Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - Mark III Classic vs. Mark III Xtra

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

Mark III Classic vs. Mark III Xtra

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Kolb-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

cwolf41(at)comcast.net
Guest

Posted: Sun Oct 15, 2006 1:10 pm Post subject: Mark III Classic vs. Mark III Xtra

If I get a Kolb, which one should I buy?  The Mark III Classic, or the Mark

III Xtra?  I need two seats, so it seems that it's one or the other.



It looks like the main difference between the two planes is the width of

the nose.  I understand that the wider nose on the Xtra permits better

placement of the rudder pedals, and gives more leg room.  It looks bigger

on the Xtra.  I'm about 6'3" tall, and weigh about 250.  My flying buddy is

5'8", and weighs 170.  Are the rudder pedals (or seats) adjustable on the

Xtra?  I saw cockpit pictures of both Classic and Xtra, and it looked like

the Xtra had a LOT more leg room.



Would a guy my size be comfortable in a Classic, or should I definitely go

for the Xtra?



Thanks!



Chris Wolf

cwolf41(at)comcast.net

Cat36Fly(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Sun Oct 15, 2006 3:17 pm Post subject: Mark III Classic vs. Mark III Xtra

I can tell you the Extra has adjustable rudder pedals. I am 5'4" and have  them set at the middle position. It is not easy to  adjust them between  flights (or pilots) but can be done. There is probably more room in the extra  cockpit than a C-150. I now have about 50 hrs on my extra and thoroughly  enjoy it (in comfort).

  

 Larry Tasker

 MKlllx -583-3 blade warp

 N615RT 

  [quote][b]

flyingfox(at)copper.net
Guest

Posted: Sun Oct 15, 2006 3:47 pm Post subject: Mark III Classic vs. Mark III Xtra

Here is my two bits:



I am 6'3" and weigh 250 pounds. I have sat in both the Classic and Mark

IIIX.



The Classic is 'cozy'. Once in you have plenty of head room but your feet

are definitely tight and I mean that to the point where I didn't feel as if

I had the space for good free controllability of the rudder pedals.



The Mark IIIX is very roomy and once you are in it you have plenty of room.

The problem is getting in and out of the thing. I found that trying to

squeeze through the door openings was a little difficult. Difficult to the

point that I felt like I was not entirely happy with the whole process and

started looking at other airplanes. Kolb brought a Mark IIIX to OSH this

year and I will be honest, I was disappointed when I sat in it because I

really had my hopes up and it was just friggin hard to get through that

door.



The jury is not out. I have a build start date of 2008 because of some other

"wife-generated-home-improvement-mandates" that will eliminate all my shop

space with furniture storage (why we even need furniture I have no idea, but

I have learned not to go there.) so I will continue to trek off to Oshkosh

and sit sit sit in everything until I get it really figured out.



What I wish is that Kolb made a tandem with more room up front. I couldn't

even get into the front seat of the Kolbra and I want doors on both sides of

the airplane that I can remove.



The RANs S-18 came pretty close to perfect but I hate the tail, the wings

don't fold and the airplane is no longer supported by the company as far as

I know.



There is a real need in the world for an airplane made for the genetically

challenged like us. I think they do have one out there with a big enough

cockpit... ...its called a 757 and they are kind of pricey and I am certain

that the wing folding is not an option.



I am seriously considering an AirCam, but that means the price of two Mark

IIIX in one machine. If not for the ingress, egress issue the IIIX would be

about perfect.



Todd

DO NOT ARCHIVE



-- 

Todd Fredricks, DO

Flying Fox Services



http://web.mac.com/flyingfoxservices

flyingfoxservices(at)mac.com

Visit my Blog at www.flyingfoxhangar.blogspot.com

cwolf41(at)comcast.net
Guest

Posted: Sun Oct 15, 2006 4:18 pm Post subject: Mark III Classic vs. Mark III Xtra

On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 19:16:33 EDT, Larry Tasker wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		  I can tell you the Extra has adjustable rudder pedals. I am 5'4" and have  

them set at the middle position. It is not easy to  adjust them between  flights 

(or pilots) but can be done. There is probably more room in the extra  

cockpit than a C-150. I now have about 50 hrs on my extra and thoroughly  enjoy it 

(in comfort).

