Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:38 AM - Re: Stabilizer Angle (Richard Pike)
2. 06:29 AM - Re: Stabilizer Angle (John Hauck)
3. 07:08 AM - Re: Spads (Denny Baber)
4. 07:24 AM - Re: too much weight i guess ... (Denny Baber)
5. 08:17 AM - Re: Stabilizer Angle (Rick Neilsen)
6. 08:24 AM - Re: Spads (Denny Baber)
7. 08:31 AM - Re: Spads (Denny Baber)
8. 09:29 AM - Re: Stabilizer Angle (Bill Berle)
9. 10:28 AM - Re: Stabilizer Angle (George Helton)
10. 10:32 AM - Re: Stabilizer Angle (George Helton)
11. 11:05 AM - Re: Stabilizer Angle (K I)
12. 11:30 AM - Re: Stabilizer Angle (chris davis)
13. 11:30 AM - Re: Stabilizer Angle (Stuart Harner)
14. 11:57 AM - Annual Rock House fly-in (Larry Cottrell)
15. 12:01 PM - Re: Stabilizer Angle (Bill Berle)
16. 12:07 PM - Fly-in (Larry Cottrell)
17. 12:28 PM - Re: Fly-in (Robert Lobdell)
18. 12:57 PM - Re: Annual Rock House fly-in (John Hauck)
19. 01:06 PM - Re: Fly-in (John Hauck)
20. 01:08 PM - Re: Fly-in (David Pemberton)
21. 01:12 PM - Re: Stabilizer Angle (Charlie England)
22. 01:21 PM - Re: Fly-in (Larry Cottrell)
23. 01:22 PM - Re: Fly-in (Larry Cottrell)
24. 01:26 PM - Spades (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: | Re: : Kolb-List:Stabilizer Angle |
Looking at this thread, and then looking at my web page on raising the elevator
leading edges on Ed's FSII, I just made a startling discovery; I apparently was
not paying attention when I typed in the info-
I got it backwards!
http://oh2fly.net/oldpoops/FSIIelevatorbracket.html
Raising the aileron trailing edges (or flaps) moves the center of lift forward,
drooping the ailerons (or flaps) moves it aft.
My apologies to everyone, I'll fix it this afternoon.
(How come none of you guys caught that? You should have had my butt on a plate
a couple years ago for that one!)
--------
Richard Pike
Kolb MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
Kingsport, TN 3TN0
Forgiving is tough, being forgiven is wonderful, and God's grace really is amazing.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=482303#482303
Message 2
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | : Kolb-List:Stabilizer Angle |
Folks with flap aircraft know when you droop the flaps the nose droops too.
If you raise the flaps the nose comes up. Same same for ailerons.
I've never done anything backwards, except reading a wind sock 180 degrees
out, entering traffic 180 degrees out, and I could go on.
Gosh, it would be nice to be perfect and not make all those mistakes. ;-)
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
Raising the aileron trailing edges (or flaps) moves the center of lift
forward, drooping the ailerons (or flaps) moves it aft.
My apologies to everyone, I'll fix it this afternoon.
(How come none of you guys caught that? You should have had my butt on a
plate a couple years ago for that one!)
--------
Richard Pike
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 |
|
I'm not trying to offend anyone by giving my opinion. Dropping the ailerons
together will work as trim. Here is another way that will work, your
choice. See print attachments.
Respectfully,
Dennis Baber
Cape Coral, Fl
baberdk@gmail.com
Stay Curious
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: too much weight i guess ... |
Do a weight and balance for your plane to see the maximum weight for your
particular plane. The builder is considered the manufacturer so every plane
is somewhat different. If you move weight around to get it within Center of
Gravity and under gross, it will fly and land safely.
Respectfully,
Dennis Baber
Cape Coral, Fl
baberdk@gmail.com
Stay Curious
Message 5
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: : Kolb-List:Stabilizer Angle |
Bill
Wow never saw a Kolb horizontal stabilizer mounted so high. The photos show
a bunch but brings up a lot of questions.
