they were a lot
like rotary wing.
Wow! My mind has a severe case of
diarrhea, but the above are my thoughts on the situation.
john h
Titus, Alabama
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com]
On Behalf Of Bill Berle
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2018 12:16
PM
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Subject: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar
Test Flight #2
Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
Please let me clarify my comment so it
does not accidentally cause a safety issue for someone. I
believe that adding weight forward of the hinge line works
against flutter. BUT I did NOT mean to imply that spades
would replace or equal the Kolb tip weights. Those are there
for a reason, as many of you know from experience. Flutter
would scare the s*** out of me in a Kolb or any other
aircraft.
Test Flight Report for flight #2
I flew my Firestar again yesterday
morning for about 20-25 minutes. I was a little more
confident in everything, so I took it right up to 1500 feet
above the airport and flew several laps above the runway.
The aircraft needed a few pounds of
forward pressure on the stick, as I have described before.
However, this was at an indicated airspeed of only 45 miles
per hour. A lot slower than one would expect for a properly
rigged aircraft. I realized at this point that I needed to
raise the leading edge of the stabilizer as a couple of
people have mentioned. A "trim tab" for this would have been
pretty large and bent pretty far.
Also on the test flight, I paid
specific attention to the rudder trim. The aircraft required
five or six pounds (guess) of LEFT rudder in level flight,
again at the 40-45 mile an hour speeds I was flying. It also
needs left rudder on takeoff to keep it straight. This was
very surprising to me because the propeller turns the
"conventional" direction, meaning that it is turning the
same direction as a Cessna or J-3 Cub, where you need right
rudder on takeoff. The torque from the engine, especially
with a high ratio gearbox and a big wide propeller, SHOULD
be trying to roll and yaw the aircraft to the left,
requiring right rudder. But this is the opposite of how it
was in flight.
I briefly let off of the rudder
pressure and the airplane yawed to the right significantly.
The air flow direction and the view from the seat verified
this without a doubt... so it does not seem that this
problem could be caused by the rudder pedals not being
adjusted well.
So I have a QUESTION for the
experienced Kolb builders/owners here: Dies the stock Kolb
engine mount have a thrust offset angle built into it??? The
way this aircraft is behaving would be explained by the Kolb
fuselage having several degrees of RIGHT thrust built into
the engine mounts. Perhaps this would have been done to
compensate for engines that turn the other direction . I'm
having trouble understanding how an engine that turns a
"right hand" propeller is making it steer to the RIGHT
instead of left.
One other thing I tried in flight was
to slow the aircraft down. This seems pretty funny starting
from 40 and 45 miles an hour, but I had plenty of altitude.
With the vortex generators installed, and having read the
flight reports from several other Kolb owners, I fully
expected the aircraft to stall at 30 MPH. But as I slowed
down to 35 MPH it gently stalled. I repeated this again
after speeding back up to 40, to make sure I had actually
stalled it the first time. Once again at 35 indicated, it
provided a fairly gentle stall. No significant buffeting or
shaking before the break, but a pretty gentle straight-ahead
stall with the nose dropping 20 degrees when it did let go.
This was disappointing, since I
installed the VG's specifically to get the lower stall speed
they usually provide. To be honest, I was pretty
disappointed, since the old Taylorcrafts and J-3 Cubs stall
just under 40 MPH, and a big part of the reason I wanted an
ultralight style aircraft was to fly really slow into really
short landings.
The last thing I tried to pay specific
attention to was the heavy ailerons getting better at lower
speeds. But again on this flight my speeds were already
slow..I moved the stick left and right and it has adequate
roll control, but the stick forces were far far higher than
the elevator or rudder forces, and this was again at only 40
and 45 indicated. Looking out at the ailerons as I moved
them, they were deflecting equally along their length...
meaning that the outboard tip of the aileron waas moving as
much as the inboard end of the ailerons were moving. The
ailerons were not "twisting" very much. Since I am not yet
familiar with the Kolb I was not able to assess whether the
amount of aileron movement in flight was the same as it was
on the ground (with the same amount of stick movement).
I realized that I had taken too much
pitch out of the propeller. The engine RPM was 5200-5300
when I was flying around at 40-45 miles an hour, and I
specifically wanted to be in the "cruising" RPM range
instead of maximum continuous power (which is 5800). So I
will probably put two degrees more pitch into the propeller
before the next test flight.
After the flight I spent the rest of
the day making and installing the parts to raise the leading
edge of the tail. I raised the leading edge of the tail by
3/4 of an inch. using short steel extension plates.
Again, my most important question for
Kolbers is whether the Kolb Firestar 2 fuselage is known to
have tight hand thrust offset built into the welded engine
mount. Only this would explain why an engine that should be
pulling the airplane left would actually be pulling it
right.
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com<http://www.ezflaphandle.com> - safety
& performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net<http://www.grantstar.net>
- winning proposals for non-profit and
for-profit entities
--------------------------------------------
On Thu, 8/9/18, John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
wrote:
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Firestar/HKS
First Flight
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Date: Thursday, August 9, 2018, 5:10
AM
"John
Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
True. Some. But not enough to
get
the job done, unless additional weight
is added to equal the
out of balance aileron.
When I originally built my MKIII,
before Kolb admitted there might be a
problem with aileron
flutter, I fabricated some really neat
counter balance
weights and attached them, very
securely to 6061 plates I
fixed to the inboard end of each
aileron. First couple
flights went well during
testing. Then, entering the
traffic pattern at my local airport,
the MKIII went into
violent flutter. Snatched the
stick right out of my
hand. Chopping power and
corralling the stick as far
back as I could get it, gets it out of
flutter. I had
learned that exercise early on with my
US and FS, but Kolb
wasn't buying it. Landed and
promptly removed my
beautiful counter balance weights.
Right about 85 mph, where the
airplane
and I liked to cruise was right on the
edge of
flutter. Turbulence would set it
off quickly. I
flew the MKIII in this condition to
Sun and Fun 1993, to
Homer's to paint the Lasers, and then
to Oshkosh. At
Oshkosh I had to fly a photo shoot
with a Cessna 208.
He was having trouble slowing to 85
and I was going into
flutter at 85. It was a tough
flight, but we got'er
done.
I was getting ready to do my flight
around CONUS and up to Alaska,
wondering how I was going to
make it with the flutter
problem. I dreamed up all
kinds of cures to keep the aileron
control linkage as tight
as possible, but I was still
susceptible to flutter.
Finally, the next year at Sun and Fun
Dick Rahill got the factory FS into
severe flutter. He
was white as a ghost and visibly
shaken when he finally got
on the ground after flying from
Lakeland South to the UL
strip on the edge of a severe
thunderstorm. A week
later I got a set of FS aileron
counter balance weights from
Kolb, made them fit my MKIII, and
never again experienced
aileron flutter. It was
wonderful and I was a month
from beginning my big flight of
1994. I had been
flying with flutter for 10 years by
this time.
Don't know why my design didn't work,
but Kolb's did.
My design was ahead of the hinge line
with bullet shaped weights like I had
seen on other
aircraft. Guess I stuck them on
the wrong end of the
aileron because they aggravated the
situation.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com]
On Behalf Of Bill Berle
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2018
11:42
PM
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firestar/HKS
First Flight
Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
Spades will add weight forward of the
hinge line, which is usually working
AGAINST flutter.
Bill Berle
On Wed, 8/8/18, Denny Baber <baberdk@gmail.com>
wrote:
My understanding is that
spades
are for aileron flutter.
Respectfully,
Dennis BaberCape Coral,
Flbaberdk@gmail.com305-814-7218
Stay
Curious
The Kolb-List Email Forum -
Navigator to browse
List Un/Subscription,
7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
- MATRONICS WEB
FORUMS -
via the Web Forums!
- NEW MATRONICS LIST
WIKI -
Email List Wiki!
- List Contribution Web
Site -
support!
-Matt Dralle, List
Admin.
The Kolb-List Email Forum -
Navigator to browse
List Un/Subscription,
7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
- MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
via the Web Forums!
- NEW MATRONICS LIST WIKI -
Email List Wiki!
- List Contribution Web Site -
support!
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
________________________________ Message 11 _____________________________
_______
Time: 01:23:24 PM PST US
From: George Helton <gdhelton@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
Well guys, we have sure beaten this thread to death.
And this I hope this will be the last of my input.
Bill, you are are GA/ Sailplane Pilot. Youve now entered the world of flyin
g an
all new category of flight. You have developed some habits that will not se
rve
you well in ultralight type aircraft. As a former ultralight instructor I c
an
say with confidence that the worst times were spent converting GA pilots to
UL pilots because, They already knew how to fly.
That being said, youre not flying a 1400lb spam can anymore. Youre a butter
fly
or hummingbird. You need a new mind set. Every little change in wind direct
ion,
wind speed, thermals, hills and tree lines will change whats going on infli
ght.
Ultralights are not aileron controlled aircraft. They are primarily rudder,
elevator and throttle. You know how to control speed. Stick forward, fast.
Stick
back, slow. Throttle forward,up. Throttle back, down. Rudder is everythin
g,
learn to have busy feet. Takeoff, cruise and decent. Think feet, feet, feet
...
you cannot let you feet get lazy in an ultralight.Thats from the time you
taxi to the time you park at the end of the flight. If the nose goes right
on
takeoff, push the left pedal. If your nose is lifting at cruise push it dow
n
and you might want to adjust you throttle a bit. Find your best climb speed
and
use it. Find your decent or guide speed and use it. Learn to feed your thro
ttle
in slowly on takeoff and reduce it slowly upon approach. Fly the friggin
plane. Youre in charge.
Fly it all the way to the ground and then keep flying it.
Stop Engineering and go out and enjoy the airplane youve worked so hard at
completing.
Your Firestar will never fly like my Firestar or Johns MKIII. Learn to
fly an ULTRALIGHT. Learn your airplane, and learn to fly it well. Get 50 ho
urs
in the air and on the ground in it and then maybe we might change some thin
gs.
Flying is easy! Its landing and all the stuff on the ground that will screw
ya up. Love ya man, go flying.
George H.
Firestar, FS100, 2702 Hirth
14GDH
Mesick, Michigan
gdhelton@gmail.com
Sent from my iPhone
> On Aug 9, 2018, at 2:48 PM, John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com> wrote:
>
>
> Kolbs produce negligible P-factor. Can't remember where I got that tidbi
t.
Yaw problems on takeoff are probably prop wash on the tail section, as you
mentioned.
>
> john h
> mkIII
> Titus, Alabama
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server
@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Stuart Harner
> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2018 1:27 PM
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
>
>
> Hi Bill,
>
> Good to hear about your safe and successful 2nd. Flight.
>
> First question: Do you know your ASI is accurate? You can get a speedomet
er (GPS
based) app for your phone and do a straight path for a couple of miles, the
n
repeat the other direction for a quick and dirty check. Won't be perfect bu
t
is good for a quick verification.
>
> Next, yes to the clockwise prop and left rudder. My Firefly does exactly
the
same thing. P-factor should cause it to turn left but it does not. We had q
uite
a discussion about this back after my first flights. Short version of the c
onclusion
is that prop wash hitting the right side of the vertical stabilizer is
more powerful than P-factor and easily overrides it. I have confirmed this
by
observing the tail while warming up the engine. Dead bugs collect on the ri
ght
side of the vertical and the rudder deflects to the left. The pusher config
uration
with a low boom tube presents no resistance between the prop and the tail
unlike something more conventional that has all that covered fuselage to "s
traighten
out" the airflow between prop and tail.
>
> Advice (on par with the price of it): Don't go messing with the tail unti
l you
get the proper cruise set up with RPM/Pitch and confirm the ASI. Also, don'
t
change more than one thing at a time between flights. You can easily confus
e
yourself and muddy the results by trying two things at once, no matter how
un-related
they seem. Been there, done that.
>
> Question two: How was the elevator pressure during the stalls, descent an
d climb
out compared to "cruise"?
>
> You're doing great! Keep it up.
>
> Stuart
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server
@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Berle
> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2018 12:16 PM
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
>
>
> Please let me clarify my comment so it does not accidentally cause a safe
ty issue
for someone. I believe that adding weight forward of the hinge line works
against flutter. BUT I did NOT mean to imply that spades would replace or e
qual
the Kolb tip weights. Those are there for a reason, as many of you know fro
m
experience. Flutter would scare the s*** out of me in a Kolb or any other a
ircraft.
>
> Test Flight Report for flight #2
>
> I flew my Firestar again yesterday morning for about 20-25 minutes. I was
a little
more confident in everything, so I took it right up to 1500 feet above the
airport and flew several laps above the runway.
>
> The aircraft needed a few pounds of forward pressure on the stick, as I h
ave
described before. However, this was at an indicated airspeed of only 45 mil
es
per hour. A lot slower than one would expect for a properly rigged aircraft
. I
realized at this point that I needed to raise the leading edge of the stabi
lizer
as a couple of people have mentioned. A "trim tab" for this would have been
pretty large and bent pretty far.
>
> Also on the test flight, I paid specific attention to the rudder trim. Th
e aircraft
required five or six pounds (guess) of LEFT rudder in level flight, again
at the 40-45 mile an hour speeds I was flying. It also needs left rudder on
takeoff to keep it straight. This was very surprising to me because the pro
peller
turns the "conventional" direction, meaning that it is turning the same dir
ection
as a Cessna or J-3 Cub, where you need right rudder on takeoff. The torque
from the engine, especially with a high ratio gearbox and a big wide propel
ler,
SHOULD be trying to roll and yaw the aircraft to the left, requiring right
rudder. But this is the opposite of how it was in flight.
>
> I briefly let off of the rudder pressure and the airplane yawed to the ri
ght
significantly. The air flow direction and the view from the seat verified t
his
without a doubt... so it does not seem that this problem could be caused by
the
rudder pedals not being adjusted well.
>
> So I have a QUESTION for the experienced Kolb builders/owners here: Dies
the
stock Kolb engine mount have a thrust offset angle built into it??? The way
this
aircraft is behaving would be explained by the Kolb fuselage having several
degrees of RIGHT thrust built into the engine mounts. Perhaps this would ha
ve
been done to compensate for engines that turn the other direction . I'm hav
ing
trouble understanding how an engine that turns a "right hand" propeller is
making
it steer to the RIGHT instead of left.
>
> One other thing I tried in flight was to slow the aircraft down. This see
ms pretty
funny starting from 40 and 45 miles an hour, but I had plenty of altitude.
With the vortex generators installed, and having read the flight reports fr
om
several other Kolb owners, I fully expected the aircraft to stall at 30 MPH
.
But as I slowed down to 35 MPH it gently stalled. I repeated this again aft
er
speeding back up to 40, to make sure I had actually stalled it the first ti
me.
Once again at 35 indicated, it provided a fairly gentle stall. No significa
nt
buffeting or shaking before the break, but a pretty gentle straight-ahead s
tall
with the nose dropping 20 degrees when it did let go.
>
> This was disappointing, since I installed the VG's specifically to get th
e lower
stall speed they usually provide. To be honest, I was pretty disappointed,
since the old Taylorcrafts and J-3 Cubs stall just under 40 MPH, and a big
part
of the reason I wanted an ultralight style aircraft was to fly really slow
into really short landings.
>
> The last thing I tried to pay specific attention to was the heavy aileron
s getting
better at lower speeds. But again on this flight my speeds were already
slow..I moved the stick left and right and it has adequate roll control, bu
t the
stick forces were far far higher than the elevator or rudder forces, and th
is
was again at only 40 and 45 indicated. Looking out at the ailerons as I mov
ed
them, they were deflecting equally along their length... meaning that the o
utboard
tip of the aileron waas moving as much as the inboard end of the ailerons
were moving. The ailerons were not "twisting" very much. Since I am not yet
familiar with the Kolb I was not able to assess whether the amount of ailer
on
movement in flight was the same as it was on the ground (with the same amou
nt
of stick movement).
>
> I realized that I had taken too much pitch out of the propeller. The engi
ne RPM
was 5200-5300 when I was flying around at 40-45 miles an hour, and I specif
ically
wanted to be in the "cruising" RPM range instead of maximum continuous
power (which is 5800). So I will probably put two degrees more pitch into t
he
propeller before the next test flight.
>
> After the flight I spent the rest of the day making and installing the pa
rts
to raise the leading edge of the tail. I raised the leading edge of the tai
l by
3/4 of an inch. using short steel extension plates.
>
> Again, my most important question for Kolbers is whether the Kolb Firesta
r 2
fuselage is known to have tight hand thrust offset built into the welded en
gine
mount. Only this would explain why an engine that should be pulling the air
plane
left would actually be pulling it right.
>
> Bill Berle
> www.ezflaphandle.com<http://www.ezflaphandle.com> - safety & performance
upgrade for light aircraft www.grantstar.net<http://www.grantstar.net>
- winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Thu, 8/9/18, John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com> wrote:
>
> Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Firestar/HKS First Flight
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Date: Thursday, August 9, 2018, 5:10 AM
>
> Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
>
> True. Some. But not enough to get
> the job done, unless additional weight is added to equal the out of bala
nce
aileron.
>
> When I originally built my MKIII,
> before Kolb admitted there might be a problem with aileron flutter, I fa
bricated
some really neat counter balance weights and attached them, very securely
to 6061 plates I fixed to the inboard end of each aileron. First couple
flights
went well during testing. Then, entering the traffic pattern at my local
airport, the MKIII went into violent flutter. Snatched the stick right ou
t
of my hand. Chopping power and corralling the stick as far back as I cou
ld
get it, gets it out of flutter. I had learned that exercise early on with
my US and FS, but Kolb wasn't buying it. Landed and promptly removed my
beautiful
counter balance weights.
>
> Right about 85 mph, where the airplane
> and I liked to cruise was right on the edge of flutter. Turbulence woul
d set
it off quickly. I flew the MKIII in this condition to Sun and Fun 1993, t
o
Homer's to paint the Lasers, and then to Oshkosh. At Oshkosh I had to fly
a photo shoot with a Cessna 208. He was having trouble slowing to 85 and I
was
going into flutter at 85. It was a tough flight, but we got'er done.
>
> I was getting ready to do my flight
> around CONUS and up to Alaska, wondering how I was going to make it with
the
flutter problem. I dreamed up all kinds of cures to keep the aileron cont
rol
linkage as tight as possible, but I was still susceptible to flutter.
>
> Finally, the next year at Sun and Fun
> Dick Rahill got the factory FS into severe flutter. He was white as a g
host
and visibly shaken when he finally got on the ground after flying from Lak
eland
South to the UL strip on the edge of a severe thunderstorm. A week later
I got a set of FS aileron counter balance weights from Kolb, made them fit
my MKIII, and never again experienced aileron flutter. It was wonderful a
nd
I was a month from beginning my big flight of 1994. I had been flying wi
th
flutter for 10 years by this time.
>
> Don't know why my design didn't work,
> but Kolb's did.
>
> My design was ahead of the hinge line
> with bullet shaped weights like I had seen on other aircraft. Guess I s
tuck
them on the wrong end of the aileron because they aggravated the situation
.
>
> john h
> mkIII
> Titus, Alabama
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com]
> On Behalf Of Bill Berle
> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2018 11:42
> PM
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firestar/HKS
> First Flight
>
> Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
>
> Spades will add weight forward of the
> hinge line, which is usually working AGAINST flutter.
>
> Bill Berle
>
> On Wed, 8/8/18, Denny Baber <baberdk@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> My understanding is that spades
> are for aileron flutter.
>
>
> Respectfully,
> Dennis BaberCape Coral,
> Flbaberdk@gmail.com305-814-7218
> Stay
> Curious
>
>
> The Kolb-List Email Forum -
> Navigator to browse
> List Un/Subscription,
> 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
> - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
> via the Web Forums!
> - NEW MATRONICS LIST WIKI -
> Email List Wiki!
> - List Contribution Web Site -
> support!
>
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>
>
________________________________ Message 12 _____________________________
_______
Time: 01:26:29 PM PST US
From: "Stuart Harner" <stuart@harnerfarm.net>
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
Bill,
I may have missed it, but where is the CG with pilot and full fuel? What yo
u are
describing sounds almost like a tail heavy condition. Trying to trim out an
aft CG would not be a good thing.
Do you see significant elevator force changes with changes in power?
Stuart
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@m
atronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Berle
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2018 2:51 PM
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
First sentence should have read, "There is no offset in the engine mount o
n standard
Kolb aircraft".
Thank you for that information, that allows me to eliminate one possible ca
use.
I was really hoping that I didn't have to make another offset engine mount
plate
to straighten out a built-in offset..
