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

MKIII wing incidence

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Kolb-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

Thom Riddle

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

Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2013 3:37 am Post subject: MKIII wing incidence

Bob Bean, asked me to post this for him, since he no longer posts to this forum, but thought it might be of interest to other MKIII pilots.



MKIII owners:  I have for years intended to change the incidence on my wings and tail.  I drilled new holes in the spar attach ears probably three years ago

but,  somehow never got around to it. -until this year.  The reason for doing it pertains more to my individual plane than a stock MkIII because of my wide windshield design.

I felt a conflict of airflow between it and the wing angle, much like what happened with early versions of the Xtra.  -Too much down pressure on the nose.



I drilled the new wing holes about 5/8" above the originals which works out to about 1.326 degrees.  I bought the adjustable tail brackets from Kolb but

modified them substantially.  They were angled to allow wing fold using any of the holes but this makes the HS stick out too far at the lower settings.

I cut the ears off to the same width and drilled new holes for two settings.

I used a combination of calculation and guesswork to figure what range I would need.  I went with the highest holes which yields about -3.5 degrees from the engine mount,

figuring the tail boom is -6 degrees.  Good thing, because with those holes I can still fold the tail without pulling any bolts.



I had crow hopped it a couple days ago and parked it without real flight.  Today was perfect flying weather so I did a  test flight.  Naturally I was hoping not to

encounter any "lawn dart" characteristics and I was either a very clever guy or blessed with dumb luck, take yer choice, because it  was perfect first time up.



I had previously been flying with one notch up on the trim, but for this occasion I lowered it to zero.  -Just right.  Neutral stick at normal cruise and

slight back pressure for full throttle straight and level.  All other trim stayed the same.  There is a noticeable increase in dihedral but I didn't get to

doing any rudder experimentation to see how much it is affected.



The plane feels as if it has been freed up from an invisible restraint.  Hard to describe but I was quite pleased.  It appears to cruise about 5 mph

faster at normal settings.  I didn't look close to check full throttle speed, just how muck stick it took.  -Full throttle speed doesn't matter to me

because I don't use it for other than climb.



I couldn't say whether a standard configured MKIII would gain from the same changes but you would definitely need the tall steel legs to compensate.

Also, because of my center section design, the angle could be changed without any extra work.



Reminder: Previous written by Bob Bean, I'm merely posting it for him and I have no further information on it than you now do. However, since many may not be familiar with Bob's customized MKIII, I've attached an old photo so you can see what his airplane's nose and center section look like.

Bean MkIII & Allegro @ Bethany.jpg

Description:

Bob Bean's customized MKIII

Filesize:

125.88 KB

Viewed:

13308 Time(s)

_________________
Thom Riddle
Buffalo, NY (9G0)

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

williamtsullivan(at)att.n
Guest

Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2013 3:45 am Post subject: MKIII wing incidence

Thom- Why doesn't Bob post to the forum any more?  Information such as this is quite valuable.  Please encourage him to post more frequently, or post through you.



do not archive 



                                                                      Bill Sullivan





        From: Thom Riddle <riddletr(at)gmail.com>

 To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com 

 Sent: Friday, July 26, 2013 7:38 AM

 Subject: MKIII wing incidence

  

 

--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Thom Riddle" <riddletr(at)gmail.com (riddletr(at)gmail.com)>



Bob Bean, asked me to post this for him, since he no longer posts to this forum, but thought it might be of interest to other MKIII pilots.



MKIII owners:  I have for years intended to change the incidence on my wings and tail.  I drilled new holes in the spar attach ears probably three years  ago

but,  somehow never got around to it. -until this year.  The reason for doing it pertains more to my individual plane than a stock MkIII because of my wide windshield design.

I felt a conflict of airflow between it and the wing angle, much like what happened with early versions of the Xtra.  -Too much down pressure on the nose.



I drilled the new wing holes about 5/8" above the originals which works out to about 1.326 degrees.  I bought the adjustable tail brackets from Kolb but

modified them substantially.  They were angled to allow wing fold using any of the holes but this makes the HS stick out too far at the lower settings.

I cut the ears off to the same width and drilled new holes for two settings.

I used a combination of calculation and guesswork to figure what range I would need.  I went with the highest holes which yields about -3.5 degrees from the engine mount,

figuring the tail boom is  -6 degrees.  Good thing, because with those holes I can still fold the tail without pulling any bolts.



