Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:51 AM - Re: Re: I Passed! (pat ladd)
2. 01:57 AM - Re: Re: I Passed! (pat ladd)
3. 02:10 AM - Re: Re: Things to see from a Kolb in the air (pat ladd)
4. 02:17 AM - Apologies (pat ladd)
5. 02:19 AM - Re: I Passed! (Dave Bigelow)
6. 04:07 AM - Re: Flying the Mark III Xtra without doors, has anyone done it ? (thumb)
7. 04:08 AM - Re: Re: I Passed! (Dana Hague)
8. 04:54 AM - Re: Weight & Balance for FS II needed (ElleryWeld@aol.com)
9. 04:59 AM - Re: Flying the Mark III Xtra without doors, has anyone done it ? (David Key)
10. 05:02 AM - Re: Wing Bracing (ElleryWeld@aol.com)
11. 05:45 AM - Re: Re: I Passed! (Richard Girard)
12. 05:47 AM - Jet Pilot Prop extension (N27SB@aol.com)
13. 05:52 AM - Re: Re: I Passed! (Richard Girard)
14. 08:28 AM - Re: I Passed! (John Williamson)
15. 09:06 AM - Re: Center Gap-seal coming loose (Kirby Dennis Contr MDA/AL)
16. 09:14 AM - Re: Re: Center Gap-seal coming loose (N27SB@aol.com)
17. 09:30 AM - Re: Re: I Passed! (Dana Hague)
18. 12:12 PM - Re: Things to see from a Kolb in the air (jb92563)
19. 12:24 PM - Re: Remaining FAT ultralights after Deadline (jb92563)
20. 01:39 PM - Re: Re: Remaining FAT ultralights after Deadline (Richard Girard)
21. 01:58 PM - Re: Re: I Passed! (Richard Girard)
22. 02:02 PM - Re: Re: Remaining FAT ultralights after Deadline (Dana Hague)
23. 02:09 PM - Re: Re: Center Gap-seal coming loose (Richard Girard)
24. 02:17 PM - Re: Re: I Passed! (Dana Hague)
25. 02:22 PM - Re: FireFly Landing Gear Leg Strength Improvement (WillUribe@aol.com)
26. 03:31 PM - Re: Re: Remaining FAT ultralights after Deadline (Richard Girard)
27. 03:43 PM - Re: Re: I Passed! (Richard Pike)
28. 04:06 PM - Re: FireFly Landing Gear Leg Strength Improvement (Jack B. Hart)
29. 05:42 PM - Re: Re: Center Gap-seal coming loose (HGRAFF@aol.com)
30. 06:39 PM - Re: Re: I Passed! (Dana Hague)
31. 08:08 PM - Re: Re: Center Gap-seal coming loose (Richard & Martha Neilsen)
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 |
|
Kilo-Oscar-Lemia-Bravo >> Lemia? Is this a typo or do you have a
different alphabet as well as a different language?
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 |
|
It is always correct to do it by the books.>.
Carramba John,
do you have a military or a Civil Administration background?
That sounds pretty much like `never mind if it is a reasonable thing to do I
have covered my back`
Cheers
Pat
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: Things to see from a Kolb in the air |
Hi Possum,
What a great pic! Its gone up on my study wall right next to the John Hauck
pic taken approaching point Barrow. The serious and the lighthearted moods
of ultralight flying.
cheers
Pat
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 |
|
Whoops,
sorry for sending my post to Big Lar to the entire list. I just hit
`reply` which on all other lists I am on sends a message to the writer
only. I should have known
Pat
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 |
|
The whole point of using a prefix in front of your "N number" call sign is to let
other traffic and ATC know something about your aircraft (speed, etc). Everyone
knows what a Cessna or Piper is, but few know what a Kolb, Flightstar, Challenger,
etc is.
When I fly my glider, I don't use "DG400 7WN" as a call sign. I say "Glider 7WN"
or "Sailplane 7WN". Who in the world would know to give way to me because
I'm a glider if I don't tell them with the call sign?
