Bush/STOL characteristics

[bransom]

I've done more searching back thru the archives and I think I'm starting to
get it. But, you tell me...

The Rebel factory stall numbers are 44/40mph. My one ride in a Rebel had us
at 500fpm sink rate at 50mph. Not so good. Furthermore, experienc in this
list says you can be flying 60+mph approach, but with a serious sink rate.
Ah, but wait ... I see also that a very light Rebel (Rotax 912) can be flown
with flaps and power under 30mph! So, you gotta admit, it is a bit
confusing.

My easiest take on all of this is that the stall is very unpronounced -- you
can get there practically unnoticed, find yourself with great roll and pitch
control, but a huge sink rate and just about any airspeed between 20 and
65 ...heck, the readings are probably off simply because of the wide range of
angle of attack on the pitot.

What I want to believe is that I could spend lots of time and money to make a
gorgeous Rebel of my own -- so far, easy you say :) -- and then be able to fly
that sucker onto a gravel bar adding full flaps and 3/4 power, and stop before
hitting the river 600 feet later. There are no trees on approach ...I'm just
dragging in low and slow over the water till I get to my spot. Yes, I will
have practiced enf to get good at this. Then I catch a big ol' salmon, toss
him in the back, blast off (125-160hp) in the opposite direction, and go home
to kiss my wife and tell her I'm the happiest guy on the planet. Can it be
done?



-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

[Mike Davis]

Have you seen the photo on Murphy's web site of the "One tired Rebel"? I
had a chance to sit and talk with the owner/builder a while back, and he
told me of a sand bar in South East Alaska he flies in and out of regularly
that is under 400ft. Apparently to practice spot landings, he likes to land
and scratch a 12 foot square in the sand, then see how many times he can
plant the mains inside the box.

Mike
195SR

----- Original Message -----
From: <bransom@dcsol.com>
To: <murphy-rebel@dcsol.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 9:57 PM
Subject: Bush/STOL characteristics

I've done more searching back thru the archives and I think I'm starting

to

get it. But, you tell me...

The Rebel factory stall numbers are 44/40mph. My one ride in a Rebel had

us

at 500fpm sink rate at 50mph. Not so good. Furthermore, experienc in this
list says you can be flying 60+mph approach, but with a serious sink rate.
Ah, but wait ... I see also that a very light Rebel (Rotax 912) can be

flown

with flaps and power under 30mph! So, you gotta admit, it is a bit
confusing.

My easiest take on all of this is that the stall is very unpronounced --

you

can get there practically unnoticed, find yourself with great roll and

pitch

control, but a huge sink rate and just about any airspeed between 20 and
65 ...heck, the readings are probably off simply because of the wide range

of

angle of attack on the pitot.

What I want to believe is that I could spend lots of time and money to

make a

gorgeous Rebel of my own -- so far, easy you say :) -- and then be able to

fly

that sucker onto a gravel bar adding full flaps and 3/4 power, and stop

before

hitting the river 600 feet later. There are no trees on approach ...I'm

just

dragging in low and slow over the water till I get to my spot. Yes, I

will

have practiced enf to get good at this. Then I catch a big ol' salmon,

toss

him in the back, blast off (125-160hp) in the opposite direction, and go h

ome

to kiss my wife and tell her I'm the happiest guy on the planet. Can it

be

done?

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

[Charles Skorupa]

I suggest you get a copy of Murphy's video promoting the Rebel that shows
some VERY short landings. I am not sure if their latest video has that
footage on it, but Collen could probably get it for you. Bear in mind that
Robin, their test pilot, is a very good pilot. but the airplane certainly
has the capabilities. Also, the take-off and climb capabilities are
excellent in a reasonably powered and loaded Rebel based on what I have
observed of local Rebels who routinely lift off in less than 100 ft amd get
to pattern altitude before the end of the runway.

- Chuck Skorupa -

From: bransom@dcsol.com
Reply-To: <murphy-rebel@dcsol.com>
To: murphy-rebel@dcsol.com
Subject: Bush/STOL characteristics
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2002 21:57:12 -0900

I've done more searching back thru the archives and I think I'm starting to
get it. But, you tell me...

