Matronics Email Lists :: View topic

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

ELSA

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Kolb-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

cedavis

Joined: 05 Jun 2006
Posts: 23
Location: Malvern, PA

Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 12:22 pm Post subject: ELSA

I now own an airplane!  This morning I received my airworthiness certificate for my Firefly, N7057K, serial # "CD-1".

  

 The inspector certainly looked over the paperwork, but seemed more interested in helping me get it filled out to a acceptable level, not on gigging me for mistakes.  He did spend about 30 minutes inspecting the airplane, and made a few suggestions.  While he was not overly picky, I got the definite impression that had he found anything he considered dangerous, he would have failed me unless it could be corrected.    As usual when dealing with government, the person you are dealing with is more important then the details of the regulations. 

  

 I am now confined to 10 Nm's around Smoketown, PA for 5 hours.  

  

 Also, regrading a point raised on a few earlier posts:  My plane's builder is officially listed as "Kolb".  The instructions which came with the original registration stated that (as you would expect) the builder would normally be the applicant.  However, as the FAA understood you may not know the original builder of a plane being converted to E-LSA, you are allowed to enter the kit manufacturer.  

  

 Chuck Davis

 Malvern, PA

 Firelfy N7057K

  [quote][b]

jdmol2002

Joined: 07 Sep 2007
Posts: 3

Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 5:32 pm Post subject: Re: ELSA

Why on earth would you register a firefly, keep it as an ultralight. Why pay more money to fly your plane. That makes no sence.

terry(at)juliaswartz.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 6:33 pm Post subject: ELSA

Who was your inspector? Do you have contact information?



 On 9/7/07, Charles Davis <ceddavis(at)gmail.com (ceddavis(at)gmail.com)> wrote:  	  Quote: 	
		   I now own an airplane!  This morning I received my airworthiness certificate for my Firefly, N7057K, serial # "CD-1".

  

 The inspector certainly looked over the paperwork, but seemed more interested in helping me get it filled out to a acceptable level, not on gigging me for mistakes.  He did spend about 30 minutes inspecting the airplane, and made a few suggestions.  While he was not overly picky, I got the definite impression that had he found anything he considered dangerous, he would have failed me unless it could be corrected.    As usual when dealing with government, the person you are dealing with is more important then the details of the regulations.  

  

 I am now confined to 10 Nm's around Smoketown, PA for 5 hours.  

  

 Also, regrading a point raised on a few earlier posts:  My plane's builder is officially listed as "Kolb".  The instructions which came with the original registration stated that (as you would expect) the builder would normally be the applicant.  However, as the FAA understood you may not know the original builder of a plane being converted to E-LSA, you are allowed to enter the kit manufacturer.   

  

 Chuck Davis

 Malvern, PA

 Firelfy N7057K

 	  Quote: 	
		  

	
	


-- 

Terry  [quote][b]

beauford173(at)verizon.ne
Guest

Posted: Sat Sep 08, 2007 7:04 am Post subject: ELSA

 	  Quote: 	
		   



 Why on earth would you register a firefly, keep it as an ultralight. Why 

 pay more money to fly your plane. That makes no sence.

One good reason, and the reason I  ELSA registered my FireFly, is that I am 
	


planning to have to relocate the Kolb and trailer to another airport when 

the one I am currently using closes in about 15 months.  Having an N-number 

on the machine steps neatly around the "no-ultralights-allowed" 

unpleasantness which is resident  at the two fields to which I would be most 

likely to move, as well as a number of others in the area which I might like 

to visit.



The second reason is the "fat" and illegal issue already mentioned... The 

Fly has 3 criss-cross coats of silver under the polytone (Florida sun), the 

.035 "heavy" cage, brakes, 6-inch wheels, strobe, metal gap seal, etc... and 

thus is about 16 lbs over the limit... I like it that way and would build it 

that way again, but I see no percentage in twisting the government's tail... 

over the long haul I don't have sufficient faith in the "don't worry, they 

can't possibly enforce the rules" crowd to believe that there will never be 

enforcement spasms of some sort at various FSDO's at some point in the 

future...Having been a federal bureaucrat for a decade in a former life, I 

have a keen appreciation for that peculiar mind-set and the fascinating 

dynamics it can induce among credentialed zealots in the field.  I'd just as 

soon not play.



