From: To: Subject: krnet Digest 6 Oct 2000 12:33:21 -0000 Issue 102 Date: Friday, October 06, 2000 4:33 AM krnet Digest 6 Oct 2000 12:33:21 -0000 Issue 102 Topics (messages 2348 through 2377): Re: I don't get it 2348 by: Albert Pecoraro Re: On the new airfoil 2349 by: Edwin Blocher Re: Hallo all KR-netters 2350 by: Seifert, Richard E variations? 2351 by: Screwy Squirrel 2355 by: Albert Pecoraro newbie questions from a kr builder wantabe 2352 by: Jerry Morris New KR-2 owner 2353 by: GoFlySlow2.aol.com 2358 by: Horn2004.aol.com Re: What am I building??? 2354 by: Patricia Burger 2356 by: Frank Ross 2359 by: ACMan5548.aol.com Re: A comment on modifications to the KR, ie: "New Airfoil" 2357 by: Robert Stone 2362 by: ACMan5548.aol.com New Wing 2360 by: GARYKR2.cs.com 2363 by: ACMan5548.aol.com 2372 by: JEAN VERON FOR SALE or NOT - NEED ANSWERS 2361 by: garbez I don't get it either! 2364 by: RONALD.FREIBERGER KR Gathering 2001 2365 by: Jim Faughn Modified KR 2366 by: Phil Maynard Elevator hinges 2367 by: ROBERT COOPER 2368 by: Mark Jones 2373 by: JEAN VERON 2376 by: Mark Langford Re: Mark's comments 2369 by: Gognij.aol.com scarf 2370 by: Timothy Brown 2374 by: Tracy & Carol O'Brien Canopy wanted 2371 by: rme114.juno.com Re: lock nuts 2375 by: rossy.teleport.com getting started/sticking with it 2377 by: Oscar Zuniga Administrivia: To subscribe to the digest, e-mail: To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail: To post to the list, e-mail: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 15:45:35 -0400 (EDT) To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: Albert Pecoraro Subject: FWD: RE: KR> I don't get it Message-ID: <380246738.970775135976.JavaMail.root@web624-wrb.mail.com> <<>> Steve and KR-List Members, I don't get it either. From a philosophical perspective it appears that we are experiencing what many wise people in the past have said about "change" - "Change creates its own resistance". It seems paradoxical. Another paradox about "change" - In order for things to remain the same, they must change". When a new concept is introduced to a group of humans, whether it be as small as an Assembly Team in a manufacturing plant or as large as an entire nation, approximately 20% of the group will accept the change instantly. The other 80% is divided 60/20 - 60% are unsure and confused, unable to make an "accept/reject decision", 20% reject the change. Usually, the leader of the group will try to use the 20% Accepters to influence the 60% Undecided. (*And if you want scientific proof for these numbers, there are plenty of social studies that have been conducted to support these numbers. You can also find these numbers in Management texts that deal with "Change in the Workplace". As a matter of fact, there is a book called "The Portable MBA" that talks about the acceptance %'s when introducing a new product in the market. As soon as I find it I shall post it on my website. That way, if you have any questions about the "fuzzy" numbers, you can contact the author who quotes the study. Or use the Internet ... it is a great research tool.) Now, having said that ... if you have read the findings of the AS504xx airfoil studies and are curious and thrilled to try something new (like I did) - congratulations. If you haven't decided whether you are going to use the new airfoil or use the RAF48 - congratulations. If you are vehemently opposed at the new airfoil and wish to use the RAF48 airfoil - congratulations. Chances are, when you finish your airplane with whichever airfoil/wing ... it will fly. For the record: I already have the templates made for the new AS5046 airfoil that I will be incorporating on my "Pecoraro KR-2S" (notice the name ... it is unique - I will be the only one in the world to have a "Pecoraro KR-2S"). The "Pecoraro KR-2S" also boasts non-stock {forward deck, turtledeck, kevlar-reinforced cockpit, canopy, cowling, gear, control system, and most importantly ... a widened cockpit}. So, having said that, are we going to waste our time and have a discussion about: - the new forward deck vs the old forward deck - the new turtledeck vs the old turtledeck - the new canopy vs the old canopy - the new gear vs the old gear - the new control system vs the old control system - the new cockpit dimensions vs the old cockpit dimensions What else is new? ... Well, I've spent the last 4 days determining all the hardware requirements for my control system. (i.e. bolts, nuts, washers, turnbuckles, rod-end bearings, eye-bolts, etc.). As you may have noticed, this detailed information is missing from the plans. I believe it is time for another revision, but it isn't up to me to decide that. On a lighter note ... In case you don't receive the Aircraft Spruce and Specialty Newsletter, they can now custom-build canopies for your very own homebuilt (if you are building a stock KR, then you don't need to read any further). I have already sent a note asking for a quotation. I don't know what specifications they need as I am awaiting their reply. I will share my response with the list when I receive it. >> HAVING PROBLEMS FINDING CANOPIES FOR YOUR HOMEBUILT? Bubble canopies for your Long-EZ and Cozy MkIV kits at reasonable prices are no longer a problem. We have an excellent source of custom made optically perfect canopies to fit your canard and other aircraft. Custom canopies can be built to customer specifications. We would be happy to quote on your specifications. Until then, I am not going to get my a$$ all tied up in a knot over debating an issue on which I have already made my mind up on. Do whatever you want. However, keep in mind that I support any efforts to enhance the KR. But that doesn't mean that I am "slamming" RR. After all, they did provide the basis for the plane that I am building and Jeanette was incredibly nice to me when I called her for information on the KR. To be quite honest, 50% of the reason I decided to go with the KR was due to Jeanette's kindness when I called and asked her some questions about the KR. The other 50% of the reason I decided to go with the KR (instead of other planes I was considering: Pulsar XP, Glasair II RG, GP-4, Finchbird - which are all fine planes) were economy, ease of building, and potential to modify to suit my tastes (within reasonable and calculated design