Matronics Email Lists :: View topic

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

Victor 1+ Report
Goto page 1, 2 Next

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Kolb-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

jbhart(at)onlyinternet.ne
Guest

Posted: Sun Jul 12, 2009 5:54 pm Post subject: Victor 1+ Report

FireFlyers & Kolbers,



I had planned to fly the Victor 1+ all summer and then take it off and mount 

the MZ 34.  But since the Victor quit, I decided to take it off and set it 

aside as I believe I can get back in the air quicker my mounting the MZ 34.  

And I will repair the Victor 1+ this winter.



Went over to the airport this morning, and started to remove the engine.  

When I took the exhaust system off, I believe I discovered the problem.  

Inside the exhaust manifold ball I found several little metal balls made 

from small strips.  They were magnetic.  What I believe happened is that the 

upper piston ring lost it's locator pin and the ring rotated about the 

piston until the free end was chopped off in the intake port.  Could not 

tell anything from the plugs as they were completely black from running a 

rich mixture for the last bit.  There was little to no build up on the 

plugs.



Before removing the engine, I weighed the fueslage, and then I stripped off 

everything that had to do with the Victor 1+.  At first it was tough because 

it was like removing an old friend (it has been pushing me around for eight 

years or 520 flights) and knowing that you are not going to be putting it 

back.  I asked for help at the FBO to lift the engine off.  After mounting 

the MZ 34 and hanging the propeller in place, I weighted again.  The weight 

difference was 44 pounds.  When I get the correct propeller bolts and mount 

directly to the MZ 34  hub, I believe I can get off another pound.



Still have lots to do to get back in the air. 



Jack B. Hart FF004

Winchester, IN

herbgh(at)nctc.com
Guest

Posted: Sun Jul 12, 2009 6:16 pm Post subject: Victor 1+ Report

44 lbs Jack??  Is that a typo?   Herb

At 09:52 PM 7/12/2009, you wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  



FireFlyers & Kolbers,



I had planned to fly the Victor 1+ all summer and then take it off and mount

the MZ 34.  But since the Victor quit, I decided to take it off and set it

aside as I believe I can get back in the air quicker my mounting the MZ 34.

And I will repair the Victor 1+ this winter.



Went over to the airport this morning, and started to remove the engine.

When I took the exhaust system off, I believe I discovered the problem.

Inside the exhaust manifold ball I found several little metal balls made

from small strips.  They were magnetic.  What I believe happened is that the

upper piston ring lost it's locator pin and the ring rotated about the

piston until the free end was chopped off in the intake port.  Could not

tell anything from the plugs as they were completely black from running a

rich mixture for the last bit.  There was little to no build up on the

plugs.



Before removing the engine, I weighed the fueslage, and then I stripped off

everything that had to do with the Victor 1+.  At first it was tough because

it was like removing an old friend (it has been pushing me around for eight

years or 520 flights) and knowing that you are not going to be putting it

back.  I asked for help at the FBO to lift the engine off.  After mounting

the MZ 34 and hanging the propeller in place, I weighted again.  The weight

difference was 44 pounds.  When I get the correct propeller bolts and mount

directly to the MZ 34  hub, I believe I can get off another pound.



Still have lots to do to get back in the air.



Jack B. Hart FF004

Winchester, IN



Checked by AVG - www.avg.com

07/12/09 08:20:00

ulflyer(at)verizon.net
Guest

Posted: Sun Jul 12, 2009 6:55 pm Post subject: Victor 1+ Report

How many hours did you have on the Victor before it went South (so to speak).

jerb

jbhart(at)onlyinternet.ne
Guest

Posted: Sun Jul 12, 2009 7:13 pm Post subject: Victor 1+ Report

At 09:10 PM 7/12/09 -0500, you wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  



44 lbs Jack??  Is that a typo?   Herb




	


Herb,



No, it means the FireFly empty weight should be some where around 210 

pounds.



Jack B. Hart FF004

Winchester, IN

jbhart(at)onlyinternet.ne
Guest

Posted: Sun Jul 12, 2009 7:13 pm Post subject: Victor 1+ Report

At 07:54 PM 7/12/09 -0700, you wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  



How many hours did you have on the Victor before it went South (so to speak).




	


Jerb,



186 flight hours.



