From: owner-krnet-l-digest@lists.teleport.com (krnet-l-digest) To: krnet-l-digest@lists.teleport.com Subject: krnet-l-digest V1 #33 Reply-To: krnet-l-digest Sender: owner-krnet-l-digest@lists.teleport.com Errors-To: owner-krnet-l-digest@lists.teleport.com Precedence: bulk krnet-l-digest Thursday, June 5 1997 Volume 01 : Number 033 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 09:26:22 -0700 From: Tom Crawford Subject: Re: KR: Re: KRnet * * * help wanted * * * JEHayward@aol.com wrote: > > In a message dated 97-06-04 09:03:24 EDT, you write: > > << fter talking with Jeanette at Sun & Fun, she made it quite clear to me > that she wanted nothing to do the KRNET. > > tomc@afn.org > > >> > Did she say why? Maybe this just hit me wrong when I read it but I sure > didn't like the sound of it. > > Jim Hayward I dont remember her exact words, but the impression she left me with was that there are very few changes that she approves of and would prefer that everybody just build to the plans. She said there are too many people suggesting design changes(people without the background to do so safely?). Please- dont get me in the middle of this one. My personal feelings are that this is why they make us put the word EXPERIMENTAL in big letters on our airplanes, and make us, the builders, fly in them for the first 40 hours alone. After all, what background did the Wright Brothers have? Bicycles? Tom tomc@afn.org KR2 N262TC Gettin' so close I cant sleep at night ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 09:31:06 -0700 From: Tom Crawford Subject: Re: KR: Project update Ted & Louisa Jones wrote: > > Tom Crawford wrote: > > > > Bobby Muse wrote: > > > > > > At 11:05 PM 6/3/97 -0700, you wrote: > > > >Micheal Mims wrote: > > > >> > > > >> I glassed and floxed the 45 degree edge on the door a > > > >> few nights ago and then sanded it to a nice smooth finish. Tonight I > > > >> covered the 45 degree angle with duct tape to act as a release agent and > > > >> re-mounted it (for the 155th time)!! I made sure it would open and close > > > >> without rubbing or catching. If this works I should have a perfect > > > >> door sill with a .003 or .004 of a gap for silicone sealant. My biggest > > > >> concern is that when I open the door, to much of the flox may stick to the > > > >> duct tape and tear away from the urethane foam! Fingers are crossed!! > > > > > > >Mike, > > > > The duct tape should work pretty good. I used it as a release barrier for > > > >my forward deck, and applied lots of dry micro at the joint to get a good > > > >seal. The stuff released pretty well. > > > > Ross > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I used duct tape as a release agent also. I found that the duct tape would sometimes slick a little to the epoxy. I used Johnson's Floor Wax on top of the duct tape . Worked a lot better. > > > > > > Bobby Muse > > > bmuse@mindspring.com > > > > If you find that you need a release surface that is thinner- try that > > thin brown tape used for sealing packages before mailing. You know, the > > stuff that is "officially" approved by UPS and USPS. This stuff is micro > > thin and works well. > > > > tomc@afn.org > > KR2 N262TC > > 95% done, 45% to go > > Excellent tip, Tom. How difficult is it to get the tape off the part it > is protecting? > > Ted Jones It comes right off, but just to be safe, I wouldn't leave it on any longer than I had to. And definitely don't leave it in the sun. Tom tomc@afn.org ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 09:36:07 -0700 From: Tom Crawford Subject: Re: KR: New Test Plan web page EagleGator@aol.com wrote: > > I put down my slide rule long enough to pull myself a little further into the > current century and created a web page to distribute the updates to the > now-famous (infamous?) test plan draft. I've had quite a few requests for > updates, so here's the easiest way to get them. Just visit the newly > created, highly incomplete, under major construction web page at > > http://members.aol.com/eaglegator > > Go to the "KR Test Plan" link (yup, multiple pages! Sorry, I impress > easily), and all the updates will be posted there as I make them. I regret > that the files are still in MS Word 7.0, I had to get back to my slide rule > before I learned how to convert the file to HTML. > > By the way, I am still soliciting inputs! Normal Procedures and Emergency > Procedures checklists (in ANY file format) would be very helpful so that I > don't have to create them from scratch. Please send anything else that folks > have that might be helpful to everyone. This is a gourp effort, just like > KROnline, and will be made