Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:43 AM - Is this a Kolb? (Dana Hague)
2. 05:13 AM - Re: Is this a Kolb? (Larry Bourne)
3. 06:22 AM - Re: Re: How do you like your FireFly? (Jack B. Hart)
4. 07:35 AM - Re: How do you like your FireFly? (jerb)
5. 07:42 AM - Re: Re: How do you like your FireFly? (Vic Peters)
6. 07:44 AM - Re: Re: How do you like your FireFly? (N27SB@aol.com)
7. 08:01 AM - Re: Re: How do you like your FireFly? (Bryan Dever)
8. 08:02 AM - Re: Re: How do you like your FireFly? (Mike Welch)
9. 08:56 AM - Re: Is this a Kolb? (jb92563)
10. 02:46 PM - Re: Re: How do you like your FireFly? (David Key)
11. 03:02 PM - Yahoo! Auto Response (jpiamber@yahoo.com)
12. 05:04 PM - Re: Re: How do you like your FireFly? (Mike Welch)
13. 06:13 PM - Re: How do you like your FireFly? (JetPilot)
14. 06:54 PM - Re: FF tailwheel weight (Bob Noyer)
15. 07:11 PM - Re: Re: Flight characteristics of the Kolb FSII & The Challenger (ross richardson)
16. 08:57 PM - Re: Re: How do you like your FireFly? (jerb)
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 |
|
Is this a Kolb?
http://www.mtairynews.com/articles/2007/12/08/news/local_news/local05.txt
http://www.mtairynews.com/articles/2007/12/09/news/local_news/local01.txt
-Dana
--
We wonder why the dogs always drink out of our toilets, but look at it
from their point of view: why do humans keep peeing into their water bowls?
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: Is this a Kolb? |
Not completely sure, but it looks like a Rans
S-12. Lar.
Dana Hague wrote:
>
> Is this a Kolb?
> http://www.mtairynews.com/articles/2007/12/08/news/local_news/local05.txt
> http://www.mtairynews.com/articles/2007/12/09/news/local_news/local01.txt
>
> -Dana
> --
> We wonder why the dogs always drink out of our toilets, but look at
> it from their point of view: why do humans keep peeing into their
> water bowls?
>
>
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: How do you like your FireFly? |
At 07:18 PM 12/20/07 -0600, you wrote:
>
>
> > A FireFly driver said that with the 447 engine it seemed overpowered and
>he installed a Victor 1+ instead and its much better behaved.
> > Ray
>
>
>Ray:
>
>Based on that statement, a rubber band might be too much for him.
>
>Much better behaved with a Victor??? Horse manure!
>
>john h - Who finds the 447 powered FF a delight to fly, a scaled down Sling
>Shot, a perfect combination of aircraft and engine.
>mkIII
>
FireFlyers,
The orginal request was made about performance of a Part 103-7 FireFly. And
my answer was given in that context. I don't know how many on the List have
flown a legal ultra light vehicle FireFly or currently own one, but I have
noticed quite a few currently sport N numbers.
Anyone can take an experimental and boost the empty weigh by adding more
engine or whatever, but it takes some effort to stay within the Part 103-7
bounds. If you have or have built a FireFly with less than 15 inch chord
ailerons and it is close to 254 pounds empty with a Rotax 447 mounted, it is
overpowered. All the comparisons you want to make to Kolbras and other
forms of Kolb heavy metal will not alter that fact. Check out AC 103-7
Appendix 1, 2, 3 & 4.
It is good that by the end of the year there will be no fat ultra light
vehicles as they will change into undocumented experimentals and illegals.
It was good to hear from Pat that they are offering the FireFly in UK with a
27 hp engine. It seems to fly very well.
The List seems to be dominated by the thought that more power is better.