Jack B. Hart FF004

Winchester, IN

herbgh(at)nctc.com
Guest

Posted: Sun Jul 12, 2009 8:08 pm Post subject: Victor 1+ Report

Jack



   Empty wt with the 447?   Herb





At 11:08 PM 7/12/2009, you wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  



At 09:10 PM 7/12/09 -0500, you wrote:

 >

 >

 >44 lbs Jack??  Is that a typo?   Herb

 >



Herb,



No, it means the FireFly empty weight should be some where around 210

pounds.



Jack B. Hart FF004

Winchester, IN

jbhart(at)onlyinternet.ne
Guest

Posted: Mon Jul 13, 2009 5:52 am Post subject: Victor 1+ Report

At 11:03 PM 7/12/09 -0500, you wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  



Jack



   Empty wt with the 447?   Herb




	


Herb,



Engine         447   Victor   MZ 34



Displacement   436    382      313



FF Empty Wt    248    252      210+ est



I am bulkhead mounting the engine free air with no pull starter, up side 

down off the rear of the root tube.  No propeller spacer is required.  By 

doing this I can rotate the reducer to move the propeller up and the left to 

keep the FireFly from slipping at cruise.  Also it puts the pumper 

carburetor on the left side so that I can flip it over which points the low 

and high speed adjustment screw toward the front.  I hope to use Richard 

Pike's mechanical system idea to be able to adjust the air fuel mixture from 

the cockpit.



Jack B. Hart FF004

Winchester, IN

herbgh(at)nctc.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Jul 13, 2009 6:17 am Post subject: Victor 1+ Report

Jack



   This moves the engine back a bit to solve a potential cg problem?  Herb

At 09:54 AM 7/13/2009, you wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  



At 11:03 PM 7/12/09 -0500, you wrote:

 >

 >

 >Jack

 >

 >   Empty wt with the 447?   Herb

 >



Herb,



Engine         447   Victor   MZ 34



Displacement   436    382      313



FF Empty Wt    248    252      210+ est



I am bulkhead mounting the engine free air with no pull starter, up side

down off the rear of the root tube.  No propeller spacer is required.  By

doing this I can rotate the reducer to move the propeller up and the left to

keep the FireFly from slipping at cruise.  Also it puts the pumper

carburetor on the left side so that I can flip it over which points the low

and high speed adjustment screw toward the front.  I hope to use Richard

Pike's mechanical system idea to be able to adjust the air fuel mixture from

the cockpit.



Jack B. Hart FF004

Winchester, IN



Checked by AVG - www.avg.com

07/12/09 17:56:00

jbhart(at)onlyinternet.ne
Guest

Posted: Mon Jul 13, 2009 8:12 am Post subject: Victor 1+ Report

At 09:17 AM 7/13/09 -0500, you wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  



Jack



   This moves the engine back a bit to solve a potential cg problem?  Herb




	


Herb,



To move the cg forward a little, I will cut the propeller to 60 inches, 

remove the thick washer that goes between the IVO propeller blades and the 

spacer and mount the muffler as far forward as I can.  I used bulkhead 

vibration isolators in conjunction with the standard FireFly engine mounting 

plate isolators.  If I have to, I can discard these isolators and move the 

whole works forward another 1.25 inches forward.



 	  Quote: 	
		  From weighing the fuselage with tail surfaces before and after, I found the 

ratio of the tail wheel weight to total weight to be 0.235 before and 0.253 
	


after.  I may have to move the battery to the nose and/or put a cushion 

behind my lower back to move the cg further forward.  When the wings are 

remounted I will be able to see how the total cg compares with what it was 

with the 447 and Victor 1+. 



Jack B. Hart FF004

Winchester, IN

DAquaNut(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Jul 13, 2009 2:39 pm Post subject: Victor 1+ Report

In a message dated 7/12/2009 10:13:32 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  jbhart(at)onlyinternet.net writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		       Jack, 	
                Can you tell us what the HP of the MZ 34 is, and the weight  ,and what  prop you plan to use?

  	  Quote: 	
		                      Ed Diebel       Hou.    TX           Do Not Archive    	
  

  	  Quote: 	
		  

No,    it means the FireFly empty weight should be some where around 210    

pounds.



Jack B. Hart FF004

Winchester,  IN



	
 Looking for love this summer? Find it now on AOL Personals.

