---------------------------------------------------------- Kolb-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Sun 08/12/18: 24 ---------------------------------------------------------- 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 _____________________________________ Time: 05:38:48 AM PST US Subject: Re: Kolb-List:Stabilizer Angle From: "Richard Pike" 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 _____________________________________ Time: 06:29:42 AM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: RE: 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 _____________________________________ Time: 07:08:38 AM PST US From: Denny Baber Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Spads 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 _____________________________________ Time: 07:24:59 AM PST US From: Denny Baber Subject: Re: Kolb-List: 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 _____________________________________ Time: 08:17:09 AM PST US From: Rick Neilsen 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 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 _____________________________________ Time: 08:24:19 AM PST US From: Denny Baber Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Spads 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 _____________________________________ Time: 08:31:20 AM PST US From: Denny Baber Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Spads 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 _____________________________________ Time: 09:29:27 AM PST US From: Bill Berle 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 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 _____________________________________ Time: 10:28:21 AM PST US From: George Helton 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 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 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 ____________________________________ Time: 10:32:55 AM PST US From: George Helton 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 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 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 ____________________________________ Time: 11:05:34 AM PST US From: K I 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 on behalf of Bill Berle 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 - safety & performance u pgrade for light aircraft www.grantstar.net - winning proposals f or non-profit and for-profit entities ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 11:30:19 AM PST US Subject: Re: Kolb-List:Stabilizer Angle From: chris davis 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 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 13 ____________________________________ Time: 11:30:23 AM PST US From: "Stuart Harner" Subject: RE: 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 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 ____________________________________ Time: 11:57:51 AM PST US From: Larry Cottrell 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 15 ____________________________________ Time: 12:01:54 PM PST US From: Bill Berle 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 wrote: Subject: Re: Kolb-List:Stabilizer Angle To: "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 on behalf of Bill Berle 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 ____________________________________ Time: 12:07:20 PM PST US From: Larry Cottrell Subject: Kolb-List: Fly-in 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 ____________________________________ Time: 12:28:58 PM PST US From: Robert Lobdell Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Fly-in 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 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 ____________________________________ Time: 12:57:39 PM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: RE: Kolb-List: 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 ____________________________________ Time: 01:06:02 PM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Fly-in 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 ____________________________________ Time: 01:08:57 PM PST US From: David Pemberton Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Fly-in 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 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 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 ____________________________________ Time: 01:12:29 PM PST US From: Charlie England 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 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 ____________________________________ Time: 01:21:33 PM PST US From: Larry Cottrell Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Fly-in 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 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 > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 01:22:39 PM PST US From: Larry Cottrell Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Fly-in 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 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 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 > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 01:26:26 PM PST US From: "John Hauck" Subject: Kolb-List: Spades 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 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post A New Message kolb-list@matronics.com UN/SUBSCRIBE http://www.matronics.com/subscription List FAQ http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/Kolb-List.htm Web Forum Interface To Lists http://forums.matronics.com Matronics List Wiki http://wiki.matronics.com Full Archive Search Engine http://www.matronics.com/search 7-Day List Browse http://www.matronics.com/browse/kolb-list Browse Digests http://www.matronics.com/digest/kolb-list Browse Other Lists http://www.matronics.com/browse Live Online Chat! http://www.matronics.com/chat Archive Downloading http://www.matronics.com/archives Photo Share http://www.matronics.com/photoshare Other Email Lists http://www.matronics.com/emaillists Contributions http://www.matronics.com/contribution ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.