Bush/STOL characteristics?

bransom · Post by **bransom** » Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:17 pm

Bruce,
Good to hear from one who has experience with both companies. I think when it
comes right down to it, I would be happy with either the Rebel or the KF. In
fact there is some advantage in lower operating costs for the KF, and perhaps
better stol performance too, partly because of the really nice match of the
Jabiru 3300 or Rotax 912S engines. These are a great power to weight engines,
but not worth putting in a Rebel (IMO), because of its ability to take the 0-
320 and do 150-160hp. I went to a Kitfox fly-in a month ago at a place about
an hour from my house. Saw and talked to a bunch of folks there and saw the
new Series 7 -- probably a $60k plane (914 turbo powered).

I don't see myself wanting to afford a new Rebel kit or especially a new SS
kit. The SS Series 7 price new is way too much for my blood. I hope to be
patient and find someone who has done little more than unpack and inventory a
5 or 6, or a Rebel. There is a Rebel kit owner in that position (from this
list) I had talked to earlier this year and might contact again to see if he
still wants to sell. But first, I need to make up my mind. I currently see
an unbuilt Series 5 on Barnstormers.com in Detroit too. It is not convenient
to check out and go get these "deals"! In the meantime, I need to get on with
completing my Kolb rebuild -- first things first.

As for STOL performance, the gist on the Rebel seems to be that it can touch
down mid-40s, but you better have an engine throttle ready to make some thrust
if you start to look short, as the back side of its power curve is very steep,
i.e. a LOT of drag and/or sink starting to take over below 60.

Best of luck with your new plane, I'm sure it will be fantastic.
Thanks for your input.
-Ben

On 6/30/02 8:00 PM, LEGEORGEN@CS.COM wrote to MURPHY-REBEL:

->
-> --part1_20.2b2308a2.2a511e50_boundary
-> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
-> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
->
-> Ben,
->
-> Skystar does not offer the model 5 anymore. The latest and greatest is the
-> model 7 that is nose wheel convertible. Otherwise it is really just a model
5
-> or 6. I believe I remember reading the all moving horizontal stabilizer was
-> scrapped for the trim old trim tab again. They had a few problems with
-> failures of the screw drive resulting in busted planes. I suspect that
might
-> have facilitated the change.
->
-> I have built and own a Kitfox Classic 4 and can speak highly of Skystar and
-> their planes. They stand behind their product and have a great support
team.
-> If you decide to go that route you will not have a problem with SS.
->
-> The Rebel has more room inside and a larger cargo area. The Rebel accepts a
-> larger engine and has a larger gross weight. Shyster's model 7 grosses at
-> 1550 lb. The Rebel just seems like more plane for the buck. I haven't flown
-> the Rebel yet, but if it performs like I expect it to and like the flying
-> pilots attest too, then I'm confident I won't be disappointed.
->
-> I could not pack everything I wanted in my model 4 and it was uncomfortable
-> to fly long distances with two people. I considered building the model 6 at
-> the time (3 inches wider and grosses at 350 lb. more) since I was already
-> familiar with the plane and company. Then I saw and flew the Rebel at
-> Arlington. I was impressed. I bought a partial completed Rebel kit and
didn't
-> tell my Skystar buddies for six months.
->
-> I'm tempted to take my Rebel to the SS fly in, that I have been attending
for
-> 5 years, and say to all my Skystar pals, Hey look what I found. But I'm
-> afraid that the principalities at SS might not appreciate that.
->
-> Don't get me wrong, I think the Kitfox is a great company and plane. I'm
-> probably just riding high on the excitement to fly the Rebel.
->
-> Bruce G 357R
->
-> --part1_20.2b2308a2.2a511e50_boundary
-> Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
-> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
->
-> <HTML>Ben,
-> 
-> Skystar does not offer the model 5 anymore. The latest and greatest is
the model 7 that is nose wheel convertible. Otherwise it is really just a
model 5 or 6. I believe I remember reading the all moving horizontal
stabilizer was scrapped for the trim old trim tab again. They had a few
problems with failures of the screw drive resulting in busted planes. I
suspect that might have facilitated the change.
-> 
-> I have built and own a Kitfox Classic 4 and can speak highly of Skystar
and their planes. They stand behind their product and have a great support
team. If you decide to go that route you will not have a problem with SS.
-> 
-> The Rebel has more room inside and a larger cargo area. The Rebel
accepts a larger engine and has a larger gross weight. Shyster's model 7
grosses at 1550 lb. The Rebel just seems like more plane for the buck. I
haven't flown the Rebel yet, but if it performs like I expect it to and like
the flying pilots attest too, then I'm confident I won't be disappointed.
-> 
-> I could not pack everything I wanted in my model 4 and it was
uncomfortable to fly long distances with two people. I considered building the
model 6 at the time (3 inches wider and grosses at 350 lb. more) since I was
already familiar with the plane and company. Then I saw and flew the Rebel at
Arlington. I was impressed. I bought a partial completed Rebel kit and didn't
tell my Skystar buddies for six months.
-> 
-> I'm tempted to take my Rebel to the SS fly in, that I have been
attending for 5 years, and say to all my Skystar pals, Hey look what I found.
But I'm afraid that the principalities at SS might not appreciate that.
-> 
-> Don't get me wrong, I think the Kitfox is a great company and plane.
I'm probably just riding high on the excitement to fly the Rebel.
-> 
-> Bruce G 357R</HTML>
->
-> --part1_20.2b2308a2.2a511e50_boundary--