Same thing with my Firestar when I finish the ELSA certification within the next
couple of weeks. I'll use "Light Sport 7DB" as my call sign, and add "experimental"
as a suffix on initial contact with a tower. I expect as more and more
pilots and ATC get familiar with Light Sport aircraft flying around, the prefix
will end up being shortened to "Sport 7DB" by most controllers.
--------
Dave Bigelow
Kamuela, Hawaii
FS2, HKS 700E
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=139355#139355
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: Flying the Mark III Xtra without doors, has anyone done |
it ?
Here is my experience with my Xtra. I had removed the rear side
windows to make it a little cooler. I also have two air vents [one on each
side ] to bring some air in.I thought I would try it one time with the doors
off. Well that was it...one time and the doors went back on. I had my knee
board with GPS and camera laying the right seat. Those things started moving
around just after lift off, I grabbed the board and stuck it under my left
leg, put the camera in the floor,came close to loosing my cap and head
phones. The prop was pulling air through there like a cyclone. It may not
have been so bad if the RR windows had been in.
I did notice any difference in the way it flew.I did not get to
any kind of performance check. Once around the pattern was enough for me.
Then the doors went back on...
Bill Futrell
MK111Xtra 912
Brooksville Fla
Do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "JetPilot" <orcabonita@hotmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2007 12:51 AM
Subject: Kolb-List: Flying the Mark III Xtra without doors, has anyone done
it ?
>
> I have seen many of the Kolbs including the Mark III Classic fly very well
> without doors, but I have a Mark III Xtra and was wondering if anyone has
> ever flown this model without doors ? The fuselage design of the Xtra is
> very different than the Classic MK III, and could yield very different
> results once the doors are removed.
>
> If any one has flown the MK III Xtra with the doors removed, what kind of
> performance and flight characteristics difference did you notice ?
>
> Mike
>
> --------
> "NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you
> could have !!!
>
> Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=139343#139343
>
>
>
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 |
|
Then for ultralights it's another whole can of worms. Somewhere I saw a
reference to using your radio station license number if you don't have an
N-number, but you don't need a station license any more. I could use the
USUA assigned number (one two delta mike hotel) but with three letters it's
obviously not an N-number. I guess I'll just use "Kolb Ultralight" and
leave it at that.
A totally irrelevant anecdote... years ago I used to go flying with a
friend who owned an American (later Grumman) AA-1 Yankee. Nice little
bird, actually started life as the Bede (yes, _that_ Bede) BD-1, but I
digress... Actually the aircraft model name was "Trainer", and the number
was N9FA. Yes, very odd to have such a short N-number on a production
airplane, I have no idea why. When he announced "Trainer nine fox alpha"
sometimes people figured he must be some kind of big shot and gave him the
red carpet treatment.
-Dana
--
--
But do you trust the _government_ with semi-automatic assault rifles?
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: Weight & Balance for FS II needed |
You cant measure your arms your self ? They could be different depending on
what model you have I wouldnt even try using anyone elses it could put you
out of CG ( NOT SAFE )
You should know how to do a weight and balance anyway
I test fly a bunch of new built aircraft for people and I always do weight
and balance my self because I want to know if it is correct I dont want to get
cought up in the air with a tail heavy plane and check where the stall is and
not be able to recover from it
if you dont know how to do a weight and balance let me know I can help you
out if needed
Ellery in Maine Building MK3Xtra and a few others
do not archive
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: | Flying the Mark III Xtra without doors, has anyone done |
it ?
On my first flight I flew it with the doors off (thought it would be easier
for the emergency crew). I had several radio problems with my ground crew
compounded by the fact the doors were off. The problem I had was too much w
ind, if you slip it slightly in you're going to feel it. Even if you are st
raight into the wind, the wind in the cockpit blowing on you tends to come
from the right or the left at 90 degrees gust from 10-15 (seemed like), whi
le the wind outside the plane might be 10% off the nose steady at 4 knots.
That was confusing. I found myself automaticly putting control imputs in ba
sed on the gusts of wind hitting me inside the plane... I haven't had the d
oors off since the first flight, but I'm wanting to do it again soon. Let m
e know what you find. All this was the first time the plane flew so I might
of been too sensitive.
