Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - HKS / Firestar FLIGHT TEST resumes

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

HKS / Firestar FLIGHT TEST resumes
Goto page 1, 2 Next

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Kolb-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 12:02 am Post subject: HKS / Firestar FLIGHT TEST resumes

Howdy Kolbers, I test flew the HKS powered Firestar again yesterday morning. First test flight with the completely sealed center section. 



It showed a 10% improvement in "cruise" speed, going from the previous 45 MPH to 50 MPH now in level flight at 5400 RPM. 



This is an improvement, but not nearly as much of an improvement as I was looking for. The aircraft is still 8-10 MPH slower than Larry C's HKS Firestar in the same (no strut fairings or gear leg fairings) configuration.



More importantly, the aircraft did NOT have anywhere near the spectacular climb performance that the Kolb should have with 50-60HP. Although I am off the ground in a couple of hundred feet, by the time I get to the far end of a 3800 foot runway, I am only 250 feet above ground. From what I have learned, the Firestar should be twice or three times that high over that distance.



So considering the cost of replacing the gearbox (which I simply cannot do at present), I have to go back and do something I really did not want to do at all. But I'm out of options. I am going to turn the gearbox from the "down" position to the "up" position and install a much larger propeller. Probably going from 65 inch diameter 3 blade to 72 inch diameter 3 blade.



This will OF COURSE require me to put the stabilizer back to the original stock position, which will make John H and others happy to hear. (Currently the front stabilizer attach bolts are 1.125 inches above the stock fitting hole). Moving the thrust line that far upwards will create a very strong pitch-down, so I am now hoping that the stock stabilizer angle will be "down" far enough. I am hoping to be able to use full pwoer on takeoff, but I will have to approach it slowly.



In the current configuration (stabilizer raised), the tail comes up automatically on takeoff roll, and I have to apply full rearward stick to hold it level until the aircraft lifts off. As it lifts off and gains speed, I can relax the stick and fly normally. Returning the stabilizer to the stock position will hopefully provide a little more down-force on the tail from propeller blast, and HOPEFULLY it will offset the pitch-down force form the propeller being higher above the aircraft.



So now I have to find a propeller to borrow, and turn the gearbox around. I willr eport on how well this did or did not work, although I do expect to see a fairly good improvement in thrust. As you all may remember, I got 250 pounds of static thrust, which is less than some other people (like Wakataka copied below) measured with smaller engines.



I'm afraid that I am the one who puts the "mental" in "experimental"...



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, 11/11/18, wakataka <wakataka(at)charter.net> wrote:



 Subject: Re: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test

 To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com

 Date: Sunday, November 11, 2018, 4:26 PM

 

 

 "wakataka" <wakataka(at)charter.net>

 

 I measured 290 pounds static with a

 Rotax 377 turning a 72" IVO prop. There was a slight amount

 of tailwind that day, so I suspect that number is slightly

 inflated, but I'm sure it produces at least 250 pounds. It

 jumps right off the ground.

 

 --------

 There is something fascinating about

 science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out

 of such a trifling investment of fact.

 

 Mark Twain

 

 

 

 

 Read this topic online here:

 

 http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=484870#484870

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Support Your Lists This Month --

 (And Get Some AWESOME FREE Gifts!)

 Fund Raiser.  Click on

 to find out more about

 Incentive Gifts provided

 www.mypilotstore.com

 support!

                

     -Matt Dralle, List Admin.

 The Kolb-List Email Forum -

 Navigator to browse

 List Un/Subscription,

 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,

      - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -

 via the Web Forums!

     - NEW MATRONICS LIST WIKI -

 Email List Wiki!

    - List Contribution Web Site -

 support!

                

     -Matt Dralle, List Admin.

gdhelton(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 4:21 am Post subject: HKS / Firestar FLIGHT TEST resumes

Hi Bill. Sounds like things are improving. I’m going to ask a John H. question. Did you do a speed check, WOT straight and level?

Your climb seems low. What are you using for your climb speed. I’ve found my Firestar that 44 to 46mph works best. 850 to 1000 fpm seems the norm. I gotten higher figures then that, but with a nice headwind.

I would guess you’ll get 5 to 15 mph by adding a enclosure and wing strut fairings. That’s been my experience. I’m actually running a 40hp , 2702 Hirth with a 2:29 G50 gearbox and a 64” 3 blade Powerfin.  Propspeed works out to be 2400 rpm (at) 5500 rpm, which is the suggested max. rpm. I can cruise anywhere between 40 and 65 mph. WOT is around 70 to 75 mph straight and level. The wings are basically the same so I’m just giving you what I’m getting out of a original Firestar. Good luck!

George H.

Firestar 

14GDH 

Mesick, Michigan 

gdhelton(at)gmail.com



Sent from my iPhone



 	  Quote: 	
		   On Nov 19, 2018, at 2:38 AM, Bill Berle <victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.net> wrote:

 

 

 

 Howdy Kolbers, I test flew the HKS powered Firestar again yesterday morning. First test flight with the completely sealed center section. 

 

 It showed a 10% improvement in "cruise" speed, going from the previous 45 MPH to 50 MPH now in level flight at 5400 RPM. 

 

 This is an improvement, but not nearly as much of an improvement as I was looking for. The aircraft is still 8-10 MPH slower than Larry C's HKS Firestar in the same (no strut fairings or gear leg fairings) configuration.

 

 More importantly, the aircraft did NOT have anywhere near the spectacular climb performance that the Kolb should have with 50-60HP. Although I am off the ground in a couple of hundred feet, by the time I get to the far end of a 3800 foot runway, I am only 250 feet above ground. From what I have learned, the Firestar should be twice or three times that high over that distance.

 

 So considering the cost of replacing the gearbox (which I simply cannot do at present), I have to go back and do something I really did not want to do at all. But I'm out of options. I am going to turn the gearbox from the "down" position to the "up" position and install a much larger propeller. Probably going from 65 inch diameter 3 blade to 72 inch diameter 3 blade.

 

 This will OF COURSE require me to put the stabilizer back to the original stock position, which will make John H and others happy to hear. (Currently the front stabilizer attach bolts are 1.125 inches above the stock fitting hole). Moving the thrust line that far upwards will create a very strong pitch-down, so I am now hoping that the stock stabilizer angle will be "down" far enough. I am hoping to be able to use full pwoer on takeoff, but I will have to approach it slowly.