The Rebel factory stall numbers are 44/40mph. My one ride in a Rebel had
us
at 500fpm sink rate at 50mph. Not so good. Furthermore, experienc in this
list says you can be flying 60+mph approach, but with a serious sink rate.
Ah, but wait ... I see also that a very light Rebel (Rotax 912) can be
flown
with flaps and power under 30mph! So, you gotta admit, it is a bit
confusing.

My easiest take on all of this is that the stall is very unpronounced --
you
can get there practically unnoticed, find yourself with great roll and
pitch
control, but a huge sink rate and just about any airspeed between 20 and
65 ...heck, the readings are probably off simply because of the wide range
of
angle of attack on the pitot.

What I want to believe is that I could spend lots of time and money to make
a
gorgeous Rebel of my own -- so far, easy you say :) -- and then be able to
fly
that sucker onto a gravel bar adding full flaps and 3/4 power, and stop
before
hitting the river 600 feet later. There are no trees on approach ...I'm
just
dragging in low and slow over the water till I get to my spot. Yes, I will
have practiced enf to get good at this. Then I catch a big ol' salmon,
toss
him in the back, blast off (125-160hp) in the opposite direction, and go
home
to kiss my wife and tell her I'm the happiest guy on the planet. Can it be
done?

*-------------------------------------------------------------------------*
To unsubscribe go to http://www.dcsol.com:81/public/listserv.htm
Archives located at http://rebel:builder@www.dcsol.com:81/default.htm
To contact the list admin, e-mail mike.davis@dcsol.com
*-------------------------------------------------------------------------*

_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus




-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

[Legeorgen]

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

[Legeorgen]

I have always maintained that a great STOL airplane is 50% the plane and 50% the pilot. To add to this, every pilot has his own tectonic as well. Personally, I like the high sink rate of the Rebel. It makes spot landing very easy without a tendency to float, not to mention the benefit of a steep approach when landing short over a tall obstacles such as tree's. Or if terrain permits, drag it in with power like you said.

I find the power off stall a non event. The ASI gives up on my factory installed pitot at 40 MPH but it stalls, some speed soon after this.

So go buy and build your Rebel, land on that sand bar, catch your Salmon and toss it in the back then go home and tell your wife your the happiest guy on the planet. You will not regret it. I promise!

Blue skies and tail winds,

Bruce 357R

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

[Bob Patterson]

Hi !

It HAS been done !! The original Rebel prototype was landed
on gravel bars in the Fraser river, I'm told....

There are videos of that same Rebel taking off (and landing !)
in LESS than 200 ft. !!

I'm another who likes the high sink rate - we could cross the
end of the runway at home at 1,000 ft., and pull full flap and
make the first turnoff with ease !!

The biggest factor will be practice and comfort with the
Rebel - it's a VERY safe, controllable airplane that won't bite you
at low speeds. I would favour a light Rebel with the 100 hp. 912-S,
OR a heavier one with a 150 hp. O-320 - avoid the O-290's (they can
be heavier than the O-320, less power, and parts are 5 times as expensive!!).

You are correct - the stall is very gentle. It will just 'nod',
dropping the nose a bit, a fly out of it if you just relax the stick
a bit.

You WILL love it !!! :-) :-)
.....bobp

--------------------------------orig.---------------------------------
At 09:57 PM 11/7/02 -0900, you wrote:

I've done more searching back thru the archives and I think I'm starting to
get it. But, you tell me...

The Rebel factory stall numbers are 44/40mph. My one ride in a Rebel had us
at 500fpm sink rate at 50mph. Not so good. Furthermore, experienc in this
list says you can be flying 60+mph approach, but with a serious sink rate.
Ah, but wait ... I see also that a very light Rebel (Rotax 912) can be flown
with flaps and power under 30mph! So, you gotta admit, it is a bit
confusing.

My easiest take on all of this is that the stall is very unpronounced -- you
can get there practically unnoticed, find yourself with great roll and pitch
control, but a huge sink rate and just about any airspeed between 20 and
65 ...heck, the readings are probably off simply because of the wide range of
angle of attack on the pitot.

