From: owner-krnet-l-digest@teleport.com[SMTP:owner-krnet-l-digest@teleport.com] Sent: Saturday, November 29, 1997 8:00 AM To: krnet-l-digest@teleport.com Subject: krnet-l-digest V1 #180 krnet-l-digest Saturday, November 29 1997 Volume 01 : Number 180 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 27 Nov 1997 14:24:50 -0800 From: Ross Youngblood Subject: KR: Non-member submission from ["Edward O'Beirne" ]] This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - --------------C639467C0D6C63263F1DDB8C Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit - --------------C639467C0D6C63263F1DDB8C Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: owner-krnet-l@lists.teleport.com Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp2.teleport.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id VAA17824; Tue, 25 Nov 1997 21:18:44 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 21:18:44 -0800 (PST) From: owner-krnet-l@teleport.com Message-Id: <199711260518.VAA17824@smtp2.teleport.com> To: owner-krnet-l@teleport.com Subject: BOUNCE krnet-l@lists.teleport.com: Non-member submission from ["Edward O'Beirne" ] >From krnet-l-owner Tue Nov 25 21:18:41 1997 Received: from UPIMSRGSMTP09 (upimsrgsmtp09.msn.com [207.68.152.53]) by smtp2.teleport.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id VAA17804 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 1997 21:18:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from upmajb09 - 204.95.110.82 by msn.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue, 25 Nov 1997 21:18:36 -0800 Date: Wed, 26 Nov 97 06:21:32 UT From: "Edward O'Beirne" Message-Id: To: krnet-l@teleport.com Subject: Need a ride an a KR! I'm inches away from buying a KR-2 kit, and would like to take a ride in one before I sign the check. If anyone in Arizona or nearby can spare a demo flight, I would be most gracious, and would gladly buy fuel and lunch. Please let me know by phone (602) 953-2832 or e-mail edobeirne@juno.com. Even if you don't live in the area but know how I might arrange a flight, I'd like to hear from you. Thanks, and Blue Skies! Ed O'Beirne - --------------C639467C0D6C63263F1DDB8C-- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Nov 1997 14:40:00 -0800 From: Ross Youngblood Subject: KR: Happy Thanksgiving I'm sitting here catching up on all the admin tasks while I smell the turkey! Smells good! DOH! I accidently uns*bscribed myself from KRNET last week when I sent a bad command to majordomo... a command without an address, he figures if you don't send an email address, you must be talking about yourself. Majordomo can be kinda stupid.... like your administrator. I just hooked up my throttle and mixture linkages. Many thanks to Tom Crawfords who's post kicked the brain cells loose, and I went crazy with brackets until I got somthing that looks pretty good. Happy holidays! -- Ross ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Nov 1997 19:00:07 -0600 From: brian whatcott Subject: Re: KR: How is your Itialian? At 14:16 11/27/97 -0800, Rossy wrote: >How's your Italian? My Italian is non-existant but I drove thru Italy coupla times, so I must be an expert, right? (Believe NOTHING of my translation...) Brian >Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 15:08:00 +0100 >Message-Id: <9711191408.AA13412@aixopenet6.ope.net> >Reply-To: a.pecorara@telecomitalia.it >From: alessandro.pecorara@aixopenet6.ope.net >To: krnet-l@teleport.com >Subject: C'e' una cartolina da Torino che ti attende! Subject: There is a postcard (?) of Turin waiting for you! >Ciao KR-net. alessandro pecorara ti ha spedito una cartolina da Torino. Hi KR-Heads. Alessandro P. has reserved a postcard of Turin for you. >Per riceverla vai all'indirizzo: To receive it, go to this URL: http://www.comune.torino.it/htbin/cartoline/get_card.pl?QEIBNJCA >La tua cartolina sara' disponibile all'indirizzo per 10 giorni. It will take about 10 days to arrive. >Saluti > So Long. >Servizio offerto dal Comune di Torino: Service of the City of Turin http://www.comune.torino.it/cartoline brian whatcott Altus OK ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 01:03:39 -0500 (EST) From: MikeTnyc@aol.com Subject: Re: KR: missing something >Well my company has unknowingly paid me to read the plans from cover to >cover and I seem to be missing a couple of things. > >I dont recall seeing a parts list that includes specifications. I just have >the general descriptions along with how much it costs to buy it from RR. > >Specifically I'm interested in things like what weight BID to use, and I'd >also like to have the Specs on the foam. > >Did I miss something? > >I thought I'd bother you all with these silly questions before I call RR. >> Any of the cataloges are a good source of info. In A/C Spruce, they say... >What I have a really