Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:54 AM - Re: Re: Kolb Firestar Fuel consumption (Gene & Tammy)
2. 06:09 AM - Re: Re: Kolb Firestar Fuel consumption (b d)
3. 06:13 AM - Re: Re: Kolb Firestar Fuel consumption (robert bean)
4. 07:58 AM - =?iso-8859-1?Q?Re:__Adding_additional_fuel_tanks_=3F=22_Jump?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?_Seat_=3F=22_FS-2? (b young)
5. 09:12 AM - Re: Adding additional fuel tanks =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=93?= Jump Seat =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=93?= FS-2 (miyer2u)
6. 10:24 AM - Re: Firestar for sale (Chris_A)
7. 11:14 AM - =?iso-8859-1?Q?Re=3A_Kolb-List=3A_Re=3A_Adding_additional_fuel_t?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?anks_=93_Jump_Seat_=93_FS-2? (Eugene Zimmerman)
8. 01:14 PM - Re: Kolb Aircraft Insurance (Watkinsdw)
9. 01:51 PM - Re: Re: Kolb Aircraft Insurance (Richard Neilsen)
10. 02:29 PM - Re: Re: Kolb Aircraft Insurance (Dana Hague)
11. 05:07 PM - Dual Stick set up for sale (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: Kolb Firestar Fuel consumption |
John, not to beat a dead horse to death but after 40 odd years being around
airplanes in Alaska and other out of the way places, I too have never seen
MPH associated with airplanes. I couldn't imagine planning a trip using
MPH. What you had better think about is TIME you can stay airborn.
I'm still looking for that static air.
Gene
--------------------------------------------------
From: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 4:19 PM
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Kolb Firestar Fuel consumption
>
>
> We can argue this all day long if you want, John. But it IS meaningful to
> me.
>
> If I know the MPG in static air and know my headwind or tailwind component
> I
> can easily determine in my head how far over the ground I can go. With GPH
> all we know is how long we can stay in the air. That plus knowing your
> ground speed and a little bit of math we can come up with the same result.
> Neither is meaningless. Just a different way to approach it.
>
> Plus it also gives you a relative efficiency number for comparing
> aircraft,
> if anyone cares to do that. In static air my normal cruise speed of 85 mph
> and 3.75 gph gives me about 22.5 mpg. Your MkIII at 85 mph and 5 GPH
> yields
> about 17 MPG in static air.
>
> --------
> Thom Riddle
>
>
> Thom R/Gang:
>
> I am sure your system of mpg works for you, but not for me. I never heard
> the term mpg in military or civilian flight training I have attended. It
> has been a long time since I have been to school, so maybe current
> aviation
> is not using GPH, but MPG now.
>
> Let me know when you find some static air. ;-)
>
> Most of us are flying with GPS now days. Mine is an old Garmin 196, but
> it
> does give me constantly updated info like "time to my next waypoint", etc.
> Much better system than the old E6B. I don't need to know wind speed or
> direction, at my altitude, and where I am located. Knowing my accurate
> fuel
> burn, I know immediately how much fuel and time it will take me to get to
> my
> next.
>
> MPG is for automobiles. GPH is for aircraft.
>
> john h
> mkIII
> Titus, Alabama
>
>
>
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: Kolb Firestar Fuel consumption |
Semantics! To each his own. The challenge is to not let the earth smite
thine ass before one reaches point "B" how ever that may be done. If one can
flap his wings or pull gas from the clouds, who cares?
On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 5:51 AM, Gene & Tammy
<zharvey@bentoncountycable.net>wrote:
> zharvey@bentoncountycable.net>
>
> John, not to beat a dead horse to death but after 40 odd years being around
> airplanes in Alaska and other out of the way places, I too have never seen
> MPH associated with airplanes. I couldn't imagine planning a trip using
> MPH. What you had better think about is TIME you can stay airborn.
> I'm still looking for that static air.
> Gene
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 4:19 PM
> To: <kolb-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Kolb Firestar Fuel consumption
>
>>
>>
>> We can argue this all day long if you want, John. But it IS meaningful to
>> me.
>>
>> If I know the MPG in static air and know my headwind or tailwind component
>> I
>> can easily determine in my head how far over the ground I can go. With GPH
>> all we know is how long we can stay in the air. That plus knowing your
>> ground speed and a little bit of math we can come up with the same result.
>> Neither is meaningless. Just a different way to approach it.
>>
>> Plus it also gives you a relative efficiency number for comparing
>> aircraft,
>> if anyone cares to do that. In static air my normal cruise speed of 85 mph
>> and 3.75 gph gives me about 22.5 mpg. Your MkIII at 85 mph and 5 GPH
>> yields
>> about 17 MPG in static air.