What I want to believe is that I could spend lots of time and money to make a
gorgeous Rebel of my own -- so far, easy you say :) -- and then be able to fly
that sucker onto a gravel bar adding full flaps and 3/4 power, and stop before
hitting the river 600 feet later. There are no trees on approach ...I'm just
dragging in low and slow over the water till I get to my spot. Yes, I will
have practiced enf to get good at this. Then I catch a big ol' salmon, toss
him in the back, blast off (125-160hp) in the opposite direction, and go home
to kiss my wife and tell her I'm the happiest guy on the planet. Can it be
done?

*-------------------------------------------------------------------------*
To unsubscribe go to http://www.dcsol.com:81/public/listserv.htm
Archives located at http://rebel:builder@www.dcsol.com:81/default.htm
To contact the list admin, e-mail mike.davis@dcsol.com
*-------------------------------------------------------------------------*

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

[George Coy]

For those who are installing the M14P engines:

I have had several requests from people installing the rubber mounts on the
M14P engines to explain why there are two different part numbers for the
rubber mounts.

. The rubber mounts consist 16 pieces that go in the 8 holes on the mounting
ring. Fourteen of these are part number 506400-05 and two of them are
506400-35. The two -35 mounts are slightly different. The metal portion that
is embedded in the rubber is slightly narrower. It is 28 mm (1.10 in.) wide
instead of the 30 mm (1.18) wide on the -05 pieces. These two narrower
pieces are to be used on the rear of the motor frame in front of the two
magnetos. These narrower -35 pieces provide clearance for the magnetos to be
rotated and timed. There is no other functional difference. If you have
already installed the rubbers and did not put them in the proper place, then
there is no problem unless you need to time the magneto and its travel is
limited by hitting the rubber mount.
I can send a diagram by e-mail to those who request it. We also keep new
rubber mounting sets in stock. The sets include all of the hardware as well
as the rubber pieces. If you have an old engine, it is wise to change them
at instillation.

George Coy

Private E-mail---- george@gesoco.com




-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

[bransom]

<clip>

-> I'm another who likes the high sink rate - we could cross the
-> end of the runway at home at 1,000 ft., and pull full flap and
-> make the first turnoff with ease !!
->
-> The biggest factor will be practice and comfort with the
-> Rebel - it's a VERY safe, controllable airplane that won't bite you
-> at low speeds. I would favour a light Rebel with the 100 hp. 912-S,
-> OR a heavier one with a 150 hp. O-320 - avoid the O-290's (they can
-> be heavier than the O-320, less power, and parts are 5 times as
expensive!!).

Hmmm... you suggest either go small/light (912S) or max (0-320). Would
something in the middle not get the best of both worlds -- better than 100hp
power for stol take-offs and less than 0-320 weight for better slow speed
landing?
-Ben

<clip>



-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

[Walter Klatt]

Ben, I went through that engine choosing reasoning many
years ago, and ended up with the 150 hp 0320. It's all
about power to weight for each engine, how much power
you need, and how much room (gross weight) do you have
to play with. If you are not going amphibs, the 912S
will be quite adequate and good power to weight.
Anything above that, though, weighs a lot more and then
you might as well go right up to the 0320 which also
has good power to weight. Of course, if you plan on
amphibs, you will want the 0320. And if you just like
power, then the 0320 is great on wheels too, as without
the floats, you have plenty of useful load anyway. And
then there is cost. I would bet that you could get a
good used 0320 for less than a new 912S. Also, I
believe the resale value of an 0320 equipped Rebel is
much higher than one with a Rotax. JMHO.