 

Larry Tasker

MKlllx -583-3 blade warp

N615RT 


	


Good information.  Thanks!



Chris Wolf

cwolf41(at)comcast.net

cwolf41(at)comcast.net
Guest

Posted: Sun Oct 15, 2006 5:39 pm Post subject: Mark III Classic vs. Mark III Xtra

On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 19:16:33 EDT, Larry Tasker wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		  I can tell you the Extra has adjustable rudder pedals. I am 5'4" and have  

them set at the middle position. It is not easy to  adjust them between  flights 

(or pilots) but can be done. There is probably more room in the extra  

cockpit than a C-150. I now have about 50 hrs on my extra and thoroughly  enjoy it 

(in comfort).

 

Larry Tasker

MKlllx -583-3 blade warp

N615RT 


	


Glad to hear the rudder pedals are adjustable.  Thanks for the info!



Chris Wolf

cwolf41(at)comcast.net

Do Not Archive

John Hauck

Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 4639
Location: Titus, Alabama (hauck's holler)

Posted: Sun Oct 15, 2006 5:56 pm Post subject: Mark III Classic vs. Mark III Xtra

| I am seriously considering an AirCam, but that means the price of 

two Mark

| IIIX in one machine. If not for the ingress, egress issue the IIIX 

would be

| about perfect.

|

| Todd



Todd:



Ever think about modifying the entrance system to fit your 

requirement?



john h

mkIII

_________________
John Hauck
MKIII/912ULS
hauck's holler
Titus, Alabama

biglar

Joined: 14 Jan 2006
Posts: 457

Posted: Sun Oct 15, 2006 6:32 pm Post subject: Mark III Classic vs. Mark III Xtra

As long as you are building a plane, build gull wing doors for it.  It's 

somewhat of a job, but can be done.  See the page in my website by clicking 

on the link in my signature, below.  Access is Very easy.



Maybe you'd like to buy an almost completed Mk III Classic - cheap - with 

gull wing doors already built, but with no engine ??????     

Lar.                 Do not Archive.



Larry Bourne

Palm Springs, CA

Building Kolb Mk III

Vamoose

www.gogittum.com

---

_________________
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Building Kolb Mk IIIC
"Vamoose"

flyingfox(at)copper.net
Guest

Posted: Sun Oct 15, 2006 6:44 pm Post subject: Mark III Classic vs. Mark III Xtra

John;



As a aerodynamic structural engineer, I make a pretty good ER doctor, if you

know what I mean. 



Todd

On 10/15/06 9:56 PM, "John Hauck" <jhauck(at)elmore.rr.com> wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   

 

 

 

 

 | I am seriously considering an AirCam, but that means the price of

 two Mark

 | IIIX in one machine. If not for the ingress, egress issue the IIIX

 would be

 | about perfect.

 |

 | Todd

 

 Todd:

 

 Ever think about modifying the entrance system to fit your

 requirement?

 

 john h

 mkIII

  

 

 

 

 

 


	


-- 

Todd Fredricks, DO

Flying Fox Services



http://web.mac.com/flyingfoxservices

flyingfoxservices(at)mac.com

Visit my Blog at www.flyingfoxhangar.blogspot.com

cwolf41(at)comcast.net
Guest

Posted: Mon Oct 16, 2006 10:20 am Post subject: Mark III Classic vs. Mark III Xtra

On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 19:47:22 -0400, Todd Fredricks wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		  



Here is my two bits:



I am 6'3" and weigh 250 pounds.


	


My long-lost twin brother!