>>
>> --------
>> Thom Riddle
>>
>>
>> Thom R/Gang:
>>
>> I am sure your system of mpg works for you, but not for me. I never heard
>> the term mpg in military or civilian flight training I have attended. It
>> has been a long time since I have been to school, so maybe current
>> aviation
>> is not using GPH, but MPG now.
>>
>> Let me know when you find some static air. ;-)
>>
>> Most of us are flying with GPS now days. Mine is an old Garmin 196, but
>> it
>> does give me constantly updated info like "time to my next waypoint", etc.
>> Much better system than the old E6B. I don't need to know wind speed or
>> direction, at my altitude, and where I am located. Knowing my accurate
>> fuel
>> burn, I know immediately how much fuel and time it will take me to get to
>> my
>> next.
>>
>> MPG is for automobiles. GPH is for aircraft.
>>
>> john h
>> mkIII
>> Titus, Alabama
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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: Kolb Firestar Fuel consumption |
cheee, I know mine's not fast but I sure would like at least some MPH :)
BB
On 2, Dec 2010, at 8:51 AM, Gene & Tammy wrote:
>
> John, not to beat a dead horse to death but after 40 odd years being around airplanes
in Alaska and other out of the way places, I too have never seen MPH
associated with airplanes. I couldn't imagine planning a trip using MPH. What
you had better think about is TIME you can stay airborn.
> I'm still looking for that static air.
> Gene
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "John Hauck" <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 4:19 PM
> To: <kolb-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Kolb Firestar Fuel consumption
>
>>
>>
>> We can argue this all day long if you want, John. But it IS meaningful to
>> me.
>>
>> If I know the MPG in static air and know my headwind or tailwind component I
>> can easily determine in my head how far over the ground I can go. With GPH
>> all we know is how long we can stay in the air. That plus knowing your
>> ground speed and a little bit of math we can come up with the same result.
>> Neither is meaningless. Just a different way to approach it.
>>
>> Plus it also gives you a relative efficiency number for comparing aircraft,
>> if anyone cares to do that. In static air my normal cruise speed of 85 mph
>> and 3.75 gph gives me about 22.5 mpg. Your MkIII at 85 mph and 5 GPH yields
>> about 17 MPG in static air.
>>
>> --------
>> Thom Riddle
>>
>>
>> Thom R/Gang:
>>
>> I am sure your system of mpg works for you, but not for me. I never heard
>> the term mpg in military or civilian flight training I have attended. It
>> has been a long time since I have been to school, so maybe current aviation
>> is not using GPH, but MPG now.
>>
>> Let me know when you find some static air. ;-)
>>
>> Most of us are flying with GPS now days. Mine is an old Garmin 196, but it
>> does give me constantly updated info like "time to my next waypoint", etc.
>> Much better system than the old E6B. I don't need to know wind speed or
>> direction, at my altitude, and where I am located. Knowing my accurate fuel
>> burn, I know immediately how much fuel and time it will take me to get to my
>> next.
>>
>> MPG is for automobiles. GPH is for aircraft.
>>
>> john h
>> mkIII
>> Titus, Alabama
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
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: iso-8859-1?Q?Re:_Kolb-List:_Adding_additional_fuel_tanks_=3F=22_Jump?= |
=?iso-8859-1?Q?_Seat_=3F=22_FS-2?
Dear Kolbers,
To enable me to have longers XC?Ts with out a fuel stop , I am
planning to add two - Six gallon tanks to the rear of the FS-2 and move
the existing two - five gallon tanks tanks to the jump seat. This will
give me a total fuel capacity of 22 gallons. I have never carried a rear
passenger and I weigh in at 195 pounds and have a Rotax -503. I surely
plan to do Weights and Balance for the additional 24 pounds of fuel
weight in the rear and 72 pounds fuel weight on the jump seat.
I wanted to check and run it through the ?oKolb list?=9D whom I
consider the list comprising of the ?oOracles?=9D to know if any
of you have flown a passenger in the jump seat in a FS-2 and what are
the changes that I should anticipate in handling of the airplane by
adding the additional weight.
Thanks much for your inputs in advance!
Mahesh
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
last i remember... fuel was measured at 6 lb/gal... if you go from 10
gal to 12 in the back. difference of 2,, x 6 lb/gal should be 12 lb
additional in the rear,,, with a bit more for the weight difference in
the 5 to 6 gal tanks.
10 gal x 6 lb/gal = 60 lb with 12 lb for tanks and brackets and
support sounds right.
boyd young
mkiii utah
do not archive.
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: Adding additional fuel tanks =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=93?= Jump |
Seat =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=93?= FS-2
Hello Richard,
Thanks for your input and the picture posted.