It hard to see from the angle of your photo but it looks like the
horizontal stabilizer is in line with the wing. Is the wing set with a much
higher angle of attack than stock? I can't comment on if that is good or
bad. If it is higher, that would explain why the horizontal stabilizer has
to be set that high. Be careful. What is the impact on all this?? Kolbs
tend to look like they are flying a bit nose down but your plane might go a
bit beyond that.
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW Powered MKIIIC
On Sat, Aug 11, 2018 at 8:07 PM Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
> Per the previous discussions regarding my FS2 / HKS testing, I have raised
> the leading edge of the stabilizers significantly higher than they had
> originally been, in order to counteract the amount of stick force I had to
> hold to keep the nose level.
>
> I am trying to attach photos of the modification to this e-mail.
>
> These photos represent the mounting point 1.25 inches above the original
> mounting.
>
> Bill Berle
> www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
> www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and
> for-profit entities
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 |
|
The problems I have found with Rotax CDI's is that people crank the engine
with the secondary's not on a grounded spark plug. That will ruin the
output coil and they are $700 new. (I ran a compression check with the
plugs out).
Another thing is people supply 12 volts to the CDI's. The CDI's will
operate no matter what until the ignition leads are grounded to stop the
magneto section. Check to see how your ignition switch is wired. You have
one system failed but the other still works. Some people run the 670
snowmobile engine with single ignition but 100 hp, your choice. On the good
side, I have never talked to a dealer say he saw a failure if you don't
crank them with the secondary not grounded. The redundant ignition comes
from mags having points, now they are capacitance discharge like the cars
are running. I hope the attachment helps you troubleshooting.
Respectfully,
Dennis Baber
Cape Coral, Fl
baberdk@gmail.com
Stay Curious
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 |
|
I found another solution to the aileron trim tab. This guy has his trim
tabs move opposite direction of his trim tabs. See attachment:
Respectfully,
Dennis Baber
Cape Coral, Fl
baberdk@gmail.com
305-814-7218
Stay Curious
Message 8
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: : Kolb-List:Stabilizer Angle |
I tried to take 0one of the photos showing that the angleo f the tail is nearly
equal to the angle of the lower surface of the wing.
Since I did not build this aircraft originally, I have no idea if the wing angle
is higher or lower than stock. It looks really high because I put taller landing
gear (Kolb Slingshot) on it, plus big tires.
I will try at least one "crow hop" down the runway with the stabilizer set like
it is in the photo. If it seems controllable then I will continue climbing and
flying, If it requires a large pull rearward on the stick then I will land and
re-set the stabilizer angle to the last setting which was safe enough to make
the last test flight.
Regarding drooping the ailerons: Last time I flew I did NOT notice that the ailerons
were flexed upward by air loads. They looked like they were parallel to
the bottom wing surface. If the ailerons were flying in a reflexed upward position
I would have seen the balance weights below the wing, which I did not.
I also moved the control stick left and right firmly, and I did not see the ailerons
twisting (meaning more movement at the inboard end of the aileron than the
outboard). So I have to say that form my limited amount of testing it does
NOT seem that the ailerons are "springy", or that the air moves them upward. So
it seems that drooping them on the ground would make them fly in the same drooped
position. I can easily see how this will pitch the nose down and solve part
or all of the trim problem, but I cannot understand how this will not create
"wash-in" or aerodynamic twist in the wrong direction. Can someone explain
to me WHY drooping the ailerons will NOT create a wiing that stalls at the tips
before the root?
I am absolutely 1000% happy and willing to try drooping the ailerons, so long as
I can understand why it will not make the aircraft more prone to tip stall.
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
--------------------------------------------
On Sun, 8/12/18, Rick Neilsen <neilsenrm@gmail.com> wrote:
Bill
Wow never saw a Kolb horizontal stabilizer mounted so high. The photos show a
bunch but brings up a lot of questions.
It hard to see from the angle of your photo but it looks like the horizontal stabilizer
is in line with the wing. Is the wing set with a much higher angle of
attack than stock?I can't comment on if that is good or bad. If it is higher,
that would explain why the horizontal stabilizer has to be set that high. Be
careful. What is the impact on all this?? Kolbs tend to look like they are flying
a bit nose down but your plane might go a
bit beyond that.