 

 In the current configuration (stabilizer raised), the tail comes up automatically on takeoff roll, and I have to apply full rearward stick to hold it level until the aircraft lifts off. As it lifts off and gains speed, I can relax the stick and fly normally. Returning the stabilizer to the stock position will hopefully provide a little more down-force on the tail from propeller blast, and HOPEFULLY it will offset the pitch-down force form the propeller being higher above the aircraft.

 

 So now I have to find a propeller to borrow, and turn the gearbox around. I willr eport on how well this did or did not work, although I do expect to see a fairly good improvement in thrust. As you all may remember, I got 250 pounds of static thrust, which is less than some other people (like Wakataka copied below) measured with smaller engines.

 

 I'm afraid that I am the one who puts the "mental" in "experimental"...

 

 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, 11/11/18, wakataka <wakataka(at)charter.net> wrote:

 

 Subject: Re: HKS / Firestar STATIC THRUST test

 To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com

 Date: Sunday, November 11, 2018, 4:26 PM

 

 

 "wakataka" <wakataka(at)charter.net>

 

 I measured 290 pounds static with a

 Rotax 377 turning a 72" IVO prop. There was a slight amount

 of tailwind that day, so I suspect that number is slightly

 inflated, but I'm sure it produces at least 250 pounds. It

 jumps right off the ground.

 

 --------

 There is something fascinating about

 science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out

 of such a trifling investment of fact.

 

 Mark Twain

 

 

 

 

 Read this topic online here:

 

 http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=484870#484870

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Support Your Lists This Month --

 (And Get Some AWESOME FREE Gifts!)

 Fund Raiser.  Click on

 to find out more about

 Incentive Gifts provided

 www.mypilotstore.com

 support!

                

     -Matt Dralle, List Admin.

 The Kolb-List Email Forum -

 Navigator to browse

 List Un/Subscription,

 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,

      - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -

 via the Web Forums!

     - NEW MATRONICS LIST WIKI -

 Email List Wiki!

    - List Contribution Web Site -

 support!

                

     -Matt Dralle, List Admin.

John Hauck

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

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 7:18 am Post subject: HKS / Firestar FLIGHT TEST resumes

George H/Kolbers:



I could get the same numbers as George H with my Ultrastar powered with a 35 hp Cuyuna ULII02, and the only streamlining was my big toes on the open rudder pedals.



I think our buddy Bill B has a sick engine.  Maybe a sick engine, gear box, prop combo.   Who knows?  I have no idea sitting here with my second cup of hot coffee in front of a computer screen 2500 miles away.



john h

mkIII

Titus, Alabama



--

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

victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 9:06 am Post subject: HKS / Firestar FLIGHT TEST resumes

I did not do a WOT run on the flight Saturday, but did see 5850 RPM on a shallow clomb when getting to altitude, at approx. 50-52 MPH. 5800 RPM is the maximum contitnuous power. The HKS has a takeoff rating of 6200 RPM for five minutes.



The engine does not appear to be sick, the compression is very very high. It's a significant effort to swing the propeller by hand through a compression stroke, far far more difficult than on any "normal" airplane engine (Lycoming / Continental). Can't do it with one hand, even out at the end of the propeller.



Again, the aircraft is off the ground in a few seconds, four maybe five seconds. It's off the ground in less than 300 feet, and my aircraft is almost 90 lb. heavier than the "brochure" weight of a Firestar, and I'm a fat SOB myself (200+)



Yesterday's flight started with about 8 gallons of fuel on board. I have not measured/marked the new fuel tank yet, but I put in 7 gallons and had a small amount in there form the previous engine test run.



If I had an unlimited budget of time and money I would do things a lot differently (we all would!), but in my case I am very limited in cost at the moment.Turning the gearbox into the up position does not cost me anything, and hopefully I can borrow a propeller to at least try. I'm not able to just buy a prop without knowing that it will solve the issue I have been fighting with.



I am very much aware that having the propeller up that high above the tail boom will be something that Kolb recommends against. Bryan said that 38-39 inches above the tailboom is the limit and he would not want to fly a Kolb if the prop was up above 40 inches. I'm pretty sure that turning the HKS gearbox around will put me over 40 inches.



Bill Berle

www.ezflaphandle.com  - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft

www.grantstar.net           - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities



--------------------------------------------

On Mon, 11/19/18, John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> wrote:



 Subject: RE: HKS / Firestar FLIGHT TEST resumes

 To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com

 Date: Monday, November 19, 2018, 7:17 AM

 

 

 Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com>

 

 George H/Kolbers:

 

 I could get the same numbers as George

 H with my Ultrastar powered with a 35 hp Cuyuna ULII02, and

 the only streamlining was my big toes on the open rudder

 pedals.

 

 I think our buddy Bill B has a sick

 engine.  Maybe a sick engine, gear box, prop

 combo.   Who knows?  I have no idea sitting here

 with my second cup of hot coffee in front of a computer

 screen 2500 miles away.

 

 john h

 mkIII

 Titus, Alabama

 

 --

victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 9:12 am Post subject: HKS / Firestar FLIGHT TEST resumes

One other important question for the Kolbers... HOW HIGH can the propeller be (center of the prop) above the top of the tailboom tube before it becomes a problem?



I know there have been Firestars with 582 and 912 engines that use larger propellers than the "normal" 503 power. Does anyone know what the dimensions were on those aircraft? What is the highest prop location that any of you believe can be "tolerated" by a Firestar?



I have also ready several posts over the years by Kolbers saying that people have frequently put Kolbs over on the nose. I certainly do NOT want to do that.



Bill Berle

www.ezflaphandle.com  - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft

www.grantstar.net           - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities



--------------------------------------------

On Mon, 11/19/18, John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> wrote:



 Subject: RE: HKS / Firestar FLIGHT TEST resumes

 To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com

 Date: Monday, November 19, 2018, 7:17 AM

 

 

 Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com>

 

 George H/Kolbers:

 

 I could get the same numbers as George

 H with my Ultrastar powered with a 35 hp Cuyuna ULII02, and

 the only streamlining was my big toes on the open rudder

 pedals.

 

 I think our buddy Bill B has a sick

 engine.  Maybe a sick engine, gear box, prop

 combo.   Who knows?  I have no idea sitting here

 with my second cup of hot coffee in front of a computer

 screen 2500 miles away.

 

 john h

 mkIII

 Titus, Alabama

 

 --

victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 9:26 am Post subject: HKS / Firestar FLIGHT TEST resumes

Just checked the HKS manual, turning the gearbox from down to up raises the prop hub by 7 3/8".



