From: To: Subject: krnet Digest 10 Mar 2001 18:12:22 -0000 Issue 188 Date: Saturday, March 10, 2001 10:12 AM krnet Digest 10 Mar 2001 18:12:22 -0000 Issue 188 Topics (messages 4503 through 4532): tail stuff - Friday 4503 by: Manager Bill Re: Mom here 4504 by: Mike Mims Wing gap seals 4505 by: Ed Schuler 4516 by: RONALD.FREIBERGER Re: are we having fun yet? 4506 by: Robert Stone Question answers 4507 by: Dean Selby CONGRATULATIONS!, THANKS. 4508 by: Frank Ross Re: Flames !! 4509 by: BillStarrs The whole is more than... 4510 by: bob hill Who here flies with Corvair power? 4511 by: Benjamin Knorr 4514 by: Frank Ross I'M SORRY 4512 by: Steven Eberhart 4523 by: Albert Pecoraro CAFE testing 4513 by: Steven Eberhart Lengthen a KR-2S? 4515 by: Didactics1.aol.com Need for improved Flight Simulator model - interested? 4517 by: Peter Nauta Invitation to Fly In 4518 by: Austin Clark STALL and STABILITY 4519 by: Dave 4524 by: Carter Pond Retractable KR1 gear 4520 by: aerobair KR newsletter archive 4521 by: CruzJ12.aol.com Tandem Tail dragger 4522 by: Carter Pond reamer/WAFs 4525 by: Timothy Brown 4526 by: Tracy & Carol O'Brien 4529 by: Donald Reid Friday request of the bizarre 4527 by: BSHADR.aol.com Re: Alt. 4528 by: Timothy Bellville KR-1 Build Time 4530 by: R.M. Obrey 4532 by: Dave and Tina Goodman Re: tail analysis 4531 by: Manager Bill Administrivia: To subscribe to the digest, e-mail: To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail: To post to the list, e-mail: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2001 08:36:26 -0700 To: Krnet From: Manager Bill Subject: tail stuff - Friday Message-ID: <3AA8F877.F8E8E43F@nm.net> Tail Stuff for Friday (I sent this last night but it didn’t go through. Trying again.) First things first: I have been challenged to knock off the discussion and publish the results of my calculations for the KR-2 and KR-2S. I did these calculations six years ago at the request of Jeannette Rand in response to concerns by the Australian CAA. The stick fixed, power off neutral point of the KR-2 is 7.24 inches aft of the wing 25 percent mean aerodynamic chord, or 31.06 inches aft of the aft face of the firewall. This is 3 inches further aft than the aft limit shown in the KR-2 manual I have had since about 1988. The stick fixed, power off neutral point of the KR-2S is 7.12 inches aft of the wing 25 percent mean aerodynamic chord, or 33.18 inches aft of the aft face of the firewall. This is a bit more than 5 inches behind the aft limit in the Rand manual (I assume the c.g. limits for the -2 and -2S are the same). The difference between the two locations is almost entirely due to the 2.0 inch difference between the locations of the 25 percent mean aerodynamic chords of the two airplanes, and this difference is due to the increased wingspan and reduced tip chord of the KR-2S relative to the KR-2. Note that within the accuracy of calculation, the neutral points are exactly the same distance behind the 25 percent mean aerodynamic chords of the two airplanes.( Incidentally, don’t take the .01 inch accuracy of the numbers too seriously, they are probably no better than about .15 inches.) For those who want to check my neutral point calculations, here are the numbers. For the KR-2: wing area 74.22 square feet wing span 20.21 square feet mean aerodynamic chord 3.52 feet aspect ratio 5.50 lift curve slope 4.401 per radian location of 25 percent mean aerodynamic chord 24.06 inches aft of the firewall aft face fuselage length 174 inches fuselage width 38.12 inches horizontal tail area 10.94 square feet horizontal tail span 20.21 feet mean aerodynamic chord 3.52 feet aspect ratio 3.20 lift curve slope 3.482 per radian location of 25 percent mean aerodynamic chords 121.05 inches aft of the firewall aft face and 30 inches above the zero lift plane of the wing. downwash derivative at the horizontal tail 0.36 degrees per degree angle of attack For the KR-2S: wing area 81.15 square feet wing span 23.54 feet mean aerodynamic chord 3.28 feet aspect ratio 6.83 lift curve slope 4.707 per radian location of 25 percent mean aerodynamic chord 26.06 inches aft of the firewall aft face fuselage length 190 inches fuselage width 38.12 inches horizontal tail dimensions are the same as KR-2 except the location of the 25 percent mean aerodynamic chord, which is 137.05 inches aft of the firewall and 34 inches above the wing zero lift line. In response to another question, I have not and am not building a KR, and I have never flown one of any kind. My personal airplane is a large, comfortable, very stable, ponderous, slow, and inefficient 1947 Navion; I have owned it since 1977. I have no axe to grind one way or another. However, I do lean toward improvements to the airplane that can be made by builders who are already flying. This is the reason I have stated that , as Dana Overall stated: stability is determined by the location of the center of gravity in relation to the center of pressure (lift). That is a qualitative, but nevertheless true, statement. More precisely, I will quote from NACA Technical Report No. 971, Appreciation and Prediction of Flying Qualities, by William H. Phillips, published in 1948: An airplane that is stable with stick fixed requires a forward movement of the stick to increase speed (same thing as decreasing angle of attack or lift coefficient) and a rearward movement of the stick to decrease speed (same thing as increasing angle of attack or lift coefficient). As the center of gravity moves aft toward the point of neutral stability, it takes less and less stick motion to pitch the airplane through its full range of lift, until at the neutral point, no motion at all is required, and aft of the neutral point the motion is reversed. This is a definition that anyone who flies can understand. Next, Phillips defines the stick-free stability: An airplane that is stable in pitch with its stick free requires not only forward motion to increase speed, but also requires that the stick must need a push force to move it forward and must need a pull force to move it aft. Because the elevator generally tends to float with the relative wind, the effective stabilizing area of a tail with the