I had crow hopped it a couple days ago and parked it without real flight.  Today was perfect flying weather so I did a  test flight.  Naturally I was hoping not to

encounter any "lawn dart" characteristics and I was either a very clever guy or blessed with dumb luck, take yer choice, because it  was perfect first time up.



I had previously been flying with one notch up on the trim, but for this occasion I lowered it to zero.  -Just right.  Neutral stick at normal cruise and

slight back pressure for full throttle straight and level.  All other trim stayed the same.  There is a noticeable increase in dihedral but I didn't get to

doing any rudder experimentation to see how much it is affected.



The plane feels as if it has been freed up from an invisible restraint.  Hard to  describe but I was quite pleased.  It appears to cruise about 5 mph

faster at normal settings.  I didn't look close to check full throttle speed, just how muck stick it took.  -Full throttle speed doesn't matter to me

because I don't use it for other than climb.



I couldn't say whether a standard configured MKIII would gain from the same changes but you would definitely need the tall steel legs to compensate.

Also, because of my center section design, the angle could be changed without any extra work.



Reminder: Previous written by Bob Bean, I'm merely posting it for him and I have no further information on it than you now do. However, since many may not be familiar with Bob's customized MKIII, I've attached an old photo so you can see what his airplane's nose and center section look like.



--------

Thom Riddle

Buffalo, NY (9G0)



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

-  Anonymous





Read this topic online here:



http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=405333#405333





Attachments: 



http://forums.matronics.com//files/bean_mkiii_and_allegro__bethany_209.jpg

<  --> http://forums.matronics                    &nbsptronics.com/contribution" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contri================

 

  

  

 [quote][b]

Thom Riddle

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

Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2013 4:02 am Post subject: Re: MKIII wing incidence

re: Why doesn't Bob post to the forum any more? 

Bob is the busiest retired guy I know. His many and varied interests keep him otherwise occupied. He even built his own house! He is a craftsman with competencies in so many things that it boggles my mind. I don't recall EVER having at any age, as much energy as he has at 72.

_________________
Thom Riddle
Buffalo, NY (9G0)

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

rowedenny

Joined: 09 Mar 2008
Posts: 338
Location: Western PA

Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2013 7:51 am Post subject: MKIII wing incidence

Thom,

Could you get pics from BB of his front horizontal stab mounts?

Due to the stock windshield bow, thus mod would be pretty tough in a stock Mk 3.



Dennis "Skid" Rowe

Mk3, 690L-70, Leechburg, PA



On Jul 26, 2013, at 7:38 AM, "Thom Riddle" <riddletr(at)gmail.com> wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   

 

 Bob Bean, asked me to post this for him, since he no longer posts to this forum, but thought it might be of interest to other MKIII pilots.

 

 MKIII owners:  I have for years intended to change the incidence on my wings and tail.  I drilled new holes in the spar attach ears probably three years ago

 but,  somehow never got around to it. -until this year.  The reason for doing it pertains more to my individual plane than a stock MkIII because of my wide windshield design.

 I felt a conflict of airflow between it and the wing angle, much like what happened with early versions of the Xtra.  -Too much down pressure on the nose.

 

 I drilled the new wing holes about 5/8" above the originals which works out to about 1.326 degrees.  I bought the adjustable tail brackets from Kolb but

 modified them substantially.  They were angled to allow wing fold using any of the holes but this makes the HS stick out too far at the lower settings.

 I cut the ears off to the same width and drilled new holes for two settings.

 I used a combination of calculation and guesswork to figure what range I would need.  I went with the highest holes which yields about -3.5 degrees from the engine mount,

 figuring the tail boom is -6 degrees.  Good thing, because with those holes I can still fold the tail without pulling any bolts.

 

 I had crow hopped it a couple days ago and parked it without real flight.  Today was perfect flying weather so I did a  test flight.  Naturally I was hoping not to

 encounter any "lawn dart" characteristics and I was either a very clever guy or blessed with dumb luck, take yer choice, because it  was perfect first time up.

 

 I had previously been flying with one notch up on the trim, but for this occasion I lowered it to zero.  -Just right.  Neutral stick at normal cruise and

 slight back pressure for full throttle straight and level.  All other trim stayed the same.  There is a noticeable increase in dihedral but I didn't get to

 doing any rudder experimentation to see how much it is affected.