I have a 65 inch propeller now, and the tip is just over 3/4" above the tailbooom tube. Which means my prop hub is 33 1/4" above the tube, and if I switch the gearbox around it will be 40 5/8".



What I do not know is whether that 40 inches mentioned by Bryan is an absolute life/death safety limit, or whether it's "kinda getting up there", or whether Bryan is just being overly cautious and the Kolb will fly safely with the prop four feet above the tailboom.



I am not trying to be annoying or overly nit-picking here, but I do want to do this safely. This is all suppposed to be fun, not death-defying.



Bill Berle

www.ezflaphandle.com  - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft

www.grantstar.net           - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities



--------------------------------------------

On Mon, 11/19/18, John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> wrote:



 Subject: RE: HKS / Firestar FLIGHT TEST resumes

 To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com

 Date: Monday, November 19, 2018, 7:17 AM

 

 

 Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com>

 

 George H/Kolbers:

 

 I could get the same numbers as George

 H with my Ultrastar powered with a 35 hp Cuyuna ULII02, and

 the only streamlining was my big toes on the open rudder

 pedals.

 

 I think our buddy Bill B has a sick

 engine.  Maybe a sick engine, gear box, prop

 combo.   Who knows?  I have no idea sitting here

 with my second cup of hot coffee in front of a computer

 screen 2500 miles away.

 

 john h

 mkIII

 Titus, Alabama

 

 --

John Hauck

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

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 9:47 am Post subject: HKS / Firestar FLIGHT TEST resumes

Maybe we have a failure to communicate.  That happens through email.



If max continuous rpm is 5800 rpm, then that is what you want to see at WOT straight and level flight.  Got to hold the throttle wide open until the aircraft is flying as fast as it will go straight and level.  If it is climbing at 5850 rpm it is under pitched and will turn higher in level flight WOT.  You know, like running around in 2 gear with a 3 speed transmission.  Normal climb rpm WOT will be a couple hundred rpm lower that WOT rpm when in straight and level flight.  6200 rpm for 5 min is like "military power".  Forget about that unless you have an in flight adjustable prop.



If Bryan Melborn gave you a max limit for thrust line, I'd adhere to that.  The higher the thrust line the more power it will absorb to overcome pitch down.  With a big boy like you it will take even more power.  How much?  I don't know, but it will rob power as the thrust line is raised.



My recommendation is:



-Make sure engine is putting out rated power/hp. 



-Make sure the aircraft is rigged correctly.



-Stop what you are doing and pitch the prop correctly through flight test - straight and level WOT bump 5800 rpm.



If the above doesn't work, sell or burn the aircraft.



Like I said in a previous email, my fully open 35hp Ultrastar with bare fuselage would fly 75 mph, climb like a home sick angel, and get off the ground in a second with a 180 lb pilot and 7.75 gal of fuel.



I've been lucky enough to fly many different Kolb aircraft over the last 35 years and I've never flown one that performed as you describe yours flies.  Makes ya wonder doesn't it.



john h

mkIII

Titus, Alabama





--

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

victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 11:06 am Post subject: HKS / Firestar FLIGHT TEST resumes

Well, selling or burning it has occurred to me more than once 



The Firestar folds down to a size that fits in the narrow space I have for it. I cannot store an Airbike, Quicksilver, Kitfox, Avid, or Zenair 701 in this small space. That's why I went looking for a Kolb in the firsty place. So the Kolb and I are stuck with each other for now. I also don't like giving up on a project and failing to succeed.



The flying characteristics of this particular Firestar do not support the idea of an aircraft that is bent, twisted, poorly built, etc. Fortunately I have owned enough airplanes to be able to spot somehting that was not built well, and I have looked at this one enough to know it is not twisted, kinked, etc. The fabric is reasonably tight, similar to the Taylorcrafts, Cubs, etc. The fabric is riveted to the ribs and is not bubblling away from the airfoil surface. The tail is on straight, or very very nearly straight. There are no doublers, scab patches, fish-mouth repairs, etc. on the steel cage.



The bottom of the wing is about 3-4 degrees to the horizon in level flight. Very similar or equal to the many photos I have researched and seen of Kolbs flying.



The control response is normal. Elevator and rudder work correctly, ailerons work correctly but are slower than the elevator and rudder. This matches everything I have learned and read about Kolbs.



When I come in to land, the aircraft behaves normally when I reduce the power. It does NOT drop like a brick with the power reduced. There is a definite glide, and it is very controllable, the only difference is that the speed bleeds off faster than the Taylorcraft or Cub or Cessna. Not as much time between pre-flare "roundout" and touchdown. Again this is all 100% consistent with what Kolbers and other ultralight people have explained to me as being normal for this type of aircraft. So if this particular Kolb was "Wrong", twisted, bent, rigged wrong, etc. then I suspect it would not fly as well as this one does.



Anyway, I apologize if I created abig mystery that is annoying or perplexing to the Kolbers. I'm going to try one more flight with increased propeller pitch and see if that makes any significant difference. If that doesn't work I will flip the gearbox and borrow a larger propeller and try that. If that doesn't work THEN I may think about burning it...



Bill Berle

www.ezflaphandle.com  - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft

www.grantstar.net           - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities



--------------------------------------------

On Mon, 11/19/18, John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> wrote:



 Subject: RE: HKS / Firestar FLIGHT TEST resumes

 To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com

 Date: Monday, November 19, 2018, 9:46 AM

 

 

 Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com>

 

 Maybe we have a failure to

 communicate.  That happens through email.

 

 If max continuous rpm is 5800 rpm, then

 that is what you want to see at WOT straight and level

 flight.  Got to hold the throttle wide open until the

 aircraft is flying as fast as it will go straight and

 level.  If it is climbing at 5850 rpm it is under

 pitched and will turn higher in level flight WOT.  You

 know, like running around in 2 gear with a 3 speed

 transmission.  Normal climb rpm WOT will be a couple

 hundred rpm lower that WOT rpm when in straight and level

 flight.  6200 rpm for 5 min is like "military

 power".  Forget about that unless you have an in flight

 adjustable prop.

 

 If Bryan Melborn gave you a max limit

 for thrust line, I'd adhere to that.  The higher the

 thrust line the more power it will absorb to overcome pitch

 down.  With a big boy like you it will take even more

 power.  How much?  I don't know, but it will rob

 power as the thrust line is raised.