The explanation about the air swirling around from the prop and hitting one
side
of the tail more than the other makes sense to me, I can see that as being
a
possibility. What I have to do in order to verify that is to make a power-o
ff
glide. My model airplane experience tells me that if it glides straight the
n
it's an engine thrust offset problem, and if it needs the rudder in the gli
de
then it's some kind of an airframe construction/damage/repair/warp issue.
To answer a question that was raised about the elevator force during the st
all,
it was almost the same as in level flight. I allowed the speed to drop off
very
slowly, so I was holding the same amount of pressure, maybe just a tiny lit
tle
bit less, in order to reach stall speed. I can 100% say that I did not have
to "pull" the stick back to stall it like you have to do on a C-172. What I
did was the exact opposite of the dramatic exaggerated "airshow" stall wher
e you
make the airplane rear up like a horse and then stop in mid-air. This was a
level flight textbook stall.
If I am remembering correctly, I believe it was Rex and Richard who mention
ed they
had successfully raised the front of the stabilizer to re-rig the pitch on
the aircraft. I think it was Richard's EXCELLENT "Old Poops" website that I
researched
on this as well (THANK YOU for this website).The figure of 7/8 of an
inch was mentioned, and I purposely went just a little less than that to be
conservative.
I have reasonably high confidence that the aircarft will still be
very controllable with this change. The Cessna 180 / 182 and the Piper fabr
ic
aircraft all use the leading edge of the stabilizer for pitch trim, and the
stabilizer
travels far more than 3/4 of an inch. But I'll make sure I am paying
attention during the takeoff roll to see if it is trying to nose over. If i
t
is doing that excessively I will abort the takeoff roll.
John H mentioned reducing the chord of the ailerons. I would try to not hav
e to
do that, because it creates the possibility of not having enough control in
an
emergency. After all the discussion about the Kolb's heavy ailerons, and ha
ving
read a lot about it by now, my question is why are the ailerons still heavy
at very low speeds? I understand 100% that the big ailerons will tend to ge
t
difficult at 70-80 MPH, and that it is just part of the design. Got that lo
ud
and clear.
But several experienced Kolbers have said that slowing the airplane down wi
ll make
most of this problem go away. My Firestar ailerons are not as heavy as Jimm
y
O'Neal's Mark 3 was, but they are still somewhat heavy, even down at 40 MPH
.
Once again, thanks to everyone for taking time and energy to participate in
this
discussion and offer their opinion/experience.
Bill Berle
Los Angeles
________________________________ Message 13 _____________________________
_______
Time: 01:51:10 PM PST US
From: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
If you have a 60 to 80 or more mph wind blowing on the side of the rudder a
nd vertical
stab, on a Kolb, it will turn the aircraft. In small increments I started
out with 3/4" offset of forward edge of the upper vertical stabilizer and
ended up with 1 1/4" offset. The effect was negligible. The rudder trim t
ab,
a large one, fixed the problem. Screwing with the vertical stab was a wast
e
of time, but was the only way to find out if it would work. I tried to get
Kolb
to punch a lot of extra holes in the tail boom, but they never got around
to it. I think New Kolb may have put that change in the plans for a MKIIIx
, but
didn't keep it there long.
More than several folks have gotten into a mush stall in a Kolb, never real
izing
this, until it hit the ground. Completely controllable, but it would not c
limb
or maintain altitude. Years ago I calculated the rate of decent in feet pe
r
minute when the Kolb was in a mush. I don't remember all the numbers, but
it was very, very close to the rate of decent of a T-10 parachute, 18 feet
a second,
that we jumped back in the 1950 and 60s. At that rate you shouldn't get
hurt, but the aircraft will. That was for my FS. Never computed for my MK
III.
Stalls in Kolbs are nonevents unless very close to the ground. Then you wi
ll get
hurt, as will your aircraft. In order to make a classic stall you have to
pull the nose up and hold the stick back to make it look like you really st
alled,
like Bill B said.
Kolbs will spin. My FS with engine at idle, controls crossed up and locked
, would
not do a full turn before it flew out of the stall with the controls still
crossed up. I was doing aerobatics at the Ultralight Flight Farm, Monterey
,
NY, in 1989, with my FS. I was able to do power off loops. Start out at 8
,000
feet over the farm, nose straight down, when it hit 90 mph, I initiated the
loop. Got to where I could do two or three loops before I ran out of altit
ude
and land. I could not restart the 447 by hand after it cooled off which on
ly
took a couple minutes during glide. I was messing around engine off one da
y,
and decided to try an engine off stall. Went right into it and the FS spun
up
like a top. I think this had something to do with that big disc when the e
ngine
was at idle. Needless to say, I was very surprised. I've gotten into a
lot of arguments about the difference in drag with engine at idle and dead
stick.
Some folks say there is none. I know better, and it is easy to demonstrate
.
Where were we?
Your ailerons are still heavy at slow speeds because they are huge compared
to
what is really required for safe flight. Plus...it's a Kolb. ;-)
Jimmy O's MKIII was the result of someone changing the geometry of the aile
ron
control system. The original owner had a terrible time contending with tha
t problem.
Sometimes, most of the time, it is not wise to try to reengineer a designer
's
work.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@m
atronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Berle
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2018 2:51 PM
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
First sentence should have read, "There is no offset in the engine mount o
n standard
Kolb aircraft".
Thank you for that information, that allows me to eliminate one possible ca
use.
I was really hoping that I didn't have to make another offset engine mount
plate
to straighten out a built-in offset..
The explanation about the air swirling around from the prop and hitting one
side
of the tail more than the other makes sense to me, I can see that as being
a
possibility. What I have to do in order to verify that is to make a power-o
ff
glide. My model airplane experience tells me that if it glides straight the
n
it's an engine thrust offset problem, and if it needs the rudder in the gli
de
then it's some kind of an airframe construction/damage/repair/warp issue.
To answer a question that was raised about the elevator force during the st
all,
it was almost the same as in level flight. I allowed the speed to drop off
very
slowly, so I was holding the same amount of pressure, maybe just a tiny lit
tle
bit less, in order to reach stall speed. I can 100% say that I did not have
to "pull" the stick back to stall it like you have to do on a C-172. What I
did was the exact opposite of the dramatic exaggerated "airshow" stall wher
e you
make the airplane rear up like a horse and then stop in mid-air. This was a
level flight textbook stall.
If I am remembering correctly, I believe it was Rex and Richard who mention
ed they
had successfully raised the front of the stabilizer to re-rig the pitch on
the aircraft. I think it was Richard's EXCELLENT "Old Poops" website that I
researched
on this as well (THANK YOU for this website).The figure of 7/8 of an
inch was mentioned, and I purposely went just a little less than that to be
conservative.
I have reasonably high confidence that the aircarft will still be
very controllable with this change. The Cessna 180 / 182 and the Piper fabr
ic
aircraft all use the leading edge of the stabilizer for pitch trim, and the
stabilizer
travels far more than 3/4 of an inch. But I'll make sure I am paying
attention during the takeoff roll to see if it is trying to nose over. If i
t
is doing that excessively I will abort the takeoff roll.
John H mentioned reducing the chord of the ailerons. I would try to not hav
e to
do that, because it creates the possibility of not having enough control in
an
emergency. After all the discussion about the Kolb's heavy ailerons, and ha
ving
read a lot about it by now, my question is why are the ailerons still heavy
at very low speeds? I understand 100% that the big ailerons will tend to ge
t
difficult at 70-80 MPH, and that it is just part of the design. Got that lo
ud
and clear.
But several experienced Kolbers have said that slowing the airplane down wi
ll make
most of this problem go away. My Firestar ailerons are not as heavy as Jimm
y
O'Neal's Mark 3 was, but they are still somewhat heavy, even down at 40 MPH
.
Once again, thanks to everyone for taking time and energy to participate in
this
discussion and offer their opinion/experience.
Bill Berle
Los Angeles
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com]
On Behalf Of John Hauck
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2018 1:26
PM
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Flutter /
Firestar Test Flight #2
"John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
There is in offset in the engine mount
on any standard Kolb.
I spent a lot of time and effort
experimenting with engine off set to correct trim my
perceived trim problems in my FS. All was for
naught. Best left just like Homer Kolb designed.
I did the same with the leading edge of
the upper vertical stabilizer. Again, a waste of
time. Best left centered like indicated on the plan
sheet.
Brother Jim fabricated the first pair
of adjustable forward horizontal stabilizer mounts.
Had 3 choices of angle. I flew off most of the 40
hours on the original factory MKIII. I knew what we
needed to make my MKIII right. Same for moving
the main gear forward, and many other modifications that
were all blessed by Homer Kolb the morning after we would
make them the night before. Many of our mods were
incorporated in subsequent MKIII airframes and other Kolb
models from changes we made to mine, SN: M3-11.
When I got to Homer's first of Jan 1991, 10 air frames had
been fabricated. Brother Jim had gotten to Homer's
around the first of Dec 1990, the help out with some
welding, when both Homer's welders were laid up with health
problems. I experimented with all three positions, but
the center position was where the aircraft settled down and
felt comfortable. The other two positions made the
MKIII feel like it was riding on a ball. Keep wanting
to fall off in all diffe!
rent directions. Not fun to
fly.
We cured the adverse yaw problem after
many hours and a 17,200 mile flight. On that flight I
flew a half ball out of trim the entire way. I'm still
a half ball out of trim, but the MKIII flies straight and
level by doubling the size of the rudder trim tab. The
prop wash comes off the engine twisting, hits the left side
of the vertical stabilizer and the top of the left
horizontal stabilizer. This is verified by crank case
ventilation depositing oil and fuel spray on those surfaces
and no place else.
It is normal to have the aircraft want
to drop the nose before some form of pitch trim is
installed. Primarily because it is a high mounted
pusher. Looks like Berle's Kolb could have raised the
engine to run a longer prop. However, there is
something that needs to be tweaked to get the aircraft to
fly level. A few ways to do it: 1-forced trim,
2-elevator trim tab, and horizontal stabilizer. On a
FS I'd go with an elevator trim tab which is adjustable,
simple, and easy to install. Doesn't take a lot of
trim tab to get the job done, and if it does it is a good
way to correct a pitch problem. However, adverse pitch
trim up ain't normal and should be thoroughly investigated.
Has your ASI been calibrated?
Most are not very accurate at slow speeds. I fly out
and back on reverse headings at a constant airspeed, add
them together and divide by 2 to get ASI error. May or
may not help at very slow speeds. You can also use a
GPS, which is ground speed only, on a calm day, to get a
pretty good idea of ASI calibration. You should be at
30 or lower before stall. My MKIII will easily hit 30,
sometimes less.
Because a Cub and your engine turn the
same way does not mean that the aircraft response will be
the same. One's a tractor and one's a pusher, IMHO.
Ailerons move very little in flight to
get the results you are looking for. They are
oversized. I reduced the area of my ailerons when I
built my MKIII knowing I had a lot more aileron than I
needed. Homer designed his aircraft primarily for
safe, very slow flight, to be able to stay in contact with
what was happening in the trees and on the ground he was
flying over. Cut the aileron cord in half and you may
get the results you are looking for.
I believe adverse yaw is caused by prop
wash primarily. A rudder trim tab corrects that
problem.
With less than an hour's flight time,
if it was me, I'd get out there and learn how to fly the
aircraft before I decided to change anything unless it was
absolutely unsafe to fly in that condition. It takes
some hours to learn your Kolb. Especially in your case
where you came from GA. I came from helicopters and
had no problem flying Kolbs. To me, they were a lot
like rotary wing.
Wow! My mind has a severe case of
diarrhea, but the above are my thoughts on the situation.
john h
Titus, Alabama
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com]
On Behalf Of Bill Berle
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2018 12:16
PM
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Subject: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar
Test Flight #2
Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
Please let me clarify my comment so it
does not accidentally cause a safety issue for someone. I
believe that adding weight forward of the hinge line works
against flutter. BUT I did NOT mean to imply that spades
would replace or equal the Kolb tip weights. Those are there
for a reason, as many of you know from experience. Flutter
would scare the s*** out of me in a Kolb or any other
aircraft.
Test Flight Report for flight #2
I flew my Firestar again yesterday
morning for about 20-25 minutes. I was a little more
confident in everything, so I took it right up to 1500 feet
above the airport and flew several laps above the runway.
The aircraft needed a few pounds of
forward pressure on the stick, as I have described before.
However, this was at an indicated airspeed of only 45 miles
per hour. A lot slower than one would expect for a properly
rigged aircraft. I realized at this point that I needed to
raise the leading edge of the stabilizer as a couple of
people have mentioned. A "trim tab" for this would have been
pretty large and bent pretty far.
Also on the test flight, I paid
specific attention to the rudder trim. The aircraft required
five or six pounds (guess) of LEFT rudder in level flight,
again at the 40-45 mile an hour speeds I was flying. It also
needs left rudder on takeoff to keep it straight. This was
very surprising to me because the propeller turns the
"conventional" direction, meaning that it is turning the
same direction as a Cessna or J-3 Cub, where you need right
rudder on takeoff. The torque from the engine, especially
with a high ratio gearbox and a big wide propeller, SHOULD
be trying to roll and yaw the aircraft to the left,
requiring right rudder. But this is the opposite of how it
was in flight.
I briefly let off of the rudder
pressure and the airplane yawed to the right significantly.
The air flow direction and the view from the seat verified
this without a doubt... so it does not seem that this
problem could be caused by the rudder pedals not being
adjusted well.
So I have a QUESTION for the
experienced Kolb builders/owners here: Dies the stock Kolb
engine mount have a thrust offset angle built into it??? The
way this aircraft is behaving would be explained by the Kolb
fuselage having several degrees of RIGHT thrust built into
the engine mounts. Perhaps this would have been done to
compensate for engines that turn the other direction . I'm
having trouble understanding how an engine that turns a
"right hand" propeller is making it steer to the RIGHT
instead of left.
One other thing I tried in flight was
to slow the aircraft down. This seems pretty funny starting
from 40 and 45 miles an hour, but I had plenty of altitude.
With the vortex generators installed, and having read the
flight reports from several other Kolb owners, I fully
expected the aircraft to stall at 30 MPH. But as I slowed
down to 35 MPH it gently stalled. I repeated this again
after speeding back up to 40, to make sure I had actually
stalled it the first time. Once again at 35 indicated, it
provided a fairly gentle stall. No significant buffeting or
shaking before the break, but a pretty gentle straight-ahead
stall with the nose dropping 20 degrees when it did let go.
This was disappointing, since I
installed the VG's specifically to get the lower stall speed
they usually provide. To be honest, I was pretty
disappointed, since the old Taylorcrafts and J-3 Cubs stall
just under 40 MPH, and a big part of the reason I wanted an
ultralight style aircraft was to fly really slow into really
short landings.
The last thing I tried to pay specific
attention to was the heavy ailerons getting better at lower
speeds. But again on this flight my speeds were already
slow..I moved the stick left and right and it has adequate
roll control, but the stick forces were far far higher than
the elevator or rudder forces, and this was again at only 40
and 45 indicated. Looking out at the ailerons as I moved
them, they were deflecting equally along their length...
meaning that the outboard tip of the aileron waas moving as
much as the inboard end of the ailerons were moving. The
ailerons were not "twisting" very much. Since I am not yet
familiar with the Kolb I was not able to assess whether the
amount of aileron movement in flight was the same as it was
on the ground (with the same amount of stick movement).
I realized that I had taken too much
pitch out of the propeller. The engine RPM was 5200-5300
when I was flying around at 40-45 miles an hour, and I
specifically wanted to be in the "cruising" RPM range
instead of maximum continuous power (which is 5800). So I
will probably put two degrees more pitch into the propeller
before the next test flight.
After the flight I spent the rest of
the day making and installing the parts to raise the leading
edge of the tail. I raised the leading edge of the tail by
3/4 of an inch. using short steel extension plates.
Again, my most important question for
Kolbers is whether the Kolb Firestar 2 fuselage is known to
have tight hand thrust offset built into the welded engine
mount. Only this would explain why an engine that should be
pulling the airplane left would actually be pulling it
right.
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com<http://www.ezflaphandle.com> - safety
& performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net<http://www.grantstar.net>
- winning proposals for non-profit and
for-profit entities
--------------------------------------------
On Thu, 8/9/18, John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
wrote:
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Firestar/HKS
First Flight
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Date: Thursday, August 9, 2018, 5:10
AM
"John
Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
True. Some. But not enough to
get
the job done, unless additional weight
is added to equal the
out of balance aileron.
When I originally built my MKIII,
before Kolb admitted there might be a
problem with aileron
flutter, I fabricated some really neat
counter balance
weights and attached them, very
securely to 6061 plates I
fixed to the inboard end of each
aileron. First couple
flights went well during
testing. Then, entering the
traffic pattern at my local airport,
the MKIII went into
violent flutter. Snatched the
stick right out of my
hand. Chopping power and
corralling the stick as far
back as I could get it, gets it out of
flutter. I had
learned that exercise early on with my
US and FS, but Kolb
wasn't buying it. Landed and
promptly removed my
beautiful counter balance weights.
Right about 85 mph, where the
airplane
and I liked to cruise was right on the
edge of
flutter. Turbulence would set it
off quickly. I
flew the MKIII in this condition to
Sun and Fun 1993, to
Homer's to paint the Lasers, and then
to Oshkosh. At
Oshkosh I had to fly a photo shoot
with a Cessna 208.
He was having trouble slowing to 85
and I was going into
flutter at 85. It was a tough
flight, but we got'er
done.
I was getting ready to do my flight
around CONUS and up to Alaska,
wondering how I was going to
make it with the flutter
problem. I dreamed up all
kinds of cures to keep the aileron
control linkage as tight
as possible, but I was still
susceptible to flutter.
Finally, the next year at Sun and Fun
Dick Rahill got the factory FS into
severe flutter. He
was white as a ghost and visibly
shaken when he finally got
on the ground after flying from
Lakeland South to the UL
strip on the edge of a severe
thunderstorm. A week
later I got a set of FS aileron
counter balance weights from
Kolb, made them fit my MKIII, and
never again experienced
aileron flutter. It was
wonderful and I was a month
from beginning my big flight of
1994. I had been
flying with flutter for 10 years by
this time.
Don't know why my design didn't work,
but Kolb's did.
My design was ahead of the hinge line
with bullet shaped weights like I had
seen on other
aircraft. Guess I stuck them on
the wrong end of the
aileron because they aggravated the
situation.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com]
On Behalf Of Bill Berle
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2018
11:42
PM
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firestar/HKS
First Flight
Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
Spades will add weight forward of the
hinge line, which is usually working
AGAINST flutter.
Bill Berle
On Wed, 8/8/18, Denny Baber <baberdk@gmail.com>
wrote:
My understanding is that
spades
are for aileron flutter.
Respectfully,
Dennis BaberCape Coral,
Flbaberdk@gmail.com305-814-7218
Stay
Curious
The Kolb-List Email Forum -
Navigator to browse
List Un/Subscription,
7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
- MATRONICS WEB
FORUMS -
via the Web Forums!
- NEW MATRONICS LIST
WIKI -
Email List Wiki!
- List Contribution Web
Site -
support!
-Matt Dralle, List
Admin.
The Kolb-List Email Forum -
Navigator to browse
List Un/Subscription,
7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
- MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
via the Web Forums!
- NEW MATRONICS LIST WIKI -
Email List Wiki!
- List Contribution Web Site -
support!
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
________________________________ Message 14 _____________________________
_______
Time: 02:35:34 PM PST US
From: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
I can't speak for other ULs, only Kolbs and a couple flights in the Howland
Honey
Bee (too many years ago to remember all its flight characteristics). IMHO
Kolbs are not rudder airplanes, based on my own flying experience with them
.
I've found that the Kolbs are more aileron aircraft, with a little rudder t
o keep
them trimmed, and of course more rudder on takeoff, landing, and taxiing.
Maybe I'm different because I still have a lot of rotary wing stuck in my h
ead
after all these years. I don't know.
Once the Kolb is trimmed up in yaw, I can put my feet on the deck, and fly
the
Kolb with aileron and elevator, trim ball centered, making coordinated turn
s.
The aileron geometry is really good on Kolbs. Homer got that right.
That's my experience and I am sticking to it. I can't speak for other ULs
because
I have only flown one other UL other than Kolbs, Burt Howland's little bipl
ane,
the Honey Bee. It was a little doll baby. Burt and Ellen Howland, rest
in peace my friends, attended The Ultralight Flight Farm in NY, 1988-89, wh
ere
I met them. They were a lot of fun. I didn't ask, but Burt offered me the
chance to fly his classic looking little bird. Landing was a no brainer.
Set
it up on final at 25 mph, hold that attitude, and a tiny flare, it's on the
ground.