Message 9
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: : Kolb-List:Stabilizer Angle |
Bill, Kolbs do not have built in twist or wash out in the wings like your Cessna.
They intentionally built flat. Your wing is not stalling at 50 mph. Its a high
lift/ high drag wing. The leading edge rib design is there to establish smooth
directional air flow over the entire wing. This is also why the wing doesnt
require any dihedral to be added. If you want to add dihedral it simply adds
more stability, which makes it more of rubbered plane then aileron controlled.
Take a long straight edge and put it along the bottom of the wing and make sure
the aileron is centered and not in reflex. Make sure they equal at the trailing
edge. Now, initially shorten your rod ends two full turns. I would return the
angle of incidence of the horizontal stabilizer back to what was originally.
Test fly the airplane. If the stick pressure has lighten a bit. Youre doing
the right thing. You may have do this a couple of times. If anyone disagrees with
this advice please chime in. It s been many years since I set mine. It flies
great with very little rudder input except for climbing with increased power
settings and naturally during takeoff and landing. I have no trim tabs at all.
But, I think thats the exception. But, Homer Kolb thought it was the way to
go if necessary. I had a adjustable elevator trim tab on my MKII which came as
standard equipment.
George H.
Firestar, FS100, 2702 Hirth
14GDH
Mesick, Michigan
gdhelton@gmail.com
Sent from my iPhone
> On Aug 12, 2018, at 12:29 PM, Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>
> I tried to take 0one of the photos showing that the angleo f the tail is nearly
equal to the angle of the lower surface of the wing.
>
> Since I did not build this aircraft originally, I have no idea if the wing angle
is higher or lower than stock. It looks really high because I put taller landing
gear (Kolb Slingshot) on it, plus big tires.
>
> I will try at least one "crow hop" down the runway with the stabilizer set like
it is in the photo. If it seems controllable then I will continue climbing
and flying, If it requires a large pull rearward on the stick then I will land
and re-set the stabilizer angle to the last setting which was safe enough to
make the last test flight.
>
> Regarding drooping the ailerons: Last time I flew I did NOT notice that the ailerons
were flexed upward by air loads. They looked like they were parallel to
the bottom wing surface. If the ailerons were flying in a reflexed upward position
I would have seen the balance weights below the wing, which I did not.
>
> I also moved the control stick left and right firmly, and I did not see the ailerons
twisting (meaning more movement at the inboard end of the aileron than
the outboard). So I have to say that form my limited amount of testing it does
NOT seem that the ailerons are "springy", or that the air moves them upward.
So it seems that drooping them on the ground would make them fly in the same
drooped position. I can easily see how this will pitch the nose down and solve
part or all of the trim problem, but I cannot understand how this will not create
"wash-in" or aerodynamic twist in the wrong direction. Can someone explain
to me WHY drooping the ailerons will NOT create a wiing that stalls at the tips
before the root?
>
> I am absolutely 1000% happy and willing to try drooping the ailerons, so long
as I can understand why it will not make the aircraft more prone to tip stall.
>
> Bill Berle
> www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
> www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Sun, 8/12/18, Rick Neilsen <neilsenrm@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Bill
> Wow never saw a Kolb horizontal stabilizer mounted so high. The photos show a
bunch but brings up a lot of questions.
> It hard to see from the angle of your photo but it looks like the horizontal
stabilizer is in line with the wing. Is the wing set with a much higher angle
of attack than stock? I can't comment on if that is good or bad. If it is higher,
that would explain why the horizontal stabilizer has to be set that high.
Be careful. What is the impact on all this?? Kolbs tend to look like they are
flying a bit nose down but your plane might go a
> bit beyond that.
>
>
>
>
>
Message 10
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: : Kolb-List:Stabilizer Angle |
I still think you have c/g problem more anything else. Which I mentioned in a earlier
email.
George H.
Firestar
Mesick, Michigan
Sent from my iPhone
> On Aug 12, 2018, at 12:29 PM, Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>
> I tried to take 0one of the photos showing that the angleo f the tail is nearly
equal to the angle of the lower surface of the wing.
