From: owner-krnet-l-digest@teleport.com[SMTP:owner-krnet-l-digest@teleport.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 1997 7:16 AM To: krnet-l-digest@teleport.com Subject: krnet-l-digest V1 #202 krnet-l-digest Wednesday, December 31 1997 Volume 01 : Number 202 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 29 Dec 1997 20:17:44 EST From: MikeT nyc Subject: Re: KR: Possible error in manual? > I also heard of a KR on a hard landing where the top 5/8" crossmember >pulled from the fuselage. The Tech counselor I chatted with suggested >that tying the crossmember to the fuselage sides might be an alternative >if I was really concerned about this. I opted to go with the plans >which do include the T6 angle, but are not too clear about the length. Yes, one of the later newsletters shows a KR after a hard landing split in half at the firewall like a biscuit hot from the oven. I've always been a weight-reduction freak, and I even still have the toothbrush I used to carry backpacking -- handle cut in half and drilled full of holes. I want my KR light, but after seeing that photo, I think I'll put up with the weight of running the aluminum angle the full length across with epoxy and bolts. Mike Taglieri ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Dec 1997 22:03:39 EST From: MikeT nyc Subject: Re: KR: Nylaflow brake lines? >> >I seem to vaguely remember somebody saying that Nylaflow(R!) brake lines >> >might melt if connected directly to the caliper, especially during >extended >> >taxi tests. Has anyone had this experience? >> >> This happened to a Defiant and she burned to the ground, > >On my KR-2 I haven't modified my nylaflow tubing yet, but in my >case the brake assembly is attached to a rather LARGE heat sink, >that being the retract casting. I think this could dissipate a >lot of heat. Also, the amount of energy being dissapated by the >KR brakes is substantially less than that of a Defiant twin engine >four place composite with (I'm expecting). But the idea is the same, >hot brakes and plastic might not mix. I've never used nylon brake line, but many English motorcycles, including my Norton Commando, use outside oil lines to the head, usually of nylon except for the high-rollers who make Aeroquipt fittings. I've been using the same 1/4" nylon airbrake line on my bike for years with no trouble, on a line that's filled with hot oil and touches the head on both sides. Therefore, a thick nylon line is good for at least this much heat. Actually, it should be fairly easy to test brake line temperature. Put some candle wax, or other stuff with lower melting points than nylon, on the tubing and the casting and do a few hard stops, then see if it had melted. (Maybe the "heat crayons" discussed awhile back would be useful for this). Eventually you could determine just how close to the melting point of nylon the brakes on your machine were getting. >I remember reading someplace that brakes on a taildragger were not >really supposed to be used except occasionally on taxi... but there >is always the fence at the end of the runway I guess. I've read that the way to get a taildragger to stop fast in an emergency is to put it into a deliberate groundloop. No intention of testing this theory. Mike Taglieri ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Dec 1997 22:03:42 EST From: MikeT nyc Subject: Re: KR: Glass fuel tank? In a message dated 97-12-29 18:56:24 EST, you write: >I'm still trying to decide whether to build a alum. or glass header tank, >it's >now time for the KRNet to make up my mind for me. If I build a glass tank, >do >I need to use 1" foam or can I get by with say 1/2" or 3/4" if I use baffles >and attach them to the top and bottom of the tank? If I use 1", are baffles >necessary? Remember this is only the header tank. Has anyone found a good, >reliable and simple (I may be asking too much) sending unit? > >Give my a hand here guys. Actually, you don't have to use any foam. Some people do tanks by glassing around a mold made of cardboard. By all means, read Tony Bingelis's stuff on glass tanks before you start. The method in the manual is only one of several possible ways to do it. Mike Taglieri ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Dec 1997 22:13:39 -0600 (CST) From: Steven A Eberhart Subject: Re: KR: NLF International Visionary Fund at $995 I guess I should proof read my posts more carefully. Here is the corrected copy. Steve Eberhart On Mon, 29 Dec 1997, Steven A Eberhart wrote: > Wow, > > We have received donations from the United Kingdom and now Japan. THis > is truly an international effort. Thanks guys we are getting there. THe > latest donations have brought the total to $995. We still need your > hel. The first wing with the NLF(1)0115 airfoil is ready for final > contouring and should be ready for our scheduled January 5th time slot > into the wind tunnel. There will be a second wind tunnel session