limits). I think we commonly refer to these as "options". (*And my percentages are not "fuzzy" math either). Bottom line: I just want to build my plane my way and get it up in the air. Build your plane the way you want to. I hope to see yours in the flight-line too some day. Regards, Albert Pecoraro Pecoraro KR-2S (30%) http://home.earthlink.net/~gryphonflier ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 14:51:28 -0500 To: "Dave and Tina Goodman" , From: "Edwin Blocher" Subject: Re: KR> On the new airfoil Message-ID: <000c01c021a9$d6f76120$96e879a5@computer> I talked to Jeanette about the new airfoil at the Gathering. She had nothing negative to say about it to me. Her main concern was her wing skins working on the "new wing". I would venture to say that skins will be available to whatever new wing becomes most popular, ie: as5xxx, bent spars, etc. She is in business to make money and if something proves out I feel like she will support and profit from it. I better shut up for now ED Ed Blocher e-mail kr-n899eb@mindspring.com ----- Original Message ----- From: Dave and Tina Goodman To: Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2000 8:58 AM Subject: KR> On the new airfoil Steve, The problem on the KR net at this point in time is that there are people out there who think they are the end all be all of aviation and the KR world in particular. "I'm and engineer" comments are your first indication that someone is blowing hard and loudly about something that is opinion, not fact. How many of these folks who are in the attack mode a) have a flying KR, and b) have flown the new wing? If the answer to both is no and that person is spouting off about how this and that will perform, they are likely someone to ignore and move on. Heck, the person who designed the wing is a Dr. Do you think HE does not know what HE is doing, especially when the wing is custom built for this airplane? Jeanette has issues with anything new on the aircraft because it is just that, new. There will be no updates to this aircraft via RR because she is satisfied with it in the current form and has no need to upgrade it. I cannot fault her for that logic, as people are still buying the product. Comments attributed to someone after they have left are at best in poor taste and worst wrong, but I was not there. I have spoken to someone who was there and knows both parties, but his input would be gossip on my part. If you want sound input on how the wing will perform, talk to the man who is flying it. Ignore those who are puffing out their chests and boasting loudly of what they "know". If you want solid information on building techniques and engineering, listen to Mark Langford or Donald Reid. These two will give you the best data they have and will not beat you over the head with how much more they know than you do. We are all learning here, check the egos at the door. Dave "Zipper" Goodman zipperts@whidbey.net ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 13:12:43 -0700 To: "'KRnet'" From: "Seifert, Richard E" Subject: Re: KR> Hallo all KR-netters Message-Id: Frank Ross: This is heresy isn't it? I thought we had all been brainwashed into believing "CHANGE IS GOOD", "CHANGE IS GOOD", "CHANGE IS GOOD", "CHANGE IS GOOD" ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 13:23:43 -0700 (PDT) To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: Screwy Squirrel Subject: variations? Message-ID: Hi there! Last time I wrote, I was at the stage of deciding whether or not to tyr my hand at building a KR. I finally purchased a set of plans this summer, and am now at the "my god what have I gotten myself into?" stage. Anywho, I was wondering if anyone had a relatively short summary of all the modifications people are making to their beasties? I thought I'd been following most of them, but every once in a while something pops up I hadn't read about before... of the most interest to me are: - the new airfoil(I can already find lots on that) - side-mounted control sticks(like the Lancairs) - "bent spars"(???) - wing skins - varieties of composites used(carbon fiber vs kevlar vs glass, etc) - engines used and what fuels they can burn - landing gear designs/configurations - variations of size/shape/location of fuel tanks That should just about do it for now. I guess what I'm looking for is a quick summary of all the varieties out there, where I can find the people doing it, how I can find info on incorporating an idea I like into my own beastie - that sort of thing. Thanks! +----------------------------------+---------------------------------------+ |John E. Holeman | OSU Computer Science| |754-3450 | OSU Atmospheric Science| +----------------------------------+---------------------------------------+ |holemanj@ucs.orst.edu |holemanj@cs.orst.edu | |www.orst.edu/~holemanj |jholeman@oce.orst.edu | +----------------------------------+---------------------------------------+ | So take your time, Look round and see | | The most in time, is where you're meant to be | | For you are light inside your dreams | | For you will find, that it's something | | That touches me. | +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 16:45:54 -0400 (EDT) To: Screwy Squirrel From: Albert Pecoraro CC: krnet@mailinglists.org Subject: RE: KR> variations? Message-ID: <383057841.970778756227.JavaMail.root@web624-wrb.mail.com> John, Start at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford. There is a section that links you to other builders. Visit each site from top to bottom (including the finished KR's). By the time you get through the list, you'll have a good idea as to the variations of modifications that have been built or are under construction. For my project I am using the enw airfoil (AS5046 - root and tip), single control stick between the pilot's legs, stock spars, no pre-fab wing skins, Bi-axial kevlar / S-glass tape / E-glass deck-cloth, 0.75" 7075T6511 Aluminum landing gear for the mains (derivative of Dr. Dean's method), and no header fuel tank. I hope this helps. Happy building. Albert Pecoraro "Pecoraro" KR-2S (30%) http://home.earthlink.net/~gryphonflier ------Original Message------ From: Screwy Squirrel To: krnet@mailinglists.org Sent: October 5, 2000 8:23:43 PM GMT Subject: KR> variations? Hi there! Last time I wrote, I was at