elevator free to move is less than with the stick fixed, and the aft limit of the center of gravity with stick free is more forward than the aft limit with stick fixed. This can result in a condition that appeals to the aerobatically inclined: there is a center of gravity that is slightly stable with stick held fixed, but that lets you move it back and forth with no resistance. This can be fun for awhile, but it gets tiresome if you are trying to fly straight and level on a cross country. Incidentally, stick free stability is what the FAA requires; in fact, it requires that the stability margin be high enough and control system slop and friction be low enough that with the airplane trimmed to zero stick force at any speed, it will return to within 10 percent of that speed if the stick is pushed or pulled for a moment and then released. Nothing here says that the only way to get more distance between the center of gravity and the stick-fixed or stick-free neutral points is by moving the neutral points to the rear. The same effect can be gotten by balancing the airplane so its center of gravity is more forward. Now, just how far forward can the center of gravity be? First, for a taildragger especially, it can’t be so nose heavy that it falls over when brakes are applied. Second, it can’t be so nose heavy that the tail can’t balance it throughout its speed range. The landing gear problem can be solved by tilting the gear legs forward, so let’s look at the tail effectiveness, starting with the condition for maximum lift. S.F. Hoerner in his book, Fluid Dynamic Lift, lists the max lift coefficient of the RAF 48 as 1.45. For the KR-2S wing, the angle of attack for this coefficient is 1.45/4.71 = .308 radians or 17.6 degrees. Including 3.5 degrees incidence, the zero lift line of the wing is approximately 3 degrees nose down, so the airplane angle of attack at maximum lift is 14.6 degrees. This should be the angle of attack of the horizontal tail, but that neglects the downwash behind the wing. The stability calculations gave the downwash as 36 percent, so the true angle of attack of the tail is 14.6 degrees minus 0.36 times 17.6 degrees, which equals 8.3 degrees. The max elevator deflection is 30 degrees up, and the elevator effectiveness, assuming 50 percent chord ratio, is about 65 percent. This means that 30 degrees elevator deflection is equivalent to 20 degrees angle of attack. Subtract 8.3 degrees from that, and the down tail load is what can be produced by 11.7 degrees angle of attack. The tail lift curve slope is 3.482, so the tail lift coefficient is -0.711. The area of the KR-2S tail is 10.94 square feet, and the dynamic pressure at max lift (1050 lb weight) is 8.94 pounds per square foot. Then the maximum tail down load with 30 degrees up elevator at maximum lift is 69.5 pounds. The 25 percent mean aerodynamic chord of the tail is 8.08 feet aft of the wing 25 percent mean aerodynamic chord, so the nose up moment at the 25 percent wing chord is 562 foot pounds. The airplane weighs 1050 pounds (in this example), but you can’t get a full forward center of gravity with two persons, so we should subtract 170 pounds. This reduces the dynamic pressure at stall to 7.49 pounds per square foot, so the maximum down load at the tail can only be 58.2 pounds and the nose up moment can only be 471 pounds. Then the furthest forward the center of gravity can be is 562/1050 = 0.535 feet, or 6.42 inches forward of the 25 percent wing mean aerodynamic chord. This is 17.6 inches aft of the aft face of the firewall. My KR-2 construction manual (NOTE: KR-2, not KR-2S) gives the forward limit as 8 inches aft of the wing leading edge, or only 4.0 inches forward of the 25 percent mean aerodynamic chord. So these calculations let you have 2.4 inches more forward center of gravity than specified in the plans. However, be aware that I have neglected the tail down load required to counter the nose-down moment of the wing-fuselage combination that is due to camber; I have neglected any power effects, and I have used an elevator effectiveness curve that ignores the gap between the elevator and the stabilizer. I have included all the details of this calculation to give you all an idea of what is involved in analyzing an airplane design. Note that I have not done the calculation of the tail angle of attack, elevator deflection, and down load required for the high speed dive condition, because I don’t have the zero lift pitching moment coefficient for the RAF 48. However, all this is mere discussion. The proof of the pudding is that dozens of KR-1’s and KR-2’s, and not a few KR-2S’s, have been built and flown for hundreds of hours. This does not mean it can’t be improved. The early Bonanza revolutionized the post WWII aviation market, but compared to the Bonanza that has evolved since 1946 it is completely outclassed. Let’s do the same for the KR. Well, I’ve gotten carried away by enthusiasm again. I had some other stuff but I will put it off until I get some feedback on what I’ve given you here. Now I’ve got to get cracking on static test loads for Chris Kogelmann. Keep the airspeed up and the dirty side down, guys! Bill Marcy old paper and pencil engineer ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 08:12:11 -0800 (PST) To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: Mike Mims Subject: Re: KR> Mom here Message-ID: <20010309161211.41731.qmail@web10815.mail.yahoo.com> --- BSHADR@aol.com wrote: > > Folks: > > I'm not sure why I have to come into the sandbox > over all of this silliness. > As my Mom would say "Don't make me come out there or > I'll be giving you > something to cry about..." How much more do I have > to say on the subject? > Hey netters, I don't say much anymore but you guys need to listen to what Randy is saying here. This is becoming nothing shot of ridiculous! BTW Everyone of you learned all you needed to know about getting along in Kindergarten. Have you forgotten? You guys be cool and enjoy because its all to short!! __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 11:23:38 -0500 To: "'krnet@mailinglists.org'" From: Ed Schuler Subject: Wing gap seals Message-Id: <01Mar9.113234est.115203@gatekeeper.dne.com> I'm just about to complete my KR after a long building process. One of the last open items I have is the gap between the outboard wing section and the center section. What is the best way to cover the gap? I was thinking about making a fiberglass piece or using aluminum flashing. Is there a better solution? Thanks in advance for any advice. Ed Schuler ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 17:06:53 -0500 To: "Ed Schuler" , From: "RONALD.FREIBERGER" Subject: RE: KR> Wing gap seals Message-ID: Either one will work. Glue it down (really sealed) with Silicone sealant. That'll hold it well , but peel off if needed w/o damaging paint. Ron Freiberger... mailto:ron.martha@mindspring.com -----Original Message----- From: Ed Schuler [mailto:eschuler@dne.com] Sent: Friday, March 09, 2001 11:24 AM To: 'krnet@mailinglists.org' Subject: KR> Wing gap seals I'm just about to complete my KR after a long building process. One of the last open items I have is the gap between the outboard wing section and the center section. What is the best way to cover the gap? I was thinking about making a fiberglass piece or using aluminum flashing. Is there a better solution? Thanks in advance for any advice. Ed Schuler --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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, 9 Mar 2001 10:52:30 -0600 To: "Jim V. Wickert" , From: "Robert Stone" Cc: "Steven Eberhart" , Subject: Re: KR> are we having fun yet? Message-ID: <000501c0a8b9$55e28aa0$ebd8fea9@pavilion> Jim W.: WELL SPOKEN, We need more of this kind of wisdom on the net. Bob Stone ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim V. Wickert" To: Cc: "Steven Eberhart" ; Sent: Friday, March 09, 2001 3:24 AM Subject: Re: KR> are we having fun yet? Mark, I agree with you, what is the KRnet going to do with out this eliet group of builders that support the questions and the development???? If every time some one has an idea and or some concept for development and we Kill them at the stake where would the KR be???? Ken and RR is no more yes they have a PO Box but.... Without a builders support network and without the people on the net that report the findings or success, where would the people who have developed the next generation KR concepts and benefits be and where would the interest and success and progress BE???? I think everyone should take a few steps back and realize how valuable this network is. I am a grad doc in engineering and I must say I have not seen, read or heard anything new or newfound on this net the would change the concept or design of the KR without a lot of people working together to prove the concept. No one in my mind is the total souce. Please give the people room and when they have done it let's liesten? Because there is a world of developers that will help us When someone brings a point out let's be constructive not destroy. Just to make a point of reality, everyone that has talked about the extension of the tail and the HS we must understand, has some one thought about what effect this has on the torsional stress on the main fuse. We can talk all day about what we think we know but did you design the plane??? Ken did and there are a lot of the KR's flying??? There are also some very impressive groups that have taken personal position of the development of the KR today and this has made a very much improved plane. Respect Respect? Jim W --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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, 8 Mar 2001 18:52:34 -0600 To: "krnet" From: "Dean Selby" Subject: Question answers Message-ID: <00a601c0a833$3ba76b00$4e5818d0@deans> ------=_NextPart_000_00A3_01C0A800.EFDEDB40 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable It seems I have created more questions than answers as I have been = getting lots of e-mail. Most were my lack of forthcoming with info as I = didn't realize the interest the previous posting would create. The altitude of the airfield I am flying out of is 1025ft.=20 Most of my flights have been at 3000 agl. (I can stay right over the = airfield but out of the way of traffic) It was about 35 deg F. when stall numbers were ran. I mistated my prop previously (brain lapse) It is 52" dia. by 48" pitch The gap seals I was refering to is aileron gap seals. (My stub wing is = glassed to the outer wing sections; although I did some flying with = aluminum tape to close this gap before I glassed them together.) My aileron gap seals are mylar strips Held to the wing with 3M double = sided tape.(Thanks to Mark Langford he pointed me to this and helped me = get what I needed) And by the way Troy's plane is a 2 with the 15% airfoil: Mine is a 2S = with the 18% airfoil Troy flew my plane a couple of weeks ago for about an hour and ran = stalls, Vne etc. and said he loved flying it. There have been several people on and off this list who have helped me = tremendously with ideas and answers and I want you to know I really = appreciate it. Especially Troy Petteway, it would have been longer = without his help and friendship, and Mark Langford without him I = wouldn't have had the opportunity to try the new = airfoil.*********THANKS******** If anyone wants to call and talk airplanes feel free; I screen my calls = so you'll get my machine but just tell me you want talk planes and I'll = answer if I'm here. Dean Selby (931) 761-8633 deans@usit.net =20 ------=_NextPart_000_00A3_01C0A800.EFDEDB40-- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 09:25:01 -0800 (PST) To: krnet From: Frank Ross Subject: CONGRATULATIONS!, THANKS. Message-ID: <20010309172501.27131.qmail@web4705.mail.yahoo.com> Dean, Congratulations on a very nice plane. Also thank you for sharing so much valuable information with us all. It's a real inspiration to keep on building. Thanks again. ===== Frank Ross, San Antonio, TX, __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 10:26:32 -0700 To: "Livingstone, Danny \(DJ\)" , From: "BillStarrs" Subject: Re: KR> Flames !! Message-ID: <000c01c0a8be$15f4ef00$230b2aa2@starrs> I'm reminded of the Army Air Corps song in WW2 " We live in fame or go down in flames, nothing to can stop