From: To: Subject: krnet Digest 7 Nov 2000 04:25:32 -0000 Issue 120 Date: Monday, November 06, 2000 8:26 PM krnet Digest 7 Nov 2000 04:25:32 -0000 Issue 120 Topics (messages 2828 through 2851): holes in the longerons 2828 by: Bob Smith 2831 by: virgnvs.juno.com 2833 by: Patrick Driscoll 2835 by: Donald Reid 2845 by: AviationMech.aol.com 2848 by: Bob Smith Re: tail wheel 2829 by: KR2616TJ.aol.com 2830 by: virgnvs.juno.com 2832 by: virgnvs.juno.com 2841 by: Jerry Mahurin Clutter 2834 by: Frank Ross adjustment of the revflow carb 2836 by: DONAN5.aol.com Re: accident report 2837 by: James Sellars small bolts 2838 by: Bob Smith 2839 by: David Mullins taildraggers v.s. trigear 2840 by: Oscar Zuniga REVFLOW ? 2842 by: Phil Visconti Holly day south africa. 2843 by: Stef & Marlies Re: just thinking outloud&online 2844 by: Dave Bogdan Tailwheel tails 2846 by: AviationMech.aol.com Re: Fiberglass covering 2847 by: Cleo Greenhaw 2849 by: larry flesner 2850 by: Laheze.aol.com TAILWHEELS ? 2851 by: Phil Visconti Administrivia: To subscribe to the digest, e-mail: To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail: To post to the list, e-mail: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2000 23:23:04 -0800 To: From: "Bob Smith" Subject: holes in the longerons Message-ID: <001e01c046f9$3f8ed460$a0931918@nycap.rr.com> ------=_NextPart_000_001B_01C046B6.2E477100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I have been figuring out my fuel tank & canopy setup and I seem to need = some (3/16 or less) holes in the longerons (side-by-side 5/8" spruce) = to mount the canopy and tank. 1) How many holes would be too many and weaken the structure? 2) I am thinking about reinforcing the longerons underneath to = compensate for weakness caused by holes. Is this a good idea? 3) are wood screws acceptable or must bolts always be used? Thanks! Bob Smith, Albany, NY ------=_NextPart_000_001B_01C046B6.2E477100-- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 5 Nov 2000 09:41:13 -0500 To: rsmith5@nycap.rr.com From: virgnvs@juno.com Cc: krnet@mailinglists.org Subject: Re: KR> holes in the longerons Message-ID: <20001105.094321.-144399.1.virgnvs@juno.com> Fasten "C" channel to tank etc and use it to go around the longerons. On Sat, 4 Nov 2000 23:23:04 -0800 "Bob Smith" writes: > I have been figuring out my fuel tank & canopy setup and I seem to > need some (3/16 or less) holes in the longerons (side-by-side 5/8" > spruce) to mount the canopy and tank. > > 1) How many holes would be too many and weaken the structure? One > 2) I am thinking about reinforcing the longerons underneath to > compensate for weakness caused by holes. Is this a good idea? See above > 3) are wood screws acceptable or must bolts always be used? No, Yes, Virg > > Thanks! > > Bob Smith, Albany, NY > > > > ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 5 Nov 2000 10:16:17 -0600 To: krnet@mailinglists.org, "Bob Smith" From: "Patrick Driscoll" Subject: RE: KR> holes in the longerons Message-ID: <4120001105161617100@earthlink.net> Am I the only one that is getting the same postings two or three times or is that a "glitch" in the system > [Original Message] > From: Bob Smith > To: > Date: 11/4/00 10:31:47 PM > Subject: KR> holes in the longerons > > I have been figuring out my fuel tank & canopy setup and I seem to need some (3/16 or less) holes in the longerons (side-by-side 5/8" spruce) to mount the canopy and tank. > > 1) How many holes would be too many and weaken the structure? > > 2) I am thinking about reinforcing the longerons underneath to compensate for weakness caused by holes. Is this a good idea? > > 3) are wood screws acceptable or must bolts always be used? > > > Thanks! > > Bob Smith, Albany, NY > > > > > --- Patrick Driscoll --- patrick36@earthlink.net --- EarthLink: It's your Internet. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2000 16:56:18 -0500 To: From: Donald Reid Subject: Re: KR> holes in the longerons Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20001105164530.0095bd10@pop.erols.com> --=====================_6334535==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 11:23 PM 11/4/2000 -0800, Bob Smith wrote: >I have been figuring out my fuel tank & canopy setup and I seem to need >some (3/16 or less) holes in the longerons (side-by-side 5/8" spruce) to >mount the canopy and tank. > >1) How many holes would be too many and weaken the structure? > >2) I am thinking about reinforcing the longerons underneath to compensate >for weakness caused by holes. Is this a good idea? > >3) are wood screws acceptable or must bolts always be used? As a general rule, it is a good design practice to avoid holes in primary structure whenever possible. A better idea might be to add an additional piece of material below the longeron and use that as a mounting point. Taper the material so that there is no abrupt transition in the cross-sectional area and add a small piece of thin plywood over both the longeron and the extra piece. According to my reference material, if you use a 3/16" bolt through a piece of (nominal) 5/8" material, then the distance between the center-to-center spacing should be at least 11/16". You should never use screws in a structural application. Don Reid mailto:donreid@erols.com Bumpass, Va KR2XL construction at http://users.erols.com/donreid/kr_page.htm Ultralights at http://users.erols.com/donreid/usua250.html --=====================_6334535==_.ALT-- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 20:14:07 EST To: rsmith5@nycap.rr.com, krnet@mailinglists.org From: AviationMech@aol.com Subject: Re: KR> holes in the longerons Message-ID: <32.c57f3d8.2738b15f@aol.com> In a message dated 11/4/00 11:31:55 PM Eastern Standard Time, rsmith5@nycap.rr.com writes: << How many holes would be too many and weaken the structure? >> The original KR canopy installation suggested installing a piano hinge which bolted through the longeron allowing the canopy to fold over. An incident simular to a ground loop resulted in failure of the longeron at one of the canopy attach bolt holes. I believe that any hole in the top longeron must be avoided if possible. You can always add extra structure to put holes in. I personally have a removable forward deck that attaches with piano hinge. The holes used are AN3 and the area is reinforced. My header tank sits in its compartment rather then is bolted to anything. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 21:45:39 -0800 To: , From: "Bob Smith" Subject: Re: KR> holes in the longerons Message-ID: <001b01c0487d$f64c95e0$8c931918@nycap.rr.com> If your tank sits in its compartment rather than is bolted to anything, what holds it in? Especially when you are upside down. I thought the tank needed to be held in big time against +Gs and -Gs. I like the original Ken Rand idea of using the glass tapes to hold it in... this is real strength and doesn't put holes in the longerons. Exactly how did you reinforce the longerons before you drilled AN3 holes? Bob Smith ----- Original Message ----- From: To: ; Sent: Monday, November 06, 2000 5:14 PM Subject: Re: KR> holes in the longerons > In a message dated 11/4/00 11:31:55 PM Eastern Standard Time, > rsmith5@nycap.rr.com writes: > > << How many holes would be too many and weaken the structure? > >> > The original KR canopy installation suggested installing a piano hinge which > bolted through the longeron allowing the canopy to fold over. An incident > simular to a ground loop resulted in failure of the longeron at one of the > canopy attach bolt holes. I believe that any hole in the top longeron must > be avoided if possible. You can always add extra structure to put holes in. > I personally have a removable forward deck that attaches with piano hinge. > The holes used are AN3 and the area is reinforced. My header tank sits in > its compartment rather then is bolted to anything. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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: Sun, 5 Nov 2000 08:22:50 EST To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: KR2616TJ@aol.com Subject: Re: KR> tail wheel Message-ID: <15.b472aeb.2736b92a@aol.com> In a message dated 11/4/00 11:16:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, rsmith5@nycap.rr.com writes: << 2) you guys with the tail wheel .....is your tailwheel fixed or steerable? Is the fixed tailwheel setup easier than the steerable for someone to learn? >> Good Morning, A tailwheel airplane is not difficult to fly. Put that thought to rest. It simply requires different learned techniques than those required in tri gear configurations. Before you decide, look at the type of flying you will do. Tailwheel airplanes are a little more suited for unpaved operations. You are a little more restricted in