better by your contributions. Also, your > questions are very valuable in making this a good plan, especially the > "stupid" ones... Someone else has the same question and is too timid to > ask, and they will benefit from the answer. Just send me a private email and > I promise I won't tell anyone who asked what. If you don't believe me, just > ask... oh, wait, that won't work..... ;-}} Now where did I put that > slide rule.... > > Cheers! > Rick Junkin > EagleGator@aol.com Rick, I have been unable to get my Word viewer to work properly. Are there any plans to put your test plan into HTML? Tom tomc@afn.org ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 11:01:45 -0400 (EDT) From: MikeTnyc@aol.com Subject: Re: KR: Re:Tiedown ideas >> > You could cold bend a piece of 1/8 inch 4130 to form an L shape, etc. >> Mine is similar, but I ran a piece of 5/16 X 0.058 tubing (with mounting >plate >> welded on) up along the outside of the spar near the tip. >> The tie downs will be 3/16 rod, made into an eyebolt. The eyebolt will >have >> a padded shoulder, and a large padded bearing plate that will fit on top >over >> the spar. The entire thing will be held on with a wing nut. Do you mean it's removeable? I was thinking that on a plane as clean as the KR, a conventional spamcan-type eyebolt could be dirty enough to be a significant component of the total drag. I've seen handles for fancy drawers, etc., that fold down flush with the surface. I wonder if something like this could be adapted, spring loaded to fold up against the wing when not in use. An eyebolt that screwed into a threaded socket on the wing would be almost as good, although slower to use. Mike Taglieri ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 08:39:21 -0700 From: Micheal Mims Subject: KR: Re: Canopy Info At 06:03 AM 6/5/97 -0400, you wrote: >Mike, can you get me a copy of those same instructions? Let me know.... > > >Take care, Yep, that's my plan! I want to publish it in the KROnline and I will more than likely post it on my web site in Adobe Acrobat format (download that Acrobat Reader!). The reason for using Adobe is I am limited on server space and Adobe compresses the heck out of Word files. A 3 meg Word file can be as little as 150k in Acrobat. I hope to have it finished in a week or two, I will keep you posted! ________________________________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 11:50:20 -0400 (EDT) From: Baleco@aol.com Subject: Re: KR: Transponder stuff In a message dated 97-06-05 11:14:36 EDT, you write: << Those of you who have mounted your transponder, I need to know what is the typical size of the mounting tray? Im guessing like most aviation electronics they are about 14 inches deep 7 inches wide and 2 inches tall. >> My Terra is of course 1/2 the normal width so is 3 1/2" wide by 2 inches tall and about 12 inches deep. Sad part is, we have Class C in our area about to become Class B. The Xponder is required but I've been told they routinely delete 1200 returns. Marty ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 08:51:54 -0700 From: Micheal Mims Subject: Re: KR: New Test Plan web page (no archive) At 09:36 AM 6/5/97 -0700, you wrote: >I have been unable to get my Word viewer to work properly. Are there any >plans to put your test plan into HTML? > >Tom >tomc@afn.org > Can you use Adobe Acrobat? I have a version of it posted somewhere on my web site in Acrobat. I guess I should update it as it is the original version of the test flight plan. ________________________________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 09:22:27 -0700 From: Micheal Mims Subject: Re: KR: Transponder stuff At 11:50 AM 6/5/97 -0400, you wrote: > My Terra is of course 1/2 the normal width so is 3 1/2" wide >by 2 inches tall and about 12 inches deep. Sad part is, we have Class C in >our area about to become Class B. The Xponder is required but I've been told >they routinely delete 1200 returns. > > Marty > Thanks, we got some pretty classy airspace around here too. Im about 50 miles south of LAX, 20 miles south of Long Beach and 2 miles south of SNA (Orange County International). There is plans in the works to turn MCAS El Toro into another International Airport which is about 5 miles to the east. I guess that's why all of us Experimenters park in Chino! ________________________________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 12:43:11 -0400 From: Patrick Flowers Subject: Re: KR: Transponder stuff Baleco@aol.com wrote: > > The Xponder is required but I've been told > they routinely delete 1200 returns. You know, this kind of garbage really bends me out of shape big time. The FAA shoved these overpriced little rattle boxes down our throats in the name of safety, (because you just can't have us little VFR guys intermingling with those all important IFR ops without some kind of dog collar around our necks) and it comes out that the controllers on the front lines don't want all the little 1200s cluttering up their displays anyway. Most of us have no desire to land at Class B or C airports, and even if you wanted to, it's not that big a deal to do it without a transponder. The Charlotte EAA chapter is based in an old hangar at CLT (Class B). One of our members had a beautiful restored J-3. He'd fly in about once a month with just a prior phone call and a King handheld COM! #@%* bureaucrats!! Excuse me while I go chew some nails! Patrick - -- Patrick Flowers Mailto:patri63@ibm.net ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 09:44:13 -0700 From: Micheal Mims Subject: Re: KR: New Test Plan web page (no archive) At 08:51 AM 6/5/97 -0700, you wrote: >At 09:36 AM 6/5/97 -0700, you wrote: >>I have been unable to get my Word viewer to work properly. Are there any >>plans to put your test plan into HTML? >> >>Tom >>tomc@afn.org >> > >Can you use Adobe Acrobat? I have a version of it posted somewhere on my >web site in Acrobat. I guess I should update it as it is the original >version of the test flight plan. > OK sports fans, if you have the Acrobat Reader plugin, point your browsers to: http://members.aol.com/kr2smazda/kr2srev2.pdf To see the latest revision to the flight test manual. >________________________________ >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >Micheal Mims >Just Plane Nutts >mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com > >http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand > > > ________________________________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 13:47:31 -0400 (EDT) From: Baleco@aol.com Subject: Re: KR: Transponder stuff In a message dated 97-06-05 12:53:48 EDT, you write: << Thanks, we got some pretty classy airspace around here too. Im about 50 miles south of LAX, 20 miles south of Long Beach and 2 miles south of SNA (Orange County International). There is plans in the works to turn MCAS El Toro into another International Airport which is about 5 miles to the east. I guess that's why all of us Experimenters park in Chino! >> Not just experimenters but anything that can't be identified as a "heavy" gets vectored all over the place intentionally in my opinion to discourage us from transitioning the airspace. They got what they wanted from me, I divert. Marty ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 13:54:24 -0400 (EDT) From: Baleco@aol.com Subject: Re: KR: Transponder stuff In a message dated 97-06-05 13:03:11 EDT, you write: << You know, this kind of garbage really bends me out of shape big time. The FAA shoved these overpriced little rattle boxes down our throats in the name of safety, (because you just can't have us little VFR guys intermingling with those all important IFR ops without some kind of dog collar around our necks) and it comes out that the controllers on the front lines don't want all the little 1200s cluttering up their displays anyway. >> One thing I probably should have mentioned that you just reminded me of...my base airport is just outside Class C and is about to be UNDER Class B. The little Sonerai clipping along at 130knots can be hard to see. I've noticed my transponder gets real busy when one of the airliners go by. I suspect their TCAS is querying my Xponder. They most certainly would be considering all replys 1200 or otherwise. It gets busy here during a "push" especially. They pass our airport sometimes as low as 500-1000ft above our pattern altitude. I use the Xponder and Mode C all the time if not to comply with the regs then to keep me from getting squashed like a bug on the leading edge of a Delta jet. Marty ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 15:12:00 -0400 (EDT) From: SLIMPIDLIN@aol.com Subject: Re: KR: ??? from a newbie KR guys, Sorry this mail will be in your boxes but didnt know Rons address.I believe you are in Colo. Springs as I am.I too have seen your newly acquired KR2S in kitplane mag,and would very much like to see it in person.have been looking into KRs for a few yrs now,have even been to Jeanettes shop and talked to her.Wife says I cant start one until I finish the st.rod (36 Chev.truck).Thats probably the wiser thing she has enforced on me.Hope to hear from you Ron Lee,my E-mail is Slimpidlin@ AOL.com Love this KRnet lotsa info from you guys,keep up good work. Slim ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 13:15:13 -0600 (MDT) From: Ron Lee Subject: Re: KR: New Test Plan web page (no archive) >OK sports fans, if you have the Acrobat Reader plugin, point your browsers to: > >http://members.aol.com/kr2smazda/kr2srev2.pdf > >To see the latest revision to the flight test manual. > Unless there has been a numbering change the last one is kr2srev3.doc (26 May) That is Word format of course Ron ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 13:23:46 -0600 (MDT) From: Ron Lee Subject: Re: KR: Re:Tiedown ideas Sounds like another KROnline article. A compilation of tiedown ideas. Would not require a lot of writing but pictures/diagrams are good. In reviewing the KR2 plans, I noticed that a structural attachment to the rear spar was made at the upper big piece of wood (forget the technical term!). I assume that tiedowns would also have to tie into the main spar caps (is that right?), as opposed to the veneer like portion of the spar. Any general rules on how many holes can be drilled in a structural spar cap? Ron ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 12:24:20 -0700 From: Micheal Mims Subject: Re: KR: New Test Plan web page (no archive) At 01:15 PM 6/5/97 -0600, you wrote: > >>OK sports fans, if you have the Acrobat Reader plugin, point your browsers to: >> >>http://members.aol.com/kr2smazda/kr2srev2.pdf >> >>To see the latest revision to the flight test manual. >> > > > >Unless there has been a numbering change the last one is kr2srev3.doc (26 May) >That is Word format of course > >Ron > The latest is kr2srev4.pdf (or .doc) but the link is pointing to where the older version was. I just uploaded the new version in the place of the old. When you view or save the file it will save as kr2srev4.pdf I know the old title at the end of the link is confusing but you guys were not supposed to notice that! :-) If you click on the link it will take you to the new version, I promise! ________________________________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 12:33:15 -0700 From: Micheal Mims Subject: Re: KR: Re:Tiedown ideas At 01:23 PM 6/5/97 -0600, you wrote: >Any general rules on how many holes can be drilled in a structural >spar cap? > This must be a question that goes through everyones mind while we drill all those holes in our spar caps for pulleys, wing attach fittings, landing gear, and now tie down rings. So what is the general rule? Does anyone know? Please share! :-) ________________________________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 17:58:55 -0400 From: Vince Bozik Subject: Re: KR: New Test Plan web page (no archive) Micheal Mims wrote: > > At 09:36 AM 6/5/97 -0700, you wrote: > >I have been unable to get my Word viewer to work properly. Are there any > >plans to put your test plan into HTML? > > > >Tom > >tomc@afn.org > > > > Can you use Adobe Acrobat? I have a version of it posted somewhere on my > web site in Acrobat. I guess I should update it as it is the original > version of the test flight plan. > If you guys really want it, I'll translate and post it into HTML. I just need the latest draft, a few days, and it'll be up. Just let me know... Vince - -- Vince Bozik - Athens, Georgia Mailto:ICBM@ix.netcom.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 18:48:02 -0400 (EDT) From: Horn2004@aol.com Subject: Re: KR: Canopy Doorsill In a message dated 6/5/97 2:06:58 PM, you wrote: <> Mike, just got back from your site and it (the canopy) looks very nice. One question, though. What are your plans for the hinge slots? I assume you'll cover them somehow. Also, I seem to remember you were going to use silicone to seal the canopy. If so, how. If not, how. Lookin' good. Steve Horn Horn2004@aol.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 16:53:46 -0600 (MDT) From: Ron Lee Subject: KR: Test plan site (No archive) I just checked the site and the file is SAVED as REV 2 but when I call up the file it is REV 4. Ron Lee ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 18:15:38 -0700 From: Ted & Louisa Jones Subject: Re: KR: Project update > > > > Excellent tip, Tom. How difficult is it to get the tape off the part it > > is protecting? > > > > Ted Jones > > It comes right off, but just to be safe, I wouldn't leave it on any > longer than I had to. And definitely don't leave it in the sun. > > Tom > tomc@afn.org Roger that. If you leave duct tape in the sun the silver stuff and some of the fabric flakes off leaving the glue behind. Masking tape is the worst, it bakes on and _maybe_ you can get it off with acetone. Thanks for the tip. Ted Jones ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 17:24:29 -0600 (MDT) From: Ron Lee Subject: KR: GPS Moving Map Software Recently someone posted a link to a site that offers 3D software for use with GPS. It looks great from the web site. A similar discussion on one of the rec.aviation newsgroups discussed the large size of even a laptop computer...suggesting palmtops..etc. The following link is of a reported shareware program that is DOS based and works on the smaller machines. I am still downloading it so I can't comment yet on its capabilities. But I bet it is better than VOR! Ron (Still haven't taxied yet) Lee ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 16:27:01 -0700 From: Micheal Mims Subject: Re: KR: Canopy Doorsill At 06:48 PM 6/5/97 -0400, you wrote: >Mike, just got back from your site and it (the canopy) looks very nice. One >question, though. What are your plans for the hinge slots? I assume you'll >cover them somehow. Also, I seem to remember you were going to use silicone >to seal the canopy. If so, how. If not, how. Interesting you ask, I will be working on the problem in about 2 hours! :-) I plan to make two male molds from foam and cover them with duct tape. They will be about 1/2 inch think by 3 inches long, the edge with the duct tape will be rounded. I plan to fill the slots with flox and then push these molds down into the flox at the right angle. After they cure I can pull out the foam and tape and it should leave two nice uniform slots that the hinge arms will fit down into, as far as trying to cover the top of the slot completely I am not going to bother with that. AS for the seal, After the windshield and windows are installed I will do the duct tape doorsill trick again on the front and aft sections of the door. This will give me a perfect surface all the way around and I can use a thin layer of silicon to seal it up. ________________________________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 17:11:50 -0700 From: Micheal Mims Subject: Re: KR: GPS Moving Map Software At 05:24 PM 6/5/97 -0600, you wrote: >The following link is of a reported shareware program that is DOS >based and works on the smaller machines. I am still downloading >it so I can't comment yet on its capabilities. > There was no link on your post, I am interested in this because I have an old Dell 386 laptop with a 80 meg drive and 12 meg ram, its a very small unit compared to todays laptops and I wouldn't mind it in my cockpit! Please post the URL. Thanks! I also have a Newton 120 which I think is a useless piece of equipment but I did manage to download a share ware program for it but it only shows road and county borders etc. Plus if I wanted the password to get it to function at 100% I had to send a check for $200 dollars to the author! Apple software is such a joke! (price wise) _______________________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 18:56:30 -0600 (MDT) From: Ron Lee Subject: Re: KR: GPS Moving Map Software >There was no link on your post, (SNIP) > >Micheal Mims OOPS!!! ftp://ftp.one.net/pub/users/hamm/poketfms.zip That was NOT me who made the first post but the real Ron Lee will correct the mistake. Ron ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 20:17:20 From: brian whatcott Subject: Re: KR: Transponder stuff At 12:43 6/5/97 -0400, Patrick F wrote: >Baleco@aol.com wrote: >> >> The Xponder is required but I've been told >> they routinely delete 1200 returns. > >You know, this kind of garbage really bends me out of shape big time. >The FAA shoved these overpriced little rattle boxes down our throats in >the name of safety... >Patrick Flowers I don't suppose it will make you feel any better, but once you have seen a 737 coming on your twelve oclock, you feel a little different about transponders. I shortly thereafter bought a (used) transponder, a strobe for the fin and wrote a letter to the Administrator. Then I got a letter requesting the pleasure of my company at the DFW tower building with the tower manager - an ex-Navy man... ...I know they checked which regs I had been breaking; they decided I hadn't - but they didn't get any confessions back from the high-frequency 737 operator at Love, either. Regards brian whatcott Altus OK ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 04:18:17 -0700 From: Donald Reid Subject: Re: KR: Re:Tiedown ideas Micheal Mims wrote: > > At 01:23 PM 6/5/97 -0600, you wrote: > >Any general rules on how many holes can be drilled in a structural > >spar cap? > > > > This must be a question that goes through everyones mind while we drill all > those holes in our spar caps for pulleys, wing attach fittings, landing > gear, and now tie down rings. So what is the general rule? Does