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-List:Wing Bracing |
Thanks Mike
Ellery in Maine building MK3Xtra
Do not archive
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 |
|
Two countries divided by a common language. Wasn't that how Churchill put
it, Pat?
Rick
On 10/11/07, pat ladd <pj.ladd@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>
> It is always correct to do it by the books.>.
>
> Carramba John,
> do you have a military or a Civil Administration background?
>
> That sounds pretty much like `never mind if it is a reasonable thing to do
> I
> have covered my back`
> Cheers
>
> Pat
>
>
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: | Jet Pilot Prop extension |
Mike
can you contact me direct in regard to your prop extension
Steve B
Firefly 007/Floats
do not archive
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 |
|
Dana, For ultralights, it's FAR 103.17
Rick
On 10/11/07, Dana Hague <d-m-hague@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
> Then for ultralights it's another whole can of worms. Somewhere I saw a
> reference to using your radio station license number if you don't have an
> N-number, but you don't need a station license any more. I could use the
> USUA assigned number (one two delta mike hotel) but with three letters
> it's
> obviously not an N-number. I guess I'll just use "Kolb Ultralight" and
> leave it at that.
>
> A totally irrelevant anecdote... years ago I used to go flying with a
> friend who owned an American (later Grumman) AA-1 Yankee. Nice little
> bird, actually started life as the Bede (yes, _that_ Bede) BD-1, but I
> digress... Actually the aircraft model name was "Trainer", and the number
> was N9FA. Yes, very odd to have such a short N-number on a production
> airplane, I have no idea why. When he announced "Trainer nine fox alpha"
> sometimes people figured he must be some kind of big shot and gave him the
> red carpet treatment.
>
> -Dana
> --
> --
> But do you trust the _government_ with semi-automatic assault rifles?
>
>
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 |
|
The correct callsign construction is:
Drop the "N' and insert the Make or Model (the only time you would use your manufacture
name as an EAB is on a "My Own Design" aircraft).
Add the "experimental" at the end of the callsign on initial contact with an Air
Traffic Control Tower.
You can shorten the callsign to what ever the ATCT calls you but not before.
FAA Order 7110.65 lists all the type certficated aircraft and the three generic
Type Designators for Homebuilt/Experimental aircraft. The type designator has
nothing to do with your callsign, it's used on the flight plan.
FAA Order 7340.1 lists all the aircraft by manufacurers that have applied for and
been assigned a type designator. Yes Kolb is listed as a manufacturer but only
the Laser is assigned a type designator (the MarkIII was dropped from the
list about 3 years ago).
As an aside, no you can't use Laird, it is already being used. It has been an accepted
practice to use the name of the plans or kit manufacturer and not the
name of the person listed as the Manufacturer on the Data Plate for a long time.
Yes, I have a military background.
Yes, I have a commercial aviation background.
Yes, I spent 4 years with the FAA in Atlanta.
Yes, I am a CFI and I am always trying to get people to fly and operate by "a book".
--------
John Williamson
Arlington, TX
Kolbra, 912ULS
http://home.tx.rr.com/kolbrapilot
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=139407#139407
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Center Gap-seal coming loose |
<< ... there is an open gap between the top of the windshield and the
gap seal, about 2-3 inches high. ... Do you have such a gap on your
machine, or is it well sealed? >>
Herb -
On my Mark-III Classic, the top edge of my windshield is within a half
inch of the gap seal, so there is still a half-inch gap in between.
Rain enters the cockpit here when flying in showers. I asked Travis at
New Kolb if they can provide some sort of seal (formed alum strip?) to
cover this gap. Travis told me they make one for the Extra, but not for
the Classic.
I'd have to make my own, either out of fiberglass or aluminum. Haven't
done this yet.
To address the attachment security issue for the gap seal, I fabricated
a pair of hold-down braces that have #8 screws poking upward that go
through the gap seal, through the 1/2" alum angle braces. Located about
the midpoint on the gap seal, one on each side of the engine. They are
secured with wingnuts (and safety pins) on top. Only adds a minute to
my setup time. Have never had gap seal vibration problems this way.
