From: To: Subject: krnet Digest 14 Mar 2001 21:45:57 -0000 Issue 191 Date: Wednesday, March 14, 2001 1:46 PM krnet Digest 14 Mar 2001 21:45:57 -0000 Issue 191 Topics (messages 4593 through 4622): Re: Landing gear question ... 4593 by: Peter Johnson 4600 by: Guenther Bryce Landing Gear Design and Retracts 4594 by: Peter Johnson Wiring 4595 by: RONALD.FREIBERGER Re: Tandem Tail dragger 4596 by: Didactics1.aol.com Re: Wiring ? 4597 by: Brian Vasseur 4598 by: Guenther Bryce 4615 by: larry flesner Re: Retractable KR1 gear 4599 by: Jerry Mahurin 4601 by: CruzJ12.aol.com Re: Alternate choices, Ragwing 4602 by: Keith & Martha Misc. 4603 by: KMcKen1.aol.com 4612 by: Peter Nauta 4619 by: Richard Selix KR/Ragwing 4604 by: CS 4610 by: Frank Ross Jabiru engine for KR2 4605 by: Nadine Brauns 4613 by: Peter Nauta 4614 by: Albert Pecoraro 4616 by: jshays 4621 by: paul e spicer Re: Missed? 4606 by: Bobby Muse Further to Landing Gear/C of G Relationship 4607 by: Peter Johnson 4608 by: Albert Pecoraro 4609 by: RONALD.FREIBERGER 1983 KR1 4611 by: clair boyd LINE/DOT TORPEDO LASER LEVEL 4617 by: Robert Stone Harbor Freight Tools 4618 by: Robert Stone For Sale 4620 by: Donald Hamm Re: KR proof load 4622 by: Christian Kogelmann Administrivia: To subscribe to the digest, e-mail: To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail: To post to the list, e-mail: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2001 16:44:08 -0800 To: From: "Peter Johnson" Subject: Fw: KR> Landing gear question ... Message-ID: <000201c0ab86$ec40a200$2ba5e2d1@peter> Hi Gary. I read your note about placement of main wheels with relation to the CG. Actually, it IS very important where the wheels are placed, and the envelope for their location relative tothe CG is actually quite small. In his book 'Landing Gear Design for Light Aircraft, Volume One', Ladislao Pazmany shows the CG to be included in arc radiating up and aft 15 to 25 degrees from the point of tire contact on the ground, with the aircraft in a horizontal position. To ensure you achieve this window, you will probably have to know your vertical CG location. Vertical CG location is not hard to figure out for a taildragger. Complete two sets of weight and balances, one with the tail down, and one with the tail raised up high. If draw vertical lines at the position you determine the two CG's to be, you will see that the lines cross, this is your vertical CG location. You will have to complete weight and balances for a minimum three loading configurations, aft most CG, forward most CG, and 'usual' CG, and you will have to complete them with the tail down, and the tail up as high as you can comfortably get it. This is not hard work. It may take you a day, but you'll be an expert at weight and balances after doing six and checking them twice! :) The layout of the tailwheel is more involved than the mainwheels as you must take rake and trail etc into account. Pazmany's fine book is easily readable, and Volume Two, which I believe is now published, describes the design of spring gear! It is going to be quite handy for KR builders who will build up their own gear. Hope this helps. mailto:pjohnson@voyageur.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: To: ; Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2001 6:44 PM Subject: Re: KR> Landing gear question ... > In a message dated 3/8/01 6:20:34 PM Eastern Standard Time, > gryphonflier@earthlink.net writes: > > << For taildraggers, does anyone know the general rule regarding the angle of > forward sweep of the axle centers with respect to the empty CG of the plane? > >> > > As far as I know, there is no set amount. There is no requirement for > any forward sweep. > Steve Witman had his gear swept back. > What is important is where the axle is in relation to the C/G. > Normal would be a couple of inches ahead of the forward most C/G. > Other than that, I can't give you a solid answer. > Go out to the airport and do some measuring of the tail draggers you > find. They already have it figured out. > 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: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 10:16:48 -0800 (PST) To: Peter Johnson , krnet@mailinglists.org From: Guenther Bryce Subject: Re: Fw: KR> Landing gear question ... Message-ID: <20010313181648.7009.qmail@web11111.mail.yahoo.com> Please accept this general understanding when you design your own landing gear. (Tail dragger aircraft are more prone to ground looping the farther the CG is aft of the main gear.) Excessive wide landing gear stance also contributes to ground looping (Q2). The size of tires you choose to mount your airframe to generate inertia loads upon acceleration on ground contact, that transfers into the landing gear structure. Do you really need spring effect on your KR if you have balloon tires and you operate off smooth runways and not dry river beds. The KR is not that off road vehicle that has to have suspension that is something to boast about the KR flys remember those dangling wheels are only used for takeoff and landing! Bryce KR2 builder --- Peter Johnson wrote: > Hi Gary. I read your note about placement of main > wheels with relation to > the CG. Actually, it IS very important where the > wheels are placed, and the > envelope for their location relative tothe CG is > actually quite small. > > In his book 'Landing Gear Design for Light Aircraft, > Volume One', Ladislao > Pazmany shows the CG to be included in arc radiating > up and aft 15 to 25 > degrees from the point of tire contact on the > ground, with the aircraft in a > horizontal position. To ensure you achieve this > window, you will probably > have to know your vertical CG location. Vertical CG > location is not hard to > figure out for a taildragger. Complete two sets of > weight and balances, one > with the tail down, and one with the tail raised up > high. If draw vertical > lines at the position you determine the two CG's to > be, you will see that > the lines cross, this is your vertical CG location. > You will have to > complete weight and balances for a minimum three > loading configurations, aft > most CG, forward most CG, and 'usual' CG, and you > will have to complete them > with the tail down, and the tail up as high as you > can comfortably get it. > This is not hard work. It may take you a day, but > you'll be an expert at > weight and balances after doing six and checking > them twice! :) > > The layout of the tailwheel is more involved than > the mainwheels as you must > take rake and trail etc into