Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 02:40 AM - Re: Mark 3 classic landing speed (pat ladd)
2. 03:31 AM - Re: Federal Funding (planecrazzzy)
3. 03:48 AM - Re: Mark 3 classic landing speed (Tony Oldman)
4. 06:03 AM - Federal Regulations, WAS Kolb Firefly (Richard Girard)
5. 07:43 AM - Re: Mark 3 classic landing speed (pat ladd)
6. 07:54 AM - Re: Federal Regulations, WAS Kolb Firefly (kenanddenice@aol.com)
7. 09:06 AM - Re: Federal Regulations (George Bass)
8. 10:28 AM - Federal Regulations, WAS Kolb Firefly (Jack B. Hart)
9. 02:34 PM - Re: Federal Funding (Dana Hague)
10. 02:38 PM - Re: Re: Kolb Firefly (Dana Hague)
11. 04:51 PM - Legal FireFly??or not?? (Don G)
12. 04:57 PM - Re: Federal Regulations, WAS Kolb Firefly (flymichigan@comcast.net)
13. 05:02 PM - Re: Federal Regulations, WAS Kolb Firefly (flymichigan@comcast.net)
14. 05:18 PM - Re: Federal Regulations, WAS Kolb Firefly (Eugene Zimmerman)
15. 05:22 PM - Re: Kolb Flyer (Dana Hague)
16. 06:21 PM - Re: Builders Plans (Rick Lewis)
17. 06:55 PM - Re: Re: Kolb Firefly (HShack@AOL.COM)
18. 07:57 PM - Re: Federal Regulations, WAS Kolb Firefly (R. Hankins)
19. 08:08 PM - Re: Re: Kolb Firefly (Richard Girard)
20. 08:15 PM - Re: Re: Federal Regulations, WAS Kolb Firefly (Richard Girard)
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: Mark 3 classic landing speed |
Hi Tony,
sounds as though you are a busy guy. An AJS and a Triumph. REAL
motorbikes. Good on ya.
I flew a Blanik out of Auckland and a K13 from Matamata in Jan and Feb
1975. Only got a scrape along the ridge at Matamata as a check flight
because with immaculate timing I arrived just as the Nationals , or
maybe the World Champs, I forget, were starting. No one really wanted to
get involved in anything but the competitions. Understandable. According
to my log book I was charged $3 plus 7c a minute. No idea why I made a
note of that. Its the only reference to cost in my log books.
I have flown a Harvard (T6) out of Hood and flown with Captain Ladd out
to Kowai (sp) Island from Auckland. Do you remember Captain Ladd? He ran
amphibian charters. "A shower of Spray and we are away" One super
evening a guy who was operating an amphibian off the beach in the Bay of
Islands took Wendy and I on an hours trip around the Bay. He let me pole
it around and fly an approach down to wave top height before taking
over just as we touched the surface. Great memories! The plane was
supposedly the one which flew under the Auckland Bridge, the one with
the Nippon Clip-on. The pilot argued that it was an extended take off
run and got away with it. Just missed the Wings over Wanaka, twice,
which shows very poor planning but did get a look at the maintenance
hangars where they were working on the planes for W over W the
following week.
Not likely to get to NZ again. I like long distance flying less and less
as I get older and my old diving buddy who I visit in Auckland is
getting a bit long in the tooth as well but there is a Rotary exchange
trip scheduled for 2009 and you never know.
I really envy you flying in NZ. Must be one of the best places to fly in
the world and everything so close together. Ski in the morning, surf in
the arvo and fly in the evening. What could be better?
Cheers
Pat
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: Federal Funding |
.
If you read it again....I'm getting it Certified....
So , for $150 bucks....I'm buying a Piece of Paper......
.
.
.
Now, if you've got $1,500....You can Buy a "NEW" :
Narco AT 155 Transponder w/AR850 Altitude Reporter
.
.
.
Gotta Fly...
Mike & "Jaz" in MN
.
.
.
.
JetPilot wrote:
>
> planecrazzzy wrote:
> >
> >
> > I'm flying there Thursday morning to get my Transponder Cert.
> >
> > $75 for the Transponder & $75 for the Alt Encoder (cheapest I've Found)
> >
> > Gotta Fly...