Dennis Kirby
912ul, "Magic Bike" in
Cedar Crest, NM
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: Center Gap-seal coming loose |
Bryan Melborn has tooled a Gap Seal for the xtra, however I do not believe
he has done anything for the Classic. If I owned a Classic I would take the
time to build a Fiber Glass one. It is time consuming but well worth the
effort. I wonder how much difference there would be from plane to plane.
Steve
Firefly 007/Floats
do not archive
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 |
|
At 08:51 AM 10/11/2007, Richard Girard wrote:
>Dana, For ultralights, it's FAR 103.17
103.17 is about "operations in certain airspace" (prior authorization from
ATC required); it says nothing about how you identify yourself on the radio.
-Dana
--
--
But do you trust the _government_ with semi-automatic assault rifles?
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: Things to see from a Kolb in the air |
Possum...thats a keeper....love it!
Those ones above the cloud desk are cool to....hope you found a hole to descend
through eventually [Wink]
--------
Ray
Riverside County, CA
Do Not Archive
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=139431#139431
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: Remaining FAT ultralights after Deadline |
Is there no E-LSA category after the deadline, or do they have to appear on a list
of approved E-LSA aircraft to be built from scratch?
For example, What if I wanted to complete my Moni Motorglider and because it meets
the LSA parameters I could register it as E-LSA instead of E-AB?
Guess I need to do some research on the matter and talk to a DAR.
--------
Ray
Riverside County, CA
Do Not Archive
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=139435#139435
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: Remaining FAT ultralights after Deadline |
Ray, Refer to FAR 21.191 i(2)i and i(2)ii and i(3). There will be E-LSA's,
that's the good news. Your Moni won't qualify, that's the bad news.
On 2-1-08 There are three ways to get an E-LSA.
First 21.191 i (i) *Operating light-sport aircraft. *Operating a light-spor
t
aircraft that=97
(2) Has been assembled=97
(i) From an aircraft kit for which the applicant can provide the informatio
n
required by =A721.193(e); and
(ii) In accordance with manufacturer's assembly instructions that meet an
applicable consensus standard; or
(3) Has been previously issued a special airworthiness certificate in the
light-sport category under =A721.190.
21.193 Experimental certificates: general.
An applicant for an experimental certificate must submit the following
information:
(e) In the case of a light-sport aircraft assembled from a kit to be
certificated in accordance with =A721.191(i)(2), an applicant must provide
the
following:
(1) Evidence that an aircraft of the same make and model was manufactured
and assembled by the aircraft kit manufacturer and issued a special
airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category.
(2) The aircraft's operating instructions.
(3) The aircraft's maintenance and inspection procedures.
(4) The manufacturer's statement of compliance for the aircraft kit used in
the aircraft assembly that meets =A721.190(c), except that instead of meeti
ng
=A721.190(c)(7), the statement must identify assembly instructions for the
aircraft that meet an applicable consensus standard.
(5) The aircraft's flight training supplement.
(6) In addition to paragraphs (e)(1) through (e)(5) of this section, for an
aircraft kit manufactured outside of the United States, evidence that the
aircraft kit was manufactured in a country with which the United States has
a Bilateral Airworthiness Agreement concerning airplanes or a Bilateral
Aviation Safety Agreement with associated Implementation Procedures for
Airworthiness concerning airplanes, or an equivalent airworthiness
agreement.
So let's jump to 21.190 c
(c) *Manufacturer's statement of compliance for light-sport category
aircraft. *The manufacturer's statement of compliance required in paragraph
(b)(1)(iii) of this section must=97
(1) Identify the aircraft by make and model, serial number, class, date of
manufacture, and consensus standard used;
(2) State that the aircraft meets the provisions of the identified consensu
s
standard;
(3) State that the aircraft conforms to the manufacturer's design data,
using the manufacturer's quality assurance system that meets the identified
consensus standard;
(4) State that the manufacturer will make available to any interested perso
n
the following documents that meet the identified consensus standard:
(i) The aircraft's operating instructions.
(ii) The aircraft's maintenance and inspection procedures.
