From: KR-net users group digest[SMTP:kr-net@telelists.com] Sent: Friday, February 26, 1999 12:14 AM To: kr-net digest recipients Subject: kr-net digest: February 25, 1999 KR-net users group Digest for Thursday, February 25, 1999. 1. Centre of gravity 2. Re: KR-1 folding wing pictures 3. RE: Centre of gravity 4. RE: Centre of gravity 5. Re: Diehl gear 6. RE: 2-S wing tanks 7. Re: KR outer wings. 8. Free web page? 9. Re: 1700 lb KR2 10. RE: Centre of gravity ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Centre of gravity From: "John Martindale" Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 4:21:27 X-Message-Number: 1 Folks Remember a forward C of G on approach and flare can be as risky as an aft one. Airflow over the elevators is reduced due to lack of airspeed and sometimes masked by flap extension. To raise the nose in the flare at a forward C of G therefore needs additional negative lift on the tail which is achieved by increasing back stick and hence negative angle of attack. Ask any Cessna Cardinal owner, this back stick can result in stalling the under elevator before adequaute negative lift is reached. The result is a highly dangerous and embarassing porpoise. Cessna later added up side down slots in the tail to address this. Take care with a forward C of G at low airspeeds as well. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: KR-1 folding wing pictures From: "R.W. Moore" Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 08:45:12 -0500 X-Message-Number: 2 If the spar is the same type as the KR1 & 2 the folding wing will work. The if the height of the spars are not the same as the KR 1 & 2 that is a minor fix. The Kit bolts on top of the wing attach fttings and does not change the airplane. The plans are at the draftsman being done on a CAD computer. Thew plans will be ready in a week or so. If I can be of any help let me know. R. W. Moore -----Original Message----- From: DAVID STUART To: KR-net users group Date: Tuesday, February 23, 1999 1:30 AM Subject: [kr-net] Re: KR-1 folding wing pictures >Hello Ed, Was intrested to read about the folding wing system on Moore's >KR-1. I'm not to sure if the KR-1 has the same wing attatchment system as >my KR-2S but if it has it could solve a lot of problems. Would appreciate >some pics if you can arrange it. No problems recieving from this end. All >the best for 99.........Dave david.stuart@xtra.co.nz > >---------- >> From: Ed Janssen >> To: KR-net users group >> Subject: [kr-net] KR-1 folding wing pictures >> Date: Tuesday, 23 February 1999 12:03 >> >> Netters, >> >> RW Moore sent me some picts of his KR-1, some of which show his folding >> wing mechanism on his KR-1. To me, it looks like his airplane is ready >> for a test flight. If someone, like Mike or Mark, would be interested in >> volunteering to post them on their website for everyone to see, I could >> scan them and send them. I don't have a website and probably wouldn't >have >> the time to set one up if I knew how anyway. >> >> E-mail me privately and we can arrange for the transfer. >> >> Ed Janssen >> >> >> >> >> --- >> You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: DAVID.STUART@xtra.co.nz >> To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > >--- >You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: rwmoore@alltel.net >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: Centre of gravity From: "Blandford, Carlton C" Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 15:44:35 +0200 X-Message-Number: 3 This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01BE60C4.ED5A751C Content-Type: text/plain My CG falls 2" behind the forward limit with a 170 pound pilot and 3gal of fuel on board. Do you think I could have this problem? Is the KR really safe throughout the 8" envelope bearing in mind that some countries have narrowed the envelope to 6"? I believe the KR2S is not so "CG" sensitive. > -----Original Message----- > From: John Martindale [SMTP:john.martindale@bigpond.com.au] > Sent: 25 February 1999 06:21 > To: KR-net users group > Subject: [kr-net] Centre of gravity > > Folks > > Remember a forward C of G on approach and flare can be as risky as an aft > one. Airflow over the elevators is reduced due to lack of airspeed and > sometimes masked by flap extension. > > To raise the nose in the flare at a forward C of G therefore needs > additional negative lift on the tail which is achieved by increasing back > stick and hence negative angle of attack. Ask any Cessna Cardinal owner, > this back stick can result in stalling the under elevator before adequaute > > negative lift is reached. The result is a highly dangerous and embarassing > > porpoise. Cessna later added up side down slots in the tail to address > this. > > Take care with a forward C of G at low airspeeds as well. > > --- > You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: CBlandford@mail.sbic.co.za > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com ------_=_NextPart_001_01BE60C4.ED5A751C Content-Type: text/html Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable RE: [kr-net] Centre of gravity

My CG falls 2" = behind the forward limit with a 170 pound pilot and 3gal of fuel on = board. Do you think I could have this problem?

 Is the KR = really safe throughout the 8" envelope bearing in mind that some = countries have narrowed the envelope to 6"?
I believe the KR2S = is not so "CG" sensitive.  
 

    -----Original Message-----
    From:   John Martindale = [SMTP:john.martindale@bigpond.com.au]
    Sent:   25 February 1999 06:21
    To:     KR-net users group
    Subject:       = [kr-net] Centre of gravity

    Folks

    Remember a = forward C of G on approach and flare can be as risky as an aft
    one. Airflow = over the elevators is reduced due to lack of airspeed and
    sometimes = masked by flap extension.