 

 The plane feels as if it has been freed up from an invisible restraint.  Hard to describe but I was quite pleased.  It appears to cruise about 5 mph

 faster at normal settings.  I didn't look close to check full throttle speed, just how muck stick it took.  -Full throttle speed doesn't matter to me

 because I don't use it for other than climb.

 

 I couldn't say whether a standard configured MKIII would gain from the same changes but you would definitely need the tall steel legs to compensate.

 Also, because of my center section design, the angle could be changed without any extra work.

 

 Reminder: Previous written by Bob Bean, I'm merely posting it for him and I have no further information on it than you now do. However, since many may not be familiar with Bob's customized MKIII, I've attached an old photo so you can see what his airplane's nose and center section look like.

 

 --------

 Thom Riddle

 Buffalo, NY (9G0)

 

 

 

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

 - Anonymous

 

 

 

 

 Read this topic online here:

 

 http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=405333#405333

 

 

 

 

 Attachments: 

 

 http://forums.matronics.com//files/bean_mkiii_and_allegro__bethany_209.jpg

Thom Riddle

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

Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2013 8:01 am Post subject: Re: MKIII wing incidence

I can ask him. I'm going to get out of the middle of this conversation and try to get BB to respond.

_________________
Thom Riddle
Buffalo, NY (9G0)

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

Mike Welch

Joined: 13 Feb 2011
Posts: 272

Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2013 9:39 am Post subject: MKIII wing incidence

Dennis,



  Pardon me if I cut into your conversation to Thom (since both Bob Bean and I have made the "new incidence change.)

  Bob Bean had some kind of fender-bender several years ago, and made his own replacement nosecone.  If appears to

be a hybrid from the original round nosed MkIIIC and the wedge shaped X.  (Mine is a pure TNK part)

  In keeping with all the other changes I made to my OEM MkIII C, I added the newer, taller, steel gear legs.  This necessitated

an incidence change to the main wings from the "high angle" to the new lower angle, found on the new Xtras with the taller steel 

gear legs.  Bob Bean was making the changes I already made a couple of years ago.

  As I remember correctly, the Kolb instructions told us to drill a hole "UP" 7/8" from the bottom of the tab.  (or 5/8". or 3/4"…whatever it said)

Again, from a fading memory, it's been a long time since I did that….this would give an effective angle of attack to the MkIIIC main wings of around

+9 degrees, give or take a degree  ( I think….)  But!  If you are going to add the tall steel gear legs, that high angle of attack doesn't work nicely

with 3-point landings because if you have such a 'very high' angle of attack, you will find yourself being launched into the air just as the tail end

drops too far.

  Therefore, to counteract this problem, Bryan Melbourne lowered the incidence of the wings, which also required a lower horizontal stabilizer

angle, too.  Plus, the wide Xtra nose figured into the deal, but we'd need Bryan to chime in tell explain all the details.

  To achieve the "new lower wings' incidence, a builder would then drill the tab hole that same 7/8" distance…..only this time he down came from 

the TOP of the tab, not up from the bottom.  I think this gives about an 1" to an 1 1/4" distance between the holes.  At any rate, now, by inserting a bolt through

the UPPER hole, you will be lowering the wings a fair amount.  As it turns out, the final intended angle (from Bryan (at) TNK Co) is +3.4 degrees (instead of that

+9 degrees for regular geared MkIIICs of Xtras).

  Later, in discussing this angle change with Bryan, he said we were looking for "2.8 to 3.4 degrees".  When I did mine, I came up with 3.4 exactly, 'cause that's what 

I was told.  If I remember correctly, our buddy Scott Thompson came up with near +2.8.  I think this is why I called and talked to Bryan.  Evidently it was "a range"

we were allowed, centered around +3.0.

  With all this main wing incidence changing, you have to also take into account the rear horizontal surfaces.  The leading edge of the H.S. must come down

a couple of degrees, in order to work well with the "reduced angle main wings".  What that angle measurement is exactly we don't know yet, and we are waiting for the 

Bean to get back to us.  He believes he nailed it on the first try.  I'm anxious to know what the digital angle reading is.  I asked him if he could also take a reading

of his main wings, too, while he was at it, to help me establish a sort of basic logical platform to deal with.

