Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:17 AM - Re: Firestar (Bruce Cox)
2. 01:51 AM - Re: Firestar (dama@mindspring.com)
3. 06:34 AM - Re: Firestar (N27SB@aol.com)
4. 06:46 AM - Firefly Axle attach fitting alignment (herbgh@juno.com)
5. 07:28 AM - Re: Firestar (N27SB@aol.com)
6. 08:00 AM - Re: Firestar (dama@mindspring.com)
7. 08:37 AM - Re: Firestar (HShack@aol.com)
8. 08:44 AM - Re: Firestar (HShack@aol.com)
9. 08:56 AM - Re: Firestar (dama@mindspring.com)
10. 10:02 AM - Firestar weights (Bruce Cox)
11. 10:25 AM - Firestar II (Richard Pike)
12. 11:08 AM - Re: Firestar weights (N27SB@aol.com)
13. 01:27 PM - Re: Firestar II (HShack@aol.com)
14. 02:42 PM - Fuel Mizer vrs NavMan (Aircraft Spruce)
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 |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Bruce Cox" <bruce_allen_cox@hotmail.com>
Being able to carry two passengers totaling 550lbs. is too much to ask
for??? :)
I am concerned about the empty weight... I'd like to fly for an hour with 2
people at 300pds.
Just trying to make the numbers work so I can take my honey up.
Can a Firestar II with a 305 weigh in at say, 385 empty?
Rest of the time it'll be just me and the sky.....
Thanks,
Bruce
Get ready for school! Find articles, homework help and more in the Back to
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 |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: dama@mindspring.com
Bruce, mine is 368 lbs. empty with a BRS, brakes, and an ELT. 441 seems pretty
heavy so passengers have to be very light...
Kip
-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Cox <bruce_allen_cox@hotmail.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: Firestar
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Bruce Cox" <bruce_allen_cox@hotmail.com>
Hi all;
Can anyone with experience on a Firestar II 503 un-confuse me as to the
carrying weight. I need to know befor I buy... (see following) Thanks
From an owner:
Best wing-fold system of any UL, strongest wing [5" dia. wing spar], 4130
chromoly cage, will haul a big guy [I'm 270, my friend Chuck is 6'4- we both
fit], the climb is great.
From a seller:
Thanks for the interest in the Kolb. I have over $19000 invested, but I have
had 400 hours of mostly pure pleasure from her. The asking price is $13000.
The plane is not junk, have complete logs on engine and airframe with
detailed entries for each condition inspection. The plane has a jumpseat but
the weight of the plane is 441# (and the factory said it could be built at
325#, another sales lie) makes it way over gross to carry a passenger unless
they weigh about 50#. It is simply and safely a one place plane.
If you have never flown a small plane like this it would benefit you to get
some lessons before you buy and try it on your own. Also do not buy anything
you can't inspect, touch, feel, have someone with an eye for homebuilts
check it out if you feel unqualified.
Okay, as corny as this sounds "define your mission and then get a plane" it
is so true. This plane is a joy in light winds and early morning/late
evenings, it is not a cross country plane, a 60 mile flight is a long flight
(longest flight about 100 miles).
hthttp://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
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 |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: N27SB@aol.com
In a message dated 9/17/2004 12:01:35 AM Eastern Standard Time,
bruce_allen_cox@hotmail.com writes:
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Bruce Cox" <bruce_allen_cox@hotmail.com>
>
> Hi all;
>
> Can anyone with experience on a Firestar II 503 un-confuse me as to the
> carrying weight. I need to know befor I buy... (see following) Thanks
>
>
Bruce,
While at Airventure 2004 this year I walked around with Homer several hours.
At one point He had a conversation with a perspective customer and some of the
TNK factory guys. It sounded like the figures in the info packet might be
wrong. I seem to remember a gross weight of 1000# and an empty weight of closer
to 400#. I will try to confirm this info at the TNK Flyin next week. It also
sounded like the figures might have gotten mixed up with the old Firestar I.
PLEASE keep in mind that this has not been confirmed yet by searching the old
records.
Steve Boetto
WetFly #007
do not archive
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: | Firefly Axle attach fitting alignment |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: herbgh@juno.com
Ed
I hadn't considered that it might have been built that way until I
took the wheels and brakes off yesterday and noticed that the axles are
aligned. So , it could not be fixed by alignment!
Bending the axle will mess up my already suspect brake drum
alignment. Won't it? The bend will necessarily occur outboard of the
brake backing plate attach point.
My solution is to weld up another set of fittings with a longer
collar so that I can drill a hole a bit further up the gear leg. Think
that will weaken the gear leg?
Anybody tried the mountain bike disc brakes? They are very lite
and seem to work well. At least on the J3 Kitten that I helped to install
them on. Herb
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 |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: N27SB@aol.com
Hello to All,
Just got of the phone with Donnie at TNK. He remembers Homer saying 980#
Gross weight as the original figure. As far as the empty weight goes, it might
be
a little tight. But keep in mind that it does not include extras like
radios,parachutes and a bunch of other things that really add up. Donnie also said
that the final answer is in the works. Bryan Melborn and I might have started
this because we were looking into fitting the FirestarII on Straight Floats.
do not archive
Steve Boetto
WetFly #007
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 |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: dama@mindspring.com
I have flown my FSII at or just over the suggested max gross of 725 lbs. I personally
believe that a 980 lb. FSII would climb out somewhere between 200-300 fpm
on a COLD day. A 503 is a bit weak for these kind of weights...
