Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:53 AM - Re: Fw: Kolb-List: club planes? (Patrick Reilly)
2. 12:29 PM - Re: Fw: Kolb-List: club planes? (floran higgins)
3. 12:44 PM - Re: Kolb-List: club planes? (Michael Gibbs)
4. 03:07 PM - Re: Fw: Kolb-List: club planes? (Weiss Richard)
5. 04:56 PM - Re: Fw: Kolb-List: club planes? (Ron Liebmann)
6. 05:18 PM - Re: Fw: Kolb-List: club planes? (John W. Hart)
7. 06:52 PM - Re: Fw: Kolb-List: club planes? (floran higgins)
8. 07:07 PM - Re: Fw: Kolb-List: club planes? (Weiss Richard)
9. 07:35 PM - Re: Fw: Kolb-List: club planes? (Lowell Fitt)
10. 09:55 PM - looking for smooth cowling for kitfox IV 1200 (diverjoe)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Fw: Kolb-List: club planes? |
Malcolm, Amen, FAA in my book doesn't stand for Federal Aviation Agency. I
can't say what it stands for here. It doesn't foster flying or aircraft
ownership. Most government rules and regulations are a parasitic drag on
what ever the activity is they are involved in. The EAA's goal is supposed
to be to further develope private aviation, hopefully in the "Expirimental"
area. More of the EAA's finances need to be directed at "eliminateing" FAA
involvement in private aviation.not building a bigger monument in Oshkosh.
Pat Reilly
Mod 3 582 Rebuilt
Rockford, IL
On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 12:53 AM, Malcolm Brubaker <brubakermal@yahoo.com>wrote:
> just a bit of history
>
> Malcolm Brubaker
> Michigan Sport
> Pilot Repair
> LSRM-A, PPC, WS
> (989)513-3022
>
>
> ----- Forwarded Message ----
> *From:* "Ron @ KFHU" <captainron1@cox.net>
> *To:* kolb-list@matronics.com
> *Sent:* Sun, February 6, 2011 11:28:57 AM
> *Subject:* Re: Kolb-List: club planes?
>
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Ron @ KFHU" <captainron1@cox.net>
>
>
> Well that's a good idea. Could certainly use it (My M3X) here in KFHU, it
> may even motivate me more to finish my project faster, which is 90% complete
> with 100% left to do kinda thing.
> However ignoring the FAA in this equation is pretty much kicking the can
> down the road. I think in terms of movement there has to be a wide ranging
> recognition the the FAA is the problem in general aviation. Fearing the FAA
> or thinking in terms of compliance with FAA all the time as we do now is
> strangling aviation. If there is no concerted effort to truncate their
> pervasive intrusion into aviation; the contraction will continue.
> I think I mentioned before that I almost never see young kids around taking
> flying lessons anymore. Its not because aviation has stopped firing up the
> imagination of the younger generation, its because the fun the freedom and
> the joy have been stomped out of flying by the FAA to an alarming degree. By
> all rights the Kolb factory should be busy and backlogged for orders, yet it
> is not happening. So the idea of a club to circumvent FAA rules is a valid
> and good, but it will not reverse the difficulty of being an aircraft owner
> aviator. The future is as it has always been in people owning their aircraft
> and plying the skies in freedom. I have yet to see an organization come
> about that makes it as its prime objective to restore freedom to aviate, by
> going after the source of the constraints. That is what we need most of all
> right now.
>
>
> ---- Malcolm Brubaker <brubakermal@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> ============
> We had an interesting discussion on linkedin this weekend. All
> about flight
> instruction and the idea of turning an experimental into a club plane so an
>
> instructor could legally use it to teach the owners to fly. This theory
> is
> viable and there is FAA approval to do this.
>
> What I think would really jump start the process is a pre-developed general
>
> format. One that would be easy for people to follow in developing their
> own club and fractional ownership; not much different than the downloads a
>
> person can buy to write their own will or start a non profit 401c3
> corporation.
> These always contain several disclaimers and liability waivers just like
> the
> ones we used in the old days to teach ultralight flying.
>
> This would help the ultralight pilot and sport pilot want-to-be, as well as
> the
> instructor.
>
> The idea of teaching someone to fly in a $14,000 plane with a 582 is not
> that
> far fetched. We all know people that have. It seemes like a better option
> than
> the $60,000 to $100,000 planes everyone thinks they currently need . When
> a student becomes a licensed pilot they can transition up.
>
> What this sport needs now is for people to stop focusing on the problem and
>
> develope a solution. The ultralight trainer was so successful that it was
> turned into a sport pilot plane; and that took 20 years. Even a 2 place
> Kolb
> classic could qualify.
> Malcolm Brubaker
> Michigan Sport
> Pilot Repair
> LSRM-A, PPC, WS
> (989)513-3022
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Pat Ladd <pj.ladd@btinternet.com>
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Sat, February 5, 2011 10:45:06 AM
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Kolb list: Pitot probe
>
>
> Hi Mike,
> << I added my own extension>>
>
> Nice neat job.
>
> P=============
>
>
> --
> kugelair.com
>
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
--
Pat Reilly
Mod 3 582 Rebuild
Rockford,IL
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Fw: Kolb-List: club planes? |
I agree also. I spent nearly my whole adult life in general aviation. The
best thing that could happen to general avaition is to abolish the FAA.
It is the most overstaffed, overpaid, and underworked group of people I k
now.
Floran Higgins
Helena Mt.
Speedster
912 ULS
----- Original Message -----
From: Patrick Reilly
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2011 6:49 AM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fw: Kolb-List: club planes?
Malcolm, Amen, FAA in my book doesn't stand for Federal Aviation Agency
=2E I can't say what it stands for here. It doesn't foster flying or airc
raft ownership. Most government rules and regulations are a parasitic dra
g on what ever the activity is they are involved in. The EAA's goal is su
pposed to be to further develope private aviation, hopefully in the "Expi
rimental" area. More of the EAA's finances need to be directed at "elimi
nateing" FAA involvement in private aviation.not building a bigger monume
nt in Oshkosh.
Pat Reilly
Mod 3 582 Rebuilt
Rockford, IL
On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 12:53 AM, Malcolm Brubaker <brubakermal@yahoo.c
om> wrote:
just a bit of history
Malcolm Brubaker
Michigan Sport
Pilot Repair
LSRM-A, PPC, WS
(989)513-3022
----- Forwarded Message ----
From: "Ron @ KFHU" <captainron1@cox.net>
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sun, February 6, 2011 11:28:57 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: club planes?
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Ron @ KFHU" <captainron1@cox.net>
Well that's a good idea. Could certainly use it (My M3X) here in KFHU
, it may even motivate me more to finish my project faster, which is 90%
complete with 100% left to do kinda thing.
However ignoring the FAA in this equation is pretty much kicking the
can down the road. I think in terms of movement there has to be a wide ra
nging recognition the the FAA is the problem in general aviation. Fearing
the FAA or thinking in terms of compliance with FAA all the time as we d
o now is strangling aviation. If there is no concerted effort to truncate
their pervasive intrusion into aviation; the contraction will continue.
I think I mentioned before that I almost never see young kids around
taking flying lessons anymore. Its not because aviation has stopped firin
g up the imagination of the younger generation, its because the fun the f
reedom and the joy have been stomped out of flying by the FAA to an alarm
ing degree. By all rights the Kolb factory should be busy and backlogged
for orders, yet it is not happening. So the idea of a club to circumvent
FAA rules is a valid and good, but it will not reverse the difficulty of
being an aircraft owner aviator. The future is as it has always been in p
eople owning their aircraft and plying the skies in freedom. I have yet t
o see an organization come about that makes it as its prime objective to
restore freedom to aviate, by going after the source of the constraints.