  [quote][b]

jbhart(at)onlyinternet.ne
Guest

Posted: Tue Jul 14, 2009 1:22 pm Post subject: Victor 1+ Report

From: DAquaNut(at)aol.com

Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 18:35:10 EDT

 	  Quote: 	

Can you tell us what the HP of the MZ 34 is, and the weight, and what prop you plan to use?

 	  Quote: 	

Ed,

When I purchased my engine back in February of 2004, it was rated at 27 hp.  

It weighed 42 pounds after removing the manual start mechanism.  The largest 

propeller I can swing by running the engine inverted and rotating the belt 

reduction unit up 120 degrees is 55 inches.  I have an IVO that I cut power 

tips on that is a little over 54 inches that I will use.

Today I mounted the propeller and started shimming the engine to take care 

of P factor.  Tomorrow I will finish shimming and also slide the battery as 

far forward on the root tube as I can.  Right now the FireFly minus wings cg 

is a little 3.2 inches back from where it was with the Victor 1+ on board.  

Today I removed the turtle shell from behind the fuselage to give a little 

better air flow over the head and cylinder.  Also I measured the weight 

difference in propeller blades.  These two changes took off another pound.  

This brings the fuselage weight down to 45 pounds below what it originally 

was.  Tomorrow I will check fuselage cg again to see if I am making headway.

Jack B. Hart FF004

Winchester, IN

John Hauck

Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 4639
Location: Titus, Alabama (hauck's holler)

Posted: Tue Jul 14, 2009 2:12 pm Post subject: Victor 1+ Report

> Today I mounted the propeller and started shimming the engine to take 

care

 	  Quote: 	
		   of P factor.



 Jack B. Hart FF004

 Winchester, IN


	




Never had a P factor problem with a Kolb aircraft of any model, turning up 

to 72" 3 blade props with 95 hp (actual), or as little as 35 hp turning a 

50" blade.



Wonder why your little FF has a significant enough P factor problem to 

warrant off setting thrust line/shimming the engine?



 john h

mkIII

_________________
John Hauck
MKIII/912ULS
hauck's holler
Titus, Alabama

jbhart(at)onlyinternet.ne
Guest

Posted: Tue Jul 14, 2009 4:53 pm Post subject: Victor 1+ Report

At 04:57 PM 7/14/09 -0500, you wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  

Wonder why your little FF has a significant enough P factor problem to 

warrant off setting thrust line/shimming the engine?




	


John,



It is all in how you want to trim out your aircraft for cruise.  If I didn't 

have a slip ball indicator, I wouldn't worry about it.  But if the ball is 

out at cruise, you are slipping and that means you are flying with a higher 

drag profile than is necessary.  If the propeller rotary axis is not 

parallel to the direction of travel, there will be P factor.  By shimming 

one can move the ball closer to the center.  When further change gives no 

gain, then one can offset the propeller on a pusher aircraft to make up the 

difference and bring the ball into center without a trim tab on the rudder. 



This problem is common to all single propeller tractor and pusher single 

engine aircraft from RC models and on up through large ga and military 

aircraft. 



More info can be found at:



http://jackbhart.com/firefly/firefly56.html



In terms of significance, it is only how much you want to put into something 

to make, in my case, the FireFly a little more economical to fly with 

reduced pilot effort.  If you use a rudder trim tab to bring in the ball at 

cruise without checking for P factor, you run the chance of flying at 

reduced propeller efficiencies.  The shimming and offset solution is a win 

win, in that, the propeller is operating at it's highest efficiency, and 

there is no drag caused by an extra trim tab.



Jack B. Hart FF004

Winchester, IN

John Hauck

Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 4639
Location: Titus, Alabama (hauck's holler)

Posted: Tue Jul 14, 2009 7:05 pm Post subject: Victor 1+ Report

But if the ball is

 	  Quote: 	
		   out at cruise, you are slipping and that means you are flying with a 

 higher

 drag profile than is necessary.  If the propeller rotary axis is not

 parallel to the direction of travel, there will be P factor.  By shimming

 one can move the ball closer to the center.  When further change gives no

 gain, then one can offset the propeller on a pusher aircraft to make up 

 the

 difference and bring the ball into center without a trim tab on the 

 rudder.



 >
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   Jack B. Hart FF004

 Winchester, IN


	


How do you trim the aircraft relative wind?  I trim mine with the rudder.



