---------------------------------------------------------- Kolb-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Fri 09/17/04: 14 ---------------------------------------------------------- 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 _____________________________________ Time: 01:17:36 AM PST US From: "Bruce Cox" Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Firestar --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Bruce Cox" 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 _____________________________________ Time: 01:51:38 AM PST US From: dama@mindspring.com Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firestar --> 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 Subject: Kolb-List: Firestar --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Bruce Cox" 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 _____________________________________ Time: 06:34:15 AM PST US From: N27SB@aol.com Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firestar --> 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" > > 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 _____________________________________ Time: 06:46:45 AM PST US Subject: Kolb-List: Firefly Axle attach fitting alignment From: herbgh@juno.com --> 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 _____________________________________ Time: 07:28:10 AM PST US 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 6 _____________________________________ Time: 08:00:09 AM PST US From: dama@mindspring.com Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firestar --> 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 _____________________________________ Time: 08:37:08 AM PST US From: HShack@aol.com Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firestar --> Kolb-List message posted by: HShack@aol.com In a message dated 9/17/2004 11:01:08 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 _____________________________________ Time: 08:44:24 AM PST US 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 9 _____________________________________ Time: 08:56:18 AM PST US From: dama@mindspring.com Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firestar --> 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 ____________________________________ Time: 10:02:51 AM PST US From: "Bruce Cox" Subject: Kolb-List: Firestar weights --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Bruce Cox" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 10:25:25 AM PST US From: Richard Pike Subject: Kolb-List: Firestar II --> Kolb-List message posted by: Richard Pike 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 ____________________________________ Time: 11:08:00 AM PST US From: N27SB@aol.com Subject: Re: Kolb-List: 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 ____________________________________ Time: 01:27:49 PM PST US From: HShack@aol.com Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Firestar II --> 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 ____________________________________ Time: 02:42:05 PM PST US From: Aircraft Spruce Subject: Kolb-List: 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 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.