 |
Matronics Email Lists Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Dana

Joined: 13 Dec 2007 Posts: 1047 Location: Connecticut, USA
|
Posted: Thu Nov 17, 2011 9:41 am Post subject: Some success at last |
|
|
John, your last post came through in reasonable sized text, but the lines don't wrap so I have to scroll back and forth.
Never heard of porn sites changing text size... though they might change the size of other things
do not archive
-Dana
At 09:13 AM 11/17/2011, John Hauck wrote:
Quote: | P
Quote: | I apologize for the inconvenience. However, I haven't changed
my Outlook settings, that I know of. That doesn't mean the gremlin
didn't change it for me. Do you think visiting porn sites could do
that? |
Quote: | I'll try and write smaller and blacker.
 |
Quote: | Our weather has changed from 64F yesterday when I got up to 46F this
morning. The rain is gone. Maybe I can get some flying done
if it doesn't get too
windy. |
0
1
2 |
--
Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted. -Albert Einstein
[quote][b]
| - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Dana

Joined: 13 Dec 2007 Posts: 1047 Location: Connecticut, USA
|
Posted: Thu Nov 17, 2011 9:41 am Post subject: Some success at last |
|
|
If you increase power to climb so you keep the same airspeed, then AOA is the same, and the amount of P-factor (zero or otherwise) should not change.
-Dana
At 10:12 AM 11/17/2011, Pat Ladd wrote:
Quote: | <<then when you're flying slower (as in climb) and at a greater angle of attack>>
Thanks Dana,
Humm!. Not completely happy with that. If you have enough power to climb and NOT slow up, what happens then? As far as I can see the airflow direction in relation to the plane (what in sailing circles is called the apparent wind) is still directly on the nose. In that case it would appear that it is a matter of airspeed, not attitude. Therefore the P factor should change as you throttle back in the cruise. Does it?
Still curious
Pat
|
--
Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted. -Albert Einstein
[quote][b]
| - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
WhiskeyVictor36(at)aol.co Guest
|
Posted: Thu Nov 17, 2011 1:53 pm Post subject: Some success at last |
|
|
In a message dated 11/17/2011 11:27:27 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, slyck(at)frontiernet.net writes:
Quote: | P- factor, as in, "I really need to land soon"
OK. Good definition. Nobody laughed at that comment yet, so I will Hahahahahah.
Bill Varnes
Original Kolb FireStar
Audubon NJ
Do Not Archive
|
[quote][b]
| - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Dana

Joined: 13 Dec 2007 Posts: 1047 Location: Connecticut, USA
|
Posted: Thu Nov 17, 2011 3:11 pm Post subject: Some success at last |
|
|
At 02:02 PM 11/17/2011, Richard Girard wrote:
Quote: | Dana, "If you increase power to climb", how exactly does P factor remain the same? |
The flight condition we were talking about was cruise when the relative wind is parallel to the propeller shaft, so there's no P-factor. If you increase power to climb while maintaining the same airspeed, the AOA will also be the same, meaning that the airflow is still parallel to the prop shaft, i.e. still no P-factor.
-Dana
--
Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence on society.
[quote][b]
| - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
rickofudall

Joined: 19 Sep 2009 Posts: 1392 Location: Udall, KS, USA
|
Posted: Thu Nov 17, 2011 5:44 pm Post subject: Some success at last |
|
|
The minute you start to climb the relative wind direction changes as you now have an upward vector and P factor ensues. Sorry, no free lunch.
Rick
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Dana Hague <d-m-hague(at)comcast.net (d-m-hague(at)comcast.net)> wrote:
Quote: | At 02:02 PM 11/17/2011, Richard Girard wrote:
Quote: | Dana, "If you increase power to climb", how exactly does P factor remain the same? |
The flight condition we were talking about was cruise when the relative wind is parallel to the propeller shaft, so there's no P-factor. If you increase power to climb while maintaining the same airspeed, the AOA will also be the same, meaning that the airflow is still parallel to the prop shaft, i.e. still no P-factor.
-Dana
--
Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence on society.