hard time uderstanding is why cant I find this in the >plans? Thats what you shell out the $245 for isnt it? I would at least >expect a detailed materials list. Your questions aren't silly -- the only silly thing is thinking RR would give you an answer to them. Don't hold your breath. The scarcity of data might be because Dynel, the original covering, is no longer readily available, and several different types of glass can be used instead. Also, several different types of foam can be used. A more cynical answer would be that RR has no interest in giving you this info because it would cut into their own product sales. At any rate, I found specs on KR construction material, including foam and glass, in the Wicks catalog. Mike Taglieri ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 01:03:46 -0500 (EST) From: MikeTnyc@aol.com Subject: Re: KR: Experimental A/C Liability > They'd certainly have a case if anybody did, and the money to pursue >>it, but If they had such thoughts, they probably gave them up after their >>lawyers told them about the chance of winning. >---------SNIP--------> > What makes you say "They'd certainly have a case if anybody did,..... >"? > > I didn't pay that close attention to the story details and I probably > have missed something. What makes someone else liable if he (Denver) > wasn't even in the air legally? And do we know what actually > caused the crash anyway? Was he operating the aircraft within > it's operating limits, etc.? > > This is not a FLAME, I'm just curious............. > I would not be surprised to see Burt Rutan sued for the John Denver crash. > Burt no longer markets homebuilt designs because he was sued approximately >12 >times by homebuilders, the estate of dead builders and the estate of dead >passengers. He did not settle any case out of court, but went to trial and >won >on technical merits. [snip] > The EAA has also stated that no builder has been >successfully sued for accidents that occur after a homebuilt has been sold. I guess I was unclear in my original post: What I meant was that, unlike most people, Denver's family would certainly be able to afford to hire lawyers and pursue such a lawsuit, that such a lawsuit would get sympathetic press in some publications, and that many mourning fans of Denver and haters of experimental aviation would cheer them on. However, I didn't mean I thought they could win. My post was basically arguing that lawsuit against builders would be virtually unwinnable, and the Denver case would probably be worse than most, since there's apparently evidence both that the plane was out of gas when it crashed and that Denver had little experience in type. Concerning the suits against Rutan, I'm glad this has not become more widespread, since kitplane companies would cease operations if they were getting sued a lot, even if they always won. It's not clear from your post when the lawsuits against Rutan happened, but perhaps his wins are why these suits stopped? At any rate, it's interesting the 12 bereaved families didn't go after the people who built the planes, but against the kitmaker. This may be why Jeanette Rand is so un-keen about modifications people make to her designs and wants everybody to build it to the plans. Mike Taglieri ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Nov 1997 22:30:45 -0800 From: Micheal Mims Subject: Re: KR: missing something At 01:03 AM 11/28/97 -0500, you wrote: >At any rate, I found specs on KR construction material, including foam and glass, in the Wicks catalog. > >Mike Taglieri > > I think that is the best materials list available for a KR, Janette should copy it and use it! :o) I will copy and post it if there's and interest. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts in Irvine Ca. mailto:mikemims@pacbell.net http://home.pacbell.net/mikemims ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 09:25:33 +0100 From: Michele Bucceri Subject: Re: KR: How is your Itialian? Brian, your Italian translation is great!! Just a veeeery little mistake: >La tua cartolina sara' disponibile all'indirizzo per 10 giorni. Shuld be translated as: It(the postacard) will be available for about 10 days. Ciao, Michele - -- MBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMB Michele Bucceri E-mail: mailto:michele.bucceri@italtel.it MBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMB ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 02:21:21 -0800 From: Ross Subject: Re: KR: How is your Itialian? Thanks! This has been terrific! Michele Bucceri wrote: > > Brian, your Italian translation is great!! > > Just a veeeery little mistake: > > >La tua cartolina sara' disponibile all'indirizzo per 10 giorni. > > Shuld be translated as: > > It(the postacard) will be available for about 10 days. > > Ciao, > Michele > > -- > MBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMB > Michele Bucceri > E-mail: mailto:michele.bucceri@italtel.it > MBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMB ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 08:26:57 -0800 From: Donald Reid Subject: Re: KR: Experimental A/C Liability MikeTnyc@aol.com wrote: snip > However, I didn't mean I thought they could win. My post was basically > arguing that lawsuit against builders would be virtually unwinnable, and the > Denver case would probably be worse than most, since there's apparently > evidence both that the plane was out of gas when it crashed and that Denver > had little experience in type. I truely agree that a lawsuit against a builder should be not only unwinnable, but should also never even be filed. This does not change the fact that some fool could get in trouble, find a lawyer, and make your life hell. There are to many cases reported in different forms of media that are offensive to good sense. > Concerning the suits against Rutan, I'm glad this has not become more > widespread, since kitplane companies would cease operations if they were > getting sued a lot, even if they always won. It's not clear from your post > when the lawsuits against Rutan happened, but perhaps his wins are why these > suits stopped? I believe that they were filed, just because he was an easy target and might have had deep pockets. I believe they stopped because he got out of the business and the Rutan Aircraft Factory no longer had deep pockets. Several years ago, the General Manager for the Sensinich (spelling) prop company was in Richmond, and gave a talk at my EAA chapter. He said that they had been sued many times (of the order of 10-20 times), they went to court on each one, and had never lost. They had liability insurance that covered their legal fees, but it has a $100,000 deductable. Each suit cost then (meaning the customers) $100,000 each time they won their case. The cost of each one of their props was 25-30% higher than necessary, just due to their legal costs. I still believe that there are too many lawyers and not enough real cases, and my sister-in-law, who is a lawyer, also agrees. - -- Don Reid mailto:donreid@erols.com http://www.erols.com/donreid/kr_page.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 05:43:41 PST From: "Oscar Zuniga" Subject: KR: Sudden death/lawsuits Mike T. wrote: >In particular, has anyone heard any hint that the family >of John Denver plans to bring a lawsuit against the seller, Rutan, or >anyone else? These things take time, Mike. I would wait until after the official NTSB findings before letting my breath go, if I were the seller. and, >I suppose it is theoretically possible that someone will bring such a >lawsuit after a crash someday, but it's also possible (and probably >more likely) that you'll be killed some day by a duck in flight. I >don't lie awake at night worrying about either one of these. > Lately, we seem to be more worried about an ignition failure, and subsequent power loss, resulting in an 18-wheeler giving us the pancake as we merge onto I-5!! Boy, if you have ever been on I-5 between the Siskiyou Summit (California border) and Portland, the highway is thick with big rigs. But the company car ('80 Tempo 4-banger) powers its way through them with nary a stumble! Ah, for such confidence in single plugs and ignition! Oscar Zuniga Medford, Oregon ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 07:54:43 -0600 (CST) From: Steven A Eberhart Subject: KR: Surprise its twins, NLF's that is Just talked to Ashok about the NLF(1)0115 wind tunnel model, I had some questions about the linkage for the aileron. During the conversation Ashok mentioned that he and Dr. Selig had been talking and they had decided to design a new airfoil section specifically for the KR-2S. THe NLF(1)0115 was still a good choice but they feel that they can optimize a new airfoil to the Reynolds Number range we will be seeing with our KR's. Ashok and Dr. Selig are going to design the airfoil and I am going to build a second wind tunnel model for it. The actual wind tunnel tests will include both airfoils. There may be a third airfoil model if there is enough time. THe nlf(1)0115 model has a 20% chord aileron on it. The new airfoil will probably have a 20% aileron as well. I would like to see data on a slotted flap for the new airfoil so may build a third model with the slotted flap. The wind tunnel access window has moved out a little. We won't get the wind tunnel for another 6 weeks. This does give me time to get the new model finished. We have received checks totaling $400.00 so far. Checks received are from: Mark Langford Richard Mole Ronald Lee Oscar Zuniga John Esch Robert Cornelius Thanks guys, this is becoming something major in sport aviation. Steve Eberhart ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 06:17:31 PST From: "Oscar Zuniga" Subject: KR: Engine mount/weight and balance Don wrote: >The battery installation will be the last thing after paint. Its placement should >fine tune the CG to exactly where I want it. > >-- >Don Reid > Hi, Don The big problem I see with this is routing and snaking-in the wires with the thing essentially finished. Plus mounting the battery (getting to the backside of things to attach hardware, etc.)