the stage of deciding whether or not to tyr my hand at building a KR. I finally purchased a set of plans this summer, and am now at the "my god what have I gotten myself into?" stage. Anywho, I was wondering if anyone had a relatively short summary of all the modifications people are making to their beasties? I thought I'd been following most of them, but every once in a while something pops up I hadn't read about before... of the most interest to me are: - the new airfoil(I can already find lots on that) - side-mounted control sticks(like the Lancairs) - "bent spars"(???) - wing skins - varieties of composites used(carbon fiber vs kevlar vs glass, etc) - engines used and what fuels they can burn - landing gear designs/configurations - variations of size/shape/location of fuel tanks That should just about do it for now. I guess what I'm looking for is a quick summary of all the varieties out there, where I can find the people doing it, how I can find info on incorporating an idea I like into my own beastie - that sort of thing. Thanks! +----------------------------------+---------------------------------------+ |John E. Holeman | OSU Computer Science| |754-3450 | OSU Atmospheric Science| +----------------------------------+---------------------------------------+ |holemanj@ucs.orst.edu |holemanj@cs.orst.edu | |www.orst.edu/~holemanj |jholeman@oce.orst.edu | +----------------------------------+---------------------------------------+ | So take your time, Look round and see | | The most in time, is where you're meant to be | | For you are light inside your dreams | | For you will find, that it's something | | That touches me. | +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To post to the list, email: krnet@mailinglists.org To unsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 14:23:46 -0600 To: "krnet@mailinglists.org" From: "Jerry Morris" Subject: newbie questions from a kr builder wantabe Message-ID: <39DCE352.7A2F9FAE@nsc.com> I think i want to build a kr2s but i really want folding wings to trailer it home at the end of the day. has anyone successfully done this? and the glassair looks a lot like the kr(to me) so why is it faster? is it just more power... is it the (forgive me)airfoil? I know it is way more money.. and i am looking for more flying for the money. but speed is nice too! and about the saturn engine .... do you have any specs? weight? hp? redrive? prop? thanks jerry ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 16:33:05 EDT To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: GoFlySlow2@aol.com Subject: New KR-2 owner Message-ID: <82.1178891.270e3f81@aol.com> My name is Chuck, I just picked up a KR-2 at Mojave Airport (hanger next to Burt Rutan's) This plane was finished in '92 and has only 50 hours. (owner/builder became ill and died) Mods include 23' 4" wing. Fuse is 15' 2"- Hinged canopy Full VFR panel. Can be seen on my web site http://www.angelfire.com/biz6/MFM Looking forward to learning more and participating in discussions. Chuck ANGEL FLIGHT ULTRALIGHTS ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 18:34:37 EDT To: GoFlySlow2@aol.com, krnet@mailinglists.org From: Horn2004@aol.com Subject: Re: KR> New KR-2 owner Message-ID: In a message dated 10/5/00 3:34:34 PM, GoFlySlow2@aol.com writes: << My name is Chuck, I just picked up a KR-2 at Mojave Airport (hanger next to Burt Rutan's) This plane was finished in '92 and has only 50 hours. (owner/builder became ill and died) Mods include 23' 4" wing. Fuse is 15' 2"- Hinged canopy Full VFR panel.>> Welcome to the fray, Chuck. If you have the past issues of the newsletters, there are several issues where the owner of your airplane submitted photos and articles of the construction of your airplane. Never really heard how it flew, but I do recall the guy had some pretty strong opinions about what needed to be changed. Looks like it did a nice job. I'm sure the rest of the KRNet would be very interested in some more detailed photos as well as a description of it's flight characteristics, engine type/size, speed/stall, etc. Let us know when you get a chance, and keep that baby outta the hot Mojave sun! Thanks, Steve Horn horn2004@aol.com Dallas, TX ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 13:50:01 -0700 To: , From: "Patricia Burger" Subject: Re: KR> What am I building??? Message-ID: <002601c02f0d$d6468500$5c3e19d0@default> Right on Mark. ====== Pat & Bill Burger ====== Roseville, Calif pbburger@inreach.com -----Original Message----- From: flykr2s@execpc.com To: krnet@mailinglists.org Date: Thursday, October 05, 2000 10:08 AM Subject: KR> What am I building??? This stems from the airfoil discussion! I bought a Dragonfly Canopy - Am I building a highly modified Dragonfly? I am building a Corvair engine - Must be a new Aerocar I have!!! My landing gear is Diehl - Must be a Diehlaplane!!! My airfoil is AS5046 - Guess I have a no name plane since everyone says it is not proven. Are you getting the point here??? What you put on your plane is your decision and no one elses. If I were to put my landing gear on top of my wings I would still have a KR. But I would have to land upside down! Come on guys, let it die and lets get some productive post going again. Mark Jones (N886MJ) Wales, WI mailto:flykr2s@execpc.com http://sites.netscape.net/flykr2s/homepage --------------------------------------------------------------------- To post to the list, email: krnet@mailinglists.org To unsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 14:03:45 -0700 (PDT) To: James Sellars , flykr2s@execpc.com, krnet@mailinglists.org From: Frank Ross Subject: Re: KR> What am I building??? Message-ID: <20001005210345.12866.qmail@web4704.mail.yahoo.com> --- James Sellars wrote: > Here here!! You want a real question What did I > build with a Saturn Engine > ? Regards Friends; Jim Jim, I'm probably not the only one with a dozen questions about that Saturn engine set-up. Did you wreck your car and decide to salvage the engine? Is it a 4 cyl inline? What kind of mount did you use? What's your cowling look like? Did you use a PSRU? Who built it? What other modifications did you have to make to the engine? Are there other GM engines identical to the Saturn? Is this a Canadian thing? Are you going to mount floats for your next swamp landing? You crazy Canadians will land anywhere! So many questions, so little time. Seriously, the Saturn opens a whole new line for KRs and I haven't heard anyone even considering it until your plane. Where did that come from? Thanks. ===== Frank Ross, San Antonio, TX, __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos - 35mm Quality Prints, Now Get 15 Free! http://photos.