Quote: |
_blank">www.aeroelectric.com
.com" target="_blank">www.buildersbooks.com
="_blank">www.homebuilthelp.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
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
[quote][b]
| - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
_________________ The smallest miracle right in front of you is enough to make you happy.... |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Dana

Joined: 13 Dec 2007 Posts: 1047 Location: Connecticut, USA
|
Posted: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:07 pm Post subject: Some success at last |
|
|
You're climbing, you have an upward vector, but the plane pitches up by the same amount. If the airspeed is the same, then Cl and AOA have to be the same to generate the same lift (equal to the plane's weight).
Actually the above isn't _exactly_ true, as the gravity vector shifts aft relative to the plane, but the effect is small for reasonable angles.
In a normal climb, of course, you're flying slower than cruise, thus higher AOA, and P-factor does in fact increase.
-Dana
At 08:42 PM 11/17/2011, Richard Girard wrote:
Quote: | The minute you start to climb the relative wind direction changes as you now have an upward vector and P factor ensues. Sorry, no free lunch.
Rick
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Dana Hague <d-m-hague(at)comcast.net (d-m-hague(at)comcast.net)> wrote: At 02:02 PM 11/17/2011, Richard Girard wrote: Quote: | Dana, "If you increase power to climb", how exactly does P factor remain the same? | The flight condition we were talking about was cruise when the relative wind is parallel to the propeller shaft, so there's no P-factor. If you increase power to climb while maintaining the same airspeed, the AOA will also be the same, meaning that the airflow is still parallel to the prop shaft, i.e. still no P-factor.
-Dana -- Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence on society. Quote: |
_blank">www.aeroelectric.com
.com" target="_blank">www.buildersbooks.com
="_blank">www.homebuilthelp.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
[/b] |
--
Zulu Delta
Mk IIIC
Thanks, Homer GBYM
It isn't necessary to have relatives in Kansas City in order to be unhappy.
- Groucho Marx
|
--
Diplomacy: Saying "nice doggy" until you find a rock.
[quote][b]
| - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
russk50(at)gmail.com Guest
|
Posted: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:25 pm Post subject: Some success at last |
|
|
Tell me why I have to hold right rudder when applying power for takeoff? If there's no P=factor on the ground ?
On Nov 17, 2011, at 9:05 PM, Dana Hague wrote:
[quote] You're climbing, you have an upward vector, but the plane pitches up by the same amount. If the airspeed is the same, then Cl and AOA have to be the same to generate the same lift (equal to the plane's weight).
Actually the above isn't _exactly_ true, as the gravity vector shifts aft relative to the plane, but the effect is small for reasonable angles.
In a normal climb, of course, you're flying slower than cruise, thus higher AOA, and P-factor does in fact increase.
-Dana
At 08:42 PM 11/17/2011, Richard Girard wrote:
Quote: | The minute you start to climb the relative wind direction changes as you now have an upward vector and P factor ensues. Sorry, no free lunch.
Rick
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Dana Hague <d-m-hague(at)comcast.net (d-m-hague(at)comcast.net)> wrote: At 02:02 PM 11/17/2011, Richard Girard wrote: Quote: | Dana, "If you increase power to climb", how exactly does P factor remain the same? | The flight condition we were talking about was cruise when the relative wind is parallel to the propeller shaft, so there's no P-factor. If you increase power to climb while maintaining the same airspeed, the AOA will also be the same, meaning that the airflow is still parallel to the prop shaft, i.e. still no P-factor.
-Dana -- Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence on society. Quote: |
_blank">www.aeroelectric.com
.com" target="_blank">www.buildersbooks.com
="_blank">www.homebuilthelp.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
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
|
--
Diplomacy: Saying "nice doggy" until you find a rock.
[b]
| - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
dan42101(at)yahoo.com Guest
|
Posted: Thu Nov 17, 2011 7:57 pm Post subject: Some success at last |
|
|
Helical propwash... In most planes you soon outrun most of it and can let off on the rudder correction. Then one more stab on them when the tail comes up. I think that is the gyroscope influence.
- DjD
From: kinne russ <russk50(at)gmail.com>
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2011 8:23 PM
Subject: Re: Some success at last
Tell me why I have to hold right rudder when applying power for takeoff? If there's no P=factor on the ground ?
On Nov 17, 2011, at 9:05 PM, Dana Hague wrote:
[quote]You're climbing, you have an upward vector, but the plane pitches up by the same amount. If the airspeed is the same, then Cl and AOA have to be the same to generate the same lift (equal to the plane's weight).