> > Mike & "Jaz" in MN - FSII / N381PM
> > .
> > .
> > .
> > .
>
>
> Where did you find a transponder for 75 bucks ?
>
> Mike
--------
.
.
.
.
.
Do Not Archive
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=122322#122322
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/transponder_wiring_loom_208.jpg
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: Mark 3 classic landing speed |
Yep you are onto it. We do have a bit of fickle weather from time to
time that keeps you on your toes.If you find your way over here again
please make contact. Irrespective of the time of year there is always
something to do. I have only missed one W over W myself. It takes place
over Easter and Easter also happens to be about the last good boating
weather over here.I happen to camp about 1 hours drive from Wanaka so
its a no brainer really.Also about 10 miutes from Omarama I think the
World gliding champs are there again this year. Sounds like you have
far more experience at this aviating than me. The T6 or Harvard as we
know it would have been a fun thing . Ultralights are where I started
and apart from poling around a bit in some home builts and cubs that's
what I have stuck too.Already have too many other things on the go.I do
have plans to travel to the UK just not sure when, I would like to see
some maritime history as well as some aviation history. That is the one
thing we do not have a lot of {Old history} I do assist in some
mechanical work for the local aviation heritage people from time to
time.They have some Richard Pierce replicas and engines ,a collection of
early ultralights, a Tiger moth and a Chipmunk on display.The debate
still go's on as to if he flew before the Right Bros.I did go to Oshkosh
in 94 ,now that's a must ,great experience. As for the long in the tooth
bit the guy that keeps me honest in the air is about 76 and still
training pilots, he also has family in LA so spends some time over
there. I hope to have as much go at that age.{ not far away } But I
understand where you are coming from its no fun sitting in the back of
one of those people movers. The only view is the one straight ahead.Bay
of Islands is a great place, just completed a tour of the North Island,
would loved to have had some wings with me. The Boss said it was her
turn to decide on the holiday so just get over it and follow along.
Cheers and keep it safe up there
Tony
----- Original Message -----
From: pat ladd
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2007 9:39 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Mark 3 classic landing speed
Hi Tony,
sounds as though you are a busy guy. An AJS and a Triumph. REAL
motorbikes. Good on ya.
I flew a Blanik out of Auckland and a K13 from Matamata in Jan and Feb
1975. Only got a scrape along the ridge at Matamata as a check flight
because with immaculate timing I arrived just as the Nationals , or
maybe the World Champs, I forget, were starting. No one really wanted to
get involved in anything but the competitions. Understandable. According
to my log book I was charged $3 plus 7c a minute. No idea why I made a
note of that. Its the only reference to cost in my log books.
I have flown a Harvard (T6) out of Hood and flown with Captain Ladd
out to Kowai (sp) Island from Auckland. Do you remember Captain Ladd? He
ran amphibian charters. "A shower of Spray and we are away" One super
evening a guy who was operating an amphibian off the beach in the Bay of
Islands took Wendy and I on an hours trip around the Bay. He let me pole
it around and fly an approach down to wave top height before taking
over just as we touched the surface. Great memories! The plane was
supposedly the one which flew under the Auckland Bridge, the one with
the Nippon Clip-on. The pilot argued that it was an extended take off
run and got away with it. Just missed the Wings over Wanaka, twice,
which shows very poor planning but did get a look at the maintenance
hangars where they were working on the planes for W over W the
following week.
Not likely to get to NZ again. I like long distance flying less and
less as I get older and my old diving buddy who I visit in Auckland is
getting a bit long in the tooth as well but there is a Rotary exchange
trip scheduled for 2009 and you never know.
I really envy you flying in NZ. Must be one of the best places to fly
in the world and everything so close together. Ski in the morning, surf
in the arvo and fly in the evening. What could be better?
Cheers
Pat
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
3/07/2007 10:02 a.m.
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: | Federal Regulations, WAS Kolb Firefly |
Don G et al, To some on you this may seem like separating the Firefly poop
from the pepper, but all this talk of unregulated ultralights begs a
response.
Don, I too go back to the days before the modern era of ultralights and I
remember well the Feds rationale for establishing Part 103. It was that,"
these vehicles generally fly in remote areas and occupy the air for brief
periods of time".