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 19:45:52 EDT To: flykr2s@execpc.com, krnet@mailinglists.org, krnet@mailinglists.org (krnet user group) From: ACMan5548@aol.com Subject: Re: KR> What am I building??? Message-ID: Agreed!!!! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 16:33:08 -0500 To: , "krnet user group" From: "Robert Stone" Subject: Re: KR> A comment on modifications to the KR, ie: "New Airfoil" Message-ID: <005f01c02f13$db991260$0101a8c0@pavilion> Tony: I have been reading the many remarks about the new airfoil and other mods. Your remarks make more sense to me than anything I have seen so far on the net. I knew the late Ken Rand and think he designed and built the cheapest, easy to build and one of the best flying homebuilts in the world. The RAF 48 wing was his choice and it was a good one. The use of up to date materials makes sense, changing the original design (Unless you are as engineer) does not. Bob Stone rlspjs@dashling.com ----- Original Message ----- From: To: "krnet user group" Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2000 10:37 AM Subject: KR> A comment on modifications to the KR, ie: "New Airfoil" > It seems to me a lot of people are spending a lot of building time arguing > about the "New Airfoil." I also see a lot of people spending a lot of time > and extra money on other exotic modifications and high end materials for an > airplane that is supposed to be a simple, economical, proven design, with > good performance. > > What is the point? > > I believe what Jeanette said to me when I was asking her about using Kevlar > and Carbon Fiber to build my KR2S, (I am paraphrasing), This is a design > mente to be economical to build and fly. Why would you spend several times > the cost of standard materials with very little gain for the money spent? > > This made sense to me, so my project is going to be more or less stock. For > me the build time, cost of construction and the performance you get the KR2S > is hard to beat. > > If you want your KR to be something it wasn't designed to be, why are you > building a KR? There are a lot of other designs out there. > > Please don't take this the wrong way. This is a hobby. Every body can do what > they want. If redesign is your thing, more power to you but for others like > me I like the "KIS" philosophy. > > Tony > Mission Viejo > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To post to the list, email: krnet@mailinglists.org > To unsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org > For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 19:56:57 EDT To: KR2616TJ@aol.com, krnet@mailinglists.org From: ACMan5548@aol.com Subject: Re: KR> A comment on modifications to the KR, ie: "New Airfoil" Message-ID: <18.328f0c5.270e6f49@aol.com> Thanks for the information on the Carbon Fiber. This is the type of things that should be brought up on the net, to help us all make better deaccessions. If Carbon fiber is that much better, I'm sold. Tony Mission Viejo, CA ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 19:46:43 EDT To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: GARYKR2@cs.com Subject: New Wing Message-ID: <4c.b417024.270e6ce3@cs.com> I was the person that started this so called "Fire Storm" By asking a simple question. So far I have not seen the "Trashing" of anyone or either wing. Nobody was swearing at or degrading each other. I HAVE read a lot of very good discussion supporting both sides. Nobody is wrong. This is what the whole KR net is about. We do not have to agree with each other, nor should we all agree on everything (that would be boring ). I learned a lot about the two airfoils that I didn't know before. So that makes it all worthwhile. Look at the positive side of it, not the negative. Stop and look at what we covered: Top speed Cruise speed Stall speed Drag Vs Lift curves Flaps Now, as I see it, everybody that was following this learned at least one thing. That's good. There was no difference between this and standing around at the airport working the pro's and con's of, let's say, fixed pitch Vs constant speed props. THIS IS WHAT WE ARE HERE FOR, at least I am. To those who still think this was a SKUNK SPRAYING CONTEST, I'm sorry I ever brought the subject up. And if you ever meet me at any of the flyins, please don't ask for my opinion on something. I will answer and it may not be the same as yours. Just to show you how I don't worry about other peoples opinions (most think I'm nuts) when the KR Twin is finished, my next project will be a scaled down version of the B-17 with four 1834s for power. It works out to around a 40ft wing span and holds 4 people. That's what I believe in. Am I wrong? I don't think so. That's the great thing about homebuilding. Dream it, and make it happen. It's good to have topics with some meat in then for a change. Now everybody join hands, and sing the KR song.( maybe some of you should not sing, just hum) Gary Hinkle (A/P) Middletown, Pa. garykr2@cs.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 20:18:35 EDT To: GARYKR2@cs.com, krnet@mailinglists.org From: ACMan5548@aol.com Subject: Re: KR> New Wing Message-ID: <9b.b3474bf.270e745b@aol.com> I for one, would love to see a scaled down B17 with four VW engines! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 23:41:08 -0500 To: , From: "JEAN VERON" Subject: Re: KR> New Wing Message-ID: <005001c02f4f$a6ef5b00$6d111b3f@computer> I think that what can be best said of the KR design is that it is very friendly to changes. I E new wings, landing gear, engines of various makers stretching and widening, more canopies and cowls than one can name. I have had plans for some time ( #68 ) and finally ended up with Dan Diehls N4DD. We have put my ( Diehl skins ) wings on Martin Roberts (original KR wings) plane, have had 1835cc ,2180cc 2600ccVW's and Cont. O-200 engines on both planes and lived to tell about it. There has NEVER been a structural failure of this design that i know of evfen though I have seen some sloppy construction. Now would I like to try another wing? angle of incidense? stretch? YES !!! Will I? NO!!! because I have finally decided to live with what I have and just fly the darned thing.. Would I discourage others from experimenting with it ? NO!!!!!! This is what experemental aviation is about.So keep trying different things, just be willing to bet your life on it because that just may be the stakes. I will wait on the sidelines here to see your results. Jean Veron N4DD ( oldest still flying ans still 95% complete ) ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2000 6:46 PM Subject: KR> New Wing > I was the person that started this so called "Fire Storm" By asking a > simple question. So far I have not seen the "Trashing" of anyone or either > wing. Nobody was swearing at or degrading each other. > I HAVE read a lot of very good discussion supporting both sides. Nobody > is wrong. > This is what the whole KR net is about. We do not have to agree with each > other, nor should we all agree on everything (that would be boring ). > I learned a lot about the two airfoils that I didn't know before. So that > makes it all worthwhile. Look at the positive side of it, not the negative. > Stop and look at what we covered: Top speed > Cruise speed > Stall speed > Drag Vs Lift curves > Flaps > Now, as I see it, everybody that was following this learned at least one > thing. > That's good. There was no difference between this and standing around at > the airport working the pro's and con's of, let's say, fixed pitch Vs > constant speed props. > THIS IS WHAT WE ARE HERE FOR, at least I am. > To those who still think this was a SKUNK SPRAYING CONTEST, I'm sorry I > ever brought the subject up. And if you ever meet me at any of the flyins, > please don't ask for my opinion on something. I will answer and it may not be > the same as yours. > Just to show you how I don't worry about other peoples opinions (most > think I'm nuts) when the KR Twin is finished, my next project will be a > scaled down version of the B-17 with four 1834s for power. It works out to > around a 40ft wing span and holds 4 people. > That's what I believe in. Am I wrong? I don't think so. That's the great > thing about homebuilding. > Dream it, and make it happen. > It's good to have topics with some meat in then for a change. > Now everybody join hands, and sing the KR song.( maybe some of you should > not sing, just hum) > Gary Hinkle (A/P) Middletown, Pa. > garykr2@cs.com > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To post to the list, email: krnet@mailinglists.org > To unsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org > For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 19:02:44 -0500 To: "KR-POST" From: "garbez" Subject: FOR SALE or NOT - NEED ANSWERS Message-ID: <000201c02f28$e3cf8800$eb0ffea9@msgtlg.netins.net> Dave wrote: Mike, I spoke with Mark Langford and William called me today. I will take your engine after I have a chance to talk to William about it tomorrow. He will be in your part of the country, next week, I believe, and is willing to take it and finish it. If this is not agreeble to you let me know, but this would be my plan as it stands right now. I will try to call you early tomorrow evening to hammer out details. I have a few questions: How is it after months of trying to work with William on this motor, trying to contact him about getting it done, to the point of giving up on it, when I finally decide to do something to get my plane back in the air after 1 year waiting for my corvair parts, all of a sudden HE can come to my house to get the engine to build for someone else? Who is being conned here? And what kind of fool does he take us for? I try to be understanding, but this is beyond me. If William would have called me sometime or made some effort for me, some of my bad feelings could have been averted. Right now I'm not so sure. This is really sad, and as it stands I've not decided what to do about the corvair parts. The engine parts, nosegear, etc. I have almost $1,400.00 invested in and I would like some answers as to how William can drive out to IA. pick up the motor and build it for someone else, but couldn't live up to our deal. I'm not looking for answers form Dave, but answers from William or anyone who can shed some light on this subject, I could use some insight. Mike ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 21:19:58 -0400 To: "KRNET" From: "RONALD.FREIBERGER" Subject: I don't get it either! Message-ID: After carefully scanning tonight's mail, I've simply canned it all. I had a big family, and now that they're raised, I don't need to listen to this trivia. I helped Bob Wetzel a bit today, and he's about ready to fly his KR2 at Punta Gorda, Florida.. Airworthiness Cert in hand. Also help another (not KR) guy start his engine for the first time and enjoyed seeing him taxi it for the first time. Ron Freiberger...Tech Counselor #4125 Stay positive mailto:ron.martha@mindspring.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 20:17:15 -0500 To: "KR Net Response" From: "Jim Faughn" Subject: KR Gathering 2001 Message-ID: Hey, with all the interesting posts, is it ok if I go to the Gathering next year? It's a joke. For the record, I think it's cool the way the KR is so changeable. Yes, I do think the stock KR fly's just fine, at least mine does. However, I also LOVE technology and believe that change can also be good. The best part of the KR is that you can experiment with it. I guess that's why it is experimental. I know that I changed my wheel pants just to see if I could pick up more speed. Took about 60 hours when you consider making the plugs, molds, fitting, painting, etc. Bottom line, no change, but they do look sexy. Would I do it again? No, but then again it was a learning experience and guess what? I've started having fun with my plane again. I just love some controversy. Just remember, we are all supposed to be having fun. Jim Faughn 4323D Laclede Ave. St. Louis, MO 63108 (314) 652-7659 mailto:jfaughn@mvp.net N891JF ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 23:01:22 -0400 To: From: "Phil Maynard" Cc: Subject: Modified KR Message-ID: <004001c02f41$b8b19780$1b01a8c0@amd500> ------=_NextPart_000_003D_01C02F20.2E065600 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I built a KR2 20 years ago. I found it flew beautifully solo. I climbed = at 120 mph and cruised at 160 mph. As a two place it was limited by CG, = not gross weight. I carried a 125 lb passenger almost effortlessly but = 175 lb was touchy. It wheel landed beautifully at 80 mph but I needed = 2500 feet of runway. That was with the grab and pull drum brakes, but I = wanted to lower the landing speed so I could get it down in 500 feet. I = did 98% of my flying solo, so I started thinking of modifying a KR2 into = a fast single place with low stall speed.