Actually the above isn't _exactly_ true, as the gravity vector shifts aft relative to the plane, but the effect is small for reasonable angles.
In a normal climb, of course, you're flying slower than cruise, thus higher AOA, and P-factor does in fact increase.
-Dana
At 08:42 PM 11/17/2011, Richard Girard wrote:
Quote: | The minute you start to climb the relative wind direction changes as you now have an upward vector and P factor ensues. Sorry, no free lunch.
Rick
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Dana Hague <d-m-hague(at)comcast.net (d-m-hague(at)comcast.net)> wrote: At 02:02 PM 11/17/2011, Richard Girard wrote: Quote: | Dana, "If you increase power to climb", how exactly does P factor remain the same? | The flight condition we were talking about was cruise when the relative wind is parallel to the propeller shaft, so there's no P-factor. If you increase power to climb while maintaining the same airspeed, the AOA will also be the same, meaning that the airflow is still parallel to the prop shaft, i.e. still no P-factor.
-Dana -- Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence on society. Quote: |
_blank">www.aeroelectric.com
.com" target="_blank">www.buildersbooks.com
="_blank">www.homebuilthelp.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
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
|
--
Diplomacy: Saying "nice doggy" until you find a rock.
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
om
Quote: |
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
|
List
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Quote: |
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
|
[b]
| - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Dana

Joined: 13 Dec 2007 Posts: 1047 Location: Connecticut, USA
|
Posted: Fri Nov 18, 2011 3:38 am Post subject: Some success at last |
|
|
At 09:23 PM 11/17/2011, kinne russ wrote:
Quote: | Tell me why I have to hold right rudder when applying power for takeoff? If there's no P=factor on the ground ? |
There _is_ P-factor on the ground in a tailwheel airplane with the tailwheel on the ground.
There are four turning effects from the propeller:
1. P-factor, or asymmetric blade thrust, whenever the axis of the prop isn't parallel to the relative wind.
2. Spiraling slipstream from the prop, impinging more on one side of the vertical stabilizer than the other (this may be less, or even in the opposite direction with an engine mounted high over the rudder as in a Kolb).
3. Direct torque (causes a roll effect as opposed to yaw).
4. Gyroscopic precession, which causes the plane to yaw while pitching, as when you lift the tailwheel.
-Dana
--
"A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away." -- Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
[quote][b]
| - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
pj.ladd(at)btinternet.com Guest
|
Posted: Fri Nov 18, 2011 3:51 am Post subject: Some success at last |
|
|
Thanks Dana, and Lanny, and Wikepedia,
I think that at last I have got it. By visualising the reductio ad absurdum case of the airflow over the propeller if a plane is descending vertically but in a horizontal position. The airflow in that case would be travelling over the prop blade in the same way as the wind over a helicopter rotor with its well known, and easily visualised, advancing and retiring blade.
I am still surprised however that the effect is noticeable in the case of the comparatively low power and small diameter props that we generally use. I would have just put it down to torque and coriolis force and the tendency of a spinning disc to precess. Think of a gyroscope.
I know better now. Thanks for your patience.
Pat
[quote][b]
| - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
russk50(at)gmail.com Guest
|
Posted: Fri Nov 18, 2011 6:01 am Post subject: Some success at last |
|
|
As I understand things, if the plane/gyroscope is going straight ahead there should be precession, no tendency to swerve. I think the plane simply runs ahead of the helical propwash when it gains speed, so you can ease up on your foot pressure. Is there any practical difference between 'helical propwash' and 'P-factor'?
On Nov 17, 2011, at 10:55 PM, Danny wrote:
[quote]Helical propwash... In most planes you soon outrun most of it and can let off on the rudder correction. Then one more stab on them when the tail comes up. I think that is the gyroscope influence.
- DjD
From: kinne russ <russk50(at)gmail.com (russk50(at)gmail.com)>
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com (kolb-list(at)matronics.com)
Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2011 8:23 PM
Subject: Re: Some success at last
Tell me why I have to hold right rudder when applying power for takeoff? If there's no P=factor on the ground ?