But with the addition of power comes increased weight, wing loading and
stall speeds, increased dynamic loading of the air frame, which means things
start cracking. These must be bulked up and so more weight is added. If
you want to do this, it is your right, but cut us guys who want to remain
Part 103-7 legal a little slack.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Winchester, IN
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: How do you like your FireFly? |
Used to have a FireFly for a number of years. I assure you it is not
under powered with a 447. It's like a little sports car version of
the Kolbs, small and quick. It flies very well, gets off great. My
partner and I were not exactly light weights, both in the 250# plus
area. It is not for a real tall person, my partner was 5-10". If
your much over that you head can start hitting the wing root
cover. Fun little airplane that doesn't take up a lot of hangar
space. Were were fat and built it knowing we would be. We had the
larger dia, wheel barrow wheels, (didn't like the 5", worked the gear
pretty hard on rough turf). Also had brakes and a very well equipped
instrument panel plus the full enclosure, VLS chute. We had the
expansion go-kart type brakes, if doing over I would adapt it over to
band brakes, they work better and weigh a lot less. Had flown it
with the short wind screen and the full enclosure, much nicer flying
with that. The wind flying it seems to be much worst than I remember
a motor cycle being. I do feel it is a little more challenging
airplane to fly, liked that but probably not the best plane for a
person just learning to flying or those with minimal flight
time. Heard that the new owner changed to different tires/wheels and
it improved its ground handling. (It had the thin Chinns tires on it
as came on the wheels from Kolb.) Since both of us were old tail
wheel pilots, we didn't have any problems with it. Do a search on
guy morgan on the list regarding his changing the tires/wheels. It
was fun to fly, but could only carry 5 gallons of fuel as
configured. We found we could stuff a couple 2-1/2 gal. jerry cans
in around the existing tank. Before we sold it we were looking into
ways of increasing fuel capacity to give range to make it to and from
other area airports especially with any major head wind. We flew it
in fairly windy conditions but again we were experienced pilots and
had hundreds of hours of tail wheel time under our belt.
jerb
At 12:10 AM 12/21/2007, you wrote:
>I'm a MkIII owner/driver, but I have flown a Firefly with 447...
>it's performance is terrific, short takeoffs, fast cruise (which, by
>itself, will break the 103 rule), and a whole lot of fun to
>fly. Highly recommended!
>
> -- Robert
>
>On Dec 20, 2007 2:38 PM, jb92563
><<mailto:jb92563@yahoo.com>jb92563@yahoo.com> wrote:
><<mailto:jb92563@yahoo.com>jb92563@yahoo.com>
>
>I have been wondering how people have been liking their FireFly Kolbs.
>
>I am particularly interested in the Part 103 ones that are really legal.
>
>I understand that if you have the Rotax 447 equiped version you
>should be able to keep under the required weight, but how does it
>perform with that engine?
>
>--------
>Ray
>Riverside County, CA
>
>Do Not Archive
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
><http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=153350#153350>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=153350#153350
>
>
><http://www.matronics.com/contribution>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
><http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>
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: How do you like your FireFly? |
I think your right Jack but don't be too hard on John.
I think he probably went out west to meet up with Mat.
They blew all the contribution money in Vegas and are now little burnt out
On cocaine and hookers.
Vic
Having fun in Maine
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: How do you like your FireFly? |
I can only speak in regard to a Firefly on floats with a 447.
Take Off on Glassy water------- 150 ft
Climb at Sea Level ----- At least 900 fpm
Handling ----- quick and nimble
**************************************See AOL's top rated recipes
(http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004)
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: How do you like your FireFly? |
*It is good that by the end of the year there will be no fat ultra light
vehicles as they will change into undocumented experimentals and illegals.*
The legal status of a "fat ultralight" does not change at all. They are no
more illegal on Feb 1st than they are now. People that are making money on
the SP transitions like to imply otherwise. I guess we will see.
Bryan Dever
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: How do you like your FireFly? |
Jack and guys and girls,
Very well stated, Jack. I think you deserve quite a bit of credit for trying
to maintain a legal Part 103 ultralight. It is no easy task, I'm sure, balancing
necessary performance and safety requirements within such stringent perameters.