Walter

-----Original Message-----
From: mike.davis@dcsol.com
[mailto:mike.davis@dcsol.com]On Behalf Of
bransom@dcsol.com
Sent: Saturday, November 09, 2002 9:12 AM
To: murphy-rebel@dcsol.com
Subject: Re: Bush/STOL characteristics


<clip>

-> I'm another who likes the high
sink rate - we could cross the
-> end of the runway at home at 1,000 ft.,
and pull full flap and
-> make the first turnoff with ease !!
->
-> The biggest factor will be
practice and comfort with the
-> Rebel - it's a VERY safe, controllable
airplane that won't bite you
-> at low speeds. I would favour a light
Rebel with the 100 hp. 912-S,
-> OR a heavier one with a 150 hp. O-320 -
avoid the O-290's (they can
-> be heavier than the O-320, less power,
and parts are 5 times as
expensive!!).

Hmmm... you suggest either go small/light
(912S) or max (0-320). Would
something in the middle not get the best of
both worlds -- better than 100hp
power for stol take-offs and less than 0-320
weight for better slow speed
landing?
-Ben

<clip>

*--------------------------------------------
-----------------------------*
To unsubscribe go to
http://www.dcsol.com:81/public/listserv.htm
Archives located at
http://rebel:builder@www.dcsol.com:81/default.htm
To contact the list admin, e-mail
mike.davis@dcsol.com
*--------------------------------------------
-----------------------------*

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

[Bob Patterson]

Hi Ben !

That certainly was my experience. I'd be surprised if the Rebel's
finished weight with an O-235 was even 100 lb lighter than an O-320.

When we had both Rebels, the 80 hp. 912-powered Rebel (716 lb)
would take off and land in considerably less distance than the O-235
powered Rebel ( ~865 lb.) - the extra weight really made a difference,
and the O-235 was only about 100 hp., in real life. ( now .... a NEW
O-235-L2C or O-235-N2C might be quite different !)

We flew both Rebels for several years (over 10 yr. for the 912 !),
and the operating cost differences were glaring. 3 gallons/hour for
the Rotax (car gas), and 5 1/2 to 6 gph for the O-235 (some car gas,
some 100ll - need the lead for the valves !). Oil changes every 50
hours on the 912, high quality automotive oil, and every 25 hours on
the O-235, expensive Aeroshell - PLUS an extra quart every 6 or 7 hours
for the Lyc. - none for the 912.

Over 1,000 hours on both engines - the 912 had 4 sets of spark
plugs, and 2 new air filters, plus the oil filters at oil changes. The
O-235 had 2 new cylinders, an exhaust system, plugs, a magneto, and a carb.
replacement. Almost the same !!! (NOT !) ;-) :-)

The only edge the extra hosepower provided was at full load,
on hot days, it climbed a bit better. Cruise was slightly slower
with the O-235 (finer prop). The 912 cruised happily at 97 mph, and
would climb over 1,100 fpm solo.

Now, jumping up to the O-320, the extra horsepower for the
weight shows !! You can cruise up to 127 mph, on about 8 1/2 to
9 gallons/hour, climb over 1,500 fpm, and haul whatever you want !!
This is the way to go for amphib floats !

Just my experience - the O-235 is great if you just want a
general purpose fly-around airplane and don't like the Rotax for
some reason...
.....bobp

----------------------------------orig.--------------------------------
At 08:12 AM 11/9/02 -0900, you wrote:

<clip>

-> I'm another who likes the high sink rate - we could cross the
-> end of the runway at home at 1,000 ft., and pull full flap and
-> make the first turnoff with ease !!
->
-> The biggest factor will be practice and comfort with the
-> Rebel - it's a VERY safe, controllable airplane that won't bite you
-> at low speeds. I would favour a light Rebel with the 100 hp. 912-S,
-> OR a heavier one with a 150 hp. O-320 - avoid the O-290's (they can
-> be heavier than the O-320, less power, and parts are 5 times as
expensive!!).

Hmmm... you suggest either go small/light (912S) or max (0-320). Would
something in the middle not get the best of both worlds -- better than 100hp
power for stol take-offs and less than 0-320 weight for better slow speed
landing?
-Ben

<clip>

*-------------------------------------------------------------------------*
To unsubscribe go to http://www.dcsol.com:81/public/listserv.htm
Archives located at http://rebel:builder@www.dcsol.com:81/default.htm
To contact the list admin, e-mail mike.davis@dcsol.com
*-------------------------------------------------------------------------*

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------