cross wind operations. Just remember, you need to stay on top of the airplane all the way to shut down. There are several tailwheels out there for experimental airplanes that are suitable for the KR. Several of us are using a tailwheel from AS&S. This tailwheel locks with a detent for your takeoff roll but breaks to full castering when you apply enough pressure on the pedals, or put enough side load on the assembly. The locking tailwheel assists you on your initial application of power and taxing. All you do is line up with the center line and let it roll a couple of feet. The tailwheel locks itself in the detents. The mystique of tailwheels is just that, a mystique. It's like anything else in flying, it's just something else to learn. Dana Overall 2000 KR Gathering host Richmond, KY mailto:kr2616tj@aol.com http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/hangar/7085/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 5 Nov 2000 09:43:02 -0500 To: KR2616TJ@aol.com From: virgnvs@juno.com Cc: krnet@mailinglists.org Subject: Re: KR> tail wheel Message-ID: <20001105.094321.-144399.2.virgnvs@juno.com> On Sun, 5 Nov 2000 08:22:50 EST KR2616TJ@aol.com writes: > In a message dated 11/4/00 11:16:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, > rsmith5@nycap.rr.com writes: > > << 2) you guys with the tail wheel .....is your tailwheel fixed or > steerable? > Is the fixed tailwheel setup easier than the steerable for someone > to learn? > >> > > Good Morning, > > A tailwheel airplane is not difficult to fly. Put that thought to > rest. It > simply requires different learned techniques than those required in > tri gear > configurations. Before you decide, look at the type of flying you > will do. > Tailwheel airplanes are a little more suited for unpaved operations. > You are > a little more restricted in cross wind operations. Just remember, > you need > to stay on top of the airplane all the way to shut down. > > There are several tailwheels out there for experimental airplanes > that are > suitable for the KR. Several of us are using a tailwheel from AS&S. > This > tailwheel locks with a detent for your takeoff roll but breaks to > full > castering when you apply enough pressure on the pedals, or put > enough side > load on the assembly. The locking tailwheel assists you on your > initial > application of power and taxing. All you do is line up with the > center line > and let it roll a couple of feet. The tailwheel locks itself in the > detents. > > The mystique of tailwheels is just that, a mystique. It's like > anything else > in flying, it's just something else to learn. > Well put, Virg > Dana Overall > 2000 KR Gathering host > Richmond, KY > mailto:kr2616tj@aol.com > http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/hangar/7085/ > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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 > ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 5 Nov 2000 09:38:36 -0500 To: rsmith5@nycap.rr.com From: virgnvs@juno.com Cc: krnet@mailinglists.org Subject: Re: KR> tail wheel Message-ID: <20001105.094321.-144399.0.virgnvs@juno.com> On Sat, 4 Nov 2000 23:07:48 -0800 "Bob Smith" writes: > Up until now I have been planning a tri-gear setup but now I am > thinking about maybe a taildragger. I know that the tailwheel setup > is inherently unstable (center of mass behind the main gears causes > rotation unless correctly aligned). Not unstable, just a fact of physics. Just get a tailwheel endosment. > So I have a couple questions: > > 1) Is it extremely difficult for a low time spam can pilot to learn > to safely land a KR taildragger or can any bozo with half a brain > (me for example) learn to do it? See above > 2) you guys with the tail wheel .....is your tailwheel fixed or > steerable? Is the fixed tailwheel setup easier than the steerable > for someone to learn? Not fixed, could not turn on ground. Virg > > thanks, > Bob Smith, Albany, NY ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2000 14:27:06 GMT To: rsmith5@nycap.rr.com, krnet@mailinglists.org From: "Jerry Mahurin" Subject: Re: KR> tail wheel Message-ID: Believe me, any Bozo can learn.... LOTS of US have....!! It will sharpen up your skills (including tap dancing), but I would recommend it as a step in 'upgrading' your piloting proficiency. You will probably be using a 'steerable' tailwheel. Keep on