That is what we need most of all right now.
---- Malcolm Brubaker <brubakermal@yahoo.com> wrote:
============
We had an interesting discussion on linkedin this weekend. All about
flight
instruction and the idea of turning an experimental into a club plane
so an
instructor could legally use it to teach the owners to fly. This t
heory is
viable and there is FAA approval to do this.
What I think would really jump start the process is a pre-developed g
eneral
format. One that would be easy for people to follow in developing t
heir
own club and fractional ownership; not much different than the downl
oads a
person can buy to write their own will or start a non profit 401c3 co
rporation.
These always contain several disclaimers and liability waivers just l
ike the
ones we used in the old days to teach ultralight flying.
This would help the ultralight pilot and sport pilot want-to-be, as w
ell as the
instructor.
The idea of teaching someone to fly in a $14,000 plane with a 582 is
not that
far fetched. We all know people that have. It seemes like a better o
ption than
the $60,000 to $100,000 planes everyone thinks they currently need .
When
a student becomes a licensed pilot they can transition up.
What this sport needs now is for people to stop focusing on the probl
em and
develope a solution. The ultralight trainer was so successful that i
t was
turned into a sport pilot plane; and that took 20 years. Even a 2
place Kolb
classic could qualify.
Malcolm Brubaker
Michigan Sport
Pilot Repair
LSRM-A, PPC, WS
(989)513-3022
________________________________
From: Pat Ladd <pj.ladd@btinternet.com>
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sat, February 5, 2011 10:45:06 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Kolb list: Pitot probe
Hi Mike,
<< I added my own extension>>
Nice neat job.
P==============
--
kugelair.com
arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List
ttp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
--
Pat Reilly
Mod 3 582 Rebuild
Rockford,IL
Email by OUTDRS.NET
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Kolb-List: club planes? |
>...Most government rules and regulations are a parasitic drag on
>what ever the activity is they are involved in.
Looks like you're right...
Mike G.
N728KF, Kitfox IV-1200 Speedster
Phoenix, AZ
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Fw: Kolb-List: club planes? |
Gentleman,
I am finding this thread particularly interesting. Without a two hour
dissertation on the subject, please allow me to make a few points for us
to ponder. These are just my opinions and probably don't count for much
more than that.
I can agree that the FAA sometimes goes overboard, but it's usually in
response to an external force. Maybe they are overpaid, but they are
certainly not underworked. To the contrary, there are about 6,000
aviation safety inspectors in the FAA. Those folks cover every airline,
every business, every certificate action, actually they work for
everyone of us who wants to get something done within the system. I
think when careful thought is given to the subject, isn't it possible
that the workforce is spread pretty thin? I don't believe for a moment
they are going out of there to find more work. It is clear they are
paying more attention to us and maybe hindering our abilities to do some
things. I think something or someone is ringing their bell and they
are responding to that. The question to be addressed is what or who is
getting their attention.
It's my opinion, and that of some others, that a portion of the problem
lies with us - the pilots, the builders of experimental aircraft. Our
safety record is abysmal. Compared to other GA activities we stand out
- with a terrible record. For the past few years we, as a group, have
been in denial about our safety record. The AOPA Nall report (less
their atrocious commentary on the subject), and especially the stats as
presented by Ron Wannttaja in Sport Aviation (checkout his article in
the Jan 2011 edition) all depict the problem. We need to fix what's
broke before the FAA is going to provide relief for expanding what we
want to do.
IMHO our Tech Counselor and Flight Advisor Programs are currently
underutilized, poorly promoted, and possibly ineffectual in their
current state. As a segment of GA we have had tremendous growth and
it's possible our programs have not kept up, or perhaps they are
misdirected. Is it possible the boom in the kit industry has outpaced
the safety programs? Safety should be our foremost thought, but I'm not
sure it is. I am sure, that like a number of folks on this list, I have
lost friends to stupid acts of airmanship and other deadly mistakes that
could possibly have been avoided. Yes, these are experimental aircraft
and things can go wrong, engines can quit, and mistakes can be made, but
a good safety management system will reduce these tremendously. We need
a strong system and strong people to fix the problems that exist.
To the FAA, this is their business. Congress holds then accountable for
our safety record 'almost' as much as they do for the air carriers.
When Congress is interested, trust me, the FAA sometimes starts to take
draconian actions, that is until the alphabet groups weigh in and cooler
heads prevail.
On the flip side, to us, members of EAA, it's personal - not business.
Our friends are being injured or killed. Our mere existence is always
in question because only we (and the FAA) really care. The general
public sees us as the reason for air traffic delays and view us as rich
guys, privileged and above others (pun intended) if you will. They
don't give a flip about our freedoms. Our segment of aviation is not a
right, it's a privilege and one that we have to earn with every flight.
Our mistakes end up on the 6 o'clock news and make headlines. I think
we are going to have to do better.
As we speak there are changes coming to the aforementioned programs and
I'm hopeful that over time these will improve our safety record. But I
don't think we can rely only on those programs. Each of us needs to
find constructive ways to impart a safety culture in what we do and what
others who share our passion do. I don't believe blaming the FAA will
improve our lot and without a groundswell of a few million people
pounding on their elected representatives, I think the FAA is here to
stay. We do have some control over what form the FAA takes. If we're
safe, responsible, and plan ahead, they will back off and go find
something else to address. Most of them are not against us, in fact,
many of them fly experimental aircraft and build aircraft just as we do.
They are only responding to the pressures within the beltway of DC and
the statistics that tend to drive the system.
I hope this doesn't come across as preaching, I mean it to be just a
viewpoint. However, I would really like to hear some constructive ideas
to fix any of the problems.
Rick Weiss
N39RW Series V Speedster, 912ULS
SkyStar S/N 1
Port Orange, FL
PS - in the spirit of complete disclosure, I am currently Chairman of
the EAA Homebuilt Aircraft Council and a retired (1997) FAA senior
manager/engineer/pilot. I will take your thoughts, comments, and ideas
to the senior EAA managers and hopefully provide some useful input into
the ultimate decision making process. Okay? That said, flame away:-)
On Feb 27, 2011, at 1:53 AM, Malcolm Brubaker wrote:
> just a bit of history
>
> Malcolm Brubaker
> Michigan Sport
> Pilot Repair
> LSRM-A, PPC, WS
> (989)513-3022
>
>
> ----- Forwarded Message ----
> From: "Ron @ KFHU" <captainron1@cox.net>
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Sun, February 6, 2011 11:28:57 AM
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: club planes?
>
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Ron @ KFHU" <captainron1@cox.net>
>
>
> Well that's a good idea. Could certainly use it (My M3X) here in KFHU,
it may even motivate me more to finish my project faster, which is 90%
complete with 100% left to do kinda thing.
> However ignoring the FAA in this equation is pretty much kicking the
can down the road. I think in terms of movement there has to be a wide
ranging recognition the the FAA is the problem in general aviation.
Fearing the FAA or thinking in terms of compliance with FAA all the time
as we do now is strangling aviation. If there is no concerted effort to
truncate their pervasive intrusion into aviation; the contraction will
continue.
> I think I mentioned before that I almost never see young kids around
taking flying lessons anymore. Its not because aviation has stopped
firing up the imagination of the younger generation, its because the fun
the freedom and the joy have been stomped out of flying by the FAA to an
alarming degree. By all rights the Kolb factory should be busy and
backlogged for orders, yet it is not happening. So the idea of a club to
circumvent FAA rules is a valid and good, but it will not reverse the
difficulty of being an aircraft owner aviator. The future is as it has
always been in people owning their aircraft and plying the skies in
freedom. I have yet to see an organization come about that makes it as
its prime objective to restore freedom to aviate, by going after the
source of the constraints. That is what we need most of all right now.