I will surely take your suggestion and calculate the W and B and move the two 6
gallon tank accordingly.
Will appreciate if you can send me additional pictures info, if you have them.
What is your present configuration of the tanks? Did you find the FS-2 flight
characteristics change after adding the additional fuel tanks?? I do anticipate
a longer roll during take off.
Thanks,
Mahesh
FS-2, Ashland, OR
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=322070#322070
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: Firestar for sale |
I didn't list the details because I was pretty bummed out about selling it and
I still am but here's the specs
Rotax 377 (35hp), engine was decarbed at 150hr, starts on the first pull.
Fabric is in outstanding shape except a small patched area on the underside of
the right aileron.
Tach,EGT,CHT, Altimeter, Vertical speed indicator, Clock, Compass
Garmin GPSIII
Strobe
Brakes
TTAE 415
Tail boom damaged on trailer but repaired to new.
I'm asking $5500 OBO
Thanks,
Chris
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=322076#322076
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: | =?iso-8859-1?Q?Re=3A_Kolb-List=3A_Re=3A_Adding_additional_fuel_t?= |
=?iso-8859-1?Q?anks_=93_Jump_Seat_=93_FS-2?
Mahesh,
Unlike Richard Pike, I have two six gal tanks in the conventional location behind
the jump seat as my main tanks, and use two auxiliary six gal. tanks as needed
depending on the length of the trip, on the jump seat location. I transfer
fuel in flight from the auxiliary tanks to the main tanks with a second pulse
pump by simply opening a valve. I'd really hate to permanently give up the
space behind the pilot's seat for carrying "other freight" by putting my main
tanks there.
If your plane flies like mine does, you will notice only a very slight difference
with the extra tanks. Slightly longer take-off roll, slightly less climb
performance, slightly higher fuel burn, slightly greater turbulence stability,
slightly greater risk of bending the landing gear on a hard landing ,,,,,,,,,,,,
and a significantly greater urgency to empty the bladder. ;-)
Gene
On Dec 2, 2010, at 12:09 PM, miyer2u wrote:
>
> Hello Richard,
> Thanks for your input and the picture posted.
> I will surely take your suggestion and calculate the W and B and move the two
6 gallon tank accordingly.
>
> Will appreciate if you can send me additional pictures info, if you have them.
What is your present configuration of the tanks? Did you find the FS-2 flight
characteristics change after adding the additional fuel tanks?? I do anticipate
a longer roll during take off.
>
> Thanks,
> Mahesh
> FS-2, Ashland, OR
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=322070#322070
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: Kolb Aircraft Insurance |
Here's another insurance carrier to check out if one is comparing prices and coverage.
They saved me considerable money, as a new Kolb owner.
Dave
Joseph R. Cacho
Aviation Insurance Resources-FLA
Ph: 407-770-0240
Fax: 407-770-0241
www.Air-Pros.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=322093#322093
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: Kolb Aircraft Insurance |
There is another insurance (liability) that you can get from a ultralight
group. Someone on the list sent me a link a few years ago when I was looking
to keep my plane at a airport that required liability insurance. It was way
less than the big insurance cariers. It seemed like it was around $400/yr
for a 1/2 million liability. Check the archives for the post.
Richard Neilsen
Redrive VW Powered MKIIIC
On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 4:11 PM, Watkinsdw <david.watkins0@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Here's another insurance carrier to check out if one is comparing prices
> and coverage. They saved me considerable money, as a new Kolb owner.
> Dave
>
> Joseph R. Cacho
> Aviation Insurance Resources-FLA
> Ph: 407-770-0240
> Fax: 407-770-0241
> www.Air-Pros.com <http://www.air-pros.com/>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=322093#322093
>
>
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 Aircraft Insurance |
At 04:48 PM 12/2/2010, Richard Neilsen wrote:
>There is another insurance (liability) that you can get from a ultralight
>group. Someone on the list sent me a link a few years ago when I was
>looking to keep my plane at a airport that required liability insurance.
>It was way less than the big insurance cariers. It seemed like it was
>around $400/yr for a 1/2 million liability. Check the archives for the post.
usua.org or aerosports.org... ~400 for $1M coverage.
-Dana
--
Income tax: capital punishment.
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: | Dual Stick set up for sale |
Anyone out there interested in a used dual stick set up for the Mk III? I'm
tired of dragging my leg over while I catch my big feet on things around the
panel. Very good condition. New $475, yours 300 OBO.
Rick Girard
--
Zulu Delta
Kolb Mk IIIC
582 Gray head
4.00 C gearbox
3 blade WD
Thanks, Homer GBYM
It is not bigotry to be certain we are right; but it is bigotry to be unable
to imagine how we might possibly have gone wrong.
- G.K. Chesterton
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! --
|