Although this isn't the direction I'm headed with my current Kolb, as I stated
a few days back, there may be a Firefly in my future...someday. It is comforting
to know that a particular aircraft is available, with excellent performance
and handling, and still remain inside the guidelines of the regulations.
It doesn't take years and years to build a Firefly, does it? Just curious............
Mike Welch in SW Chilly Utah, w/ no snow, working on tailfeather fabric today,
in my heated shop, listening to Rush.
> FireFlyers,
>
> The orginal request was made about performance of a Part 103-7 FireFly. And
> my answer was given in that context. I don't know how many on the List have
> flown a legal ultra light vehicle FireFly or currently own one, but I have
> noticed quite a few currently sport N numbers.
>
> Anyone can take an experimental and boost the empty weigh by adding more
> engine or whatever, but it takes some effort to stay within the Part 103-7
> bounds. If you have or have built a FireFly with less than 15 inch chord
> ailerons and it is close to 254 pounds empty with a Rotax 447 mounted, it is
> overpowered. All the comparisons you want to make to Kolbras and other
> forms of Kolb heavy metal will not alter that fact. Check out AC 103-7
> Appendix 1, 2, 3 & 4.
>
> It is good that by the end of the year there will be no fat ultra light
> vehicles as they will change into undocumented experimentals and illegals.
> It was good to hear from Pat that they are offering the FireFly in UK with a
> 27 hp engine. It seems to fly very well.
>
> The List seems to be dominated by the thought that more power is better.
> But with the addition of power comes increased weight, wing loading and
> stall speeds, increased dynamic loading of the air frame, which means things
> start cracking. These must be bulked up and so more weight is added. If
> you want to do this, it is your right, but cut us guys who want to remain
> Part 103-7 legal a little slack.
>
> Jack B. Hart FF004
> Winchester, IN
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
The best games are on Xbox 360. Click here for a special offer on an Xbox 360
Console.
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/hardware/wheretobuy/
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: Is this a Kolb? |
Definitely not a Kolb.
There is no typical Kolb "cage" like structure behind the pilot to support the
wings.
--------
Ray
Riverside County, CA
Do Not Archive
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=153533#153533
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: How do you like your FireFly? |
good choice of music, you'll probably be done before they tour again.> From
: mdnanwelch7@hotmail.com> To: kolb-list@matronics.com> Subject: RE: Kolb-L
ist: Re: How do you like your FireFly?> Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2007 08:00:36 -08
> > > Jack and guys and girls,> > Very well stated, Jack. I think you deser
ve quite a bit of credit for trying to maintain a legal Part 103 ultralight
. It is no easy task, I'm sure, balancing necessary performance and safety
requirements within such stringent perameters.> > Although this isn't the d
irection I'm headed with my current Kolb, as I stated a few days back, ther
e may be a Firefly in my future...someday. It is comforting to know that a
particular aircraft is available, with excellent performance and handling,
and still remain inside the guidelines of the regulations.> > It doesn't ta
ke years and years to build a Firefly, does it? Just curious............> >
Mike Welch in SW Chilly Utah, w/ no snow, working on tailfeather fabric to
day, in my heated shop, listening to Rush.> > > > > > > > > > > FireFlyers,
> >> > The orginal request was made about performance of a Part 103-7 FireF
ly. And> > my answer was given in that context. I don't know how many on th
e List have> > flown a legal ultra light vehicle FireFly or currently own o
ne, but I have> > noticed quite a few currently sport N numbers.> >> > Anyo
ne can take an experimental and boost the empty weigh by adding more> > eng
ine or whatever, but it takes some effort to stay within the Part 103-7> >
bounds. If you have or have built a FireFly with less than 15 inch chord> >
ailerons and it is close to 254 pounds empty with a Rotax 447 mounted, it
is> > overpowered. All the comparisons you want to make to Kolbras and othe
r> > forms of Kolb heavy metal will not alter that fact. Check out AC 103-7
> > Appendix 1, 2, 3 & 4.> >> > It is good that by the end of the year ther
e will be no fat ultra light> > vehicles as they will change into undocumen
ted experimentals and illegals.> > It was good to hear from Pat that they a
re offering the FireFly in UK with a> > 27 hp engine. It seems to fly very
well.> >> > The List seems to be dominated by the thought that more power i
s better.> > But with the addition of power comes increased weight, wing lo
ading and> > stall speeds, increased dynamic loading of the air frame, whic
h means things> > start cracking. These must be bulked up and so more weigh
t is added. If> > you want to do this, it is your right, but cut us guys wh
o want to remain> > Part 103-7 legal a little slack.> >> > Jack B. Hart FF0
04> > Winchester, IN> >> >> >> >> >> > ____________________________________
_____________________________> The best games are on Xbox 360. Click here f
or a special offer on an Xbox 360 Console.> http://www.xbox.com/en-US/hardw
========================> _
=====> > >
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: | Yahoo! Auto Response |
JPI will be closed to observe Christmas
December 22ND and will return on December 27TH.