I'm sure there was also the realization that requiring the newer motorized
hang gliders to demonstrate a capability to be foot launched was darn
dangerous, as well. Once landing gear were allowed to be the primary method
of launching and landing and the good folks at Rotax began supplying fairly
reliable engines, the cheating began. Then came the "trainers" and the first
step was trod on the path to the brave new world of LSA.
What are commonly referred to as the FAR's are in fact Title 14 of the Code
of Federal Regulations, of which Part 103 is a very small subset. For years
it was a commonly held belief among many misinformed hang glider and
ultralight pilots that, "the rules don't apply to us". As late as 2004 I saw
one buffoon claim this on the nightly news in Seattle. It was his
justification for conducting towing operations with a 3000 foot line on Lake
Washington, well inside the veil and easily busting the floor of the SeaTac
class B airspace as well as the class D and C airspace of Renton and Boeing
Field. As I understand it, he found the Feds knocking on his door the
following morning ready, willing and able to insure he understood his
misunderstanding of the Part 103 regulations and the consequences thereof.
At the trike party at X49 during Sun n Fun, at which most of the top FAA LSA
contingent was present, I had the opportunity to ask the question, "what
will you do about noncompliant ultralights". The answer was, "that depends".
If you are like me, flying from a remote private airfield, virtually
nothing, as long as a low profile is maintained. If, on the other hand, you
operate from a field adjacent to controlled airspace and violations of the
regulations have been frequent and flagrant that's another matter entirely.
"WE HAVE A LIST OF THOSE PLACES AND WE WILL BE THERE THE MORNING OF FEBRUARY
1ST, 2008".
So much for the theory of what will they do, show up with scales? They don't
have to, they can simply seize suspected aircraft and it will be up to the
owner to bring the scales and prove them wrong. Don't even bother if the
aircraft has a second seat.
My friend, Jeff, who never quite got the message that the 60's were over,
learned this the hard way. He had a nice little business selling grow lights
and materials to horticulturists of exotic plants. He got brazen enough to
start placing ads in "High Times" magazine and one morning, as he was
opening his shop, large trucks and a black van with the letters DEA on the
sides pulled up to the curb. As men with moving dollies began dismantling
his displays, he protested that this wasn't legal. He was told, "you're
right, but it will cost you a half million dollars in legal expenses to
prove it". In a little less than two hours his entire inventory was loaded
up and driven away. He had, as we hang glider pilots say, "pushed way out",
and got bitten for it. Frankly, from my point of view as a parent, good
riddance.
As a pilot, I feel pretty much the same way about "fat" ultralights. Part
103 was manna from heaven and some gorged themselves without regard for the
consequences. Now we've been handed a second gift from above and some still
refuse to see it for what it is. It is not a trampling of our rights, there
is no right to break the law. It's an amnesty with a relatively small dollar
penalty and great benefits.
Rick
do not archive
--
Rick Girard
"Ya'll drop on in"
takes on a whole new meaning
when you live at the airport.
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: Mark 3 classic landing speed |
Sounds like you have far more experience at this aviating than me. >>
Hi Tony,
probably not. Only licenced for gliders and ultralights but I have found
most pilots will let you fly if you have any idea at all.
I got a ride in a Jet Provost that way. The pilot asked if I flew and
when I said only microlights he said `Take her out then` and apart from
raising and lowering the undercarriage he didn`t touch the controls
until we parked it. Same with a P-51 in Kissimmee, except that the pilot
did the takeoff and took the controls for a take off after I had landed
it and he changed it to a touch and go.
Cheers
Pat
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: | Re: Federal Regulations, WAS Kolb Firefly |
If
Hope all have woke to smell the coffee fly now you might after waiking from the
slumber party....?
Hope all have woke to smell the coffee, the time is right to get in line with the
required laws.? Sit with that cup of coffee and review the requirements, get
some help from a friend or ask questions as soon as possible, time waits for
no man and some may find themselves waking from the slumber party only to find?a
bitter cup awaits.
The law is the law.? Don't expect it will make an exception or turn a blind eye,
would you.....if it were your job and you were a just person.