(iii) The aircraft's flight training supplement.
(5) State that the manufacturer will monitor and correct safety-of-flight
issues through the issuance of safety directives and a continued
airworthiness system that meets the identified consensus standard;
(6) State that at the request of the FAA, the manufacturer will provide
unrestricted access to its facilities; and
(7) State that the manufacturer, in accordance with a production acceptance
test procedure that meets an applicable consensus standard has=97
(i) Ground and flight tested the aircraft;
(ii) Found the aircraft performance acceptable; and
(iii) Determined that the aircraft is in a condition for safe operation.
So at least you don't have to have the manufacturer test fly the aircraft
for you, but they will control every other aspect of your E-LSA.
Anyway, unless John Monnett decides to build and certify the Moni to the
consensus standard, you're out of luck as an E-LSA.
Rick
On 10/11/07, jb92563 <jb92563@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> Is there no E-LSA category after the deadline, or do they have to appear
> on a list of approved E-LSA aircraft to be built from scratch?
>
> For example, What if I wanted to complete my Moni Motorglider and because
> it meets the LSA parameters I could register it as E-LSA instead of E-AB?
>
> Guess I need to do some research on the matter and talk to a DAR.
>
> --------
> Ray
> Riverside County, CA
>
> Do Not Archive
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=139435#139435
>
>
===========
===========
===========
>
>
Message 21
| 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 |
|
Dana, (prior authorization from ATC required) usually means you call ahead
on the phone from the ground and get permission, they will tell you how to
identify yourself. At least that's what I was taught. Whether ATC will take
a radio call for prior authorization is up to them and their work load at
the time.
Rick Pike has more experience here, I've only done a ground call once, when
the transponder wasn't working when I requested flight following outside the
Seatac mode C veil. I landed in Anacortes to make the request, got my
instructions and took off again.
Rick
On 10/11/07, Dana Hague <d-m-hague@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
> At 08:51 AM 10/11/2007, Richard Girard wrote:
> >Dana, For ultralights, it's FAR 103.17
>
> 103.17 is about "operations in certain airspace" (prior authorization from
> ATC required); it says nothing about how you identify yourself on the
> radio.
>
> -Dana
> --
> --
> But do you trust the _government_ with semi-automatic assault rifles?
>
>
Message 22
| 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: Remaining FAT ultralights after Deadline |
At 03:24 PM 10/11/2007, jb92563 wrote:
>
>Is there no E-LSA category after the deadline, or do they have to appear
>on a list of approved E-LSA aircraft to be built from scratch?
See http://www.kitplanes.com/sportplanes/0505-3740.pdf for a very good
article explaining all the SLSA/ELSA/EAB variations. Should answer all
your questions.
-Dana
--
--
But do you trust the _government_ with semi-automatic assault rifles?
Message 23
| 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: Center Gap-seal coming loose |
Real simple seal, quick to make, and cheap, too. Get a piece of foam pipe
insulation, trim with a box knife to fit. A little duct or vinyl tape and
there you have it. Take it out in the summer time for full flow through
ventilation. Works great.
Rick
On 10/11/07, N27SB@aol.com <N27SB@aol.com> wrote:
>
> Bryan Melborn has tooled a Gap Seal for the xtra, however I do not
> believe he has done anything for the Classic. If I owned a Classic I would
> take the time to build a Fiber Glass one. It is time consuming but well
> worth the effort. I wonder how much difference there would be from plane to
> plane.
>
>
> Steve
> Firefly 007/Floats
> do not archive
>
>
> ------------------------------
> See what's
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
Message 24
| 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 04:57 PM 10/11/2007, Richard Girard wrote:
>Dana, (prior authorization from ATC required) usually means you call ahead
>on the phone from the ground and get permission, they will tell you how to
>identify yourself. At least that's what I was taught. Whether ATC will
>take a radio call for prior authorization is up to them and their work
>load at the time...
That makes sense... though most of us are probably more concerned with
identifying ourselves at a unicom field.