anyone > know? Please share! :-) > Here are some general rules for drilling holes. In a solid beam like the stabilizer spars, a fairly large amount of material can be removed from the center of the spar. The hinge bolts and similar will not reduce the strength of the spar at all. When a beam deflects under load, it will bend in a curve. The inside of the curve will be under compression (pushingor squeezing) and the outside of the curve will be under tension (stretching or pulling). The center of the curve is under no strain at all. In a built up spar like in the wing, things are a little different. Out near the tip, the spar is a lot stronger than it needs to be. Lots of holes are OK. The part of the spar that is the most heavily loaded is right at the fuselage. Do not drill any more holes than possible, either inside or outside the fuselage. Holes like the wing attachment fittings are OK since the spar caps in the center section are not tapered. There is just as much material at the wing attachment fitting as there is at the wing root, but the stress levels are lower. The stress levels in the spar decrease as you get to the center or the wing. Reasonable holes can be drilled in either the spar caps or the plywood shear web. If you drill a hole and don't use it, the standard aviation practice is the plug it with a wooden dowel soaked in glue. This is probably more than anyone wants to hear. My kids have learned that if they ask a technical question, they get a long answer. Just an engineering geek at work and play. - -- Don Reid donreid@erols.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 04:24:14 -0700 From: Donald Reid Subject: Re: KR: Re:Tiedown ideas MikeTnyc@aol.com wrote: > Do you mean it's removeable? I was thinking that on a plane as clean as the > KR, a conventional spamcan-type eyebolt could be dirty enough to be a > significant component of the total drag. I've seen handles for fancy > drawers, etc., that fold down flush with the surface. I wonder if something > like this could be adapted, spring loaded to fold up against the wing when > not in use. An eyebolt that screwed into a threaded socket on the wing would > be almost as good, although slower to use. > > Mike Taglieri Yes, mine is removeable. Undo the wing nut on top of the wing, drop the eyebolt out of the wing, nothing left but a small hole through wing surface. I thought of the spring loaded hook or eyebolt that would qo up in the wing and deceide that the removeable would be easier. - -- Don Reid donreid@erols.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 20:31:46 From: brian whatcott Subject: Re: KR: Transponder stuff At 13:47 6/5/97 -0400,Marty wrote: >... Not just experimenters but anything that can't be >identified as a "heavy" gets vectored all over the place intentionally in my >opinion to discourage us from transitioning the airspace. They got what they >wanted from me, I divert. > > Marty > This can be a trap; in one of my less glorious moments I vectored around the Houston airspace from the north heading to Hobby ( on the south side.) Despite a Loran, I gave it such a wide birth that I landed long after my ETA. (When the penny dropped about stretching my time, I had dropped to best economy speed which was slow - and aggravated the lateness) I was getting tower calls asking if I wanted a straight-in - which I declined - but the fuel man filled me with complete tanks less about 10 minutes flight time.... and that is plainly dumb. So, when in doubt, declare an emergency - or at least don't screw round with self-vectors... Regards brian whatcott Altus OK ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 18:50:08 -0700 From: Micheal Mims Subject: Re: KR: Transponder stuff Baleco@aol.com wrote: >>> >>> The Xponder is required but I've been told >>> they routinely delete 1200 returns. >> >>You know, this kind of garbage really bends me out of shape big time. >>The FAA shoved these overpriced little rattle boxes down our throats in >>the name of safety... >>Patrick Flowers I guess I am the one who started this and I should have included that the single most benefit from us (little guys) using mode C is the big guys who have TCAS have an easier time doing their job. I have had the opportunity to fly jump seat in transport aircraft a few times (got some stick time in a CV-580 once) and it is annoying as hell to hear the TCAS alarm going off because off all the non mode C traffic! If the FAA would have just came out and said, do this so the TCAS equipped aircraft can avoid you and let us (little guys) continue to fly where we used too without the headaches of trying to talk to ATC, the