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Girard <jindoguy@gmail.com>
Sent: Thu, 5 Jul 2007 7:02 am
Subject: Kolb-List: Federal Regulations, WAS Kolb Firefly
Don G et al, To some on you this may seem like separating the Firefly poop from
the pepper, but all this talk of unregulated
ultralights begs a response.
Don, I too go back to the days before the modern era of ultralights and I remember
well the Feds rationale for establishing Part 103. It was that," these vehicles
generally fly in remote areas and occupy the air for brief periods of time".
I'm sure there was also the realization that requiring the newer motorized hang
gliders to demonstrate a capability to be foot launched was darn dangerous, as
well. Once landing gear were allowed to be the primary method of launching and
landing and the good folks at Rotax began supplying fairly reliable engines,
the cheating began. Then came the "trainers" and the first step was trod on
the path to the brave new world of LSA.
What are commonly referred to as the FAR's are in fact Title 14 of the Code of
Federal Regulations, of which Part 103 is a very small subset. For years it was
a commonly held belief among many misinformed hang glider and ultralight pilots
that, "the rules don't apply to us". As late as 2004 I saw one buffoon claim
this on the nightly news in Seattle. It was his justification for conducting
towing operations with a 3000 foot line on Lake Washington, well inside the
veil and easily busting the floor of the SeaTac class B airspace as well as the
class D and C airspace of Renton and Boeing Field. As I understand it, he found
the Feds knocking on his door the following morning ready, willing and able
to insure he understood his misunderstanding of the Part 103 regulations and
the consequences thereof.
At the trike party at X49 during Sun n Fun, at which most of the top FAA LSA contingent
was present, I had the opportunity to ask the question, "what will you
do about noncompliant ultralights". The answer was, "that depends". If you are
like me, flying from a remote private airfield, virtually nothing, as long
as a low profile is maintained. If, on the other hand, you operate from a field
adjacent to controlled airspace and violations of the regulations have been
frequent and flagrant that's another matter entirely.
"WE HAVE A LIST OF THOSE PLACES AND WE WILL BE THERE THE MORNING OF FEBRUARY 1ST,
2008".
So much for the theory of what will they do, show up with scales? They don't have
to, they can simply seize suspected aircraft and it will be up to the owner
to bring the scales and prove them wrong. Don't even bother if the aircraft has
a second seat.
My friend, Jeff, who never quite got the message that the 60's were over, learned
this the hard way. He had a nice little business selling grow lights and materials
to horticulturists of exotic plants. He got brazen enough to start placing
ads in "High Times" magazine and one morning, as he was opening his shop,
large trucks and a black van with the letters DEA? on the sides pulled up to
the curb. As men with moving dollies began dismantling his displays, he protested
that this wasn't legal. He was told, "you're right, but it will cost you a
half million dollars in legal expenses to prove it". In a little less than two
hours his entire inventory was loaded up and driven away. He had, as we hang
glider pilots say, "pushed way out", and got bitten for it. Frankly, from my
point of view as a parent, good riddance.
As a pilot, I feel pretty much the same way about "fat" ultralights. Part 103 was
manna from heaven and some gorged themselves without regard for the consequences.
Now we've been handed a second gift from above and some still refuse to
see it for what it is. It is not a trampling of our rights, there is no right
to break the law. It's an amnesty with a relatively small dollar penalty and
great benefits.
Rick
do not archive
--
Rick Girard
"Ya'll drop on in"
takes on a whole new meaning
when you live at the airport.
________________________________________________________________________
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: Federal Regulations |
Richard Girard, et al;
About the best description and explanation of the situation
that I've ever heard. Thank you.
Would hope that this gets plastered everywhere ANY pilot
might see it, regardless of the rating or category.
Been flying since 1974. Never held a PPL. Began flying
UL's in 1984 (as my USUA affirmation will attest) and will
continue to fly UL's 'til I can no longer do so, safely.
Again, thanks for one of the best, informative, very easily
understood, explanations of the frivolous, dangerous and
damaging activities (not to mention illegal) that affect all
of the aviation world. Your 'prime example' of the fellow
in Seattle was all too easily recognized.
About the best commentary I've ever seen, on ANY of the
dozen lists, that I lurk/monitor.