>
>
>
> ---- Malcolm Brubaker <brubakermal@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> ============
> We had an interesting discussion on linkedin this weekend. All about
flight
> instruction and the idea of turning an experimental into a club plane
so an
> instructor could legally use it to teach the owners to fly. This
theory is
> viable and there is FAA approval to do this.
>
> What I think would really jump start the process is a pre-developed
general
> format. One that would be easy for people to follow in developing
their
> own club and fractional ownership; not much different than the
downloads a
> person can buy to write their own will or start a non profit 401c3
corporation.
> These always contain several disclaimers and liability waivers just
like the
> ones we used in the old days to teach ultralight flying.
>
> This would help the ultralight pilot and sport pilot want-to-be, as
well as the
> instructor.
>
> The idea of teaching someone to fly in a $14,000 plane with a 582 is
not that
> far fetched. We all know people that have. It seemes like a better
option than
> the $60,000 to $100,000 planes everyone thinks they currently need .
When
> a student becomes a licensed pilot they can transition up.
>
> What this sport needs now is for people to stop focusing on the
problem and
> develope a solution. The ultralight trainer was so successful that it
was
> turned into a sport pilot plane; and that took 20 years. Even a 2
place Kolb
> classic could qualify.
> Malcolm Brubaker
> Michigan Sport
> Pilot Repair
> LSRM-A, PPC, WS
> (989)513-3022
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Pat Ladd <pj.ladd@btinternet.com>
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Sat, February 5, 2011 10:45:06 AM
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Kolb list: Pitot probe
>
>
> Hi Mike,
> << I added my own extension>>
>
> Nice neat job.
>
> P==============
>
>
>
>
> --
> kugelair.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Fw: Kolb-List: club planes? |
No flames from me, Rick. I am in complete agreement with you. And, you
could not have said it better.
Ron Liebmann N55KF FA/TC 15 years
From: Weiss Richard
Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2011 5:04 PM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fw: Kolb-List: club planes?
Gentleman,
I am finding this thread particularly interesting. Without a two hour
dissertation on the subject, please allow me to make a few points for us
to ponder. These are just my opinions and probably don't count for much
more than that.
I can agree that the FAA sometimes goes overboard, but it's usually in
response to an external force. Maybe they are overpaid, but they are
certainly not underworked. To the contrary, there are about 6,000
aviation safety inspectors in the FAA. Those folks cover every airline,
every business, every certificate action, actually they work for
everyone of us who wants to get something done within the system. I
think when careful thought is given to the subject, isn't it possible
that the workforce is spread pretty thin? I don't believe for a moment
they are going out of there to find more work. It is clear they are
paying more attention to us and maybe hindering our abilities to do some
things. I think something or someone is ringing their bell and they
are responding to that. The question to be addressed is what or who is
getting their attention.
It's my opinion, and that of some others, that a portion of the problem
lies with us - the pilots, the builders of experimental aircraft. Our
safety record is abysmal. Compared to other GA activities we stand out
- with a terrible record. For the past few years we, as a group, have
been in denial about our safety record. The AOPA Nall report (less
their atrocious commentary on the subject), and especially the stats as
presented by Ron Wannttaja in Sport Aviation (checkout his article in
the Jan 2011 edition) all depict the problem. We need to fix what's
broke before the FAA is going to provide relief for expanding what we
want to do.
IMHO our Tech Counselor and Flight Advisor Programs are currently
underutilized, poorly promoted, and possibly ineffectual in their
current state. As a segment of GA we have had tremendous growth and
it's possible our programs have not kept up, or perhaps they are
misdirected. Is it possible the boom in the kit industry has outpaced
the safety programs? Safety should be our foremost thought, but I'm not
sure it is. I am sure, that like a number of folks on this list, I have
lost friends to stupid acts of airmanship and other deadly mistakes that
could possibly have been avoided. Yes, these are experimental aircraft
and things can go wrong, engines can quit, and mistakes can be made, but
a good safety management system will reduce these tremendously. We need
a strong system and strong people to fix the problems that exist.
To the FAA, this is their business. Congress holds then accountable for
our safety record 'almost' as much as they do for the air carriers.
When Congress is interested, trust me, the FAA sometimes starts to take
draconian actions, that is until the alphabet groups weigh in and cooler
heads prevail.
On the flip side, to us, members of EAA, it's personal - not business.
Our friends are being injured or killed. Our mere existence is always
in question because only we (and the FAA) really care. The general
public sees us as the reason for air traffic delays and view us as rich
guys, privileged and above others (pun intended) if you will. They
don't give a flip about our freedoms. Our segment of aviation is not a
right, it's a privilege and one that we have to earn with every flight.
Our mistakes end up on the 6 o'clock news and make headlines. I think
we are going to have to do better.
As we speak there are changes coming to the aforementioned programs and
I'm hopeful that over time these will improve our safety record. But I
don't think we can rely only on those programs. Each of us needs to
find constructive ways to impart a safety culture in what we do and what
others who share our passion do. I don't believe blaming the FAA will
improve our lot and without a groundswell of a few million people
pounding on their elected representatives, I think the FAA is here to
stay. We do have some control over what form the FAA takes. If we're
safe, responsible, and plan ahead, they will back off and go find
something else to address. Most of them are not against us, in fact,
many of them fly experimental aircraft and build aircraft just as we do.
They are only responding to the pressures within the beltway of DC and
the statistics that tend to drive the system.
I hope this doesn't come across as preaching, I mean it to be just a
viewpoint. However, I would really like to hear some constructive ideas
to fix any of the problems.
Rick Weiss
N39RW Series V Speedster, 912ULS
SkyStar S/N 1
Port Orange, FL
PS - in the spirit of complete disclosure, I am currently Chairman of
the EAA Homebuilt Aircraft Council and a retired (1997) FAA senior
manager/engineer/pilot. I will take your thoughts, comments, and ideas
to the senior EAA managers and hopefully provide some useful input into
the ultimate decision making process. Okay? That said, flame away:-)
On Feb 27, 2011, at 1:53 AM, Malcolm Brubaker wrote:
just a bit of history
Malcolm Brubaker
Michigan Sport
Pilot Repair
LSRM-A, PPC, WS
(989)513-3022
----- Forwarded Message ----
From: "Ron @ KFHU" <captainron1@cox.net>
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sun, February 6, 2011 11:28:57 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: club planes?
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Ron @ KFHU" <captainron1@cox.net>
Well that's a good idea. Could certainly use it (My M3X) here in KFHU,
it may even motivate me more to finish my project faster, which is 90%
complete with 100% left to do kinda thing.
However ignoring the FAA in this equation is pretty much kicking the
can down the road. I think in terms of movement there has to be a wide
ranging recognition the the FAA is the problem in general aviation.
Fearing the FAA or thinking in terms of compliance with FAA all the time
as we do now is strangling aviation. If there is no concerted effort to
truncate their pervasive intrusion into aviation; the contraction will
continue.
I think I mentioned before that I almost never see young kids around
taking flying lessons anymore. Its not because aviation has stopped
firing up the imagination of the younger generation, its because the fun
the freedom and the joy have been stomped out of flying by the FAA to an
alarming degree. By all rights the Kolb factory should be busy and
backlogged for orders, yet it is not happening. So the idea of a club to
circumvent FAA rules is a valid and good, but it will not reverse the
difficulty of being an aircraft owner aviator. The future is as it has
always been in people owning their aircraft and plying the skies in
freedom. I have yet to see an organization come about that makes it as
its prime objective to restore freedom to aviate, by going after the
source of the constraints. That is what we need most of all right now.