The Army Air Corps" . These people are funny, sad, but funny. They take themselves too seriously. They think they are the seat of wisdom,and in a way they are right. That's where their brains are. Bill Starrs ----- Original Message ----- From: "Livingstone, Danny (DJ)" To: Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2001 10:25 PM Subject: RE: KR> Flames !! > Hello guys > > As a South African and no KR agent in the country to speak of, I rely > heavily on the KR-net for most of my assistance on problems or queries I may > have. If we loose the guys with all the know-how from the net it will be a > sad day not to mention dangerous in some cases. > > I think that any member flames, etc. any other member the Net "moms" should > suspend that person immediately and without warning until that person has > facts to prove what he has said. That said, we will disagree with each other > now and then but that is what "reply" button is for. It allows for personal > communication between two parties. They can discuss the differences between > them and if necessary send a more detailed explanation or retract their > statement as the case may be. > > I hereby give the Net "moms" my support on this matter, I will make the > "flamer" think twice before he flames someone over the net. > > I would like to say to those of you who made the KR-net what it is today, > thank you for your effort, It is definitely appreciated by people like me. > Don't leave the net, your input is valuable to more than most of us. Never > mind the negative few. > > Danny Livingstone > South Africa > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Cleo Greenhaw [SMTP:cleo@fullnet.net] > > Sent: Friday, March 09, 2001 1:34 AM > > To: krnet@mailinglists.org > > Subject: KR> Flames !! > > > > Netters: There are only a few people who think they are qualified to > > blast other members and/or builders. I hope that the "Moms" will take a > > hand in this and issue a warning to make this a friendly net, and not a > > net for trying to admonish other members who seek help, not to follow > > those on an ego trip, with their beliefs which are for the most part are > > bogus anyway. Cleo@fullnet.net > > > ********************************************************************** > This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and > intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they > are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify > the system manager. All opinions expressed are the sender's > own and not necessarily that of the employer. > ********************************************************************** > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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, 9 Mar 2001 09:43:30 -0800 (PST) To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: bob hill Subject: The whole is more than... Message-ID: <20010309174330.12946.qmail@web1105.mail.yahoo.com> I've been on the net since 95 and have subscribed to several lists to learn more about a given topic, mostly cars I care about. About three months ago, I acted on an idea I've had ever since becoming a pilot about ten years ago. I've hemmed and hawed about building my own plane, but can't honestly say I'm fully committed because of all the things that occupy my time--family, work, flying, cars, etc. So I was looking for a way to put my toes in the water as cheaply as possible. One way to do this was to get a set of plans and get involved learning as much as possible from people who were actually building that plane. I chose the KR after researching about ten planes. There were two compelling reasons: --the construction seem do-able and there were plenty of examples flying. --of all the planes I checked, the KR has an astonishing level of support on the Net. Issues and issues of newsletters to be downloaded and read. Website after website by builders with great info and photos. And, of course, this mailing list. What a great way to get in touch with the issues builders face and how they resolve them. I thank each builder that contributes his/her thoughts to this list--both those who ask good questions and those who take the time to answer them. Now for the plea--don't we all have more to gain by exchanging ideas, even those we think are wrong? If you disagree with someone, it fine by me to tell them so and tell them why, but then GET OVER IT. The mailing lists I read that thrive are those where particular attention is paid to courteous behavior. Please don't go away mad after lobbing a grenade; help the next guy who will help the next guy and so on. End of sermonette, thanks for reading, I'm jumping back into the bushes. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2001 10:54:22 -0700 To: From: "Benjamin Knorr" Subject: Who here flies with Corvair power? Message-Id: I've been reading for a while about all these projects underway that were = originally going to use VW power, then most switched to Corvair motors, = citing that they are 6 cylinder, cheap, powerful...etc. What I haven't seem to have found is someone who has actually flown their = KR with a corvair motor. URL's or reports, anyone? -ben --always looking forward to my daily read of KR info =3D) =AF ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 11:04:52 -0800 (PST) To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: Frank Ross Subject: Re: KR> Who here flies with Corvair power? Message-ID: <20010309190452.10229.qmail@web4705.mail.yahoo.com> > What I haven't seem to have found is someone who has > actually flown their KR with a corvair motor. URL's > or reports, anyone? > -ben Ben You'll probably have to wait just a little longer. Some of the best Corvair/KRs are only a few months from flying. The Pietenpol Air Campers have been flying for nearly 40 years with Corvairs, however. William Wynne has an Air Camper with Corvair that is flying. Right now there's a lot of companies supplying parts and support for VWs and that kind of support is still in it's infancy for Corvairs. I'm not ready for an engine yet, so, like you, I'm excited to see how this Corvair thing turns out. If I got a shot at a good Corvair engine right now, I sure