I can't remember if the Honey Bee was a rudder plane or not. Been too
long ago. Certainly wasn't an Aeronca Champ. ;-)
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@m
atronics.com] On Behalf Of George Helton
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2018 3:23 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
Well guys, we have sure beaten this thread to death.
And this I hope this will be the last of my input.
Bill, you are are GA/ Sailplane Pilot. Youve now entered the world of flyin
g an
all new category of flight. You have developed some habits that will not se
rve
you well in ultralight type aircraft. As a former ultralight instructor I c
an
say with confidence that the worst times were spent converting GA pilots to
UL pilots because, They already knew how to fly.
That being said, youre not flying a 1400lb spam can anymore. Youre a butter
fly
or hummingbird. You need a new mind set. Every little change in wind direct
ion,
wind speed, thermals, hills and tree lines will change whats going on infli
ght.
Ultralights are not aileron controlled aircraft. They are primarily rudder,
elevator and throttle. You know how to control speed. Stick forward, fast.
Stick
back, slow. Throttle forward,up. Throttle back, down. Rudder is everythin
g,
learn to have busy feet. Takeoff, cruise and decent. Think feet, feet, feet
...
you cannot let you feet get lazy in an ultralight.Thats from the time you
taxi to the time you park at the end of the flight. If the nose goes right
on
takeoff, push the left pedal. If your nose is lifting at cruise push it dow
n
and you might want to adjust you throttle a bit. Find your best climb speed
and
use it. Find your decent or guide speed and use it. Learn to feed your thro
ttle
in slowly on takeoff and redu!
ce it slowly upon approach. Fly the friggin plane. Youre in charge.
Fly it all the way to the ground and then keep flying it.
Stop Engineering and go out and enjoy the airplane youve worked so hard at
completing.
Your Firestar will never fly like my Firestar or Johns MKIII. Learn to
fly an ULTRALIGHT. Learn your airplane, and learn to fly it well. Get 50 ho
urs
in the air and on the ground in it and then maybe we might change some thin
gs.
Flying is easy! Its landing and all the stuff on the ground that will screw
ya up. Love ya man, go flying.
George H.
Firestar, FS100, 2702 Hirth
14GDH
Mesick, Michigan
gdhelton@gmail.com
Sent from my iPhone
> On Aug 9, 2018, at 2:48 PM, John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com> wrote:
>
>
> Kolbs produce negligible P-factor. Can't remember where I got that tidbi
t.
Yaw problems on takeoff are probably prop wash on the tail section, as you
mentioned.
>
> john h
> mkIII
> Titus, Alabama
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server
@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Stuart Harner
> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2018 1:27 PM
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
>
>
> Hi Bill,
>
> Good to hear about your safe and successful 2nd. Flight.
>
> First question: Do you know your ASI is accurate? You can get a speedomet
er (GPS
based) app for your phone and do a straight path for a couple of miles, the
n
repeat the other direction for a quick and dirty check. Won't be perfect bu
t
is good for a quick verification.
>
> Next, yes to the clockwise prop and left rudder. My Firefly does exactly
the
same thing. P-factor should cause it to turn left but it does not. We had q
uite
a discussion about this back after my first flights. Short version of the c
onclusion
is that prop wash hitting the right side of the vertical stabilizer is
more powerful than P-factor and easily overrides it. I have confirmed this
by
observing the tail while warming up the engine. Dead bugs collect on the ri
ght
side of the vertical and the rudder deflects to the left. The pusher config
uration
with a low boom tube presents no resistance between the prop and the tail
unlike something more conventional that has all that covered fuselage to "s
traighten
out" the airflow between prop and tail.
>
> Advice (on par with the price of it): Don't go messing with the tail unti
l you
get the proper cruise set up with RPM/Pitch and confirm the ASI. Also, don'
t
change more than one thing at a time between flights. You can easily confus
e
yourself and muddy the results by trying two things at once, no matter how
un-related
they seem. Been there, done that.
>
> Question two: How was the elevator pressure during the stalls, descent an
d climb
out compared to "cruise"?
>
> You're doing great! Keep it up.
>
> Stuart
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server
@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Berle
> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2018 12:16 PM
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
>
>
> Please let me clarify my comment so it does not accidentally cause a safe
ty issue
for someone. I believe that adding weight forward of the hinge line works
against flutter. BUT I did NOT mean to imply that spades would replace or e
qual
the Kolb tip weights. Those are there for a reason, as many of you know fro
m
experience. Flutter would scare the s*** out of me in a Kolb or any other a
ircraft.
>
> Test Flight Report for flight #2
>
> I flew my Firestar again yesterday morning for about 20-25 minutes. I was
a little
more confident in everything, so I took it right up to 1500 feet above the
airport and flew several laps above the runway.
>
> The aircraft needed a few pounds of forward pressure on the stick, as I h
ave
described before. However, this was at an indicated airspeed of only 45 mil
es
per hour. A lot slower than one would expect for a properly rigged aircraft
. I
realized at this point that I needed to raise the leading edge of the stabi
lizer
as a couple of people have mentioned. A "trim tab" for this would have been
pretty large and bent pretty far.
>
> Also on the test flight, I paid specific attention to the rudder trim. Th
e aircraft
required five or six pounds (guess) of LEFT rudder in level flight, again
at the 40-45 mile an hour speeds I was flying. It also needs left rudder on
takeoff to keep it straight. This was very surprising to me because the pro
peller
turns the "conventional" direction, meaning that it is turning the same dir
ection
as a Cessna or J-3 Cub, where you need right rudder on takeoff. The torque
from the engine, especially with a high ratio gearbox and a big wide propel
ler,
SHOULD be trying to roll and yaw the aircraft to the left, requiring right
rudder. But this is the opposite of how it was in flight.
>
> I briefly let off of the rudder pressure and the airplane yawed to the ri
ght
significantly. The air flow direction and the view from the seat verified t
his
without a doubt... so it does not seem that this problem could be caused by
the
rudder pedals not being adjusted well.
>
> So I have a QUESTION for the experienced Kolb builders/owners here: Dies
the
stock Kolb engine mount have a thrust offset angle built into it??? The way
this
aircraft is behaving would be explained by the Kolb fuselage having several
degrees of RIGHT thrust built into the engine mounts. Perhaps this would ha
ve
been done to compensate for engines that turn the other direction . I'm hav
ing
trouble understanding how an engine that turns a "right hand" propeller is
making
it steer to the RIGHT instead of left.
>
> One other thing I tried in flight was to slow the aircraft down. This see
ms pretty
funny starting from 40 and 45 miles an hour, but I had plenty of altitude.
With the vortex generators installed, and having read the flight reports fr
om
several other Kolb owners, I fully expected the aircraft to stall at 30 MPH
.
But as I slowed down to 35 MPH it gently stalled. I repeated this again aft
er
speeding back up to 40, to make sure I had actually stalled it the first ti
me.
Once again at 35 indicated, it provided a fairly gentle stall. No significa
nt
buffeting or shaking before the break, but a pretty gentle straight-ahead s
tall
with the nose dropping 20 degrees when it did let go.
>
> This was disappointing, since I installed the VG's specifically to get th
e lower
stall speed they usually provide. To be honest, I was pretty disappointed,
since the old Taylorcrafts and J-3 Cubs stall just under 40 MPH, and a big
part
of the reason I wanted an ultralight style aircraft was to fly really slow
into really short landings.
>
> The last thing I tried to pay specific attention to was the heavy aileron
s getting
better at lower speeds. But again on this flight my speeds were already
slow..I moved the stick left and right and it has adequate roll control, bu
t the
stick forces were far far higher than the elevator or rudder forces, and th
is
was again at only 40 and 45 indicated. Looking out at the ailerons as I mov
ed
them, they were deflecting equally along their length... meaning that the o
utboard
tip of the aileron waas moving as much as the inboard end of the ailerons
were moving. The ailerons were not "twisting" very much. Since I am not yet
familiar with the Kolb I was not able to assess whether the amount of ailer
on
movement in flight was the same as it was on the ground (with the same amou
nt
of stick movement).
>
> I realized that I had taken too much pitch out of the propeller. The engi
ne RPM
was 5200-5300 when I was flying around at 40-45 miles an hour, and I specif
ically
wanted to be in the "cruising" RPM range instead of maximum continuous
power (which is 5800). So I will probably put two degrees more pitch into t
he
propeller before the next test flight.
>
> After the flight I spent the rest of the day making and installing the pa
rts
to raise the leading edge of the tail. I raised the leading edge of the tai
l by
3/4 of an inch. using short steel extension plates.
>
> Again, my most important question for Kolbers is whether the Kolb Firesta
r 2
fuselage is known to have tight hand thrust offset built into the welded en
gine
mount. Only this would explain why an engine that should be pulling the air
plane
left would actually be pulling it right.
>
> Bill Berle
> www.ezflaphandle.com<http://www.ezflaphandle.com> - safety & performance
upgrade for light aircraft www.grantstar.net<http://www.grantstar.net>
- winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Thu, 8/9/18, John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com> wrote:
>
> Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Firestar/HKS First Flight
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Date: Thursday, August 9, 2018, 5:10 AM
>
> Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
>
> True. Some. But not enough to get
> the job done, unless additional weight is added to equal the out of bala
nce
aileron.
>
> When I originally built my MKIII,
> before Kolb admitted there might be a problem with aileron flutter, I fa
bricated
some really neat counter balance weights and attached them, very securely
to 6061 plates I fixed to the inboard end of each aileron. First couple
flights
went well during testing. Then, entering the traffic pattern at my local
airport, the MKIII went into violent flutter. Snatched the stick right ou
t
of my hand. Chopping power and corralling the stick as far back as I cou
ld
get it, gets it out of flutter. I had learned that exercise early on with
my US and FS, but Kolb wasn't buying it. Landed and promptly removed my
beautiful
counter balance weights.
>
> Right about 85 mph, where the airplane
> and I liked to cruise was right on the edge of flutter. Turbulence woul
d set
it off quickly. I flew the MKIII in this condition to Sun and Fun 1993, t
o
Homer's to paint the Lasers, and then to Oshkosh. At Oshkosh I had to fly
a photo shoot with a Cessna 208. He was having trouble slowing to 85 and I
was
going into flutter at 85. It was a tough flight, but we got'er done.
>
> I was getting ready to do my flight
> around CONUS and up to Alaska, wondering how I was going to make it with
the
flutter problem. I dreamed up all kinds of cures to keep the aileron cont
rol
linkage as tight as possible, but I was still susceptible to flutter.
>
> Finally, the next year at Sun and Fun
> Dick Rahill got the factory FS into severe flutter. He was white as a g
host
and visibly shaken when he finally got on the ground after flying from Lak
eland
South to the UL strip on the edge of a severe thunderstorm. A week later
I got a set of FS aileron counter balance weights from Kolb, made them fit
my MKIII, and never again experienced aileron flutter. It was wonderful a
nd
I was a month from beginning my big flight of 1994. I had been flying wi
th
flutter for 10 years by this time.
>
> Don't know why my design didn't work,
> but Kolb's did.
>
> My design was ahead of the hinge line
> with bullet shaped weights like I had seen on other aircraft. Guess I s
tuck
them on the wrong end of the aileron because they aggravated the situation
.
>
> john h
> mkIII
> Titus, Alabama
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com]
> On Behalf Of Bill Berle
> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2018 11:42
> PM
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firestar/HKS
> First Flight
>
> Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
>
> Spades will add weight forward of the
> hinge line, which is usually working AGAINST flutter.
>
> Bill Berle
>
> On Wed, 8/8/18, Denny Baber <baberdk@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> My understanding is that spades
> are for aileron flutter.
>
>
> Respectfully,
> Dennis BaberCape Coral,
> Flbaberdk@gmail.com305-814-7218
> Stay
> Curious
>
>
> The Kolb-List Email Forum -
> Navigator to browse
> List Un/Subscription,
> 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
> - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
> via the Web Forums!
> - NEW MATRONICS LIST WIKI -
> Email List Wiki!
> - List Contribution Web Site -
> support!
>
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>
>
________________________________ Message 15 _____________________________
_______
Time: 02:47:07 PM PST US
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
From: Gary Aman <zeprep251@aol.com>
Bill ,dont be too sure about stall speeds until you can authenticate your a
irspeed
indicator.your prop create a swirl like a screw that twists around the fuse
lage
and that blast of air hits the side of the vertical and moves it.I think
the mounts are straight.the vgs are doing their job, no sharp unexpected dr
op,I
raised the horizontal on my FS2 and still had to add some weight in the nos
e
to make it feel good. If I weighed 200# it would have been better .Kolbs ne
ed
to be a little closer to the forward end of the CG to feel right in my opin
ion.I
put heavier springs on pedals to stop the oscillations caused by the prop.
> On Aug 9, 2018, at 1:15 PM, Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>
> Please let me clarify my comment so it does not accidentally cause a safe
ty issue
for someone. I believe that adding weight forward of the hinge line works
against flutter. BUT I did NOT mean to imply that spades would replace or e
qual
the Kolb tip weights. Those are there for a reason, as many of you know fro
m
experience. Flutter would scare the s*** out of me in a Kolb or any other a
ircraft.
>
> Test Flight Report for flight #2
>
> I flew my Firestar again yesterday morning for about 20-25 minutes. I was
a little
more confident in everything, so I took it right up to 1500 feet above the
airport and flew several laps above the runway.
>
> The aircraft needed a few pounds of forward pressure on the stick, as I h
ave
described before. However, this was at an indicated airspeed of only 45 mil
es
per hour. A lot slower than one would expect for a properly rigged aircraft
. I
realized at this point that I needed to raise the leading edge of the stabi
lizer
as a couple of people have mentioned. A "trim tab" for this would have been
pretty large and bent pretty far.
>
> Also on the test flight, I paid specific attention to the rudder trim. Th
e aircraft
required five or six pounds (guess) of LEFT rudder in level flight, again
at the 40-45 mile an hour speeds I was flying. It also needs left rudder on
takeoff to keep it straight. This was very surprising to me because the pro
peller
turns the "conventional" direction, meaning that it is turning the same dir
ection
as a Cessna or J-3 Cub, where you need right rudder on takeoff. The torque
from the engine, especially with a high ratio gearbox and a big wide propel
ler,
SHOULD be trying to roll and yaw the aircraft to the left, requiring right
rudder. But this is the opposite of how it was in flight.
>
> I briefly let off of the rudder pressure and the airplane yawed to the ri
ght
significantly. The air flow direction and the view from the seat verified t
his
without a doubt... so it does not seem that this problem could be caused by
the
rudder pedals not being adjusted well.
>
> So I have a QUESTION for the experienced Kolb builders/owners here: Dies
the
stock Kolb engine mount have a thrust offset angle built into it??? The way
this
aircraft is behaving would be explained by the Kolb fuselage having several
degrees of RIGHT thrust built into the engine mounts. Perhaps this would ha
ve
been done to compensate for engines that turn the other direction . I'm hav
ing
trouble understanding how an engine that turns a "right hand" propeller is
making
it steer to the RIGHT instead of left.
>
> One other thing I tried in flight was to slow the aircraft down. This see
ms pretty
funny starting from 40 and 45 miles an hour, but I had plenty of altitude.
With the vortex generators installed, and having read the flight reports fr
om
several other Kolb owners, I fully expected the aircraft to stall at 30 MPH
.
But as I slowed down to 35 MPH it gently stalled. I repeated this again aft
er
speeding back up to 40, to make sure I had actually stalled it the first ti
me.
Once again at 35 indicated, it provided a fairly gentle stall. No significa
nt
buffeting or shaking before the break, but a pretty gentle straight-ahead s
tall
with the nose dropping 20 degrees when it did let go.
>
> This was disappointing, since I installed the VG's specifically to get th
e lower
stall speed they usually provide. To be honest, I was pretty disappointed,
since the old Taylorcrafts and J-3 Cubs stall just under 40 MPH, and a big
part
of the reason I wanted an ultralight style aircraft was to fly really slow
into really short landings.
>
> The last thing I tried to pay specific attention to was the heavy aileron
s getting
better at lower speeds. But again on this flight my speeds were already
slow..I moved the stick left and right and it has adequate roll control, bu
t the
stick forces were far far higher than the elevator or rudder forces, and th
is
was again at only 40 and 45 indicated. Looking out at the ailerons as I mov
ed
them, they were deflecting equally along their length... meaning that the o
utboard
tip of the aileron waas moving as much as the inboard end of the ailerons
were moving. The ailerons were not "twisting" very much. Since I am not yet
familiar with the Kolb I was not able to assess whether the amount of ailer
on
movement in flight was the same as it was on the ground (with the same amou
nt
of stick movement).
>
> I realized that I had taken too much pitch out of the propeller. The engi
ne RPM
was 5200-5300 when I was flying around at 40-45 miles an hour, and I specif
ically
wanted to be in the "cruising" RPM range instead of maximum continuous
power (which is 5800). So I will probably put two degrees more pitch into t
he
propeller before the next test flight.
>
> After the flight I spent the rest of the day making and installing the pa
rts
to raise the leading edge of the tail. I raised the leading edge of the tai
l by
3/4 of an inch. using short steel extension plates.
>
> Again, my most important question for Kolbers is whether the Kolb Firesta
r 2
fuselage is known to have tight hand thrust offset built into the welded en
gine
mount. Only this would explain why an engine that should be pulling the air
plane
left would actually be pulling it right.
>
> Bill Berle
> www.ezflaphandle.com<http://www.ezflaphandle.com> - safety & performance
upgrade for light aircraft
> www.grantstar.net<http://www.grantstar.net> - winning proposals
for non-profit and for-profit entities
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Thu, 8/9/18, John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com> wrote:
>
> Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Firestar/HKS First Flight
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Date: Thursday, August 9, 2018, 5:10 AM
>
> Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
>
> True. Some. But not enough to get
> the job done, unless additional weight is added to equal the
> out of balance aileron.
>
> When I originally built my MKIII,
> before Kolb admitted there might be a problem with aileron
> flutter, I fabricated some really neat counter balance
> weights and attached them, very securely to 6061 plates I
> fixed to the inboard end of each aileron. First couple
> flights went well during testing. Then, entering the
> traffic pattern at my local airport, the MKIII went into
> violent flutter. Snatched the stick right out of my
> hand. Chopping power and corralling the stick as far
> back as I could get it, gets it out of flutter. I had
> learned that exercise early on with my US and FS, but Kolb
> wasn't buying it. Landed and promptly removed my
> beautiful counter balance weights.
>
> Right about 85 mph, where the airplane
> and I liked to cruise was right on the edge of
> flutter. Turbulence would set it off quickly. I
> flew the MKIII in this condition to Sun and Fun 1993, to
> Homer's to paint the Lasers, and then to Oshkosh. At
> Oshkosh I had to fly a photo shoot with a Cessna 208.
> He was having trouble slowing to 85 and I was going into
> flutter at 85. It was a tough flight, but we got'er
> done.
>
> I was getting ready to do my flight
> around CONUS and up to Alaska, wondering how I was going to
> make it with the flutter problem. I dreamed up all
> kinds of cures to keep the aileron control linkage as tight
> as possible, but I was still susceptible to flutter.
>
> Finally, the next year at Sun and Fun
> Dick Rahill got the factory FS into severe flutter. He
> was white as a ghost and visibly shaken when he finally got
> on the ground after flying from Lakeland South to the UL
> strip on the edge of a severe thunderstorm. A week
> later I got a set of FS aileron counter balance weights from
> Kolb, made them fit my MKIII, and never again experienced
> aileron flutter. It was wonderful and I was a month
> from beginning my big flight of 1994. I had been
> flying with flutter for 10 years by this time.
>
> Don't know why my design didn't work,
> but Kolb's did.
>
> My design was ahead of the hinge line
> with bullet shaped weights like I had seen on other
> aircraft. Guess I stuck them on the wrong end of the
> aileron because they aggravated the situation.
>
> john h
> mkIII
> Titus, Alabama
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com]
> On Behalf Of Bill Berle
> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2018 11:42
> PM
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firestar/HKS
> First Flight
>
> Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
>
> Spades will add weight forward of the
> hinge line, which is usually working AGAINST flutter.
>
> Bill Berle
>
> On Wed, 8/8/18, Denny Baber <baberdk@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> My understanding is that spades
> are for aileron flutter.
>
>
> Respectfully,
> Dennis BaberCape Coral,
> Flbaberdk@gmail.com305-814-7218
> Stay
> Curious
>
>
> The Kolb-List Email Forum -
> Navigator to browse
> List Un/Subscription,
> 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
> - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
> via the Web Forums!