Blue Skies,
George Bass
USUA 80399
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: | Federal Regulations, WAS Kolb Firefly |
From: "Richard Girard" <jindoguy@gmail.com>
.....................
"WE HAVE A LIST OF THOSE PLACES AND WE WILL BE THERE THE MORNING OF FEBRUARY 1ST,
2008".
So much for the theory of what will they do, show up with scales? They don't have
to, they can simply seize suspected aircraft and it will be up to the owner
to bring the scales and prove them wrong. Don't even bother if the aircraft has
a second seat.
.....................
Rick and FireFlyers,
The following document has been declared as sufficient proof that your FireFly
is an ultra light vehicle:
http://www.thirdshift.com/jack/firefly/fireflylegal.html
I carry a copy to all fly-ins. The front page was signed by an A&E and each page
carries his initials.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Winchester, IN
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: Federal Funding |
At 11:55 AM 7/3/2007, Robert Laird wrote:
>
>By default, any airport designated as public is required to allow any
>aircraft to use it's services. This includes ultralights. (If a
>private airport, designated for public use, has never taken federal or
>state funding, then they have the right to deny services...
That's where the issue may arise. Many airports are "privately owned for
public use", and if these have received no federal funding they can deny
landing to anybody, not just ultralights. The airport I used to call home
(N04, now sadly closed) was such an airport. It was ultralight friendly,
actually friendly to any aircraft that could deal with its 1800' strip, but
required prior permission (which was always granted) from ALL transient
aircraft.
Many small airports were originally WWII training or auxiliary
fields. That qualifies as "receiving federal funding" even if the original
acquisition was the only dealing with the feds.
-Dana
--
--
The only correct outcome to an armed robbery attempt is a dead armed robber.
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: | Re: Kolb Firefly |
At 11:15 AM 7/4/2007, flymichigan@comcast.net wrote:
>
>I find all this talk about enforcement a little strange. The FAA has
>never seemed to care about overweight ultralights and I have seen no
>evidence that they will start after January...I have spoken off the record
>with a two FAA officials, and they have not received any mandate to step
>up enforcement...
Depends on who you talk to. I have heard (secondhand, but from a reliable
source) is that the FAA plans to small airports where there has
traditionally been lots of ultralight activity and/or complaints and ramp
check everything in sight. Not everywhere, they don't have the manpower,
but scattered pot shots to make a few examples.
-Dana
--
--
The only correct outcome to an armed robbery attempt is a dead armed robber.
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 |
|
| Subject: | Legal FireFly??or not?? |
Jimmy,
Back to your question about the worth of a "fat" firefly.
What would it cost to bring it back under 103 compliance?..add that to the equasion.
More than registering it?
this is what I think...not what I know..just what I think...maybeee...
A legal 103 FireFly might have more value than a non-registered "fat" one.
A 503 Firestar that never had a chance of making 254 lbs unless you left the wing
off...will be worth more legal as an E-LSA than not.
Same with Challengers and 503 Titan I's and so on.
There is no "NEW " rule that makes all fat ultralites now illegal,,,they always
were. They were all required to be registered as an Experimental before...now
there is just a new rule that allows them to be easily "transitioned" to a E-LSA.
This is the "manna from above" as just someone mentioned.
No hassle...no documentation...dont even have to be the original builder.
This is a good thing....make that a GREAT thing. For all those birds that have
no chance of making 103.
You just need to decide if that FireFly will appeal in the resale market to licensed
sport pilots...or non-licensed Ultralite pilots.
I am thinking it would be more appealing..therefore worth more...to ultralite pilots.
I certainly dont know this for sure....I just think maybee!!!!!!
IN fact...all legal 103 craft might just get a boost in the market appeal...
maybeeee!
--------
Don G.
Central Illinois
Kitfox IV Speedster
Luscombe 8A
http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=122436#122436
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: Federal Regulations, WAS Kolb Firefly |
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Federal Regulations, WAS Kolb Firefly |
I totally agree that the attitude and greed of many pilots is what brought about
the end of the two place exemption. The orgs were "selling" BFI exemptions as
fast as they could without regard to the legitimacy of any training activities.