How do you counteract adverse yaw caused by the cork screwing prop wash 

hitting one side of the vertical stabilizer and relative wind hitting the 

opposite side of the rudder?  On the MKIII, I do it with a very large trim 

tab.



I think p factor has little of no effect on our Kolbs.



During my experiments with the FS and MKIII, I was not able to see any 

significant change/advantage in offsetting the engine thrust line 

horizontally or vertically.



I know you are an avid experimenter and enjoy attempting to squeeze every 

gram of efficiency out of your FF.  You also fly much slower and with much 

less hp than most of us.  However, for the average Kolb flyer like me and 

most others, there doesn't seem to be much advantage in changing the 

standard engine mount orientation.



john h

mkIII

_________________
John Hauck
MKIII/912ULS
hauck's holler
Titus, Alabama

Thom Riddle

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1597
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA (9G0)

Posted: Wed Jul 15, 2009 3:33 am Post subject: Re: Victor 1+ Report

Jack,



Please keep you reports coming on the MZ installation. I'm sure most would like to see photos when you get a chance too.

_________________
Thom Riddle
Buffalo, NY (9G0)

Don't worry about old age... it doesn't last very long.
- Anonymous

jbhart(at)onlyinternet.ne
Guest

Posted: Wed Jul 15, 2009 4:20 am Post subject: Victor 1+ Report

At 10:05 PM 7/14/09 -0500, you wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  


	


John,



If your aircraft is trimmed out for your desired cruise, further trimming 

with the rudder should be unnecessary, and the ball centering will be 

independent of the relative wind.



I do not subscribe to the cork screw prop wash theory.  I do subscribe to 

the adverse roll caused by the torque reaction between the propeller and the 

aircraft.  This is countered with a little ailerons bias which then causes 

the adverse yaw.  This can be removed by P factor adjustment and offsetting 

the propeller.  Very large trim tabs can be a sign of poor airframe and 

engine adjustment.



P factor affects any single propeller aircraft where the propeller rotary 

axis is not parallel to the relative wind.



An advantage of the reduction units is to be able to displace the thrust 

line to the side without a major weight shift.  Also, I have found that the 

more propeller wash I can get over the FireFly's low horizontal tail 

surfaces the better it performs at low speed and on the ground.



Yes, I do have an advantage in that the FireFly is lighter and slower, but 

even so if the FireFly was not well trimmed I would be throwing money away.  

Also, it requires more pilot energy to fly an untrimmed aircraft.  The 

heavier the aircraft and the faster you cruise with the ball off center, the 

more it is hitting you in the wallet.  Using a trim tab to bring the ball in 

is better than cruising with the ball out of center.



Jack B. Hart FF004

Winchester, IN

 	  Quote: 	
		  

How do you trim the aircraft relative wind?  I trim mine with the rudder.



How do you counteract adverse yaw caused by the cork screwing prop wash 

hitting one side of the vertical stabilizer and relative wind hitting the 

opposite side of the rudder?  On the MKIII, I do it with a very large trim 

tab.



I think p factor has little of no effect on our Kolbs.



During my experiments with the FS and MKIII, I was not able to see any 

significant change/advantage in offsetting the engine thrust line 

horizontally or vertically.



I know you are an avid experimenter and enjoy attempting to squeeze every 

gram of efficiency out of your FF.  You also fly much slower and with much 

less hp than most of us.  However, for the average Kolb flyer like me and 

most others, there doesn't seem to be much advantage in changing the 

standard engine mount orientation.



john h

mkIII

lucien

Joined: 03 Jun 2007
Posts: 721
Location: santa fe, NM

Posted: Wed Jul 15, 2009 5:56 am Post subject: Re: Victor 1+ Report

 	  jbhart(at)onlyinternet.ne wrote: 	
		  

I do not subscribe to the cork screw prop wash theory.  I do subscribe to 

the adverse roll caused by the torque reaction between the propeller and the 

aircraft.  This is countered with a little ailerons bias which then causes 

the adverse yaw.  This can be removed by P factor adjustment and offsetting 

the propeller.  Very large trim tabs can be a sign of poor airframe and 

engine adjustment.

	




Don't mean to jump in but, speaking of that... I never could figure out what was going on with my FSII.