=20 I read some aeronautical engineering texts and started working on a = design. At the time I wasn't in a position to pursue this or try to = build it myself. To my eye at least, the design has great potential and = I'd love to see it developed or any part of it that may have merit. I = don't have the training or time to complete it. With the Internet and = email, it's much easier to share ideas and collaborate on a project than = before.=20 These are the general design points. I wanted to increase the speed range. For top speed I drew the pilot = laid back to reduce frontal area. I kept the cowling tight and as close = as I could especially on top to increase forward visibility over it. The = bottom of the cowling doesn't show the carburetor bump that would be = required.=20 To slow it down I wanted good flaps. The KR2 can't really do this = because there isn't enough of a center section to fit them on. Once you = go with a fixed gear it makes less sense to keep the center section as = it is. I reduced the center section to a minimum. I don't know if Dan = Diehl's gear will work on this but that's where I would start. I traded = some of the aileron length for flaps. I increased the aileron chord to = regain effectiveness lost due to the shorter aileron length. I picked = slotted flaps, as they were the most effective flaps short of fowler = flaps on tracks. I made the flaps constant chord. I can do this in a = tapered wing because the RAF48 has essentially straight top and bottom = surfaces at the trailing edge running forward far enough to house the = flap. I couldn't do this with the new airfoils being considered as they = have much stronger curves especially on the bottom. The cable pulley = aileron linkage on the KR plans worked well for me. I used the same type = of linkages for the flaperons. The single control handle would pull the = ailerons down 20 degrees when the flaps are lowered 40 degree. With the = ailerons at full down deflection they would drop an additional 10 = degrees. If there was also a separate belly flap under the fuselage in = line with the wing flaps with it's own control stick, then the flaps = provide lift and the belly flap provides lift and drag to help slow it = down. My concerns are: does the wing have enough torsional rigidity and = or rear spar strength to handle the additional loads? What are the stall = characteristics, especially in low, slow and gusty conditions with large = aileron deflections? What is the pitching moment of all this? What are = the loads on the longer chord aileron and flap itself? What's the = maneuvering speed, etc, etc? I don't have the background to do these = calculations. The flaperon/aileron linkages and in particular the = aileron bellcrank which is riding on the end of a swing arm, would have = to be built carefully so as to maintain rigidity and stiffness and to = insure positive motion with no flutter. These parts would be ideal = candidates for a kit supplier to fabricate. I wouldn't be surprised if = some additional guides or Teflon glides would be required to maintain = alignments for the linkages and reduce stress on the pivot bolts. The = wing tanks would occupy the forward half of the bay between the spars. = This is necessary to avoid the aileron/flap linkages. It does have the = benefit of keeping the fuel closer to the CG and the drawback of = reducing the size of the tank. I notice in the recent discussions of = replacement airfoils that the gains to performance do not come at the = top and bottom end of the speed range. It's a good argument that the = middle cruising speed matters the most as that's where most of the = flying is done but I don't see why an improved airfoil should have = increased drag at low speed. As it stands now I would keep the RAF48. Here's a link to a web server with 3 views, a layout of the aileron and = flap arrangement and a photo of a model. There are full size .tif and = compressed .jpg copies of the drawings.=20 http://24.40.33.135/airplane/ The jpg are much lower quality and smaller scale but will download = quickly and open in a browser. Span 18'-0"=20 Length 14'-4" Airfoil RAF48 Wing chord root 3'-6" Wing chord tip 2'-0" Center section 3'-0" Wing panels 7'-6" Wing area 60 sf Wing loading 13 psf Power loading 11.75 psf Empty weight 475# Phil Maynard pmaynard@bellatlantic.net ------=_NextPart_000_003D_01C02F20.2E065600-- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 23:33:31 -0700 To: From: "ROBERT COOPER" Subject: Elevator hinges Message-ID: <005601c02f5f$779620e0$a41f143f@pavilion> ------=_NextPart_000_0053_01C02F24.ABB88A60 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Netters I have been working on the horizontal stabalizer and eleverator spars. = Tonight I installed the rod end bearings and eye bolts (Dr. Dean = hinges). I used an 970 washers on each side of the elevator spar where = the eye bolt goes through. I used a an 960 and an 970 washer on the bolt = through the rod end bearing. My problem is that there is washer to = washer contact on the two an 970 washers. The washers ar at right angles = to each other and causes stiffness in the movement. I used 5 hinges and = have contact on all 5 points. Has anyone else experienced this problem = with the Dr. Dean setup? I am thinking that I will grind the edge off = the washer on the elevator to prevent contact. Anyone see a problem with = doing that? Jack Cooper mailto:kr2cooper@msn.com http://www.geocities.com/kr2cooper/ Fayetteville, NC.