keeping on, Jerry Mahurin Lugoff, SC >From: "Bob Smith" >To: >Subject: KR> tail wheel >Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2000 23:07:48 -0800 > >Up until now I have been planning a tri-gear setup but now I am thinking >about maybe a taildragger. I know that the tailwheel setup is inherently >unstable (center of mass behind the main gears causes rotation unless >correctly aligned). > > So I have a couple questions: > >1) Is it extremely difficult for a low time spam can pilot to learn to >safely land a KR taildragger or can any bozo with half a brain (me for >example) learn to do it? > >2) you guys with the tail wheel .....is your tailwheel fixed or steerable? >Is the fixed tailwheel setup easier than the steerable for someone to >learn? > >thanks, >Bob Smith, Albany, NY _________________________________________________________________________ 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. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 5 Nov 2000 08:20:08 -0800 (PST) To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: Frank Ross Subject: Clutter Message-ID: <20001105162008.21312.qmail@web4701.mail.yahoo.com> Meant to send last note just to K. Boyer. Sorry abt the clutter. ===== Frank Ross, San Antonio, TX, __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one Place. http://shopping.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 5 Nov 2000 19:06:51 EST To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: DONAN5@aol.com Subject: adjustment of the revflow carb Message-ID: Anybody got a step by step method on adjusting this carb(revflow) for a VW....2180 Not having luck getting it much lower than 900 RPM and not quitting thanks Don Shipley ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2000 09:13:45 -0400 To: "Gaston Landry" , kirkland@vianet.on.ca, krnet@mailinglists.org From: James Sellars Subject: Re: KR> accident report Message-Id: <4.3.0.20001106090931.00a7d370@mail.auracom.com> Gaston; First, I am very interested in you coming around to help when you can, ;and I have something for you too. I have been working on finding a new airframe and getting the red tape sorted out here in Canada regarding bringing an airframe in from the States. Seems like I may have put that one to bed, now I just have to make the money and make the deal that will let me move forward. Phil in Mass. has a very good looking airframe he may let go. Then I would spend the winter moving my mechanical parts to that airframe, ;and then in the spring be ready to go again. Keep in touch. Jim At 04:42 PM 11/2/00 -0400, Gaston Landry wrote: >Bill... didn't you know? That was Jim Sellars, from the list. We had >posted this accident the day (or 2) after the accident. > >After the accident, I had the chance to meet Jim, and helped him dismantle >some of his plane. I was kinda hoping I'd be able to help him rebuild, >but apparently (last I heard, at least), he decided to buy another >plane. Jim, what are the current developments in that area? >We'd like to be kept up to date, y'know... hehe :o) > >Gaston > > >>From: "w.g. kirkland" >>To: "krnet" >>Subject: KR> accident report >>Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 00:51:23 -0500 > From the COPA newsletter >>"The Rand Robinson KR-2amateur built departed the Moncton N.B. airport on >>it's maiden flight enroute to the McEwen airport 5.5 miles to the NW with >>the pilot builder onboard. Approximately two miles SE of the McEwen >>airfield the engine (saturn automobile engine) started to run rough and >>lose power. The pilot informed Moncton tower of the problem and advised >>them he was going to try o land on runway 29 at McEwen. Shortly >>afterwards the pilot realized he could not make the airfield and elected >>to carry out a forced landing in a nearby bog with small trees rather >>than risk lcrashing into the large trees in the forest on his flight >>path. The aircraft sustained substantial damage during the forced >>landing. The pilot was not injured." >>All those years and hours of building to have that happen on your maiden >>flight. Yech. >>W.G.