...unless we're talking about a fairly limited range of locations that have already been considered and provisions made. Let's see: you're an engineer; that means you will have already provided a wireway, plus some dummy mounting points in several well-thought-out locations, plus 12 ft. long pigtails on all wiring, etc...;o) Oscar "got my pocket protector, too" Zuniga Medford, Oregon ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Nov 97 14:20:00 GMT From: "R.H.Mole -Richard Mole" Subject: KR: Book by Bruce Carmichael Sport Aviation carried an article on CFD for the RV-6 in April 1997. On page 51, the article mentioned the availability of the book 'Personal Aircraft Drag Reduction' by Bruce Carmichael. I would very much like to see this book. Does anyone know where to get it and how much it is? EAA didn't seem to know anything about it. Has anyone read it and if so would they recommend it? I'm thinking it might help to set in context some of the stuff on low drag fairings and so on. Richard Mole R.H.Mole@open.ac.uk ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 06:37:46 PST From: "Oscar Zuniga" Subject: KR: Lawsuits >At any rate, it's interesting the 12 bereaved families didn't go after the >people who built the planes, but against the kitmaker. This may be why >Jeanette Rand is so un-keen about modifications people make to her designs >and wants everybody to build it to the plans. > >Mike Taglieri > Yep, Mike- It's called, "deep pockets". Unless the builder/seller happens to be Bill Gates, they will go after the plans designer or kit maker, or even Wicks or Aircraft Spruce... whichever is "greener". I would wonder, as a point of law, if Jeanette Rand has any liability exposure for designs which aren't hers, anyway (they're Ken's)? Hey, I wonder if Bill Gates is thinking about a Microsoft kitplane? Would it have Intel Inside?? (How many trademarks have I infringed here? Can I include O*lite?) Oscar Zuniga Medford, Oregon ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 06:55:52 PST From: "Oscar Zuniga" Subject: KR: fuses >At 07:21 11/22/97 -0600, you wrote: > >> Can anyone tell me the difference between the ACG fuse and >> the 3AG fuse. Someone asked me yesterday and now I'm >> curious...... >> Larry Flesner >> > >Not much. >Here are some sample specs: >Littelfuse > >3AG slo blo - inductive loads - motors >will hold 110% for 4 hrs+ >135% for 1 hr >200% for 5 sec > >Bussman > >AGC fast acting - instruments + electronics >110% indefinite >135% 1 hr or less > >I picked these details out of the Newark cat. >Dunno how far I'd trust this data... > >Regards >brian whatcott >Altus OK > Hi, Brian You got it right, and it's quite important to select the proper fuse for the job. As you note, some are time-delay or slo-blo, others are not, and if you pick the wrong one, you can fry some Narco, or your Facet will pop a fuse when you hit the Master. I have catalogs on Buss, Littelfuse, and others- if anybody needs specifics on a fuse. Far from being "old technology", fuses have a definite place in electrical systems, and do it better than other stuff in many ways. But don't get me wrong- they DO have their place! Oscar Zuniga Medford, Oregon ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 10:05:45 -0600 From: brian whatcott Subject: Re: KR: Book by Bruce Carmichael At 14:20 11/28/97 GMT, you wrote: > >Sport Aviation carried an article on CFD for the RV-6 in April 1997. > >On page 51, the article mentioned the availability of the book > 'Personal Aircraft Drag Reduction' by Bruce Carmichael. >... >Richard Mole >R.H.Mole@open.ac.uk > > I searched www.amazon.com They have 2.5 million titles in the catalog they say. But I drew a blank on the title. A power search found 5 books with aircraft and drag in the title but not this one. So it may possibly be a self-publish. There are precious few who are in a position to use this material, I suppose. You would need to write him if this is the case. Unfortunately, there are 28 Bruce Carmichaels in the U.S. Find a city of residence or some other detail if you want me to pin him down. Regards ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 09:10:42 -0800 From: Micheal Mims Subject: Re: KR: Engine mount/weight and balance At 06:17 AM 11/28/97 PST, you wrote: Let's see: you're an engineer;.............. >Oscar "got my pocket protector, too" Zuniga So that's what happened to you! :o) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts in Irvine Ca. mailto:mikemims@pacbell.net http://home.pacbell.net/mikemims ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 10:03:32 -0800 From: hjfine@wave.net Subject: Re: KR: Experimental A/C Liability At 09:19 AM 11/27/97 -0800, you wrote: >At 09:02 AM 11/27/97 -0800, you wrote: >>Yes, I am paranoid about liabilty. There are too many lawyers chasing too >few real cases. >> >>-- >>Don Reid >>mailto:donreid@erols.com >>http://www.erols.com/donreid/kr_page.htm >> > >Yea me too, so I plan to give mine to my oldest son when he gets his >license. (of course that's if I deem my KR as a safe airplane) >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >Micheal Mims >Just Plane Nutts in Irvine Ca. >mailto:mikemims@pacbell.net >http://home.pacbell.net/mikemims > >Mike and Don: To limit your liability, convey all your assets into a family limited partnership or an irrevocable trust. The parasites will then leave you alone. I'm not a lawyer by the way. If you want more details, I'd be happy to pass them on to you. Hank > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 13:11:00 -0500 (EST) From: MikeTnyc@aol.com Subject: KR: Re: Removing wings / trailering plane > I plan to remove the wings and trailer to my home which is 2 miles away >from a remote mountain airport. The KR will fit nicely into my shop. Is it >unrealistic of me to think that I can do this every time I want to fly? >Thanks guys. Hank Happy Thanksgiving to one and all! >Well after watching the guy at the gathering spend almost 2 hours to install >and another 2 hours to remove I have to answer YES it is very unrealistic. >I don't think the intent of the WAFs was allow the builder/flyer to remove >the wings and trailer it home every time, but to allow the KR to be built in >a very small place (no one piece spar to wrestle with). No disrespect meant to the KR, but if you really want to trailer your plane to the airport for every flight, you might want to consider building a Sonerai instead. It's a similar 2-place VW powered plane, (although tandem and made from tube & fabric instead of wood & 'glass), but it has wings that are designed to fold in minutes. Several people in the old newsletters tried to devise such a system for the KR, but I don't think anybody perfected one. Mike Taglieri ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 10:16:15 -0800 From: Micheal Mims Subject: Re: KR: Re: Removing wings / trailering plane At 01:11 PM 11/28/97 -0500, you wrote: >No disrespect meant to the KR, but if you really want to trailer your plane >to the airport for every flight, you might want to consider building a >Sonerai instead. Non taken Im sure and I think your right. If its one of the primary items (removable wings) that a builder is looking at in a airplane then I think the KR is NOT your plane. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts in Irvine Ca. mailto:mikemims@pacbell.net http://home.pacbell.net/mikemims ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 21:37:33 GMT From: bbland@busprod.com (Brian Bland) Subject: KR: Web page Hello everyone! I am currently updating my web page. Some of it has been changed already. Please keep checking it out and see my changes in the next couple of days. If I do not have a link to your page please e-mail me privately with your page address and I will add it. Thanks Brian J. Bland, PP, A&P Claremore, OK Building stretched and widened KR-2S=20 KR-2SBuilder@bigfoot.com http://www.busprod.com/bbland/kr2s.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 16:06:53 -0800 From: hjfine@wave.net Subject: Re: KR: Re: Removing wings / trailering plane At 01:11 PM 11/28/97 -0500, you wrote: >> I plan to remove the wings and trailer to my home which is 2 miles away >>from a remote mountain airport. The KR will fit nicely into my shop. Is it >>unrealistic of me to think that I can do this every time I want to fly? >>Thanks guys. Hank Happy Thanksgiving to one and all! > >>Well after watching the guy at the gathering spend almost 2 hours to install >>and another 2 hours to remove I have to answer YES it is very unrealistic. >>I don't think the intent of the WAFs was allow the builder/flyer to remove >>the wings and trailer it home every time, but to allow the KR to be built in >>a very small place (no one piece spar to wrestle with). > >No disrespect meant to the KR, but if you really want to trailer your plane >to the airport for every flight, you might want to consider building a >Sonerai instead. It's a similar 2-place VW powered plane, (although tandem >and made from tube & fabric instead of wood & 'glass), but it has wings that >are designed to fold in minutes. Several people in the old