I've phoned the tower and gotten permission to fly PPG about a half mile
inside their Class D airspace, with no radio... we agreed that we'd stay
under 200' while inside the Class D. On another occasion a friend (who
_did_ have a radio) phoned first and also got permission. When he tried to
radio the tower once airborne, he was unintelligible... the tower realized
who he was, told him to proceed as agreed, no reply required.
We now have permission from the landowner to fly other ultralights from
that location, so I'll probably try to work out a regular procedure with
the tower.
-Dana
--
--
But do you trust the _government_ with semi-automatic assault rifles?
Message 25
| 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: FireFly Landing Gear Leg Strength Improvement |
Hi John,
I'm sure John will inspect it after it is removed and will replace it if
needed.
Why did you loose your engine and how did you get your FS back home?
Regards,
Will Uribe,
FireStar II N4GU
El Paso, TX
In a message dated 10/9/2007 5:46:21 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
jhauck@elmore.rr.com writes:
Hi Will:
I am sure Thom can reuse his H brace. However, I would not consider it,
even if it had not taken the hit it did.
Glad you got to fly over Niagra Falls.
First time I flew over Niagra Fallls was 1988. Departed the Falls, flew
back up the river, over Grand Island, and lost the engine halfway between the
island and the mainland. Elected to force land on Grand Island. Got really
busy just prior to touch down, division of attention, stalled the FS and
dropped in left wing low. Got the left gear leg socket which was ripped right
out
of the gear leg socket tube cluster. Did not take a whole lot to do this on
an original FS. Also, the lower rear longerons always bent out of column as
the result of a hard landing, or striking an immoveable object on the ground.
I went back and took a look at the tailboom photo again. No way would I
even consider reusing that H brace.
john h
mkIII
Message 26
| 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: Remaining FAT ultralights after Deadline |
Dana, et al, I'll call the Light Sport Branch tomorrow, to confirm, but
Ron's take on E-LSA is not what I learned at Corning. That was last year and
LSA has been pretty fluid, so who knows.
The version I got was, Yes you could modify your S-LSA or E-LSA (registered
after 2-1-08 doesn't apply to those grandfathered in and registered under
21.191 i (1)), but you had to get a letter of authorization from the
manufacturer listing your airplane by N number. This was to prevent exactly
what Ron says you can do to something like the Cessna Skycatcher. I can't
imagine Jack Pelton's fleet of attorneys would have given him the go ahead
to produce the 162 if they thought somebody could pull off the O-200D and
strap on a Chevy V-6 while the Cessna name was still painted on the tail.
The media doesn't make such distinctions, and a crashed Cessna is a crashed
Cessna.
As I got it, the only advantage to E-LSA was that you could go take the
Repairman Inspector weekend class and do your own conditional inspections.
For that you lost the ability to teach in it or rent it. But like S-LSA,
unauthorized modifications to an E-LSA voided your airworthiness
certificate. I'll get back to you all with an answer, tomorrow.
Rick
On 10/11/07, Dana Hague <d-m-hague@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
> At 03:24 PM 10/11/2007, jb92563 wrote:
> >
> >Is there no E-LSA category after the deadline, or do they have to appear
> >on a list of approved E-LSA aircraft to be built from scratch?
>
> See http://www.kitplanes.com/sportplanes/0505-3740.pdf for a very good
> article explaining all the SLSA/ELSA/EAB variations. Should answer all
> your questions.
>
> -Dana
> --
> --
> But do you trust the _government_ with semi-automatic assault rifles?
>
>
Message 27
| 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 |
|
Ask for a Letter of Agreement.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dana Hague" <d-m-hague@comcast.net>
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2007 5:16 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: I Passed!
<snip>
> We now have permission from the landowner to fly other ultralights from
> that location, so I'll probably try to work out a regular procedure with
> the tower.
>
> -Dana
>
> --
> --
> But do you trust the _government_ with semi-automatic assault rifles?
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 28
| 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: FireFly Landing Gear Leg Strength Improvement |
At 01:23 PM 10/9/07 -0700, you wrote:
>
>I have tried the cables between the wheel axles on a Mark III Classic.