to test > the custom airfoil that Dr. Selig and his graduate students will be > designing specifically for the KR-2S. The original $1000 will cover both > wind tunnel sessions but I could use some help for materials. Each wing > section takes about $180 in carbon fiber alone and I will have close to > $400 invested in the first wing section. The first set of precision machined steel spars were made by John Roffey and were donated to the > NLF effort but I hesitate to ask for a second set to be donated. We > should at least be able to pay for materials, about $60 to $70. All of John's work in making the beautiful spars as well as the materials were part of his donation. > > We are not only getting two wind tunnel sessions but a full blown > stability analysis of the KR-2S design. > > The list of contributors to date: > > John Roffey (made and contributed the spars) > Richard Mole (Great Briton) > Tim Schuy (Japan) > Brian Bland > G.M. Lee > Ross Youngblood > Pat Flowers > Randy Stein > Robert Moreland > Robert Cornelius > John Esch > Ronald Lee > Mark Langford > Oscar Zuniga > Rex Ellington > Troy Johnson > > Current plans are to have all of the names of the contributors engraved > on the NLF wind tunnel wing and donate it to the EAA museum after we are > done with it. THis is your chance to get your name in the EAA museum > (assuming they accept it :-)) > > Steve > > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Dec 1997 21:04:10 -0800 From: "John F. Esch" Subject: KR: e-mail problems? Is anyone getting any messages to speak of? I haven't received very many messages or e-mail lately! Who did I upset this time? John F. Esch Salem, OR htttp://www.cyberis.net/~sesch ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Dec 1997 21:48:17 -0800 From: tomstokes1@juno.com (Wayland T. Stokes) Subject: Re: KR: KR-NET Michele I bought a used set that was orignally bought in 1977 and Jenette Rand registered them for me. The only thing she checks is to make sure there is not a KR built from the plans. Tom Stokes in Reno NV On Thu, 11 Dec 1997 14:02:51 +0100 Michele Bucceri writes: >KR2S drawings ... the never ending story ... > >I've found some unused KR2S plans here in Italy, but I don't know how >to >evaluate if they are up to date or not ... what's the last edition? >I know that plans are composed by 6 drawings and the builder manual. >Is >that true? What shuld be a reasonable prices for that? I've read some >days ago (but I've trashed it ... foolish man ...) that somebody who >bought unused plan is going to "reregister" them ... was I dreaming? > >Ciao, >Michele >-- >MBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMB >Italtel, a Stet and Siemens Company >Castelletto di Settimo Milanese >20019 Settimo Milanese (MILANO) Italy > >Michele Bucceri >E-mail: mailto:michele.bucceri@italtel.it >Phone: +39-2-43889077 >Fax: +39-2-43888431 >MBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMBMB > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Dec 1997 06:24:16 PST From: "Oscar Zuniga" Subject: KR: Progress report Hi, Netters I know Paul is too humble to post progress reports on his project, so I'm forwarding this one on the rebuild/nosegear conversion of his KR-2: >I'm hooking up the engine. It looks like when tipped up, the tail >will hit the garage rafters before the engine hits the ground. I >will probably fire the engine without putting the instrument panel >back in. >The panel will take a month to put together and I want to hear the >motor run. I still need some exhaust tubing and someone to weld it. > >I finished making the brake/rudder pedals and mounts yesterday. It >feels good to make progress. > >More later. > >Paul ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Dec 1997 10:46:57 -0500 From: mscott@wlgore.com Subject: Re: KR: wood soaking Dennis, it's been awhile, but I think the mixture was something like a cup of ammonia to a quart of water. This was something I saw in model magazines at the time. It was really governed more by how much if the smell I could stand. I got a big old pot of water boiling on the stove and then just started to add ammonia til it smelled pretty strong. Not very scientific, but it seemed to work. How much of the effect on the wood was from the hot water and how much was from the ammonia is anybody's guess. As far as gluing, keep in mind that I was using model related cyanoacrylate glues (basically like super glue), which undoubtedly behave differently than the epoxies that you would be using. These glues will stick anything together, including your fingers. If you're going to try the soaking method I would suggest trying it on several small pieces first, using different thicknesses and grain structures to see what works best. dambrose@ican.net on 12/27/97 07:14:41 PM Please respond to krnet-l@teleport.com To: krnet-l@teleport.com cc: (bcc: Mark L Scott/WLGORE) Subject: Re: KR: "Banana Boat" question