One thing I noted with it was it needed left rudder on the takeoff roll to varying degrees depending on what technique I used, i.e. a right-turning tendency. But the prop rotated right hand (and it was a monster too, a 68" WD 3-blade) so the torque or P-factor affects should have caused the plane to go to the _left_. This was how other planes with a RH turning prop I've flown behaved, but my FSII was the opposite.



The only explanation that seemed to fit was the corkscrewing airflow theory, where, I guess, it was hitting the vertical stab from the right and thus trying to swing the plane to the right.



This seemed to be how it behaved in the air too when doing slow flight or slow high powered climbs. 



So judging by that, it couldn't have been P-factor or torque but something else stronger than either of those affects. Well, my guess anyway. There was no offset in the engine mounting, the crank was parallel to the tailboom.....



Still scratching my head over that one...



LS

_________________
LS
Titan II SS

flykolb(at)pa.net
Guest

Posted: Wed Jul 15, 2009 6:22 am Post subject: Victor 1+ Report

An interesting experiment:

Chock your main wheels securely and the support the tail of the  

airplane by a padded support under the fuselage tube so the tailwheel  

is off the ground.  Start the engine and add some throttle.  As you  

blip the throttle watch what the rudder does.

Dennis

Quoting lucien <lstavenhagen(at)hotmail.com>:

 	  Quote: 	

 jbhart(at)onlyinternet.ne wrote:

>

> I do not subscribe to the cork screw prop wash theory.  I do subscribe to

> the adverse roll caused by the torque reaction between the propeller and the

> aircraft.  This is countered with a little ailerons bias which then causes

> the adverse yaw.  This can be removed by P factor adjustment and offsetting

> the propeller.  Very large trim tabs can be a sign of poor airframe and

> engine adjustment.

>

 Don't mean to jump in but, speaking of that... I never could figure  

 out what was going on with my FSII.

 One thing I noted with it was it needed left rudder on the takeoff  

 roll to varying degrees depending on what technique I used, i.e. a  

 right-turning tendency. But the prop rotated right hand (and it was  

 a monster too, a 68" WD 3-blade) so the torque or P-factor affects  

 should have caused the plane to go to the _left_. This was how other  

 planes with a RH turning prop I've flown behaved, but my FSII was  

 the opposite.

 The only explanation that seemed to fit was the corkscrewing airflow  

 theory, where, I guess, it was hitting the vertical stab from the  

 right and thus trying to swing the plane to the right.

 This seemed to be how it behaved in the air too when doing slow  

 flight or slow high powered climbs.

 So judging by that, it couldn't have been P-factor or torque but  

 something else stronger than either of those affects. Well, my guess  

 anyway. There was no offset in the engine mounting, the crank was  

 parallel to the tailboom.....

 Still scratching my head over that one...

 LS

 --------

 LS

 Titan II SS

 Read this topic online here:

 http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 53123#253123

captainron1(at)cox.net
Guest

Posted: Wed Jul 15, 2009 7:40 am Post subject: Victor 1+ Report

There is an easy way to settle the cork screw debate.



Someone needs to hook a string in the prop wash and see if it blows straight back or if it blows back at an angle supporting the cork screw motion. This can be done on the ground with a string tied to the tail and see what it does. Or maybe even by observing if the rudder is forced to one side or the other while holding the brakes.

As for P-factor that is directly related to how aligned your motor thrust line with the relative wind. You could have a counter or clockwise. It all depends which blade is taking the bigger bite out of the air, that's the one that will have the most torque to exert on the flight path. The Kolb thrust line is pretty close to its center of mass so its moment arm for affecting deviation from flight path is pretty weak, as compared to a Cessna 150. But of course the Kolb is also very light so it may be noticeable even with the short moment arm. 



Ron (at) KFHU

================================================

---- lucien <lstavenhagen(at)hotmail.com> wrote: 



=============


jbhart(at)onlyinternet.ne wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   

 I do not subscribe to the cork screw prop wash theory.  I do subscribe to 

 the adverse roll caused by the torque reaction between the propeller and the 

 aircraft.  This is countered with a little ailerons bias which then causes 

 the adverse yaw.  This can be removed by P factor adjustment and offsetting 

 the propeller.  Very large trim tabs can be a sign of poor airframe and 

 engine adjustment.

 


	




Don't mean to jump in but, speaking of that... I never could figure out what was going on with my FSII.