-----------------------------------------------------------------
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 · Post by **Mike Davis** » Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:17 pm

Hi Ben,

Just thought I'd pass on a comparison I've heard... a friend of mine has an
older Kitfox, and while he seems to enjoy it, he says it's a toy. Mind that
when you jump in a plane to go somewhere in Alaska, you're bound by law to
carry more survival gear than the cargo sack of a Kitfox will comfortably
carry even before you pack your tooth brush! Other Kitfox owners I've known
have also been very happy with their airplanes, but most used them as Sunday
fliers... if they had to go on a long trip, they rented a bigger airplane
(my friend would say a "real" airplane). If you already have a Kolb, it
sounds like the Kitfox isn't really all that much of a step up for you. The
Rebel is simply more airplane. Again, I'm sure the Kitfox is a fine
airplane, this is just my opinion. I have a Quicksilver MX myself that I
will use for cheap, fun flying. But I needed a real airplane in order to
haul a moose out of the Alaska bush, or to haul the whole family to
Anchorage for the week end. When I finally get done building I guess I will
always be able to say I brought a "Moose" back on my hunting trips! ;-)

Mike
195SR

----- Original Message -----
From: <bransom@dcsol.com>
To: <murphy-rebel@dcsol.com>
Sent: Sunday, June 30, 2002 8:22 PM
Subject: Re: Bush/STOL characteristics?

Bruce,
Good to hear from one who has experience with both companies. I think

when it

comes right down to it, I would be happy with either the Rebel or the KF.

In

fact there is some advantage in lower operating costs for the KF, and

perhaps

better stol performance too, partly because of the really nice match of

the

Jabiru 3300 or Rotax 912S engines. These are a great power to weight

engines,

but not worth putting in a Rebel (IMO), because of its ability to take the

0-

320 and do 150-160hp. I went to a Kitfox fly-in a month ago at a place

about

an hour from my house. Saw and talked to a bunch of folks there and saw

the

new Series 7 -- probably a $60k plane (914 turbo powered).

I don't see myself wanting to afford a new Rebel kit or especially a new

SS

kit. The SS Series 7 price new is way too much for my blood. I hope to

be

patient and find someone who has done little more than unpack and

inventory a

5 or 6, or a Rebel. There is a Rebel kit owner in that position (from

this

list) I had talked to earlier this year and might contact again to see if

he

still wants to sell. But first, I need to make up my mind. I currently

see

an unbuilt Series 5 on Barnstormers.com in Detroit too. It is not

convenient

to check out and go get these "deals"! In the meantime, I need to get on

with

completing my Kolb rebuild -- first things first.

As for STOL performance, the gist on the Rebel seems to be that it can

touch

down mid-40s, but you better have an engine throttle ready to make some

thrust

if you start to look short, as the back side of its power curve is very

steep,

i.e. a LOT of drag and/or sink starting to take over below 60.

Best of luck with your new plane, I'm sure it will be fantastic.
Thanks for your input.
-Ben

On 6/30/02 8:00 PM, LEGEORGEN@CS.COM wrote to MURPHY-REBEL:

->
-> --part1_20.2b2308a2.2a511e50_boundary
-> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
-> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
->
-> Ben,
->
-> Skystar does not offer the model 5 anymore. The latest and greatest is

the

-> model 7 that is nose wheel convertible. Otherwise it is really just a

model

5
-> or 6. I believe I remember reading the all moving horizontal stabilizer

was

-> scrapped for the trim old trim tab again. They had a few problems with
-> failures of the screw drive resulting in busted planes. I suspect that
might
-> have facilitated the change.
->
-> I have built and own a Kitfox Classic 4 and can speak highly of Skystar

and

-> their planes. They stand behind their product and have a great support
team.
-> If you decide to go that route you will not have a problem with SS.
->
-> The Rebel has more room inside and a larger cargo area. The Rebel

accepts a

-> larger engine and has a larger gross weight. Shyster's model 7 grosses

at

-> 1550 lb. The Rebel just seems like more plane for the buck. I haven't

flown

-> the Rebel yet, but if it performs like I expect it to and like the

flying

-> pilots attest too, then I'm confident I won't be disappointed.
->
-> I could not pack everything I wanted in my model 4 and it was

uncomfortable

-> to fly long distances with two people. I considered building the model

6 at

-> the time (3 inches wider and grosses at 350 lb. more) since I was

already

-> familiar with the plane and company. Then I saw and flew the Rebel at
-> Arlington. I was impressed. I bought a partial completed Rebel kit and
didn't
-> tell my Skystar buddies for six months.
->
-> I'm tempted to take my Rebel to the SS fly in, that I have been

attending

for
-> 5 years, and say to all my Skystar pals, Hey look what I found. But I'm
-> afraid that the principalities at SS might not appreciate that.
->
-> Don't get me wrong, I think the Kitfox is a great company and plane.

I'm

-> probably just riding high on the excitement to fly the Rebel.
->
-> Bruce G 357R
->
-> --part1_20.2b2308a2.2a511e50_boundary
-> Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
-> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
->
-> <HTML>Ben,
-> 
-> Skystar does not offer the model 5 anymore. The latest and greatest

is

the model 7 that is nose wheel convertible. Otherwise it is really just a
model 5 or 6. I believe I remember reading the all moving horizontal
stabilizer was scrapped for the trim old trim tab again. They had a few
problems with failures of the screw drive resulting in busted planes. I
suspect that might have facilitated the change.
-> 
-> I have built and own a Kitfox Classic 4 and can speak highly of

Skystar

and their planes. They stand behind their product and have a great support
team. If you decide to go that route you will not have a problem with SS.
-> 
-> The Rebel has more room inside and a larger cargo area. The Rebel
accepts a larger engine and has a larger gross weight. Shyster's model 7
grosses at 1550 lb. The Rebel just seems like more plane for the buck. I
haven't flown the Rebel yet, but if it performs like I expect it to and

like

the flying pilots attest too, then I'm confident I won't be disappointed.
-> 
-> I could not pack everything I wanted in my model 4 and it was
uncomfortable to fly long distances with two people. I considered building

the

model 6 at the time (3 inches wider and grosses at 350 lb. more) since I

was

already familiar with the plane and company. Then I saw and flew the Rebel

at

Arlington. I was impressed. I bought a partial completed Rebel kit and

didn't

tell my Skystar buddies for six months.
-> 
-> I'm tempted to take my Rebel to the SS fly in, that I have been
attending for 5 years, and say to all my Skystar pals, Hey look what I

found.

But I'm afraid that the principalities at SS might not appreciate that.
-> 
-> Don't get me wrong, I think the Kitfox is a great company and

plane.

I'm probably just riding high on the excitement to fly the Rebel.
-> 
-> Bruce G 357R</HTML>
->
-> --part1_20.2b2308a2.2a511e50_boundary--

*-------------------------------------------------------------------------*

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
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Legeorgen · Post by **Legeorgen** » Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:17 pm

Mike,

The newer model 5,6 and 7 KF have a 150 lb. cargo and gross at 1550 lb., compared to the older model 2,3 and 4 that gross at 1200 lb. or less. My model 4 weighs 675 lb. empty with a 912S (much like a 912 Rebel) and a cargo of 50 lb. You can build a model 5,6 or 7 under 800 lb. with a 912S. It is a great performer with this engine combination and is how I would build it.

Bruce G

-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------

klehman · Post by **klehman** » Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:17 pm

Ben

I'm surprised you didn't mention the Zenith 801 in your comparison??
Probably a little slower, but quicker to build than a Rebel and
impressive STOL characteristics I think. OK kinda ugly too I guess...

Bob must be out of town but he has made several comments here on slow
speed handling of the Rebel. "Bobp" and "ias" or something might bring
up some interesting hits in the archives.

Curt, have you been able to compare landing and takeoff distance on
floats yet? Do you feel you need more landing distance on water than
takeoff distance? I'm concerned about distance over the trees to stopped
and stopped to over the trees.

thanks
Ken

-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Drew Dalgleish · Post by **Drew Dalgleish** » Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:17 pm

Great site Ben The Kolb is a neat plane. It's easy to see where you're
coming from with your slow speed concerns.
I thought of the Glasstar and Avid Magnum as well. I'm not sure about the
Avid company though I was ready to buy wheel skiis from them last winter
but I didn't get any response after about a dozen phone calls over a 3 week
period. I gave up and decided I'll build my own someday.
My Rebel build time was under 1500hrs. I didn't make any changes except
using die spring landing gear.
Drew Dalgleish

At 08:51 AM 7/1/2002 -0400, you wrote:

Ben

I'm surprised you didn't mention the Zenith 801 in your comparison??
Probably a little slower, but quicker to build than a Rebel and
impressive STOL characteristics I think. OK kinda ugly too I guess...

Bob must be out of town but he has made several comments here on slow
speed handling of the Rebel. "Bobp" and "ias" or something might bring
up some interesting hits in the archives.

Curt, have you been able to compare landing and takeoff distance on
floats yet? Do you feel you need more landing distance on water than
takeoff distance? I'm concerned about distance over the trees to stopped
and stopped to over the trees.

thanks
Ken

*-------------------------------------------------------------------------*
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Rebflyer · Post by **Rebflyer** » Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:17 pm

Hi Ken, I really haven't put any numbers to the landing takeoff comparrison, it's much harder to get accurate distance mesurements when your in the middle of a lake. However, in my learning curve at this point the landing distance is shorter than the takeoff, especially if you want to slip it over the trees. It really looses the altitude in the slip, and just before the touch on the water 50rpm really arrest the decent and make for a nice slide onto the water. I have not tried the small lake thing yet, Im just narrowing my paramiters on the big lakes. Today I went flying to give the hot weather stuff a try. 94deg f and two 200 pounders on board. 35 gal of fuel, but a nice breeze of about 10-15k. Off the water in between 18 and 20 sec. and I'm still spending to much time searching for the sweet spot on the step. Anybody got an excersize to practice that? Hint's for the Murphy floats? Don' t forget These are the only floats I've flown except for 5hrs for my checkout. I really am pleased with the performance and I got to do a little comparison flying at a splash-in On Otsego Lk in Mich. 45 planes including the Cessna factory Carravan, three widgons a bunch of Lakes a few Volmers and a scattering of stuff. The only one to beat me off the water won the contest, and he didn't beat me by much. The pilot of the winning airplane had asked in the pilot briefing what could disqualify you, and the answer was he had to be able to taxi back to the dock after the last race. I still had 25gal on board! Next year I hope to be ready for him. Oh in case you were wondering the last race was between a supercub and a Volmer powered by a subaru, The Vomer won! those two had been battling for years, and the Cub lost for the first time. It was a way good time with way nice people. Enough rambling. I'll try to get some more accurate numbers, but just learning how to float fly is way to much fun to spend alot of test time. Any way k eep at it, it's a ball! Curt N97 MR

-----------------------------------------------------------------
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 · Post by **Walter Klatt** » Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:17 pm

Hey, Curt, sounds like you're having great fun with your floats, too. I think my numbers are probably similar to yours. The best I have done off the water, solo, half fuel and a good breeze, is about 8 seconds, but with 2 people, loaded up, and no wind, I am 20 + seconds, and even longer if I don't get the sweet spot right. Usually solo, I can screw up with the sweet spot, and it just overpowers it, and I still get off pretty quick. I still haven't got my flap setting dialled, though. I think it works best with half flap with no wind, but a little more flap with a good breeze. Full flap doesn't seem to help more, and might even slow it some. I need to do some further experimenting in this area.

Are you still using the Warp prop, and at what pitch setting? I changed mine recently from 11 1/2 to 10 1/2 degrees, and improved my take off and climb. I still cruise at the same speed (105 MPH), but now at 2450 instead of 2350. However, my fuel flow is the same at 7.8 gph (I have a fuel flow monitor).

Now if I could just get it to run a little cooler on the CHT's...

Walter

-----Original Message-----
From: murphy-rebel@dcsol.com [mailto:murphy-rebel@dcsol.com]On Behalf Of Rebflyer@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2002 5:48 PM
To: murphy-rebel@dcsol.com
Subject: Re: Bush/STOL characteristics?

Hi Ken, I really haven't put any numbers to the landing takeoff comparrison, it's much harder to get accurate distance mesurements when your in the middle of a lake. However, in my learning curve at this point the landing distance is shorter than the takeoff, especially if you want to slip it over the trees. It really looses the altitude in the slip, and just before the touch on the water 50rpm really arrest the decent and make for a nice slide onto the water. I have not tried the small lake thing yet, Im just narrowing my paramiters on the big lakes. Today I went flying to give the hot weather stuff a try. 94deg f and two 200 pounders on board. 35 gal of fuel, but a nice breeze of about 10-15k. Off the water in between 18 and 20 sec. and I'm still spending to much time searching for the sweet spot on the step. Anybody got an excersize to practice that? Hint's for the Murphy flo ats? Don't forget These are the only floats I've flown except for 5hrs for my checkout. I really am pleased with the performance and I got to do a little comparison flying at a splash-in On Otsego Lk in Mich. 45 planes including the Cessna factory Carravan, three widgons a bunch of Lakes a few Volmers and a scattering of stuff. The only one to beat me off the water won the contest, and he didn't beat me by much. The pilot of the winning airplane had asked in the pilot briefing what could disqualify you, and the answer was he had to be able to taxi back to the dock after the last race. I still had 25gal on board! Next year I hope to be ready for him. Oh in case you were wondering the last race was between a supercub and a Volmer powered by a subaru, The Vomer won! those two had been battling for years, and the Cub lost for the first time. It was a way good time with way nice people. Enough rambling. I'll try to get some more accurate numbers, but just learning how to float fly is way to much fun to spend alo t of test time. Any way k eep at it, it's a ball! Curt N97 MR

Wayne G. O'Shea · Post by **Wayne G. O'Shea** » Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:17 pm

Howard's off the water time on Monday was 11 seconds, solo and half tanks, into a 5 to 8 knot breeze. 35*C (Humidex 46*C) and he missed the sweet spot the first time, which was easily noticeable by the porpoise thing! 150hp E2D and the DM sensenich pitched at -52

Wayne

----- Original Message -----
From: Walter Klatt (walter.klatt@shaw.ca)
To: murphy-rebel@dcsol.com (murphy-rebel@dcsol.com)
Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2002 9:30 PM
Subject: RE: Bush/STOL characteristics?

Hey, Curt, sounds like you're having great fun with your floats, too. I think my numbers are probably similar to yours. The best I have done off the water, solo, half fuel and a good breeze, is about 8 seconds, but with 2 people, loaded up, and no wind, I am 20 + seconds, and even longer if I don't get the sweet spot right. Usually solo, I can screw up with the sweet spot, and it just overpowers it, and I still get off pretty quick. I still haven't got my flap setting dialled, though. I think it works best with half flap with no wind, but a little more flap with a good breeze. Full flap doesn't seem to help more, and might even slow it some. I need to do some further experimenting in this area.

Are you still using the Warp prop, and at what pitch setting? I changed mine recently from 11 1/2 to 10 1/2 degrees, and improved my take off and climb. I still cruise at the same speed (105 MPH), but now at 2450 instead of 2350. However, my fuel flow is the same at 7.8 gph (I have a fuel flow monitor).

Now if I could just get it to run a little cooler on the CHT's...

Walter

-----Original Message-----
From: murphy-rebel@dcsol.com [mailto:murphy-rebel@dcsol.com]On Behalf Of Rebflyer@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2002 5:48 PM
To: murphy-rebel@dcsol.com
Subject: Re: Bush/STOL characteristics?

Hi Ken, I really haven't put any numbers to the landing takeoff comparrison, it's much harder to get accurate distance mesurements when your in the middle of a lake. However, in my learning curve at this point the landing distance is shorter than the takeoff, especially if you want to slip it over the trees. It really looses the altitude in the slip, and just before the touch on the water 50rpm really arrest the decent and make for a nice slide onto the water. I have not tried the small lake thing yet, Im just narrowing my paramiters on the big lakes. Today I went flying to give the hot weather stuff a try. 94deg f and two 200 pounders on board. 35 gal of fuel, but a nice breeze of about 10-15k. Off the water in between 18 and 20 sec. and I'm still spending to much time searching for the sweet spot on the step. Anybody got an excersize to practice that? Hint's for the Murphy flo ats? Don't forget These are the only floats I've flown except for 5hrs for my checkout. I really am pleased with the performance and I got to do a little comparison flying at a splash-in On Otsego Lk in Mich. 45 planes including the Cessna factory Carravan, three widgons a bunch of Lakes a few Volmers and a scattering of stuff. The only one to beat me off the water won the contest, and he didn't beat me by much. The pilot of the winning airplane had asked in the pilot briefing what could disqualify you, and the answer was he had to be able to taxi back to the dock after the last race. I still had 25gal on board! Next year I hope to be ready for him. Oh in case you were wondering the last race was between a supercub and a Volmer powered by a subaru, The Vomer won! those two had been battling for years, and the Cub lost for the first time. It was a way good time with way nice people. Enough rambling. I'll try to get some more accurate numbers, but just learning how to float fly is way to much fun to spend alo t of test time. Any way k eep at it, it's a ball! Curt N97 MR

SWSLOANLK · Post by **SWSLOANLK** » Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:17 pm

Walter&Curt&others

It sounds like you both are having as much fun as I am with the floats.
My Rebel came in at 1156 lbs which includes 4 gal unsable fuel, hyd fluid, one paddle, 2 life vests and a fire ext.

Over the past 4 weeks I have flown off the flight restrictions on the propeller and the float installation on my Rebel. To date the highest lake that I have flown into was lake Hancock a small alpine lake located in the foot hills of the Cascades at 2000 foot elevation. The next alpine lake is located at 3000 feet when I get some more nerve as these lakes are about 3/4 of a mile long with one way in and out.

I am pleased with the preformance eventhough I have only 125 hp. At 1450 lbs takeoff weight at sealevel in light wind at std temp and pressure the take off run is 9 to 10 sec with the R/C at just over 1000 FPM. At the airplanes MGTOW of 1590 lbs the takeoff run is 12 to 13 sec with the R/C of 875 FPM

A couple of weeks ago we had some unseasonably hot weather here. At a GTOW of 1440 lbs off glassy water at 1000ft elevation at 33deg C the take off run was 13-14 sec with the R/C of 925 FPM. I then loaded the plane to 1760 lbs 12 % over gross and in the same conditions the take off run was 22 to 24 sec with thr R/C at 740 FPM. Note: "This test was done to confirm that I could get the plane off the water with a leaking float from a remote lake."

Cruise speeds are running 105 to 110 mph at sealevel pulling 22"mp at 2400 RPM at 5.8 GPH (65%) We are getting 118 to 120 mph TAS at 6500 ft pulling 24"mp at 2450 to 2500 RPM at 6.8 gph (75%)

I have not found any problems with the 8" lower float installation.

Walter I am planing to be at Arlington all day Friday and Saturday untill noon.

Hope to see you there.

Steve Sloan

-----------------------------------------------------------------
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 · Post by **bransom** » Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:17 pm

Hmmm, i don't see how to send private within the BBS.

Anyway, Ken, yeah, i think Zenith even says "not just another pretty
airplane" -- tongue in cheek. An avid builder near me made reference to
seeing one and his reaction is that the plane lacks "real" aircraft parts and
construction -- more of a hammer something together look. This is pretty
second hand so i dunno, and of course it could have been the builder's fault.
I would ignore any design I felt wasn't top notch methods. Then too, I'll be
vain enf to say I gotta be able to like looking at my baby too. Zenith
probably is too ugly for me even if it might do well in the functional
category! :)

Good to see all the other nice performance numbers coming in from float fliers
here.

On 7/4/02 9:56 AM, KLEHMAN@ALBEDO.NET wrote to MURPHY-REBEL:

-> Ben
->
-> I'm surprised you didn't mention the Zenith 801 in your comparison??
-> Probably a little slower, but quicker to build than a Rebel and
-> impressive STOL characteristics I think. OK kinda ugly too I guess...
->
-> Bob must be out of town but he has made several comments here on slow
-> speed handling of the Rebel. "Bobp" and "ias" or something might bring
-> up some interesting hits in the archives.
->
-> Curt, have you been able to compare landing and takeoff distance on
-> floats yet? Do you feel you need more landing distance on water than
-> takeoff distance? I'm concerned about distance over the trees to stopped
-> and stopped to over the trees.
->
-> thanks
-> Ken
->
->

-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Rebflyer · Post by **Rebflyer** » Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:17 pm

Hi Walt, yes I to am still using the warp.About same degree settin too. after the initial setting, the reset was just to make them same when I changed. I found that 1 deg of change made 100 rpm diff. My cruise is less though. I'm more like just 100mph at 2500. My fuel burn is 7.1 overall No fuel flow for accurate instant readings, but a 3 hr trip gave me the same results. The electronic ignition really helps. Sounds like our performances are about the same. It really launches off the water light and cool. Hope you're fun continues like mine. Curt N97MR

-----------------------------------------------------------------
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 · Post by **Walter Klatt** » Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:17 pm

Well, Steve, sounds like you are still the cruise king with your machine, and lower fuel consumption to boot. I can't remember what your wheels empty weight was, but am curious to know what your net increase was with the floats.

With flying into small alpine lakes, watch out for dark glassy water that is shaded by the mountain side, like in early morning or evening. That is much worse than regular glassy water, and you will need more room to land than you think. I found that out many years ago in my previous ultralight floatplane. You sure can get into some awesome places, though, that the wheel guys could only imagine.

Yes, I am planning to make Arlington, too, probably also on Friday or Saturday, so will look for you then. I would like to fly down, but haven't yet gone into the US with mine, so will have to quickly research what paperwork I need for my plane, and approach procedures.

Also, Steve, if you want to come up to Canada some time, I spend a lot of time at Harrison Lake, which is only about 20 minutes flight from Abbotsford, where you would clear customs. I have a cabin there, and it's a great place to visit on floats.