On Nov 17, 2011, at 9:05 PM, Dana Hague wrote:
Quote: | You're climbing, you have an upward vector, but the plane pitches up by the same amount. If the airspeed is the same, then Cl and AOA have to be the same to generate the same lift (equal to the plane's weight).
Actually the above isn't _exactly_ true, as the gravity vector shifts aft relative to the plane, but the effect is small for reasonable angles.
In a normal climb, of course, you're flying slower than cruise, thus higher AOA, and P-factor does in fact increase.
-Dana
At 08:42 PM 11/17/2011, Richard Girard wrote:
Quote: | The minute you start to climb the relative wind direction changes as you now have an upward vector and P factor ensues. Sorry, no free lunch.
Rick
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Dana Hague <d-m-hague(at)comcast.net (d-m-hague(at)comcast.net)> wrote: At 02:02 PM 11/17/2011, Richard Girard wrote: Quote: | Dana, "If you increase power to climb", how exactly does P factor remain the same? | The flight condition we were talking about was cruise when the relative wind is parallel to the propeller shaft, so there's no P-factor. If you increase power to climb while maintaining the same airspeed, the AOA will also be the same, meaning that the airflow is still parallel to the prop shaft, i.e. still no P-factor.
-Dana -- Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence on society. Quote: |
_blank">www.aeroelectric.com
.com" target="_blank">www.buildersbooks.com
="_blank">www.homebuilthelp.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
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
|
--
Diplomacy: Saying "nice doggy" until you find a rock.
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
om
Quote: |
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
|
List
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Quote: |
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
|
href="http://www.aeroelectric.com/">www.aeroelectric.com
href="http://www.buildersbooks.com/">www.buildersbooks.com
href="http://www.homebuilthelp.com/">www.homebuilthelp.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
|
[b]
| - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
John Hauck

Joined: 09 Jan 2006 Posts: 4639 Location: Titus, Alabama (hauck's holler)
|
Posted: Fri Nov 18, 2011 6:28 am Post subject: Some success at last |
|
|
On Behalf Of kinne russ
As I understand things, if the plane/gyroscope is going straight ahead there should be precession, no tendency to swerve. I think the plane simply runs ahead of the helical propwash when it gains speed, so you can ease up on your foot pressure. Is there any practical difference between 'helical propwash' and 'P-factor'? Quote: | Russ K/Kolbers: That is what I have been sharing for a long time. The primary yaw problem in the MKIII is the effect of helical prop wash. Take that problem away and the adverse yaw problem goes away. Clear evidence of where the prop wash hits the left side of the vertical stabilizer and the top of the left horizontal stabilizer, on a 912 powered MKIII, is enough for me to understand by I have to have a large rudder trim tab to kick the rudder left and keep it in trim. I have experimented with changing angle of thrust up and down, left and right; moved the leading edge of the upper vertical stabilizer left; but the large rudder trim tab was the fix for adverse yaw on my MKIII. | 012345
[quote][b]
| - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
_________________ John Hauck
MKIII/912ULS
hauck's holler
Titus, Alabama |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
dan42101(at)yahoo.com Guest
|
Posted: Fri Nov 18, 2011 4:34 pm Post subject: Some success at last |
|
|
Take the front wheel off the nearest "English Racer", hold it by the axle and spin it up. Now tilt it as if it were your prop disc when the tail comes up. The effect is quite strong but brief...
[url=http://www.jetero.com/newsletters/Types%20of%20Propeller%20Forces%20and%20Impact%20on%20Flight.pdf ]Click here[/url] to read more...
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 7:59 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Some success at last
As I understand things, if the plane/gyroscope is going straight ahead there should be precession, no tendency to swerve. I think the plane simply runs ahead of the helical propwash when it gains speed, so you can ease up on your foot pressure. Is there any practical difference between 'helical propwash' and 'P-factor'?
On Nov 17, 2011, at 10:55 PM, Danny wrote:
[quote] Helical propwash... In most planes you soon outrun most of it and can let off on the rudder correction. Then one more stab on them when the tail comes up. I think that is the gyroscope influence.
- DjD
From: kinne russ <russk50(at)gmail.com (russk50(at)gmail.com)>
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com (kolb-list(at)matronics.com)
Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2011 8:23 PM
Subject: Re: Some success at last
Tell me why I have to hold right rudder when applying power for takeoff? If there's no P=factor on the ground ?