Ramp checks aside, a significant aspect of this has to be the inherent 

tendency of the two-stroking Rotax brothers to stop talking to one another 

at inconvenient times and in awkward places...Have had two off-airport 

"experiences" so far....  If the FAA is going to pull my hard-earned 

tickets, it will be because I flew inverted under a bridge someplace 

laughing like hell, not because I abruptly arrived in some Wal-Mart parking 

lot seated in a fat, unregistered, illegal airplane in front of a silent 447 

Rotax.  In other words, if the toy is capable of getting me honorable 

mention on the 6 o'clock news, I'd just as soon have the paperwork straight.



..and for you worriers out there, there is always the life insurance 

angle...."let me get this straight...you say he was killed while 

intentionally breaking the law flying an illegal, overweight, unregistered 

airplane....?  ...er... we'll get back to you after we check the policy, 

ma'am....."

..just a thought...worth what ye paid fer it...



Beauford

FF 076 / N173BW

Brandon, FL

DO NOT ARCHIVE

cedavis

Joined: 05 Jun 2006
Posts: 23
Location: Malvern, PA

Posted: Sat Sep 08, 2007 4:22 pm Post subject: ELSA

That's a valid question.  The reasons are several, starting with the fact that while close, my Firefly is not (was not!) a legit 103 vehicle.  It was 30 lbs overweight, and I did not want to give up the larger wheels, brakes, VSI, etc.  Should there ever be an issue, I am now in the clear.  Also, given that the serial number is my own "CD-1" rather then the Kolb frame serial number,  it can be converted back to an ultralight by pulling off the data plate and N number.  No data plate, no airplane! 

  

 For me, with a desire to move up the certification ladder, having my own airplane is useful in that I can now log all the hours I'll fly anyway.  Except for the 3 hours night training, I'll do everything I need for my Private in my Firefly, and a lot cheaper!  That's the beauty of the way the regs were written.  We can each choose the options that suite us best. 

  

 The inspector was Eugene Breiner, 717 776  7608.  

  

 



Time: 06:32:38 PM PST US

Subject: Re: ELSA

From: "jdmol2002" <jdmol2002(at)yahoo.com (jdmol2002(at)yahoo.com) >

Why on earth would you register a firefly, keep it as an ultralight. Why pay more

money to fly your plane. That makes no sence.

Read this topic online here:



 http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=133332#133332

 

  [quote][b]

russ(at)rkiphoto.com
Guest

Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2007 5:02 am Post subject: ELSA

Private used to require 20 hrs of dual with a CFI and 3 hrs of Instrument time. No more?Couldn't do that in  a Firefly.

The more instruction you get, the safer a pilot you'll be. Don 't work too hard to avoid it.



On Sep 8, 2007, at 8:21 PM, Charles Davis wrote:

[quote]That's a valid question.  The reasons are several, starting with the fact that while close, my Firefly is not (was not!) a legit 103 vehicle.  It was 30 lbs overweight, and I did not want to give up the larger wheels, brakes, VSI, etc.  Should there ever be an issue, I am now in the clear.  Also, given that the serial number is my own "CD-1" rather then the Kolb frame serial number,  it can be converted back to an ultralight by pulling off the data plate and N number.  No data plate, no airplane! 

  

 For me, with a desire to move up the certification ladder, having my own airplane is useful in that I can now log all the hours I'll fly anyway.  Except for the 3 hours night training, I'll do everything I need for my Private in my Firefly, and a lot cheaper!  That's the beauty of the way the regs were written.  We can each choose the options that suite us best. 

  

 The inspector was Eugene Breiner, 717 776  7608.  

  

 



Time: 06:32:38 PM PST US

Subject: Re: ELSA

From: "jdmol2002" <jdmol2002(at)yahoo.com (jdmol2002(at)yahoo.com) >

Why on earth would you register a firefly, keep it as an ultralight. Why pay more

money to fly your plane. That makes no sence.