>
> Since I did not build this aircraft originally, I have no idea if the wing angle
is higher or lower than stock. It looks really high because I put taller landing
gear (Kolb Slingshot) on it, plus big tires.
>
> I will try at least one "crow hop" down the runway with the stabilizer set like
it is in the photo. If it seems controllable then I will continue climbing
and flying, If it requires a large pull rearward on the stick then I will land
and re-set the stabilizer angle to the last setting which was safe enough to
make the last test flight.
>
> Regarding drooping the ailerons: Last time I flew I did NOT notice that the ailerons
were flexed upward by air loads. They looked like they were parallel to
the bottom wing surface. If the ailerons were flying in a reflexed upward position
I would have seen the balance weights below the wing, which I did not.
>
> I also moved the control stick left and right firmly, and I did not see the ailerons
twisting (meaning more movement at the inboard end of the aileron than
the outboard). So I have to say that form my limited amount of testing it does
NOT seem that the ailerons are "springy", or that the air moves them upward.
So it seems that drooping them on the ground would make them fly in the same
drooped position. I can easily see how this will pitch the nose down and solve
part or all of the trim problem, but I cannot understand how this will not create
"wash-in" or aerodynamic twist in the wrong direction. Can someone explain
to me WHY drooping the ailerons will NOT create a wiing that stalls at the tips
before the root?
>
> I am absolutely 1000% happy and willing to try drooping the ailerons, so long
as I can understand why it will not make the aircraft more prone to tip stall.
>
> Bill Berle
> www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
> www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Sun, 8/12/18, Rick Neilsen <neilsenrm@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Bill
> Wow never saw a Kolb horizontal stabilizer mounted so high. The photos show a
bunch but brings up a lot of questions.
> It hard to see from the angle of your photo but it looks like the horizontal
stabilizer is in line with the wing. Is the wing set with a much higher angle
of attack than stock? I can't comment on if that is good or bad. If it is higher,
that would explain why the horizontal stabilizer has to be set that high.
Be careful. What is the impact on all this?? Kolbs tend to look like they are
flying a bit nose down but your plane might go a
> bit beyond that.
>
>
>
>
>
Message 11
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: : Kolb-List:Stabilizer Angle |
Hi Bill,
I was just looking at the photos. Are your fuel tanks mounted side by side
or inline?
________________________________
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com <owner-kolb-list-server@matronic
s.com> on behalf of Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
Sent: Saturday, August 11, 2018 6:04:11 PM
Subject: RE: Kolb-List:Stabilizer Angle
Per the previous discussions regarding my FS2 / HKS testing, I have raised
the leading edge of the stabilizers significantly higher than they had orig
inally been, in order to counteract the amount of stick force I had to hold
to keep the nose level.
I am trying to attach photos of the modification to this e-mail.
These photos represent the mounting point 1.25 inches above the original mo
unting.
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
Message 12
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: : Kolb-List:Stabilizer Angle |
Have u flown it yet? Looks to a non engineer like a drastic change.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Aug 11, 2018, at 8:04 PM, Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> Per the previous discussions regarding my FS2 / HKS testing, I have raised the
leading edge of the stabilizers significantly higher than they had originally
been, in order to counteract the amount of stick force I had to hold to keep
the nose level.
>
> I am trying to attach photos of the modification to this e-mail.
>
> These photos represent the mounting point 1.25 inches above the original mounting.
>
> Bill Berle
> www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
> www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
> <Tail Extensions August 2018-1.JPG>
> <Tail Extensions August 2018-2.JPG>
> <Tail Extensions August 2018-3.JPG>
> <Tail Extensions August 2018-4.JPG>
> <Tail Extensions August 2018-5.JPG>
Message 13
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | : Kolb-List:Stabilizer Angle |
Bill,
The way I understand it drooping the ailerons will cause them to act as "flaps".
This will slightly increase the lift of that portion of the wing while adding
a small bit of drag to the bottom of the wing.
This small bit of drag will help move the nose in a downward position.
Going by Richard Pike's description it also moves the center of lift aft. Although
in this case a small amount. One would think that this also would help move
the nose downward.