transition would have went a bit smoother! Don't get me wrong, I like talking to ATC, I are a IFR rated pilot (actually ATP but that's another story) but the problem in Southern California is you don't get a chance! They are so overworked its incredible! THIS you can blame on the FAA and beurocrats. The poor ATC employee just doesn't have the time to deal with anything that isn't IFR, (kinda weird considering its CAVU here about 89% of the year!) and if he does his primary concern is keeping you out of his corridor because its full of heavy metal. Why is it full of heavy metal? Deregulation? I don't know? _______________________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 18:57:31 -0700 From: Micheal Mims Subject: Re: KR: Re:Tiedown ideas At 04:18 AM 6/5/97 -0700, you wrote: to hear. My kids have learned that if >they ask a technical question, they get a long answer. >Just an engineering geek at work and play. NO this is exactly what I wanted to hear! :-) Does making the shear web in the location of the holes thicker help? I glued a 1/4 ply pad under my gear attach points (see http://pw2.netcom.com/~mimsmand/gear.html ). Did this create the dreaded stress riser? _______________________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 06:28:46 -0700 From: Donald Reid Subject: Re: KR: Re:Tiedown ideas Micheal Mims wrote: > > NO this is exactly what I wanted to hear! :-) Does making the shear web in > the location of the holes thicker help? I glued a 1/4 ply pad under my gear > attach points (see http://pw2.netcom.com/~mimsmand/gear.html ). Did this > create the dreaded stress riser? > I tried to look before answering but could not get through right away. I will answer anyway. A stress riser is created by several ways. In the metal fittings we make, a scratch or even a sharp edge will where the stresses concentrate and where the part will fail. Polish all surfaces and chamfer all holes. In the wooden spars, a stress riser can be created by a radical change in the material properties or size. If there is an extra bearing plate added, the edges should be beveled in some way so that there is no abrupt change in the cross sectional area. Quoting from ANC-18, Design of Wood Aircraft Structure, June 1951 "Whenever highly concentrated loads are introduced, greater bearing strength can be obtained by scarfing in high-density material. ... Whenever metal fittings are attached to wood members, it is generally advisable to reinforce the wood against crushing by the use of high-density bearing plates ... cross banding of these plates will help to prevent splitting of the solid wood member." Bearing plates that have been beveled are good and do not introduce a stress riser. Still a geek at heart. - -- Don Reid donreid@erols.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Jun 97 7:13:50 ÿÿÿ From: steveb@aviation.denel.co.za Subject: RE: KR: Insufficient Gravity Fuel Flow Parley Byington wrote: "I have a 1835 VW KR-2 with a turbo charger. While experimenting with >the intake system I starved the engine of fuel (due to shutting off the >electric fuel pump " Was this TOTAL starvation or would the engine run at a lower power setting? Steve in SA - ---------- From: SMTP1@K1 - Server@Servers[] To: Cc: Subject: KR: Insufficient Gravity Fuel Flow Date: Saturday, May 31, 1997 7:40AM At 22:50 97/5/30 -0800, you wrote: >Marty > >I have a 1835 VW KR-2 with a turbo charger. While experimenting with >the intake system I starved the engine of fuel (due to shutting off the >electric fuel pump and discovering the gravity flow at full power >wasn't sufficient). The engine continued to windmill and started up >as soon as I switched the fuel pump back on. At the time the engine >quit I was passing through 155 mph and the speed was still increasing. >I estimate the engine restarted with in 5 seconds of quiting, almost >before I could get really concerned. Hope this is of some interest. > >Parley Byington > Could you elaborate on the fuel starvation problem. I am not sure that fuel pumps are standard on KRs so I am curious about this occurence. Ron Lee ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 01:21:49 -0400 (EDT) From: MikeTnyc@aol.com Subject: Re: KR: Transponders >>You need a transponder to fly into the Mode C veil if your plane >>was CERTIFIED with an ENGINE-POWERED electrical system. >Not quite correct, Mike. If you have ANY kind of a certificated aircraft, you > >MUST have a mode-C transponder in it to fly into the 30 nm mode-C veil area, >non-electrical aircraft or otherwise. > >For folks flying non-electric aircraft (like antiques and non-electric >homebuilts), you can, however, call