 

 My recommendation is:

 

 -Make sure engine is putting out rated

 power/hp. 

 

 -Make sure the aircraft is rigged

 correctly.

 

 -Stop what you are doing and pitch the

 prop correctly through flight test - straight and level WOT

 bump 5800 rpm.

 

 If the above doesn't work, sell or burn

 the aircraft.

 

 Like I said in a previous email, my

 fully open 35hp Ultrastar with bare fuselage would fly 75

 mph, climb like a home sick angel, and get off the ground in

 a second with a 180 lb pilot and 7.75 gal of fuel.

 

 I've been lucky enough to fly many

 different Kolb aircraft over the last 35 years and I've

 never flown one that performed as you describe yours

 flies.  Makes ya wonder doesn't it.

 

 john h

 mkIII

 Titus, Alabama

 

 

 

 

 --

Pfatchantz(at)protonmail.
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 11:24 am Post subject: HKS / Firestar FLIGHT TEST resumes

Bill



  Been off of the list a while...and likely every suggestion under the sun has been offered....Mine is to simply have someone take some pics of you in flight...post them here....

   By the way..when taking off...you should feel as if the nose is getting ready to take a divit...Herb

Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.



‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

On Monday, November 19, 2018 1:05 PM, Bill Berle <victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.net> wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   



 Well, selling or burning it has occurred to me more than once 



 The Firestar folds down to a size that fits in the narrow space I have for it. I cannot store an Airbike, Quicksilver, Kitfox, Avid, or Zenair 701 in this small space. That's why I went looking for a Kolb in the firsty place. So the Kolb and I are stuck with each other for now. I also don't like giving up on a project and failing to succeed.



 The flying characteristics of this particular Firestar do not support the idea of an aircraft that is bent, twisted, poorly built, etc. Fortunately I have owned enough airplanes to be able to spot somehting that was not built well, and I have looked at this one enough to know it is not twisted, kinked, etc. The fabric is reasonably tight, similar to the Taylorcrafts, Cubs, etc. The fabric is riveted to the ribs and is not bubblling away from the airfoil surface. The tail is on straight, or very very nearly straight. There are no doublers, scab patches, fish-mouth repairs, etc. on the steel cage.



 The bottom of the wing is about 3-4 degrees to the horizon in level flight. Very similar or equal to the many photos I have researched and seen of Kolbs flying.



 The control response is normal. Elevator and rudder work correctly, ailerons work correctly but are slower than the elevator and rudder. This matches everything I have learned and read about Kolbs.



 When I come in to land, the aircraft behaves normally when I reduce the power. It does NOT drop like a brick with the power reduced. There is a definite glide, and it is very controllable, the only difference is that the speed bleeds off faster than the Taylorcraft or Cub or Cessna. Not as much time between pre-flare "roundout" and touchdown. Again this is all 100% consistent with what Kolbers and other ultralight people have explained to me as being normal for this type of aircraft. So if this particular Kolb was "Wrong", twisted, bent, rigged wrong, etc. then I suspect it would not fly as well as this one does.



 Anyway, I apologize if I created abig mystery that is annoying or perplexing to the Kolbers. I'm going to try one more flight with increased propeller pitch and see if that makes any significant difference. If that doesn't work I will flip the gearbox and borrow a larger propeller and try that. If that doesn't work THEN I may think about burning it...



 Bill Berle

 www.ezflaphandle.com  - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft

 www.grantstar.net           - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities

lcottrell

Joined: 29 May 2006
Posts: 1494
Location: Jordan Valley, Or

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 11:34 am Post subject: HKS / Firestar FLIGHT TEST resumes

I just checked the height of my prop and it is 33 1/4 from the tail boom. Since I have longer legs on mine it is not easy to tip over on its nose, but prior to the longer legs I have accomplished that ignominious feat at least twice, maybe three times. Not fun, do not recommend it.  I personally think you should not get into a hurry to change the gear box around.

I have a few questions however. All the speeds that I relate as coming from my plane are those shown over the ground by GPS. I do not trust anything else, and it is the only thing that I feel can accurately portray the actual speed of the plane. I have by tweaking the angle of the pitot tube gotten my ASI to pretty closely match what the gps reads. In my video's the speeds seem to be higher than reality. ( just my opinion)

I also have my prop set to a pitch that will allow me to climb at max rpm of 6100. The climb difference between 5800 and 6100 is quite noticeable. I also rarely see more than a 350 FPM climb rate, mostly less. In fact I have never seen the climb rate claimed by those of you who have very light firestars that are operating at or nearer sea level than I do. When I am climbing out, I am bumping redline - 6100, always! When I get to where I want to be or pass the two minute mark, I throttle back to cruise - 5430. The engine seems to like it and I will be turning around 62 - 64 MPH per the GPS. I have a trim tab on the elevator that keeps me level at 5430- hands off ( for a while) I check my GPS to see what my climb rate is. If I am close to level flight my speed will be around 62 MPH. It doesn't take much climb to slow that speed by a lot. If I want to climb, I increase the throttle, and leave the stick in neutral position. For instance I wanted to clear the Steen's Mtn, 39 miles away. A climb of 6000 feet. At 5800 with the stick neutral it took almost 38 miles to achieve that. However I did it at 58 MPH. 

I have flown my plane with a passenger that put me up to the Max gross, and probably over by as much as 60 pounds. It will fly, but it takes a long time to get up to speed, and take off. The climb is anemic and it handles a lot like a C 150. I always feel as though I am riding a knife edge when I am at gross. When I first got the plane it weighed 275 empty. Now I am running about 410. It used to jump off the ground, sometimes before I was ready. Now it doesn't. My speed with a 503 loaded for a trip to Texas, was a max- Throttle set to 6200, of 60 MPH. Most times slower.

All of this was without any streamlining. I added streamlining to the struts, gained about three MPH, streamlined the gear legs, added another three.

My point is that I think you are where you should be considering your weight. Lets face it the more weight you put on it the more doggy its going to be. It was intended to be an ultralight, or to fit in that category. Yeah, I think you would be a lot better off with a different gear box. However your main problems is that it is so heavy. I believe you can improve the speed with some stream lining. I would also suggest you try the elevator back in its original position just for grins, and to see if you actually need it jacked up in the air.