---- Malcolm Brubaker <brubakermal@yahoo.com> wrote:
============
We had an interesting discussion on linkedin this weekend. All about
flight
instruction and the idea of turning an experimental into a club plane
so an
instructor could legally use it to teach the owners to fly. This
theory is
viable and there is FAA approval to do this.
What I think would really jump start the process is a pre-developed
general
format. One that would be easy for people to follow in developing
their
own club and fractional ownership; not much different than the
downloads a
person can buy to write their own will or start a non profit 401c3
corporation.
These always contain several disclaimers and liability waivers just
like the
ones we used in the old days to teach ultralight flying.
This would help the ultralight pilot and sport pilot want-to-be, as
well as the
instructor.
The idea of teaching someone to fly in a $14,000 plane with a 582 is
not that
far fetched. We all know people that have. It seemes like a better
option than
the $60,000 to $100,000 planes everyone thinks they currently need .
When
a student becomes a licensed pilot they can transition up.
What this sport needs now is for people to stop focusing on the
problem and
develope a solution. The ultralight trainer was so successful that it
was
turned into a sport pilot plane; and that took 20 years. Even a 2
place Kolb
classic could qualify.
Malcolm Brubaker
Michigan Sport
Pilot Repair
LSRM-A, PPC, WS
(989)513-3022
________________________________
From: Pat Ladd <pj.ladd@btinternet.com>
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sat, February 5, 2011 10:45:06 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Kolb list: Pitot probe
Hi Mike,
<< I added my own extension>>
Nice neat job.
P==============
--
kugelair.com
face="courier
new,courier">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
ontribution
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Fw: Kolb-List: club planes? |
Rick,
I agree. One thing that we need to do, in my opinion, is to do our own
safety management. We, as a group, would benefit from less FAA oversight if
we could get our accident/incident rate down to, or below, the accident
rate of the rest of GA. The only way we can do that is to be our own
conformance inspectors and do away with some of our macho, egotistical mind
sets. I've had some of those states of mind on occasion.
Most aviation accidents are not caused from a single discrepancy, but from a
series of minor causal factors, that snowball until situational awareness is
lost and the aircraft strikes the planet in an "ungood" manner. Homebuilt
aircraft essentially react to these planet strikes in the same manner as
certificated aircraft.
I'm as guilty as anyone about occasionally letting something fall through
the cracks that could adversely affect safety, although I strive to avoid
those situations as well as I can. There are lots of folks in the EAA and
among homebuilders in general that have myriads of experience and expertise
that are more than willing to help in suggesting ways to put things
together, to verify that the way something is put together is safe, and to
offer flying techniques instruction in aircraft we may not be familiar with.
It's going to take a change in our collective attitudes to learn to use all
those assets to effect a safety improvement program that results in an
acceptable accident rate.
John Hart
KF IV
Wilburton, OK
CW4 US Army (Retired)
US Army Aviation Safety Officer Course Graduate
Commercial Pilot
ASEL, ASES, AMEL, Rotorcraft-Helicopter, Instrument Airplane and Helicopter
CFI
AS&MEL, Rotorcraft-Helicopter, Instrument Airplane and
Helicopter
Mechanic
Airframe and Powerplant
Former FAA Aviation Safety Technician
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Weiss Richard
Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2011 5:04 PM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fw: Kolb-List: club planes?
Gentleman,
I am finding this thread particularly interesting. Without a two hour
dissertation on the subject, please allow me to make a few points for us to
ponder. These are just my opinions and probably don't count for much more
than that.
I can agree that the FAA sometimes goes overboard, but it's usually in
response to an external force. Maybe they are overpaid, but they are
certainly not underworked. To the contrary, there are about 6,000 aviation
safety inspectors in the FAA. Those folks cover every airline, every
business, every certificate action, actually they work for everyone of us
who wants to get something done within the system. I think when careful
thought is given to the subject, isn't it possible that the workforce is
spread pretty thin? I don't believe for a moment they are going out of
there to find more work. It is clear they are paying more attention to us
and maybe hindering our abilities to do some things. I think something or
someone is ringing their bell and they are responding to that. The question
to be addressed is what or who is getting their attention.
It's my opinion, and that of some others, that a portion of the problem lies
with us - the pilots, the builders of experimental aircraft. Our safety
record is abysmal. Compared to other GA activities we stand out - with a
terrible record. For the past few years we, as a group, have been in denial
about our safety record. The AOPA Nall report (less their atrocious
commentary on the subject), and especially the stats as presented by Ron
Wannttaja in Sport Aviation (checkout his article in the Jan 2011 edition)
all depict the problem. We need to fix what's broke before the FAA is going
to provide relief for expanding what we want to do.
IMHO our Tech Counselor and Flight Advisor Programs are currently
underutilized, poorly promoted, and possibly ineffectual in their current
state. As a segment of GA we have had tremendous growth and it's possible
our programs have not kept up, or perhaps they are misdirected. Is it
possible the boom in the kit industry has outpaced the safety programs?
Safety should be our foremost thought, but I'm not sure it is. I am sure,
that like a number of folks on this list, I have lost friends to stupid acts
of airmanship and other deadly mistakes that could possibly have been
avoided. Yes, these are experimental aircraft and things can go wrong,
engines can quit, and mistakes can be made, but a good safety management
system will reduce these tremendously. We need a strong system and strong
people to fix the problems that exist.
To the FAA, this is their business. Congress holds then accountable for our
safety record 'almost' as much as they do for the air carriers. When
Congress is interested, trust me, the FAA sometimes starts to take draconian
actions, that is until the alphabet groups weigh in and cooler heads
prevail.
On the flip side, to us, members of EAA, it's personal - not business. Our
friends are being injured or killed. Our mere existence is always in
question because only we (and the FAA) really care. The general public sees
us as the reason for air traffic delays and view us as rich guys, privileged
and above others (pun intended) if you will. They don't give a flip about
our freedoms. Our segment of aviation is not a right, it's a privilege and
one that we have to earn with every flight. Our mistakes end up on the 6
o'clock news and make headlines. I think we are going to have to do better.
As we speak there are changes coming to the aforementioned programs and I'm
hopeful that over time these will improve our safety record. But I don't
think we can rely only on those programs. Each of us needs to find
constructive ways to impart a safety culture in what we do and what others
who share our passion do. I don't believe blaming the FAA will improve our
lot and without a groundswell of a few million people pounding on their
elected representatives, I think the FAA is here to stay. We do have some
control over what form the FAA takes. If we're safe, responsible, and plan
ahead, they will back off and go find something else to address. Most of
them are not against us, in fact, many of them fly experimental aircraft and
build aircraft just as we do. They are only responding to the pressures
within the beltway of DC and the statistics that tend to drive the system.
I hope this doesn't come across as preaching, I mean it to be just a
viewpoint. However, I would really like to hear some constructive ideas to
fix any of the problems.
Rick Weiss
N39RW Series V Speedster, 912ULS
SkyStar S/N 1
Port Orange, FL
PS - in the spirit of complete disclosure, I am currently Chairman of the
EAA Homebuilt Aircraft Council and a retired (1997) FAA senior
manager/engineer/pilot. I will take your thoughts, comments, and ideas to
the senior EAA managers and hopefully provide some useful input into the
ultimate decision making process. Okay? That said, flame away:-)
On Feb 27, 2011, at 1:53 AM, Malcolm Brubaker wrote:
just a bit of history
Malcolm Brubaker
Michigan Sport
Pilot Repair
LSRM-A, PPC, WS
(989)513-3022
----- Forwarded Message ----
From: "Ron @ KFHU" <captainron1@cox.net>
Sent: Sun, February 6, 2011 11:28:57 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: club planes?