    To raise the = nose in the flare at a forward C of G therefore needs
    additional = negative lift on the tail which is achieved by increasing back
    stick and = hence negative angle of attack. Ask any Cessna Cardinal owner,
    this back = stick can result in stalling the under elevator before adequaute =
    negative lift = is reached. The result is a highly dangerous and embarassing
    porpoise. = Cessna later added up side down slots in the tail to address
    this.

    Take care with = a forward C of G at low airspeeds as well.

    ---
    You are = currently subscribed to kr-net as: CBlandford@mail.sbic.co.za
    To = unsubscribe send a blank email to = leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com

------_=_NextPart_001_01BE60C4.ED5A751C-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: Centre of gravity From: "Mark Langford" Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 08:24:28 -0600 X-Message-Number: 4 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0012_01BE6098.428F0FC0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Blandford, Carlton wrote: >>My CG falls 2" behind the forward limit with a 170 pound pilot and = 3gal of fuel on board. Do you think I could have this problem?<< The big question would be what is the most forward possible location of = your CG? If you have a header tank, it would be full, and with the = lightest pilot imagineable. The location of the CG in this condition = should coincide with the published forward limit. Then empty the tank = and put in the heaviest pilot and baggage that the gross weight will = allow, and it should not extend past the aft CG limit, which is almost = universally agreed should be a 6" range, rather than an 8" range. If it = doesn't, you should move the battery or engine or something to get it = that way. If you have wing tanks, the rules are a little different... Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama mailto:langford@hiwaay.net see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ------=_NextPart_000_0012_01BE6098.428F0FC0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable RE: [kr-net] Centre of = gravity
Blandford, = Carlton wrote:
 
>>My CG falls = 2" behind=20 the forward limit with a 170 pound pilot and 3gal of fuel on board. Do = you think=20 I could have this problem?<<
 
The big question would be what is = the most=20 forward possible location of your CG?  If you have a header tank, = it would=20 be full, and with the lightest pilot imagineable.  The location of = the CG=20 in this condition should coincide with the published forward = limit.  Then=20 empty the tank and put in the heaviest pilot and baggage that the gross = weight=20 will allow, and it should not extend past the aft CG limit, which is = almost=20 universally agreed should be a 6" range, rather than an 8"=20 range.  If it doesn't, you should move the battery or engine or = something=20 to get it that way.   If you have wing tanks, the rules are a = little=20 different...

Mark Langford,  Huntsville, = Alabama
mailto:langford@hiwaay.net
see= KR2S=20 project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langfor= d
 