On Nov 17, 2011, at 9:05 PM, Dana Hague wrote:
Quote: | You're climbing, you have an upward vector, but the plane pitches up by the same amount. If the airspeed is the same, then Cl and AOA have to be the same to generate the same lift (equal to the plane's weight).
Actually the above isn't _exactly_ true, as the gravity vector shifts aft relative to the plane, but the effect is small for reasonable angles.
In a normal climb, of course, you're flying slower than cruise, thus higher AOA, and P-factor does in fact increase.
-Dana
At 08:42 PM 11/17/2011, Richard Girard wrote:
Quote: | The minute you start to climb the relative wind direction changes as you now have an upward vector and P factor ensues. Sorry, no free lunch.
Rick
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Dana Hague <d-m-hague(at)comcast.net (d-m-hague(at)comcast.net)> wrote: At 02:02 PM 11/17/2011, Richard Girard wrote: Quote: | Dana, "If you increase power to climb", how exactly does P factor remain the same? | The flight condition we were talking about was cruise when the relative wind is parallel to the propeller shaft, so there's no P-factor. If you increase power to climb while maintaining the same airspeed, the AOA will also be the same, meaning that the airflow is still parallel to the prop shaft, i.e. still no P-factor.
-Dana -- Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence on society. Quote: |
_blank">www.aeroelectric.com
.com" target="_blank">www.buildersbooks.com
="_blank">www.homebuilthelp.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
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
|
--
Diplomacy: Saying "nice doggy" until you find a rock.
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
om
Quote: |
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
|
List
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Quote: |
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
|
href="http://www.aeroelectric.com/">www.aeroelectric.com
href="http://www.buildersbooks.com/">www.buildersbooks.com
href="http://www.homebuilthelp.com/">www.homebuilthelp.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
|
ollow target=_blank>www.aeroelectric.com
/" rel=nofollow target=_blank>www.buildersbooks.com
ofollow target=_blank>www.homebuilthelp.com
llow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
=nofollow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
llow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
[b]
| - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
captainron1(at)cox.net Guest
|
Posted: Sun Nov 27, 2011 8:08 am Post subject: Some success at last |
|
|
Has someone ever tried a V tail on a Kolb
I have been designing a mixer box for a V tail configuration for my M3X in Idle moments to ward off boredom. But I wonder if it would bring any benefits besides P torque elimination....
It certainly would be different!!!! So for you Kolbers that would be *the* sensation at the next gathering here is a challenge.
to make it easier the mixer box can be patterned after the one in the Sonex.
Ron (at) KFHU
======================================
---- Rick Neilsen <neilsenrm(at)gmail.com> wrote:
=============
Rick
Keep looking for that cure I don't think this is it. During primary
training I was trained to keep the ball centered at all times especially in
stall. In less I'm miss interpreting your description I have to believe you
were allowing the plane with the trim tab to yaw when going into stall.
I currently have the leading edge of my vertical stabilizer off set by
about an inch. I really couldn't tell any difference but it has to help the
trim tab do its work. My trim tab is defected about 45 degrees and seems to
be about right. I add left rudder under full power climb, right rudder
power off and just a bit left in cruise.
Big high thrust props flying at a high angles of attack produce lots of
asymmetrical thrust referred to a P factor. No thrust, no P factor. Your
photo was taken from one side so it will naturally look like it is
defected.
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW Powered MKIIIC
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 9:35 AM, Richard Girard <aslsa.rng(at)gmail.com> wrote:
Quote: | Thanks, John. My Mk III is completely different from yours apparently. It
has almost no trim tab and the tab has almost no bend in it, maybe 10
degrees. The plane needs just a smidgeon of left rudder in climb and the
same amount of right rudder in cruise. No comparison to yours and none at
all to Ken's X.
I was pretty tired when I wrote last night and I got the wrong photo for
number 3. Here's the correct photo.