account. Pazmany's > fine book is easily > readable, and Volume Two, which I believe is now > published, describes the > design of spring gear! It is going to be quite > handy for KR builders who > will build up their own gear. > > Hope this helps. > > mailto:pjohnson@voyageur.ca > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: ; > > Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2001 6:44 PM > Subject: Re: KR> Landing gear question ... > > > > In a message dated 3/8/01 6:20:34 PM Eastern > Standard Time, > > gryphonflier@earthlink.net writes: > > > > << For taildraggers, does anyone know the general > rule regarding the angle > of > > forward sweep of the axle centers with respect to > the empty CG of the > plane? > > >> > > > > As far as I know, there is no set amount. > There is no requirement for > > any forward sweep. > > Steve Witman had his gear swept back. > > What is important is where the axle is in > relation to the C/G. > > Normal would be a couple of inches ahead of > the forward most C/G. > > Other than that, I can't give you a solid > answer. > > Go out to the airport and do some measuring > of the tail draggers you > > find. They already have it figured out. > > 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 > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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 > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices. http://auctions.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2001 17:44:52 -0800 To: From: "Peter Johnson" Subject: Landing Gear Design and Retracts Message-ID: <000301c0ab86$ed997b40$2ba5e2d1@peter> ------=_NextPart_000_0094_01C0AB1C.245ECB00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello to everyone here who has helped me with landing gear design over = the past weeks. I told some of you that I would have some numbers = crunched 'soon', but boy, now that I've started building, it seems = everybody wants me for something! In the last month I've started = coaching my godson in rifle shooting as he has been asked to apply to = the Canadian Junior Biathlon Team next year! So, I've been coaching him = steady in cross-country too. I've organized an Underwater Hockey and an = Underwater Football tournament and played in both, (does anyone else = play these silly games?!), helped a friend move, helped another friend = build up some cabinets, and you get the idea..... The reason for my desire to design my own gear is two-fold. One, I just = happen to have an amount of gear available to complete a push-pull rod = setup for my aileron control. Because my 'KR-2Sexy' is going to be a = nose wheel bird, I had to keep the landing gear width to a minimum to = clear the push-pull tubes. Two, the cost of getting Mr. Diehls gear = into Canada is stimulus enough to design my own. (I work as an = engineering tech by day, I've no fear of designing things). So, where does this put the design effort? Well a funny thing happened = in AutoCad one day. I was looking at options for the main gear mount, = very simple thing actually so of course I couldn't just accept it! I = started looking at what would happen if one where to put a pair of = bushings on the front and aft plates, pass a tube through them, mount a = plate on the tube, and mount the gear legs to the plate. And guess = what?! I've started designing a set of retracts for the plane! Nope, = just couldn't take the easy route! The nose gear retract is interesting. The strut comes up into a 'box'. = This box has a bottom, two sides, and a back plate that bolts to the = fuse structure just like Diehls. The strut is hinged in the box, side = brace tubes come off the hinge line and up to join the motor mount just = like Diehls. Shock absorption will be provided by eurathane between the = gear leg and the bottom of the box. What I have not liked in other = retract systems that I've seen is the cutting of the fuse structure to = allow the front strut to retract. What I intend to do with my gear is = retract it along the bottom of the fuse! The front strut is going to be = shaped to fit along the bottom of the fuse, and the wheel will retract = into a box located between stations C & D. The fairing of the gearleg = and wheel will look like half a stretched out teardrop. The main gear remains mounted close to the fuse, and will rotate up and = out. The wheel will protrude about 1 1/2" below the bottom of the outer = wing panel.=20 So what prompted me to design my own gear legs, the need to keep them = narrow, is completly lost! But with regards to the legs, I intend to = use aluminum, 7075 unclad. For the same load capacity, a narrow and = thick gear leg will provide a stiff ride, and a wide and thin leg will = provide a springy ride with lots of lingering bounce! For retraction, I am looking at small bore hydraulic cylinders and a = small hand operated pump. The cylinders will be connected directly to = retract arms mounted on the hinge lines. The main gear will rotate up = and out about 45 degrees, and the nose gear rotates aft and up approx. = 110 degrees. Locking will be completed by pins through the hinge tubes = on the main gear, and a pin through the box and above the strut end on = the nose gear. The pins have to be hard material, and the holes through = the gear need some extra material added around them, but the method = works well. So, to everyone that offered input on the design of the gear legs, THANK = YOU! I am going to continue to work this system up, I will not promise = when it will be done. If anyone is interested in this idea, or has any = input to it, please get hold of me. I know I will receive comments = about how little speed I can expect to gain with retracts, and I suppose = that such comments might be accurate. The reason I'm excited about this = retract system is two-fold; one, it's fun to design things!, and two, = I've always liked the KR without wheels. What more can I say...??? mailto:pjohnson@voyageur.ca ------=_NextPart_000_0094_01C0AB1C.245ECB00-- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 00:37:28 -0500 To: "KRNET" From: "RONALD.FREIBERGER" Subject: Wiring Message-ID: Mark said; (when the breaker doesn't "see" enough load to trip), and if that insulation is the wrong kind, it's not good. Actually, the breaker should always be sized according to the wire used. It MUST be the weak link in the system, and open whenever the load exceeds the wire's proper load capacity. Both the wire and breaker must carry the intended load, of course, but the breaker should open long before the wire reaches it's temperature limit, which is a hellofa lot less than the "kindling point" Ron Freiberger... mailto:ron.martha@mindspring.