At 02:15 PM 12/23/97 -0500, you wrote: > >FWIW, I have used the wood soaking method on RC aircraft in the past, it >does help. The wood was balsa sheet, and was soaked in hot ammonia water >until it was pliable enough to wrap around a turtledeck framework. Glue >was applied as usual, followed by the wood planking, then rubber banded, >clamped, etc. to hold it in place til it dried. The practicalities of >doing this on a full scale plane might make the operation a little more >difficult, obviously. > >Mark Scott >Vision wannabe builder >Elkton, MD USA > > When you say "hot ammonia water" what exactly is it? ie. 50% water, 50% ammonia and 180 deg. F? Thanks Dennis (in Toronto) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Dec 1997 12:51:37 EST From: BSHADR Subject: KR: Jabiru Hey KRNetheads: Time to dream and drool... Check out the following as posted on the Europa list. Enjoy, Randy Stein BSHADR@aol.com Soviet Monica, CA ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ These are from a Jabiru "draft" spec. Jabiru 3300 Aero engine. 3.3L displacement, 4 stroke, 6 cyl opposed, air cooled, direct drive, alloy case, pushrod OHV, dual electronic magneto ignition, integrated AC generator, electric start, mechanical fuel pump, normally aspirated pressure compensating single carb, est weight 148 lbs/67 KG complete (no description of complete), Width 23.5 in, length 24in, depth about 17in to lowest point. Predicted performance 120hp @ 3300rpm, 110hp @ 3000rpm, 100hp @ 2750rpm 93hp @ 2551rpm, 90hp @ 2475rpm, 80hp @ 2200rpm. Jabiru Aircraft, Queensland Australia, ph (011) 61 71 551 778, fax 011 61 71 552 669 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Dec 1997 14:18:51 EST From: EagleGator Subject: KR: Insurance - There is a way I just spent about 30 minutes on the phone with Jim Nelson from Avemco. What I found out was that the KR's are not the only airplanes that they won't insure for hull and occupant liability, but there are some things that we can do to reduce the risk to a level where they will issue the insurance we're looking for. Here are the highlights of our conversation: 1. The insurance company needs 200 - 300 airplanes of a given type insured with them to spread the cost of the claims they have to pay. This could be the beginning of the end of this issue, are there that many KR folks out there that want the insurance? A survey is required here. 2. They would require a formal inspection program for newly built airplanes. This inspection would be conducted prior to any testing, and prior to the FAA certification. The Glasair folks have a program like this in place, and Avemco won't insure new Glasairs unless they have been inspected under this program. 3. Engines are a big issue. One of the biggest problems Jim cited with the KR's is that people were putting unmodified VW engines on their airplanes and they were failing (big suprise). He would require some type of inspection of the engine installation to verify that it was suitable for flight. He mentioned that they had 3 Kitfoxes lost recently to engine failures -- all three were running Subaru conversions. He wasn't sure what type conversions they were, but when I mentioned Stratus and NSI, he said they sounded familiar. He also stated that Revmaster engines have a good safety record, but wasn't familiar with the Great Plains engines. This isn't an endorsement of any given engine, but it gives you an idea of how the insurance company sees things. 3. Formal in-type pilot training and currency is a requirement. Again, there are programs in place for the Glasair/Lancair types, both for new pilot training and for annual proficiency checks, and pilots must have the training to keep their insurance. There are also the standard considerations for pilot experience, time in a tail dragger (the steps are 50, 100, 250, and 500 hours), time in high performance airplanes, etc. that determine individual insurability and rates. He said that hull insurance probably wouldn't be economical, as they only value the KR at $6 - 8K, unless there were alot of folks (>200) to share the cost. The question becomes is it worth the pain to put all this in place to get the occupant liability and hull damage coverage, or is the non-occupant external liability coverage adequate? Again, survey says...... Personally, I'd like to put these things in place, regardless of the insurance situation. These kind of programs would be beneficial for all of us in the long run. If there is enough interest (at least 20 people), I'll work to have a complete program drafted and coordinated with Avemco and the EAA for everyone to review at next year's gathering. If we go through with this, perhaps we could pull more people and airplanes in for future gatherings to get their annual refresher and build on the family. So, is anyone interested? Cheers, Rick Junkin EagleGator@aol.com St. Charles MO ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Dec 