 	  Quote: 	
		  I have sat in both the Classic and Mark IIIX.


	


 	  Quote: 	
		  The Classic is 'cozy'. Once in you have plenty of head room but your feet

are definitely tight and I mean that to the point where I didn't feel as if

I had the space for good free controllability of the rudder pedals.



The Mark IIIX is very roomy and once you are in it you have plenty of room.

The problem is getting in and out of the thing. I found that trying to

squeeze through the door openings was a little difficult. Difficult to the

point that I felt like I was not entirely happy with the whole process and

started looking at other airplanes. Kolb brought a Mark IIIX to OSH this

year and I will be honest, I was disappointed when I sat in it because I

really had my hopes up and it was just friggin hard to get through that

door.


	


I guess I need to go sit in both aircraft, and see for myself.  But I hear

what you're saying, and it sounds like the Xtra would be a good idea for a

guy like me.  Definitely must check this out.



 	  Quote: 	
		  The jury is not out. I have a build start date of 2008 because of some other

"wife-generated-home-improvement-mandates" that will eliminate all my shop

space with furniture storage (why we even need furniture I have no idea, but

I have learned not to go there.) so I will continue to trek off to Oshkosh

and sit sit sit in everything until I get it really figured out.


	


What do you need furniture for, if you have an airplane?  



However the solution to your problem is quite simple; build another shop!



 	  Quote: 	
		  What I wish is that Kolb made a tandem with more room up front. I couldn't

even get into the front seat of the Kolbra and I want doors on both sides of

the airplane that I can remove.


	


Aren't the Kolb doors removable now?



 	  Quote: 	
		  The RANs S-18 came pretty close to perfect but I hate the tail, the wings

don't fold and the airplane is no longer supported by the company as far as

I know.



There is a real need in the world for an airplane made for the genetically

challenged like us.


	


Yeah, I think most planes are designed by guys who are 5'8" and weigh 170

pounds.



 	  Quote: 	
		  I think they do have one out there with a big enough

cockpit... ...its called a 757 and they are kind of pricey and I am certain

that the wing folding is not an option.


	


Paul Allan, Microsoft multimillionaire and owner of the Portland

Trailblazers, has a 757 that he keeps at Boeing Field, near Seattle.  He

uses it to haul his friends and basketball team around.  He also has a very

large hangar to keep it in, so folding wings is probably not a priority for

him.



 	  Quote: 	
		  I am seriously considering an AirCam, but that means the price of two Mark

IIIX in one machine. If not for the ingress, egress issue the IIIX would be

about perfect.


	


That is exactly the sort of information I was looking for.  And the fact

that you are my size, makes the information doubly useful.  Thanks very

much!



Chris Wolf

cwolf41(at)comcast.net

flyingfox(at)copper.net
Guest

Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 3:28 am Post subject: Mark III Classic vs. Mark III Xtra

John H sent me a suggestion that I modify the airframe to suit my

purposes. I replied that I am not an aircraft structural engineer...

..however, it is widely known that John H did exactly that to his

own Classic, which was then just the Mark III. Frankly, I have always

thought that John's version looks better than the stock one.



The point to all that is this, for us genetic deviants, the Mark IIIX

is really the only way to go, unless you chop the front end off the

Classic ala Adriel Hasey. 



I would recommend sling seats, as much for available backside width

over the molded products as weight savings. I sat in the slings in

London and the molded job at OSH. Slings are much better. I would

also consider talking to the London KY folks about the door

arrangement, the structural side. I have no idea how 'structural'

that door frame is, but if it could be modified to increase the

height of the upper cross member, it would be a great way to allow

big guys to get in.



The lower door sill is probably where it needs to be. Frankly it

serves to protect the throttle and other fragile bits and works well

ergonomically. 