>They work great. I am sure that some cruising speed is lost. I intend
>to put a fairing over them. I now use one 7/64" and two 1/16" cables so
>that they will break at different times when overstressed. On one
>landing recently, I did not account for the wind gradient cause by a 25
>mph headwind and dropped it in hard. Both 7/64" tension wires ripped,
>but the gear leg did not bend. That proved a point to me. Most agree
>that wheel landings are the way to go. I definitely agree. These hard
>landings are probably having a negative effect on the boom tube. I was
>wondering how to inspect it. Vic in Sacramento
>
Vic,
You were the one that triggered me to look at cables. You mentioned a
Challenger, and I took some time in a Challenger to be sure that I did not
do something stupid when I flew the FireFly for the first time. I asked the
instructor for lots of emergencies, and he gave them to me. One was and
engine out and I had to land on a grass strip that crossed an asphalt
runway. I got down ok, but as we passed over the asphalt runway, the cable
broke between the gear legs. That was the end of my flight time. The
owner had a jig on which he made these cable sets.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Winchester, IN
Message 29
| 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: Center Gap-seal coming loose |
In a message dated 10/11/2007 12:07:06 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
Dennis.Kirby@kirtland.af.mil writes:
To address the attachment security issue for the gap seal, I fabricated
a pair of hold-down braces that have #8 screws poking upward that go
through the gap seal, through the 1/2" alum angle braces. Located about
the midpoint on the gap seal, one on each side of the engine. They are
secured with wingnuts (and safety pins) on top.
Dennis,
Understand and will implement as well. Not having the details at hand to
look at, I wonder how you connected the braces to the air frame itself. Should
you have a picture of it, could you please send it to my Email:
_HGRAFF@AOL.COM_ (mailto:HGRAFF@AOL.COM) .
I think the extra hold-downs, plus closing up the "Gap" should solve the
problem,. Also, I am thinking of lengthening the center "pin", maybe putting
something like a barb on it, to keep it from pulling out.
Many thanks to you and the gang, Herb
Message 30
| 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 06:43 PM 10/11/2007, Richard Pike wrote:
>
>Ask for a Letter of Agreement.
I think my buddy mentioned something like that after he talked to the
tower. I'll look into it.
-Dana
--
--
But do you trust the _government_ with semi-automatic assault rifles?
Message 31
| 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: Center Gap-seal coming loose |
Herb
I use a piece of garage door gasket to seal the gap between the center
seal and the wind shield. Its L shaped foam rubber, it works well. The
gasket is pop riveted to the center seal and velcroed to the windshield.
The more I think about you seal working loose it seems like there is
something else going on. I know of people that fly or have flown without
the windshield and there are those that fly with the gap open below the
seal that your talking about. The standard plans for the MKIII suggest
springs and I don't remember anyone having this problem before. I would
suggest you review your plans again for differences. Make sure you have
the sheet aluminum rib that locks the top and bottom of the seal
together and that it is installed properly.
I used long universal bolts with wing nuts to secure the center seal
because it seemed a better way. If there was any lifting on the lexon
where the seal is secured with wing nuts the lexon would have failed by
now. Just feels like something isn't right???????
Rick Neilsen
Redrive VW powered MKIIIC
----- Original Message -----
From: HGRAFF@aol.com
To: kolb-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2007 8:41 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Center Gap-seal coming loose
In a message dated 10/11/2007 12:07:06 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
Dennis.Kirby@kirtland.af.mil writes:
To address the attachment security issue for the gap seal, I
fabricated
a pair of hold-down braces that have #8 screws poking upward that go
through the gap seal, through the 1/2" alum angle braces. Located
about
the midpoint on the gap seal, one on each side of the engine. They
are
secured with wingnuts (and safety pins) on top.
Dennis,
Understand and will implement as well. Not having the details at hand
to look at, I wonder how you connected the braces to the air frame
itself. Should you have a picture of it, could you please send it to my
Email: HGRAFF@AOL.COM.
I think the extra hold-downs, plus closing up the "Gap" should solve
the problem,. Also, I am thinking of lengthening the center "pin", maybe
putting something like a barb on it, to keep it from pulling out.
Many thanks to you and the gang, Herb
.
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! --
|