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 09:03:22 EST To: carterkr2s1@home.com From: Didactics1@aol.com CC: krnet@mailinglists.org Subject: Re: KR> Tandem Tail dragger Message-ID: <46.11d6f256.27df82aa@aol.com> Carter, Appreciate your tracking down the Canadien for me. I'm wondering if it would be possible to use a lengthened KR-1 fuselage with the new AS504X airfoil wing. This would give more sq. ft. of wing area to carry 2, yet retain the smaller frontal area for speed. I'm going to be ordering plans about April 1st and am thinking of the best way to about this. Steve Robinson ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 10:02:45 -0700 To: " IMA FLYER" , From: "Brian Vasseur" Subject: Re: KR> Wiring ? Message-ID: <002601c0abdf$6d193880$db528392@edpower.com> The latest Kitplanes or Custom Planes had a good article on selecting wire size. As well as just load you have to compensate for how many wires in a bundle, total length, and ground return length. All of this was just an explanation of what was in AC43-13. Brian ----- Original Message ----- From: IMA FLYER To: Sent: March 12, 2001 3:55 PM Subject: KR> Wiring ? > Here's a real question or two for anyone that might be able to help out. I have a spool of 250 ft of shielded instrumentation and computer cable. The label on the side of the box reads as follows. > > Shielded instrumentation and computer cable, 7 pair 24 AWG (.21mm) > 7x#32(.03mm then a character that I can't read) Tin Cu .010" (.25mm) > S-R PVC Insul-Beldfoil, Shield 100% coverage overall. .035" (.89mm) > PVC Jkted. - .300" O.D. CSA TYPE AWM : Appliance wiring material. > : 80(degree symbol)C Use: for internal or interconnecting of Proc. Control, computers, business machines, electric equipment & X-ray machines. .300V 80(degree symbol)C. VW-1 Surface PRTD. AWM Style 2464 > > The wires come in 7 pairs and are color coded. Here are my questions. > > 1.) Will the wiring be suitable for use in wiring my panel, instmts, cabin lights and fans, etc? > 2.) Will the foil shielding reduce RF problems when I install my radio, GPS and moving map? > 3.) There is a bare wire wrapped around the outside of the foil just under the gray plastic covering is this the grounding wire and how is it used? > This shows how little I know about electrical wiring. In any event I hope there's someone out there that can help. > Thanks much. > And as always. Be safe and watch yur 6. Jon Minneapolis > > __________________________________________________________________ > Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Webmail account today at http://webmail.netscape.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: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 09:48:13 -0800 (PST) To: IMA FLYER , krnet@mailinglists.org From: Guenther Bryce Subject: Re: KR> Wiring ? Message-ID: <20010313174813.97512.qmail@web11106.mail.yahoo.com> --- IMA FLYER wrote: > Here’s a real question or two for anyone that might > be able to help out. I have a spool of 250 ft of > shielded instrumentation and computer cable. The > label on the side of the box reads as follows. > > Shielded instrumentation and computer cable, 7 pair > 24 AWG (.21mm) > 7x#32(.03mm then a character that I can’t read) Tin > Cu .010” (.25mm) > S-R PVC Insul-Beldfoil, Shield 100% coverage > overall. .035” (.89mm) > PVC Jkted. - .300” O.D. CSA TYPE AWM : Appliance > wiring material. > : 80(degree symbol)C Use: for internal or > interconnecting of Proc. Control, computers, > business machines, electric equipment & X-ray > machines. .300V 80(degree symbol)C. VW-1 Surface > PRTD. AWM Style 2464 > > The wires come in 7 pairs and are color coded. Here > are my questions. > > 1.) Will the wiring be suitable for use in wiring my > panel, instmts, cabin lights and fans, etc? > 2.) Will the foil shielding reduce RF problems when > I install my radio, GPS and moving map? > 3.) There is a bare wire wrapped around the outside > of the foil just under the gray plastic covering is > this the grounding wire and how is it used? > This shows how little I know about electrical > wiring. In any event I hope there’s someone out > there that can help. > Thanks much. > And as always… Be safe and watch yur 6. Jon > Minneapolis > > To avoid interference_noise generated by beacon or strobe lights always route as far away as possible from all wiring especially nav/com antenna and battery cables. You will save troubleshooting this problem from your aircraft later. Just as a Hint!!_________________________________________________________________ > Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Webmail account > today at http://webmail.netscape.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 > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices. http://auctions.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 06:43:46 -0600 To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: larry flesner Subject: Re: KR> Wiring ? Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20010314064346.00863360@pop3.norton.antivirus> Many shops at FBO's and such even keep >bundles of it laying around for "scrounge" that have >been removed from something else. Wiring from a wind >damaged or wrecked airplane can be a valuable source >for cheap wire that is perfectly good. >Doug =========================================================================== Doug, Good suggestion. I got almost enough wire to do my entire project from the bundles taken from an Apache when they did a radio change. Also check with your local salvage/scrap/recycle yards that are near airports. They sometimes get in aircraft wiring and will sell it out by the pound. I once saw three 55 gallon drums of wire at a local yard but when you have no use for that much wire you just have to wipe back the tears and let it go. Good quality aircraft wire will still be in good shape after 20 years of use and then removed and scrapped. Larry Flesner ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 18:09:16 To: GARYKR2@cs.com, aerobair@netc.net, krnet@mailinglists.org From: "Jerry Mahurin" Subject: Re: KR> Retractable KR1 gear Message-ID: Netters, I am in the process of removing a perfectly good retract from my KR2 right now. I am installing DD's fixed gear. Sooo, I could make someone a real deal on the whole package (except wheels and brakes).... Jerry Mahurin Lugoff, SC email: myrddin@usa.net >From: GARYKR2@cs.com >To: aerobair@netc.net, krnet@mailinglists.org >Subject: Re: KR> Retractable KR1 gear >Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2001 21:37:48 EST > >In a message dated 3/9/01 6:42:44 PM Eastern Standard Time, >aerobair@netc.net >writes: > ><< 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. >> > > They CAN NOT be soldered. Why not make new ones from 4130? > I do not want to give up my retracts either. > 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 > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 17:38:54 EST To: myrddin@usa.net, GARYKR2@cs.com, aerobair@netc.net, krnet@mailinglists.org From: CruzJ12@aol.com Subject: Re: KR> Retractable KR1 gear Message-ID: <6d.10b22c57.27dffb7e@aol.com> --part1_6d.10b22c57.27dffb7e_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Netters, I have 3 complete sets of kr2 retractable landing gears . 