I think you are about where you should be. Try cleaning it up a bit, lighten up on the pitch till you can hit 6100 wot on climb out. you need to remember that the competition you have for your plane is within the limitations of your plane. If its heavy, it will fly badly compared to a lightly loaded one. Your best bet is to do the things that you can with cleaning it up. If you can shed any weight off the plane do so, Other wise like me you will just have to live with what Nature has saddled you with. Keep feelers out for the right gear box, or perhaps  a lot lighter plane.

Larry 

On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 10:10 AM Bill Berle <victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.net (victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.net)> wrote:



[quote]--> Kolb-List message posted by: Bill Berle <victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.net (victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.net)>

 

 I did not do a WOT run on the flight Saturday, but did see 5850 RPM on a shallow clomb when getting to altitude, at approx. 50-52 MPH. 5800 RPM is the maximum contitnuous power. The HKS has a takeoff rating of 6200 RPM for five minutes.

 

 The engine does not appear to be sick, the compression is very very high. It's a significant effort to swing the propeller by hand through a compression stroke, far far more difficult than on any "normal" airplane engine (Lycoming / Continental). Can't do it with one hand, even out at the end of the propeller.

 

 Again, the aircraft is off the ground in a few seconds, four maybe five seconds. It's off the ground in less than 300 feet, and my aircraft is almost 90 lb. heavier than the "brochure" weight of a Firestar, and I'm a fat SOB myself (200+)

 

 Yesterday's flight started with about 8 gallons of fuel on board. I have not measured/marked the new fuel tank yet, but I put in 7 gallons and had a small amount in there form the previous engine test run.

 

 If I had an unlimited budget of time and money I would do things a lot differently (we all would!), but in my case I am very limited in cost at the moment.Turning the gearbox into the up position does not cost me anything, and hopefully I can borrow a propeller to at least try. I'm not able to just buy a prop without knowing that it will solve the issue I have been fighting with.

 

 I am very much aware that having the propeller up that high above the tail boom will be something that Kolb recommends against. Bryan said that 38-39 inches above the tailboom is the limit and he would not want to fly a Kolb if the prop was up above 40 inches. I'm pretty sure that turning the HKS gearbox around will put me over 40 inches.

 

 Bill Berle

 www.ezflaphandle.com  - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft

 www.grantstar.net           - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities

 

 --------------------------------------------

 On Mon, 11/19/18, John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com (jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com)> wrote:

 

  Subject: RE: HKS / Firestar FLIGHT TEST resumes

  To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com (kolb-list(at)matronics.com)

  Date: Monday, November 19, 2018, 7:17 AM

 

  --> Kolb-List message posted by: "John

  Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com (jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com)>

 

  George H/Kolbers:

 

  I could get the same numbers as George

  H with my Ultrastar powered with a 35 hp Cuyuna ULII02, and

  the only streamlining was my big toes on the open rudder

  pedals.

 

  I think our buddy Bill B has a sick

  engine.  Maybe a sick engine, gear box, prop

  combo.   Who knows?  I have no idea sitting here

  with my second cup of hot coffee in front of a computer

  screen 2500 miles away.

 

  john h

  mkIII

  Titus, Alabama

 

  --

_________________
do not archive

lcottrell

Joined: 29 May 2006
Posts: 1494
Location: Jordan Valley, Or

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 11:45 am Post subject: HKS / Firestar FLIGHT TEST resumes

I just checked the height of my prop and it is 33 1/4 from the tail boom. Since I have longer legs on mine it is not easy to tip over on its nose, but prior to the longer legs I have accomplished that ignominious feat at least twice, maybe three times. Not fun, do not recommend it.  I personally think you should not get into a hurry to change the gear box around.

I have a few questions however. All the speeds that I relate as coming from my plane are those shown over the ground by GPS. I do not trust anything else, and it is the only thing that I feel can accurately portray the actual speed of the plane. I have by tweaking the angle of the pitot tube gotten my ASI to pretty closely match what the gps reads. In my video's the speeds seem to be higher than reality. ( just my opinion)

I also have my prop set to a pitch that will allow me to climb at max rpm of 6100. The climb difference between 5800 and 6100 is quite noticeable. I also rarely see more than a 350 FPM climb rate, mostly less. In fact I have never seen the climb rate claimed by those of you who have very light firestars that are operating at or nearer sea level than I do. When I am climbing out, I am bumping redline - 6100, always! When I get to where I want to be or pass the two minute mark, I throttle back to cruise - 5430. The engine seems to like it and I will be turning around 62 - 64 MPH per the GPS. I have a trim tab on the elevator that keeps me level at 5430- hands off ( for a while) I check my GPS to see what my climb rate is. If I am close to level flight my speed will be around 62 MPH. It doesn't take much climb to slow that speed by a lot. If I want to climb, I increase the throttle, and leave the stick in neutral position. For instance I wanted to clear the Steen's Mtn, 39 miles away. A climb of 6000 feet. At 5800 with the stick neutral it took almost 38 miles to achieve that. However I did it at 58 MPH. 

I have flown my plane with a passenger that put me up to the Max gross, and probably over by as much as 60 pounds. It will fly, but it takes a long time to get up to speed, and take off. The climb is anemic and it handles a lot like a C 150. I always feel as though I am riding a knife edge when I am at gross. When I first got the plane it weighed 275 empty. Now I am running about 410. It used to jump off the ground, sometimes before I was ready. Now it doesn't. My speed with a 503 loaded for a trip to Texas, was a max- Throttle set to 6200, of 60 MPH. Most times slower.

All of this was without any streamlining. I added streamlining to the struts, gained about three MPH, streamlined the gear legs, added another three.

My point is that I think you are where you should be considering your weight. Lets face it the more weight you put on it the more doggy its going to be. It was intended to be an ultralight, or to fit in that category. Yeah, I think you would be a lot better off with a different gear box. However your main problems is that it is so heavy. I believe you can improve the speed with some stream lining. I would also suggest you try the elevator back in its original position just for grins, and to see if you actually need it jacked up in the air.

I think you are about where you should be. Try cleaning it up a bit, lighten up on the pitch till you can hit 6100 wot on climb out. you need to remember that the competition you have for your plane is within the limitations of your plane. If its heavy, it will fly badly compared to a lightly loaded one. Your best bet is to do the things that you can with cleaning it up. If you can shed any weight off the plane do so, Other wise like me you will just have to live with what Nature has saddled you with. Keep feelers out for the right gear box, or perhaps  a lot lighter plane

Larry



On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 12:10 PM Bill Berle <victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.net (victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.net)> wrote:



[quote]--> Kolb-List message posted by: Bill Berle <victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.net (victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.net)>

 

 Well, selling or burning it has occurred to me more than once 

 

 The Firestar folds down to a size that fits in the narrow space I have for it. I cannot store an Airbike, Quicksilver, Kitfox, Avid, or Zenair 701 in this small space. That's why I went looking for a Kolb in the firsty place. So the Kolb and I are stuck with each other for now. I also don't like giving up on a project and failing to succeed.