If the Mark IIIX is the airplane that I end up with, the panel layout

will change but even so, there is plenty of leg and foot room for my

size 13R gunboats. The center stick is probably also the best bet

over the dual control sticks. I had good control throw on the center

arrangement and it is a lot like Zenith's set up, which I find very

comfortable to use. Dual control sticks are not so good, because I

like to feel the stops when I move the stick... ...not my thigh.



Uncle Craig 'Milow' has done some really beautiful work with the

panel arrangement and there is plenty of space in the machine for

avionics and other instruments. The purists here will start choking

on that, especially when I tell them that I will have two comms and a

WAAS/LNAV IFR GPS in whatever I build, but that is only because I am

a passionate IFR pilot who likes to shoot approaches for fun, I am

gadget obscessed and I live in a hollar in Southeast Ohio where one

draw looks like the next. One airstrip sits on a ridge, the

other...the long one...down in a valley. On hazy VFR Ohio days it is

nice to know exactly where you are always.



The only other consideration from my perspective is storeability. I

ditched my 172 because I realized that I was spending the equivalent

of a Garmin 495 every year on hangars and my annual was enough to buy

a new navcom every two years and I was 45 minutes away and flew my

airplane no more than 20 hours a year. So off it went. I have a large

shop with 18 foot high garage doors but they are only 12 feet wide.

Whatever it is it needs to fold so I can use my shop for a hangar.



I cannot speak for Glastars, but I doubt that anyone has purposely

gone out and destroyed them in flight. Homer Kolb did that with his

design. An actual in-flight test to failure, so we know the absolute

structural limits of the design. That says it for me.



The AirCam wings can come off and be put back on in about 30 minutes.

Not nearly as convenient as the Kolb, but for low altitude with no

forced landing area flying, two engines will always trump one.



The bottom line is that you need to sit in some Kolbs, talk with the

London folks, they are all as nice as can be, and frankly consider

where you live. If you live in the flatlands, you don't need but one

engine because you always have lots of options. If you live in the

mountains or near the water, two engines becomes a consideration,

especially if you plan on doing a lot of low altitude flying.



It is a tough thing in the end because these machines tend to become

an extension of the pilot. You cannot look at John Williams Kolbra,

or Hauck's Mark III or Jeremy Lezin's Chiquita AirCam or Uncle

Craig's Xtra and not say, that is a unique machine and a reflection

of its owner. There is nothing 172-generic about experimentals.



So whatever you build/buy will become your baby and in the forums

everyone will say, Oh, Miss P'Fer, that's Hauck's airplane. It is

pretty cool actually. And much like your kids, it becomes a

crapshoot. You put your heart into the thing and in the end, it is

never perfect, but you love it and it is yours and it works for you.



Todd



DO NOT ARCHIVE

cwolf41(at)comcast.net
Guest

Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 12:13 pm Post subject: Mark III Classic vs. Mark III Xtra

On Tue, 17 Oct 2006 11:27:43 -0000, Todd wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		  



John H sent me a suggestion that I modify the airframe to suit my

purposes. I replied that I am not an aircraft structural engineer...

...however, it is widely known that John H did exactly that to his

own Classic, which was then just the Mark III. Frankly, I have always

thought that John's version looks better than the stock one.



The point to all that is this, for us genetic deviants, the Mark IIIX

is really the only way to go, unless you chop the front end off the

Classic ala Adriel Hasey. 



I would recommend sling seats, as much for available backside width

over the molded products as weight savings. I sat in the slings in

London and the molded job at OSH. Slings are much better. I would

also consider talking to the London KY folks about the door

arrangement, the structural side. I have no idea how 'structural'

that door frame is, but if it could be modified to increase the

height of the upper cross member, it would be a great way to allow

big guys to get in.



The lower door sill is probably where it needs to be. Frankly it

serves to protect the throttle and other fragile bits and works well

ergonomically. 