2 have the 3/4" spring bar and a 1" spring bar, wheels, brakes and castings. I'll sell the entire lot or part out........... email me off the KRnet. I also have the tail wheels. Joe Cruz Spencer, NY email: cruzj12@aol.com --part1_6d.10b22c57.27dffb7e_boundary-- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 18:46:30 -0500 To: From: Keith & Martha Subject: Re: KR> Alternate choices, Ragwing Message-ID: hey kr fans about a week ago there was some talk about putting a rag wing on the kr. whose idea is this. I would like some more info if possible. please email me direct @ mcrawford@voyager.net thanks, keith ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 20:18:00 EST To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: KMcKen1@aol.com Subject: Misc. Message-ID: <79.117c36e7.27e020c8@aol.com> --part1_79.117c36e7.27e020c8_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I have 3 questions for you guys, I know that someone will be able to help me. 1) What would be the best auto engine conversion to use to produce 160 - 180 hp and approx. cost to build? 2) A plane I am building has two wing struts per wing. How difficult would it be to make it only one per wing and incorporate an airfoil into it's shape to reduce drag? 3) Does anyone know how the NACA 2412 compares to the NACA 23012? Thanks, Keith --part1_79.117c36e7.27e020c8_boundary-- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 08:44:44 +0100 To: From: "Peter Nauta" Subject: RE: KR> Misc. Message-ID: Keith, One of the books I read says to take special care NOT to build smaller "airfoils" into struts etc to create more lift. Because aspect ratio is very important, you'll only create problems like interference with other surfaces (see the biplane problem) and more drag, so try and get a shape that will be neutral, but never try and build more wings. Also, why would you want to put 160-180 horses in front of that firewall? It's going 200kts as designed with 100hp and weight within design limits, so what do you want to gain? Not trying to provoke, just interested in your motives. Regards, Peter Nauta (not an engineer, lost my pencil long ago, never had a slide rule) > -----Original Message----- > From: KMcKen1@aol.com [mailto:KMcKen1@aol.com] > Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2001 2:18 AM > To: krnet@mailinglists.org > Subject: KR> Misc. > > > I have 3 questions for you guys, I know that someone will be able > to help me. > > 1) What would be the best auto engine conversion to use to > produce 160 - 180 > hp and approx. cost to build? > > 2) A plane I am building has two wing struts per wing. How > difficult would it > be to make it only one per wing and incorporate an airfoil into > it's shape to > reduce drag? > > 3) Does anyone know how the NACA 2412 compares to the NACA 23012? > > > Thanks, > Keith > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 08:45:40 -0800 To: KMcKen1@aol.com From: Richard Selix CC: krnet@mailinglists.org Subject: Re: KR> Misc. Message-ID: <3AAFA034.200BFDC9@earthlink.net> Keith: Regarding the differences in the 2412 and the 23012 airfoils. They are somewhat similar in some aspects, however the 23012 has a much nastier stall than the 2412. Maximum CL for the 23012 at 6.0 Reynolds number is about 1.8, whereas 2412 has a Max. CL at 1.7 The main difference is in the pitching moment cooeffients. The 23012 has a CM of -.0125 and the 2412 has a CM of -.05 which requires more trim drag. Hope this helps, Richard Selix......San Diego, Ca. mailto:rselix@earthlink.net KMcKen1@aol.com wrote: > I have 3 questions for you guys, I know that someone will be able to help me. > > 1) What would be the best auto engine conversion to use to produce 160 - 180 > hp and approx. cost to build? > > 2) A plane I am building has two wing struts per wing. How difficult would it > be to make it only one per wing and incorporate an airfoil into it's shape to > reduce drag? > > 3) Does anyone know how the NACA 2412 compares to the NACA 23012? > > Thanks, > Keith ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 17:20:08 -0800 (PST) To: Keith & Martha , krnet@mailinglists.org From: CS Subject: KR/Ragwing Message-ID: <20010314012008.14586.qmail@web2303.mail.yahoo.com> Keith... This is weird...but what I think happened. I asked the net what would be a cheap/easy bird to build and start building taildragger time. Someone suggested look at Rag products. I THINK this may be where you're coming from. NOTHING to do with a Rag/KR 2. I've been wrong before, I may be wrong now. Chuck --- Keith & Martha wrote: > hey kr fans about a week ago there was some talk > about putting a rag wing on > the kr. whose idea is this. I would like some more > info if possible. > please email me direct @ mcrawford@voyager.net > thanks, keith > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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 > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices. http://auctions.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 20:55:42 -0800 (PST) To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: Frank Ross Subject: Re: KR> KR/Ragwing Message-ID: <20010314045542.6579.qmail@web4704.mail.yahoo.com> > Keith... > This is weird...but what I think happened. I asked > ...what would be a cheap/easy bird to build and > start building taildragger time. Someone suggested > look at Rag products. I THINK this may be where > you're coming from. > NOTHING to do with a Rag/KR 2. > Chuck > --- Keith wrote: > > hey kr fans ... there was some talk > > about putting a rag wing on the kr. .... I would > > like some more info .... > > thanks, keith That was me Chuck, There's a type of small homebuilts called "Ragwing". Don't recall seeing any posts about a fabric wing on KRs though. I read somewhere that Ken Rand and Stu Robinson originally thought of putting a fabric-covered wing on the KR, but thought the Dynel-composite was better. I wonder how many times while they were sanding those wings they wished they'd used fabric... ===== Frank Ross, San Antonio, TX, __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices. http://auctions.