  NOTE:  All angles, readings, etc. are assumed to be read with an initial setting of the MkIII boom tube propped up to "6" degrees (or -6 degrees) EXACTLY.  

It is whatever makes the motor mount "0.0"!!  BTW, I think the hor. stab is supposed to come in at -4.8 degrees.  That is where I have mine set at.  I have 3 

other holes to choose from, 1 upper, 2 lower.

  My plane is almost finished, but medical issues and finances are slowing me down at the moment.

  Here is a photo of when I attached the Xtra nosecone to my completely rebuilt MkIIIC front end. (first photo)  I used exact measurements from a OEM Xtra fuselage

to modify my MkIIIC fuselage.   (Pat Ladd's wrecked frame)  The stick on top was to show a different member the intended angle he should achieve.  He was going 

to do the MkIIIC to MkIIIX change, too,  but I haven't heard from him in a year and a half.

  Oh yeah.  You are correct, Dennis.  Yes, the wing incidence change will require you to make a new, (probably custom) wing gap seal.  I did mine out of fiberglass,

under which is housed the ballistic chute in the front compartment. (see second and third photo)

  We now return you to your regularly scheduled program.

Mike Welch

By the way, you can see the increased dihedral from all the "normal" MkIIIs.  When you use your old struts, like we did, and you lower the leading edge, you

end up increasing the dihedral to about double the O.E. setting..  From what I've heard, this is a good thing.  (It ends up being close to 3.0 degrees)

DSC00753.jpeg

Description:

Filesize:

115 KB

Viewed:

13279 Time(s)

DSC01413.jpeg

Description:

Filesize:

113.71 KB

Viewed:

13279 Time(s)

DSC01405.jpeg

Description:

Filesize:

136.95 KB

Viewed:

13279 Time(s)

rowedenny

Joined: 09 Mar 2008
Posts: 338
Location: Western PA

Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2013 1:41 pm Post subject: MKIII wing incidence

Mike,

Thanks for all the background info.

I put the long steel legs on my stock 1991 vintage Mk 3 a few years ago, (thanks for the good deal RG). I love the taller legs and have had no issues with handling, would never go back to the aluminum ones.

To much mods to fuselage to drop the wing incidence, but the extra five mph would be sweet.

Do not archive



Dennis "Skid" RoweMk3, 690L-70, Leechburg, PA

On Jul 26, 2013, at 1:38 PM, Mike Welch <mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com (mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com)> wrote:

[quote]Dennis,



  Pardon me if I cut into your conversation to Thom (since both Bob Bean and I have made the "new incidence change.)

  Bob Bean had some kind of fender-bender several years ago, and made his own replacement nosecone.  If appears to

be a hybrid from the original round nosed MkIIIC and the wedge shaped X.  (Mine is a pure TNK part)

  In keeping with all the other changes I made to my OEM MkIII C, I added the newer, taller, steel gear legs.  This necessitated

an incidence change to the main wings from the "high angle" to the new lower angle, found on the new Xtras with the taller steel 

gear legs.  Bob Bean was making the changes I already made a couple of years ago.

  As I remember correctly, the Kolb instructions told us to drill a hole "UP" 7/8" from the bottom of the tab.  (or 5/8". or 3/4"â€¦whatever it said)

Again, from a fading memory, it's been a long time since I did thatâ€¦.this would give an effective angle of attack to the MkIIIC main wings of around

+9 degrees, give or take a degree  ( I thinkâ€¦.)  But!  If you are going to add the tall steel gear legs, that high angle of attack doesn't work nicely

with 3-point landings because if you have such a 'very high' angle of attack, you will find yourself being launched into the air just as the tail end

drops too far.

  Therefore, to counteract this problem, Bryan Melbourne lowered the incidence of the wings, which also required a lower horizontal stabilizer

angle, too.  Plus, the wide Xtra nose figured into the deal, but we'd need Bryan to chime in tell explain all the details.

  To achieve the "new lower wings' incidence, a builder would then drill the tab hole that same 7/8" distanceâ€¦..only this time he down came from 

the TOP of the tab, not up from the bottom.  I think this gives about an 1" to an 1 1/4" distance between the holes.  At any rate, now, by inserting a bolt through

the UPPER hole, you will be lowering the wings a fair amount.  As it turns out, the final intended angle (from Bryan (at) TNK Co) is +3.4 degrees (instead of that

+9 degrees for regular geared MkIIICs of Xtras).