If the Mark IIIX is the airplane that I end up with, the panel layout

will change but even so, there is plenty of leg and foot room for my

size 13R gunboats. The center stick is probably also the best bet

over the dual control sticks. I had good control throw on the center

arrangement and it is a lot like Zenith's set up, which I find very

comfortable to use. Dual control sticks are not so good, because I

like to feel the stops when I move the stick... ...not my thigh.



Uncle Craig 'Milow' has done some really beautiful work with the

panel arrangement and there is plenty of space in the machine for

avionics and other instruments. The purists here will start choking

on that, especially when I tell them that I will have two comms and a

WAAS/LNAV IFR GPS in whatever I build, but that is only because I am

a passionate IFR pilot who likes to shoot approaches for fun, I am

gadget obscessed and I live in a hollar in Southeast Ohio where one

draw looks like the next. One airstrip sits on a ridge, the

other...the long one...down in a valley. On hazy VFR Ohio days it is

nice to know exactly where you are always.



The only other consideration from my perspective is storeability. I

ditched my 172 because I realized that I was spending the equivalent

of a Garmin 495 every year on hangars and my annual was enough to buy

a new navcom every two years and I was 45 minutes away and flew my

airplane no more than 20 hours a year. So off it went. I have a large

shop with 18 foot high garage doors but they are only 12 feet wide.

Whatever it is it needs to fold so I can use my shop for a hangar.



I cannot speak for Glastars, but I doubt that anyone has purposely

gone out and destroyed them in flight. Homer Kolb did that with his

design. An actual in-flight test to failure, so we know the absolute

structural limits of the design. That says it for me.



The AirCam wings can come off and be put back on in about 30 minutes.

Not nearly as convenient as the Kolb, but for low altitude with no

forced landing area flying, two engines will always trump one.



The bottom line is that you need to sit in some Kolbs, talk with the

London folks, they are all as nice as can be, and frankly consider

where you live. If you live in the flatlands, you don't need but one

engine because you always have lots of options. If you live in the

mountains or near the water, two engines becomes a consideration,

especially if you plan on doing a lot of low altitude flying.


	


That's a great deal of very useful information, Todd.  Thanks!



 	  Quote: 	
		  It is a tough thing in the end because these machines tend to become

an extension of the pilot. You cannot look at John Williams Kolbra,

or Hauck's Mark III or Jeremy Lezin's Chiquita AirCam or Uncle

Craig's Xtra and not say, that is a unique machine and a reflection

of its owner. There is nothing 172-generic about experimentals.



So whatever you build/buy will become your baby and in the forums

everyone will say, Oh, Miss P'Fer, that's Hauck's airplane. It is

pretty cool actually. And much like your kids, it becomes a

crapshoot. You put your heart into the thing and in the end, it is

never perfect, but you love it and it is yours and it works for you.



Todd



DO NOT ARCHIVE


	


An inspiring concluding thought.  It ought to be archived!



Chris Wolf

cwolf41(at)comcast.net

flyingfox(at)copper.net
Guest

Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 1:15 pm Post subject: Mark III Classic vs. Mark III Xtra

This might be the way to go, Lar since I was planning on putting a wire

cutter up the windshield anyway. I might see if structurally I can alter the

Mark IIIX canopy to allow for those doors.



Todd



DO NOT ARCHIVE



On 10/15/06 10:32 PM, "Larry Bourne" <biglar(at)gogittum.com> wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   

 

 

 As long as you are building a plane, build gull wing doors for it.  It's

 somewhat of a job, but can be done.  See the page in my website by clicking

 on the link in my signature, below.  Access is Very easy.

 

 Maybe you'd like to buy an almost completed Mk III Classic - cheap - with

 gull wing doors already built, but with no engine ??????    

 Lar.                 Do not Archive.