 

 The flying characteristics of this particular Firestar do not support the idea of an aircraft that is bent, twisted, poorly built, etc. Fortunately I have owned enough airplanes to be able to spot somehting that was not built well, and I have looked at this one enough to know it is not twisted, kinked, etc. The fabric is reasonably tight, similar to the Taylorcrafts, Cubs, etc. The fabric is riveted to the ribs and is not bubblling away from the airfoil surface. The tail is on straight, or very very nearly straight. There are no doublers, scab patches, fish-mouth repairs, etc. on the steel cage.

 

 The bottom of the wing is about 3-4 degrees to the horizon in level flight. Very similar or equal to the many photos I have researched and seen of Kolbs flying.

 

 The control response is normal. Elevator and rudder work correctly, ailerons work correctly but are slower than the elevator and rudder. This matches everything I have learned and read about Kolbs.

 

 When I come in to land, the aircraft behaves normally when I reduce the power. It does NOT drop like a brick with the power reduced. There is a definite glide, and it is very controllable, the only difference is that the speed bleeds off faster than the Taylorcraft or Cub or Cessna. Not as much time between pre-flare "roundout" and touchdown. Again this is all 100% consistent with what Kolbers and other ultralight people have explained to me as being normal for this type of aircraft. So if this particular Kolb was "Wrong", twisted, bent, rigged wrong, etc. then I suspect it would not fly as well as this one does.

 

 Anyway, I apologize if I created abig mystery that is annoying or perplexing to the Kolbers. I'm going to try one more flight with increased propeller pitch and see if that makes any significant difference. If that doesn't work I will flip the gearbox and borrow a larger propeller and try that. If that doesn't work THEN I may think about burning it...

 

 Bill Berle

 www.ezflaphandle.com  - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft

 www.grantstar.net           - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities

 

 --------------------------------------------

 On Mon, 11/19/18, John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com (jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com)> wrote:

 

  Subject: RE: HKS / Firestar FLIGHT TEST resumes

  To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com (kolb-list(at)matronics.com)

  Date: Monday, November 19, 2018, 9:46 AM

 

  --> Kolb-List message posted by: "John

  Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com (jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com)>

 

  Maybe we have a failure to

  communicate.  That happens through email.

 

  If max continuous rpm is 5800 rpm, then

  that is what you want to see at WOT straight and level

  flight.  Got to hold the throttle wide open until the

  aircraft is flying as fast as it will go straight and

  level.  If it is climbing at 5850 rpm it is under

  pitched and will turn higher in level flight WOT.  You

  know, like running around in 2 gear with a 3 speed

  transmission.  Normal climb rpm WOT will be a couple

  hundred rpm lower that WOT rpm when in straight and level

  flight.  6200 rpm for 5 min is like "military

  power".  Forget about that unless you have an in flight

  adjustable prop.

 

  If Bryan Melborn gave you a max limit

  for thrust line, I'd adhere to that.  The higher the

  thrust line the more power it will absorb to overcome pitch

  down.  With a big boy like you it will take even more

  power.  How much?  I don't know, but it will rob

  power as the thrust line is raised.

 

  My recommendation is:

 

  -Make sure engine is putting out rated

  power/hp. 

 

  -Make sure the aircraft is rigged

  correctly.

 

  -Stop what you are doing and pitch the

  prop correctly through flight test - straight and level WOT

  bump 5800 rpm.

 

  If the above doesn't work, sell or burn

  the aircraft.

 

  Like I said in a previous email, my

  fully open 35hp Ultrastar with bare fuselage would fly 75

  mph, climb like a home sick angel, and get off the ground in

  a second with a 180 lb pilot and 7.75 gal of fuel.

 

  I've been lucky enough to fly many

  different Kolb aircraft over the last 35 years and I've

  never flown one that performed as you describe yours

  flies.  Makes ya wonder doesn't it.

 

  john h

  mkIII

  Titus, Alabama

 

 

 

 

  --

_________________
do not archive

John Hauck

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

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 3:00 pm Post subject: HKS / Firestar FLIGHT TEST resumes

Apologize for what?



Again....if it was me, I wouldn't just try increased propeller pitch to see what happens.....I'd try to concentrate on propping the aircraft correctly.  Do it right and no matter what the results you will know it is propped correctly.  After getting the prop pitch correct, if that doesn't help, at least you can check that off your list and "really" discover and correct another problem.  If not....burn it.



Did you ever check static thrust to see how it compares with a Firestar that flies normally?  Takes thrust to push an airplane.  I don't think you are getting normal power out of your rig.  Anyhow...that's the way it looks from Gantt International Airport, Titus, Alabama.



john h

mkIII

Titus, Alabama

 

Anyway, I apologize if I created abig mystery that is annoying or perplexing to the Kolbers. I'm going to try one more flight with increased propeller pitch and see if that makes any significant difference. If that doesn't work I will flip the gearbox and borrow a larger propeller and try that. If that doesn't work THEN I may think about burning it...



Bill Berle

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

Pfatchantz(at)protonmail.
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 3:28 pm Post subject: HKS / Firestar FLIGHT TEST resumes

Again Bill...do not recall whether you have an Ivo prop...Likely you know the diff between ul versions and medium ones...I tried to install a three blade 60 inch medium on a Firefly only to have it bog down at abt 4400 rpms...447 engine..Simply cannot remove enough pitch... It could be that a ul prop might work with most of the pitch dialed in...definitely would not be ideal however..Herb

Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.



‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

On Monday, November 19, 2018 4:58 PM, John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   



 Apologize for what?



 Again....if it was me, I wouldn't just try increased propeller pitch to see what happens.....I'd try to concentrate on propping the aircraft correctly. Do it right and no matter what the results you will know it is propped correctly. After getting the prop pitch correct, if that doesn't help, at least you can check that off your list and "really" discover and correct another problem. If not....burn it.