  Later, in discussing this angle change with Bryan, he said we were looking for "2.8 to 3.4 degrees".  When I did mine, I came up with 3.4 exactly, 'cause that's what 

I was told.  If I remember correctly, our buddy Scott Thompson came up with near +2.8.  I think this is why I called and talked to Bryan.  Evidently it was "a range"

we were allowed, centered around +3.0.

  With all this main wing incidence changing, you have to also take into account the rear horizontal surfaces.  The leading edge of the H.S. must come down

a couple of degrees, in order to work well with the "reduced angle main wings".  What that angle measurement is exactly we don't know yet, and we are waiting for the 

Bean to get back to us.  He believes he nailed it on the first try.  I'm anxious to know what the digital angle reading is.  I asked him if he could also take a reading

of his main wings, too, while he was at it, to help me establish a sort of basic logical platform to deal with.

  NOTE:  All angles, readings, etc. are assumed to be read with an initial setting of the MkIII boom tube propped up to "6" degrees (or -6 degrees) EXACTLY.  

It is whatever makes the motor mount "0.0"!!  BTW, I think the hor. stab is supposed to come in at -4.8 degrees.  That is where I have mine set at.  I have 3 

other holes to choose from, 1 upper, 2 lower.

  My plane is almost finished, but medical issues and finances are slowing me down at the moment.

  Here is a photo of when I attached the Xtra nosecone to my completely rebuilt MkIIIC front end. (first photo)  I used exact measurements from a OEM Xtra fuselage

to modify my MkIIIC fuselage.   (Pat Ladd's wrecked frame)  The stick on top was to show a different member the intended angle he should achieve.  He was going 

to do the MkIIIC to MkIIIX change, too,  but I haven't heard from him in a year and a half.

  Oh yeah.  You are correct, Dennis.  Yes, the wing incidence change will require you to make a new, (probably custom) wing gap seal.  I did mine out of fiberglass,

under which is housed the ballistic chute in the front compartment. (see second and third photo)

  We now return you to your regularly scheduled program.

Mike Welch

By the way, you can see the increased dihedral from all the "normal" MkIIIs.  When you use your old struts, like we did, and you lower the leading edge, you

end up increasing the dihedral to about double the O.E. setting..  From what I've heard, this is a good thing.  (It ends up being close to 3.0 degrees)





<DSC00753.jpeg>



<DSC01413.jpeg>



<DSC01405.jpeg>





[b]

rickofudall

Joined: 19 Sep 2009
Posts: 1392
Location: Udall, KS, USA

Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2013 3:04 pm Post subject: MKIII wing incidence

Dennis, With a stock Mk III (C) nose cone I'm not sure you would see any speed increase at all. I won't stake money on it, but I don't think so and here's why;The speed increase of the Mk IIIX was due, primarily from decreasing the angle between the forward and aft fuselage panels. On the bottom panels this created a condition where the nose of the "X" was flying at a negative angle of attack. Decreasing the wing incidence raised this back to a positive angle.

 For the horizontal stabilizer, the change from "C" to "X" puts it right down the center line of the boom tube. As Bob noted this spreads the attach point further apart and puts a fore to aft kink in the elevator hinge line. On Ken Holle's airplane it was so pronounced you could feel the elevator bind as it came in level with the stabilizer and pop free on either side. Like Bob I tried reworking the stock 3 hole brackets but could not get that to work especially well either so I welded up new brackets with the holes drilled as close to the boom as possible and still get the bolts in and that fixed it.

 When making this change there's also the issue of what to do with the old bracket holes. The solution is to make cover plates from a piece of boom tube and rivet them on over the old holes. The previous owner of Ken's aircraft had drilled so many holes the boom looked like a piece of Swiss cheese. See the pics. 

 Anyway, IMHO putting the longer steel gear legs on a "C" does not mean the wing incidence must be changed. It is, rather, the other way around. Changing the wing incidence requires the steel gear legs. If anything a stock "C" with the steel gear legs should be able to land slower because you can pull back farther when landing without hitting on the tail wheel first.

 



Rick Girard



On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 4:41 PM, Dennis Rowe <rowedenny(at)windstream.net (rowedenny(at)windstream.net)> wrote:

  	  Quote: 	
		  Mike,

Thanks for all the background info.