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 02:31:13 +0100 To: From: "Nadine Brauns" Subject: Jabiru engine for KR2 Message-ID: <007d01c0ac26$921a3660$90b708d4@oemcomputer> ------=_NextPart_000_007A_01C0AC2E.D6C3C080 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, Has anyone (in Australia or elsewhere) installed a Jabiru engine on its = KR2? Not the cheapest option, I know, but our governing body doesn't = leave us much choice. If so, do you have basic drawings of the engine = mount you used? We're hesitating between different models. Of course = we're also interested to hear your comments about the general = performance of that engine. Thanks! Nadine from Belgium ------=_NextPart_000_007A_01C0AC2E.D6C3C080-- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 08:49:11 +0100 To: From: "Peter Nauta" Subject: RE: KR> Jabiru engine for KR2 Message-ID: Nadine, It's funny to see how our two neighbouring governing bodies (Belgium and Netherlands) can have such a different view on things. I read that the Dutch Dakota Association registred some vintage plane (Skymaster?) in Belgium because we had strict rules.... Anyhow, build your plane over here in the Netherlands, and you don't have that problem. I don't need to put a certified engine in, as a matter of fact, we will even break new ground by putting a BMW engine (1100 RS) in a KR. Regards, Peter Nauta > -----Original Message----- > From: Nadine Brauns [mailto:NadineB@yucom.be] > Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2001 2:31 AM > To: krnet@mailinglists.org > Subject: KR> Jabiru engine for KR2 > > > Hi, > Has anyone (in Australia or elsewhere) installed a Jabiru engine > on its KR2? Not the cheapest option, I know, but our governing > body doesn't leave us much choice. If so, do you have basic > drawings of the engine mount you used? We're hesitating between > different models. Of course we're also interested to hear your > comments about the general performance of that engine. > Thanks! > Nadine > from Belgium > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 07:33:25 -0500 To: "kr2s group" From: "Albert Pecoraro" Subject: Re: KR> Jabiru engine for KR2 Message-ID: <001201c0ac82$f83199a0$32d4b23f@steelcase.com> > > Hi, > > Has anyone (in Australia or elsewhere) installed a Jabiru engine > > on its KR2? Not the cheapest option, I know, but our governing > > body doesn't leave us much choice. If so, do you have basic > > drawings of the engine mount you used? We're hesitating between > > different models. Of course we're also interested to hear your > > comments about the general performance of that engine. > > Thanks! > > Nadine > > from Belgium Nadine, If you are going to consider an engine such as a Jabiru (cost-wise), perhaps you would also like to take a look at the Limbach series (they are type certified): http://www.limflug.de Their L2400 series generate 87hp to 130hp (depending on which model you choose and if it is turbocharged) and the L2000 series generate 80hp. I would make the general assumption that if you are in Belgium it would be easier and more cost effective to procure this engine than the Jabiru, but my assumption could be wrong. Also, here is a link to many engine sites: http://www.aviator.cc/engines.html Regards, Albert ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Mar 01 08:33:30 -0600 To: "Nadine Brauns" , From: jshays Subject: RE: KR> Jabiru engine for KR2 I too am interested in the Jabiru in the KR, since it would seem to be an excellent choice for the plane. Really doesn't seem like an issue to use it though, so long as the centerline is set correctly and the weight and balance come out ok. Regards, Jeff. >===== Original Message From "Nadine Brauns" ===== >Hi, >Has anyone (in Australia or elsewhere) installed a Jabiru engine on its KR2? Not the cheapest option, I know, but our governing body doesn't leave us much choice. If so, do you have basic drawings of the engine mount you used? We're hesitating between different models. Of course >we're also interested to hear your comments about the general performance of that engine. >Thanks! >Nadine >from Belgium ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2001 05:29:57 +1000 To: "Albert Pecoraro" , "kr2s group" From: "paul e spicer" Subject: Re: KR> Jabiru engine for KR2 Message-ID: <000701c0acbd$3c832d00$a9ae868b@paulspicer> Hello there I am considering installing a Jabiru engine in my KR 2S - building started in earnest a month ago. They are excellent engines and very lightweight. The Aussie dollar is at an all time low so that engine would be quite cheap if purchased now. Paul (Spicer) ----- Original Message ----- From: Albert Pecoraro To: kr2s group Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2001 10:33 PM Subject: Re: KR> Jabiru engine for KR2 > > > > Hi, > > > Has anyone (in Australia or elsewhere) installed a Jabiru engine > > > on its KR2? Not the cheapest option, I know, but our governing > > > body doesn't leave us much choice. If so, do you have basic > > > drawings of the engine mount you used? We're hesitating between > > > different models. Of course we're also interested to hear your > > > comments about the general performance of that engine. > > > Thanks! > > > Nadine > > > from Belgium > > Nadine, > > If you are going to consider an engine such as a Jabiru (cost-wise), perhaps > you would also like to take a look at the Limbach series (they are type > certified): > > http://www.limflug.de > > Their L2400 series generate 87hp to 130hp (depending on which model you > choose and if it is turbocharged) and the L2000 series generate 80hp. I > would make the general assumption that if you are in Belgium it would be > easier and more cost effective to procure this engine than the Jabiru, but > my assumption could be wrong. > > Also, here is a link to many engine sites: > > http://www.aviator.cc/engines.html > > Regards, > > Albert > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 21:19:06 -0600 To: Frank Ross From: Bobby Muse CC: krnet@mailinglists.org, KR2616TJ@aol.com, Steven Eberhart Subject: Re: KR> Missed? Message-ID: <3AAEE32A.4610451B@ev1.net> Frank Ross wrote: > Did I miss something? Someone is blasting the new > airfoil again? I have been through all the postings > and have not found anyone criticizing it and yet folks > are leaving the sandbox because, they say, someone > criticized the new airfoil. > Where is it? > Who did it this time? > Is there anyone who hasn't heard how much time, > effort, brains, sweat, tears, saliva and key-board > pounding has gone into defending it? > Why? > I'd be embarrassed if I had designed that thing and so > many used it as an excuse to beat to death everyone > who disagreed with them on every little thing. > The KRnet isn't going to die because a few want to go > off and pout. > I hope when they're through pouting, they'll come back > and play another day. > I also hope they'll quit acting like every little > disagreement is about the new airfoil, or a reason to > shut down the KRnet, or, especially quit attacking > people who don't agree with them. > Frank Ross, San Antonio, TX > > - I agree with Frank. Bobby Muse ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 21:24:21 -0800 To: From: "Peter Johnson" Subject: Further to Landing Gear/C of G Relationship Message-ID: <001601c0ac47$0a694320$a009eccf@peter> ------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C0AC03.F8587540 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Further to location of the C of G to the point of tire contact, in the = front view of the airplane the angle between the tire contact point and = the CG is also important. From Ladislao Pazmanys book 'Landing Gear Design for Light Aircraft', in = the front view of the aircraft in a horizontal position, the angle = between the ground and a line drawn from the tire contact point to the = CG, should not be less than 25 degrees. Hope this helps. mailto:pjohnson@voyageur.ca ------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C0AC03.F8587540-- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 23:07:52 -0500 To: "kr2s group" From: "Albert Pecoraro" Subject: Re: KR> Further to Landing Gear/C of G Relationship Message-ID: <000901c0ac3c$585bcb80$8cd1b23f@steelcase.com> <<>> Netters, I originally asked the question that started this thread, and I received good, informative answers from several people on this list. I just needed a general answer and some direction on where to find out more. Peter and a few others provided such information (for all of us). The reason I asked this question - I lengthened my main gear considerably. And as we all know, when you deviate from plans - any plans - you have to consider other things that may be impacted. 'Nuff said. Good night. ;-) Albert ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 23:30:29 -0500 To: "Albert Pecoraro" , "kr2s group" From: "RONALD.FREIBERGER" Subject: RE: KR> Further to Landing Gear/C of G Relationship Message-ID: " Pazmany said, some one said"" From Ladislao Pazmanys book 'Landing Gear Design for Light Aircraft', in the front view of the aircraft in a horizontal position, the angle between the ground and a line drawn from the tire contact point to the CG, should not be less than 25 degrees. Paz has QUANTIFIED HIS OPINION, but it's still an opinion. There's a wide range of gear positions, and the variations change the way the aircraft handle. Further aft, more tendency to tip over; further forward, more squirelly. Chose what you want, but I wish my taildagger KR2 had the gear about 4 inches further forward. However, I'll build it with the Diehl parts on hand. handle Ron Freiberger... mailto:ron.martha@mindspring.com -----Original Message----- From: Albert Pecoraro [mailto:gryphonflier@earthlink.net] Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2001 11:08 PM To: kr2s group Subject: Re: KR> Further to Landing Gear/C of G Relationship ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 00:40:19 -0500 (EST) To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: clair boyd Subject: 1983 KR1 Message-ID: <384182429.984548420135.JavaMail.root@web124-wra.mail.com> I bought a 1983 kr1 with mag and no starter and the engine is removed.I,m replacing with a starter and distributor.Did the tach connect to the mag,if so can I connect to the distributor? There is a 6 volt lantern battery on the firewall that I dont know what it powers. There is gear retract warning light but it might power some of the instruments. Does anyone go that far back to give me some help? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 09:22:08 -0600 To: "KRNet" From: "Robert Stone" Subject: LINE/DOT TORPEDO LASER LEVEL Message-ID: <001101c0ac9a$9a832180$ebd8fea9@pavilion> ------=_NextPart_000_000E_01C0AC68.3DDDDBA0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable KRNet members: To all who may be interested, HARBOR FREIGHT TOOLS is = offering a Line/Dot Torpedo Laser Level for $39.99. The stock number = for this item is 39980-2VGA. =20 Bob Stone ------=_NextPart_000_000E_01C0AC68.3DDDDBA0-- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 09:32:41 -0600 To: "KRNet" From: "Robert Stone" Subject: Harbor Freight Tools Message-ID: <004801c0ac9c$032f96e0$ebd8fea9@pavilion> ------=_NextPart_000_0045_01C0AC69.B7AA2AA0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable KRNet members: I forgot to put their phone number in, it's l-800-423-2567 Bob Stone ------=_NextPart_000_0045_01C0AC69.B7AA2AA0-- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 10:44:28 -0800 To: From: "Donald Hamm" Subject: For Sale Message-ID: <001d01c0acb6$ceaacfa0$096d43d8@oemcomputer> ------=_NextPart_000_001A_01C0AC73.BEE57860 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Kr2 for sale!