newsletters tried >to devise such a system for the KR, but I don't think anybody perfected one. > >Mike Taglieri > >Thanks for helping me make that attitude adjustment re: wing removal. There is a large hanger at the airport with 2 C-182s in it. I know the owners. I'm sure they would be honored to have a quite little homebuilt KR tucked under their high wing jobbers. Hank ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 20:37:35 -0600 From: "Mark Langford" Subject: KR: Re: Surprise its twins, NLF's that is Steven A Everhart wrote: > Ashok mentioned that he and Dr. Selig had been talking and they had > decided to design a new airfoil section specifically for the KR-2S. Incredible news! I guess I'd better put the brakes on finishing those outer spars. Will they try to maintain similar dimensions such as chord length, or is this our opportunity to go with a higher aspect ratio? Do you think anybody at RR will appreciate us making the RAF48 obsolete overnight? I think we could definitely call the next one the "KRNet Airfoil", since it never would have happened otherwise. We really are getting in history-making territory. Mark Langford, Huntsville, AL email at langford@hiwaay.net KR2S project construction at http://fly.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 23:09:19 -0500 (EST) From: jeroffey@tir.com (jeroffey) Subject: Re: KR: Surprise its twins, NLF's that is >Just talked to Ashok about the NLF(1)0115 wind tunnel model, I had some >questions about the linkage for the aileron. During the conversation >Ashok mentioned that he and Dr. Selig had been talking and they had >decided to design a new airfoil section specifically for the KR-2S. THe >NLF(1)0115 was still a good choice but they feel that they can optimize a >new airfoil to the Reynolds Number range we will be seeing with our >KR's. Ashok and Dr. Selig are going to design the airfoil and I am going >to build a second wind tunnel model for it. The actual wind tunnel tests >will include both airfoils. > >There may be a third airfoil model if there is enough time. THe >nlf(1)0115 model has a 20% chord aileron on it. The new airfoil will >probably have a 20% aileron as well. I would like to see data on a >slotted flap for the new airfoil so may build a third model with the >slotted flap. > >The wind tunnel access window has moved out a little. We won't get the >wind tunnel for another 6 weeks. This does give me time to get the new >model finished. > >We have received checks totaling $400.00 so far. Checks received are from: > >Mark Langford >Richard Mole >Ronald Lee >Oscar Zuniga >John Esch >Robert Cornelius > >Thanks guys, this is becoming something major in sport aviation. > >Steve Eberhart >Hi Steve. Mark sent me the drawing for the metal spars for the airfoil project. Wicks sent the tubing here last Wednesday (26th) and I'll be back at work on Monday. It shoudn't take long to make the stub shafts and thread the tubing so you can expect the parts late next week or early the following week. I hope it all fits in your schedule. John Roffey jeroffey@tir.com > > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 23:35:31 -0500 (EST) From: MikeTnyc@aol.com Subject: Re: KR: spoilers >> For all you folks interested in cheap tricks, Team Aircraft states that >> reflexing their ailerons UP a few degrees results in a 2 knot increase. Of >> course the Team airfoil is a huge flat-bottomed airfoil which could really >> use a little streamlining anyway, but maybe there's something to this? >> -Tom > >All airfoils have what is called a pitch moment. In a symmetric airfoil, >like >on the tail, the pitch moment about the aerodynamic center is zero. In a >typical airfoil, the pitch moment about the aerodynamic center is a negative >number. . . . I was thinking about this just today. I think some of the Murphy or Merlin planes use the same system: you can set a little bit of aileron retraction above the null position for less lift and more speed in cruise. Since the RAF 48 airfoil that's standard on the KR supposedly has more lift than it needs for cruise, this would be useful for getting rid of some. The only problem I can see is the gap that opens under the aileron when you raise it. If you raised both, you'd create drag on both sides, maybe more than you'd lose by raising them. I don't know how many degrees they'd have to go up before the gap opens. Of course, you could redesign the aileron to get rid of the gap, but this was put there on purpose to create drag on the wing that drops during a turn and control yaw. Mike Taglieri ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 20:35:13 -0800 From: Micheal Mims Subject: Re: KR: spoilers At 11:35 PM 11/28/97 -0500, you wrote: Since the RAF 48 airfoil that's standard on the KR supposedly has more lift than it needs for cruise, this would be useful for getting rid of some. > > I remember reading in an old newsletter (cant remember which issue) that a KR pilot rigged a little reflex into his ailerons thinking just what you mention above and in his words darn near killed himself! I guess he considered his airplane almost uncontrollable and decided to quit tinkering with it and just fly it after this little journey into the unknown! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts in Irvine Ca. mailto:mikemims@pacbell.net http://home.pacbell.net/mikemims ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Nov 1997 00:17:39 -0800 From: Ross Subject: Re: KR: Surprise its twins, NLF's that is Steve, Where do I send that check again? -- Ross Steven A Eberhart wrote: > > Just talked to Ashok about the NLF(1)0115 wind tunnel model, I had some > questions about the linkage for the aileron. During the conversation > Ashok mentioned that he and Dr. Selig had been talking and they had > decided to design a new airfoil section specifically for the KR-2S. THe > NLF(1)0115 was still a good choice but they feel that they can optimize a > new airfoil to the Reynolds Number range we will be seeing with our > KR's. Ashok and Dr. Selig are going to design the airfoil and I am going > to build a second wind tunnel model for it. The actual wind tunnel tests > will include both airfoils. > > There may be a third airfoil model if there is enough time. THe > nlf(1)0115 model has a 20% chord aileron on it. The new airfoil will > probably have a 20% aileron as well. I would like to see data on a > slotted flap for the new airfoil so may build a third model with the > slotted flap. > > The wind tunnel access window has moved out a little. We won't get the > wind tunnel for another 6 weeks. This does give me time to get the new > model finished. > > We have received checks totaling $400.00 so far. Checks received are from: > > Mark Langford > Richard Mole > Ronald Lee > Oscar Zuniga > John Esch > Robert Cornelius > > Thanks guys, this is becoming something major in sport aviation. > > Steve Eberhart ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Nov 1997 00:23:10 -0800 From: Ross Subject: Re: KR: Book by Bruce Carmichael I did a search at www.amazon.com but didn't find it sorry. R.H.Mole -Richard Mole wrote: > > Sport Aviation carried an article on CFD for the RV-6 in April 1997. > > On page 51, the article mentioned the availability of the book > 'Personal Aircraft Drag Reduction' by Bruce Carmichael. > > I would very much like to see this book. > > Does anyone know where to get it and how much it is? EAA didn't seem to know > anything about it. > > Has anyone read it and if so would they recommend it? I'm thinking it might > help to set in context some of the stuff on low drag fairings and so on. > > Richard Mole > R.H.Mole@open.ac.uk ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Nov 1997 00:26:24 -0800 From: Ross Subject: KR: Re: KRNET Email Test If you check out the yearbook page on my site, you will find links to other KR NET builders who have much more interesting websites then mine. rdewees@juno.com wrote: > > On Thu, 27 Nov 1997 13:35:19 -0800 Ross writes: > >I will add you today. This is NOT the newsletter but an email list. > >We do have some electronic newsletters available, but if you want > >the regular newsletter, you need to subscribe to the KR Newsletter > >edited by Monte Miller. > > > >The address is available on my website. > > > > -- Regards > > Ross > > > >Ron DeWees wrote: > >> > >> Hello.. Thanks for the my inclusion into the Kr fraternity. I am > >looking > >> forward to seeing the newsletter. I have LOTS or questions... Ron > >DeWees > > > Hi Ross. Thanks for the information and inclusion on the list. I already > subscribed to the newsletter and also for the 100+ back issues that are > available. Hope I will learn a bunch from them as the folks that sold me > the KR's havaent sent the plans yet. > I will have a lot of questions about engine size, weight, > instrumentation and mods and wonder if this site is the best to ask > questions. You mentioned other sites for KR info. Would appreciate it if > you could share their addresses with me. > Thanks Ron DeWees ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Nov 1997 06:41:25 -0600 (CST) From: Steven A Eberhart Subject: Re: KR: Surprise its twins, NLF's that is John, Your schedule is perfect. That is just about when I will need them. Thanks for all of your help. Steve On Fri, 28 Nov 1997, jeroffey wrote: > >Just talked to Ashok about the NLF(1)0115 wind tunnel model, I had some > >questions about the linkage for the aileron. During the conversation > >Ashok mentioned that he and Dr. Selig had been talking and they had > >decided to design a new airfoil section specifically for the KR-2S. THe > >NLF(1)0115 was