> - NEW MATRONICS LIST WIKI -
> Email List Wiki!
> - List Contribution Web Site -
> support!
>
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>
>
________________________________ Message 16 _____________________________
_______
Time: 02:58:02 PM PST US
From: Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
I also have to disagree regarding the Kolb being a "rudder airplane". The s
tock
plans built Firestar has zero or maybe 1/2 degree of dihedral in the wings.
At
least on the plans I have. My Firestar has maybe 3 degrees total, or one an
d
one half degree each side. I did that as much for appearance as I did for a
ny
other reason. Also, as an old washed up model airplane pilot, having a litt
le
dihedral at least gives me a CHANCE to get back on the ground safe using ru
dder
if the entire control stick assembly falls out of the airplane :)
But with this little dihedral, I cannot imagine the Kolb responding WELL to
rudder
like other "classic" ultralights, Quicksilvers, etc.
But... I am without a doubt the world's LOWEST time Kolb pilot, about 35 or
45
minutes total flight time in this Firestar and maybe another 30 minutes in
Jimmy's
Mark 3. So I can easily be wrong.
I understand completely what George is saying, I would be a much more diffi
cult
student for a UL instructor than someone with no flight time. The only thin
g
I will disagree with George about is that as a sailplane pilot we learned t
o use
the rudder continuously and we learned about micrometeorology, localized wi
nds,
eddy currents behind trees, etc.
My big problem is that I remember all of this fondly but it has been 30 yea
rs.
So it is not at the front of my thinking anymore. Flying a lovely old antiq
ue
C-172 has spoiled me and put 9 years of rust on what were once reasonably g
ood
stick and rudder skills.
(Part of why I wanted this airplane is because I wanted to grind off all th
at rust.
See if I could go back and find that young sharp pilot I used to know)
With all sincere respect for John H, I will leave the spins and aerobatics
in a
Kolb to him. He recently posted on the Kolb List "If you want to do aerobat
ics
go get a Pitts..." Excellent advice :)
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com<http://www.ezflaphandle.com> - safety & performance up
grade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net<http://www.grantstar.net> - winning proposals for no
n-profit and for-profit entities
--------------------------------------------
On Thu, 8/9/18, John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com> wrote:
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Date: Thursday, August 9, 2018, 2:35 PM
Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
I can't speak for other ULs, only Kolbs
and a couple flights in the Howland Honey Bee (too many
years ago to remember all its flight characteristics).
IMHO Kolbs are not rudder airplanes, based on my own flying
experience with them. I've found that the Kolbs are
more aileron aircraft, with a little rudder to keep them
trimmed, and of course more rudder on takeoff, landing, and
taxiing. Maybe I'm different because I still have a
lot of rotary wing stuck in my head after all these
years. I don't know.
Once the Kolb is trimmed up in yaw, I
can put my feet on the deck, and fly the Kolb with aileron
and elevator, trim ball centered, making coordinated
turns. The aileron geometry is really good on
Kolbs. Homer got that right.
That's my experience and I am sticking
to it. I can't speak for other ULs because I have only
flown one other UL other than Kolbs, Burt Howland's little
biplane, the Honey Bee. It was a little doll
baby. Burt and Ellen Howland, rest in peace my
friends, attended The Ultralight Flight Farm in NY, 1988-89,
where I met them. They were a lot of fun. I
didn't ask, but Burt offered me the chance to fly his
classic looking little bird. Landing was a no
brainer. Set it up on final at 25 mph, hold that
attitude, and a tiny flare, it's on the ground. I
can't remember if the Honey Bee was a rudder plane or
not. Been too long ago. Certainly wasn't an
Aeronca Champ. ;-)
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: Thursday, August 09, 2018 3:23
PM
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Flutter /
Firestar Test Flight #2
George Helton <gdhelton@gmail.com>
Well guys, we have sure beaten this
thread to death.
And this I hope this will be the last
of my input.
Bill, you are are GA/ Sailplane Pilot.
Youve now entered the world of flying an all new category
of flight. You have developed some habits that will not
serve you well in ultralight type aircraft. As a former
ultralight instructor I can say with confidence that the
worst times were spent converting GA pilots to UL pilots
because, They already knew how to fly.
That being said, youre not flying a
1400lb spam can anymore. Youre a butterfly or
hummingbird. You need a new mind set. Every little change in
wind direction, wind speed, thermals, hills and tree lines
will change whats going on inflight. Ultralights are not
aileron controlled aircraft. They are primarily rudder,
elevator and throttle. You know how to control speed. Stick
forward, fast. Stick back, slow. Throttle forward,up.
Throttle back, down. Rudder is everything, learn
to have busy feet. Takeoff, cruise and decent. Think feet,
feet, feet... you cannot let you feet get lazy in an
ultralight.Thats from the time you taxi to the time you
park at the end of the flight. If the nose goes right on
takeoff, push the left pedal. If your nose is lifting at
cruise push it down and you might want to adjust you
throttle a bit. Find your best climb speed and use it. Find
your decent or guide speed and use it. Learn to feed your
throttle in slowly on takeoff and redu!
ce it slowly upon approach. Fly the
friggin plane. Youre in charge.
Fly it all the way to the ground and
then keep flying it.
Stop Engineering and go out and enjoy
the airplane youve worked so hard at completing. Your
Firestar will never fly like my Firestar or Johns MKIII.
Learn to fly an ULTRALIGHT. Learn your airplane, and learn
to fly it well. Get 50 hours in the air and on the ground in
it and then maybe we might change some things. Flying is
easy! Its landing and all the stuff on the ground that
will screw ya up. Love ya man, go flying.
George H.
Firestar, FS100, 2702 Hirth
14GDH
Mesick, Michigan
gdhelton@gmail.com
Sent from my iPhone
> On Aug 9, 2018, at 2:48 PM, John
Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
wrote:
>
> --> Kolb-List message posted
by: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
>
> Kolbs produce negligible
P-factor. Can't remember where I got that
tidbit. Yaw problems on takeoff are probably prop wash
on the tail section, as you mentioned.
>
> john h
> mkIII
> Titus, Alabama
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com]
On Behalf Of Stuart Harner
> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2018
1:27 PM
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Flutter /
Firestar Test Flight #2
>
> --> Kolb-List message posted
by: "Stuart Harner" <stuart@harnerfarm.net>
>
> Hi Bill,
>
> Good to hear about your safe and
successful 2nd. Flight.
>
> First question: Do you know your
ASI is accurate? You can get a speedometer (GPS based) app
for your phone and do a straight path for a couple of miles,
then repeat the other direction for a quick and dirty check.
Won't be perfect but is good for a quick verification.
>
> Next, yes to the clockwise prop
and left rudder. My Firefly does exactly the same thing.
P-factor should cause it to turn left but it does not. We
had quite a discussion about this back after my first
flights. Short version of the conclusion is that prop wash
hitting the right side of the vertical stabilizer is more
powerful than P-factor and easily overrides it. I have
confirmed this by observing the tail while warming up the
engine. Dead bugs collect on the right side of the vertical
and the rudder deflects to the left. The pusher
configuration with a low boom tube presents no resistance
between the prop and the tail unlike something more
conventional that has all that covered fuselage to
"straighten out" the airflow between prop and tail.
>
> Advice (on par with the price of
it): Don't go messing with the tail until you get the proper
cruise set up with RPM/Pitch and confirm the ASI. Also,
don't change more than one thing at a time between flights.
You can easily confuse yourself and muddy the results by
trying two things at once, no matter how un-related they
seem. Been there, done that.
>
> Question two: How was the elevator
pressure during the stalls, descent and climb out compared
to "cruise"?
>
> You're doing great! Keep it up.
>
> Stuart
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com]
On Behalf Of Bill Berle
> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2018
12:16 PM
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Kolb-List: Flutter /
Firestar Test Flight #2
>
> --> Kolb-List message posted
by: Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
>
> Please let me clarify my comment
so it does not accidentally cause a safety issue for
someone. I believe that adding weight forward of the hinge
line works against flutter. BUT I did NOT mean to imply that
spades would replace or equal the Kolb tip weights. Those
are there for a reason, as many of you know from experience.
Flutter would scare the s*** out of me in a Kolb or any
other aircraft.
>
> Test Flight Report for flight #2
>
> I flew my Firestar again yesterday
morning for about 20-25 minutes. I was a little more
confident in everything, so I took it right up to 1500 feet
above the airport and flew several laps above the runway.
>
> The aircraft needed a few pounds
of forward pressure on the stick, as I have described
before. However, this was at an indicated airspeed of only
45 miles per hour. A lot slower than one would expect for a
properly rigged aircraft. I realized at this point that I
needed to raise the leading edge of the stabilizer as a
couple of people have mentioned. A "trim tab" for this would
have been pretty large and bent pretty far.
>
> Also on the test flight, I paid
specific attention to the rudder trim. The aircraft required
five or six pounds (guess) of LEFT rudder in level flight,
again at the 40-45 mile an hour speeds I was flying. It also
needs left rudder on takeoff to keep it straight. This was
very surprising to me because the propeller turns the
"conventional" direction, meaning that it is turning the
same direction as a Cessna or J-3 Cub, where you need right
rudder on takeoff. The torque from the engine, especially
with a high ratio gearbox and a big wide propeller, SHOULD
be trying to roll and yaw the aircraft to the left,
requiring right rudder. But this is the opposite of how it
was in flight.
>
> I briefly let off of the rudder
pressure and the airplane yawed to the right significantly.
The air flow direction and the view from the seat verified
this without a doubt... so it does not seem that this
problem could be caused by the rudder pedals not being
adjusted well.
>
> So I have a QUESTION for the
experienced Kolb builders/owners here: Dies the stock Kolb
engine mount have a thrust offset angle built into it??? The
way this aircraft is behaving would be explained by the Kolb
fuselage having several degrees of RIGHT thrust built into
the engine mounts. Perhaps this would have been done to
compensate for engines that turn the other direction . I'm
having trouble understanding how an engine that turns a
"right hand" propeller is making it steer to the RIGHT
instead of left.
>
> One other thing I tried in flight
was to slow the aircraft down. This seems pretty funny
starting from 40 and 45 miles an hour, but I had plenty of
altitude. With the vortex generators installed, and having
read the flight reports from several other Kolb owners, I
fully expected the aircraft to stall at 30 MPH. But as I
slowed down to 35 MPH it gently stalled. I repeated this
again after speeding back up to 40, to make sure I had
actually stalled it the first time. Once again at 35
indicated, it provided a fairly gentle stall. No significant
buffeting or shaking before the break, but a pretty gentle
straight-ahead stall with the nose dropping 20 degrees when
it did let go.
>
> This was disappointing, since I
installed the VG's specifically to get the lower stall speed
they usually provide. To be honest, I was pretty
disappointed, since the old Taylorcrafts and J-3 Cubs stall
just under 40 MPH, and a big part of the reason I wanted an
ultralight style aircraft was to fly really slow into really
short landings.
>
> The last thing I tried to pay
specific attention to was the heavy ailerons getting better
at lower speeds. But again on this flight my speeds were
already slow..I moved the stick left and right and it has
adequate roll control, but the stick forces were far far
higher than the elevator or rudder forces, and this was
again at only 40 and 45 indicated. Looking out at the
ailerons as I moved them, they were deflecting equally along
their length... meaning that the outboard tip of the aileron
waas moving as much as the inboard end of the ailerons were
moving. The ailerons were not "twisting" very much. Since I
am not yet familiar with the Kolb I was not able to assess
whether the amount of aileron movement in flight was the
same as it was on the ground (with the same amount of stick
movement).
>
> I realized that I had taken too
much pitch out of the propeller. The engine RPM was
5200-5300 when I was flying around at 40-45 miles an hour,
and I specifically wanted to be in the "cruising" RPM range
instead of maximum continuous power (which is 5800). So I
will probably put two degrees more pitch into the propeller
before the next test flight.
>
> After the flight I spent the rest
of the day making and installing the parts to raise the
leading edge of the tail. I raised the leading edge of the
tail by 3/4 of an inch. using short steel extension plates.
>
> Again, my most important question
for Kolbers is whether the Kolb Firestar 2 fuselage is known
to have tight hand thrust offset built into the welded
engine mount. Only this would explain why an engine that
should be pulling the airplane left would actually be
pulling it right.
>
> Bill Berle
> www.ezflaphandle.com<http://www.ezflaphandle.com> -
safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net<http://www.grantstar.net> -
winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
>
>
--------------------------------------------
> On Thu, 8/9/18, John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
wrote:
>
> Subject: RE: Kolb-List:
Firestar/HKS First Flight
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Date: Thursday, August 9, 2018,
5:10 AM
>
> --> Kolb-List message posted
by: "John
> Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
>
> True. Some. But not enough
to get
> the job done, unless additional
weight is added to equal the out of balance aileron.
>
> When I originally built my MKIII,
> before Kolb admitted there might
be a problem with aileron flutter, I fabricated some
really neat counter balance weights and attached them,
very securely to 6061 plates I fixed to the inboard
end of each aileron. First couple flights went
well during testing. Then, entering the traffic
pattern at my local airport, the MKIII went into
violent flutter. Snatched the stick right out of
my hand. Chopping power and corralling the stick
as far back as I could get it, gets it out of
flutter. I had learned that exercise early on
with my US and FS, but Kolb wasn't buying it.
Landed and promptly removed my beautiful counter
balance weights.
>
> Right about 85 mph, where the
airplane
> and I liked to cruise was right on
the edge of flutter. Turbulence would set it off
quickly. I flew the MKIII in this condition to
Sun and Fun 1993, to Homer's to paint the Lasers, and
then to Oshkosh. At Oshkosh I had to fly a photo
shoot with a Cessna 208. He was having trouble slowing
to 85 and I was going into flutter at 85. It was
a tough flight, but we got'er done.
>
> I was getting ready to do my
flight
> around CONUS and up to Alaska,
wondering how I was going to make it with the flutter
problem. I dreamed up all kinds of cures to keep
the aileron control linkage as tight as possible, but
I was still susceptible to flutter.
>
> Finally, the next year at Sun and
Fun
> Dick Rahill got the factory FS
into severe flutter. He was white as a ghost and
visibly shaken when he finally got on the ground after
flying from Lakeland South to the UL strip on the edge
of a severe thunderstorm. A week later I got a
set of FS aileron counter balance weights from Kolb,
made them fit my MKIII, and never again experienced
aileron flutter. It was wonderful and I was a
month from beginning my big flight of 1994. I
had been flying with flutter for 10 years by this
time.
>
> Don't know why my design didn't
work,
> but Kolb's did.
>
> My design was ahead of the hinge
line
> with bullet shaped weights like I
had seen on other aircraft. Guess I stuck them
on the wrong end of the aileron because they
aggravated the situation.
>
> john h
> mkIII
> Titus, Alabama
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com]
> On Behalf Of Bill Berle
> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2018
11:42
> PM
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List:
Firestar/HKS
> First Flight
>
> --> Kolb-List message posted
by:
> Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
>
> Spades will add weight forward of
the
> hinge line, which is usually
working AGAINST flutter.
>
> Bill Berle
>
> On Wed, 8/8/18, Denny Baber <baberdk@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> My understanding is
that spades
> are for aileron flutter.
>
>
> Respectfully,
> Dennis BaberCape Coral,
> Flbaberdk@gmail.com305-814-7218
> Stay
> Curious
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> The Kolb-List Email Forum -
> Navigator to browse
> List Un/Subscription,
> 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
> - MATRONICS
WEB FORUMS -
> via the Web Forums!
> - NEW MATRONICS LIST
WIKI -
> Email List Wiki!
> - List Contribution
Web Site -
> support!
>
> -Matt Dralle, List
Admin.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
The Kolb-List Email Forum -
Navigator to browse
List Un/Subscription,
7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
- MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
via the Web Forums!
- NEW MATRONICS LIST WIKI -
Email List Wiki!
- List Contribution Web Site -
support!
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
________________________________ Message 17 _____________________________
_______
Time: 03:22:09 PM PST US
From: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
My last aerobatic maneuver was 15 March 1990... Took 6 years from the time
I first
started flying Kolbs to learn my lesson. I still like to fly somewhat aggr
essively,
but without aerobatics.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@m
atronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Berle
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2018 4:58 PM
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
I also have to disagree regarding the Kolb being a "rudder airplane". The s
tock
plans built Firestar has zero or maybe 1/2 degree of dihedral in the wings.
At
least on the plans I have. My Firestar has maybe 3 degrees total, or one an
d
one half degree each side. I did that as much for appearance as I did for a
ny
other reason. Also, as an old washed up model airplane pilot, having a litt
le
dihedral at least gives me a CHANCE to get back on the ground safe using ru
dder
if the entire control stick assembly falls out of the airplane :)
But with this little dihedral, I cannot imagine the Kolb responding WELL to
rudder
like other "classic" ultralights, Quicksilvers, etc.
But... I am without a doubt the world's LOWEST time Kolb pilot, about 35 or
45
minutes total flight time in this Firestar and maybe another 30 minutes in
Jimmy's
Mark 3. So I can easily be wrong.
I understand completely what George is saying, I would be a much more diffi
cult
student for a UL instructor than someone with no flight time. The only thin
g
I will disagree with George about is that as a sailplane pilot we learned t
o use
the rudder continuously and we learned about micrometeorology, localized wi
nds,
eddy currents behind trees, etc.
My big problem is that I remember all of this fondly but it has been 30 yea
rs.
So it is not at the front of my thinking anymore. Flying a lovely old antiq
ue
C-172 has spoiled me and put 9 years of rust on what were once reasonably g
ood
stick and rudder skills.
(Part of why I wanted this airplane is because I wanted to grind off all th
at rust.
See if I could go back and find that young sharp pilot I used to know)
With all sincere respect for John H, I will leave the spins and aerobatics
in a
Kolb to him. He recently posted on the Kolb List "If you want to do aerobat
ics
go get a Pitts..." Excellent advice :)
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com<http://www.ezflaphandle.com> - safety & performance u
pgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net<http://www.grantstar.net> - winning proposals f
or non-profit and for-profit entities
--------------------------------------------
On Thu, 8/9/18, John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com> wrote:
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Date: Thursday, August 9, 2018, 2:35 PM
Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
I can't speak for other ULs, only Kolbs
and a couple flights in the Howland Honey Bee (too many
years ago to remember all its flight characteristics).
IMHO Kolbs are not rudder airplanes, based on my own flying
experience with them. I've found that the Kolbs are
more aileron aircraft, with a little rudder to keep them
trimmed, and of course more rudder on takeoff, landing, and
taxiing. Maybe I'm different because I still have a
lot of rotary wing stuck in my head after all these
years. I don't know.
Once the Kolb is trimmed up in yaw, I
can put my feet on the deck, and fly the Kolb with aileron
and elevator, trim ball centered, making coordinated
turns. The aileron geometry is really good on
Kolbs. Homer got that right.
That's my experience and I am sticking
to it. I can't speak for other ULs because I have only
flown one other UL other than Kolbs, Burt Howland's little
biplane, the Honey Bee. It was a little doll
baby. Burt and Ellen Howland, rest in peace my
friends, attended The Ultralight Flight Farm in NY, 1988-89,
where I met them. They were a lot of fun. I
didn't ask, but Burt offered me the chance to fly his
classic looking little bird. Landing was a no
brainer. Set it up on final at 25 mph, hold that
attitude, and a tiny flare, it's on the ground. I
can't remember if the Honey Bee was a rudder plane or
not. Been too long ago. Certainly wasn't an
Aeronca Champ. ;-)
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: Thursday, August 09, 2018 3:23
PM
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Flutter /
Firestar Test Flight #2
George Helton <gdhelton@gmail.com>
Well guys, we have sure beaten this
thread to death.
And this I hope this will be the last
of my input.
Bill, you are are GA/ Sailplane Pilot.
Youve now entered the world of flying an all new category
of flight. You have developed some habits that will not
serve you well in ultralight type aircraft. As a former
ultralight instructor I can say with confidence that the
worst times were spent converting GA pilots to UL pilots
because, They already knew how to fly.
That being said, youre not flying a
1400lb spam can anymore. Youre a butterfly or
hummingbird. You need a new mind set. Every little change in
wind direction, wind speed, thermals, hills and tree lines
will change whats going on inflight. Ultralights are not
aileron controlled aircraft. They are primarily rudder,
elevator and throttle. You know how to control speed. Stick
forward, fast. Stick back, slow. Throttle forward,up.