Rick
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 6:29 AM, John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> wrote:
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> * *****
>
> I still have no idea why P factor is so strong in this airplane. ****
>
> ** **
>
> Anyway, I think the airplane is much safer, although I can only fly it
> for about 30 minutes before I get a cramp in my left calf.****
>
> ** **
>
> Rick Girard****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> Rick G/Kolbers:****
>
> ** **
>
> Before I doubled the size of my rudder trim tab my mkIII flew about 1/2
> bubble out of trim. Other than bugging me because it was not perfect, the
> mkIII flew great that way. In fact, I flew the 17,400 mile flight in 1994,
> that way.****
>
> ** **
>
> I decided to experiment to correct this problem by offsetting the leading
> edge of the upper vertical stabilizer. Moved it three times in 1/2"
> increments. Each time there was insignificant improvement in the adverse
> yaw. ****
>
> ** **
>
> After the experiment was over, I returned the upper vertical stabilizer
> to its centered position and doubled the length of the rudder trim tab,
> from one rib bay to two. That fixed the adverse yaw problem. Now my mkIII
> flies in yaw trim with my feet off the pedals.****
>
> ** **
>
> I believe the adverse yaw problem is caused by the way the rotating prop
> blast hits the tail section. My prop turns counter clockwise when observed
> from the rear. All the oil that is blown from the oil tank breather hose
> hits the left side of the upper vertical stabilizer and the top of the left
> horizontal stabilizer. My rudder trim tab counteracts this force.****
>
> ** **
>
> That big pusher prop does a lot of weird things to some Kolbs.****
>
> ** **
>
> john h****
>
> mkIII****
>
> Titus, Alabama****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> *
>
> _blank">www.aeroelectric.com
> .com" target="_blank">www.buildersbooks.com
> ="_blank">www.homebuilthelp.com
> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> 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
|
--
kugelair.com
| - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
John Hauck

Joined: 09 Jan 2006 Posts: 4639 Location: Titus, Alabama (hauck's holler)
|
Posted: Sun Nov 27, 2011 8:54 am Post subject: Some success at last |
|
|
Has someone ever tried a V tail on a Kolb
Ron (at) KFHU
For what?
I'd recommend flying a Kolb first. Then...if it doesn't fly like you think it should fly...change it to your satisfaction.
Kolbs have been flying for many, many safe, enjoyable hours, as they were designed by Homer Kolb and Dennis Souder.
I made changes on my Kolbs based on flight experience in that particular model. My first Kolb was an Ultrastar. The only changes I made to it were progressively heavier wall tubing for its rigid landing gear, because, at times, I blew landings, usually landing on one gear leg and bending it.
The Firestar, we went to heat treated 4130 gear legs much longer than stock gear legs. This put the FS in a good 3 point position for taking off and landing. Also helped some to keep it off its nose. and helped me get it slowed down on my 600 foot airstrip because I had no brakes. BTW: I made a flight in the FS in 1988, with no brakes, from Alabama to Monterey, NY, to the Flight Farm. Had no problems, but had to stay well ahead of the FS in all taxi situations, especially when the fuel pumps were at the bottom of a slope. When that happened, I'd get out and walk the FS to the pump.
We made changes to the MKIII based on 1185.0 hours flying the US and FS, and what we needed to make extended cross country flights. Based on flight experience in the new factory MKIII, I decided to reduce the size of the ailerons and flaps. The easy way to do that was snap a line from the stock inboard aft corner of the flap to a point a few inches short of the stock aileron aft outboard corner. This way I reduced more aileron and lost less flap area.
Putting more weight on the tail wheel by moving the main gear forward was insurance during off field landings to keep the mkIII off its nose.
Other than tuning horizontal stabilizer leading edge positions, I never changed any of Homer's flying surfaces.
With more than 3,100.0 flight hours and nearly 20 years, my mkIII and the few changes we made to satisfy me, have worked out well.
I see nothing wrong with wanting a V tail Kolb and nose gear. What it will accomplish to make it a better airplane than the stock configuration, I have no idea, other than to satisfy the builder/flyer.
I still think it is a good idea to fly your airplane a significant amount of time before you decide it needs changing. You may find that it is a great little airplane in its stock configuration.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama - On a rainy Sunday morning.
| - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
_________________ John Hauck
MKIII/912ULS
hauck's holler
Titus, Alabama |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
captainron1(at)cox.net Guest
|
Posted: Sun Nov 27, 2011 9:01 am Post subject: Some success at last |
|
|
Yup !!!