JPI will be closed to observe the New Year Holiday
December 29TH and will return on January 2ND.
The holiday season offers us a special opportunity to extend our personal thanks
to our friends, and our very best wishes for the future.
And so it is that we now gather together and wish to you a very Merry Christmas
and a Happy New Year. We consider you a good friend and extend our wishes for
good health and good cheer.
It is people like you who make being in business such a pleasure all year long.
Our business is a source of pride to us, and with customers like you, we find
going to work each day a rewarding experience.
To our friends all over the world, JP Instruments
extends to you and your loved ones our best wishes for a
Vrolijke Kersttmis Sarbatori Felicite
Joyeux Noel Tin Hao Nian
Froeliche Weihnachten Felice Natale
Kinga Shinnen Glad Julen
Ichok Yilara Boas Festas
Chrustovjna Wesloych Swiat
Glaedelig Jul Veselele Vanoche
Felice Pascuas Sretan Bozic
Boldog Karacsonyi Unnepeket Merry Christmas
and a Happy New Year!
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: How do you like your FireFly? |
Thanks Dave, but I was referring to Limbaugh. 8>)
I finished the Poly Fiber fabric on the MkIII fuselage and got one coat of Poly
Spray. Essentially today all I had to do is all the "touch up" work, like
edges, and misc. reinforcements. I did a fantastic job on the Poly Fiber, if
I do say so myself. That, or it's just easy, whichever. Anyway, the fuselage
looks just plain awesome....
I heard once I ain't braggin' if it's true.
Mike Welch....headed to Missouri on Monday to sight-see/vacation.
Do Not Archive
________________________________
From: dhkey@msn.com
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Re: How do you like your FireFly?
good choice of music, you'll probably be done before they tour again.
> From: mdnanwelch7@hotmail.com
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Re: How do you like your FireFly?
> Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2007 08:00:36 -0800
>
>
>
> Jack and guys and girls,
>
> Very well stated, Jack. I think you deserve quite a bit of credit for trying
to maintain a legal Part 103 ultralight. It is no easy task, I'm sure, balancing
necessary performance and safety requirements within such stringent perameters.
>
> Although this isn't the direction I'm headed with my current Kolb, as I stated
a few days back, there may be a Firefly in my future...someday. It is comforting
to know that a particular aircraft is available, with excellent performance
and handling, and still remain inside the guidelines of the regulations.
>
> It doesn't take years and years to build a Firefly, does it? Just curious............
>
> Mike Welch in SW Chilly Utah, w/ no snow, working on tailfeather fabric today,
in my heated shop, listening to Rush.
>
>
>> FireFlyers,
>>
>> The orginal request was made about performance of a Part 103-7 FireFly. And
>> my answer was given in that context. I don't know how many on the List have
>> flown a legal ultra light vehicle FireFly or currently own one, but I have
>> noticed quite a few currently sport N numbers.
>>
>> Anyone can take an experimental and boost the empty weigh by adding more
>> engine or whatever, but it takes some effort to stay within the Part 103-7
>> bounds. If you have or have built a FireFly with less than 15 inch chord
>> ailerons and it is close to 254 pounds empty with a Rotax 447 mounted, it is
>> overpowered. All the comparisons you want to make to Kolbras and other
>> forms of Kolb heavy metal will not alter that fact. Check out AC 103-7
>> Appendix 1, 2, 3 & 4.