Throttle back, down. Rudder is everything, learn
to have busy feet. Takeoff, cruise and decent. Think feet,
feet, feet... you cannot let you feet get lazy in an
ultralight.Thats from the time you taxi to the time you
park at the end of the flight. If the nose goes right on
takeoff, push the left pedal. If your nose is lifting at
cruise push it down and you might want to adjust you
throttle a bit. Find your best climb speed and use it. Find
your decent or guide speed and use it. Learn to feed your
throttle in slowly on takeoff and redu!
ce it slowly upon approach. Fly the
friggin plane. Youre in charge.
Fly it all the way to the ground and
then keep flying it.
Stop Engineering and go out and enjoy
the airplane youve worked so hard at completing. Your
Firestar will never fly like my Firestar or Johns MKIII.
Learn to fly an ULTRALIGHT. Learn your airplane, and learn
to fly it well. Get 50 hours in the air and on the ground in
it and then maybe we might change some things. Flying is
easy! Its landing and all the stuff on the ground that
will screw ya up. Love ya man, go flying.
George H.
Firestar, FS100, 2702 Hirth
14GDH
Mesick, Michigan
gdhelton@gmail.com
Sent from my iPhone
> On Aug 9, 2018, at 2:48 PM, John
Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
wrote:
>
> --> Kolb-List message posted
by: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
>
> Kolbs produce negligible
P-factor. Can't remember where I got that
tidbit. Yaw problems on takeoff are probably prop wash
on the tail section, as you mentioned.
>
> john h
> mkIII
> Titus, Alabama
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com]
On Behalf Of Stuart Harner
> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2018
1:27 PM
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Flutter /
Firestar Test Flight #2
>
> --> Kolb-List message posted
by: "Stuart Harner" <stuart@harnerfarm.net>
>
> Hi Bill,
>
> Good to hear about your safe and
successful 2nd. Flight.
>
> First question: Do you know your
ASI is accurate? You can get a speedometer (GPS based) app
for your phone and do a straight path for a couple of miles,
then repeat the other direction for a quick and dirty check.
Won't be perfect but is good for a quick verification.
>
> Next, yes to the clockwise prop
and left rudder. My Firefly does exactly the same thing.
P-factor should cause it to turn left but it does not. We
had quite a discussion about this back after my first
flights. Short version of the conclusion is that prop wash
hitting the right side of the vertical stabilizer is more
powerful than P-factor and easily overrides it. I have
confirmed this by observing the tail while warming up the
engine. Dead bugs collect on the right side of the vertical
and the rudder deflects to the left. The pusher
configuration with a low boom tube presents no resistance
between the prop and the tail unlike something more
conventional that has all that covered fuselage to
"straighten out" the airflow between prop and tail.
>
> Advice (on par with the price of
it): Don't go messing with the tail until you get the proper
cruise set up with RPM/Pitch and confirm the ASI. Also,
don't change more than one thing at a time between flights.
You can easily confuse yourself and muddy the results by
trying two things at once, no matter how un-related they
seem. Been there, done that.
>
> Question two: How was the elevator
pressure during the stalls, descent and climb out compared
to "cruise"?
>
> You're doing great! Keep it up.
>
> Stuart
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com]
On Behalf Of Bill Berle
> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2018
12:16 PM
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Kolb-List: Flutter /
Firestar Test Flight #2
>
> --> Kolb-List message posted
by: Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
>
> Please let me clarify my comment
so it does not accidentally cause a safety issue for
someone. I believe that adding weight forward of the hinge
line works against flutter. BUT I did NOT mean to imply that
spades would replace or equal the Kolb tip weights. Those
are there for a reason, as many of you know from experience.
Flutter would scare the s*** out of me in a Kolb or any
other aircraft.
>
> Test Flight Report for flight #2
>
> I flew my Firestar again yesterday
morning for about 20-25 minutes. I was a little more
confident in everything, so I took it right up to 1500 feet
above the airport and flew several laps above the runway.
>
> The aircraft needed a few pounds
of forward pressure on the stick, as I have described
before. However, this was at an indicated airspeed of only
45 miles per hour. A lot slower than one would expect for a
properly rigged aircraft. I realized at this point that I
needed to raise the leading edge of the stabilizer as a
couple of people have mentioned. A "trim tab" for this would
have been pretty large and bent pretty far.
>
> Also on the test flight, I paid
specific attention to the rudder trim. The aircraft required
five or six pounds (guess) of LEFT rudder in level flight,
again at the 40-45 mile an hour speeds I was flying. It also
needs left rudder on takeoff to keep it straight. This was
very surprising to me because the propeller turns the
"conventional" direction, meaning that it is turning the
same direction as a Cessna or J-3 Cub, where you need right
rudder on takeoff. The torque from the engine, especially
with a high ratio gearbox and a big wide propeller, SHOULD
be trying to roll and yaw the aircraft to the left,
requiring right rudder. But this is the opposite of how it
was in flight.
>
> I briefly let off of the rudder
pressure and the airplane yawed to the right significantly.
The air flow direction and the view from the seat verified
this without a doubt... so it does not seem that this
problem could be caused by the rudder pedals not being
adjusted well.
>
> So I have a QUESTION for the
experienced Kolb builders/owners here: Dies the stock Kolb
engine mount have a thrust offset angle built into it??? The
way this aircraft is behaving would be explained by the Kolb
fuselage having several degrees of RIGHT thrust built into
the engine mounts. Perhaps this would have been done to
compensate for engines that turn the other direction . I'm
having trouble understanding how an engine that turns a
"right hand" propeller is making it steer to the RIGHT
instead of left.
>
> One other thing I tried in flight
was to slow the aircraft down. This seems pretty funny
starting from 40 and 45 miles an hour, but I had plenty of
altitude. With the vortex generators installed, and having
read the flight reports from several other Kolb owners, I
fully expected the aircraft to stall at 30 MPH. But as I
slowed down to 35 MPH it gently stalled. I repeated this
again after speeding back up to 40, to make sure I had
actually stalled it the first time. Once again at 35
indicated, it provided a fairly gentle stall. No significant
buffeting or shaking before the break, but a pretty gentle
straight-ahead stall with the nose dropping 20 degrees when
it did let go.
>
> This was disappointing, since I
installed the VG's specifically to get the lower stall speed
they usually provide. To be honest, I was pretty
disappointed, since the old Taylorcrafts and J-3 Cubs stall
just under 40 MPH, and a big part of the reason I wanted an
ultralight style aircraft was to fly really slow into really
short landings.
>
> The last thing I tried to pay
specific attention to was the heavy ailerons getting better
at lower speeds. But again on this flight my speeds were
already slow..I moved the stick left and right and it has
adequate roll control, but the stick forces were far far
higher than the elevator or rudder forces, and this was
again at only 40 and 45 indicated. Looking out at the
ailerons as I moved them, they were deflecting equally along
their length... meaning that the outboard tip of the aileron
waas moving as much as the inboard end of the ailerons were
moving. The ailerons were not "twisting" very much. Since I
am not yet familiar with the Kolb I was not able to assess
whether the amount of aileron movement in flight was the
same as it was on the ground (with the same amount of stick
movement).
>
> I realized that I had taken too
much pitch out of the propeller. The engine RPM was
5200-5300 when I was flying around at 40-45 miles an hour,
and I specifically wanted to be in the "cruising" RPM range
instead of maximum continuous power (which is 5800). So I
will probably put two degrees more pitch into the propeller
before the next test flight.
>
> After the flight I spent the rest
of the day making and installing the parts to raise the
leading edge of the tail. I raised the leading edge of the
tail by 3/4 of an inch. using short steel extension plates.
>
> Again, my most important question
for Kolbers is whether the Kolb Firestar 2 fuselage is known
to have tight hand thrust offset built into the welded
engine mount. Only this would explain why an engine that
should be pulling the airplane left would actually be
pulling it right.
>
> Bill Berle
> www.ezflaphandle.com<http://www.ezflaphandle.com> -
safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net<http://www.grantstar.net> -
winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
>
>
--------------------------------------------
> On Thu, 8/9/18, John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
wrote:
>
> Subject: RE: Kolb-List:
Firestar/HKS First Flight
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Date: Thursday, August 9, 2018,
5:10 AM
>
> --> Kolb-List message posted
by: "John
> Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
>
> True. Some. But not enough
to get
> the job done, unless additional
weight is added to equal the out of balance aileron.
>
> When I originally built my MKIII,
> before Kolb admitted there might
be a problem with aileron flutter, I fabricated some
really neat counter balance weights and attached them,
very securely to 6061 plates I fixed to the inboard
end of each aileron. First couple flights went
well during testing. Then, entering the traffic
pattern at my local airport, the MKIII went into
violent flutter. Snatched the stick right out of
my hand. Chopping power and corralling the stick
as far back as I could get it, gets it out of
flutter. I had learned that exercise early on
with my US and FS, but Kolb wasn't buying it.
Landed and promptly removed my beautiful counter
balance weights.
>
> Right about 85 mph, where the
airplane
> and I liked to cruise was right on
the edge of flutter. Turbulence would set it off
quickly. I flew the MKIII in this condition to
Sun and Fun 1993, to Homer's to paint the Lasers, and
then to Oshkosh. At Oshkosh I had to fly a photo
shoot with a Cessna 208. He was having trouble slowing
to 85 and I was going into flutter at 85. It was
a tough flight, but we got'er done.
>
> I was getting ready to do my
flight
> around CONUS and up to Alaska,
wondering how I was going to make it with the flutter
problem. I dreamed up all kinds of cures to keep
the aileron control linkage as tight as possible, but
I was still susceptible to flutter.
>
> Finally, the next year at Sun and
Fun
> Dick Rahill got the factory FS
into severe flutter. He was white as a ghost and
visibly shaken when he finally got on the ground after
flying from Lakeland South to the UL strip on the edge
of a severe thunderstorm. A week later I got a
set of FS aileron counter balance weights from Kolb,
made them fit my MKIII, and never again experienced
aileron flutter. It was wonderful and I was a
month from beginning my big flight of 1994. I
had been flying with flutter for 10 years by this
time.
>
> Don't know why my design didn't
work,
> but Kolb's did.
>
> My design was ahead of the hinge
line
> with bullet shaped weights like I
had seen on other aircraft. Guess I stuck them
on the wrong end of the aileron because they
aggravated the situation.
>
> john h
> mkIII
> Titus, Alabama
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com]
> On Behalf Of Bill Berle
> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2018
11:42
> PM
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List:
Firestar/HKS
> First Flight
>
> --> Kolb-List message posted
by:
> Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
>
> Spades will add weight forward of
the
> hinge line, which is usually
working AGAINST flutter.
>
> Bill Berle
>
> On Wed, 8/8/18, Denny Baber <baberdk@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> My understanding is
that spades
> are for aileron flutter.
>
>
> Respectfully,
> Dennis BaberCape Coral,
> Flbaberdk@gmail.com305-814-7218
> Stay
> Curious
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> The Kolb-List Email Forum -
> Navigator to browse
> List Un/Subscription,
> 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
> - MATRONICS
WEB FORUMS -
> via the Web Forums!
> - NEW MATRONICS LIST
WIKI -
> Email List Wiki!
> - List Contribution
Web Site -
> support!
>
> -Matt Dralle, List
Admin.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
The Kolb-List Email Forum -
Navigator to browse
List Un/Subscription,
7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
- MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
via the Web Forums!
- NEW MATRONICS LIST WIKI -
Email List Wiki!
- List Contribution Web Site -
support!
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
________________________________ Message 18 _____________________________
_______
Time: 03:39:23 PM PST US
From: George Helton <gdhelton@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
I wasnt implying that Kolbs are rudder controlled aircraft. I apologize if
that
was way it was interrupted. The Kolb is the exception. My instructing was d
one
in Spectrum Beavers and Quiksilvers. High dihedral makes very stable, very
rudder
oriented aircraft.
My Firestar is also aileron oriented. I to can cruise around with my feet f
lat
on the floor. And I love it. Homer did get it right. That being said, my Fi
restar
on takeoff and landing requires good foot work to be flown properly. Especi
ally
in crosswind conditions. Lazy feet and improper use of flight controls use
on the ground make for expensive repairs. Time and money Id rather spend o
n
flying.
My point is that you have learn to fly and enjoy your airplane, before you
go making
it a different airplane.
George H.
Firestar, FS100, 2702 Hirth
14GDH
Mesick, Michigan
gdhelton@gmail.com
Sent from my iPhone
> On Aug 9, 2018, at 5:57 PM, Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>
> I also have to disagree regarding the Kolb being a "rudder airplane". The
stock
plans built Firestar has zero or maybe 1/2 degree of dihedral in the wings.
At least on the plans I have. My Firestar has maybe 3 degrees total, or one
and
one half degree each side. I did that as much for appearance as I did for a
ny
other reason. Also, as an old washed up model airplane pilot, having a litt
le
dihedral at least gives me a CHANCE to get back on the ground safe using ru
dder
if the entire control stick assembly falls out of the airplane :)
>
> But with this little dihedral, I cannot imagine the Kolb responding WELL
to rudder
like other "classic" ultralights, Quicksilvers, etc.
>
> But... I am without a doubt the world's LOWEST time Kolb pilot, about 35
or 45
minutes total flight time in this Firestar and maybe another 30 minutes in
Jimmy's
Mark 3. So I can easily be wrong.
>
> I understand completely what George is saying, I would be a much more dif
ficult
student for a UL instructor than someone with no flight time. The only thin
g
I will disagree with George about is that as a sailplane pilot we learned t
o
use the rudder continuously and we learned about micrometeorology, localize
d
winds, eddy currents behind trees, etc.
>
> My big problem is that I remember all of this fondly but it has been 30 y
ears.
So it is not at the front of my thinking anymore. Flying a lovely old antiq
ue
C-172 has spoiled me and put 9 years of rust on what were once reasonably g
ood
stick and rudder skills.
>
> (Part of why I wanted this airplane is because I wanted to grind off all
that
rust. See if I could go back and find that young sharp pilot I used to know
)
>
> With all sincere respect for John H, I will leave the spins and aerobatic
s in
a Kolb to him. He recently posted on the Kolb List "If you want to do aerob
atics
go get a Pitts..." Excellent advice :)
>
> Bill Berle
> www.ezflaphandle.com<http://www.ezflaphandle.com> - safety & performance
upgrade for light aircraft
> www.grantstar.net<http://www.grantstar.net> - winning proposals
for non-profit and for-profit entities
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Thu, 8/9/18, John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com> wrote:
>
> Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Date: Thursday, August 9, 2018, 2:35 PM
>
> Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
>
> I can't speak for other ULs, only Kolbs
> and a couple flights in the Howland Honey Bee (too many
> years ago to remember all its flight characteristics).
> IMHO Kolbs are not rudder airplanes, based on my own flying
> experience with them. I've found that the Kolbs are
> more aileron aircraft, with a little rudder to keep them
> trimmed, and of course more rudder on takeoff, landing, and
> taxiing. Maybe I'm different because I still have a
> lot of rotary wing stuck in my head after all these
> years. I don't know.
>
> Once the Kolb is trimmed up in yaw, I
> can put my feet on the deck, and fly the Kolb with aileron
> and elevator, trim ball centered, making coordinated
> turns. The aileron geometry is really good on
> Kolbs. Homer got that right.
>
> That's my experience and I am sticking
> to it. I can't speak for other ULs because I have only
> flown one other UL other than Kolbs, Burt Howland's little
> biplane, the Honey Bee. It was a little doll
> baby. Burt and Ellen Howland, rest in peace my
> friends, attended The Ultralight Flight Farm in NY, 1988-89,
> where I met them. They were a lot of fun. I
> didn't ask, but Burt offered me the chance to fly his
> classic looking little bird. Landing was a no
> brainer. Set it up on final at 25 mph, hold that
> attitude, and a tiny flare, it's on the ground. I
> can't remember if the Honey Bee was a rudder plane or
> not. Been too long ago. Certainly wasn't an
> Aeronca Champ. ;-)
>
> 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: Thursday, August 09, 2018 3:23
> PM
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Flutter /
> Firestar Test Flight #2
>
> George Helton <gdhelton@gmail.com>
>
> Well guys, we have sure beaten this
> thread to death.
> And this I hope this will be the last
> of my input.
> Bill, you are are GA/ Sailplane Pilot.
> Youve now entered the world of flying an all new category
> of flight. You have developed some habits that will not
> serve you well in ultralight type aircraft. As a former
> ultralight instructor I can say with confidence that the
> worst times were spent converting GA pilots to UL pilots
> because, They already knew how to fly.
> That being said, youre not flying a
> 1400lb spam can anymore. Youre a butterfly or
> hummingbird. You need a new mind set. Every little change in
> wind direction, wind speed, thermals, hills and tree lines
> will change whats going on inflight. Ultralights are not
> aileron controlled aircraft. They are primarily rudder,
> elevator and throttle. You know how to control speed. Stick
> forward, fast. Stick back, slow. Throttle forward,up.
> Throttle back, down. Rudder is everything, learn
> to have busy feet. Takeoff, cruise and decent. Think feet,
> feet, feet... you cannot let you feet get lazy in an
> ultralight.Thats from the time you taxi to the time you
> park at the end of the flight. If the nose goes right on
> takeoff, push the left pedal. If your nose is lifting at
> cruise push it down and you might want to adjust you
> throttle a bit. Find your best climb speed and use it. Find
> your decent or guide speed and use it. Learn to feed your
> throttle in slowly on takeoff and redu!
> ce it slowly upon approach. Fly the
> friggin plane. Youre in charge.
> Fly it all the way to the ground and
> then keep flying it.
> Stop Engineering and go out and enjoy
> the airplane youve worked so hard at completing. Your
> Firestar will never fly like my Firestar or Johns MKIII.
> Learn to fly an ULTRALIGHT. Learn your airplane, and learn
> to fly it well. Get 50 hours in the air and on the ground in
> it and then maybe we might change some things. Flying is
> easy! Its landing and all the stuff on the ground that
> will screw ya up. Love ya man, go flying.
>
> George H.
> Firestar, FS100, 2702 Hirth
> 14GDH
> Mesick, Michigan
> gdhelton@gmail.com
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Aug 9, 2018, at 2:48 PM, John
> Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> --> Kolb-List message posted
> by: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
>>
>> Kolbs produce negligible
> P-factor. Can't remember where I got that
> tidbit. Yaw problems on takeoff are probably prop wash
> on the tail section, as you mentioned.
>>
>> john h
>> mkIII
>> Titus, Alabama
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com]
> On Behalf Of Stuart Harner
>> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2018
> 1:27 PM
>> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Flutter /
> Firestar Test Flight #2
>>
>> --> Kolb-List message posted
> by: "Stuart Harner" <stuart@harnerfarm.net>
>>
>> Hi Bill,
>>
>> Good to hear about your safe and
> successful 2nd. Flight.
>>
>> First question: Do you know your
> ASI is accurate? You can get a speedometer (GPS based) app
> for your phone and do a straight path for a couple of miles,
> then repeat the other direction for a quick and dirty check.
> Won't be perfect but is good for a quick verification.
>>
>> Next, yes to the clockwise prop
> and left rudder. My Firefly does exactly the same thing.
> P-factor should cause it to turn left but it does not. We
> had quite a discussion about this back after my first
> flights. Short version of the conclusion is that prop wash
> hitting the right side of the vertical stabilizer is more
> powerful than P-factor and easily overrides it. I have
> confirmed this by observing the tail while warming up the
> engine. Dead bugs collect on the right side of the vertical
> and the rudder deflects to the left. The pusher
> configuration with a low boom tube presents no resistance
> between the prop and the tail unlike something more
> conventional that has all that covered fuselage to
> "straighten out" the airflow between prop and tail.
>>
>> Advice (on par with the price of
> it): Don't go messing with the tail until you get the proper
> cruise set up with RPM/Pitch and confirm the ASI. Also,
> don't change more than one thing at a time between flights.
> You can easily confuse yourself and muddy the results by
> trying two things at once, no matter how un-related they
> seem. Been there, done that.
>>
>> Question two: How was the elevator
> pressure during the stalls, descent and climb out compared
> to "cruise"?
>>
>> You're doing great! Keep it up.
>>
>> Stuart
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com]
> On Behalf Of Bill Berle
>> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2018
> 12:16 PM
>> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Kolb-List: Flutter /
> Firestar Test Flight #2
>>
>> --> Kolb-List message posted
> by: Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
>>
>> Please let me clarify my comment
> so it does not accidentally cause a safety issue for
> someone. I believe that adding weight forward of the hinge
> line works against flutter. BUT I did NOT mean to imply that
> spades would replace or equal the Kolb tip weights. Those
> are there for a reason, as many of you know from experience.
> Flutter would scare the s*** out of me in a Kolb or any
> other aircraft.