1997 16:21:15 EST From: EagleGator Subject: KR: Insurance - I found one! I just got off the phone with Scott Smith, (800) 743-1439, and he is preparing a quote for me. He is a broker, so I don't know what companies he works with yet. Here are some rough numbers that he gave me: $1,000,000 liability, property and bodily injury (including passengers) - $412 Add $9,000 hull insurance - $750 total He said that for $15,000 hull, you would be looking at right around $1,000. He also writes first flight and builder's all risk coverage (insures you're project while you're building). I told him to expect a "few" calls. Oh, and by the way, I got his name and number from Jeanette Rand. I still want to do the inspection and training program if there is enough interest. Just so there is no confusion, 20 interested parties will make it worth my time to develop. Let me know if you're interested. Cheers! Rick Junkin EagleGator@aol.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Dec 1997 14:11:21 -0800 From: Ross Youngblood Subject: [Fwd: KR: Can you help with Missing Digests?] Received: by mail1 for rossy (with Cubic Circle's cucipop (v1.21 1997/08/10) Tue Dec 30 13:50:56 1997) X-From_: johnbou@timberline.com Mon Dec 29 08:29:01 1997 Return-Path: johnbou@timberline.com Received: from relay3.smtp.psi.net (relay3.smtp.psi.net [38.8.210.2]) by smtp4.teleport.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id IAA24302 for ; Mon, 29 Dec 1997 08:29:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from wichita7.timberline.com by relay3.smtp.psi.net (8.8.5/SMI-5.4-PSI) id LAA22402; Mon, 29 Dec 1997 11:28:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from laposte.timberline.com by wichita7.timberline.com via smtpd (for relay3.smtp.psi.net [38.8.210.2]) with SMTP; 29 Dec 1997 16:28:59 UT Received: (private information removed) Message-ID: From: john bouyea To: "'Ross Youngblood @ teleport'" Subject: KR: Can you help with Missing Digests? Date: Mon, 29 Dec 1997 08:27:48 -0800 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.994.63 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Ross, could you post this to the list? My email digests collection is missing # 52 - 74. Ross has checked his list twice but cannot find them. If you have these posts, send them to me at johnbou@timberline.com I'll get them backed up to tape and publish them for posterity. Everyone is invited to browse my list at their convenience. http://kr2s.timberline.com/krnet/digests ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Dec 1997 14:22:21 -0800 From: Ross Youngblood Subject: Re: KR: Glass fuel tank? KR2 616TJ wrote: > > I'm still trying to decide whether to build a alum. or glass header tank, it's > now time for the KRNet to make up my mind for me. If I build a glass tank, do > I need to use 1" foam or can I get by with say 1/2" or 3/4" if I use baffles > and attach them to the top and bottom of the tank? If I use 1", are baffles > necessary? Remember this is only the header tank. Has anyone found a good, > reliable and simple (I may be asking too much) sending unit? > > Give my a hand here guys. > > Dana Overall > http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/7085/ Dana, On my header tank, I used 1" foam, with 2 BID, wet. Then I scraped off most of the foam on the outside walls after discovering leaks. I then did some layups on the outside which sealed the leaks, and also provide some additional rigidity. My header tank is purposefully small (only 5 gal). I am using a sight gauge for the header tank, and capactive sending units for the wing tanks (bendable probes). Getting the correct bendable probe configuration for a side mounted probe is still TBD. -- Ross ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Dec 1997 14:26:00 -0800 From: Ross Youngblood Subject: Re: KR: e-mail problems? Grr... it must have been the bounced email syndrome... too many bounces... and you get dropped from the list. Someday I will automate this so I don't piss people off too much. - -- Ross John F. Esch wrote: > > Is anyone getting any messages to speak of? I haven't received very > many messages or e-mail lately! Who did I upset this time? > > John F. Esch > Salem, OR > htttp://www.cyberis.net/~sesch ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Dec 1997 14:31:11 -0800 From: Ross Youngblood Subject: Re: KR: Insurance - There is a way Rick, Thanks for the legwork regarding insurance. I like the idea of inspection programs and in-type pilot training. Count me in. I'm still trying to build hours and come up with a flight training plan. Jeff Scott suggested some back seat solo time in a Champ would be good, so I am looking towards building taildragger hours. Any EAA Flight Advisors out there? I will eventually call EAA and try to hook up with one locally and will share what I learn from that. But don't hold your breath. I'm way behind the power curve on things I shoulda be doin. -- Ross EagleGator wrote: > > I just spent about 30 minutes on the phone with Jim Nelson from Avemco. What > I found out was that the KR's are not the only airplanes that they won't > insure for hull and occupant liability, but there are some things that we can > do to reduce the risk to a level where they will issue the insurance we're > looking for. > > Here are the highlights of our conversation: > > 1. The insurance company needs 200 - 300 airplanes of a given type insured > with them to spread the cost of the claims they have to pay. This could be > the beginning of the end of this issue, are there that many KR folks out there > that want the insurance? A survey is required here. > > 2. They would require a formal inspection program for newly built airplanes. > This inspection would be conducted prior to any testing, and prior to the FAA > certification. The Glasair folks have a program like this in place, and > Avemco won't insure new Glasairs unless they have been inspected under this > program. > > 3. Engines are a big issue. One of the biggest problems Jim cited with the > KR's is that people were putting unmodified VW engines on their airplanes and > they were failing (big suprise). He would require some type of inspection of > the engine installation to verify that it was suitable for flight. He > mentioned that they had 3 Kitfoxes lost recently to engine failures -- all > three were running Subaru conversions. He wasn't sure what type conversions > they were, but when I mentioned Stratus and NSI, he said they sounded > familiar. He also stated that Revmaster engines have a good safety record, > but wasn't familiar with the Great Plains engines. This isn't an endorsement > of any given engine, but it gives you an idea of how the insurance company > sees things. > > 3. Formal in-type pilot training and currency is a requirement. Again, there > are programs in place for the Glasair/Lancair types, both for new pilot > training and for annual proficiency checks, and pilots must have the training > to keep their insurance. > > There are also the standard considerations for pilot experience, time in a > tail dragger (the steps are 50, 100, 250, and 500 hours), time in high > performance airplanes, etc. that determine individual insurability and rates. > He said that hull insurance probably wouldn't be economical, as they only > value the KR at $6 - 8K, unless there were alot of folks (>200) to share the > cost. > > The question becomes is it worth the pain to put all this in place to get the > occupant liability and hull damage coverage, or is the non-occupant external > liability coverage adequate? Again, survey says...... > > Personally, I'd like to put these things in place, regardless of the insurance > situation. These kind of programs would be beneficial for all of us in the > long run. If there is enough interest (at least 20 people), I'll work to have > a complete program drafted and coordinated with Avemco and the EAA for > everyone to review at next year's gathering. If we go through with this, > perhaps we could pull more people and airplanes in for future gatherings to > get their annual refresher and build on the family. > > So, is anyone interested? > > Cheers, > Rick Junkin > EagleGator@aol.com > St. Charles MO ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Dec 1997 14:32:52 -0800 From: Ross Youngblood Subject: Re: KR: Insurance - I found one! Rick, Thanks!!!! > > Oh, and by the way, I got his name and number from Jeanette Rand. > Just a note... RR does support us! -- Ross EagleGator wrote: > > I just got off the phone with Scott Smith, (800) 743-1439, and he is preparing > a quote for me. He is a broker, so I don't know what companies he works with > yet. Here are some rough numbers that he gave me: > > $1,000,000 liability, property and bodily injury (including passengers) - $412 > Add $9,000 hull insurance - $750 total > > He said that for $15,000 hull, you would be looking at right around $1,000. > > He also writes first flight and builder's all risk coverage (insures you're > project while you're building). > > I told him to expect a "few" calls. > > Oh, and by the way, I got his name and number from Jeanette Rand. > > I still want to do the inspection and training program if there is enough > interest. Just so there is no confusion, 20 interested parties will make it > worth my time to develop. Let me know if you're interested. > > Cheers! > Rick Junkin > EagleGator@aol.