 Did you ever check static thrust to see how it compares with a Firestar that flies normally? Takes thrust to push an airplane. I don't think you are getting normal power out of your rig. Anyhow...that's the way it looks from Gantt International Airport, Titus, Alabama.



 john h

 mkIII

 Titus, Alabama



 Anyway, I apologize if I created abig mystery that is annoying or perplexing to the Kolbers. I'm going to try one more flight with increased propeller pitch and see if that makes any significant difference. If that doesn't work I will flip the gearbox and borrow a larger propeller and try that. If that doesn't work THEN I may think about burning it...



 Bill Berle

victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 4:40 pm Post subject: HKS / Firestar FLIGHT TEST resumes

I posted my static thrust test numbers to the Kolb list a week or so ago. 250 pounds static thrust, measured on a new spring scale. 11 degrees pitch at the propeller tip. I also asked for as many static thrust measurements from other Kolbers as I could get. I only got a few replies with actual numbers. My static thrust is a little or a lot less than some of the other numbers that were posted on the Kolb list.



I also agree 100% that I am not getting the full amount of thrust out of my engine/prop combination. I tried to fix theone thing on the airframe itself that COULD have been a big problem, and that turned out to NOT be the big problem.So I have to agree that I have a thrust probblem. But I do not think my problem is that the engine is worn out or sick or defective. I believe the engine is fairly healthy. I believe that the problem is in the gearbox/propeller combination, transferring that power into usable thrust..



Bill Berle

www.ezflaphandle.com  - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft

www.grantstar.net           - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities



--------------------------------------------

On Mon, 11/19/18, John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> wrote:



 Subject: RE: HKS / Firestar FLIGHT TEST resumes

 To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com

 Date: Monday, November 19, 2018, 2:58 PM

 

 

 Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com>

 

 Apologize for what?

 

 Again....if it was me, I wouldn't just

 try increased propeller pitch to see what happens.....I'd

 try to concentrate on propping the aircraft correctly. 

 Do it right and no matter what the results you will know it

 is propped correctly.  After getting the prop pitch

 correct, if that doesn't help, at least you can check that

 off your list and "really" discover and correct another

 problem.  If not....burn it.

 

 Did you ever check static thrust to see

 how it compares with a Firestar that flies normally? 

 Takes thrust to push an airplane.  I don't think you

 are getting normal power out of your rig. 

 Anyhow...that's the way it looks from Gantt International

 Airport, Titus, Alabama.

 

 john h

 mkIII

 Titus, Alabama

  

 Anyway, I apologize if I created abig

 mystery that is annoying or perplexing to the Kolbers. I'm

 going to try one more flight with increased propeller pitch

 and see if that makes any significant difference. If that

 doesn't work I will flip the gearbox and borrow a larger

 propeller and try that. If that doesn't work THEN I may

 think about burning it...

 

 Bill Berle

  

 

 

 

 Support Your Lists This Month --

 (And Get Some AWESOME FREE Gifts!)

 Fund Raiser.  Click on

 to find out more about

 Incentive Gifts provided

 www.mypilotstore.com

 support!

                

     -Matt Dralle, List Admin.

 The Kolb-List Email Forum -

 Navigator to browse

 List Un/Subscription,

 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,

      - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -

 via the Web Forums!

     - NEW MATRONICS LIST WIKI -

 Email List Wiki!

    - List Contribution Web Site -

 support!

                

     -Matt Dralle, List Admin.

John Hauck

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

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 4:52 pm Post subject: HKS / Firestar FLIGHT TEST resumes

Yep...the prop is the direct link between power and thrust.  To be happy, it must be correct.



john h

mkIII

Titus, Alabama





--

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

John Hauck

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

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 4:53 pm Post subject: HKS / Firestar FLIGHT TEST resumes

I never measured thrust on any of my airplanes and engine combos.  Don't have a clue what it is.



john h

mkIII

Titus, Alabama





--

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

lcottrell

Joined: 29 May 2006
Posts: 1494
Location: Jordan Valley, Or

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 5:05 pm Post subject: HKS / Firestar FLIGHT TEST resumes

Bill if you want a direct comparison, box up your spring scale and send it to me, I'll measure my HKS with it and send it back.

Larry

On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 5:55 PM John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com (jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com)> wrote:



[quote]--> Kolb-List message posted by: "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com (jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com)>

 

 I never measured thrust on any of my airplanes and engine combos.  Don't have a clue what it is.

 

 john h

 mkIII

 Titus, Alabama

 

 

 

 

 --

_________________
do not archive

victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 5:06 pm Post subject: HKS / Firestar FLIGHT TEST resumes

I do not have an Ivoprop, I have an Arplast prop from France. I need the Arplast because I need a large blade area (wide chord) to absorb 58HP within a diameter and RPM restriction. I have a 3.47 to 1 gearbox on the engine. The prop RPM is so slow that I need all the area I can get to absorb that power. If I had the 2.58 gearbox I would be able to turn a 64 inch Ivo or Warp Drive prop at higher RPM like most Kolbs.

Bill Berle

www.ezflaphandle.com  - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft

www.grantstar.net           - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities

--------------------------------------------

On Mon, 11/19/18, Pfatchantz <Pfatchantz(at)protonmail.ch> wrote:

 Subject: RE: HKS / Firestar FLIGHT TEST resumes

 To: "kolb-list(at)matronics.com" <kolb-list(at)matronics.com>

 Date: Monday, November 19, 2018, 3:26 PM

 Pfatchantz <Pfatchantz(at)protonmail.ch>

 Again Bill...do not recall whether you

 have an Ivo prop...Likely you know the diff between ul

 versions and medium ones...I tried to install a three blade

 60 inch medium on a Firefly only to have it bog down at abt

 4400 rpms...447 engine..Simply cannot remove enough pitch...

 It could be that a ul prop might work with most of the pitch

 dialed in...definitely would not be ideal however..Herb

 Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.

 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message

 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

 On Monday, November 19, 2018 4:58 PM,

 John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com>

 wrote:

 > --> Kolb-List message posted

 by: "John Hauck" jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com

 >

 > Apologize for what?

 >

 > Again....if it was me, I wouldn't

 just try increased propeller pitch to see what

 happens.....I'd try to concentrate on propping the aircraft

 correctly. Do it right and no matter what the results you

 will know it is propped correctly. After getting the prop

 pitch correct, if that doesn't help, at least you can check

 that off your list and "really" discover and correct another

 problem. If not....burn it.

 >

 > Did you ever check static thrust

 to see how it compares with a Firestar that flies normally?