---- Pat Ladd <pj.ladd(at)btinternet.com> wrote:
=============
John,
your post is coming through too large to fit on the scheme, large font and blue in colour..
Have you inadvertently changed a setting somewhere?
Anyone else with the same problem or is it me?.
Pat
--
kugelair.com
| - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
captainron1(at)cox.net Guest
|
Posted: Sun Nov 27, 2011 9:13 am Post subject: Some success at last |
|
|
Pat think of the angle of attack as it changes relative to each blade in a climb and the relative wind. If the nose of the airplane is pointed at 45 degrees the airplane does not climb at 45, it climbs at 8 degrees or so (I am sawgging) so the relative wind is not impacting the blades straight on. Its impacting the blades from say 37 degrees. So the blade coming down hits the oncoming air at 37+whatever angle it has, and the ascending blade is climbing at 37- whatever angle your blades are dialed in for.
Make sense?
Ron (at) KFHU
=================
---- Pat Ladd <pj.ladd(at)btinternet.com> wrote:
=============
<<then when you're flying slower (as in climb) and at a greater angle of attack>>
Thanks Dana,
Humm!. Not completely happy with that. If you have enough power to climb and NOT slow up, what happens then? As far as I can see the airflow direction in relation to the plane (what in sailing circles is called the apparent wind) is still directly on the nose. In that case it would appear that it is a matter of airspeed, not attitude. Therefore the P factor should change as you throttle back in the cruise. Does it?
Still curious
Pat
--
kugelair.com
| - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
captainron1(at)cox.net Guest
|
Posted: Sun Nov 27, 2011 10:22 am Post subject: Some success at last |
|
|
Hell John the Kolb is good as it is, no dispute there. Just tinkering (or is it thinkering) I have it in my hanger mostly complete but no time to complete. Will it be better, don't know will it fly different don't know, will it look different sure. Why do it,,, well because, well just because.... hehehehe.
Why are we in aviation to begin with? to have fun I guess, well for me its actually an attempt to earn a living, sometimes I even succeed.
I think that's my approach.
Happy thanksgiving bro!
Ron
====================
---- John Hauck <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> wrote:
=============
Has someone ever tried a V tail on a Kolb
Ron (at) KFHU
For what?
I'd recommend flying a Kolb first. Then...if it doesn't fly like you think it should fly...change it to your satisfaction.
Kolbs have been flying for many, many safe, enjoyable hours, as they were designed by Homer Kolb and Dennis Souder.
I made changes on my Kolbs based on flight experience in that particular model. My first Kolb was an Ultrastar. The only changes I made to it were progressively heavier wall tubing for its rigid landing gear, because, at times, I blew landings, usually landing on one gear leg and bending it.
The Firestar, we went to heat treated 4130 gear legs much longer than stock gear legs. This put the FS in a good 3 point position for taking off and landing. Also helped some to keep it off its nose. and helped me get it slowed down on my 600 foot airstrip because I had no brakes. BTW: I made a flight in the FS in 1988, with no brakes, from Alabama to Monterey, NY, to the Flight Farm. Had no problems, but had to stay well ahead of the FS in all taxi situations, especially when the fuel pumps were at the bottom of a slope. When that happened, I'd get out and walk the FS to the pump.
We made changes to the MKIII based on 1185.0 hours flying the US and FS, and what we needed to make extended cross country flights. Based on flight experience in the new factory MKIII, I decided to reduce the size of the ailerons and flaps. The easy way to do that was snap a line from the stock inboard aft corner of the flap to a point a few inches short of the stock aileron aft outboard corner. This way I reduced more aileron and lost less flap area.
Putting more weight on the tail wheel by moving the main gear forward was insurance during off field landings to keep the mkIII off its nose.
Other than tuning horizontal stabilizer leading edge positions, I never changed any of Homer's flying surfaces.
With more than 3,100.0 flight hours and nearly 20 years, my mkIII and the few changes we made to satisfy me, have worked out well.
I see nothing wrong with wanting a V tail Kolb and nose gear. What it will accomplish to make it a better airplane than the stock configuration, I have no idea, other than to satisfy the builder/flyer.
I still think it is a good idea to fly your airplane a significant amount of time before you decide it needs changing. You may find that it is a great little airplane in its stock configuration.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama - On a rainy Sunday morning.