I put the long steel legs on my stock 1991 vintage Mk 3 a few years ago, (thanks for the good deal RG). I love the taller legs and have had no issues with handling, would never go back to the aluminum ones.

 To much mods to fuselage to drop the wing incidence, but the extra five mph would be sweet.

Do not archive



Dennis "Skid" RoweMk3, 690L-70, Leechburg, PA



 



On Jul 26, 2013, at 1:38 PM, Mike Welch <mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com (mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com)> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   Dennis,



  Pardon me if I cut into your conversation to Thom (since both Bob Bean and I have made the "new incidence change.)

  Bob Bean had some kind of fender-bender several years ago, and made his own replacement nosecone.  If appears to

 be a hybrid from the original round nosed MkIIIC and the wedge shaped X.  (Mine is a pure TNK part)

  In keeping with all the other changes I made to my OEM MkIII C, I added the newer, taller, steel gear legs.  This necessitated

 an incidence change to the main wings from the "high angle" to the new lower angle, found on the new Xtras with the taller steel 

gear legs.  Bob Bean was making the changes I already made a couple of years ago.

 



  As I remember correctly, the Kolb instructions told us to drill a hole "UP" 7/8" from the bottom of the tab.  (or 5/8". or 3/4"…whatever it said)

Again, from a fading memory, it's been a long time since I did that….this would give an effective angle of attack to the MkIIIC main wings of around

 +9 degrees, give or take a degree  ( I think….)  But!  If you are going to add the tall steel gear legs, that high angle of attack doesn't work nicely

with 3-point landings because if you have such a 'very high' angle of attack, you will find yourself being launched into the air just as the tail end

 drops too far.

  Therefore, to counteract this problem, Bryan Melbourne lowered the incidence of the wings, which also required a lower horizontal stabilizer

angle, too.  Plus, the wide Xtra nose figured into the deal, but we'd need Bryan to chime in tell explain all the details.

 



  To achieve the "new lower wings' incidence, a builder would then drill the tab hole that same 7/8" distance…..only this time he down came from 

the TOP of the tab, not up from the bottom.  I think this gives about an 1" to an 1 1/4" distance between the holes.  At any rate, now, by inserting a bolt through

 the UPPER hole, you will be lowering the wings a fair amount.  As it turns out, the final intended angle (from Bryan (at) TNK Co) is +3.4 degrees (instead of that

+9 degrees for regular geared MkIIICs of Xtras).

 



  Later, in discussing this angle change with Bryan, he said we were looking for "2.8 to 3.4 degrees".  When I did mine, I came up with 3.4 exactly, 'cause that's what 

I was told.  If I remember correctly, our buddy Scott Thompson came up with near +2.8.  I think this is why I called and talked to Bryan.  Evidently it was "a range"

 we were allowed, centered around +3.0.

  With all this main wing incidence changing, you have to also take into account the rear horizontal surfaces.  The leading edge of the H.S. must come down

 a couple of degrees, in order to work well with the "reduced angle main wings".  What that angle measurement is exactly we don't know yet, and we are waiting for the 

Bean to get back to us.  He believes he nailed it on the first try.  I'm anxious to know what the digital angle reading is.  I asked him if he could also take a reading

 of his main wings, too, while he was at it, to help me establish a sort of basic logical platform to deal with.

  NOTE:  All angles, readings, etc. are assumed to be read with an initial setting of the MkIII boom tube propped up to "6" degrees (or -6 degrees) EXACTLY.  

 It is whatever makes the motor mount "0.0"!!  BTW, I think the hor. stab is supposed to come in at -4.8 degrees.  That is where I have mine set at.  I have 3 

other holes to choose from, 1 upper, 2 lower.

 



  My plane is almost finished, but medical issues and finances are slowing me down at the moment.

  Here is a photo of when I attached the Xtra nosecone to my completely rebuilt MkIIIC front end. (first photo)  I used exact measurements from a OEM Xtra fuselage

 to modify my MkIIIC fuselage.   (Pat Ladd's wrecked frame)  The stick on top was to show a different member the intended angle he should achieve.  He was going 

to do the MkIIIC to MkIIIX change, too,  but I haven't heard from him in a year and a half.