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Ron @ KFHU" <captainron1@cox.net>
Well that's a good idea. Could certainly use it (My M3X) here in KFHU, it
may even motivate me more to finish my project faster, which is 90% complete
with 100% left to do kinda thing.
However ignoring the FAA in this equation is pretty much kicking the can
down the road. I think in terms of movement there has to be a wide ranging
recognition the the FAA is the problem in general aviation. Fearing the FAA
or thinking in terms of compliance with FAA all the time as we do now is
strangling aviation. If there is no concerted effort to truncate their
pervasive intrusion into aviation; the contraction will continue.
I think I mentioned before that I almost never see young kids around taking
flying lessons anymore. Its not because aviation has stopped firing up the
imagination of the younger generation, its because the fun the freedom and
the joy have been stomped out of flying by the FAA to an alarming degree. By
all rights the Kolb factory should be busy and backlogged for orders, yet it
is not happening. So the idea of a club to circumvent FAA rules is a valid
and good, but it will not reverse the difficulty of being an aircraft owner
aviator. The future is as it has always been in people owning their aircraft
and plying the skies in freedom. I have yet to see an organization come
about that makes it as its prime objective to restore freedom to aviate, by
going after the source of the constraints. That is what we need most of all
right now.
---- Malcolm Brubaker <brubakermal@yahoo.com> wrote:
============
We had an interesting discussion on linkedin this weekend. All about flight
instruction and the idea of turning an experimental into a club plane so an
instructor could legally use it to teach the owners to fly. This theory
is
viable and there is FAA approval to do this.
What I think would really jump start the process is a pre-developed general
format. One that would be easy for people to follow in developing their
own club and fractional ownership; not much different than the downloads a
person can buy to write their own will or start a non profit 401c3
corporation.
These always contain several disclaimers and liability waivers just like the
ones we used in the old days to teach ultralight flying.
This would help the ultralight pilot and sport pilot want-to-be, as well as
the
instructor.
The idea of teaching someone to fly in a $14,000 plane with a 582 is not
that
far fetched. We all know people that have. It seemes like a better option
than
the $60,000 to $100,000 planes everyone thinks they currently need . When
a student becomes a licensed pilot they can transition up.
What this sport needs now is for people to stop focusing on the problem and
develope a solution. The ultralight trainer was so successful that it was
turned into a sport pilot plane; and that took 20 years. Even a 2 place
Kolb
classic could qualify.
Malcolm Brubaker
Michigan Sport
Pilot Repair
LSRM-A, PPC, WS
(989)513-3022
________________________________
From: Pat Ladd <pj.ladd@btinternet.com>
Sent: Sat, February 5, 2011 10:45:06 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Kolb list: Pitot probe
Hi Mike,
<< I added my own extension>>
Nice neat job.
P==============
--
kugelair.com <http://kugelair.com/>
<http://kugelair.com/>
<http://kugelair.com/>
<http://kugelair.com/>
<http://kugelair.com/> face="courier
new,courier">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contri
bution
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Fw: Kolb-List: club planes? |
I would like to make a comment from my viewpoint.
When I srarted to fly in Jan 1953 there was two FAA inspectors in Montana
=2E One in Helena and one in Billings. Today there is 25 inspectors in th
e Helena office and five secretarys I am now retired so I don't know how
many there are in Billings. I do know that there is only about 2/3 as man
y active pilots and airplanes in Mt now as there was in 1950.
I knew some of these FAA people quite well. They have told me that they d
o not have enough work to do so they are out nitpicking the flight operat
ors so they can write a memo just to justify their positions
Floran Higgins
Helena, Mt
Speedster
912ULS..
----- Original Message -----
From: Weiss Richard
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2011 4:04 PM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fw: Kolb-List: club planes?
Gentleman,
I am finding this thread particularly interesting. Without a two hour
dissertation on the subject, please allow me to make a few points for us
to ponder. These are just my opinions and probably don't count for much
more than that.
I can agree that the FAA sometimes goes overboard, but it's usually in
response to an external force. Maybe they are overpaid, but they are cer
tainly not underworked. To the contrary, there are about 6,000 aviation
safety inspectors in the FAA. Those folks cover every airline, every bus
iness, every certificate action, actually they work for everyone of us wh
o wants to get something done within the system. I think when careful th
ought is given to the subject, isn't it possible that the workforce is sp
read pretty thin? I don't believe for a moment they are going out of the
re to find more work. It is clear they are paying more attention to us a
nd maybe hindering our abilities to do some things. I think something o
r someone is ringing their bell and they are responding to that. The que
stion to be addressed is what or who is getting their attention.
It's my opinion, and that of some others, that a portion of the problem
lies with us - the pilots, the builders of experimental aircraft. Our s
afety record is abysmal. Compared to other GA activities we stand out -
with a terrible record. For the past few years we, as a group, have been
in denial about our safety record. The AOPA Nall report (less their atr
ocious commentary on the subject), and especially the stats as presented
by Ron Wannttaja in Sport Aviation (checkout his article in the Jan 2011
edition) all depict the problem. We need to fix what's broke before the
FAA is going to provide relief for expanding what we want to do.
IMHO our Tech Counselor and Flight Advisor Programs are currently under
utilized, poorly promoted, and possibly ineffectual in their current stat
e. As a segment of GA we have had tremendous growth and it's possible ou
r programs have not kept up, or perhaps they are misdirected. Is it poss
ible the boom in the kit industry has outpaced the safety programs? Safe
ty should be our foremost thought, but I'm not sure it is. I am sure, th
at like a number of folks on this list, I have lost friends to stupid act
s of airmanship and other deadly mistakes that could possibly have been a
voided. Yes, these are experimental aircraft and things can go wrong, en
gines can quit, and mistakes can be made, but a good safety management sy
stem will reduce these tremendously. We need a strong system and strong
people to fix the problems that exist.
To the FAA, this is their business. Congress holds then accountable fo
r our safety record 'almost' as much as they do for the air carriers. Wh
en Congress is interested, trust me, the FAA sometimes starts to take dra
conian actions, that is until the alphabet groups weigh in and cooler hea
ds prevail.
On the flip side, to us, members of EAA, it's personal - not business.
Our friends are being injured or killed. Our mere existence is always i
n question because only we (and the FAA) really care. The general public
sees us as the reason for air traffic delays and view us as rich guys, p
rivileged and above others (pun intended) if you will. They don't give a
flip about our freedoms. Our segment of aviation is not a right, it's a
privilege and one that we have to earn with every flight. Our mistakes
end up on the 6 o'clock news and make headlines. I think we are going to
have to do better.
As we speak there are changes coming to the aforementioned programs and
I'm hopeful that over time these will improve our safety record. But I
don't think we can rely only on those programs. Each of us needs to find
constructive ways to impart a safety culture in what we do and what othe
rs who share our passion do. I don't believe blaming the FAA will improv
e our lot and without a groundswell of a few million people pounding on t
heir elected representatives, I think the FAA is here to stay. We do hav
e some control over what form the FAA takes. If we're safe, responsible,
and plan ahead, they will back off and go find something else to address
=2E Most of them are not against us, in fact, many of them fly experimen
tal aircraft and build aircraft just as we do. They are only responding
to the pressures within the beltway of DC and the statistics that tend to
drive the system.
I hope this doesn't come across as preaching, I mean it to be just a vi
ewpoint. However, I would really like to hear some constructive ideas to
fix any of the problems.