--
kugelair.com
| - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Richard Pike

Joined: 09 Jan 2006 Posts: 1671 Location: Blountville, Tennessee
|
Posted: Sun Nov 27, 2011 1:37 pm Post subject: Re: Some success at last |
|
|
I think maybe I've got it - it is the relationship of the wing and the prop, and the relative airflow as it leaves the wing and goes into the prop.
With the Kolb in level flight, the wing will be at an angle of attack somewhere between 5 and 10 degrees, depending on airspeed, trim and any number of variables, but in any event, it will be at some angle of attack relative to the airflow in level flight.
Engine mounting typically has the engine adjusted so that the prop is perpendicular or at 90 degrees to the airflow at level flight. Some have tinkered, for varying reasons with varying results, but just for the sake of argument, let's say that 90 degrees is probably typical.
The airflow as it departs the aft section of the wing into the prop will not be at 90 degrees relative to the prop, even though the prop might be mounted 90 degrees relative to straight and level flight, because the airflow coming off that wing is going to be descending for several feet before it returns to being true relative wind and regains it's normal horizontal, or undisturbed flow.
This descending angle could be further compounded by the airflow coming off the top of the wing within that prop area - or maybe not, depending on how bad the engine messes it up. In any event, you have a downward vector of airflow for several feet behind the wing, and that is what the prop is slicing through.
I went out to the hangar and turned the 2 blade prop horizontal and looked at it from one side to see it's apparent angle of attack to the visualized descending airflow off the wing, and then went around and looked at it from the other side. The downward moving blade would be slicing through the airflow off the wing at almost zero angle of attack, while the upward moving blade will be going through that air at a very large angle of attack. Since I am running a 582, then the right blade effectively has a very fine pitch, while the left blade will have a comparatively coarse pitch, biting out a bigger hunk.
Bearing in mind that the prop center line is several inches above the trailing edge of the wing, this is not a clear cut situation by any means, the descending blade is starting to sweep down and left, the ascending blade is going up and left through the wing-redirected airflow, but it will still be true to an extent.
Which means that the lower left side of the prop is pushing harder than the lower right side with the net effect being that it will push the nose to the right. Which agrees with me needing a trim tab sticking out the right side of the rudder, to push the rudder left, to push the nose left, to counteract the left side of the prop pushing harder. If you had a 4-stroke Rotax, then the rudder tab needs to go on the other side, for all the same reasons.
If it were possible to modify the Kolb center section so that the airflow just ahead of the prop was not receiving a downward vector, then (if this theory is correct) the need for a rudder trim tab would pretty much go away.
This is just a theory, and like all theories, I have probably overlooked something. So have at it - this is an interesting thread
| - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
_________________ Richard Pike
Kolb MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
Kingsport, TN 3TN0
Forgiving is tough, being forgiven is wonderful, and God's grace really is amazing. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
jbhart(at)onlyinternet.ne Guest
|
Posted: Sun Nov 27, 2011 7:03 pm Post subject: Some success at last |
|
|
At 01:37 PM 11/27/11 -0800, you wrote:
Quote: |
I think maybe I've got it - it is the relationship of the wing and the prop, and the relative airflow as it leaves the wing and goes into the prop.
--------
|
Richard,
I agree with most of what you have written. A tractor engine mount gives
the propeller clean air as apposed to trashy air flow entering the pusher
propeller. That is why it so important to trim the wings level and then
start washering the engine to move the ball or string slip indicator toward
the center. At some point you will not be able to gain additional
improvement from further washering and then you must tab the rudder to
remove the remaining slip. You can only get it right for one desired
aircraft loading and cruise speed while in level flight. For all other
cases, slip and power factor will creep back in.
With the ultrastar, firestars, kobras and the firefly it is a little easier,
because wing loading due to fuel, pilot and passenger is symmetrical. But
with the mark III's this will not be the case if one trims out for single
seat flying. It seems that if one trimed out for this condition, a
different aileron and rudder trim would be required when piloting from the
right or left seat. And again it seem like it would be different when
carrying a passenger. Have you noticed that is the case with your aircraft?
Jack B. Hart FF004
Winchester, IN
| - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
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
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|