>>
>> Test Flight Report for flight #2
>>
>> I flew my Firestar again yesterday
> morning for about 20-25 minutes. I was a little more
> confident in everything, so I took it right up to 1500 feet
> above the airport and flew several laps above the runway.
>>
>> The aircraft needed a few pounds
> of forward pressure on the stick, as I have described
> before. However, this was at an indicated airspeed of only
> 45 miles per hour. A lot slower than one would expect for a
> properly rigged aircraft. I realized at this point that I
> needed to raise the leading edge of the stabilizer as a
> couple of people have mentioned. A "trim tab" for this would
> have been pretty large and bent pretty far.
>>
>> Also on the test flight, I paid
> specific attention to the rudder trim. The aircraft required
> five or six pounds (guess) of LEFT rudder in level flight,
> again at the 40-45 mile an hour speeds I was flying. It also
> needs left rudder on takeoff to keep it straight. This was
> very surprising to me because the propeller turns the
> "conventional" direction, meaning that it is turning the
> same direction as a Cessna or J-3 Cub, where you need right
> rudder on takeoff. The torque from the engine, especially
> with a high ratio gearbox and a big wide propeller, SHOULD
> be trying to roll and yaw the aircraft to the left,
> requiring right rudder. But this is the opposite of how it
> was in flight.
>>
>> I briefly let off of the rudder
> pressure and the airplane yawed to the right significantly.
> The air flow direction and the view from the seat verified
> this without a doubt... so it does not seem that this
> problem could be caused by the rudder pedals not being
> adjusted well.
>>
>> So I have a QUESTION for the
> experienced Kolb builders/owners here: Dies the stock Kolb
> engine mount have a thrust offset angle built into it??? The
> way this aircraft is behaving would be explained by the Kolb
> fuselage having several degrees of RIGHT thrust built into
> the engine mounts. Perhaps this would have been done to
> compensate for engines that turn the other direction . I'm
> having trouble understanding how an engine that turns a
> "right hand" propeller is making it steer to the RIGHT
> instead of left.
>>
>> One other thing I tried in flight
> was to slow the aircraft down. This seems pretty funny
> starting from 40 and 45 miles an hour, but I had plenty of
> altitude. With the vortex generators installed, and having
> read the flight reports from several other Kolb owners, I
> fully expected the aircraft to stall at 30 MPH. But as I
> slowed down to 35 MPH it gently stalled. I repeated this
> again after speeding back up to 40, to make sure I had
> actually stalled it the first time. Once again at 35
> indicated, it provided a fairly gentle stall. No significant
> buffeting or shaking before the break, but a pretty gentle
> straight-ahead stall with the nose dropping 20 degrees when
> it did let go.
>>
>> This was disappointing, since I
> installed the VG's specifically to get the lower stall speed
> they usually provide. To be honest, I was pretty
> disappointed, since the old Taylorcrafts and J-3 Cubs stall
> just under 40 MPH, and a big part of the reason I wanted an
> ultralight style aircraft was to fly really slow into really
> short landings.
>>
>> The last thing I tried to pay
> specific attention to was the heavy ailerons getting better
> at lower speeds. But again on this flight my speeds were
> already slow..I moved the stick left and right and it has
> adequate roll control, but the stick forces were far far
> higher than the elevator or rudder forces, and this was
> again at only 40 and 45 indicated. Looking out at the
> ailerons as I moved them, they were deflecting equally along
> their length... meaning that the outboard tip of the aileron
> waas moving as much as the inboard end of the ailerons were
> moving. The ailerons were not "twisting" very much. Since I
> am not yet familiar with the Kolb I was not able to assess
> whether the amount of aileron movement in flight was the
> same as it was on the ground (with the same amount of stick
> movement).
>>
>> I realized that I had taken too
> much pitch out of the propeller. The engine RPM was
> 5200-5300 when I was flying around at 40-45 miles an hour,
> and I specifically wanted to be in the "cruising" RPM range
> instead of maximum continuous power (which is 5800). So I
> will probably put two degrees more pitch into the propeller
> before the next test flight.
>>
>> After the flight I spent the rest
> of the day making and installing the parts to raise the
> leading edge of the tail. I raised the leading edge of the
> tail by 3/4 of an inch. using short steel extension plates.
>>
>> Again, my most important question
> for Kolbers is whether the Kolb Firestar 2 fuselage is known
> to have tight hand thrust offset built into the welded
> engine mount. Only this would explain why an engine that
> should be pulling the airplane left would actually be
> pulling it right.
>>
>> Bill Berle
>> www.ezflaphandle.com<http://www.ezflaphandle.com> -
> safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
> www.grantstar.net<http://www.grantstar.net> -
> winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
> --------------------------------------------
>>> On Thu, 8/9/18, John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Subject: RE: Kolb-List:
> Firestar/HKS First Flight
>> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
>> Date: Thursday, August 9, 2018,
> 5:10 AM
>>
>> --> Kolb-List message posted
> by: "John
>> Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
>>
>> True. Some. But not enough
> to get
>> the job done, unless additional
> weight is added to equal the out of balance aileron.
>>
>> When I originally built my MKIII,
>> before Kolb admitted there might
> be a problem with aileron flutter, I fabricated some
> really neat counter balance weights and attached them,
> very securely to 6061 plates I fixed to the inboard
> end of each aileron. First couple flights went
> well during testing. Then, entering the traffic
> pattern at my local airport, the MKIII went into
> violent flutter. Snatched the stick right out of
> my hand. Chopping power and corralling the stick
> as far back as I could get it, gets it out of
> flutter. I had learned that exercise early on
> with my US and FS, but Kolb wasn't buying it.
> Landed and promptly removed my beautiful counter
> balance weights.
>>
>> Right about 85 mph, where the
> airplane
>> and I liked to cruise was right on
> the edge of flutter. Turbulence would set it off
> quickly. I flew the MKIII in this condition to
> Sun and Fun 1993, to Homer's to paint the Lasers, and
> then to Oshkosh. At Oshkosh I had to fly a photo
> shoot with a Cessna 208. He was having trouble slowing
> to 85 and I was going into flutter at 85. It was
> a tough flight, but we got'er done.
>>
>> I was getting ready to do my
> flight
>> around CONUS and up to Alaska,
> wondering how I was going to make it with the flutter
> problem. I dreamed up all kinds of cures to keep
> the aileron control linkage as tight as possible, but
> I was still susceptible to flutter.
>>
>> Finally, the next year at Sun and
> Fun
>> Dick Rahill got the factory FS
> into severe flutter. He was white as a ghost and
> visibly shaken when he finally got on the ground after
> flying from Lakeland South to the UL strip on the edge
> of a severe thunderstorm. A week later I got a
> set of FS aileron counter balance weights from Kolb,
> made them fit my MKIII, and never again experienced
> aileron flutter. It was wonderful and I was a
> month from beginning my big flight of 1994. I
> had been flying with flutter for 10 years by this
> time.
>>
>> Don't know why my design didn't
> work,
>> but Kolb's did.
>>
>> My design was ahead of the hinge
> line
>> with bullet shaped weights like I
> had seen on other aircraft. Guess I stuck them
> on the wrong end of the aileron because they
> aggravated the situation.
>>
>> john h
>> mkIII
>> Titus, Alabama
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com]
>> On Behalf Of Bill Berle
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2018
> 11:42
>> PM
>> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Kolb-List:
> Firestar/HKS
>> First Flight
>>
>> --> Kolb-List message posted
> by:
>> Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
>>
>> Spades will add weight forward of
> the
>> hinge line, which is usually
> working AGAINST flutter.
>>
>> Bill Berle
>>
>> On Wed, 8/8/18, Denny Baber <baberdk@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> My understanding is
> that spades
>> are for aileron flutter.
>>
>>
>> Respectfully,
>> Dennis BaberCape Coral,
>> Flbaberdk@gmail.com305-814-7218
>> Stay
>> Curious
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> The Kolb-List Email Forum -
>> Navigator to browse
>> List Un/Subscription,
>> 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
>> - MATRONICS
> WEB FORUMS -
>> via the Web Forums!
>> - NEW MATRONICS LIST
> WIKI -
>> Email List Wiki!
>> - List Contribution
> Web Site -
>> support!
>>
>> -Matt Dralle, List
> Admin.
>
>
> The Kolb-List Email Forum -
> Navigator to browse
> List Un/Subscription,
> 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
> - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
> via the Web Forums!
> - NEW MATRONICS LIST WIKI -
> Email List Wiki!
> - List Contribution Web Site -
> support!
>
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>
>
________________________________ Message 19 _____________________________
_______
Time: 04:00:50 PM PST US
From: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
Absolutely! I agree with you 100%. Glad you set me straight.
Every once in a while we get a rash of new pilots spreading the main gear a
nd breaking
airplanes because of what our buddy Pat Ladd, RIP, in England, called
"Kolb quit". For some reason folks could not understand why the Kolb had t
his
nasty characteristic of falling out of the sky two or more feet above the a
ir
strip. Poor old Kolb had nothing to do with "Kolb quit", but it had everyt
hing
to do with pilot error, not flying the aircraft. Can't blame poor pilotage
on the airplane. If we keep the Kolb above stall speed, it won't stall and
it
will not commit "Kolb quit".
Best way to learn to fly the Kolb is get out there and fly a lot, every day
if
you can. The more you fly the more you learn about your Kolb. It is a sup
er
safe aircraft if flown reasonably. Normally, only time I broke something w
as
when I was pushing the limits, exploring unknown territory. You couldn't p
ay
me to do that stuff again. I don't have the guts or I have a lot more sens
e now
than I did 25-30 years ago.
I believe in learning to fly the Kolb engine off, make dead stick landings.
When
the engine surprises you by getting real quiet, you'll know just what to do
and how the aircraft will be with a dead stick. It is different from an id
ling
prop.
The main thing is get out there and have fun with your Kolb.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@m
atronics.com] On Behalf Of George Helton
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2018 5:39 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
I wasnt implying that Kolbs are rudder controlled aircraft. I apologize if
that
was way it was interrupted. The Kolb is the exception. My instructing was d
one
in Spectrum Beavers and Quiksilvers. High dihedral makes very stable, very
rudder
oriented aircraft.
My Firestar is also aileron oriented. I to can cruise around with my feet f
lat
on the floor. And I love it. Homer did get it right. That being said, my Fi
restar
on takeoff and landing requires good foot work to be flown properly. Especi
ally
in crosswind conditions. Lazy feet and improper use of flight controls use
on the ground make for expensive repairs. Time and money Id rather spend o
n
flying.
My point is that you have learn to fly and enjoy your airplane, before you
go making
it a different airplane.
George H.
Firestar, FS100, 2702 Hirth
14GDH
Mesick, Michigan
gdhelton@gmail.com
Sent from my iPhone
> On Aug 9, 2018, at 5:57 PM, Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>
> I also have to disagree regarding the Kolb being a "rudder airplane". The
stock
plans built Firestar has zero or maybe 1/2 degree of dihedral in the wings.
At least on the plans I have. My Firestar has maybe 3 degrees total, or one
and
one half degree each side. I did that as much for appearance as I did for a
ny
other reason. Also, as an old washed up model airplane pilot, having a litt
le
dihedral at least gives me a CHANCE to get back on the ground safe using ru
dder
if the entire control stick assembly falls out of the airplane :)
>
> But with this little dihedral, I cannot imagine the Kolb responding WELL
to rudder
like other "classic" ultralights, Quicksilvers, etc.
>
> But... I am without a doubt the world's LOWEST time Kolb pilot, about 35
or 45
minutes total flight time in this Firestar and maybe another 30 minutes in
Jimmy's
Mark 3. So I can easily be wrong.
>
> I understand completely what George is saying, I would be a much more dif
ficult
student for a UL instructor than someone with no flight time. The only thin
g
I will disagree with George about is that as a sailplane pilot we learned t
o
use the rudder continuously and we learned about micrometeorology, localize
d
winds, eddy currents behind trees, etc.
>
> My big problem is that I remember all of this fondly but it has been 30 y
ears.
So it is not at the front of my thinking anymore. Flying a lovely old antiq
ue
C-172 has spoiled me and put 9 years of rust on what were once reasonably g
ood
stick and rudder skills.
>
> (Part of why I wanted this airplane is because I wanted to grind off all
that
rust. See if I could go back and find that young sharp pilot I used to know
)
>
> With all sincere respect for John H, I will leave the spins and aerobatic
s in
a Kolb to him. He recently posted on the Kolb List "If you want to do aerob
atics
go get a Pitts..." Excellent advice :)
>
> Bill Berle
> www.ezflaphandle.com<http://www.ezflaphandle.com> - safety & performance
upgrade for light aircraft
> www.grantstar.net<http://www.grantstar.net> - winning proposals
for non-profit and for-profit entities
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Thu, 8/9/18, John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com> wrote:
>
> Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Date: Thursday, August 9, 2018, 2:35 PM
>
> Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
>
> I can't speak for other ULs, only Kolbs
> and a couple flights in the Howland Honey Bee (too many
> years ago to remember all its flight characteristics).
> IMHO Kolbs are not rudder airplanes, based on my own flying
> experience with them. I've found that the Kolbs are
> more aileron aircraft, with a little rudder to keep them
> trimmed, and of course more rudder on takeoff, landing, and
> taxiing. Maybe I'm different because I still have a
> lot of rotary wing stuck in my head after all these
> years. I don't know.
>
> Once the Kolb is trimmed up in yaw, I
> can put my feet on the deck, and fly the Kolb with aileron
> and elevator, trim ball centered, making coordinated
> turns. The aileron geometry is really good on
> Kolbs. Homer got that right.
>
> That's my experience and I am sticking
> to it. I can't speak for other ULs because I have only
> flown one other UL other than Kolbs, Burt Howland's little
> biplane, the Honey Bee. It was a little doll
> baby. Burt and Ellen Howland, rest in peace my
> friends, attended The Ultralight Flight Farm in NY, 1988-89,
> where I met them. They were a lot of fun. I
> didn't ask, but Burt offered me the chance to fly his
> classic looking little bird. Landing was a no
> brainer. Set it up on final at 25 mph, hold that
> attitude, and a tiny flare, it's on the ground. I
> can't remember if the Honey Bee was a rudder plane or
> not. Been too long ago. Certainly wasn't an
> Aeronca Champ. ;-)
>
> 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: Thursday, August 09, 2018 3:23
> PM
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Flutter /
> Firestar Test Flight #2
>
> George Helton <gdhelton@gmail.com>
>
> Well guys, we have sure beaten this
> thread to death.
> And this I hope this will be the last
> of my input.
> Bill, you are are GA/ Sailplane Pilot.
> Youve now entered the world of flying an all new category
> of flight. You have developed some habits that will not
> serve you well in ultralight type aircraft. As a former
> ultralight instructor I can say with confidence that the
> worst times were spent converting GA pilots to UL pilots
> because, They already knew how to fly.
> That being said, youre not flying a
> 1400lb spam can anymore. Youre a butterfly or
> hummingbird. You need a new mind set. Every little change in
> wind direction, wind speed, thermals, hills and tree lines
> will change whats going on inflight. Ultralights are not
> aileron controlled aircraft. They are primarily rudder,
> elevator and throttle. You know how to control speed. Stick
> forward, fast. Stick back, slow. Throttle forward,up.
> Throttle back, down. Rudder is everything, learn
> to have busy feet. Takeoff, cruise and decent. Think feet,
> feet, feet... you cannot let you feet get lazy in an
> ultralight.Thats from the time you taxi to the time you
> park at the end of the flight. If the nose goes right on
> takeoff, push the left pedal. If your nose is lifting at
> cruise push it down and you might want to adjust you
> throttle a bit. Find your best climb speed and use it. Find
> your decent or guide speed and use it. Learn to feed your
> throttle in slowly on takeoff and redu!
> ce it slowly upon approach. Fly the
> friggin plane. Youre in charge.
> Fly it all the way to the ground and
> then keep flying it.
> Stop Engineering and go out and enjoy
> the airplane youve worked so hard at completing. Your
> Firestar will never fly like my Firestar or Johns MKIII.
> Learn to fly an ULTRALIGHT. Learn your airplane, and learn
> to fly it well. Get 50 hours in the air and on the ground in
> it and then maybe we might change some things. Flying is
> easy! Its landing and all the stuff on the ground that
> will screw ya up. Love ya man, go flying.
>
> George H.
> Firestar, FS100, 2702 Hirth
> 14GDH
> Mesick, Michigan
> gdhelton@gmail.com
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Aug 9, 2018, at 2:48 PM, John
> Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> --> Kolb-List message posted
> by: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
>>
>> Kolbs produce negligible
> P-factor. Can't remember where I got that
> tidbit. Yaw problems on takeoff are probably prop wash
> on the tail section, as you mentioned.
>>
>> john h
>> mkIII
>> Titus, Alabama
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com]
> On Behalf Of Stuart Harner
>> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2018
> 1:27 PM
>> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Flutter /
> Firestar Test Flight #2
>>
>> --> Kolb-List message posted
> by: "Stuart Harner" <stuart@harnerfarm.net>
>>
>> Hi Bill,
>>
>> Good to hear about your safe and
> successful 2nd. Flight.
>>
>> First question: Do you know your
> ASI is accurate? You can get a speedometer (GPS based) app
> for your phone and do a straight path for a couple of miles,
> then repeat the other direction for a quick and dirty check.
> Won't be perfect but is good for a quick verification.
>>
>> Next, yes to the clockwise prop
> and left rudder. My Firefly does exactly the same thing.
> P-factor should cause it to turn left but it does not. We
> had quite a discussion about this back after my first
> flights. Short version of the conclusion is that prop wash
> hitting the right side of the vertical stabilizer is more
> powerful than P-factor and easily overrides it. I have
> confirmed this by observing the tail while warming up the
> engine. Dead bugs collect on the right side of the vertical
> and the rudder deflects to the left. The pusher
> configuration with a low boom tube presents no resistance
> between the prop and the tail unlike something more
> conventional that has all that covered fuselage to
> "straighten out" the airflow between prop and tail.
>>
>> Advice (on par with the price of
> it): Don't go messing with the tail until you get the proper
> cruise set up with RPM/Pitch and confirm the ASI. Also,
> don't change more than one thing at a time between flights.
> You can easily confuse yourself and muddy the results by
> trying two things at once, no matter how un-related they
> seem. Been there, done that.
>>
>> Question two: How was the elevator
> pressure during the stalls, descent and climb out compared
> to "cruise"?
>>
>> You're doing great! Keep it up.
>>
>> Stuart
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com]
> On Behalf Of Bill Berle
>> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2018
> 12:16 PM
>> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Kolb-List: Flutter /
> Firestar Test Flight #2
>>
>> --> Kolb-List message posted
> by: Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
>>
>> Please let me clarify my comment
> so it does not accidentally cause a safety issue for
> someone. I believe that adding weight forward of the hinge
> line works against flutter. BUT I did NOT mean to imply that
> spades would replace or equal the Kolb tip weights. Those
> are there for a reason, as many of you know from experience.
> Flutter would scare the s*** out of me in a Kolb or any
> other aircraft.
>>
>> Test Flight Report for flight #2
>>
>> I flew my Firestar again yesterday
> morning for about 20-25 minutes. I was a little more
> confident in everything, so I took it right up to 1500 feet
> above the airport and flew several laps above the runway.
>>
>> The aircraft needed a few pounds
> of forward pressure on the stick, as I have described
> before. However, this was at an indicated airspeed of only
> 45 miles per hour. A lot slower than one would expect for a
> properly rigged aircraft. I realized at this point that I
> needed to raise the leading edge of the stabilizer as a
> couple of people have mentioned. A "trim tab" for this would
> have been pretty large and bent pretty far.
>>
>> Also on the test flight, I paid
> specific attention to the rudder trim. The aircraft required
> five or six pounds (guess) of LEFT rudder in level flight,
> again at the 40-45 mile an hour speeds I was flying. It also
> needs left rudder on takeoff to keep it straight. This was
> very surprising to me because the propeller turns the
> "conventional" direction, meaning that it is turning the
> same direction as a Cessna or J-3 Cub, where you need right
> rudder on takeoff. The torque from the engine, especially
> with a high ratio gearbox and a big wide propeller, SHOULD
> be trying to roll and yaw the aircraft to the left,
> requiring right rudder. But this is the opposite of how it
> was in flight.
>>
>> I briefly let off of the rudder
> pressure and the airplane yawed to the right significantly.
> The air flow direction and the view from the seat verified
> this without a doubt... so it does not seem that this
> problem could be caused by the rudder pedals not being
> adjusted well.