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Dec 1997 14:46:55 -0800 From: Ross Youngblood Subject: KR: Thanks to KRNET Supporters I just recieved an email from a KRNET-L supporter which reminded me that I have been delinquent in thanking those of you who have sent funds in to support KRNET-L. After Randys rallying cry at the gathering last year which resulted in a $470 check, I have been receving periodic checks for $10.00. Unfortunatly, I haven't done a good job of acknowledging those how have contributed. The funds for the gathering were used to setup a seperate ISP account ($180/yr), and register krnet.org as a seperate domain. Your KRNET service is assured at least through the end of 1998. Although I would like to indvidually recognize everyone who contributes. I simply haven't been able to do so. Often it seems I'm doing a barley adequate job of keeping people signed up... so if anyone wants to step-up and run the mailing list... be my guest. I will say that getting the $10.00 checks from names I recognize in the mail really cheers me up and makes all this email stuff worthwile. Hoping to meet all of you at next years KR Gathering! -- Ross ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Dec 1997 18:06:49 -0500 From: Donald Reid Subject: Re: KR: Thanks to KRNET Supporters Ross Youngblood wrote: > > I just recieved an email from a KRNET-L supporter which > reminded me that I have been delinquent in thanking > those of you who have sent funds in to support KRNET-L. Ross, I just changed from a VERY antique 386 machine to a PentII and I lost your address. For my benifit, and perhaps others as well, please send it out again. I want to make the donation, the service is well worth it. Thanks - -- Don Reid mailto:donreid@erols.com http://www.erols.com/donreid/kr_page.htm ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Dec 1997 18:13:08 -0500 From: Donald Reid Subject: KR: test Just a test, sorry - -- Don Reid mailto:donreid@erols.com http://www.erols.com/donreid/kr_page.htm ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Dec 1997 22:15:30, -0500 From: YCGB97A@prodigy.com (MR JEAN R VERON) Subject: KR: NLF(1)0115 Just wondering why it takes $180 in carbon fiber to cover the wing sectons? My plane has been holding up just fine with E glass and wood spars. Jean N4DD ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Dec 1997 22:17:45 EST From: BSHADR Subject: KR: Thanks to KRNET Supporters In a message dated 97-12-30 18:09:59 EST, Don wrote: << I just changed from a VERY antique 386 machine to a PentII and I lost your address. For my benifit, and perhaps others as well, please send it out again. I want to make the donation, the service is well worth it. >> WOW - What an opening...care for a shot of whine anyone? Don - You are right. KRNet is super for the newbees and builders. The KR family just keeps growing and growing. Life is grand! Just in case anyone else has a few bucks to toss into the KRNet pot I'll include the address. I'll bet if we were to check the roster and compare it to actual donations made, we would find a serious shortfall. Let's see, 200 subscribers x $10 each = $2,000. I'll wager we are a bit shy of that so far...could we have some folks who have jumped on the bus and didn't come in through the front door where the fare bucket is kept? Naw, couldn't be. Maybe the mail man is taking a cut...could you check on that for me Mr. KRNet "Janitor" Ross? Ross Youngblood 1109 NE Burke Pl Corvalis, OR 97330 Ross - You are appreciated. No one has stepped up to the plate to help (which surprises me a bit), regardless, you have done one heck of a job keeping the KRNet Turkey flying. Thank you so much. I don't recall EAA, or Flying, or AOPA, or Kitplanes spending very much time or effort thanking me for contributing to them either. So don't feel too guilty about not naming each and everyone who sends their dollars. Heck, we all get back fair value for our few bucks tossed in...actually many times more! Ross, I think it is time KRNet kicked in for a night out and a burger for you and the 'lil lady. Feel guilty yet? Good - hurry up and finish that burger so you can get back open the next round of envelopes of money the mail man is going to bring...especially since I just busted him and the envelopes will still have money in them this time. Randy (whine) Stein BSHADR@aol.com Soviet Monica, CA PS - BTW, I just got my 97 Perry KRKosh video. I'll try to sit down to look it over before the week is up. Did I mention KRNet gets a few dollars from Video Bob for each video ordered through KRNet too? :-) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Dec 1997 00:17:31 EST From: EagleGator Subject: KR: Retort to whine - BIG FLAME In a message dated 97-12-30 22:38:34 EST, you write: << Let's see, 200 subscribers x $10 each = $2,000. I'll wager we are a bit shy of that so far...could we have some folks who have jumped on the bus and didn't come in through the front door where the fare bucket is kept? >> To the best of my knowledge, Ross volunteered for the administration duties because he wanted to (Ross, please correct me if I'm wrong), and his work on the list is a "labor of love". Such is the case with the many, many fine web pages supported by many of the folks on this list. Yes, I count myself among that crowd with my meager web page