 



  Oh yeah.  You are correct, Dennis.  Yes, the wing incidence change will require you to make a new, (probably custom) wing gap seal.  I did mine out of fiberglass,

under which is housed the ballistic chute in the front compartment. (see second and third photo)

 



  We now return you to your regularly scheduled program.

Mike Welch

By the way, you can see the increased dihedral from all the "normal" MkIIIs.  When you use your old struts, like we did, and you lower the leading edge, you

 end up increasing the dihedral to about double the O.E. setting..  From what I've heard, this is a good thing.  (It ends up being close to 3.0 degrees)





<DSC00753.jpeg>



<DSC01413.jpeg>

 

<DSC01405.jpeg>

	
 	  Quote: 	
		  

 









get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List

tp://forums.matronics.com

_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution



	




	




-- 

Zulu Delta

Mk IIIC

Thanks, Homer GBYM

It isn't necessary to have relatives in Kansas City in order to be unhappy.

   - Groucho Marx

Under_the_patch_plate.jpg

Description:

Filesize:

812.03 KB

Viewed:

13267 Time(s)

Patch_plate_1.jpg

Description:

Filesize:

1.6 MB

Viewed:

13267 Time(s)

New_brackets_mounted.jpg

Description:

Filesize:

971.25 KB

Viewed:

13267 Time(s)

_________________
The smallest miracle right in front of you is enough to make you happy....

jbhart(at)onlyinternet.ne
Guest

Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2013 4:05 pm Post subject: MKIII wing incidence

At 04:38 AM 7/26/2013 -0700, you wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  



Bob Bean, asked me to post this for him, since he no longer posts to this 

forum, but thought it might be of interest to other MKIII pilots.
	


 	  Quote: 	
		  

.................
	


 	  Quote: 	
		  I drilled the new wing holes about 5/8" above the originals which works out 

to about 1.326 degrees.  I bought the adjustable tail brackets from Kolb but 
	


modified them substantially.  They were angled to allow wing fold using any 

of the holes but this makes the HS stick out too far at the lower settings.

 	  Quote: 	
		  

The plane feels as if it has been freed up from an invisible restraint.  

Hard to describe but I was quite pleased.  It appears to cruise about 5 mph 
	


faster at normal settings.  I didn't look close to check full throttle 

speed, just how muck stick it took.  

 	  Quote: 	
		  


	


Bob,



You may want to adjust the thrust vector by trial washer elevating the front 

and/or back of the engine to the mounting plate.  If you are all ready getting 

a plus five mph at cruise it may be a useless endeavor.  But it may get you a 

little bit more cruise speed.



Jack B. Hart FF004

Winchester, IN

GeoB

Joined: 16 Jun 2009
Posts: 207
Location: Fresno, CA

Posted: Sat Jul 27, 2013 4:09 am Post subject: MKIII wing incidence

 	  Quote: 	
		   I put the long steel legs on my stock 1991 vintage Mk 3 a few years ago


	


Where can I get the steel legs for my '80's Firestar? I bought it needing a

recover but haven't done it yet so I haven't flown it. And there is the

small matter of not being a pilot.

_________________
GeoB

"Members of Congress should be compelled to wear uniforms like NASCAR drivers, so we could identify their corporate sponsors"

rowedenny

Joined: 09 Mar 2008
Posts: 338
Location: Western PA

Posted: Sat Jul 27, 2013 6:16 am Post subject: MKIII wing incidence

Call Travis for the gear legs, my Mk 3 legs are stock Kolb products. Sweet.

Do not archive



Dennis "Skid" Rowe

Mk3, 690L-70, Leechburg, PA



On Jul 27, 2013, at 8:09 AM, "George Bearden" <gab16(at)sbcglobal.net> wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   

 

> I put the long steel legs on my stock 1991 vintage Mk 3 a few years ago

 

 Where can I get the steel legs for my '80's Firestar? I bought it needing a

 recover but haven't done it yet so I haven't flown it. And there is the

 small matter of not being a pilot.

rickofudall

Joined: 19 Sep 2009
Posts: 1392
Location: Udall, KS, USA

Posted: Sat Jul 27, 2013 3:41 pm Post subject: MKIII wing incidence

George, For the Firestar the aluminum and steel gear legs are the same. At least the ones I have for my 5 rib Firestar are.