wouldn't turn it down. Stay tuned :) ===== Frank Ross, San Antonio, TX, __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 12:42:33 -0600 (CST) To: From: Steven Eberhart cc: Ashok Gopalarathnam Subject: I'M SORRY Message-ID: Mom always told me to say I'm sorry when I screwed up. Just because I want a plane with a little more stability for cross country flights doesn't mean that is what everyone wants. Bill Marcy has published his analysis of the KRs stability. That is all that I really want to see. Real data and/or analysis with real numbers. I would really like to see KRNet pull together around another project. What I am proposing here is for the engineers on the group to put together a CAFE type of flight test program that can be used to get actual flight stability data on as many stock KRs as possible. This data can be used to form a base line for the KR design so we will have real world numbers to compare any R&D efforts against. THis would also publish definatively what the stability characteristics of the KR actually is. Each builder would also be able to compair his actual performance to that of the fleet. Bill has published the results of his analysis. Richard Mole and Mark Lougheed have both done similar analysis. This would be a great time for Ashok and some of his graduate students to get their feet wet in another real world aeronautical engineering project. KRNet can provide the flying KRs for the flight tests. Ashok can coordinate the engineering tallent on KRNet and his engineering students while the tinkerers on KRNet can provide the recording and measuring equipment. THis project could provide the base line for all experimental aircraft to be compared against. A pretty nice contribution to experimental aviation if you ask me. I have talked to Richard Mole privately and he has agreed to participate. Since this is Friday I will add another paragraph. I once heard a story about two men that were standing by the fence of a horse pasture. They were debating how many teeth the horse on the other side of the pasture had in its mouth. A third person, probably a woman or one of the net moms, walked up and after seeing what was going on suggested that they just climb the fence, go over and count the teeth in the horses mouth. Lets count some teeth. Steve Eberhart mailto:newtech@newtech.com One test is worth a thousand expert opinions but a thousand opinions are easier to get. --plagiarized from an unknown author ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 20:28:27 -0500 To: From: "Albert Pecoraro" Subject: Re: KR> I'M SORRY Message-ID: <004601c0a901$69d063a0$0dd4b23f@steelcase.com> Steve, Glad to see you are still around. I think your idea of CAFE-type testing for the KR series is excellent and has a lot of potential. Now, I would like to say a few words to everyone on this net in light of what has happened lately regarding the tail discussions. <<>> And I would like to add: "from real people." Allow me to explain. For those of you who haven't met Dana Overall, Steve Eberhardt, Mark Langford, Mark Lougheed, Mark Jones, and many other regular contributors to KRNet, I suggest you go to this site and after all the pictures are loaded scroll down to the bottom and look for these captions: "Steve Eberhart brought his BX-2 Cherry plans so we could see what REAL plans are supposed to look like." "But things got too deep for Dana after a while. http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/barkley2000/ The first picture ... notice the expressions on our faces (by the way, if you don't know who I am, I'm the smurf on the right holding the cup!) In this picture from left to right is Dana Overall, John Roffey (background), "Video" Bob Vermeulen, Rich Parker, I forget the name of the gentleman reading the plans (sorry!), and Albert Pecoraro. The person who took the picture is Mark Langford. There were a few other people at Mark's cabin that night. What is happening in this picture? Well, Dana is telling a story of when he and Tom Crawford were at Oshkosh one year and they were at the ultralight field watching someone try their first flight in a powered parachute and how this guy couldn't make it off the ground. The second picture is Dana imitating how the guy's butt was close to the ground and how he had his feet up to stay airborne. The story that Dana told was one of the most hilarious I have ever heard. So, what does this have to do with my "real people" addendum? Netters, the email names you see in your inbox everyday come from real people, like the ones in the pictures. People that are so easy to get along with and love to talk airplanes and tell jokes and drink a beer (or more) and just have a good time. Dana loves to tell a good story and capture an audience. He also has a lot of experience in aviation. Listen to what he has to offer. Mark Langford is an engineer and has worked on some pretty impressive projects. Listen to him also. Mark Lougheed is an excellent mathematician and has done some impressive analyses on aviation-related issues. Listen to him also. Steve Eberhardt, an engineer, has done his homework too. Another person to listen to. Mark Jones has accomplished a lot on his KR - check out his construction - it should be used as a benchmark. Me ... I just like to shoot the sh!t and have a good time! And that is what we are all having in these pictures - a good time! I can't say this for sure, but I will bet my "you-know-what" that the people in this picture probably disagree on a few things about the KR. I'll tell you right now that Bob Vermeulen and I have discussed the RAF48 and AS5046 airfoils - we both have our differences regarding these airfoils. I can recall several times when Bob and I have gone out for coffee or gone out for pizza after our monthly EAA meetings and just talked about the various mods to the KR. We disagree on almost everything! But you know what - we respect each other's differences and we learn from our disagreements (well, at least I do. I'll let Bob speak for himself! ;-) We disagree courteously. If Bob and I agreed on everything, what would we learn from each other? Probably not too much. Disagreement is an indication that we are trying to achieve a higher level of understanding. Well, I must end this now because my girlfriend just arrived from a 5 hour road-trip to be with me this weekend. There are a few more things that I would like to say about this list and the people that I've met as a result of this list. And when I have time I will tell my story of why I decided to buy the KR plans - and it has a LOT to do with Jeanette Rand's kindness. Stay tuned for more. Respectfully, your KRNet brother, Albert Pecoraro. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 12:58:59 -0600 (CST) To: From: Steven Eberhart Subject: CAFE testing Message-ID: Some links to get you thinking about CAFE testing the KR fleet: http://members.eaa.org/home/flight_reports/#Homebuilt Aircraft Evaluations http://members.eaa.org/home/flight_reports/technology.html http://www.mustangaero.com/Mustang%20II/Cafe%20Results.htm Steve Eberhart mailto:newtech@newtech.com One test is worth a thousand expert opinions but a thousand opinions are easier to get. --plagiarized from an unknown author ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 14:34:13 EST To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: Didactics1@aol.com Subject: Lengthen a KR-2S? Message-ID: Question for you that are knowledgeable on the KR-2S design. I'm about to order the plans and join your community (been passively reading net traffic for some 2 years). My thought is to avoid the cramped two-side-by-side concept and build a two-seat tandem taildragger. What issues do I need to be mindful of? I figure moments arms, and variations about the CG are important. Would I have to place my dynamic payload (passenger and fuel) on top of the CG, or can I put the other guy behind me instead of in the front (ala, per old biplane trainers)? Everyone's thoughts, especially from the old heads would be appreciated. Steve Robinson at: Robinson@Didactics.com, or Didactics1@aol.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 23:12:46 +0100 To: "Krnet@Mailinglists. Org" From: "Peter Nauta" Subject: Need for improved Flight Simulator model - interested? Message-ID: Hi, (it's friday, isn't it?) Some time ago, there was a guy who called himself "monastery" (monastery@gmx.net), who put together a Flight Simulator 98 model of a KR2-S taildragger. It can be downloaded from www.flightsim.com Flight Simulator 2000 has been around for some time, and I feel it's time to improve on that. Anybody interested in: - supplying me info I need to get all the parameters right? I would send you some questions sometime to fill in... - testing the simulation once it progresses? I need real pilots / owners to test it, so we can get it right... - using it (after all, I will be using it, but is there any interest in this at all? I don't have a flyable model yet (release 0.1 tumbled on it's nose, release 0.2 can't even maintain altitude). I want to concentrate on the flight dynamics first, and once that produces something anywhere close to realism, design a panel (not much fancy needed here, since we all agree it's a VFR vehicle :-) (don't even think of starting that one again) and then tackling the visual model. I noticed that the visual model now offered not even sports tapered wings. But then again, I don't really mind the visuals outside, as I plan to get inside the cockpit (the visual model's not important at all) So, if you can fill in on one of those three, or have any opinion on this, let me know privately. I'll post it later if this is going to go anywhere. Groeten, Peter Nauta (the virtual KR2-S builder?) mailto:p.nauta@wanadoo.nl +31(0)6 51411018 Fax: 020 8663552 http://www.fs2000.nl PS. BTW, I read this list every day, and while flaming is no good, the discussion does stick to the real stuff mostly, and I got a wealth of info from the latest posts, so keep on going... ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 12:29:28 -0600 To: From: "Austin Clark" Subject: KR>Invitation to Fly In Message-ID: <000001c0a8e6$cef3c300$0100a8c0@mshome.net> EAA Saint Elmo Chapter 1209 is having their 4th annual spring fly-in Saturday, March 31, 2001 at the Saint Elmo, Alabama Airport (2R5) . The airport is located 7 miles south of Mobile Alabama Regional Airport (MOB). There will be spot landing competition, young eagles flights, aircraft peoples choice award and 10 gallons of gas for the aircraft flown farthest distance to the fly-in. Saturday - FREE LUNCH (best Bar-B-Q Beef Brisket this side of the Mississippi !!!) Saturday Night - FAA Safety Seminar presented by the Birmingham FSDO Sunday Morning - FREE continental breakfast 7:00 - 9:00 am Overnight Camping Friday and Saturday night - Tranportation to area Motels provided For more information you can call (334) 865-4071 Everyone is invited !!! Austin Clark ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2001 12:26:00 +1300 To: From: "Dave" Cc: "Max Saunders" Subject: STALL and STABILITY Message-ID: <003901c0a8f0$5f5cab60$dd9f60cb@e2u4f6> ------=_NextPart_000_0036_01C0A95D.445BE660 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I'm at 3000 feet and pulling alongside of Max in his little Druine = Turbulent. Conditions are very smooth and not even a little bump in the = sky. Deep blue above and rolling green pastures below with just a little = white aeroplane beside me. Carb heat is on as I pull the power right = back and try to adjust my decreasing speed and at the same time time = maintain the height that Max is flying at untill at last i'm flying = slightly faster but know that i'm still loosing foward speed and it = should all even out as I move along side. Max normally flies the little = Turbulent ZK-CVX at about 80mph but today something is different as I = notice the angle of attack in my KR-2special is getting higher and = higher. A quick glance at the air speed indicator shows 55mph and then = its eyes outside to maintain station with Max who is maintaining a = constant speed and flying nice and straight and level.Or so I thought. = Its just starting to dawn on me that his insane looking grin is probably = for my benefit and that he has been slowing down ever since he saw me = comming along side. Right. Lets see if we can match him