(Bill) KIRKLAND >>kirkland@vianet.on.ca > >_________________________________________________________________________ >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. > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >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: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 08:20:56 -0800 To: From: "Bob Smith" Subject: small bolts Message-ID: <001d01c0480d$8b9a64e0$8c931918@nycap.rr.com> ------=_NextPart_000_001A_01C047CA.7CB55B80 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I dont see a reference to bolts smaller than AN3 in the Wicks catalog. I = was considering using some smaller bolts so I don't have to punch big = holes in my longerons. Is it possible to get AN hardware with smaller = diameters than this? Does anyone ever use bolts smaller than this? = Where would I get smaller AN hardware? =20 Bob Smith Albany, NY KR2S ------=_NextPart_000_001A_01C047CA.7CB55B80-- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2000 08:41:03 -0500 From: David Mullins CC: krnet@mailinglists.org Subject: Re: KR> small bolts Message-ID: <3A06B4EF.56FCD76C@ici.net> Bob, There are 6-32 and 8-32 MS (Mil Spec) machine screws. An AN3 Bolts size is 10-32, However, I don't know if they are made to the same strength in PSI as an AN3 bolt is. Dave M Nashua, New Hampshire Putting Boat sides together Web site to be put up shortly!! Bob Smith wrote: > > I dont see a reference to bolts smaller than AN3 in the Wicks catalog. I was considering using some smaller bolts so I don't have to punch big holes in my longerons. Is it possible to get AN hardware with smaller diameters than this? Does anyone ever use bolts smaller than this? Where would I get smaller AN hardware? > > Bob Smith Albany, NY KR2S ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2000 14:24:39 GMT To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: "Oscar Zuniga" Subject: taildraggers v.s. trigear Message-ID: Bob wrote: >Up until now I have been planning a tri-gear setup but now >I am thinking about maybe a taildragger. Why change? It doesn't seem to change cruise speed any, though a nosewheel adds a little weight and complexity up front. Nosewheel will be easier on the ground. >So I have a couple questions: > >1) Is it extremely difficult for a low time spam can pilot to >learn to safely land a KR taildragger You actually have two questions here. One has to do with landing a KR, the other has to do with landing a taildragger. In the air, a taildragger KR is just a KR. As has been mentioned by several KR pilots and builders, landing a KR is not like bringing in the space shuttle or landing a Pitts; it can be done (and you will live to tell about it!) There is a bit more technique to it than, say, landing a Cherokee 140 or a Cessna 152, but that's what training is for. I've had 2 flights in a KR and got to jockey the stick on an approach or two, and things do happen a bit quickly with that little stick in your hand, but it's not an insurmountable challenge. The other part of the question, landing a taildragger, relates to your frame of mind. If you are afraid or apprehensive about taildraggers, that doesn't help. If it's just another skill to learn, like learning anything new, you would be amazed at the capabilities of the human brain in coordinating all that mess of nerves, muscles, and bones! Heck, if you can toss a ball in the air and catch it with your eyes closed, why not land a taildragger with your eyes open? Folks who learned in a Champ or a J-3, or a 120/140 never know why it's any harder to do one than the other. Me, after learning in a J-3 and Citabrias, I had a dickens of a time setting up and landing a Tomahawk the first couple of hours I tried flying one. And, finally, you asked: >2) you guys with the tail wheel .....is your tailwheel fixed or = >steerable? For taxiing, you'll want a steerable tailwheel. You won't see too many full-swivel steerable tailwheels on KRs, so you can't spin them on one main, but I don't think you'll see many (any?) that aren't steerable through at least a small arc for ease in taxiing. I've even seen pictures of one with a locking tailwheel, allowing swiveling for taxi and locking for take-offs. 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. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2000 11:48:25 -0500 To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: Phil Visconti Subject: REVFLOW ? Message-ID: <3A06E0D9.105C9186@gis.net> --------------F3C121D954547A35CADFF261 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Is "revflow" spelled with upper-case "R" or lower-case "r" ? Sometimes the Posa carburetor on a Revmaster engine is called a "revflow" carb. However, a "Revflow" carburetor is made by Revmaster. Is there a difference ? YES.....or so some people say. When I bought my Revmaster engine, from someone in AZ, it had a Posa carb. I only have info on that one. Phil Visconti Marlboro, MA --------------F3C121D954547A35CADFF261-- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 19:25:42 +0100 To: From: "Stef & Marlies" Subject: Holly day south africa. Message-ID: <003501c166ff$fc3c7a00$4f474bd5@stef> ------=_NextPart_000_0024_01C166F8.D35E9C00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hai Netheads. I am still working on my plane but sometimes you have to go on a = hollyday. At this time i am sure I will go togeteher with my wife too = south africa. Is there someone out there who wants me too show his plane = and maby we can make a flight. Hope to here somebode from there. So I can make my plans fr the rond = trip. Thanks Stef en Boer ------=_NextPart_000_0024_01C166F8.D35E9C00-- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2000 23:21:54 GMT To: kae_ar@yahoo.com, holemanj@ucs.orst.edu, krnet@mailinglists.org From: "Dave Bogdan" Subject: Re: KR> just thinking outloud&online Message-ID: If you're flying just VFR you should bear in mind that the weather can change alot in a couple of hours... I plan to have the extra fuel capacity in anticipation of unexpected changes in plan. I'll stop every couple of hours for refreshments and weather updates. Dave Bogdan Milwaukee >From: Frank Ross >To: Screwy Squirrel , krnet@mailinglists.org >Subject: Re: KR> just thinking outloud&online >Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 19:13:33 -0700 (PDT) > >John Holeman asked:... >not use/use a small header tank in favor of... >could you extend the wing > > spars a bit so that you > > could build bigger wing tanks? > > |John E. Holeman | > > OSU Computer Science| > > |754-3450 | > > OSU Atmospheric Science| >John, >If you are worried about the safety of a >cowl-fuel-tank, why carry more than 6-8 hours of fuel >in your wings? Flying safety dictates that you land >every 4-6 hrs just to keep your reflexes and thinking >straight. I love flying, but I don't think I want to >spend over about 4 hours at a stretch in a KR cockpit. >Why carry 6-8 hrs of fuel? Keep it light, Keep it >uncomplicated (a long word for simple). > > >===== >Frank Ross, San Antonio, TX, > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Yahoo! Messenger - Talk while you surf! It's FREE. >http://im.yahoo.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 > _________________________________________________________________________ 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. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 20:48:37 EST To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: AviationMech@aol.com Subject: Tailwheel tails Message-ID: On a return trip from Oshkosh several years ago, I stopped for fuel somewhere in Indiana. After the pit stop, I mounted the plane and a bystander asked, "where are you going with that tailwheel that is shaved in half"??? I got out and sure enough, almost half of that 3" wheel was gone and what was left was sure never to roll again. The decision was easy. I was going home. My KR is balanced such that at high power, I can lift the tail as high as I like off the ground. So, the only question is how much of the ramaining metal would I loose in the taxi,l takeoff, land and taxi process to get me home. The answer was that I got close to the through bolt and the bracket assembly. In response to an earlier question and comment, If you wanted to you could use a tail skid. The KR with power, the right balance and adequate brakes will pivot on one wheel as other larger tailwheel aircraft with full swivle wheels. It does shorten the life of the 20 dollar wheel, but if the need arises it can be done. I recommend a small steerable wheel. I have not seen a full swivle wheel that I think is small and light enough for the KR. Orma Aviationmech@AOL.com Builder and Pilot, KR-2 N110LR, 1984-2000 AP with Inspection Authorization ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 20:13:19 -0600 To: From: "Cleo Greenhaw" Subject: Fw: Fiberglass covering Message-ID: <001101c04860$4cec78c0$076a67ce@cleogree> ------=_NextPart_000_000E_01C0482E.015F6B60 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Cleo Greenhaw=20 To: krnet@mailinglists.org=20 Sent: Monday, November 06, 2000 1:30 PM Subject: Fiberglass covering Netters: I am almost ready to begin covering the wings of this project = that I bought and would like to have an opinion of what weight of = fiberglass cloth I should use, and how many layers? Also, should I use = polyester resin or a type of epoxy resin? Your opinions would be = appreciated....thank you. Cleo@fullnet.net ------=_NextPart_000_000E_01C0482E.015F6B60-- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2000 21:06:00 -0600 To: "Cleo Greenhaw" , From: larry flesner Subject: Re: KR> Fw: Fiberglass covering Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001106210600.0082e100@mail.midwest.net> >Subject: Fiberglass covering >Netters: I am almost ready to begin covering the wings of this project that I bought and would like to have an opinion of what weight of fiberglass cloth I should use, and how many layers? Also, should I use polyester resin or a type of epoxy resin? Your opinions would be appreciated....thank you. Cleo@fullnet.net ============================================================================ ===== Cleo, Did you get a set of plans with your project? If not , purchase one. Buy the KR cloth from Wicks and build to the plans. I've never used polyester resin so I can't recommend. From things I've heard, I'd go with the epoxy. Larry Flesner ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 23:09:01 EST To: cleo@fullnet.net, krnet@mailinglists.org From: Laheze@aol.com Subject: Re: KR> Fw: Fiberglass covering Message-ID: Cleo, this is my opinion, one of thousands I am certain ! If I were you I would use a single layer of biaxial cloth on both sides of course. Biaxial cloth comes in 60" wide rolls. The seperate layers of unidirectional cloth is already at a 45 degree angle to the edge of the fabric as you unroll it off of the roll. The way the cloth is made is two separate layers of unidirectional fibers lain at 90 degrees opposite to each other just the way you want it. You lay the cloth on the wing surface starting at the root going out towards the tip all at one time with out having to overlap any pieces as you have to do if you use bidirectional cloth. The biaxial cloth is about 15% stronger than bidirectional cloth. I would use the lightest weight/ or ounce per sq yd biaxial cloth you can get from Aircraft Spruce, Wicks or whoever. Some people on here have said that bidirectional is just as good laid on at a 45 degree angle but believe me that is not true. Ask any composites engineer and they will tell you that is not correct. If you use bid laid at a 45 degree then you have to overlap it at the edges by at least an inch to carry the strength from one piece of cloth to the next. 'When you do this you have an extra thickness at the overlap even when peel ply has been used to make the edges blend in.This method will give you problems leveling the surface when you get ready to finish for painting. You will either sand away the overlap (which will cause you to loose the strength of the overlap) or you will start adding fillers to the surface to try and blend in the overlap which will add unwanted weight. Your other option would be to use unidirectional cloth applied to the wing surface one layer at a time layed up at a 45 degree angle to the leading edge and then a second layer or ply laid up at a opposite 45 degree angle to the leading edge or at a 90 degree angle to the first layer of unidirectional. The uni does not need overlapping at the edges as does bidirectional. Just butt up the edges and keep going out to the end of your wing or whatever with however many widths of cloth that it takes. If you use the biaxial cloth it is two layers of uni at 90 degree angle to one another not woven together but laid one layer on top of the other with a light stitching just holding them in place so you can handle it while you get it onto whatever your glassing without falling apart. I hope this helps and if you have any questions feel free to ask. Larry Howell laheze@aol.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2000 23:25:12 -0500 To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: Phil Visconti Subject: TAILWHEELS ? Message-ID: <3A078428.9EEC9BFE@gis.net> Doesn't anyone have the original KR tailwheels anymore ? Phil ------------------------------ End of krnet Digest ***********************************