Read this topic online here:



 http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=133332#133332

 

  	  Quote: 	
		  

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

href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com



	
[b]

cedavis

Joined: 05 Jun 2006
Posts: 23
Location: Malvern, PA

Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:37 pm Post subject: ELSA

Russ - Actually, I have > 20 hours duel already, having taken my practical in an Evecktor Sportstar and tail wheel endorsement in a 7AC champ.  Have not nor intend to avoid training.  In fact I plan on continuing training to get my towered airspace endorsement, which I need to do for my private.   I could have  received both the SP and Tail wheel endorsement quicker had I wanted to avoid training.  My tail wheel training was in unusual conditions:  we had a period of strong cross winds rather then the normal "down the runway".   Trust me, I have no issues landing the champ in any conditions I'd even consider flying in.  I could have waited for better conditions and done it in 4 hours. 



Also, I may have missed it in the regs, but I'm fairly certain they dropped the instrument requirement a long time ago, although I'm sure some one on the list knows for sure.  In fact, I'll likely continue on and get some instrument training.  For that matter, a local airport (Van Sant, 9N1) offer acrobatic training, which I'd also love to take.  Not to do it in a FireFly, but to be a better pilot.  Not to mention, it would be a blast...it's in a Stearman.  They also offer training, including acrobatic, in sailplanes.   We'll never run out of new things to train on. 



Chuck 





Time: 06:02:46 AM PST US

From: Russ Kinne <russ(at)rkiphoto.com (russ(at)rkiphoto.com)>

Subject: Re: ELSA 



Private used to require 20 hrs of dual with a CFI and 3 hrs of

Instrument time. No more?

Couldn't do that in  a Firefly.

The more instruction you get, the safer a pilot you'll be. Don 't

work too hard to avoid it. 



On Sep 8, 2007, at 8:21 PM, Charles Davis wrote:



[quote] That's a valid question.  The reasons are several, starting with

 the fact that while close, my Firefly is not (was not!) a legit 103

 vehicle.  It was 30 lbs overweight, and I did not want to give up 

 the larger wheels, brakes, VSI, etc.  Should there ever be an

 issue, I am now in the clear.  Also, given that the serial number

 is my own "CD-1" rather then the Kolb frame serial number,  it can 

 be converted back to an ultralight by pulling off the data plate

 and N number.  No data plate, no airplane!



 For me, with a desire to move up the certification ladder, having

 my own airplane is useful in that I can now log all the hours I'll 

 fly anyway.  Except for the 3 hours night training, I'll do

 everything I need for my Private in my Firefly, and a lot cheaper!

 That's the beauty of the way the regs were written.  We can each 

 choose the options that suite us best.



 The inspector was Eugene Breiner, 717 776  7608.



  [quote][b]

jindoguy(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 5:19 pm Post subject: ELSA

Chuck, if you're leading up to a private pilot ticket, per FAR 61.109



 (a) For an airplane single-engine rating. Except as provided in paragraph (k) of this section, a person who applies for a private pilot certificate with an airplane category and single-engine class rating must log at least 40 hours of flight time that includes at least 20 hours of flight training from an authorized instructor and 10 hours of solo flight training in the areas of operation listed in §61.107(b)(1) of this part, and the training must include at least— 



 (3) 3 hours of flight training in a single-engine airplane on the control and maneuvering of an airplane solely by reference to instruments, including straight and level flight, constant airspeed climbs and descents, turns to a heading, recovery from unusual flight attitudes, radio communications, and the use of navigation systems/facilities and radar services appropriate to instrument flight 



Rick



On 9/10/07, Charles Davis <ceddavis(at)gmail.com (ceddavis(at)gmail.com)> wrote: 	  Quote: 	
		   Russ - Actually, I have > 20 hours duel already, having taken my practical in an Evecktor Sportstar and tail wheel endorsement in a 7AC champ.  Have not nor intend to avoid training.  In fact I plan on continuing training to get my towered airspace endorsement, which I need to do for my private.   I could have  received both the SP and Tail wheel endorsement quicker had I wanted to avoid training.  My tail wheel training was in unusual conditions:  we had a period of strong cross winds rather then the normal "down the runway".   Trust me, I have no issues landing the champ in any conditions I'd even consider flying in.  I could have waited for better conditions and done it in 4 hours. 