the FAA people in the mode-C veil area >concerned and make arrangements with them to enter the area at a specific >time >and date. But this is a hassle if you plan on operating in a mode-C area on a > >routine basis. This is not what I have always read, so I'm unconvinced it's correct, unless the regulations have changed very recently. Are you quoting from a recent revision of the FAR's, and which one? I also think such a change in the regulations would be more trouble than it would be worth. The big Class B's often have many little uncontrolled fields scattered around inside the veil area (including private fields, I count 15 on the Kennedy/Newark/LaGuardia Class B terminal chart). Since the Piper Cubs, Aeroncas, older-generation homebuilts, etc., that tend to inhabit these fields usually have no electrical systems, making them install transponders would be prohibitively expensive to the owners of these planes, since their engines often have no provision for a generator. It would also encourage people to relocate outside the veil, causing a severe economic impact to these airfields, some of which are of historic importance to aviation. I think the FAA may have kept this exception in the rules because there would otherwise be a great deal of political turmoil for no particular gain, since there's no real danger if the planes stay out of the controlled airspace itself. I would be surprised if it has been summarily changed. Mike Taglieri Mike Taglieri ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 01:21:51 -0400 (EDT) From: MikeTnyc@aol.com Subject: Re: KR: ??? from a newbie >>Can I build one of these things without being an engineer, assuming that I >>am a competant builder. >> >Yes you can!! Buy yourself a set of KR2S plans and build it as is, if you >have the extra cash buy the pre molded parts if not then scratch build them. >Nothing needs to be changed on the KR2S, it will fly fine built the way the >plans call for. I'm not sure I agree with this, since most people on this list (Including Mike, I think) will agree that the KR plans are extremely sketchy compared to modern designs like the Pulsar, Kitfox, etc., and many, many details have to be custom-designed that would be cut-and-dried in the plans of modern planes (which are also much more expensive, of course). The KR-2S, the stretched version being built by many people now, is particularly confusing, since it currently uses the original KR-2 plans plus a set of modifications to those plans. This method was thrown together by the factory based on suggestions for modifications by KR-2 builders, and the new plane has never been tested by the factory, since it has no design capability now and the original designer has been dead for many years. A few KR-2S's are now in the air and fly OK, and the plans are currently being revised and will someday be less confusing. However, I doubt ANY KR plans will ever be as detailed as plans for modern planes, so the KR tends to attract people who want to put their own personal stamp on the plane and do their own design where the plans are vague. If you want a "follow-the-book-exactly" homebuilt, this probably isn't it. Mike Taglieri ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 22:35:38 -0700 From: Ross Youngblood Subject: KR: Progress Report Well, I was going to try and spray some topcoat today, but after looking at the plane in the sunlight (rare opportunity in Oregon), I found some pinholes etc that need a final bout of sanding/filling before I can spray. I just didn't have it in me to sand this evening, so I washed it and put it back in the garage... Whew! Instead I cut out some engine baffle pieces based on templates I recieved from Great Planes when I purchased my engine kit. At first I wasn't sure I could figure out where all the pieces went, even with the photos in the little write up. Once I had them cut and formed I figured out how it all goes together. This is one of those tasks that would have taken forever for me to figure out without the templates. The aluminum pieces capture nifty threaded holes in the VW case which are intended for stock baffeling. TIPS: We bought some new couches from Wards a couple of years ago, and they came packed in LARGE bubble rap pouches. Turns out these bubble rap sheets work great to line the shop floor. They are bouncy to walk on, and it doesn't matter if you drip resin, epoxy or micro on them. Just rinse them out on the lawn. -- Ross - -- Ross Youngblood KRNET-L administrator mailto:rossy@teleport.com http://www.teleport.com/~rossy/N541RY.htm ------------------------------ End of krnet-l-digest V1 #33 ****************************