 

 Larry Bourne

 Palm Springs, CA

a58r(at)verizon.net
Guest

Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 2:27 pm Post subject: Mark III Classic vs. Mark III Xtra

Todd,Now I see why you want two fans...to drive that wire cutter right through those pesky EHT lines, even the paired ones?



regards,

Bob N.    FireFly 070 Old Kolb

http://www.angelfire.com/rpg/ronoy/



do not archive



 



 [quote][b]

flyingfox(at)copper.net
Guest

Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 2:42 pm Post subject: Mark III Classic vs. Mark III Xtra

Well, the issue is wire-strikes. I have already known three helicopter crews that have hit wires and never saw the towers or the wires. The wire cutters saved their lives. So as a low altitude flier I intend to put them on my airplane. I know it sounds crazy but fly around south east Ohio a while and you realize that even with the best recon, you can miss the small ones pretty easily. They are not that big and I can probably salvage a set off an old OH-58.

 

 Todd

 

 

 On 10/17/06 6:18 PM, "Bob Noyer" <a58r(at)verizon.net> wrote:

 

  	  Quote: 	
		  Todd,

 Now I see why you want two fans...to drive that wire cutter right through those pesky EHT lines, even the paired ones?

 

 regards,

 Bob N.    FireFly 070 Old Kolb

 http://www.angelfire.com/rpg/ronoy/

 

 do not archive

 

 

  

 

 

 

 mail Forum -

 t">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List

 ; - NEW MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -

 matronics.com

 ; - NEW MATRONICS LIST WIKI -

 onics.com

 ;- List Contribution Web Site -

 ;                 -Matt Dralle, List Admin.

 ://www.matronics.com/contribution

 

 

 	


 

 -- 

 Todd Fredricks, DO

 Flying Fox Services

 

 http://web.mac.com/flyingfoxservices

 flyingfoxservices(at)mac.com

 Visit my Blog at www.flyingfoxhangar.blogspot.com

 

 [img]cid:3243955293_12976932[/img]

image.gif

Description:

Filesize:

803 Bytes

Viewed:

6188 Time(s)

John Hauck

Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 4639
Location: Titus, Alabama (hauck's holler)

Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 3:04 pm Post subject: Mark III Classic vs. Mark III Xtra

| This might be the way to go, Lar since I was planning on putting a 

wire

| cutter up the windshield anyway. I might see if structurally I can 

alter the

| Mark IIIX canopy to allow for those doors.

|

| Todd

Todd:



Like I said the other day, you can modify the entrance system to fit 

you and still maintain structural integrity of the aircraft.



My mkIII was designed for one pilot and one mission.  This aircraft 

fits me, and if it fits anyone else, it is lucky.



Contact Donnie Sizemore reference modifications to existing aircraft 

kits, or to modify a fuselage before it is complete to prevent undoing 

a lot of work that has already been done.  Bryan Melborn will also 

work with you.



Take care,



john h

mkIII



PS:  Wire cutter?  Like the Grey Baron said, "Gonna need two engines 

to drive the wire cutter."

_________________
John Hauck
MKIII/912ULS
hauck's holler
Titus, Alabama

planecrazzzy
Guest

Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 3:45 pm Post subject: Re: Mark III Classic vs. Mark III Xtra

Big Lar....

               Say it AIN'T so.....



.

.

Gotta Fly...

Mike & "Jaz" in MN

.

.

.

.





 	  biglar wrote: 	
		  



Maybe you'd like to buy an almost completed Mk III Classic - cheap - with 

gull wing doors already built, but with no engine ??????     

Lar.                 

---

biglar

Joined: 14 Jan 2006
Posts: 457

Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 3:04 pm Post subject: Mark III Classic vs. Mark III Xtra

Yup.  Maybe even the engine, too, for enuf money, but the redrive that 

caused my problems is long gone in the trash.   More later...........just 

got home from interviews.                Do not Archive.



Larry Bourne

Palm Springs, CA

Building Kolb Mk III

Vamoose

www.gogittum.com



---

_________________
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Building Kolb Mk IIIC
"Vamoose"

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Kolb-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

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