=20 ------=_NextPart_000_0053_01C02F24.ABB88A60-- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 22:52:26 -0500 To: ROBERT COOPER From: Mark Jones CC: krnet@mailinglists.org Subject: Re: KR> Elevator hinges Message-ID: <39DD4C79.29DE24D3@execpc.com> Jack, The AN970 on the rod end through bolt is an overkill. Why do you need both 960 and 970 on each side of the bearing through bolt? When I installed mine, I did not feel the need except for one 960 on each side of the hinge arrangement. Someone please correct me if I am wrong here. Mark Jones ROBERT COOPER wrote: > Netters > I have been working on the horizontal stabalizer and eleverator spars. Tonight I installed the rod end bearings and eye bolts (Dr. Dean hinges). I used an 970 washers on each side of the elevator spar where the eye bolt goes through. I used a an 960 and an 970 washer on the bolt through the rod end bearing. My problem is that there is washer to washer contact on the two an 970 washers. The washers ar at right angles to each other and causes stiffness in the movement. I used 5 hinges and have contact on all 5 points. Has anyone else experienced this problem with the Dr. Dean setup? I am thinking that I will grind the edge off the washer on the elevator to prevent contact. Anyone see a problem with doing that? > Jack Cooper > mailto:kr2cooper@msn.com > http://www.geocities.com/kr2cooper/ > Fayetteville, NC. > - Mark Jones (N886MJ) Wales, WI USA E-mail me at mailto:flykr2s@execpc.com Visit my KR-2S CorvAIRCRAFT web site at http://sites.netscape.net/flykr2s/homepage ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 23:56:45 -0500 To: "ROBERT COOPER" , From: "JEAN VERON" Subject: Re: KR> Elevator hinges Message-ID: <006e01c02f51$d5499680$6d111b3f@computer> I hate to even bring this up but N191MR has had rod end bushings long before Dr. Dean mentioned them. Ok, go ahead and flame me personally don't take up the net band width. Jean ----- Original Message ----- From: ROBERT COOPER To: Sent: Friday, October 06, 2000 1:33 AM Subject: KR> Elevator hinges Netters I have been working on the horizontal stabalizer and eleverator spars. Tonight I installed the rod end bearings and eye bolts (Dr. Dean hinges). I used an 970 washers on each side of the elevator spar where the eye bolt goes through. I used a an 960 and an 970 washer on the bolt through the rod end bearing. My problem is that there is washer to washer contact on the two an 970 washers. The washers ar at right angles to each other and causes stiffness in the movement. I used 5 hinges and have contact on all 5 points. Has anyone else experienced this problem with the Dr. Dean setup? I am thinking that I will grind the edge off the washer on the elevator to prevent contact. Anyone see a problem with doing that? Jack Cooper mailto:kr2cooper@msn.com http://www.geocities.com/kr2cooper/ Fayetteville, NC. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 07:05:28 -0500 To: From: "Mark Langford" Subject: Re: KR> Elevator hinges Message-ID: <002d01c02f8d$b850a140$58e6a58c@tbe.com> JEAN VERON wrote: > I hate to even bring this up but N191MR has had rod end bushings long before > Dr. Dean mentioned them. Ok, go ahead and flame me personally don't take up > the net band width. Well I guess they're called "Dr. Dean" hinges because he's the first guy that we KNEW of that had done it and made them work. After feeling all the slop in tail surfaces on the KRs at the Gatherings, I vowed it wouldn't happen to me, and started looking at rod end bearings too. Don Chisholm in Canada once wrote about using the MB5 rod end bearing in one of the newsletters. I called him and he said he'd never really gotten it to work and had given up and used the stock way. That's when I went to Oil*te bearings (also suggested in an old newsletter) and five hinges. Dr. Dean then came along and persevered and made them work, documented it on his web page, and detailed the process of KRNet. On the other hand, I never even knew Marty had those hinges, even though I was standing right next to it two weeks ago. Besides, are they "bushings" or are they "bearings" on Marty's plane? It would have been nice to know that somebody sucessfully did it (and how) before I built mine... Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama mailto:langford@hiwaay.net see KR2S N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 23:56:00 EDT To: msgtlg@netins.net, krnet@mailinglists.org From: Gognij@aol.com Subject: Re: KR> Mark's comments Message-ID: <57.c131351.270ea750@aol.com> Hello Folks Last year I caught a lot of pooh pooh about sharing my experience with Mr. Wynne. I feel that I can come out of hiding at this time since many of you have had your experiences by now. I am still interested in a Corvair engine conversion. I have Three Corvair motors in my possession that belonged to my grandfathers cars. He had five Corvairs at any given time. My question for everybody today is. Where can we get a prop hub, and rear starter setup without going through William? Best Regards.....Jim Gogniat Gognij@aol.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 21:00:54 -0700 (PDT) To: Group KR NET From: Timothy Brown Subject: scarf Message-ID: <20001006040054.68490.qmail@web9501.mail.yahoo.com> Dear group: I think it's about time to get back to basics. As I was sitting in the jacuzzi tonight my KR came to mind. I am about to "skin" the bottom and it occurred to me that if the T-88 is stronger than the wood itself, why is it so important to place the scarf joint over a member. Why can't the joint be anywhere? If the response is for clamping reasons, why can't one just T-88 four 4X4s, cut in approximately the right shape, together on the work bench so that they can be weighted or clamped, then just T-88 them to the belly? Just a thought. Tim, high in Lake Arrowhead above the fracas __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos - 35mm Quality Prints, Now Get 15 Free! http://photos.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 22:53:22 -0700 To: Timothy Brown , Group KR NET From: Tracy & Carol O'Brien Subject: Re: KR> scarf Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.20001005225322.00ca184c@localaccess.com> Netters: "Stitch and glue" plywood boats are usually frameless and built with full length scarphed up panels. These scarph joints are for the most part not backed up with anything! Regards, Tracy O'Brien ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 21:33:02 -0700 To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: rme114@juno.com Subject: Canopy wanted Message-ID: <20001005.213303.