How many two place pilots in your area actually trained anyone? I know a guy
here in Michigan who actually advertised his float flying business as "beach
flights". The literature did not even make mention of any training. He was
using a Rans s12 on floats with a 2 seat exemption. no license, no insurance, no
air worthiness certification, no inspections. This clearly put the uninformed
public at risk.
However the comparison of flying a 265lb Firefly to advertising and selling
equipment for the production of illegal drugs is a little extreme. I think a
better analogy is a guy that drives 60mph in a 55mph zone. Sure he could get
ticket, but he is unlikely to be pulled over unless he does something else to
attract the attention of the authorities.
Sport Pilot was a solution to solve the 2 seat exemption problem that put the public
at risk. A
single seat ultralight with a five gallon tank is not going to be a priority to
the FAA. They really don't care if you kill yourself in an airplane as long as
you don't take any other tax payers with you.
That said, a few high profile ramp checks and fines may go a long way to scare
people into submission.
Bryan Dever
do not archive
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: | Re: Federal Regulations, WAS Kolb Firefly |
On Jul 5, 2007, at 7:56 PM, flymichigan@comcast.net wrote:
>
>
Hey,
No one can disagree with you on that. :^)
do not archive
Message 15
| 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 |
|
At 07:33 PM 6/30/2007, grabo172 wrote:
>
>Just saw this on TNK website! Any idea on a price?
>
>http://www.tnkolbaircraft.com/index.html
Looks just like every other updated Cessna 150 clone in the LSA rush...
you'd think an offering from Kolb would be, well, more "Kolb-ish".
-Dana
--
--
The only correct outcome to an armed robbery attempt is a dead armed robber.
Message 16
| 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: Builders Plans |
Rick
This M3X will have the flaps. I will look in the archives, if I can figure
out how to get there.
Rick
[quote="neilsenrm(at)comcast.net"]Rick
Are you getting the MKIIIX with flaps or flaperons? Check the archives for considerable
discussion of the differences and advantages.
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIIIC
[quote]-------------- Original message --------------
From: "Rick2"
I am new to this forum and will be picking up my plane kit this Thursday, July
5th. I am going to build the M3x and install a VW engine. The Kolb people are
working with me on the engine mounts with the help of Rick Neilson. I will talk
more on the engine situation as things progress.
My main concern for now is the plans. Donnie, from Kolb, gave me my set of
plans early while they got the kit together. This is not my first plane I will
be building, in fact it's the third. The first was a Cozy, wide body Long Ezy,
which was strickly a plans built aircraft ( not a kit ). The second was a
Glastar. Now the third will be the M3X, tha t is i ics Li
> [b]
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=122458#122458
Message 17
| 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 Firefly |
In a message dated 7/3/2007 12:32:19 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
jim@tru-cast.com writes:
( 1) Tanks which have a permanent standpipe or venting arrangement to control
capacity are permitted, but may be subject to demonstration of the capacity
if there is any reason to doubt that the arrangement is effective.
. . . So carrying extra fuel is permitted, so long as it is not usable in
flight. As long as the extra fuel is not plumbed into the aircraft fuel system
I
think you'll be OK.
Oh, if it were only so......
Howard Shackleford
FS II
SC
************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
Message 18
| 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: Federal Regulations, WAS Kolb Firefly |
> Sport Pilot was a solution to solve the 2 seat exemption problem that put the
public at risk.
Let me put that in perspective. A quick review of the NTSB website shows 11 accidents
by unregistered aircraft in 2006. Five of those were fatal accidents
with eight people deceased. That means (according to the NTSB) three passengers
of unregistered aircraft died. During the same period.......
"Each year, 800,000 Americans seek medical attention for dog bites; half of these
are children. Of those injured, 386,000 require treatment in an emergency department
and about a dozen die." (I pulled this data from the Centers for Disease
Control website)
I believe that Sport Pilot was more a response to EAA pressure to allow thousands
of aging pilots to fly without a medical, than an effort at public protection.
Of course the government will always trot out these kinds of safety slogans
to ease the pain when it tightens its grip. It is the nature of any bureaucracy.
With any luck they will have pilots and airport operators clamouring for
their cell phones to turn in those dangerous unregistered aircraft.
