Wrongway John
Well-Known Member
Not concerned about it being 103 compliant, actually prefer one that is built without being restrained by certain weight limitations.
Researched quite a bit, and Kolb Aircraft are certainly high up on my list. Load factor is 4+ 2-. I assume that is useful load? It's hell finding any service ceiling information on this plane. I imagine engine choice is also going to help determine this. Like the foldable wings. Does anyone have any pics of a Kolb without the pod? Kind of would prefer at times to fly without it. Got a place in the mountains of CO at 8,800' elevation, that is 24 miles as the crow flies from my hangar. On most days, I'd probably have to add 2.5X the normal runway length required compared to your 1,000' elevations. It may not even be feasible to be flying ultralights in mountainous terrain, regardless, I have other places I'd like to go besides there.
Another high up on my list is the Just aircraft Stol solo, same load factor as Kolb. Supposed to be in production soon. Already know they will not have the boom on it, and plan on going 4130 tubing all the way on the fuselage, which is also okay by me. Heard they may also opt out of the spoliers and go with ailerons. Not too much new info out on it. I'm not that familiar with the particular Italian engine, so if I go this route, I may just find a decent used Rotax 503.
I like the Quicksilver Sprint, particularly just having top wing covered for slightly better stol, and just slightly less on cruise compared to the Sport. Just don't want to deal with all of those cables, and prefer a tailwheel. Also like the B1RD, but it's a old plane. Was the 15mph stall realistic that it listed? It sure had a longer wingspan than most ultralights, and like the Sprint, was just covered on top. I imagine windy days, it would have been a bit more difficult to fly with that much of a wing.
Also like the T-Bird, but those don't come up for sale very often. It lists load factor at 6+ 4-. Don't know if that is useful or ultimate load. Anyone know? Take off and landing under 100' with the Rotax 503.
While looking at Kolbs on Barnstormers, I've called on three Firefly's. All three don't have any logbooks or maintenance records of any kind. I asked why that was so. Some replied, they didn't get any when they bought it, another said it was for liability issues. Not sure how they think that protects them, but feel like the risks are quite small to the seller, a bit more for kit manufacturer.
I do know on certified and experimental planes, if you don't have the logs, it drops the value of the plane considerably. Wouldn't even consider buying one without it. I know from a Quicksilver Sprint, there were many things that needed inspecting, replaced or repaired at certain intervals. With that plane, I think the tangs was one such area, but there were plenty others. I imagine the strut based ultralights may not have as many parts to worry about, but surely their airframes have periodic checks on certain parts as well that may need replacement past certain hours.
Anything noticeably different about flight characteristics of a pusher vs tractor? Seems like I could get better stol with a tractor, but it didn't seem to affect the Quicksilver Sprint with a 50' take off and landing.
Researched quite a bit, and Kolb Aircraft are certainly high up on my list. Load factor is 4+ 2-. I assume that is useful load? It's hell finding any service ceiling information on this plane. I imagine engine choice is also going to help determine this. Like the foldable wings. Does anyone have any pics of a Kolb without the pod? Kind of would prefer at times to fly without it. Got a place in the mountains of CO at 8,800' elevation, that is 24 miles as the crow flies from my hangar. On most days, I'd probably have to add 2.5X the normal runway length required compared to your 1,000' elevations. It may not even be feasible to be flying ultralights in mountainous terrain, regardless, I have other places I'd like to go besides there.
Another high up on my list is the Just aircraft Stol solo, same load factor as Kolb. Supposed to be in production soon. Already know they will not have the boom on it, and plan on going 4130 tubing all the way on the fuselage, which is also okay by me. Heard they may also opt out of the spoliers and go with ailerons. Not too much new info out on it. I'm not that familiar with the particular Italian engine, so if I go this route, I may just find a decent used Rotax 503.
I like the Quicksilver Sprint, particularly just having top wing covered for slightly better stol, and just slightly less on cruise compared to the Sport. Just don't want to deal with all of those cables, and prefer a tailwheel. Also like the B1RD, but it's a old plane. Was the 15mph stall realistic that it listed? It sure had a longer wingspan than most ultralights, and like the Sprint, was just covered on top. I imagine windy days, it would have been a bit more difficult to fly with that much of a wing.
Also like the T-Bird, but those don't come up for sale very often. It lists load factor at 6+ 4-. Don't know if that is useful or ultimate load. Anyone know? Take off and landing under 100' with the Rotax 503.
While looking at Kolbs on Barnstormers, I've called on three Firefly's. All three don't have any logbooks or maintenance records of any kind. I asked why that was so. Some replied, they didn't get any when they bought it, another said it was for liability issues. Not sure how they think that protects them, but feel like the risks are quite small to the seller, a bit more for kit manufacturer.
I do know on certified and experimental planes, if you don't have the logs, it drops the value of the plane considerably. Wouldn't even consider buying one without it. I know from a Quicksilver Sprint, there were many things that needed inspecting, replaced or repaired at certain intervals. With that plane, I think the tangs was one such area, but there were plenty others. I imagine the strut based ultralights may not have as many parts to worry about, but surely their airframes have periodic checks on certain parts as well that may need replacement past certain hours.
Anything noticeably different about flight characteristics of a pusher vs tractor? Seems like I could get better stol with a tractor, but it didn't seem to affect the Quicksilver Sprint with a 50' take off and landing.