A wing with a small amount of lift added by applying flaps will stall at a higher
angle of attack, therefore the root with no flaps will stall before the tips
with a little bit of flaps. This should mean that the tips will stall last while
preserving aileron effectiveness up until the last bit of flow separates
from the wing. Assuming the wings have no "twist" to them.
Somewhere in your plans there should be data about setting the fuselage to wing
root angle. I would verify this on both wings. Then move on to verify that the
wing tips have the same angle. Next I would seriously do the weight an balance
again, myself just to confirm that it is correct. If you discover that your
wings are anything but flat along the bottom it may be causing some of your problems.
That is likely to cause a wing heavy problem but not a tail heavy problem
unless they are twisted equally but that is another discussion entirely.
I would use different scales as a second check point. For this you don't have to
have certified scales. For the W&B of my Firefly I bought three $25 bathroom
scales from Walmart. I used known weights of various amounts and checked all
3 against the known value. To my surprise they all agreed within the 0.2# resolution
of the scales. When I got the plane into level flight attitude, I put a
scale under all wheels and took a reading. Then rotated the scales one wheel
clockwise and took new readings. Then did it again. I averaged all the readings
and calculated the CG. You could do the same kind of thing with scales that
were not identical.
Doing an analysis of what is going on is a different process than second guessing
the design. The first part of the analysis should be confirmation of the product
against the design (plans). You already know that the plane flies tail heavy
and that applying down elevator corrects this condition. A trim tab will
also correct for this condition. Even though it may be a band-aid and not solve
the underlying problem in the end it may be the most practical. By the same
token adjusting the tail plane angle is also a band-aid if it was built to plans
in the first place.
Sleuthing out the root cause could be fun and infuriating at the same time. Only
you can decide how far you want to pursue it.
Along with double checking the W&B checking the boom tube length would seem most
appropriate. I had not considered that someone might have intentionally cut
it down from the plans. But you never know if you didn't do it yourself. :)
If for some reason your CG is out of whack, no amount of tweaking or tabbing or
twisting will solve that problem. It may mask the problem but it will still be
there waiting to bite you in the butt at the worst time possible. Murphy and
all that....
Best of luck and keep posting. We're here to help if we can.
Stuart
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Berle
Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2018 11:29 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List:Stabilizer Angle
I tried to take 0one of the photos showing that the angleo f the tail is nearly
equal to the angle of the lower surface of the wing.
Since I did not build this aircraft originally, I have no idea if the wing angle
is higher or lower than stock. It looks really high because I put taller landing
gear (Kolb Slingshot) on it, plus big tires.
I will try at least one "crow hop" down the runway with the stabilizer set like
it is in the photo. If it seems controllable then I will continue climbing and
flying, If it requires a large pull rearward on the stick then I will land and
re-set the stabilizer angle to the last setting which was safe enough to make
the last test flight.
Regarding drooping the ailerons: Last time I flew I did NOT notice that the ailerons
were flexed upward by air loads. They looked like they were parallel to
the bottom wing surface. If the ailerons were flying in a reflexed upward position
I would have seen the balance weights below the wing, which I did not.
I also moved the control stick left and right firmly, and I did not see the ailerons
twisting (meaning more movement at the inboard end of the aileron than the
outboard). So I have to say that form my limited amount of testing it does
NOT seem that the ailerons are "springy", or that the air moves them upward. So
it seems that drooping them on the ground would make them fly in the same drooped
position. I can easily see how this will pitch the nose down and solve part
or all of the trim problem, but I cannot understand how this will not create
"wash-in" or aerodynamic twist in the wrong direction. Can someone explain
to me WHY drooping the ailerons will NOT create a wiing that stalls at the tips
before the root?
I am absolutely 1000% happy and willing to try drooping the ailerons, so long as
I can understand why it will not make the aircraft more prone to tip stall.
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
--------------------------------------------
On Sun, 8/12/18, Rick Neilsen <neilsenrm@gmail.com> wrote:
Bill
Wow never saw a Kolb horizontal stabilizer mounted so high. The photos show a
bunch but brings up a lot of questions.