-----------------40% done Tail finished, Dihel wings, tail dragger,on its R.R. springs. Main gear and hydraulic brakes, with pre-molded ccowling, gas tank, front desk and rear deck. A few instruments and most all controls. Also included a 16.5 ft. inclosed trailer with tailgate ramp. $4500.00 Lost Medical. Don 909 652-5429 or E-mail: dlhamm@amexol.net ------=_NextPart_000_001A_01C0AC73.BEE57860-- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 22:35:36 +0100 To: "Manager Bill" , "Krnet" From: "Christian Kogelmann" Subject: Re: KR> KR proof load Message-ID: <006001c0acce$c6cf78e0$3b1c2e3e@aptivacomputer> Dear Bill, I appreciate your help. I will have to read it a couple of times before I understand it completely. I have a meeting with my inspector in two weeks to determine were we are going. I've also received a structural analysis for Franco Negri's KR2 , an Italian builder which I am currently translating into german and adapting to the "S", (which is a challenge). I will update you on my progress. Thanks Chris ----- Original Message ----- From: Manager Bill To: chris K ; Krnet Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2001 8:39 PM Subject: KR> KR proof load > This is for Chris Kogelmann in Austria, but I am sending it via the > krnet for information and comment. > > First I want to dispel the notion that I am on the Rand Robinson > payroll. I have an ongoing agreement with Jeannette to work on a > structural analysis of the KR-2S, but it is a task-by-task job and I > haven't worked on it very often. Despite what many of you may believe, > Mrs. Rand is not reaping huge profits from her business. Most of what I > have done in forums at Oshkosh and at Sun N Fun has been as a volunteer, > though she helped some with travel expenses. Like the rest of you, all > that I do here on krnet is unpaid, though I have written about a couple > of things I was paid to do. What follows is part of that, although the > conversions to metric I am doing for Chris, not Jeannette. > > Chris, you didn't mention what the gross weight of your KR is going to > be, but since you are using VW power, I assume you are following the > guidelines and are working toward 980 lb (445 kg). You should have no > fear of loading your wing to the equivalent of 445 kg; as I wrote a few > days ago, it is more than strong enough to support 477 kg at 4.0 g > without permanent deformation. That is, when the load is removed, it > will return to its unloaded shape. That is the definition of limit load. > So you are perfectly safe in loading to 445 kg at 3.8 g, provided that > you do it carefully and correctly. As a matter of fact, it's a good > idea. You wouldn't fire a rifle or shotgun without proof marks on the > barrel, would you? > > You expressed reluctance to invert your KR so it can be loaded acting > downward on the lower surface, so I will tell you how to keep the > airplane upright. It will take some sturdy lumber and a bit of time to > build the loading levers, but the work is pretty easy. You are going to > build a pair of simple support beams to go over the spar at the wing > roots, because you will be pushing up on the wings, and you need to hold > the airplane down. Next you are going to build ten loading levers and > their stands, five for each wing, but they will all be identical. > > First, the support beams. They need to be sturdy, because you will be > pushing against them with about 800 kg on each side. In the US, a > standard board size is 2 x 6, which is finished to 1.5 x 5.5 inches, or > 4 cm x 14 cm. You need two pieces, each 2 meters long. Drill each end > through the 14 cm width so you can attach a chain or cable that will > reach an anchor in the ground and so the cables will clear the wings > with the midpoint of the beam centered over the front spar. Attach a 5 > cm x 4 cm rubber pad to the 4 cm bottom edge at its midpoint to form a > bearing surface on the top of the front spar. Each ground anchor and > cable should withstand at least 400 kg; 500 kg would be better. > > Now you will need a total of 24.5 meters of 50 mm x 50 mm square stock, > 8 square meters of 18 to 20 mm plywood, and 28 glass or steel balls > about 12 to 15 mm in diameter. Finally you will need 1306 kg of bricks > or sand and sandbags. The bricks are easier to stack, but don't buy > them; borrow them, and if you can't borrow bricks, use the sand and > sandbags. Of course, you'll also need a scale to weigh the bricks or > sand. > > Cut 10 pieces of 50 mm square stock into 1 meter lengths. Set 2 pieces > aside. With a drill, start a 10 mm hole 20 mm from the end of each of > the 8 pieces remaining. Turn the pieces over, and start a 10 mm hole 330 > mm from the center of the first hole in each piece. These are sockets > for the 12 mm balls. (If you use 15 mm balls, use a 12 mm drill bit.) > Each hole should be such that a ball will go about 1/3 of the way into a > hole. These 8 pieces are the outboard loading levers. Measure 660 mm > from the center of each end socket, and drill a shallow socket hole. > These holes will locate the center lines of the loading planks that you > will place your sandbags on. > > Cut 12 blocks of 50 mm square stock, each 100 mm long (this length is > not critical). Glue and screw two blocks flush with the ends of each of > the two remaining 1 meter lever arms and on opposite sides of the arm so > you form a 100 mm x 150 mm surface at one end of each lever. These are > the inboard lever arms. Drill a ball socket 100 mm apart and 20 mm from > the end of each lever arm. (This is why you glued blocks to the sides.) > Measure 330 mm from the centers of the sockets and mark the pivot point > on each arm. Center a 100 mm block to each side of the lever arms (same > orientation as the end blocks) on these marks, and glue and screw them > in place. Turn each arm over and drill a ball socket in each block at > the lever arm center line and 100 mm apart. Turn the arms over again and > measure 660 mm from the center line between the end socket holes. Mark > each arm. This is the centerline of the inboard loading platform. Center > two of the last four 100 mm blocks to each lever arm (same orientation > as the others) and glue and screw them in place. > > Now cut 2 pieces of 18 mm or 20 mm plywood, each 600 x 630 mm. The > grain should run the long way. Mark the center of each piece, and glue > and screw one platform with its center over the loading centerline of > each inboard loading lever. > > Cut 4 pieces of 50 mm square stock, each 630 mm long. Two of these are > the inboard load distribution pads, and the other two are ballast to > balance the 630 mm loading pads. Mark the centers of the two load > distribution pads, and drill a pair of ball sockets 50 mm on each side > of the centerlines to match the two sockets in the ends of the inboard > loading levers. > > Cut 4 pieces of 50 mm square stock, each 2.4 meters long. Two of these > are load distribution pads and two are ballast to balance the loading > plank that will rest on the loading levers. Make a mark to identify the > outboard tips of the two distribution pads. Starting from the outboard > end of each pad, drill ball sockets centered at 4 locations on each pad: > 343 mm from the tip, 953 mm from the tip, 1504 mm from the tip, and 2174 > mm from the tip. These sockets