as I move away = to give a bit of distance between us. ZK-CSR stalls at 55mph and am = starting to get a little stick shake now as the speed falls through = 55mph.We are starting to drop away a little so add a trickle of power to = my Revmaster 2100 and the buffeting through the stick gets stronger. = Increasing revs to 2100 and the buffeting remains constant and wow. The = airspeed is dropping below 50mph and we are still along side him and. At = 45mph indicated max is dropping behind and I know we just can't go any = slower and so start a gentle turn away leaving Max and his Turbulent = outlined against a deep blue sky and the sharp green line seperating the = sea. Still maintaing height I increase revs to 2200rpm and keep the = stick held back trying to keep the speed smack on 40mph. Still have the = buffeting and I wonder about a rate one turn to the right. No problems = there and the same to the left. A full 360 degree turn with stick = buffeting and apparent full control. So lets try full control deflection = to the left and back again. Just a soggy very slow response. Full = deflection to the right gave a bit of height loss but no control = problems. Oh well. I suppose I should head back to the airfield and have = a coffee and discuss the speeds with Max. "Paraparam traffic this is CSR = five to the north 3000 feet joining". I wonder what the indicated = airspeed error was at the speed we were travelling. Wiil never know = really. What I do know is that this little aeroplane of mine has not got = any bad vices at all and think to myself how lucky I am. "CSR is left = base for 34 number two behind the Cub on short final". Last week I did = my biannual licence review "CSR short final for 34" and the instructor = was very impressed with the the handling and wanted to go off on his own = and do some aeros's. No way. This is my wee baby. Accross the fence at = 70mph and holding off, holding off, holding off. Mains down and a little = check foward on the stick to stick them there then ease back as the tail = comes down."CSR clearing left to Sport hanger". Stick hard back and a = lot of power to run up on to the grass and finally to the hanger. A cup = of coffee. A good talk about aircraft and then another flight and = then.....What a life........ David J Stuart Email fly@paradise.net.nz http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/~fly=20 =20 ------=_NextPart_000_0036_01C0A95D.445BE660-- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2001 21:54:11 -0800 To: Dave From: Carter Pond CC: krnet@mailinglists.org, Max Saunders Subject: Re: KR> STALL and STABILITY Message-ID: <3AA9C183.F5F07F9F@home.com> One of these letter a day and my plane will be fling in no time. Thanks Dave Carter Building and designing ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2001 18:46:21 -0500 To: "Krnet@Mailinglists. Org" From: aerobair Subject: Retractable KR1 gear Message-ID: <3AA96B4D.D190738B@netc.net> Hi, After around 700 hrs of flying time, since 1985, and a last rather hard landing, I found both no 1 castings (brackets) are cracked just behind the point where the bar lies on it. Can someone tell me if these castings can be soldered and if not, if they are still on the market. RR offered me a fixed landing gear, witch solution I would not take for the moment. Can the 7075 bar... (bent 3/8 of an inch, and yes, holes through the stub wings, after a deadstick approach on a highway, over an unseen car witch caused a stall...) ...be straightened or has it lost its characteristics ? Could it be replaced with a 2024 bar ? Thanks ! Please e-mail me directly, Bob Riendeau ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 18:49:56 EST To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: CruzJ12@aol.com Subject: KR newsletter archive Message-ID: <71.b676c28.27dac624@aol.com> --part1_71.b676c28.27dac624_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Can anyone send me the link to the newsletter archive. Thanks, Joe --part1_71.b676c28.27dac624_boundary-- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2001 19:28:25 -0800 To: kr From: Carter Pond Subject: Tandem Tail dragger Message-ID: <3AA99F59.4862475C@home.com> There is a KR Tandem Tail dragger some where in Ontario Canada. I have the address of the builder if any one would like it. I have heard that it was not the friendliest to fly but i am told the new owner just jumped in and went flying. Skill level may have been a large consideration. carter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 21:50:23 -0800 (PST) To: Group KR NET From: Timothy Brown Subject: reamer/WAFs Message-ID: <20010310055023.13564.qmail@web9505.mail.yahoo.com> Dear Net: Anyone know if I buy a 3/16 reamer whether it will enlarge the RR WAF holes to perfectly fit an AN-3? The AN-3s that I bought from AS & S fit fine for the RR large WAF for the forward spars but the AN-3s will not fit through the holes in the WAFs for the aft spar WAFs. I have the MSC catalog and it has a 3/16 (.1875) reamer and a .1885 reamer which would be a thousandth of an inch larger. All comments and thoughts welcome. Tim __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices. http://auctions.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2001 22:52:33 -0800 To: Timothy Brown , Group KR NET From: Tracy & Carol O'Brien Subject: Re: KR> reamer/WAFs Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.20010309225233.00741eb8@localaccess.com> Tim, I'd mike the AN3 bolts: I doubt they are over .1875. Then order your reamer to fit. Tracy O'Brien At 09:50 PM 03/09/2001 -0800, Timothy Brown wrote: >Dear Net: > >Anyone know if I buy a 3/16 reamer whether it will >enlarge the RR WAF holes to perfectly fit an AN-3? >The AN-3s that I bought from AS & S fit fine for the >RR large WAF for the forward spars but the AN-3s will >not fit through the holes in the WAFs for the aft spar >WAFs. I have the MSC catalog and it has a 3/16 >(.1875) reamer and a .1885 reamer which would be a >thousandth of an inch larger. All comments and >thoughts welcome. > >Tim > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices. >http://auctions.