Rick Weiss
N39RW Series V Speedster, 912ULS
SkyStar S/N 1
Port Orange, FL
PS - in the spirit of complete disclosure, I am currently Chairman of t
he EAA Homebuilt Aircraft Council and a retired (1997) FAA senior manager
/engineer/pilot. I will take your thoughts, comments, and ideas to the s
enior EAA managers and hopefully provide some useful input into the ultim
ate decision making process. Okay? That said, flame away:-)
On Feb 27, 2011, at 1:53 AM, Malcolm Brubaker wrote:
just a bit of history
Malcolm Brubaker
Michigan Sport
Pilot Repair
LSRM-A, PPC, WS
(989)513-3022
----- Forwarded Message ----
From: "Ron @ KFHU" <captainron1@cox.net>
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sun, February 6, 2011 11:28:57 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: club planes?
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Ron @ KFHU" <captainron1@cox.net>
Well that's a good idea. Could certainly use it (My M3X) here in KFHU
, it may even motivate me more to finish my project faster, which is 90%
complete with 100% left to do kinda thing.
However ignoring the FAA in this equation is pretty much kicking the
can down the road. I think in terms of movement there has to be a wide ra
nging recognition the the FAA is the problem in general aviation. Fearing
the FAA or thinking in terms of compliance with FAA all the time as we d
o now is strangling aviation. If there is no concerted effort to truncate
their pervasive intrusion into aviation; the contraction will continue.
I think I mentioned before that I almost never see young kids around
taking flying lessons anymore. Its not because aviation has stopped firin
g up the imagination of the younger generation, its because the fun the f
reedom and the joy have been stomped out of flying by the FAA to an alarm
ing degree. By all rights the Kolb factory should be busy and backlogged
for orders, yet it is not happening. So the idea of a club to circumvent
FAA rules is a valid and good, but it will not reverse the difficulty of
being an aircraft owner aviator. The future is as it has always been in p
eople owning their aircraft and plying the skies in freedom. I have yet t
o see an organization come about that makes it as its prime objective to
restore freedom to aviate, by going after the source of the constraints.
That is what we need most of all right now.
---- Malcolm Brubaker <brubakermal@yahoo.com> wrote:
============
We had an interesting discussion on linkedin this weekend. All about
flight
instruction and the idea of turning an experimental into a club plane
so an
instructor could legally use it to teach the owners to fly. This t
heory is
viable and there is FAA approval to do this.
What I think would really jump start the process is a pre-developed g
eneral
format. One that would be easy for people to follow in developing t
heir
own club and fractional ownership; not much different than the downl
oads a
person can buy to write their own will or start a non profit 401c3 co
rporation.
These always contain several disclaimers and liability waivers just l
ike the
ones we used in the old days to teach ultralight flying.
This would help the ultralight pilot and sport pilot want-to-be, as w
ell as the
instructor.
The idea of teaching someone to fly in a $14,000 plane with a 582 is
not that
far fetched. We all know people that have. It seemes like a better o
ption than
the $60,000 to $100,000 planes everyone thinks they currently need .
When
a student becomes a licensed pilot they can transition up.
What this sport needs now is for people to stop focusing on the probl
em and
develope a solution. The ultralight trainer was so successful that i
t was
turned into a sport pilot plane; and that took 20 years. Even a 2
place Kolb
classic could qualify.
Malcolm Brubaker
Michigan Sport
Pilot Repair
LSRM-A, PPC, WS
(989)513-3022
________________________________
From: Pat Ladd <pj.ladd@btinternet.com>
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sat, February 5, 2011 10:45:06 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Kolb list: Pitot probe
Hi Mike,
<< I added my own extension>>
Nice neat job.
P==============
--
kugelair.com
face="courier new,courier">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-Li
st
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
ontribution
Email by OUTDRS.NET
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Fw: Kolb-List: club planes? |
Floran,
If that's true, and I have no reason to doubt your word, it's just
wrong. Maybe it's time, we the people, do something about it. These
things are fixable if our elected officials are made aware of the
issues. If they don't fix it, then they get taken care of in the next
election. Most important is to be sure the facts are truly the facts.
I know in our area, the FAA is spread a little thin, but then guys from
Montana may not want to live here, it may be a little too flat for
them:-)
Rick Weiss
N39RW Series V Speedster, 912ULS
SkyStar S/N 1
Port Orange, FL
On Feb 27, 2011, at 9:49 PM, floran higgins wrote:
> I would like to make a comment from my viewpoint.
> When I srarted to fly in Jan 1953 there was two FAA inspectors in
Montana. One in Helena and one in Billings. Today there is 25 inspectors
in the Helena office and five secretarys I am now retired so I don't
know how many there are in Billings. I do know that there is only about
2/3 as many active pilots and airplanes in Mt now as there was in 1950.
> I knew some of these FAA people quite well. They have told me that
they do not have enough work to do so they are out nitpicking the flight
operators so they can write a memo just to justify their positions
>
>
> Floran Higgins
> Helena, Mt
> Speedster
> 912ULS..
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Weiss Richard
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2011 4:04 PM
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fw: Kolb-List: club planes?
>
> Gentleman,
>
> I am finding this thread particularly interesting. Without a two hour
dissertation on the subject, please allow me to make a few points for us
to ponder. These are just my opinions and probably don't count for much
more than that.
>
> I can agree that the FAA sometimes goes overboard, but it's usually in
response to an external force. Maybe they are overpaid, but they are
certainly not underworked. To the contrary, there are about 6,000
aviation safety inspectors in the FAA. Those folks cover every airline,
every business, every certificate action, actually they work for
everyone of us who wants to get something done within the system. I
think when careful thought is given to the subject, isn't it possible
that the workforce is spread pretty thin? I don't believe for a moment
they are going out of there to find more work. It is clear they are
paying more attention to us and maybe hindering our abilities to do some
things. I think something or someone is ringing their bell and they
are responding to that. The question to be addressed is what or who is
getting their attention.
>
> It's my opinion, and that of some others, that a portion of the
problem lies with us - the pilots, the builders of experimental
aircraft. Our safety record is abysmal. Compared to other GA
activities we stand out - with a terrible record. For the past few
years we, as a group, have been in denial about our safety record. The
AOPA Nall report (less their atrocious commentary on the subject), and
especially the stats as presented by Ron Wannttaja in Sport Aviation
(checkout his article in the Jan 2011 edition) all depict the problem.
We need to fix what's broke before the FAA is going to provide relief
for expanding what we want to do.
>
> IMHO our Tech Counselor and Flight Advisor Programs are currently
underutilized, poorly promoted, and possibly ineffectual in their
current state. As a segment of GA we have had tremendous growth and
it's possible our programs have not kept up, or perhaps they are
misdirected. Is it possible the boom in the kit industry has outpaced
the safety programs? Safety should be our foremost thought, but I'm not
sure it is. I am sure, that like a number of folks on this list, I have
lost friends to stupid acts of airmanship and other deadly mistakes that
could possibly have been avoided. Yes, these are experimental aircraft
and things can go wrong, engines can quit, and mistakes can be made, but
a good safety management system will reduce these tremendously. We need
a strong system and strong people to fix the problems that exist.
>
> To the FAA, this is their business. Congress holds then accountable
for our safety record 'almost' as much as they do for the air carriers.
When Congress is interested, trust me, the FAA sometimes starts to take
draconian actions, that is until the alphabet groups weigh in and cooler
heads prevail.
>
> On the flip side, to us, members of EAA, it's personal - not business.
Our friends are being injured or killed. Our mere existence is always
in question because only we (and the FAA) really care. The general
public sees us as the reason for air traffic delays and view us as rich
guys, privileged and above others (pun intended) if you will. They
don't give a flip about our freedoms. Our segment of aviation is not a
right, it's a privilege and one that we have to earn with every flight.
Our mistakes end up on the 6 o'clock news and make headlines. I think
we are going to have to do better.
>
> As we speak there are changes coming to the aforementioned programs
and I'm hopeful that over time these will improve our safety record.