Walter

-----Original Message-----
From: murphy-rebel@dcsol.com [mailto:murphy-rebel@dcsol.com]On Behalf Of SWSLOANLK@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2002 9:05 PM
To: murphy-rebel@dcsol.com
Subject: RE:Bush/STOL characteristics?

Walter&Curt&others

It sounds like you both are having as much fun as I am with the floats.
My Rebel came in at 1156 lbs which includes 4 gal unsable fuel, hyd fluid, one paddle, 2 life vests and a fire ext.

Over the past 4 weeks I have flown off the flight restrictions on the propeller and the float installation on my Rebel. To date the highest lake that I have flown into was lake Hancock a small alpine lake located in the foot hills of the Cascades at 2000 foot elevation. The next alpine lake is located at 3000 feet when I get some more nerve as these lakes are about 3/4 of a mile long with one way in and out.

I am pleased with the preformance eventhough I have only 125 hp. At 1450 lbs takeoff weight at sealevel in light wind at std temp and pressure the take off run is 9 to 10 sec with the R/C at just over 1000 FPM. At the airplanes MGTOW of 1590 lbs the takeoff run is 12 to 13 sec with the R/C of 875 FPM

A couple of weeks ago we had some unseasonably hot weather here. At a GTOW of 1440 lbs off glassy water at 1000ft elevation at 33deg C the take off run was 13-14 sec with the R/C of 925 FPM. I then loaded the plane to 1760 lbs 12 % over gross and in the same conditions the take off run was 22 to 24 sec with thr R/C at 740 FPM. Note: "This test was done to confirm that I could get the plane off the water with a leaking float from a remote lake."

Cruise speeds are running 105 to 110 mph at sealevel pulling 22"mp at 2400 RPM at 5.8 GPH (65%) We are getting 118 to 120 mph TAS at 6500 ft pulling 24"mp at 2450 to 2500 RPM at 6.8 gph (75%)

I have not found any problems with the 8" lower float installation.

Walter I am planing to be at Arlington all day Friday and Saturday untill noon.

Hope to see you there.

Steve Sloan

Walter Klatt · Post by **Walter Klatt** » Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:17 pm

Curt, is your Warp a taper tip, or the wide flat tips? If your fuel burn is only 7.1 at 2500, then it sounds like you may be underpitched.

Walter

-----Original Message-----
From: murphy-rebel@dcsol.com [mailto:murphy-rebel@dcsol.com]On Behalf Of Rebflyer@aol.com
Sent: Thursday, July 04, 2002 11:32 AM
To: murphy-rebel@dcsol.com
Subject: Re: Bush/STOL characteristics?

Hi Walt, yes I to am still using the warp.About same degree settin too. after the initial setting, the reset was just to make them same when I changed. I found that 1 deg of change made 100 rpm diff. My cruise is less though. I'm more like just 100mph at 2500. My fuel burn is 7.1 overall No fuel flow for accurate instant readings, but a 3 hr trip gave me the same results. The electronic ignition really helps. Sounds like our performances are about the same. It really launches off the water light and cool. Hope you're fun continues like mine. Curt N97MR

Mike Davis · Post by **Mike Davis** » Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:17 pm

If you want to reply only to the author of a message, just hit reply like
normal, then copy the author's address from the old message header, see
"From: <bransom@dcsol.com>" below, now paste this address on the "To:" line
of your message and send.

Mike

----- Original Message -----
From: <bransom@dcsol.com>
To: <murphy-rebel@dcsol.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 04, 2002 10:15 AM
Subject: Re: Bush/STOL characteristics?

Hmmm, i don't see how to send private within the BBS.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
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 · Post by **Legeorgen** » Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:17 pm

Walter, Steve,

Great to here you guys plan on being in Arlington. I would very much like to see your planes. I sure missed you all last year while I was still building but it's never to late. Maybe you can park your planes together. I plane on being at Arlington Friday about 1:00 and all day Saturday. I'll introduce myself.

I have first flight scheduled for the 23 of July.

Bruce G 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
-----------------------------------------------------------------