How many people have I harmed by flying my unregistered aircraft for 428hrs over
the last seven years? The same amount as have been harmed by my driving 77mph
when I'm late for work - exactly none. I know its against the law, but the
odds of getting caught are pretty slim if one keeps ones eyes open.
That being said, I have applied for ELSA status on my single seat Firestar. I
look at it as insurance. The odds are better that I will be able to freely continue
to do what I love to do if I comply with the new (and old) law. If and
when the spot light of enforcement shines my direction, I don't want to have
to shrink into the shadows. Maybe I'm getting old, but the idea of being a rebel
just for rebellion's sake doesn't seem as much fun anymore. I'm going to
jump through the hoops and quit looking over my shoulder.
I hope the "public" feels safer. Ok, I'm off my soapbox now...
Do Not Archive
--------
Roger in Oregon
1992 KXP 503
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=122471#122471
Message 19
| 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 Firefly |
Kill one, send message to thousands.
Old Chines proverb
Rick
On 7/5/07, HShack@aol.com <HShack@aol.com> wrote:
>
> In a message dated 7/3/2007 12:32:19 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> jim@tru-cast.com writes:
>
> ( 1) Tanks which have a permanent standpipe or venting arrangement to
> control capacity are permitted, but may be subject to demonstration of the
> capacity if there is any reason to doubt that the arrangement is effective.
>
> . . . So carrying extra fuel is permitted, so long as it is not usable in
> flight. As long as the extra fuel is not plumbed into the aircraft fuel
> system I think you'll be OK.
>
>
> Oh, if it were only so......
>
> Howard Shackleford
> FS II
> SC
>
>
> ------------------------------
> See what's free at AOL.com <http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000503>.
>
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
--
Rick Girard
"Ya'll drop on in"
takes on a whole new meaning
when you live at the airport.
Message 20
| 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: Federal Regulations, WAS Kolb Firefly |
One other very good reason, post 9/11, is that in the view of homeland
security types, there are an estimated 30,000 unregistered aircraft to be
accounted for.
Rick
On 7/5/07, R. Hankins <rphanks@grantspass.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Sport Pilot was a solution to solve the 2 seat exemption problem that
> put the public at risk.
>
>
> Let me put that in perspective. A quick review of the NTSB website
> shows 11 accidents by unregistered aircraft in 2006. Five of those were
> fatal accidents with eight people deceased. That means (according to the
> NTSB) three passengers of unregistered aircraft died. During the same
> period.......
>
> "Each year, 800,000 Americans seek medical attention for dog bites; half
> of these are children. Of those injured, 386,000 require treatment in an
> emergency department and about a dozen die." (I pulled this data from the
> Centers for Disease Control website)
>
> I believe that Sport Pilot was more a response to EAA pressure to allow
> thousands of aging pilots to fly without a medical, than an effort at public
> protection. Of course the government will always trot out these kinds of
> safety slogans to ease the pain when it tightens its grip. It is the nature
> of any bureaucracy. With any luck they will have pilots and airport
> operators clamouring for their cell phones to turn in those dangerous
> unregistered aircraft.
>
> How many people have I harmed by flying my unregistered aircraft for
> 428hrs over the last seven years? The same amount as have been harmed by my
> driving 77mph when I'm late for work - exactly none. I know its against the
> law, but the odds of getting caught are pretty slim if one keeps ones eyes
> open.
>
> That being said, I have applied for ELSA status on my single seat
> Firestar. I look at it as insurance. The odds are better that I will be
> able to freely continue to do what I love to do if I comply with the new
> (and old) law. If and when the spot light of enforcement shines my
> direction, I don't want to have to shrink into the shadows. Maybe I'm
> getting old, but the idea of being a rebel just for rebellion's sake doesn't
> seem as much fun anymore. I'm going to jump through the hoops and quit
> looking over my shoulder.
>
> I hope the "public" feels safer. Ok, I'm off my soapbox now...
>
> Do Not Archive
>
> --------
> Roger in Oregon
> 1992 KXP 503
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=122471#122471
>
>
--
Rick Girard
"Ya'll drop on in"
takes on a whole new meaning
when you live at the airport.
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! --
|