Kip
-----Original Message-----
From: N27SB@aol.com
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firestar
--> Kolb-List message posted by: N27SB@aol.com
Hello to All,
Just got of the phone with Donnie at TNK. He remembers Homer saying 980#
Gross weight as the original figure. As far as the empty weight goes, it might
be
a little tight. But keep in mind that it does not include extras like
radios,parachutes and a bunch of other things that really add up. Donnie also said
that the final answer is in the works. Bryan Melborn and I might have started
this because we were looking into fitting the FirestarII on Straight Floats.
do not archive
Steve Boetto
WetFly #007
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 |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: HShack@aol.com
In a message dated 9/17/2004 11:01:08 AM Eastern Standard Time,
dama@mindspring.com writes:
I have flown my FSII at or just over the suggested max gross of 725 lbs. I
personally believe that a 980 lb. FSII would climb out somewhere between 200-300
fpm on a COLD day. A 503 is a bit weak for these kind of weights...
Kip
Yea, 725 was the suggested gross on mine. I think mine weighs in at 440 with
radio, Matco disc brakes, "C" box, & Warp Drive 3 blade prop. I regularly
fly a little over gross with 10 [or even 16] gallons of gas & my personal weight
of 270 [dressed]. I reckon that puts me at just over 800 lbs.
Even so, I still out-climb most UL's at our field, including FS II's. Why?
It's because of the "C" box at a ratio of 3.47:1 turning the Warp Drive, 3
blade, taper tip, 68" prop. I think a big, slow-turning prop is the way to go
for a heavy hauler.
With the above setup, you could easily carry two 150 pounders, and for short
flights, just carry 5 gallons of gas. Your passenger will not be very
comfortable as the jump seat is small & they can't move their feet much, but for
one
person, it's a dream.
Howard Shackleford
FS II
SC
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 |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: HShack@aol.com
In a message dated 9/17/2004 11:37:52 AM Eastern Standard Time,
HShack@aol.com writes:
Even so, I still out-climb most UL's at our field, including FS II's. Why?
It's because of the "C" box at a ratio of 3.47:1 turning the Warp Drive, 3
blade, taper tip, 68" prop. I think a big, slow-turning prop is the way to
go
for a heavy hauler.
By the way, my fuel efficiency is as good or better than most of the UL's at
our field.
Howard Shackleford
FS II
SC
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 |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: dama@mindspring.com
Good point...
Kip
-----Original Message-----
From: HShack@aol.com
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firestar
--> Kolb-List message posted by: HShack@aol.com
In a message dated 9/17/2004 11:37:52 AM Eastern Standard Time,
HShack@aol.com writes:
Even so, I still out-climb most UL's at our field, including FS II's. Why?
It's because of the "C" box at a ratio of 3.47:1 turning the Warp Drive, 3
blade, taper tip, 68" prop. I think a big, slow-turning prop is the way to
go
for a heavy hauler.
By the way, my fuel efficiency is as good or better than most of the UL's at
our field.
Howard Shackleford
FS II
SC
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: | Firestar weights |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Bruce Cox" <bruce_allen_cox@hotmail.com>
Ok... I for one am sold. I really wanted the Star to work for me. Thanks
guys. Waiting to hear from Steve....I wonder if there is a wait allowance
for the floats?
Bruce
Get ready for school! Find articles, homework help and more in the Back to
Message 11
| 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 |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Richard Pike <richard@bcchapel.org>
We are getting into the short rows on our FSII with the 582 on it, maybe
another three or four weeks at most. (Not counting waiting for the
paperwork/inspections to get done)
We will be starting out with a 62" three blade and loading it down to 6000
rpm static to keep the 582 from developing it's full HP until we get a feel
for it. We expect that climb will be excellent even under adverse
conditions, but that cruise will be very quiet at an expected low rpm, that
is one of the main reasons for the 582 vs the 503. Since the owner's wife
is somewhat lighter and smaller than average, a 980 pound gross weight
ought to work fine.
Will keep the list posted once we get to that stage.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
do not archive
At 09:59 AM 9/17/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>--> Kolb-List message posted by: dama@mindspring.com
>
>I have flown my FSII at or just over the suggested max gross of 725 lbs. I
>personally believe that a 980 lb. FSII would climb out somewhere between
>200-300 fpm on a COLD day. A 503 is a bit weak for these kind of weights...
>Kip
Message 12
| 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: Firestar weights |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: N27SB@aol.com
In a message dated 9/17/04 12:03:50 PM Central Daylight Time,
bruce_allen_cox@hotmail.com writes:
>
> Ok... I for one am sold. I really wanted the Star to work for me. Thanks
> guys. Waiting to hear from Steve....I wonder if there is a wait allowance
> for the floats?