It hard to see from the angle of your photo but it looks like the horizontal stabilizer
is in line with the wing. Is the wing set with a much higher angle of
attack than stock? I can't comment on if that is good or bad. If it is higher,
that would explain why the horizontal stabilizer has to be set that high. Be
careful. What is the impact on all this?? Kolbs tend to look like they are flying
a bit nose down but your plane might go a bit beyond that.
Message 14
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Annual Rock House fly-in |
I was just reminded that its time to invite all of you to the Rock House
for the annual fly-in and liars convention. Every one who can find their
way here through the smoke and fires will be welcome, regardless of what
you fly or drive. At this time the condition of the skies and resultant
visibility is in question. However having in mind how long these things
have been burning might indicate that they should some time soon run out of
fuel, and visibility can be restored.
If you decide to come, you should be prepared to camp and should have some
means of staving off starvation if necessary to get here. Once here we will
supply most if not all of your food requirements. Every body pitches in and
contributes what they can or we what we need. The only thing we are short
on is shade. There is a pool ( small, but suitable) hot tub, Sauna. Bring
towels and the guy's should bring suits, females, clothing optional.
The fly-in will last as long as the interest is there. Since I live in a
remote area, visitors equal distraction, so stay as long as you want to.
Larry
--
*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 15
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: : Kolb-List:Stabilizer Angle |
Hi Kurt, thanks for chiming in on this discussion.
My fuel tanks are stock Kolb plastic cans in the stock (inline) position. I had
briefly thought about putting the fuel where the rear "seat" was, but in the
end I did not want to redesign that. I know other people have put the fuel in
the "rear seat" location. It makes sense to me. If it turns out that my CG is
behind the maximum Kolb factory limit then I may have to move the fuel, because
there is not any safe place to put the battery in the front of the aircraft.
Stuart thank you for your input as well, and thanks to everyone else (John, Richard,
George, Larry, and the "usual suspects") once again.
I am really sorry if I seem to have "an attitude" about any of this, but I absolutely
promise I am not being a smart ass here. I just need the answers and opinions
of others to make sense and not conflict with established basic aerodynamics
or basic aircraft engineering principles.
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities
--------------------------------------------
On Sun, 8/12/18, K I <wrk2win4u@msn.com> wrote:
Subject: Re: Kolb-List:Stabilizer Angle
To: "kolb-list@matronics.com" <kolb-list@matronics.com>
Date: Sunday, August 12, 2018, 11:05 AM
Hi Bill,
I was just looking
at the photos. Are your fuel tanks mounted side by side or
inline?
From:
owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
<owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com> on behalf of
Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
Sent: Saturday, August 11, 2018 6:04:11 PM
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Subject: RE: Kolb-List:Stabilizer Angle
Per the
previous discussions regarding my FS2 / HKS testing, I have
raised the leading edge of the stabilizers significantly
higher than they had originally been, in order to counteract
the amount of stick force I had to hold to keep
the nose level.
I am trying to attach photos of the modification to this
e-mail.
These photos represent the mounting point 1.25 inches above
the original mounting.
Bill Berle
www.ezflaphandle.com
- safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
www.grantstar.net
- winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit
entities
Message 16
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
That would be Sept 8th and RSVP please.
Larry
--
*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 17
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Larry where is this fly in? I=99m in East Texas (Waskom). If time p
ermits I would love to try a trip. Just not sure how far. Flying a Aeronca
Chief cruising at 65. May take a while.
Thanks
Robert Lobdell
Waskom, Texas
Our goal as proficient Pilots is using superior planning to avoid situations
which require superior skill.
> On Aug 12, 2018, at 2:06 PM, Larry Cottrell <lcottrell1020@gmail.com> wrot
e:
>
> That would be Sept 8th and RSVP please.
> Larry
>
> --
> The older I get, the less tolerant I am of those who are intolerant of oth
ers.
>
> If you forward this email, or any part of it, please remove my email addre
ss before sending.
Message 18
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Annual Rock House fly-in |
I'm tweaking the 5th wheel and making my loading list at this moment.
The Rock House Flyin is the highlight of my year. For many years I flew
there in the MKIII, but haven't had the urge to make that long flight
out and back since my last in 2014, to celebrate my 75th birthday.