But I don't think we can rely only on those programs. Each of us needs
to find constructive ways to impart a safety culture in what we do and
what others who share our passion do. I don't believe blaming the FAA
will improve our lot and without a groundswell of a few million people
pounding on their elected representatives, I think the FAA is here to
stay. We do have some control over what form the FAA takes. If we're
safe, responsible, and plan ahead, they will back off and go find
something else to address. Most of them are not against us, in fact,
many of them fly experimental aircraft and build aircraft just as we do.
They are only responding to the pressures within the beltway of DC and
the statistics that tend to drive the system.
>
> I hope this doesn't come across as preaching, I mean it to be just a
viewpoint. However, I would really like to hear some constructive ideas
to fix any of the problems.
>
> Rick Weiss
> N39RW Series V Speedster, 912ULS
> SkyStar S/N 1
> Port Orange, FL
>
> PS - in the spirit of complete disclosure, I am currently Chairman of
the EAA Homebuilt Aircraft Council and a retired (1997) FAA senior
manager/engineer/pilot. I will take your thoughts, comments, and ideas
to the senior EAA managers and hopefully provide some useful input into
the ultimate decision making process. Okay? That said, flame away:-)
>
>
> On Feb 27, 2011, at 1:53 AM, Malcolm Brubaker wrote:
>
>> just a bit of history
>>
>> Malcolm Brubaker
>> Michigan Sport
>> Pilot Repair
>> LSRM-A, PPC, WS
>> (989)513-3022
>>
>>
>> ----- Forwarded Message ----
>> From: "Ron @ KFHU" <captainron1@cox.net>
>> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
>> Sent: Sun, February 6, 2011 11:28:57 AM
>> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: club planes?
>>
>> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Ron @ KFHU" <captainron1@cox.net>
>>
>>
>> Well that's a good idea. Could certainly use it (My M3X) here in
KFHU, it may even motivate me more to finish my project faster, which is
90% complete with 100% left to do kinda thing.
>> However ignoring the FAA in this equation is pretty much kicking the
can down the road. I think in terms of movement there has to be a wide
ranging recognition the the FAA is the problem in general aviation.
Fearing the FAA or thinking in terms of compliance with FAA all the time
as we do now is strangling aviation. If there is no concerted effort to
truncate their pervasive intrusion into aviation; the contraction will
continue.
>> I think I mentioned before that I almost never see young kids around
taking flying lessons anymore. Its not because aviation has stopped
firing up the imagination of the younger generation, its because the fun
the freedom and the joy have been stomped out of flying by the FAA to an
alarming degree. By all rights the Kolb factory should be busy and
backlogged for orders, yet it is not happening. So the idea of a club to
circumvent FAA rules is a valid and good, but it will not reverse the
difficulty of being an aircraft owner aviator. The future is as it has
always been in people owning their aircraft and plying the skies in
freedom. I have yet to see an organization come about that makes it as
its prime objective to restore freedom to aviate, by going after the
source of the constraints. That is what we need most of all right now.
>>
>>
>>
>> ---- Malcolm Brubaker <brubakermal@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> ============
>> We had an interesting discussion on linkedin this weekend. All about
flight
>> instruction and the idea of turning an experimental into a club plane
so an
>> instructor could legally use it to teach the owners to fly. This
theory is
>> viable and there is FAA approval to do this.
>>
>> What I think would really jump start the process is a pre-developed
general
>> format. One that would be easy for people to follow in developing
their
>> own club and fractional ownership; not much different than the
downloads a
>> person can buy to write their own will or start a non profit 401c3
corporation.
>> These always contain several disclaimers and liability waivers just
like the
>> ones we used in the old days to teach ultralight flying.
>>
>> This would help the ultralight pilot and sport pilot want-to-be, as
well as the
>> instructor.
>>
>> The idea of teaching someone to fly in a $14,000 plane with a 582 is
not that
>> far fetched. We all know people that have. It seemes like a better
option than
>> the $60,000 to $100,000 planes everyone thinks they currently need .
When
>> a student becomes a licensed pilot they can transition up.
>>
>> What this sport needs now is for people to stop focusing on the
problem and
>> develope a solution. The ultralight trainer was so successful that
it was
>> turned into a sport pilot plane; and that took 20 years. Even a 2
place Kolb
>> classic could qualify.
>> Malcolm Brubaker
>> Michigan Sport
>> Pilot Repair
>> LSRM-A, PPC, WS
>> (989)513-3022
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Pat Ladd <pj.ladd@btinternet.com>
>> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
>> Sent: Sat, February 5, 2011 10:45:06 AM
>> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Kolb list: Pitot probe
>>
>>
>> Hi Mike,
>> << I added my own extension>>
>>
>> Nice neat job.
>>
>> P==============
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> kugelair.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> face="courier
new,courier">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List
>> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>>
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/co
ntribution
>>
>>
>
>
>
> >http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List
> onics.com
> ww.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
> Email by OUTDRS.NET
>
>
>
>
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Fw: Kolb-List: club planes? |
I have been following this thread and have some thoughts - based on a
little experience but I will withhold my opinions.
In our area, the FSDO does get involved in Airworthiness Inspections.
My first went off as a very good experience with the FAA, but that was
over ten years ago. A neighbor had his RV-10 inspected recently with
virtually the same result. When we did our emergency landing that
destroyed our Model IV and brought the FAA calling, I have to say that
what I experienced was professional and actually quite pleasant. All
worked as I expected and more. I had done my job - I had all the
paperwork, my log book was current as was my medical - he did his.
A fellow contributor to the forums is trying to get the Danish version
of the FAA to authorize their version of an airworthiness certificate
and the hoops he is forced to "fly" through are quite astonishing and
his perseverance is quite inspiring. He is having to replace the lift
struts, and after he does, he will have to invert the whole airplane and
place I.6 tons of sand bags on the wings to prove (to the government)
that it is structurally sound. If I understand our regs, if I chose to
replace my lift struts with home made ones, all I would have to do is
report the major modification and fly off another FAA mandated test
period.
I put 900 hours on my first Model IV and can't think of a single
incident where I was negatively affected or felt constrained by the FAA.
Lowell
From: John W. Hart
Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2011 5:14 PM
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Fw: Kolb-List: club planes?
Rick,
I agree. One thing that we need to do, in my opinion, is to do our own
safety management. We, as a group, would benefit from less FAA
oversight if we could get our accident/incident rate down to, or below,
the accident rate of the rest of GA. The only way we can do that is to
be our own conformance inspectors and do away with some of our macho,
egotistical mind sets. I've had some of those states of mind on
occasion.
Most aviation accidents are not caused from a single discrepancy, but
from a series of minor causal factors, that snowball until situational
awareness is lost and the aircraft strikes the planet in an "ungood"
manner. Homebuilt aircraft essentially react to these planet strikes
in the same manner as certificated aircraft.
I'm as guilty as anyone about occasionally letting something fall
through the cracks that could adversely affect safety, although I
strive to avoid those situations as well as I can. There are lots of
folks in the EAA and among homebuilders in general that have myriads of
experience and expertise that are more than willing to help in
suggesting ways to put things together, to verify that the way something
is put together is safe, and to offer flying techniques instruction in
aircraft we may not be familiar with. It's going to take a change in
our collective attitudes to learn to use all those assets to effect a
safety improvement program that results in an acceptable accident rate.
John Hart
KF IV
Wilburton, OK
CW4 US Army (Retired)
US Army Aviation Safety Officer Course Graduate
Commercial Pilot
ASEL, ASES, AMEL, Rotorcraft-Helicopter, Instrument Airplane and
Helicopter
CFI
AS&MEL, Rotorcraft-Helicopter, Instrument Airplane and
Helicopter
Mechanic
Airframe and Powerplant
Former FAA Aviation Safety Technician
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Weiss
Richard
Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2011 5:04 PM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Fw: Kolb-List: club planes?