offerings. Ross, you're doing a fine job and providing an invaluable service to us all, and we'll support you with whatever is required to keep KRNet "in the black" and your personal funds where they belong (in your own pocket). Please let us know if your KRNet expenses are not met, and I know enough of us will kick in to cover them. Just ask. Randy, to even IMPLY that there is a charge for subscribing to this list is out of line, even if it was meant in jest. If I remember correctly, someone was appropriately chastised at the gathering for trying to charge admission. That's not the way KR people have done things in the past, and I think it's a tradition that should be maintained. The vast majority of us are good people who will support the effort as we are able. Thus the "passing of the bucket" at the gathering banquet. The next thing we know you'll be suggesting that we copyright KROnline and charge for subscriptions, just like the print newsletter (I had to bring up THAT dead horse.... oops). If I've over-reacted, tough. This is a subject I feel very strongly about. If there is a need, I'll be one of the first to contribute time, research or funds, as I am able, to meet that need. But don't ever dare to CHARGE me for it -- that's just not how you treat family. Another fine sermon delivered by.... Rick Junkin EagleGator@aol.com St. Charles MO ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Dec 1997 05:58:20 GMT From: bbland@busprod.com (Brian Bland) Subject: Re: KR: NLF(1)0115 On Tue, 30 Dec 1997 22:15:30, -0500, you wrote: >Just wondering why it takes $180 in carbon fiber to cover the wing=20 >sectons? My plane has been holding up just fine with E glass and wood=20 >spars. Jean N4DD If I recall correctly this was a requirement of Dr. Selig. Steve should be able to tell you the whole story...... 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: Wed, 31 Dec 1997 01:14:21 EST From: MikeT nyc Subject: Re: KR: wood soaking In a message dated 97-12-30 10:51:43 EST, you write: > >Dennis, it's been awhile, but I think the mixture was something like a cup >of ammonia to a quart of water. This was something I saw in model >magazines at the time. It was really governed more by how much if the >smell I could stand. I got a big old pot of water boiling on the stove and >then just started to add ammonia til it smelled pretty strong. Not very >scientific, but it seemed to work. How much of the effect on the wood was >from the hot water and how much was from the ammonia is anybody's guess. >As far as gluing, keep in mind that I was using model related cyanoacrylate >glues (basically like super glue), which undoubtedly behave differently >than the epoxies that you would be using. These glues will stick anything >together, including your fingers. If you're going to try the soaking >method I would suggest trying it on several small pieces first, using >different thicknesses and grain structures to see what works best. Actually, what I was thinking of when I asked about wetting the plywood was to build the sides of the boat normally (i.e., glue the plywood on while the sides are flat on the table) then wet the outside of the plywood with a towel or sponge for awhile before trying to bend it. Would this help, or would you have to immerse the thing before it would soften? I agree with the people who say that immersing before gluing would be too extreme to do on a full-size plane. Mike Taglieri ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Dec 1997 02:25:33 EST From: EagleGator Subject: KR: Insurance from Scott Smith This should wrap up my insurance shopping saga. Here's what Scott quoted me for $1,000,000 total liability (property damage and personal injury), $100,000 per person per occurance (occupants included), $18,000 hull insurance with 10% deductable: Builder's Risk Policy, Hull and Liability (non-flying project) $335 Total Coverage, flying aircraft $967 This was for me with 2200 hours, Private Pilot SEL, 50 hours of taildragger time. He said the underwriter was insisting on 100 hours of tail dragger time, but came down due to my military experience (doesn't make sense to me, either). Also, time in type would decrease the premium. Again, Scott's number is (800) 743-1439. I hope this helps. Cheers! Rick Junkin EagleGator@aol.com St. Charles MO P.S. Sorry for the number of posts today, I guess I had too much caffeine. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Dec 1997 09:43:24 -0500 From: mscott@wlgore.com Subject: Re: KR: wood soaking Mike, I too agree, immersing would probably be impractical for the plywood pieces on a KR. However, I think that's the only thing that would help. I really doubt that just spraying one side of the ply is going to do much. I just doubt that you'd get moisture penetration far enough into the ply to make any difference. However, that does give me an idea. Howabout this, soak up the steamin' hot mixture with some towels, lay them out on a flat surface, then lay the plywood over this. Add more steamin' hot towels on top and cover to keep some of the heat in. Let it stand for awhile, maybe 1/2 an hour. This might work, what do ya think? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Dec 1997 07:15:38 PST From: "Oscar Zuniga" Subject: KR: Insurance-is there a way? EagleGator wrote: >1. The insurance company needs 200 - 300 airplanes of a given type >insured with them to spread the cost of the claims they have to pay. >This could be the beginning of the end of this issue, are there that >many KR folks out there that want the insurance? A survey is >required here. >So, is anyone interested? > My opinion only (renter pilot)- this just nuked the idea. KR people seem to be somewhat of the renegade type (true experimenters), and I have my doubts about finding this many owners wanting to jump on this. In addition, R-R seems to me to lack the interest or motivation to back this, and a complete database or registry of KR owners/builders would be the starting point for getting the word out about a potential new program. Without the "factory" backing like Stoddard Hamilton and Lancair have, it would be hard to round up that many owners/builders. Also my unsolicited opinion- the insurance companies seem to have a large lack of knowledge of what/who they are insuring in the sport/experimental aviation arena, and the cost is higher because of this... it's the CYA syndrome, with a heavy extra layer of padding to cover the unknowns. My own feeling is that a liability-only coverage is all I'm going to be able to get, and that I get to pay for my own bent prop or the windsock I knock over. Oscar Zuniga Medford, Oregon ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Dec 1997 09:16:48 -0600 (CST) From: flesner Subject: KR: insurance Rick, Thanks for following up on the insurance. Much appreciated!! The inspection and training program would certianly be good for safer airplanes and better prepared pilots but implementing a program of that size would be a full time job for more than one person. The Glassair program is factory supported , if I'm not mistaken, and we don't have that block to build on. This is not slinging arrows at RR as I know Jeanette and think she is a great lady. It's just that the KR and Glassair are two different ballgames. Some things to consider: -- Who would do these pre-FAA inspections, at whose cost, and how many inspections would be required. What about already completed airplanes ? How do we know the inspector is any more qualified then the builder? Would we need a network of inspectors to cover all parts of the country and what about outside the U.S. ? -- Would the airplane have to be built to plans with no changes to qualify? If so, very few KR's would make the cut. -- Would any changes to the airplane after completino have to be approved by the insurance company? -- Who is going to allow their KR to be used for "type" training and who is the "qualified" instructor ? A lot of KR's are not dual control aircraft so would problably limit the number of aircraft available. Of those available, how many are "standard" KR's ? -- A $2000 initial inspection program and type training is not nearly as big a hurdle to a builder with a $100,000 project that he wants to insure but that amount could easily be 17% of a KR project!!! To keep it in perspective, we would have to hold the cost of the initial inspection and type training to $240 on a $12,000 project. My estimate on the Glassair is just a wild a-- guess but I suspect is not far from the mark. And remember, all this without factor support!!! -- If the Scott Smith line works out, you can get passanger coverage also for only $42 a year more than the limited liability coverage offered by Avemco. The $750 a year figure for full coverage ($9000 hull ) is very close to what it cost to insure a Tripacer. The Tripacer would have a higer value of course, but the total insurance cost per year would be similar. I applaude your willingness to help out your fellow KR builders and flyers , Rick, but I think you would be taking on a bigger project then you did when you committed to build the airplane inself!!! I, personally, will utilize the local chapter Tech. Councilor and other builders eyes to check my work and do my best to prepare myself to test fly the KR when it is finished. I'm confident that I will recognize a comfort level in "type" that should see me through the first flights. Having said that, watch me splatter my bird all over the airport !!!!!! Lack of insurance on the airplane inself will present a huge risk to me personally but not one that will keep me grounded. I've not spent eight years building this thing to use it as a yard decoration!!!!!! Enough babbling already..... Thanks again , Rick. Larry Flesner ------------------------------ End of krnet-l-digest V1 #202 *****************************