One thing I noted with it was it needed left rudder on the takeoff roll to varying degrees depending on what technique I used, i.e. a right-turning tendency. But the prop rotated right hand (and it was a monster too, a 68" WD 3-blade) so the torque or P-factor affects should have caused the plane to go to the _left_. This was how other planes with a RH turning prop I've flown behaved, but my FSII was the opposite.



The only explanation that seemed to fit was the corkscrewing airflow theory, where, I guess, it was hitting the vertical stab from the right and thus trying to swing the plane to the right.



This seemed to be how it behaved in the air too when doing slow flight or slow high powered climbs. 



So judging by that, it couldn't have been P-factor or torque but something else stronger than either of those affects. Well, my guess anyway. There was no offset in the engine mounting, the crank was parallel to the tailboom.....



Still scratching my head over that one...



LS



--------

LS

Titan II SS





Read this topic online here:



http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 53123#253123



--

kugelair.com

John Hauck

Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 4639
Location: Titus, Alabama (hauck's holler)

Posted: Wed Jul 15, 2009 8:25 am Post subject: Victor 1+ Report

Jack H/Folks:



 	  Quote: 	
		   If your aircraft is trimmed out for your desired cruise, further trimming

 with the rudder should be unnecessary, and the ball centering will be

 independent of the relative wind.


	


Relative wind has affected every aircraft I ever flew, fixed and rotary 

wing.  The fix was step on the ball and get it centered.



 	  Quote: 	
		   I do not subscribe to the cork screw prop wash theory.


	


Cork screw prop wash, on my mkIII, is not theory.



 	  Quote: 	
		  Very large trim tabs can be a sign of poor airframe and

 engine adjustment.


	


Might be, but I go with what I have.  I have experiemented with different 

engine positions/angles, and the old cork screw prop wash never changes.  It 

keeps hitting the left side of the vertical stab, and relative wind is 

hitting the right side of that big rudder.  The fix, a rudder trim tab that 

will get the job done.  Mine keeps the ball of the slip/skid indicator 

centered.



 	  Quote: 	
		   P factor affects any single propeller aircraft where the propeller rotary

 axis is not parallel to the relative wind.


	


I agree with the above, but not enough to try and correct at normal cruise. 

I think my cruise speed is what the aircraft was designed for.  If I slow it 

down in comparison to the way you fly, everything changes, including the 

prop angle of attack in relative wind.



 >Also, I have found that the

 	  Quote: 	
		   more propeller wash I can get over the FireFly's low horizontal tail

 surfaces the better it performs at low speed and on the ground.


	


Never seen or flown a Kolb aircraft that did not have more than enough prop 

wash over the tail to take care of any situation.  If there is not enough 

prop wash over your FF's tail, it is because you have screwed it up 

adjusting prop thrust lines and flying with under powered engines.  There 

are occassions when a burst of full throttle is all that saved my mkIII from 

ground looping, as experienced during my flight from Gallup, NM, to MV, 

while landing at Chinle, AZ.



 > The  heavier the aircraft and the faster you cruise with the ball off 

center, the

 	  Quote: 	
		   more it is hitting you in the wallet.  Using a trim tab to bring the ball 

 in

 is better than cruising with the ball out of center.



 Jack B. Hart FF004

 Winchester, IN


	


In a previous post I said you fly a lot different than most of us.  Pilot 

flying style, model Kolb, interests, engine power, affect aircraft 

performance tremendously.



I am happy with my mkIII after nearly 3,000 hours and 17 years living with 

and flying it.  You would not be happy with my mkIII and I would not be 

happy with your FF, the way you have it set up.  That is what makes the Kolb 

List what it is.  If I don't happen to agree with someone, doesn't mean I 

don't like them or what they are doing.  Just not the way I do it.



I don't tell folks how to do it.  I try to share what I do and let you all 

pick and choose what they want, if anything.



Getting ready to get out of here in the morning.  Got a long boring 800 

miles to fly in some really hot, humid, hazy weather.  It gets worse as I 

get further NE, closer to the larger population centers.  I also have to 

contend with the Washington DC restricted area.  Going to make me fly 

further north and west than I would normally.  Thanks to the terrorists!!!



jhn h

mkIII

_________________
John Hauck
MKIII/912ULS
hauck's holler
Titus, Alabama

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Kolb-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page 1, 2 Next
Page 1 of 2

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum