 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
flykolb(at)pa.net
Guest
|
 Posted: Wed Mar 15, 2006 4:19 pm Post subject: Heavy Xtra :-( |
 |
|
Kolb weightwatchers,
It is my recollection that the TOK Mark-III demonstrator weighed 530 lbs.,
equipped with 912, BRS, Matco hyd brakes, alum gear legs, battery, EIS and
other instruments, 3-blade warp, intercom, dual controls.
Dennis
--
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
dhkey(at)msn.com
Guest
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Hauck
Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 4639
Location: Titus, Alabama (hauck's holler)
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 15, 2006 6:37 pm Post subject: Heavy Xtra :-( |
|
|
| My Xtra/Jab = 534.6 lb.
|
| Mike
Mike:
The MKIII Xtra extra weight is the 912ULS. That's where the other 50
lbs comes from. 
Dennis Souder weighed my MKIII during one of my op stops at Homer
Kolb's. In 1994, Dennis said it weighed, correct me if I am wrong,
Dennis, 630 lbs. Now that was nearly 12 years ago and it was being
pushed along with a little 912UL. I haven't weighed it in a long
time, but I know I have added heavier wheels, brakes, axles, tires,
heavier gut (mine), since Dennis did the weigh-in at Homer's while I
slept and unbeknownst to me at the time.
As the builder of my MKIII I placarded the max gross weight at 1,200
lbs. This was done primarily to cover me if I totaled the airplane
and the insurance company discovered it was over 1,000 lbs gross
weight as recommended by the Old Kolb Company. As the builder I added
enough "stuff" here and there to insure the MKIII was more than
capable of handling the 1,200 lb gross weight I designated for my
airplane. It had been thoroughly flight tested over the years and has
proven to be a great little airplane. Normal takeoff weight on
serious cross country flights with 150 lbs of fuel, me and my gear, is
approximately 1,200 lbs. It flies well at that weight, and as I fly,
it loses weight and I gain it.
Take care,
john h
PS: My old MKIII SN: M3-011 has a lot of dope and paint on it. It
was built to fly and show at the time I built it. A lot of paint is a
lot of weight.
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
_________________
John Hauck
MKIII/912ULS
hauck's holler
Titus, Alabama |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JetPilot
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1246
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 16, 2006 8:35 am Post subject: Re: Heavy Xtra :-( |
|
|
Did the make the Horizontal Stab smaller on recent MK-III Xtras ? If so I want the bigger stab, I wish they had told me about that  !!!!
As far as the weight, I would rather have the heavier model. The problem with trying to take to much weight off a structure is that it starts to get weak, fatigue, and is not as durable.
30 pounds of airframe weight is 3% at my flying weight, that is not enough to make any noticable difference in performance... And I could care less about the ultralight trainer weight regulations. Most of us are flying them as experimental.
Michael A. Bigelow
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
_________________
"NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could have !!!
Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WillUribe(at)aol.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 16, 2006 9:03 am Post subject: Heavy Xtra :-( |
|
|
Mike,
Not smaller, the tail is the same as the MK-III classic. If you want it
bigger then you can build it bigger, after all your the builder. But I suspect
the bigger Horizontal Stabilizer was add to keep the airplane balanced after
all that weight was added up front. Once the fuselage's extra weight was
removed there was no need for the bigger tail. I also suspect the extra welding
and materials on the early model Xtra was more added cost then what they
wanted to add to the price of the kit.
Regards,
Guillermo Uribe
FireStar II N4GU
El Paso, TX
--
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WillUribe(at)aol.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 16, 2006 9:52 am Post subject: Heavy Xtra :-( |
|
|
Michael,
There is no problem with structure weakening or fatigue. Had you seen the
early Xtra and the new model you would have seen the difference. Most of what
was removed, as I recall, was the chrome-molly steel that made up the cosmetic
rounded edges on the fuselage. As I posted before this was originally done
for aerodynamic reasons, it had nothing to do with structural.
Now, I don't own a MK-III Classic or a MK-III Xtra but I do my homework
before I purchase. After I decided on the Kolb product I couldn't make up my mind
about which model to get. I don't remember how many times I called Dennis
asking him about the Kolb models. It was until Dennis mentioned that he
preferred flying the FireStar and as we say the rest is history.
Hope this helps,
Guillermo Uribe
FireStar II N4GU
El Paso, TX
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "JetPilot" <orcabonita(at)hotmail.com>
<snip>
As far as the weight, I would rather have the heavier model. The problem
with trying to take to much weight off a structure is that it starts to get
weak, fatigue, and is not as durable.
30 pounds of airframe weight is 3% at my flying weight, that is not enough
to make any noticable difference in performance... And I could care less
about the ultralight trainer weight regulations. Most of us are flying them as
experimental.
Michael A. Bigelow
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