>>
>> It is good that by the end of the year there will be no fat ultra light
>> vehicles as they will change into undocumented experimentals and illegals.
>> It was good to hear from Pat that they are offering the FireFly in UK with a
>> 27 hp engine. It seems to fly very well.
>>
>> The List seems to be dominated by the thought that more power is better.
>> But with the addition of power comes increased weight, wing loading and
>> stall speeds, increased dynamic loading of the air frame, which means things
>> start cracking. These must be bulked up and so more weight is added. If
>> you want to do this, it is your right, but cut us guys who want to remain
>> Part 103-7 legal a little slack.
>>
>> Jack B. Hart FF004
>> Winchester, IN
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> The best games are on Xbox 360. Click here for a special offer on an Xbox 360
Console.
> http://www.xbox.com/en-US/hardware/wheretobuy/
>
> ==================
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Share life as it happens with the new Windows Live.
http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_Wave2_sharelife_122007
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: How do you like your FireFly? |
I think the Firefly would be a really fun plane to own, although I would not even
consider making it 103 legal. Building it as an experimental and putting
an N number on it is not hard at all. One could end up with a much better and
durable plane by adding a couple more pounds.
As far as engine, I would put a 503 on it, much more reliable an better than the
447. As far as some that say its overpowered, those are guys that have small
engines and try to convince themselves that they made the correct choice by
having a small, sub standard engine... Nothing says you need to fly around at
high power all the time, but lots of power is a really great thing to have when
you need it. More power is also safer, will get you out of trouble when you
need it, you will get off the ground quicker, and on takeoff you will also
be a lot higher at the end of runway.. If the engine quits on takeoff, you will
have several hundred feet more altitude then they poor guy with the small,
very light engine.
I have flown with a lot of Learjet pilots over the years, and every one of them
loved the 45 degree climb-outs, and quick takeoffs. I have NEVER heard anyone
say that any plane they actually flew had to much power. The only people I
ever hear talk about some planes "having to much power" are pilots of doggy,
sluggish airplanes that are trying to convince themselves that a lack of power
is a good thing.
Mike
MK-III Xtra 912-S And loving the steep climbs :)
--------
"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=153612#153612
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: FF tailwheel weight |
Dave,
As promised, I weighed my FF's tail wheel. Have a rather std FF,
brakes, larger tires, not much else for weight, about 3 gal fuel.
Tailwheel on electronic scale=56# When I came home, the dang scale
had 'slud' over and fell on driveway when I opened the door! Now my
weight has dropped to 146 from 175!!!
regards,
Bob N. FireFly 070 Old Kolb
http://www.angelfire.com/rpg/ronoy/
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: Flight characteristics of the Kolb FSII & The Challenger |
I as J D have listened to the comments Kolb vs Challenger and had to say so
mething.
I have a Mark 3 w/912 and a modified Challenger 11 CW special w/503 and bot
h have their
good and not so called good points, it all depends on what you want or need
.
My Challenger will perform and stay with the Mark 3 except for roll off dis
tance and climb but then there is the
difference of 50hp & 2 blade to a 80hp & 3 blade prop.
I started flying UL's in the 70's to check my livestock in high grass and p
ut out feed when the snow drifts where to high to
get through in a truck, weather permitting. The tail dragger would permit m
e to get in and out places as where
a noise wheel would have keep me grounds. Flying beats covering 1800ac a 15
mi round trip on hourse back.
Now I am in sunny Fl. and still have gotten in to trouble with the nose whe
el in soft sand, both planes have
HD landing gear and turf tires.