Gentleman,
I am finding this thread particularly interesting. Without a two hour
dissertation on the subject, please allow me to make a few points for us
to ponder. These are just my opinions and probably don't count for much
more than that.
I can agree that the FAA sometimes goes overboard, but it's usually in
response to an external force. Maybe they are overpaid, but they are
certainly not underworked. To the contrary, there are about 6,000
aviation safety inspectors in the FAA. Those folks cover every airline,
every business, every certificate action, actually they work for
everyone of us who wants to get something done within the system. I
think when careful thought is given to the subject, isn't it possible
that the workforce is spread pretty thin? I don't believe for a moment
they are going out of there to find more work. It is clear they are
paying more attention to us and maybe hindering our abilities to do some
things. I think something or someone is ringing their bell and they
are responding to that. The question to be addressed is what or who is
getting their attention.
It's my opinion, and that of some others, that a portion of the problem
lies with us - the pilots, the builders of experimental aircraft. Our
safety record is abysmal. Compared to other GA activities we stand out
- with a terrible record. For the past few years we, as a group, have
been in denial about our safety record. The AOPA Nall report (less
their atrocious commentary on the subject), and especially the stats as
presented by Ron Wannttaja in Sport Aviation (checkout his article in
the Jan 2011 edition) all depict the problem. We need to fix what's
broke before the FAA is going to provide relief for expanding what we
want to do.
IMHO our Tech Counselor and Flight Advisor Programs are currently
underutilized, poorly promoted, and possibly ineffectual in their
current state. As a segment of GA we have had tremendous growth and
it's possible our programs have not kept up, or perhaps they are
misdirected. Is it possible the boom in the kit industry has outpaced
the safety programs? Safety should be our foremost thought, but I'm not
sure it is. I am sure, that like a number of folks on this list, I have
lost friends to stupid acts of airmanship and other deadly mistakes that
could possibly have been avoided. Yes, these are experimental aircraft
and things can go wrong, engines can quit, and mistakes can be made, but
a good safety management system will reduce these tremendously. We need
a strong system and strong people to fix the problems that exist.
To the FAA, this is their business. Congress holds then accountable for
our safety record 'almost' as much as they do for the air carriers.
When Congress is interested, trust me, the FAA sometimes starts to take
draconian actions, that is until the alphabet groups weigh in and cooler
heads prevail.
On the flip side, to us, members of EAA, it's personal - not business.
Our friends are being injured or killed. Our mere existence is always
in question because only we (and the FAA) really care. The general
public sees us as the reason for air traffic delays and view us as rich
guys, privileged and above others (pun intended) if you will. They
don't give a flip about our freedoms. Our segment of aviation is not a
right, it's a privilege and one that we have to earn with every flight.
Our mistakes end up on the 6 o'clock news and make headlines. I think
we are going to have to do better.
As we speak there are changes coming to the aforementioned programs and
I'm hopeful that over time these will improve our safety record. But I
don't think we can rely only on those programs. Each of us needs to
find constructive ways to impart a safety culture in what we do and what
others who share our passion do. I don't believe blaming the FAA will
improve our lot and without a groundswell of a few million people
pounding on their elected representatives, I think the FAA is here to
stay. We do have some control over what form the FAA takes. If we're
safe, responsible, and plan ahead, they will back off and go find
something else to address. Most of them are not against us, in fact,
many of them fly experimental aircraft and build aircraft just as we do.
They are only responding to the pressures within the beltway of DC and
the statistics that tend to drive the system.
I hope this doesn't come across as preaching, I mean it to be just a
viewpoint. However, I would really like to hear some constructive ideas
to fix any of the problems.
Rick Weiss
N39RW Series V Speedster, 912ULS
SkyStar S/N 1
Port Orange, FL
PS - in the spirit of complete disclosure, I am currently Chairman of
the EAA Homebuilt Aircraft Council and a retired (1997) FAA senior
manager/engineer/pilot. I will take your thoughts, comments, and ideas
to the senior EAA managers and hopefully provide some useful input into
the ultimate decision making process. Okay? That said, flame away:-)
On Feb 27, 2011, at 1:53 AM, Malcolm Brubaker wrote:
just a bit of history
Malcolm Brubaker
Michigan Sport
Pilot Repair
LSRM-A, PPC, WS
(989)513-3022
----- Forwarded Message ----
From: "Ron @ KFHU" <captainron1@cox.net>
Sent: Sun, February 6, 2011 11:28:57 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: club planes?
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Ron @ KFHU" <captainron1@cox.net>
Well that's a good idea. Could certainly use it (My M3X) here in KFHU,
it may even motivate me more to finish my project faster, which is 90%
complete with 100% left to do kinda thing.
However ignoring the FAA in this equation is pretty much kicking the can
down the road. I think in terms of movement there has to be a wide
ranging recognition the the FAA is the problem in general aviation.
Fearing the FAA or thinking in terms of compliance with FAA all the time
as we do now is strangling aviation. If there is no concerted effort to
truncate their pervasive intrusion into aviation; the contraction will
continue.
I think I mentioned before that I almost never see young kids around
taking flying lessons anymore. Its not because aviation has stopped
firing up the imagination of the younger generation, its because the fun
the freedom and the joy have been stomped out of flying by the FAA to an
alarming degree. By all rights the Kolb factory should be busy and
backlogged for orders, yet it is not happening. So the idea of a club to
circumvent FAA rules is a valid and good, but it will not reverse the
difficulty of being an aircraft owner aviator. The future is as it has
always been in people owning their aircraft and plying the skies in
freedom. I have yet to see an organization come about that makes it as
its prime objective to restore freedom to aviate, by going after the
source of the constraints. That is what we need most of all right now.
---- Malcolm Brubaker <brubakermal@yahoo.com> wrote:
============
We had an interesting discussion on linkedin this weekend. All about
flight
instruction and the idea of turning an experimental into a club plane so
an
instructor could legally use it to teach the owners to fly. This
theory is
viable and there is FAA approval to do this.
What I think would really jump start the process is a pre-developed
general
format. One that would be easy for people to follow in developing
their
own club and fractional ownership; not much different than the
downloads a
person can buy to write their own will or start a non profit 401c3
corporation.
These always contain several disclaimers and liability waivers just like
the
ones we used in the old days to teach ultralight flying.
This would help the ultralight pilot and sport pilot want-to-be, as well
as the
instructor.
The idea of teaching someone to fly in a $14,000 plane with a 582 is not
that
far fetched. We all know people that have. It seemes like a better
option than
the $60,000 to $100,000 planes everyone thinks they currently need .
When
a student becomes a licensed pilot they can transition up.
What this sport needs now is for people to stop focusing on the problem
and
develope a solution. The ultralight trainer was so successful that it
was
turned into a sport pilot plane; and that took 20 years. Even a 2
place Kolb
classic could qualify.
Malcolm Brubaker
Michigan Sport
Pilot Repair
LSRM-A, PPC, WS
(989)513-3022
________________________________
From: Pat Ladd <pj.ladd@btinternet.com>
Sent: Sat, February 5, 2011 10:45:06 AM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Kolb list: Pitot probe
Hi Mike,
<< I added my own extension>>
Nice neat job.
P==============
--
kugelair.com
face="courier
new,courier">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-Listhref="http:/
/forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.comhref="http://www.matr
onics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-Listhttp://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | looking for smooth cowling for kitfox IV 1200 |
I have a kitfox IV 1200 with the round cowling and would like to changes it to
the smooth cowling. does anyone have a good used cowling thay want to part with
at a fair price?
thanks
Joe Sheldon
541-892-7637
jrsheldon@q.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=332268#332268
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|