-434817.9.rme114@juno.com> Hello from Bisbee AZ !!, This is Steve, future KR driver ( not too distant future I hope ). A few months ago I purchased a 16 year old bran new KR (less than 20 hrs all taxi time). Simple age with hanger rash and other events have taken their toll. Currently I am elbow deep in reserection. The canopy is just too far gone. This is a standard width KR2, flaps, retracts, 1.7 VW , tail dragger. I am looking for a canopy. From the Gathering photos, (A nice job done on them too !! ) I noticed alot of side hinged canopies, this looks like it makes for easier acess than the "split" style on mine now. Next. Those wonderful, intelligent, local elected officials we voted into office down here have chip-sealed everything that resembles asphault down here ( PO4 ) and I'm thinking, this is gonna chew up this fine 2-bladed wood prop that came with the KR. I'm considering a 3- blade with a smaller circle for more ground clearance. I would be interested in a happy medium between a "climb" pitch and a "cruise" pitch. All responces will be appreciated. I've been an audiance to the KRnet for a while now and find it 70% informative, 30% entertainment, and 100% better than what's useually on tv these days, I like it 11 Thanx. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 07:07 +0000 To: "larry flesner" , "Bob Smith" , From: Cc: Subject: Re: KR> lock nuts Message-ID: <20001006070542.5298.qmail@relay1.teleport.com> It's ok to use nylon lock nuts, castelated nuts are for parts that are subject to rotation. --Ross ----Original Message----- >From: =09larry flesner >To: =09"Bob Smith" ; >Subj: =09Re: KR> lock nuts >Sent: =09Wednesday, October 04, 2000 5:59 AM > >At 07:43 PM 10/3/00 -0700, Bob Smith wrote: >>Is it acceptable to use nylon lined lock nuts (AN) for the bolts that hold >on the hinges through the spruce spars for hstab, elevator, vstab, and >rudder? The plans say its OK but we all know about those plans. >=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > >Bob, > >The generally acceptable practice is: (those more knowledgable can correct >me if I'm wrong) > >- nylon selflocking nuts are acceptable in all locations unless you > have rotation, then use castle nuts with cotter pins, or at >temperatures above approx 250 degrees (engine area) then use >steel lock nuts. If the nylon nuts have been on and off several times >and the locking feature is getting weak, use a new one. Use your best >judgement. Also, anyone building NEEDS TO HAVE THE TONY BINGALIS BOOKS. >It also wouldn't hurt to have a copy of the AC43.13-1A and -2A > > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >To post to the list, email: krnet@mailinglists.org >To unsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org >For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org > > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 12:32:47 GMT To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: "Oscar Zuniga" Subject: getting started/sticking with it Message-ID: G'day, netters; From another one of those "time warp" KRNet digest subscr*bers (me)- a few comments, since it's Friday. First comment: I see many a post from somebody who is like I was, "lurking and listening", planning to get started one day. My comment is, don't wait! Do something, no matter how small, to get started. Order a set of plans. Start building up an engine. Get materials lists. Make sketches. Whatever... just start something. You probably will never have more shop space, or free time, or loose cash, than you have now. Besides, you and I aren't getting any younger, so just do it. I must admit I only did a half a jump, starting construction of a simpler project first before I start the KR-2S, but believe me- if you wait to get started, it will be a long, long time till you lift off of a runway. I haven't spent more than a few hundred dollars every couple of months by spreading my project out over a little time (except buying the engine). I got most of my wood for free, and by patient scrounging, have slowly gotten things I need without large cash outlays. Second comment: To the guys who have been sanding old paint off for 4 years (not picking on anybody here; just an example)- just try to do a little something every day, or at least every week. If you let the project get cold for a month or two, it will never fly. There is something about putting your hands on a tool or a part and doing something in the shop, even for a few minutes, that keeps the thread going. The endless sanding-filling-priming-sanding-filling routine will truly never end if you don't stick with it. Keep dreaming; but remember, it's easier to keep the dream alive if you're in the shop actually seeing and working on something. Last comment: When I started my "KR construction trainer" project, I firmly resolved to build it exactly to plans, simple and plain, and as light as possible. Guess what? I've spent more time detailing and modifying than I have spent building to plans. It just happens! If you have the mental make-up and the desire to build and fly, you will probably end up "customizing", tweaking, modifying, and otherwise making your airplane just the way you want it. It's like cars or boats or guns or motorcycles, or whatever your hobby is: your mind starts trying to figure out how to improve things, make yours a little more finely honed or tighter grouping or whatever. So it is with "the wing". It is the product of inquisitive and innovative minds and hands, and it is for those who want it. I want a Corvair engine in my KR, you want a 2180 VW. I want conventional gear, you want tricycle. I want minimal electrics, you want a full panel. So just get in the buffet line, take what you like, sit down, and start enjoying the food! Yeah, you can tell me how much you hate the vegetables or applesauce I have on my plate, but I might not care for what's on your plate either. And at least we have choices! Oscar Zuniga Medford, Oregon mailto: taildrags@hotmail.com website at http://www.geocities.com/taildrags/ _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ------------------------------ End of krnet Digest ***********************************