will locate the ends of the 8 outboard > loading levers, 4 on each outboard wing panel. > > Cut 2 plywood loading planks, each 2.4 meters long by 600 mm wide, with > the grain running the long way (if your plywood is only available in > American 8 foot lengths, don't worry about the missing inch. Just > compensate for a 25 mm shortage at the tip end of each plank.) Scribe a > centerline down each plank and drill ball socket holes corresponding to > the socket holes in the load distribution pads. Don't forget to > compensate for the missing 25 mm at the tip if you are using American > size plywood. > > Now cut 10 pieces of 50 mm square stock, each 220 mm long, and 10 pieces > of plywood each 150 mm square. These are the pylons that the loading > planks and the load distribution pads will rest on. Center one end of a > 220 mm pylon on the center of each plywood base and glue and screw it in > place. Drill a ball socket in the free end of each pylon. > > You are ready to assemble the loading system. Place five pylons about > equally spaced and about 15 mm ahead of the center section leading edge > of each wing. Starting from the inboard end, number them from 1 to 5. > Place a bearing ball in each pylon socket. Take the two inboard loading > levers (the ones with two ball sockets in the ends) and place them on > the no. 1 pylons, locating each lever with its socket on the ball in the > pylon and the short end projecting under the wing. Insert balls in the > sockets and place the 630 mm loading pads on the levers, with their ball > sockets on the bearing balls in the ends of the loading levers. Put a > 630 mm ballast bar just in front of each load distribution pad. Now > adjust each assembly of pylon, loading lever, load distribution pad and > ballast bar so the loading pad is centered on the bottom of the main > spar and the end of the loading pad is flush with the outside of the > fuselage. The loading levers won't be completely balanced, so the > distribution pads will press lightly against the bottom of the spar and > keep everything steady. > > Place a loading lever with its midpoint ball socket over the bearing > ball on each of the 8 outboard pylons, and put a bearing ball in the end > socket and the loading socket of each lever. Now place a 600 mm loading > plank, with its locating sockets facing down, over each set of outboard > loading levers, and adjust the pylons in and out so the ball sockets in > the platforms fit onto the bearing balls in the lever arms. Adjust the > whole assembly so the outboard edge of each platform is even with the > tips of the wings. Place a load distribution pad and a ballast bar > between the wing and the loading levers, and again adjust the pylons in > and out and back and forth so the load distribution bars are even with > the bottoms of the spars and the bearing sockets fit over the balls in > the loading levers. > > Are you still with me? It is hard to describe this without using a > picture or drawing, but I have a phobia against e-mail attachments. If > you require a drawing, I will send you one by postal service. > > You should now have your airplane securely fastened down, with ten short > pylons each supporting a load lever, and the system of load levers > having a short inboard and a long outboard loading platform in front of > the wing and a short load distribution pad and a long distribution pad > pressing against the bottom of the wing spar on each side of the > fuselage. You are ready to apply the 3.8 g static load. However, the > total load will not be 3.8 times 444 kg, both because you are not going > to load the part of the wing that is inside the fuselage, and because > the downward inertia of the outboard wing panels relieves the lift load > on the wing. The applied load is centered on the forward spar because > this is the 25 percent chord location, and the lift load is centered > approximately on the 25 percent chord. Gather your bricks. > > You are going to apply the following loads: > pad number 1, 186 kg > pad number 2, 144 kg > pad number 3, 125 kg > pad number 4, 107 kg > pad number 5, 91 kg > Total applied to each wing, 653 kg > Incidentally, this distribution includes the effect of 2 degrees washout > (twist) in the outer wing panels. > > Start at the inboard location, pad number 1. Stack 186 kg of bricks so > the load is centered on the center of the pylon. Note that the wing spar > will bend a little, and the outer levers will be tilted upward against > the wing. Put some spacers under the number 2 pylon until the lever is > at least level, and make sure that the long loading pad is even with the > spar all along its length. Load both number 1 pylons before you adjust > the number 2 pylons. > > Now stack 144 kg of bricks on the loading plank, with the load centered > over the center of the number 2 pylon on each side of the fuselage.. > > Move to pylon number 3. Note that the wing spar will be bent a little > more, and the number 3 loading levers will be tilting up toward the > wing. Put spacers under the pylon platforms to level the levers again, > and load each lever number 3 with 125 kg of bricks, again centered over > the number 3 pylons. > > Move to the number 4 pylons. Put spacers under the platforms to level > the loading levers. Then load the plank with 107 kg of bricks, centered > on pylon number 4, for each wing panel. > > Finally, move to the number 5 pylons. Put spacers under the platforms > (it will probably take quite a few!) to level the loading levers. > Finally, load each plank with 91 kg of bricks, centered on pylon number > 5. > > Take lots of pictures! Also be sure the Austrian officials are there to > witness the loading, though you don't need them around until you > actually start piling bricks. It would also be wise to measure the > upward bending of the spar at the wingtip also. Finally, remove the > loads in reverse order. That is, unload the number 5 pylons, then the > number 4 pylons, and so on, working on both wings as you go. > > The last step, and of utmost importance to the officials (as well as to > you!), is to inspect the wings and the attach fittings after all the > load has been removed. If you have done all the gluing, glassing, > reaming and bolting properly, there should be no damage at all. Go fly! > > Bill Marcy > Still penciling on paper > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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 > ------------------------------ End of krnet Digest ***********************************