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 > > > ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2001 09:52:28 -0500 To: From: Donald Reid Subject: Re: KR> reamer/WAFs Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.0.20010310094630.009f5700@pop.erols.com> --=====================_6501123==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed >Anyone know if I buy a 3/16 reamer whether it will >enlarge the RR WAF holes to perfectly fit an AN-3? >The AN-3s that I bought from AS & S fit fine for the Please don't buy tools from AS&S. They overcharge by a whole lot. Get a catalog from Wholesale Tool. The head office is in Warren Michigan, phone number is 800-521-3420. I don't know if they have a web site. The last catalog I got from then is over 750 pages. There are over 10 pages of reams --=====================_6501123==_.ALT-- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2001 02:14:45 EST To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: BSHADR@aol.com Subject: Friday request of the bizarre Message-ID: --part1_b4.126ee8c8.27db2e65_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit KRNetHeads: It is now 11:10PM PST, so the left coast is still in Friday mode. I've got a request for an odd aviation picture I saw about 5-6 years ago. It was of a crop-duster wing, maybe a Piper Pawnee, with a roadsign impaled in the leading edge of one wing. It was a pretty impressive site. Anyone recall such a photo? I'd sure like to chase it down and nab a cyber copy. Thanks kids, as you were... Randy "Enjoying the apparent harmony once again NetMom" Stein --part1_b4.126ee8c8.27db2e65_boundary-- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2001 07:45:56 -0500 To: "Albert Pecoraro" , From: "Timothy Bellville" Subject: Re: Alt. Message-ID: <00c401c0a960$0d6bd860$be5f570c@default> I have a three point altemiter forsale, came out of a C-172 about nine years ago, must be calibrated. $40.00 and I'll Pay shiping. Tim Sonerai I N2206X ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2001 09:03:15 -0700 To: From: "R.M. Obrey" <39viking@home.com> Subject: KR-1 Build Time Message-ID: <001e01c0aa44$c7c4b7b0$0100a8c0@c311196a> ------=_NextPart_000_001B_01C0AA0A.1B444DF0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Has anyone built a KR-1 or KR-2 in a thousand hours or less? If not, = why? Thanks. - Richard ------=_NextPart_000_001B_01C0AA0A.1B444DF0-- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2001 10:11:59 -0800 To: "R.M. Obrey" <39viking@home.com>, From: "Dave and Tina Goodman" Subject: Re: KR> KR-1 Build Time Message-ID: <007d01c0a98d$9a5ad1e0$b544a6d1@oemcomputer> Richard, I am currently at 550 hours on my project, and project it will be done in under 1000 hours. The only time I count toward building is time I am actually physically in the garage making something on the plane. Here are some of the specifics on my aircraft so you have a more detailed baseline: KR-2S plans - HIGHLY MODIFIED AS5048 airfoil and different V and H Stab airfoils (TET) Tri-gear (Diehl Aeronautical) Corvair engine (Corvair Authority, William Wynne) Aluminum fuel tanks - outer wings (built for me under my direction by a local machine shop) Rand Robinson turtledecks/canopy/cowling Day VFR+ cockpit (no external lights, a few additional instruments in the cockpit) VHF/VOR/ILS/GPS/XPDR Antennas from RST Engineering I currently have the fuselage, tail, landing gear, flight control cabling, and pilot's seat done. I start work on the outer wings this weekend. I believe I will be complete ~ 850-900 hours, give or take a few. If I were doing the fuel tanks and decks myself, I would probably have to add a good amount of time, but I could not give you a figure on that. I believe, with the pre-made items listed above that this plane can easily be done in less than 1000 hours. Pre-made items will significantly reduce your build time, if you have the cash and are willing to accept not building those parts yourself. This is experimental aviation, so if you have the desire to experiment and make you own parts for everything, cost will go down, but time will go up. Other builders out there have been making all the parts for their aircraft, and in many cases actually redesigning major sections of the KRs. These builders will obviously have far more time invested in their aircraft not only in build time, but time in front of a CAD program or with paper and slide rule (yes, Toto, I do know how to use a slide rule). Good luck! Balance my input with that you will hear from others on the net. Respectfully, Dave "Zipper" Goodman zipperts@whidbey.net ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2001 11:03:16 -0700 To: George Robertson , Krnet From: Manager Bill Subject: Re: tail analysis Message-ID: <3AAA6C63.9636AB41@nm.net> Well, I blew it and you guys are probably laughing your heads off, so here's a correction. I copied the wing span and mean aerodynamic chord for the horizontal tail. The real values I used were: area 10.94 square feet, span 5.92 feet (71 inches), aspect ratio 3.20, mean aerodynamic chord 1.938 feet. This does not include the area cut out of the elevators for rudder movement. Notice that I am avoiding symbols, abbreviations, and acronyms. I hate that stuff! And it sometimes leads to confusion. Another item I left out is the equation for stick fixed neutral point. Again, I am giving it in words rather than symbols because my Netscape doesn't seem to translate word processing into HTML with the symbols I intend it to use. Sorry for the inconvenience. (neutral point divided by mean aerodynamic chord) = (lift curve slope of tail divided by lift curve slope of wing) times (tail length divided by mean aerodymanic chord) times (tail area divided by wing area) times (unity minus the ratio of downwash angle to angle of attack) minus (fuselage moment coefficient ) times (fuselage width)squared times (fuselage length) divided by the quantity (wing area times mean aerodynamic chord times wing lift curve slope) This is essentially equation 5-35 of Perkins and Hage with the aerodynamic center of the wing (usually 25 percent mean aerodynamic chord) as the reference point. ------------------------------ End of krnet Digest ***********************************