Rick Girard

do not archive



 



On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 7:09 AM, George Bearden <gab16(at)sbcglobal.net (gab16(at)sbcglobal.net)> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   --> Kolb-List message posted by: "George Bearden" <gab16(at)sbcglobal.net (gab16(at)sbcglobal.net)>

 

 > I put the long steel legs on my stock 1991 vintage Mk 3 a few years ago

 

 Where can I get the steel legs for my '80's Firestar? I bought it needing a

 recover but haven't done it yet so I haven't flown it. And there is the

 small matter of not being a pilot.

 

 

 

 

 ===========

 arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List

 ===========

 http://forums.matronics.com

 ===========

 le, List Admin.

 ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution

 ===========

 

 

 

 	




-- 

Zulu Delta

Mk IIIC

Thanks, Homer GBYM

It isn't necessary to have relatives in Kansas City in order to be unhappy.

   - Groucho Marx

 

  [quote][b]

_________________
The smallest miracle right in front of you is enough to make you happy....

rickofudall

Joined: 19 Sep 2009
Posts: 1392
Location: Udall, KS, USA

Posted: Sat Jul 27, 2013 3:48 pm Post subject: MKIII wing incidence

Jack and Bob, There's an easier way to adjust the thrust line. Run the forward motor mounts short side up, run the rear motor mounts long side up. Takes about an hour to accomplish but you don't have to buy anything. I've set up both a "C" and an "X" this way. It does make a slight difference in decreasing pitch changes with throttle setting. Didn't notice any speed change one way or the other, but it did make a slight improvement in the Kolb Mk III's already impeccable handling qualities. 

Rick Girard

On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 9:14 AM, Dennis Rowe <rowedenny(at)windstream.net (rowedenny(at)windstream.net)> wrote:

  	  Quote: 	
		  --> Kolb-List message posted by: Dennis Rowe <rowedenny(at)windstream.net (rowedenny(at)windstream.net)>

 Call Travis for the gear legs, my Mk 3 legs are stock Kolb products. Sweet.

 Do not archive

 Dennis "Skid" Rowe

 Mk3, 690L-70, Leechburg, PA

On Jul 27, 2013, at 8:09 AM, "George Bearden" <gab16(at)sbcglobal.net (gab16(at)sbcglobal.net)> wrote:

 > --> Kolb-List message posted by: "George Bearden" <gab16(at)sbcglobal.net (gab16(at)sbcglobal.net)>

 >

 >> I put the long steel legs on my stock 1991 vintage Mk 3 a few years ago

 >

 	  Quote: 	
		   Where can I get the steel legs for my '80's Firestar? I bought it needing a

 > recover but haven't done it yet so I haven't flown it. And there is the

 > small matter of not being a pilot.

 >

 >

 >

 >

 >

 >

 >

 ===========

 arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List

 ===========

 http://forums.matronics.com

 ===========

 le, List Admin.

 ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution

 ===========

-- 

Zulu Delta

Mk IIIC

Thanks, Homer GBYM

It isn't necessary to have relatives in Kansas City in order to be unhappy.

   - Groucho Marx

  [quote][b]

_________________
The smallest miracle right in front of you is enough to make you happy....

Thom Riddle

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

Posted: Tue Jul 30, 2013 6:10 am Post subject: Re: MKIII wing incidence

Bob Bean sent me more info on his wing incidence mod, as follows:



My plane was not the result of a "fender bender" but the combined parts of two other guy's wrecks.  There was no nose cone

included in any of the parts and I wanted more foot room so the wider nose was the result.  It comes off with 10-32 machine screws

for accessibility.

BB

BB wing incidence 3.jpg

Description:

a visual of the new dihedral.

Filesize:

345.71 KB

Viewed:

13184 Time(s)

BB wing incidence 2.jpg

Description:

modified HS ears. Now at the top holes. I refilled the old empty rivet holes with new rivets and was able to reuse some of them on the new brackets.

Filesize:

252.1 KB

Viewed:

13184 Time(s)

BB wing incidence 1.jpg

Description:

The new wing holes in use. (note top ones for an even more extreme change)
Also note how the top of the windshield is considerably below the top of the wing and lower than both the classic and the xtra. More air can flow to the prop.

Filesize:

204.85 KB

Viewed:

13184 Time(s)

_________________
Thom Riddle
Buffalo, NY (9G0)

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

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Kolb-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

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