>>
>> So I have a QUESTION for the
> experienced Kolb builders/owners here: Dies the stock Kolb
> engine mount have a thrust offset angle built into it??? The
> way this aircraft is behaving would be explained by the Kolb
> fuselage having several degrees of RIGHT thrust built into
> the engine mounts. Perhaps this would have been done to
> compensate for engines that turn the other direction . I'm
> having trouble understanding how an engine that turns a
> "right hand" propeller is making it steer to the RIGHT
> instead of left.
>>
>> One other thing I tried in flight
> was to slow the aircraft down. This seems pretty funny
> starting from 40 and 45 miles an hour, but I had plenty of
> altitude. With the vortex generators installed, and having
> read the flight reports from several other Kolb owners, I
> fully expected the aircraft to stall at 30 MPH. But as I
> slowed down to 35 MPH it gently stalled. I repeated this
> again after speeding back up to 40, to make sure I had
> actually stalled it the first time. Once again at 35
> indicated, it provided a fairly gentle stall. No significant
> buffeting or shaking before the break, but a pretty gentle
> straight-ahead stall with the nose dropping 20 degrees when
> it did let go.
>>
>> This was disappointing, since I
> installed the VG's specifically to get the lower stall speed
> they usually provide. To be honest, I was pretty
> disappointed, since the old Taylorcrafts and J-3 Cubs stall
> just under 40 MPH, and a big part of the reason I wanted an
> ultralight style aircraft was to fly really slow into really
> short landings.
>>
>> The last thing I tried to pay
> specific attention to was the heavy ailerons getting better
> at lower speeds. But again on this flight my speeds were
> already slow..I moved the stick left and right and it has
> adequate roll control, but the stick forces were far far
> higher than the elevator or rudder forces, and this was
> again at only 40 and 45 indicated. Looking out at the
> ailerons as I moved them, they were deflecting equally along
> their length... meaning that the outboard tip of the aileron
> waas moving as much as the inboard end of the ailerons were
> moving. The ailerons were not "twisting" very much. Since I
> am not yet familiar with the Kolb I was not able to assess
> whether the amount of aileron movement in flight was the
> same as it was on the ground (with the same amount of stick
> movement).
>>
>> I realized that I had taken too
> much pitch out of the propeller. The engine RPM was
> 5200-5300 when I was flying around at 40-45 miles an hour,
> and I specifically wanted to be in the "cruising" RPM range
> instead of maximum continuous power (which is 5800). So I
> will probably put two degrees more pitch into the propeller
> before the next test flight.
>>
>> After the flight I spent the rest
> of the day making and installing the parts to raise the
> leading edge of the tail. I raised the leading edge of the
> tail by 3/4 of an inch. using short steel extension plates.
>>
>> Again, my most important question
> for Kolbers is whether the Kolb Firestar 2 fuselage is known
> to have tight hand thrust offset built into the welded
> engine mount. Only this would explain why an engine that
> should be pulling the airplane left would actually be
> pulling it right.
>>
>> Bill Berle
>> www.ezflaphandle.com<http://www.ezflaphandle.com> -
> safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
> www.grantstar.net<http://www.grantstar.net> -
> winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
> --------------------------------------------
>>> On Thu, 8/9/18, John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Subject: RE: Kolb-List:
> Firestar/HKS First Flight
>> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
>> Date: Thursday, August 9, 2018,
> 5:10 AM
>>
>> --> Kolb-List message posted
> by: "John
>> Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
>>
>> True. Some. But not enough
> to get
>> the job done, unless additional
> weight is added to equal the out of balance aileron.
>>
>> When I originally built my MKIII,
>> before Kolb admitted there might
> be a problem with aileron flutter, I fabricated some
> really neat counter balance weights and attached them,
> very securely to 6061 plates I fixed to the inboard
> end of each aileron. First couple flights went
> well during testing. Then, entering the traffic
> pattern at my local airport, the MKIII went into
> violent flutter. Snatched the stick right out of
> my hand. Chopping power and corralling the stick
> as far back as I could get it, gets it out of
> flutter. I had learned that exercise early on
> with my US and FS, but Kolb wasn't buying it.
> Landed and promptly removed my beautiful counter
> balance weights.
>>
>> Right about 85 mph, where the
> airplane
>> and I liked to cruise was right on
> the edge of flutter. Turbulence would set it off
> quickly. I flew the MKIII in this condition to
> Sun and Fun 1993, to Homer's to paint the Lasers, and
> then to Oshkosh. At Oshkosh I had to fly a photo
> shoot with a Cessna 208. He was having trouble slowing
> to 85 and I was going into flutter at 85. It was
> a tough flight, but we got'er done.
>>
>> I was getting ready to do my
> flight
>> around CONUS and up to Alaska,
> wondering how I was going to make it with the flutter
> problem. I dreamed up all kinds of cures to keep
> the aileron control linkage as tight as possible, but
> I was still susceptible to flutter.
>>
>> Finally, the next year at Sun and
> Fun
>> Dick Rahill got the factory FS
> into severe flutter. He was white as a ghost and
> visibly shaken when he finally got on the ground after
> flying from Lakeland South to the UL strip on the edge
> of a severe thunderstorm. A week later I got a
> set of FS aileron counter balance weights from Kolb,
> made them fit my MKIII, and never again experienced
> aileron flutter. It was wonderful and I was a
> month from beginning my big flight of 1994. I
> had been flying with flutter for 10 years by this
> time.
>>
>> Don't know why my design didn't
> work,
>> but Kolb's did.
>>
>> My design was ahead of the hinge
> line
>> with bullet shaped weights like I
> had seen on other aircraft. Guess I stuck them
> on the wrong end of the aileron because they
> aggravated the situation.
>>
>> john h
>> mkIII
>> Titus, Alabama
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com]
>> On Behalf Of Bill Berle
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2018
> 11:42
>> PM
>> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Kolb-List:
> Firestar/HKS
>> First Flight
>>
>> --> Kolb-List message posted
> by:
>> Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
>>
>> Spades will add weight forward of
> the
>> hinge line, which is usually
> working AGAINST flutter.
>>
>> Bill Berle
>>
>> On Wed, 8/8/18, Denny Baber <baberdk@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> My understanding is
> that spades
>> are for aileron flutter.
>>
>>
>> Respectfully,
>> Dennis BaberCape Coral,
>> Flbaberdk@gmail.com305-814-7218
>> Stay
>> Curious
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> The Kolb-List Email Forum -
>> Navigator to browse
>> List Un/Subscription,
>> 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
>> - MATRONICS
> WEB FORUMS -
>> via the Web Forums!
>> - NEW MATRONICS LIST
> WIKI -
>> Email List Wiki!
>> - List Contribution
> Web Site -
>> support!
>>
>> -Matt Dralle, List
> Admin.
>
>
> The Kolb-List Email Forum -
> Navigator to browse
> List Un/Subscription,
> 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
> - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
> via the Web Forums!
> - NEW MATRONICS LIST WIKI -
> Email List Wiki!
> - List Contribution Web Site -
> support!
>
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>
>
________________________________ Message 20 _____________________________
_______
Time: 04:27:21 PM PST US
From: George Helton <gdhelton@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
Amen to that John. After living in SoCal for 43 years its taken some gettin
g use
to only having 4 or 5 flyable months a year living in the great white north
.
Im over 70 now and still enjoy every moment that I get to spend in my old F
irestar.
I never did like that Kolb Quit crap. There is no substitute for real
deadsticks. I never soloed a student without them experiencing one for real
.
George H.
Firestar, FS100, 2702 Hirth
14GDH
Mesick, Michigan
gdhelton@gmail.com
Sent from my iPhone
> On Aug 9, 2018, at 7:00 PM, John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com> wrote:
>
>
> Absolutely! I agree with you 100%. Glad you set me straight.
>
> Every once in a while we get a rash of new pilots spreading the main gear
and
breaking airplanes because of what our buddy Pat Ladd, RIP, in England, cal
led
"Kolb quit". For some reason folks could not understand why the Kolb had t
his
nasty characteristic of falling out of the sky two or more feet above the a
ir
strip. Poor old Kolb had nothing to do with "Kolb quit", but it had everyt
hing
to do with pilot error, not flying the aircraft. Can't blame poor pilotage
on the airplane. If we keep the Kolb above stall speed, it won't stall and
it will not commit "Kolb quit".
>
> Best way to learn to fly the Kolb is get out there and fly a lot, every d
ay if
you can. The more you fly the more you learn about your Kolb. It is a sup
er
safe aircraft if flown reasonably. Normally, only time I broke something w
as
when I was pushing the limits, exploring unknown territory. You couldn't p
ay
me to do that stuff again. I don't have the guts or I have a lot more sens
e
now than I did 25-30 years ago.
>
> I believe in learning to fly the Kolb engine off, make dead stick landing
s.
When the engine surprises you by getting real quiet, you'll know just what
to
do and how the aircraft will be with a dead stick. It is different from an
idling
prop.
>
> The main thing is get out there and have fun with your Kolb.
>
>
> 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: Thursday, August 09, 2018 5:39 PM
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
>
>
> I wasnt implying that Kolbs are rudder controlled aircraft. I apologize i
f that
was way it was interrupted. The Kolb is the exception. My instructing was d
one
in Spectrum Beavers and Quiksilvers. High dihedral makes very stable, very
rudder oriented aircraft.
> My Firestar is also aileron oriented. I to can cruise around with my feet
flat
on the floor. And I love it. Homer did get it right. That being said, my Fi
restar
on takeoff and landing requires good foot work to be flown properly. Especi
ally
in crosswind conditions. Lazy feet and improper use of flight controls
use on the ground make for expensive repairs. Time and money Id rather spe
nd
on flying.
> My point is that you have learn to fly and enjoy your airplane, before yo
u go
making it a different airplane.
> George H.
> Firestar, FS100, 2702 Hirth
> 14GDH
> Mesick, Michigan
> gdhelton@gmail.com
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Aug 9, 2018, at 5:57 PM, Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net> wrote
:
>>
>>
>> I also have to disagree regarding the Kolb being a "rudder airplane". Th
e stock
plans built Firestar has zero or maybe 1/2 degree of dihedral in the wings.
At least on the plans I have. My Firestar has maybe 3 degrees total, or one
and one half degree each side. I did that as much for appearance as I did f
or
any other reason. Also, as an old washed up model airplane pilot, having a
little
dihedral at least gives me a CHANCE to get back on the ground safe using ru
dder
if the entire control stick assembly falls out of the airplane :)
>>
>> But with this little dihedral, I cannot imagine the Kolb responding WELL
to
rudder like other "classic" ultralights, Quicksilvers, etc.
>>
>> But... I am without a doubt the world's LOWEST time Kolb pilot, about 35
or
45 minutes total flight time in this Firestar and maybe another 30 minutes
in
Jimmy's Mark 3. So I can easily be wrong.
>>
>> I understand completely what George is saying, I would be a much more di
fficult
student for a UL instructor than someone with no flight time. The only thin
g
I will disagree with George about is that as a sailplane pilot we learned t
o
use the rudder continuously and we learned about micrometeorology, localize
d
winds, eddy currents behind trees, etc.
>>
>> My big problem is that I remember all of this fondly but it has been 30
years.
So it is not at the front of my thinking anymore. Flying a lovely old antiq
ue
C-172 has spoiled me and put 9 years of rust on what were once reasonably g
ood
stick and rudder skills.
>>
>> (Part of why I wanted this airplane is because I wanted to grind off all
that
rust. See if I could go back and find that young sharp pilot I used to know
)
>>
>> With all sincere respect for John H, I will leave the spins and aerobati
cs in
a Kolb to him. He recently posted on the Kolb List "If you want to do aerob
atics
go get a Pitts..." Excellent advice :)
>>
>> Bill Berle
>> www.ezflaphandle.com<http://www.ezflaphandle.com> - safety & performanc
e upgrade for light aircraft
>> www.grantstar.net<http://www.grantstar.net> - winning proposal
s for non-profit and for-profit entities
>>
>> --------------------------------------------
>> On Thu, 8/9/18, John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>> Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2
>> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
>> Date: Thursday, August 9, 2018, 2:35 PM
>>
>> Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
>>
>> I can't speak for other ULs, only Kolbs
>> and a couple flights in the Howland Honey Bee (too many
>> years ago to remember all its flight characteristics).
>> IMHO Kolbs are not rudder airplanes, based on my own flying
>> experience with them. I've found that the Kolbs are
>> more aileron aircraft, with a little rudder to keep them
>> trimmed, and of course more rudder on takeoff, landing, and
>> taxiing. Maybe I'm different because I still have a
>> lot of rotary wing stuck in my head after all these
>> years. I don't know.
>>
>> Once the Kolb is trimmed up in yaw, I
>> can put my feet on the deck, and fly the Kolb with aileron
>> and elevator, trim ball centered, making coordinated
>> turns. The aileron geometry is really good on
>> Kolbs. Homer got that right.
>>
>> That's my experience and I am sticking
>> to it. I can't speak for other ULs because I have only
>> flown one other UL other than Kolbs, Burt Howland's little
>> biplane, the Honey Bee. It was a little doll
>> baby. Burt and Ellen Howland, rest in peace my
>> friends, attended The Ultralight Flight Farm in NY, 1988-89,
>> where I met them. They were a lot of fun. I
>> didn't ask, but Burt offered me the chance to fly his
>> classic looking little bird. Landing was a no
>> brainer. Set it up on final at 25 mph, hold that
>> attitude, and a tiny flare, it's on the ground. I
>> can't remember if the Honey Bee was a rudder plane or
>> not. Been too long ago. Certainly wasn't an
>> Aeronca Champ. ;-)
>>
>> 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: Thursday, August 09, 2018 3:23
>> PM
>> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Flutter /
>> Firestar Test Flight #2
>>
>> George Helton <gdhelton@gmail.com>
>>
>> Well guys, we have sure beaten this
>> thread to death.
>> And this I hope this will be the last
>> of my input.
>> Bill, you are are GA/ Sailplane Pilot.
>> Youve now entered the world of flying an all new category
>> of flight. You have developed some habits that will not
>> serve you well in ultralight type aircraft. As a former
>> ultralight instructor I can say with confidence that the
>> worst times were spent converting GA pilots to UL pilots
>> because, They already knew how to fly.
>> That being said, youre not flying a
>> 1400lb spam can anymore. Youre a butterfly or
>> hummingbird. You need a new mind set. Every little change in
>> wind direction, wind speed, thermals, hills and tree lines
>> will change whats going on inflight. Ultralights are not
>> aileron controlled aircraft. They are primarily rudder,
>> elevator and throttle. You know how to control speed. Stick
>> forward, fast. Stick back, slow. Throttle forward,up.
>> Throttle back, down. Rudder is everything, learn
>> to have busy feet. Takeoff, cruise and decent. Think feet,
>> feet, feet... you cannot let you feet get lazy in an
>> ultralight.Thats from the time you taxi to the time you
>> park at the end of the flight. If the nose goes right on
>> takeoff, push the left pedal. If your nose is lifting at
>> cruise push it down and you might want to adjust you
>> throttle a bit. Find your best climb speed and use it. Find
>> your decent or guide speed and use it. Learn to feed your
>> throttle in slowly on takeoff and redu!
>> ce it slowly upon approach. Fly the
>> friggin plane. Youre in charge.
>> Fly it all the way to the ground and
>> then keep flying it.
>> Stop Engineering and go out and enjoy
>> the airplane youve worked so hard at completing. Your
>> Firestar will never fly like my Firestar or Johns MKIII.
>> Learn to fly an ULTRALIGHT. Learn your airplane, and learn
>> to fly it well. Get 50 hours in the air and on the ground in
>> it and then maybe we might change some things. Flying is
>> easy! Its landing and all the stuff on the ground that
>> will screw ya up. Love ya man, go flying.
>>
>> George H.
>> Firestar, FS100, 2702 Hirth
>> 14GDH
>> Mesick, Michigan
>> gdhelton@gmail.com
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>> On Aug 9, 2018, at 2:48 PM, John
>> Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> --> Kolb-List message posted
>> by: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
>>>
>>> Kolbs produce negligible
>> P-factor. Can't remember where I got that
>> tidbit. Yaw problems on takeoff are probably prop wash
>> on the tail section, as you mentioned.
>>>
>>> john h
>>> mkIII
>>> Titus, Alabama
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com]
>> On Behalf Of Stuart Harner
>>> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2018
>> 1:27 PM
>>> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
>>> Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Flutter /
>> Firestar Test Flight #2
>>>
>>> --> Kolb-List message posted
>> by: "Stuart Harner" <stuart@harnerfarm.net>
>>>
>>> Hi Bill,
>>>
>>> Good to hear about your safe and
>> successful 2nd. Flight.
>>>
>>> First question: Do you know your
>> ASI is accurate? You can get a speedometer (GPS based) app
>> for your phone and do a straight path for a couple of miles,
>> then repeat the other direction for a quick and dirty check.
>> Won't be perfect but is good for a quick verification.
>>>
>>> Next, yes to the clockwise prop
>> and left rudder. My Firefly does exactly the same thing.
>> P-factor should cause it to turn left but it does not. We
>> had quite a discussion about this back after my first
>> flights. Short version of the conclusion is that prop wash
>> hitting the right side of the vertical stabilizer is more
>> powerful than P-factor and easily overrides it. I have
>> confirmed this by observing the tail while warming up the
>> engine. Dead bugs collect on the right side of the vertical
>> and the rudder deflects to the left. The pusher
>> configuration with a low boom tube presents no resistance
>> between the prop and the tail unlike something more
>> conventional that has all that covered fuselage to
>> "straighten out" the airflow between prop and tail.
>>>
>>> Advice (on par with the price of
>> it): Don't go messing with the tail until you get the proper
>> cruise set up with RPM/Pitch and confirm the ASI. Also,
>> don't change more than one thing at a time between flights.
>> You can easily confuse yourself and muddy the results by
>> trying two things at once, no matter how un-related they
>> seem. Been there, done that.
>>>
>>> Question two: How was the elevator
>> pressure during the stalls, descent and climb out compared
>> to "cruise"?
>>>
>>> You're doing great! Keep it up.
>>>
>>> Stuart
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com]
>> On Behalf Of Bill Berle
>>> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2018
>> 12:16 PM
>>> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
>>> Subject: Kolb-List: Flutter /
>> Firestar Test Flight #2
>>>
>>> --> Kolb-List message posted
>> by: Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
>>>
>>> Please let me clarify my comment
>> so it does not accidentally cause a safety issue for
>> someone. I believe that adding weight forward of the hinge
>> line works against flutter. BUT I did NOT mean to imply that
>> spades would replace or equal the Kolb tip weights. Those
>> are there for a reason, as many of you know from experience.
>> Flutter would scare the s*** out of me in a Kolb or any
>> other aircraft.
>>>
>>> Test Flight Report for flight #2
>>>
>>> I flew my Firestar again yesterday
>> morning for about 20-25 minutes. I was a little more
>> confident in everything, so I took it right up to 1500 feet
>> above the airport and flew several laps above the runway.
>>>
>>> The aircraft needed a few pounds
>> of forward pressure on the stick, as I have described
>> before. However, this was at an indicated airspeed of only
>> 45 miles per hour. A lot slower than one would expect for a
>> properly rigged aircraft. I realized at this point that I
>> needed to raise the leading edge of the stabilizer as a
>> couple of people have mentioned. A "trim tab" for this would
>> have been pretty large and bent pretty far.
>>>
>>> Also on the test flight, I paid
>> specific attention to the rudder trim. The aircraft required
>> five or six pounds (guess) of LEFT rudder in level flight,
>> again at the 40-45 mile an hour speeds I was flying. It also
>> needs left rudder on takeoff to keep it straight. This was
>> very surprising to me because the propeller turns the
>> "conventional" direction, meaning that it is turning the
>> same direction as a Cessna or J-3 Cub, where you need right
>> rudder on takeoff. The torque from the engine, especially
>> with a high ratio gearbox and a big wide propeller, SHOULD
>> be trying to roll and yaw the aircraft to the left,
>> requiring right rudder. But this is the opposite of how it
>> was in flight.
>>>
>>> I briefly let off of the rudder
>> pressure and the airplane yawed to the right significantly.
>> The air flow direction and the view from the seat verified
>> this without a doubt... so it does not seem that this
>> problem could be caused by the rudder pedals not being
>> adjusted well.
>>>
>>> So I have a QUESTION for the
>> experienced Kolb builders/owners here: Dies the stock Kolb
>> engine mount have a thrust offset angle built into it??? The
>> way this aircraft is behaving would be explained by the Kolb
>> fuselage having several degrees of RIGHT thrust built into
>> the engine mounts. Perhaps this would have been done to
>> compensate for engines that turn the other direction . I'm
>> having trouble understanding how an engine that turns a
>> "right hand" propeller is making it steer to the RIGHT
>> instead of left.