We have a great time visiting and couldn't find a better place to chill
out and relax for a while.
Anxious to get going.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Larry
Cottrell
Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2018 1:55 PM
Subject: Kolb-List: Annual Rock House fly-in
I was just reminded that its time to invite all of you to the Rock House
for the annual fly-in and liars convention. Every one who can find their
way here through the smoke and fires will be welcome, regardless of what
you fly or drive. At this time the condition of the skies and resultant
visibility is in question. However having in mind how long these things
have been burning might indicate that they should some time soon run out
of fuel, and visibility can be restored.
If you decide to come, you should be prepared to camp and should have
some means of staving off starvation if necessary to get here. Once here
we will supply most if not all of your food requirements. Every body
pitches in and contributes what they can or we what we need. The only
thing we are short on is shade. There is a pool ( small, but suitable)
hot tub, Sauna. Bring towels and the guy's should bring suits, females,
clothing optional.
The fly-in will last as long as the interest is there. Since I live in a
remote area, visitors equal distraction, so stay as long as you want to.
Larry
--
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 19
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Robert L/Kolbers,
Straight line distance from Waskom to the Rock House is aprx 1500 miles,
about a 23-24 hour flight. It takes me 24 hours to fly to the Rock
House averaging 80 mph. Be a good flight in an Aeronca.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert
Lobdell
Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2018 2:21 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Fly-in
Larry where is this fly in? I=99m in East Texas (Waskom). If
time permits I would love to try a trip. Just not sure how far. Flying
a Aeronca Chief cruising at 65. May take a while.
Thanks
Robert Lobdell
Waskom, Texas
Message 20
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
What state, town, did you say fly in is?
Fire star II
Sent from my iPhone
> On Aug 12, 2018, at 2:20 PM, Robert Lobdell <robpen5557@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Larry where is this fly in? I=99m in East Texas (Waskom). If time
permits I would love to try a trip. Just not sure how far. Flying a Aeron
ca Chief cruising at 65. May take a while.
>
> Thanks
> Robert Lobdell
> Waskom, Texas
>
>
> Our goal as proficient Pilots is using superior planning to avoid situatio
ns which require superior skill.
>
>> On Aug 12, 2018, at 2:06 PM, Larry Cottrell <lcottrell1020@gmail.com> wro
te:
>>
>> That would be Sept 8th and RSVP please.
>> Larry
>>
>> --
>> The older I get, the less tolerant I am of those who are intolerant of ot
hers.
>>
>> If you forward this email, or any part of it, please remove my email addr
ess before sending.
Message 21
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: : Kolb-List:Stabilizer Angle |
Here are a few thoughts from the guy with less Kolb time than you.
(Probably less than 10 minutes. :-) )
One possible reason to not get the same reversed inboard/outboard stall
pattern when you droop the Kolb ailerons is that they are more or less full
span, so the root gets the same change that a 'normal' plane's aileron area
would get when the ailerons droop.
But I'm kinda in the cg camp, as well. Did you mention whether you had to
pull the nose up to flair for landing, or did you have to push even in the
flair? If you were always pushing, I wouldn't want to fly it again before
*knowing* where the cg really is. I had one experience with a tail heavy
Luscombe (water in the fuselage), and I'm quite proud to still be alive. I
suspect that a Kolb, with the engine already behind the cg, could be
completely unrecoverable if it has an out of limit aft cg
& the nose got 'up'.
As someone mentioned, I'd be verifying every measurement distance and angle
you can find in the plans, before doing anything else. Then I'd re-do
weight & balance, paying particular attention to not only where the datum
is, but also where the measurement points are, because with the extended
gear, everything changes. I have no idea how detailed the Firestar
instructions are, but my prehistoric Twinstar plans had very little in the
way of useful w&b instructions.
Charlie
On Sun, Aug 12, 2018 at 11:29 AM, Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
>
> I tried to take 0one of the photos showing that the angleo f the tail is
> nearly equal to the angle of the lower surface of the wing.