 Takes thrust to push an airplane. I don't think you are

 getting normal power out of your rig. Anyhow...that's the

 way it looks from Gantt International Airport, Titus,

 Alabama.

 >

 > john h

 > mkIII

 > Titus, Alabama

 >

 > Anyway, I apologize if I created

 abig mystery that is annoying or perplexing to the Kolbers.

 I'm going to try one more flight with increased propeller

 pitch and see if that makes any significant difference. If

 that doesn't work I will flip the gearbox and borrow a

 larger propeller and try that. If that doesn't work THEN I

 may think about burning it...

 >

 > Bill Berle

 >

 Support Your Lists This Month --

 (And Get Some AWESOME FREE Gifts!)

 Fund Raiser.  Click on

 to find out more about

 Incentive Gifts provided

 www.mypilotstore.com

 support!

     -Matt Dralle, List Admin.

 The Kolb-List Email Forum -

 Navigator to browse

 List Un/Subscription,

 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,

      - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -

 via the Web Forums!

     - NEW MATRONICS LIST WIKI -

 Email List Wiki!

    - List Contribution Web Site -

 support!

     -Matt Dralle, List Admin.

gdhelton(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 5:36 pm Post subject: HKS / Firestar FLIGHT TEST resumes

Well Bill I hope your not looking for another Arplast propeller? They’ve apparently been out of business for a couple of years. Their reputation seems to be somewhat questionable.

George H

Firestar 

Mesick, Michigan 

gdhelton(at)gmail.com

Sent from my iPhone

 	  Quote: 	
		   On Nov 19, 2018, at 8:05 PM, Bill Berle <victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.net> wrote:

 I do not have an Ivoprop, I have an Arplast prop from France. I need the Arplast because I need a large blade area (wide chord) to absorb 58HP within a diameter and RPM restriction. I have a 3.47 to 1 gearbox on the engine. The prop RPM is so slow that I need all the area I can get to absorb that power. If I had the 2.58 gearbox I would be able to turn a 64 inch Ivo or Warp Drive prop at higher RPM like most Kolbs.

 Bill Berle

 www.ezflaphandle.com  - safety & performance upgrade for light aircraft

 www.grantstar.net           - winning proposals for non-profit and for-profit entities

 --------------------------------------------

 On Mon, 11/19/18, Pfatchantz <Pfatchantz(at)protonmail.ch> wrote:

 Subject: RE: HKS / Firestar FLIGHT TEST resumes

 To: "kolb-list(at)matronics.com" <kolb-list(at)matronics.com>

 Date: Monday, November 19, 2018, 3:26 PM

 Pfatchantz <Pfatchantz(at)protonmail.ch>

 Again Bill...do not recall whether you

 have an Ivo prop...Likely you know the diff between ul

 versions and medium ones...I tried to install a three blade

 60 inch medium on a Firefly only to have it bog down at abt

 4400 rpms...447 engine..Simply cannot remove enough pitch...

 It could be that a ul prop might work with most of the pitch

 dialed in...definitely would not be ideal however..Herb

 Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.

 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message

 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

 On Monday, November 19, 2018 4:58 PM,

 John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com>

 wrote:

> --> Kolb-List message posted

 by: "John Hauck" jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com

> 

> Apologize for what?

> 

> Again....if it was me, I wouldn't

 just try increased propeller pitch to see what

 happens.....I'd try to concentrate on propping the aircraft

 correctly. Do it right and no matter what the results you

 will know it is propped correctly. After getting the prop

 pitch correct, if that doesn't help, at least you can check

 that off your list and "really" discover and correct another

 problem. If not....burn it.

> 

> Did you ever check static thrust

 to see how it compares with a Firestar that flies normally?

 Takes thrust to push an airplane. I don't think you are

 getting normal power out of your rig. Anyhow...that's the

 way it looks from Gantt International Airport, Titus,

 Alabama.

> 

> john h

> mkIII

> Titus, Alabama

> 

> Anyway, I apologize if I created

 abig mystery that is annoying or perplexing to the Kolbers.

 I'm going to try one more flight with increased propeller

 pitch and see if that makes any significant difference. If

 that doesn't work I will flip the gearbox and borrow a

 larger propeller and try that. If that doesn't work THEN I

 may think about burning it...

> 

> Bill Berle

> 

 Support Your Lists This Month --

 (And Get Some AWESOME FREE Gifts!)

 Fund Raiser.  Click on

 to find out more about

 Incentive Gifts provided

 www.mypilotstore.com

 support!

     -Matt Dralle, List Admin.

 The Kolb-List Email Forum -

 Navigator to browse

 List Un/Subscription,

 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,

      - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -

 via the Web Forums!

     - NEW MATRONICS LIST WIKI -

 Email List Wiki!

    - List Contribution Web Site -

 support!

     -Matt Dralle, List Admin.

victorbravo(at)sbcglobal.
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 6:02 pm Post subject: HKS / Firestar FLIGHT TEST resumes

Well Bill I hope your not looking for another Arplast propeller? They’ve apparently been out of

 business for a couple of years. Their reputation seems to be somewhat questionable.

 ------------------



Perhaps some of the Kolb list can suggest the correct propeller, to meet THESE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS:



1) My engine will only spin the propeller at 1675 RPM at max continuous power (gearbox limit)

2) The propeller diameter has to be 65 inches or less (tail boom interference)

3) The propeller can have only two or three blades (wing fold interference)



I have taken these specific parameters and called the major prop manufacturers... Ivo, Warp, Powerfin, Prince, Ultra-Prop, Whirlwind. Every one of them has said that it will be very difficult to make a lot of thrust at that slow RPM with a 65 inch diameter prop, and all of them said that their prop blades are not wide enough (blade area) for those conditions. They said I would need some other brand of propeller with a very wide blade chord. 



So I looked and found that the Arplast company made one style of propeller with very wide chord blades, to use with high gear reduction ratios, in order to make thrust in a smaller diameter with less noise for European noise regulations. I managed to find a used one and buy it,a nd that is the prop onmy airplane now. 



So if I am obviously not making enough thrust with this wide-chord Arplast propeller, how am I going to make any more thrust with a propeller that is narrower (less blade choord) in the same diameter? Tell me if I am thinking incorrectly here. I think I need a larger diameter propeller to solve the thrust problem, regardless of what brand of prop I am using.



But if I turn the gearbox around, I can remove the 65 inch diameter limitation, and run a larger prop, then I can run ANY good prop... Ivo, Warp, Powerfin, and probably make a lot more thrust than I am making now.

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