> From: jstewart@inebraska.com> To: kolb-list@matronics.com> Subject: RE:
Kolb-List: Re: Flight characteristics of the Kolb FSII & The Challenger> D
.D. Stewart" <jstewart@inebraska.com>> > I've listened politely for a month
now, holding my tongue. > What a load of crap. There are over 3500 Challen
gers out there.> Probably the most successful design behind the Quicksilver
(but hasn't gone> out of business 4~5 times). If you want something with a
bigger tail, more> robust landing gear, and easier entrance/exit then the
new LSS Challenger> takes care of all those issues. > But, that's not what
you're here for. Like John says, if you want> to know more the Challenger l
ist is the place to go. We certainly don't> spend any time bashing Kolbs on
that list, regardless of their shortcomings.> I'll leave open a standing o
ffer to take any Kolb list member for a> ride in a Challenger. We can even
shut the engine off and dead-stick it to> a nice, soft landing.> > Kolb adm
irer and list member since '98,> > J.D. Stewart> UltraFun AirSports, LLC> h
ttp://www.ultrafunairsports.com> Challenger e-mail list> http://challenger.
inebraska.com> Titan e-mail list> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircra
ft/ > > > Do not archive> > > John Hauck wrote:> > > > > > Guess that is wh
y a Challenger never appealed to me. > > And.........if I wanted to know mo
re about Challengers, I > > think I would go over to the Challenger List to
find out.> > > > > > > > > > Don't go an do something rash ! Besides, the
you would just > > scare yourself learning about Challengers... Just readin
g > > about Challengers makes me want to give up flying take up > > somethi
ng safe like motorcycle racing.> > > > Mike> > > > --------> > "NO FEA
R" - If you have no fear you did not go as > > fast as you could have
========================> _
=============> > >
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: How do you like your FireFly? |
Mike,
Do you have any stick time in a FireFly, I have and there is plenty
of power there with a 447.
Our 447 worked fine and mine on my Hawk so far has performed
well. While I will agree the 503 is a good engine, (especially like
oil injection no premix - less stale fuel to deal with) it would just
add more weight to the airframe. Got to remember the FireFly is a
light airplane compared to a FireStar and you need to consider the
specified gross weight limit of the airframe.
As for building it to meet the 254# limit, I'm confident it can be
done - no extras. I know what ours weighed and what contributed to
the weight. Go with 5" inch wheels, band brakes if any, wood prop,
bare bone instruments (non-sensitive altimeter) - air speed, and toss
up between analog EGT/CHT gauges or Grand Rapids Technologies EIS,
and if you must, the open wind screen rather than the full
enclosure. (I would still take the EIS, it's a wonderful piece of
equipment.) As for climb out at our weight (both plane and our full
figures) we still normally pushed in excess of 1000 F/S on climb
out. We had an electric Variometer like used in gliders - was very
sensitive and accurate.
jerb
At 08:11 PM 12/21/2007, you wrote:
>
>I think the Firefly would be a really fun plane to own, although I
>would not even consider making it 103 legal. Building it as an
>experimental and putting an N number on it is not hard at all. One
>could end up with a much better and durable plane by adding a couple
>more pounds.
>
>As far as engine, I would put a 503 on it, much more reliable an
>better than the 447. As far as some that say its overpowered, those
>are guys that have small engines and try to convince themselves that
>they made the correct choice by having a small, sub standard
>engine... Nothing says you need to fly around at high power all
>the time, but lots of power is a really great thing to have when you
>need it. More power is also safer, will get you out of trouble when
>you need it, you will get off the ground quicker, and on takeoff you
>will also be a lot higher at the end of runway.. If the engine
>quits on takeoff, you will have several hundred feet more altitude
>then they poor guy with the small, very light engine.
>
>I have flown with a lot of Learjet pilots over the years, and every
>one of them loved the 45 degree climb-outs, and quick takeoffs. I
>have NEVER heard anyone say that any plane they actually flew had to
>much power. The only people I ever hear talk about some planes
>"having to much power" are pilots of doggy, sluggish airplanes that
>are trying to convince themselves that a lack of power is a good thing.
>
>Mike
>
>MK-III Xtra 912-S And loving the steep climbs :)
>
>--------
>"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=153612#153612
>
>
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! --
|