still a good choice but they feel that they can optimize a > >new airfoil to the Reynolds Number range we will be seeing with our > >KR's. Ashok and Dr. Selig are going to design the airfoil and I am going > >to build a second wind tunnel model for it. The actual wind tunnel tests > >will include both airfoils. > > > >There may be a third airfoil model if there is enough time. THe > >nlf(1)0115 model has a 20% chord aileron on it. The new airfoil will > >probably have a 20% aileron as well. I would like to see data on a > >slotted flap for the new airfoil so may build a third model with the > >slotted flap. > > > >The wind tunnel access window has moved out a little. We won't get the > >wind tunnel for another 6 weeks. This does give me time to get the new > >model finished. > > > >We have received checks totaling $400.00 so far. Checks received are from: > > > >Mark Langford > >Richard Mole > >Ronald Lee > >Oscar Zuniga > >John Esch > >Robert Cornelius > > > >Thanks guys, this is becoming something major in sport aviation. > > > >Steve Eberhart > >Hi Steve. Mark sent me the drawing for the metal spars for the airfoil > project. Wicks sent the tubing here last Wednesday (26th) and I'll be back > at work on Monday. It shoudn't take long to make the stub shafts and thread > the tubing so you can expect the parts late next week or early the following > week. I hope it all fits in your schedule. > John Roffey > jeroffey@tir.com > > > > > > ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Nov 1997 08:30:50 -0800 From: Donald Reid Subject: Re: KR: Engine mount/weight and balance Oscar Zuniga wrote: > > Don wrote: > > >The battery installation will be the last thing after paint. Its > placement should > >fine tune the CG to exactly where I want it. > > The big problem I see with this is routing and snaking-in the wires with > the thing essentially finished. Plus mounting the battery (getting to > the backside of things to attach hardware, etc.)...unless we're talking > about a fairly limited range of locations that have already been > considered and provisions made. > Oscar "got my pocket protector, too" Zuniga All good and valid points, and if I am too far off in my calculations, I will wish that I had done some or all of them. I will be aiming for the battery midway between the instrument panel and the firewall. I will not have an electric starter, so the battery will be minimum size. That cuts down on cable sizes, battery contactors, starter, starter solenoid, and the associated weight. - -- Don Reid mailto:donreid@erols.com http://www.erols.com/donreid/kr_page.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Nov 1997 09:35:15 EST From: rdewees@juno.com Subject: Re: KR: Web page Hi Brian.. Please include me in your new address book. I have just purchased two KR2 projects and need a lot of help. I am Ron DeWees@juno.com thanks On Fri, 28 Nov 1997 21:37:33 GMT bbland@busprod.com (Brian Bland) writes: >Hello everyone! > >I am currently updating my web page. Some of it has been changed >already. Please keep checking it out and see my changes in the next >couple of days. If I do not have a link to your page please e-mail me >privately with your page address and I will add it. > >Thanks > > >Brian J. Bland, PP, A&P >Claremore, OK >Building stretched and widened KR-2S=20 > >KR-2SBuilder@bigfoot.com >http://www.busprod.com/bbland/kr2s.htm > ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Nov 1997 10:26:29 -0800 From: rahuman@swbell.net Subject: Re: KR: Book by Bruce Carmichael Ross wrote: > > I did a search at www.amazon.com but > didn't find it sorry. > > R.H.Mole -Richard Mole wrote: > > > > Sport Aviation carried an article on CFD for the RV-6 in April 1997. > > > > On page 51, the article mentioned the availability of the book > > 'Personal Aircraft Drag Reduction' by Bruce Carmichael. > > > > I would very much like to see this book. > > > > Does anyone know where to get it and how much it is? EAA didn't seem to know > > anything about it. > > > > Has anyone read it and if so would they recommend it? I'm thinking it might > > help to set in context some of the stuff on low drag fairings and so on. > > > > Richard Mole > > R.H.Mole@open.ac.uk It's available directly from Carmichael Bruce Carmichael 34795 Camino Capisteano Capistrano Beach, Ca. 92624 $25.00 Pretty high level stuff - better suited for designing from scratch than looking for drag reduction devices - Paser's book is much better in this respect. Incidently Bruce was a consultant on Lars Gertz's record airplane project - Bruce may know more about going fast than low speed control ability. (Lars's airplane rolled inverted into the runway on the first landing attempt. Lars did not survive.) ------------------------------ End of krnet-l-digest V1 #180 *****************************