>>>
>>> One other thing I tried in flight
>> was to slow the aircraft down. This seems pretty funny
>> starting from 40 and 45 miles an hour, but I had plenty of
>> altitude. With the vortex generators installed, and having
>> read the flight reports from several other Kolb owners, I
>> fully expected the aircraft to stall at 30 MPH. But as I
>> slowed down to 35 MPH it gently stalled. I repeated this
>> again after speeding back up to 40, to make sure I had
>> actually stalled it the first time. Once again at 35
>> indicated, it provided a fairly gentle stall. No significant
>> buffeting or shaking before the break, but a pretty gentle
>> straight-ahead stall with the nose dropping 20 degrees when
>> it did let go.
>>>
>>> This was disappointing, since I
>> installed the VG's specifically to get the lower stall speed
>> they usually provide. To be honest, I was pretty
>> disappointed, since the old Taylorcrafts and J-3 Cubs stall
>> just under 40 MPH, and a big part of the reason I wanted an
>> ultralight style aircraft was to fly really slow into really
>> short landings.
>>>
>>> The last thing I tried to pay
>> specific attention to was the heavy ailerons getting better
>> at lower speeds. But again on this flight my speeds were
>> already slow..I moved the stick left and right and it has
>> adequate roll control, but the stick forces were far far
>> higher than the elevator or rudder forces, and this was
>> again at only 40 and 45 indicated. Looking out at the
>> ailerons as I moved them, they were deflecting equally along
>> their length... meaning that the outboard tip of the aileron
>> waas moving as much as the inboard end of the ailerons were
>> moving. The ailerons were not "twisting" very much. Since I
>> am not yet familiar with the Kolb I was not able to assess
>> whether the amount of aileron movement in flight was the
>> same as it was on the ground (with the same amount of stick
>> movement).
>>>
>>> I realized that I had taken too
>> much pitch out of the propeller. The engine RPM was
>> 5200-5300 when I was flying around at 40-45 miles an hour,
>> and I specifically wanted to be in the "cruising" RPM range
>> instead of maximum continuous power (which is 5800). So I
>> will probably put two degrees more pitch into the propeller
>> before the next test flight.
>>>
>>> After the flight I spent the rest
>> of the day making and installing the parts to raise the
>> leading edge of the tail. I raised the leading edge of the
>> tail by 3/4 of an inch. using short steel extension plates.
>>>
>>> Again, my most important question
>> for Kolbers is whether the Kolb Firestar 2 fuselage is known
>> to have tight hand thrust offset built into the welded
>> engine mount. Only this would explain why an engine that
>> should be pulling the airplane left would actually be
>> pulling it right.
>>>
>>> Bill Berle
>>> www.ezflaphandle.com<http://www.ezflaphandle.com> -
>> safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
>> www.grantstar.net<http://www.grantstar.net> -
>> winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
>> --------------------------------------------
>>>> On Thu, 8/9/18, John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Subject: RE: Kolb-List:
>> Firestar/HKS First Flight
>>> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
>>> Date: Thursday, August 9, 2018,
>> 5:10 AM
>>>
>>> --> Kolb-List message posted
>> by: "John
>>> Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
>>>
>>> True. Some. But not enough
>> to get
>>> the job done, unless additional
>> weight is added to equal the out of balance aileron.
>>>
>>> When I originally built my MKIII,
>>> before Kolb admitted there might
>> be a problem with aileron flutter, I fabricated some
>> really neat counter balance weights and attached them,
>> very securely to 6061 plates I fixed to the inboard
>> end of each aileron. First couple flights went
>> well during testing. Then, entering the traffic
>> pattern at my local airport, the MKIII went into
>> violent flutter. Snatched the stick right out of
>> my hand. Chopping power and corralling the stick
>> as far back as I could get it, gets it out of
>> flutter. I had learned that exercise early on
>> with my US and FS, but Kolb wasn't buying it.
>> Landed and promptly removed my beautiful counter
>> balance weights.
>>>
>>> Right about 85 mph, where the
>> airplane
>>> and I liked to cruise was right on
>> the edge of flutter. Turbulence would set it off
>> quickly. I flew the MKIII in this condition to
>> Sun and Fun 1993, to Homer's to paint the Lasers, and
>> then to Oshkosh. At Oshkosh I had to fly a photo
>> shoot with a Cessna 208. He was having trouble slowing
>> to 85 and I was going into flutter at 85. It was
>> a tough flight, but we got'er done.
>>>
>>> I was getting ready to do my
>> flight
>>> around CONUS and up to Alaska,
>> wondering how I was going to make it with the flutter
>> problem. I dreamed up all kinds of cures to keep
>> the aileron control linkage as tight as possible, but
>> I was still susceptible to flutter.
>>>
>>> Finally, the next year at Sun and
>> Fun
>>> Dick Rahill got the factory FS
>> into severe flutter. He was white as a ghost and
>> visibly shaken when he finally got on the ground after
>> flying from Lakeland South to the UL strip on the edge
>> of a severe thunderstorm. A week later I got a
>> set of FS aileron counter balance weights from Kolb,
>> made them fit my MKIII, and never again experienced
>> aileron flutter. It was wonderful and I was a
>> month from beginning my big flight of 1994. I
>> had been flying with flutter for 10 years by this
>> time.
>>>
>>> Don't know why my design didn't
>> work,
>>> but Kolb's did.
>>>
>>> My design was ahead of the hinge
>> line
>>> with bullet shaped weights like I
>> had seen on other aircraft. Guess I stuck them
>> on the wrong end of the aileron because they
>> aggravated the situation.
>>>
>>> john h
>>> mkIII
>>> Titus, Alabama
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
>>> [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com]
>>> On Behalf Of Bill Berle
>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2018
>> 11:42
>>> PM
>>> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
>>> Subject: Re: Kolb-List:
>> Firestar/HKS
>>> First Flight
>>>
>>> --> Kolb-List message posted
>> by:
>>> Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
>>>
>>> Spades will add weight forward of
>> the
>>> hinge line, which is usually
>> working AGAINST flutter.
>>>
>>> Bill Berle
>>>
>>> On Wed, 8/8/18, Denny Baber <baberdk@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> My understanding is
>> that spades
>>> are for aileron flutter.
>>>
>>>
>>> Respectfully,
>>> Dennis BaberCape Coral,
>>> Flbaberdk@gmail.com305-814-7218
>>> Stay
>>> Curious
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The Kolb-List Email Forum -
>>> Navigator to browse
>>> List Un/Subscription,
>>> 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
>>> - MATRONICS
>> WEB FORUMS -
>>> via the Web Forums!
>>> - NEW MATRONICS LIST
>> WIKI -
>>> Email List Wiki!
>>> - List Contribution
>> Web Site -
>>> support!
>>>
>>> -Matt Dralle, List
>> Admin.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> The Kolb-List Email Forum -
>> Navigator to browse
>> List Un/Subscription,
>> 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
>> - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
>> via the Web Forums!
>> - NEW MATRONICS LIST WIKI -
>> Email List Wiki!
>> - List Contribution Web Site -
>> support!
>>
>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________ Message 21 _____________________________
_______
Time: 05:58:55 PM PST US
From: Russ Kinne <russk50@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: gear legs
I frankly dont know; got them from Kolb for
the Xtra I had then. I can measure if you want me to
Fair winds, Russ
> On Aug 7, 2018, at 10:59 PM, Vern <verdixbo@sisqtel.net> wrote:
>
>
> Do your gear legs fit a Mark 3 classic. I might be interested if they do.
>
> Thanks Vern
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=482172#482172
>
>
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 |
|
Gents,
I have mostly been enjoying other people's posts and staying quiet but
decided there was enough safety issue here to comment. I was an F-106 and
A-10 driver years ago and went on to a career in NASA spacecraft design.
But my passion is aviation, and especially low and slow like Kolbs. As
part of that I built an original Firestar and later owned a Mark3X. Loved
them both but made a point to learn a lot about them too.
Spades obviously lighten stick forces by adding aerodynamic balancing.
They do this by digging in to the wind on the "other" side of the aileron
hinge from what the pilot input is doing. This helps you deflect the
aileron. And yes, Kolbs do have heavy ailerons, especially that M3X with
flaperons.
But Kolbs are very unusual in a very important way. The ailerons are heavy
because they have lots of area with no aerodynamic balance. If the aileron
structure were rigid, they would feel even heavier. That is because much
of the movement you have in your stick comes from the aileron spar bending
and twisting. I used to be amazed that even with a bunch of stick input on
the M3 the tip of the aileron hardly moved at all. But what really got my
attention was when I would stand at the wingtip and twist the aileron with
the mass balance and see how easy it was to move it 3 or 4 inches after the
stick had hit the stops. This is not what I consider to be a safety issue
because that big aileron is trying to stay streamlined and will not do
anything funny (assuming you have mass balanced the faster ones), but it is
unusual in aircraft design.
Now imagine that you have a spade out there on the end so that instead of
the aileron spar bending against the predictable resistance of that big
aileron there was a spade applying a booster force. I assume that with
small spades like in the picture installed symmetrically the handling would
not change too much, but it might. And if you did put just one on the
aileron on that side would deflect much further both directions and could
really mess with the handling.
I love Kolbs which is why I read this list all of the time. And I would
like all of you to enjoy them safely.
Jim
On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 6:16 PM, John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com> wrote:
> You might have had a problem testing with one spade.
>
>
> If I decided to take on that task I'd do it with two.
>
>
> Seems to me the spades need to balanced. One spade would be severely out
> of balance, nothing to counteract the single spade except stick force.
> Might be a hand full.
>
>
> john h
>
> mkIII
>
> Titus, Alabama
>
>
> *From:* owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kolb-list-
> server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Rick Neilsen
> *Sent:* Friday, August 10, 2018 4:08 PM
> *To:* kolb-list@matronics.com
> *Subject:* Kolb-List: Spads
>
>
> Was going to try one on one side first so if it snatched or ripped
> something off the plane I might still have aileron control. Then I got
> concerned and never went any further.
>
>
> Thoughts
>
>
> Rick Neilsen
>
> Redrive VW Powered MKIIIC
>
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 |
|
Jim what about spades mounted at mid aileron? It seems to me that the spade will
reduce the amount of strain and deformation of the aileron system components.
Sent from my Samsung Captivate(tm) on AT&T
james.vanlaak@gmail.com wrote:
>Gents,
>
>I have mostly been enjoying other people's posts and staying quiet but
>decided there was enough safety issue here to comment. I was an F-106 and
>A-10 driver years ago and went on to a career in NASA spacecraft design.
>But my passion is aviation, and especially low and slow like Kolbs. As
>part of that I built an original Firestar and later owned a Mark3X. Loved
>them both but made a point to learn a lot about them too.
>
>Spades obviously lighten stick forces by adding aerodynamic balancing.
>They do this by digging in to the wind on the "other" side of the aileron
>hinge from what the pilot input is doing. This helps you deflect the
>aileron. And yes, Kolbs do have heavy ailerons, especially that M3X with
>flaperons.
>
>But Kolbs are very unusual in a very important way. The ailerons are heavy
>because they have lots of area with no aerodynamic balance. If the aileron
>structure were rigid, they would feel even heavier. That is because much
>of the movement you have in your stick comes from the aileron spar bending
>and twisting. I used to be amazed that even with a bunch of stick input on
>the M3 the tip of the aileron hardly moved at all. But what really got my
>attention was when I would stand at the wingtip and twist the aileron with
>the mass balance and see how easy it was to move it 3 or 4 inches after the
>stick had hit the stops. This is not what I consider to be a safety issue
>because that big aileron is trying to stay streamlined and will not do
>anything funny (assuming you have mass balanced the faster ones), but it is
>unusual in aircraft design.
>
>Now imagine that you have a spade out there on the end so that instead of
>the aileron spar bending against the predictable resistance of that big
>aileron there was a spade applying a booster force. I assume that with
>small spades like in the picture installed symmetrically the handling would
>not change too much, but it might. And if you did put just one on the
>aileron on that side would deflect much further both directions and could
>really mess with the handling.
>
>I love Kolbs which is why I read this list all of the time. And I would
>like all of you to enjoy them safely.
>
>Jim
>
>On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 6:16 PM, John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> You might have had a problem testing with one spade.
>>
>>
>>
>> If I decided to take on that task I'd do it with two.
>>
>>
>>
>> Seems to me the spades need to balanced. One spade would be severely out
>> of balance, nothing to counteract the single spade except stick force.
>> Might be a hand full.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> john h
>>
>> mkIII
>>
>> Titus, Alabama
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kolb-list-
>> server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Rick Neilsen
>> *Sent:* Friday, August 10, 2018 4:08 PM
>> *To:* kolb-list@matronics.com
>> *Subject:* Kolb-List: Spads
>>
>>
>>
>> Was going to try one on one side first so if it snatched or ripped
>> something off the plane I might still have aileron control. Then I got
>> concerned and never went any further.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thoughts
>>
>>
>>
>> Rick Neilsen
>>
>> Redrive VW Powered MKIIIC
>>
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 |
|
Why don't you give it a shot and see what happens. I wouldn't mind lighter
forces myself. You are in probably the best situation to try this.
Larry
On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 5:50 PM Bill <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> Jim what about spades mounted at mid aileron? It seems to me that the
> spade will reduce the amount of strain and deformation of the aileron
> system components.
>
> Sent from my Samsung Captivate(tm) on AT&T
>
> james.vanlaak@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >Gents,
> >
> >I have mostly been enjoying other people's posts and staying quiet but
> >decided there was enough safety issue here to comment. I was an F-106 and
> >A-10 driver years ago and went on to a career in NASA spacecraft design.
> >But my passion is aviation, and especially low and slow like Kolbs. As
> >part of that I built an original Firestar and later owned a Mark3X. Loved
> >them both but made a point to learn a lot about them too.
> >
> >Spades obviously lighten stick forces by adding aerodynamic balancing.
> >They do this by digging in to the wind on the "other" side of the aileron
> >hinge from what the pilot input is doing. This helps you deflect the
> >aileron. And yes, Kolbs do have heavy ailerons, especially that M3X with
> >flaperons.
> >
> >But Kolbs are very unusual in a very important way. The ailerons are
> heavy
> >because they have lots of area with no aerodynamic balance. If the
> aileron
> >structure were rigid, they would feel even heavier. That is because much
> >of the movement you have in your stick comes from the aileron spar bending
> >and twisting. I used to be amazed that even with a bunch of stick input
> on
> >the M3 the tip of the aileron hardly moved at all. But what really got my
> >attention was when I would stand at the wingtip and twist the aileron with
> >the mass balance and see how easy it was to move it 3 or 4 inches after
> the
> >stick had hit the stops. This is not what I consider to be a safety issue
> >because that big aileron is trying to stay streamlined and will not do
> >anything funny (assuming you have mass balanced the faster ones), but it
> is
> >unusual in aircraft design.
> >
> >Now imagine that you have a spade out there on the end so that instead of
> >the aileron spar bending against the predictable resistance of that big
> >aileron there was a spade applying a booster force. I assume that with
> >small spades like in the picture installed symmetrically the handling
> would
> >not change too much, but it might. And if you did put just one on the
> >aileron on that side would deflect much further both directions and could
> >really mess with the handling.
> >
> >I love Kolbs which is why I read this list all of the time. And I would
> >like all of you to enjoy them safely.
> >
> >Jim
> >
> >On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 6:16 PM, John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com> wrote:
> >
> >> You might have had a problem testing with one spade.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> If I decided to take on that task I'd do it with two.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Seems to me the spades need to balanced. One spade would be severely
> out
> >> of balance, nothing to counteract the single spade except stick force.
> >> Might be a hand full.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> john h
> >>
> >> mkIII
> >>
> >> Titus, Alabama
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> *From:* owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kolb-list-
> >> server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Rick Neilsen
> >> *Sent:* Friday, August 10, 2018 4:08 PM
> >> *To:* kolb-list@matronics.com
> >> *Subject:* Kolb-List: Spads
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Was going to try one on one side first so if it snatched or ripped
> >> something off the plane I might still have aileron control. Then I got
> >> concerned and never went any further.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Thoughts
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Rick Neilsen
> >>
> >> Redrive VW Powered MKIIIC
> >>
>
>
--
*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.*
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: Flutter / Firestar Test Flight #2 |
Right on, JG - hope some people listen
Russ K
> On Aug 10, 2018, at 4:33 AM, JC Gilpin <j.gilpin@bigpond.com> wrote:
>
> Sure wish folks would get into the habit of deleting the ever increasing tail
of previous posts that follow their post.......
>
> JG
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 |
|
I am a big fan of aerodynamic balances for well balanced control forces,
and I would love to see a nice set of spades for the Kolbs. But remember
that right now only a small fraction of your ailerons are moving and
contributing to the roll rate. If you put the aerodynamic balance in the
middle there will be more movement in the outer part of the aileron and
that would increase your rate. I like sprightly controls so sounds good at
first blush.
But remember there are 40 years of Kolbs flying with that springy aileron
spar. you would be a bit more of a test pilot than when you build from a
well established kit. I like that but not everybody does. Point is to
understand the implications of your changes.
One of the planes I built was a Talon II and it had its wing split between
flaps and ailerons. With pushrod control to the middle of the ailerons
they were nice and powerful yet reasonably light. I was comfortable in 15
knot direct crosswinds which is saying something when you land at 35
knots. But it was designed that way and I made no significant changes.
Kolbs are great little airplanes with an excellent record. If you want to
change it that is your right but do be careful. If I were going to build
another one I would start with smaller ailerons outboard of nice big
flaps. But that is just me.
Jim
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 |
|
Why have spades at all?
Why have VGs?
Neither are a necessary mod.
I put VGs on my MKIII after I flew it 3400 hours for the past 34 years. Then I
got an itch to give them a shot. I did not need them to comfortably fly my aircraft.
It was a novelty to give them a try. Yep, they helped a little. I
could fly a few mph slower, and best of all VGs did help clean up my full stall
landings. At my age I was not as sharp as I once was, and found myself occasionally
screwing up my landings.
I didn't need them but they did improve an already good handling airplane. I got
mine from John Gilpin, STOL Speed VGs. You can also order them from Aircraft
Spruce.
What started this thread was a very low time Kolb pilot and builder. I think he
has less than an hour flight time already. This is the same guy that initially
came on the List denigrating Kolb's elevator hinge system. Had to go get
an aerodynamic engineer to tell thousands of us Kolb pilots and builders that
we were doing it wrong, not the way the book dictated. So...we've flown thousands
of hours without losing a single elevator, yet we are flying in an unsafe
condition according to these experts.
Now...Bill Berle has flown his FS 20 minutes and he wants to redesign it because
it does not fly the way he wants it to. Kolbs fly like Kolbs. That is one
of the things that make them a unique aircraft, one that I have flown for many
years. The reason I have stuck strictly to Kolbs is because I love them, the
way they fly, the way they look, and best of all their superior crash worthiness.
Maybe one of these days some of you all will be able to experience Kolb's
crashworthiness first hand. I sincerely hope not.
I too complained to Homer Kolb many, many years ago about his heavy ailerons.
I thought they should be light like a rotary wing cyclic, the aircraft I had some
experience flying. Homer told me to be gentle with the Kolb and it would
do just what you wanted it to do. Homer was absolutely correct. Imagine that.
I've learned to use Homer's advice and have been privileged to fly in some
pretty exciting places in some pretty exciting weather. I don't ever recall wishing
I had spades to get me out of any situation. I didn't need them to get
me home.
OK...something to think about when you're screwing with Kolb ailerons. Kolbs
will not fly very long without aileron control. If you don't believe me, try
to fly your Kolb with the ailerons locked, using rudder and elevator only. Those
that put a bunch of dihedral in the wings can probably toot around all day
flying without aileron input, but the plans built and rigged Kolbs won't. They'll
maintain heading for a bit and then roll over and dive to the ground. Your
rudder and elevators can't get you out of that situation. They will fly with
one aileron. We've had folks lose aileron control on a single aileron.
If Bill B wants nice light aileron control and can come up with safe, workable
spades, that is fine with me. I am not trying to encourage Bill to stop his experimentation.
That's what it is all about, but I prefer to fly my MKIII just
the way it is without them.
The above are my thoughts and opinions only. Not intended to influence anyone.
I don't encourage anyone to do stuff the way I do it.
Good luck Bill B.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill
Sent: Friday, August 10, 2018 6:49 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Spads
Jim what about spades mounted at mid aileron? It seems to me that the spade will
reduce the amount of strain and deformation of the aileron system components.
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! --
|