> Bruce
>
Just got off the phone with Bryan Melborn, He seems to think that the
original book value was 740# but that it got transposed a while ago to 725#. He
also
said that the those figures are not realistic because Homer did comment on a
value close to 900#.
BUT, keep in mind, don't assume that the larger numbers are true until
someone from TNK corrects their specs. Should be a good topic of conversation at
the
Flyin.
BTW, Floats will add about 65# to the plane and we will be working on that
right after the WetFly #007. The FAA allows 60# for floats in part 103 but that
does not apply here because the FSII is already overweight. we just have to
make the laws of nature happy.
As soon as John H gets his power back I am sure he will have something to
say about the gross weight of the FSII
do not archive
Steve B
WetFly #007
Message 13
| 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 |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: HShack@aol.com
In a message dated 9/17/2004 1:25:59 PM Eastern Standard Time,
richard@bcchapel.org writes:
We are getting into the short rows on our FSII with the 582 on it, maybe
another three or four weeks at most. (Not counting waiting for the
paperwork/inspections to get done)
We too will be installing a 582 on a FS II [Chuck Reinert's plane] as soon as
we rebuild the engine. We will be installing the largest prop we can get
away with to get maximum climb.
We anticipate some awsome results. Well, he should at least be able to keep
up with me. hehehe
Howard Shackleford
FS II
SC
Message 14
| 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: | Fuel Mizer vrs NavMan |
da2a@yahoogroups.com, Aircar@yahoogroups.com,
canard-aviators@yahoogroups.com, Corby_Starlet@yahoogroups.com,
navion_aircraft_mail@yahoogroups.com, piper-cub-builders@yahoogroups.com,
quicksilverultralightowners@yahoogroups.com, RV10@yahoogroups.com,
subaruaircraft@yahoogroups.com, europa-list@matronics.com,
kitfox-list@matronics.com, kolb-list@matronics.com
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Aircraft Spruce <fun_plane@yahoo.com>
Builders,
Thanks for bringing the matter of Fuel Mizer vs.
NavMan fuel computers to our attention. We have
carried Fuel Mizer for a couple of years and had never
heard of NavMan. We asked the manufacturer of NavMan
about the difference in the units, and as you can see
from the following commentary there is definitely a
difference, only the Fuel Mizer is recommended for
Aviation use. Fuel Mizer has been thoroughly tested
in aviation applications and is certified for
CAO-95-45 aircraft in the Australia.
Best Regards,
Jim Irwin
President, Aircraft Spruce
----- Original Message -----
From: SlipStream Industries, Inc.
Subject: Questions Regarding Fuel Mizer
Dear Jim:
I am forwarding an email I received from Ole Jensen,
President of Boss Products, the manufacturer of the
Fuel Mizer under license from Navman. SlipStream is
Boss Product's North American distributor. In his
response to the questions posed yesterday, he
references certain modifications and approvals
received for use of this product in aviation. The
exact language found on the cover of the Installation
and Instruction manual is as follows:
This instrument has been modified to comply with
Australian Engineering order HEO-469 and certified for
CAO 95-25 type aircraft in Australia.
Please let me know if you have any questions, or
desire any further information.
Kindest regards,
Mike Puhl
SlipStream International
----- Original Message -----
From: Ole Jensen
Subject: Re: Mizer.
Dear Mike:
The question raised regarding the Navman fuel
flow meter and the Mizer is a common one that has been
around for many years and a lot of people have lost
money and endangered themselves by purchasing the
Navman for use in aviation. Nearly all the Navman
units purchased for this application have failed and
Navman refuses to replace them under warranty. Several
years ago we negotiated with Navman and paid a
licensing fee that enabled us to make the appropriate
modifications for use in aviation. In addition, the
Mizer has been registered with CASA (the equivalent to
your FAA) and certified by a qualified aeronautical
engineer. Boss Products paid to have the appropriate
modifications made for use in civil aviation, and
these modifications have been improved upon several
times since. As a result, the Mizer enjoys an
excellent reliability record and has been certified
according to CAO order no.HEO-469 as printed on the
cover of the installation manual.
Any one doubting the validity of our agreement
with Navman is free to contact the Vice President of
Navman in New Zealand, Mr. Mark Michell, and he will
verify these facts. Boss Products is the only company
in the world licensed to modify and distribute this
particular product. Unfortunately, some unscrupulous
marine dealers still offer the Navman for use in
unapproved applications despite the knowledge that the
manufacturer strictly prohibits this practice. Greed
and ignorance are usually the motivator. I can also
tell you that the price differences between the Navman
and Fuel Mizer are reasonably close, especially
considering the potential danger for misuse in a
non-approved aviation application. Further, I spoke
with Navman earlier today and was told that no one in
the U.S. is offering this unit for anywhere close to
US $99.00, and that the suggested retail price is US
$299.00, though they offer special MAP pricing from
time to time.
Hope this helps to clear up this issue. Please let me
know if I can be of further assistance in any way.
Regards,
Ole Jensen
President
_______________________________
Express yourself with Y! Messenger! Free. Download now.
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! --
|