Also, I may have missed it in the regs, but I'm fairly certain they dropped the instrument requirement a long time ago, although I'm sure some one on the list knows for sure.  In fact, I'll likely continue on and get some instrument training.  For that matter, a local airport (Van Sant, 9N1) offer acrobatic training, which I'd also love to take.  Not to do it in a FireFly, but to be a better pilot.  Not to mention, it would be a blast...it's in a Stearman.  They also offer training, including acrobatic, in sailplanes.   We'll never run out of new things to train on. 



Chuck 





Time: 06:02:46 AM PST US

From: Russ Kinne <russ(at)rkiphoto.com (russ(at)rkiphoto.com)>

Subject: Re: ELSA 



Private used to require 20 hrs of dual with a CFI and 3 hrs of

Instrument time. No more?

Couldn't do that in  a Firefly.

The more instruction you get, the safer a pilot you'll be. Don 't

work too hard to avoid it. 



On Sep 8, 2007, at 8:21 PM, Charles Davis wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   That's a valid question.  The reasons are several, starting with

 the fact that while close, my Firefly is not (was not!) a legit 103

 vehicle.  It was 30 lbs overweight, and I did not want to give up 

 the larger wheels, brakes, VSI, etc.  Should there ever be an

 issue, I am now in the clear.  Also, given that the serial number

 is my own "CD-1" rather then the Kolb frame serial number,  it can 

 be converted back to an ultralight by pulling off the data plate

 and N number.  No data plate, no airplane!



 For me, with a desire to move up the certification ladder, having

 my own airplane is useful in that I can now log all the hours I'll 

 fly anyway.  Except for the 3 hours night training, I'll do

 everything I need for my Private in my Firefly, and a lot cheaper!

 That's the beauty of the way the regs were written.  We can each 

 choose the options that suite us best.



 The inspector was Eugene Breiner, 717 776  7608.



   	  Quote: 	
		  


	


= the many List utilities such as the Subscriptions page,

ronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">

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

k" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">

http://forums.matronics.com

=========== 	
	


-- 

Rick Girard

"Ya'll drop on in"

takes on a whole new meaning

 when you live at the airport.  [quote][b]

Ralph B

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Posts: 367
Location: Mound Minnesota

Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 6:19 pm Post subject: Re: ELSA

 	  jdmol2002 wrote: 	
		  Why on earth would you register a firefly, keep it as an ultralight. Why pay more money to fly your plane. That makes no sence. 	




Mine is very much like a Firefly (an Original Firestar) at 319 lbs. It's even pictured as a Firefly in the September issue of LIGHT SPORT AND ULTRALIGHT FLYING magazine (the one with an orange nose on skis). Why did I register it? For the same reasons Beauford mentioned along with the privilege of carrying extra fuel in 2 tanks behind the seat with the 5-gallon main tank that I still have.



Here are a couple recent pics of the Firestar. It's in good shape after 20 years of flying it.



Ralph B

my little plane 1-.jpg

Description:

At home field

Filesize:

145.12 KB

Viewed:

395 Time(s)

Firestar at a fly-in.jpg

Description:

Firestar at a fly-in on 8-12-07

Filesize:

151.61 KB

Viewed:

398 Time(s)

_________________
Ralph B

Kolb Kolbra 912uls
N20386
550 hours

Ed in JXN

Joined: 24 Mar 2006
Posts: 122

Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:54 pm Post subject: ELSA

Chuck,

  

         The  instrument training requirement is still there, has never been removed  (thankfully).  

          

         FAR  61.109(a)(3)

  

 Ed in JXN

 MkII/503

  

  

  

 [quote]   ---

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