>
> Since I did not build this aircraft originally, I have no idea if the wing
> angle is higher or lower than stock. It looks really high because I put
> taller landing gear (Kolb Slingshot) on it, plus big tires.
>
> I will try at least one "crow hop" down the runway with the stabilizer set
> like it is in the photo. If it seems controllable then I will continue
> climbing and flying, If it requires a large pull rearward on the stick then
> I will land and re-set the stabilizer angle to the last setting which was
> safe enough to make the last test flight.
>
> Regarding drooping the ailerons: Last time I flew I did NOT notice that
> the ailerons were flexed upward by air loads. They looked like they were
> parallel to the bottom wing surface. If the ailerons were flying in a
> reflexed upward position I would have seen the balance weights below the
> wing, which I did not.
>
> I also moved the control stick left and right firmly, and I did not see
> the ailerons twisting (meaning more movement at the inboard end of the
> aileron than the outboard). So I have to say that form my limited amount of
> testing it does NOT seem that the ailerons are "springy", or that the air
> moves them upward. So it seems that drooping them on the ground would make
> them fly in the same drooped position. I can easily see how this will pitch
> the nose down and solve part or all of the trim problem, but I cannot
> understand how this will not create "wash-in" or aerodynamic twist in the
> wrong direction. Can someone explain to me WHY drooping the ailerons will
> NOT create a wiing that stalls at the tips before the root?
>
> I am absolutely 1000% happy and willing to try drooping the ailerons, so
> long as I can understand why it will not make the aircraft more prone to
> tip stall.
>
> Bill Berle
> www.ezflaphandle.com - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft
> www.grantstar.net - winning proposals for non-profit and
> for-profit entities
>
>
Message 22
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
The Rock House is located at 42 40.419 N 117 51.198 W If you Google it it
will show you what it looks like.
Its in the SE corner of Oregon.
Larry
On Sun, Aug 12, 2018 at 1:30 PM Robert Lobdell <robpen5557@gmail.com> wrote
:
> Larry where is this fly in? I=99m in East Texas (Waskom). If tim
e permits
> I would love to try a trip. Just not sure how far. Flying a Aeronca Chi
ef
> cruising at 65. May take a while.
>
> Thanks
> Robert Lobdell
> Waskom, Texas
>
>
> Our goal as proficient Pilots is using superior planning to avoid
> situations which require superior skill.
>
> On Aug 12, 2018, at 2:06 PM, Larry Cottrell <lcottrell1020@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> That would be Sept 8th and RSVP please.
> Larry
>
> --
> *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.*
>
>
--
*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 23
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
That would be Oregon and the nearest town is Jordan Valley at 52 miles.
Larry
On Sun, Aug 12, 2018 at 2:10 PM David Pemberton <pemberton.david@gmail.com>
wrote:
> What state, town, did you say fly in is?
>
> Fire star II
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Aug 12, 2018, at 2:20 PM, Robert Lobdell <robpen5557@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Larry where is this fly in? I=99m in East Texas (Waskom). If tim
e permits
> I would love to try a trip. Just not sure how far. Flying a Aeronca Chi
ef
> cruising at 65. May take a while.
>
> Thanks
> Robert Lobdell
> Waskom, Texas
>
>
> Our goal as proficient Pilots is using superior planning to avoid
> situations which require superior skill.
>
> On Aug 12, 2018, at 2:06 PM, Larry Cottrell <lcottrell1020@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> That would be Sept 8th and RSVP please.
> Larry
>
> --
> *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.*
>
>
--
*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 24
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Kolbs don't stall inboard first. If they did, Flaperons equipped models
would be falling out of the sky.
Don't take my word on that. I can't explain why Kolbs don't stall inboard
first, but I know they don't through "actual" experience. That's like our
elevator hinge attachment. I can't explain why it works, but I know it does
without a doubt. Its history.
I'm surprised you haven't checked wing incidence. It may be correct or it
may be way out.
It doesn't matter to me whether you droop your ailerons or not. I think you
have a bigger problem in aircraft rigging. I don't recall Kolbs wanting to
climb like yours. Normally they need nose up trim.
I don't know anyone that can fix your Kolb through email.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
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! --
|