 
------=_NextPart_000_0012_01BE6098.428F0FC0-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Diehl gear From: Tom Crawford Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 11:01:07 -0800 X-Message-Number: 5 > By the way, one straw per saide is not enought, I used Hot Glue to hold the > straws together and to the gear leg while glassing the gear leg. Bobby is right on this, make sure that the straw encloses the brake line all the way to the wheelpants leaving none exposed. Also- put the straws on the BACK of the gear leg. Obvious, right? Tom Crawford tomc@afn.org Gainesville, FL N262TC ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: 2-S wing tanks From: Tom Crawford Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 11:07:33 -0800 X-Message-Number: 6 If relatively small and high, it will apparently fuel a > GPAC carb or an ellison in a pich > Like electrical failure or pump failure... > > Plumb up with a low cracking pressure check valve from aircraft spruce to > bypass fuel pumps. > > Be sure to go to the Ellison web pages and read all the good info there. > > Ron Freiberger > My plane has a stock header tank and an Ellison TBI. I find that with 3/8" fuel lines, I dont have to use the fuel pump. BUT- On climb out, I turn the pump on and my EGT drops about 100 degrees. In straight and level flight, turning the pump on has no effect on EGT or performance. Tom Crawford tomc@afn.org Gainesville, FL N262TC ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: KR outer wings. From: "JEAN" Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 16:55:55 -0600 X-Message-Number: 7 Actually the wing skins are bonded on the spars with them on the airplane. After they have been bonded with proper incidence and washout they are removed and put on the engine/wing stand to glass the leading edge and do all the aileron work. Thos is also good for checking and repairing wing fuel tanks. Works great for painting too. Jean -----Original Message----- From: Michael Taglieri To: KR-net users group Cc: kr-net@telelists.com Date: Wednesday, February 24, 1999 11:08 PM Subject: [kr-net] Re: KR outer wings. >>One thing that we have in our hangar is a pair of adapters that bolt to >the >>outer wing pannels at the wing attach fittings and fit our engine stand. >>This allows you to position the wing at the best angle for glassing. >>They have been worth their weight in gold. > >Do you mean that you're glassing the outer wings not on the fuselage, or >that these adapters move the angle of the whole fuselage around? > >Mike Taglieri > >___________________________________________________________________ >You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. >Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html >or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] > >--- >You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: YCGB97A@prodigy.com >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Free web page? From: "RONALD R. EASON" Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 17:17:03 -0600 X-Message-Number: 8 Check this out http://www.freeyellow.com/404.html for free web site maybe it has possibilities. Ron ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: 1700 lb KR2 From: "Rob Matthews" Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 07:37:37 +0200 X-Message-Number: 9 Hi Kobus Who's plane are you refering to here. Regards Rob Matthews Have A Wonderful Day South Africa ( Sunny Skies ) KR 2 - ZS - VCM -----Original Message----- From: Kobus de Wet To: KR-net users group Date: Wednesday, 24 February, 1999 05:24 Subject: [kr-net] 1700 lb KR2 >Hi all you netters. >Well after having been off the air for almost a month ( Computer cashed in >and I had to wait for the local release of a new chip) here I am back again. >800 e-mail's in the box and it took me a day to work through all that. >Q1. Who gets the panel planner next. > >Fact 1. Locally we have a KR-2 flying at 1700 Lbs. all up weight. I do not >have to many facts regarding the beast (Concrete mixer) but I do know that >the motor is 150 Hp confessional and it has wingletts on the main planes >(wings), retractable gear and the owner operator is a 747 captain. I plan on >getting hold of the guy to give me some more info. and will see if I can get >hold of some pictures to post on my web site. > >Cheers >Kobus de Wet >Cape Town South Africa GMT +2.00 >http://home.intekom.com/kobusdw > > >--- >You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: mathewrz@iafrica.com >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: Centre of gravity From: "Blandford, Carlton C" Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 09:42:49 +0200 X-Message-Number: 10 This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01BE615B.8A6F142A Content-Type: text/plain This configuration is with full tanks and the 3gal fuel on board should be 13gal of fuel. My CG locations are empty 1,5" in front of the forward limit, 2" behind forward limit with pilot and 13gal of fuel and 7" aft with two 170 pound people and 0 fuel. These are all worst case scenarios. I'm not all that familiar with the KR2S but I would say that one should move the engine 2" forward on the STANDARD KR2 to improve the CG problem with any engine installation of 220 pounds and less. This would create a more stable and safer aircraft. This is obviously my personal opinion and not the Gospel Truth. Carlton > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Langford [SMTP:langford@hiwaay.net] > Sent: 25 February 1999 04:24 > To: KR-net users group > Subject: [kr-net] RE: Centre of gravity > > Blandford, Carlton wrote: > > >>My CG falls 2" behind the forward limit with a 170 pound pilot and 3gal > of fuel on board. Do you think I could have this problem?<< > > The big question would be what is the most forward possible location of > your CG? If you have a header tank, it would be full, and with the > lightest pilot imagineable. The location of the CG in this condition > should coincide with the published forward limit. Then empty the tank and > put in the heaviest pilot and baggage that the gross weight will allow, > and it should not extend past the aft CG limit, which is almost > universally agreed should be a 6" range, rather than an 8" range. If it > doesn't, you should move the battery or engine or something to get it that > way. If you have wing tanks, the rules are a little different... > > Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama > > see KR2S project N56ML at > > ------_=_NextPart_001_01BE615B.8A6F142A Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable RE: [kr-net] RE: Centre of gravity

This configuration = is with full tanks and the 3gal fuel on board should be 13gal of fuel. = My CG locations are empty 1,5" in front of the forward limit, = 2" behind forward limit with pilot and 13gal of fuel and 7" = aft with two 170 pound people and 0 fuel. These are all worst case = scenarios.

I'm not all that = familiar with the KR2S but I would say that one should move the engine = 2" forward on the STANDARD KR2 to improve the CG problem = with any engine installation of 220 pounds and less. This would create = a more stable and safer aircraft.

This is obviously my = personal opinion and not the Gospel Truth.

Carlton   =

    -----Original Message-----
    From:   Mark Langford [SMTP:langford@hiwaay.net]
    Sent:   25 February 1999 04:24
    To:     KR-net users group
    Subject:       = [kr-net] RE: Centre of = gravity

    Blandford, Carlton = wrote:
    =A0
    >>My CG falls = 2" behind the forward limit with a 170 pound pilot and 3gal of = fuel on board. Do you think I could have this = problem?<<

    =A0
    The big question = would be what is the most forward possible location of your CG?=A0 If = you have a header tank, it would be full, and with the lightest pilot = imagineable.=A0 The location of the CG in this condition should = coincide with the published forward limit.=A0 Then empty the tank and = put in the heaviest pilot and baggage that the gross weight will allow, = and it should not extend past the aft CG limit, which is almost = universally agreed should be a 6" range, rather than an 8" = range.=A0 If it doesn't, you should move the battery or engine or = something to get it that way.=A0=A0 If you have wing tanks, the rules = are a little different...


    Mark Langford,=A0 = Huntsville, Alabama
    <mailto:langford@hiwaay.net>
    see KR2S project N56ML = at <http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford>
    =A0
    =A0

------_=_NextPart_001_01BE615B.8A6F142A-- --- END OF DIGEST --- You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: johnbou@timberline.com To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com