From: To: Subject: krnet Digest 22 Feb 2002 02:51:21 -0000 Issue 377 Date: Thursday, February 21, 2002 6:51 PM krnet Digest 22 Feb 2002 02:51:21 -0000 Issue 377 Topics (messages 8881 through 8901): Re: THRUST LINE 8881 by: Ross Youngblood 8882 by: Ross Youngblood KR on grass 8883 by: Serge F. VIDAL 8885 by: larry flesner Flexion Test of Sitka Spruce 8884 by: Eduardo José Jankosz 8887 by: Mark Langford 8891 by: HAshraf.aol.com Tom Crawford?? 8886 by: Bo124rs.aol.com KR2-S for sale 8888 by: Aughaus.cs.com Text 8889 by: Edson Nóbrega Info request/ Wing tanks also 8890 by: Conley, Paul W. Rudder Peddle Stops 8892 by: Jim Morehead 8899 by: Ron Eason KR FOLDING WING PLANS Re: KR> Folding wing 8893 by: Jerry Morris 8894 by: Robert X. Cringely Parting out my KR 8895 by: Bo124rs.aol.com Parting out...continued. 8896 by: Bo124rs.aol.com Going once, going twice...........sold. 8897 by: Bo124rs.aol.com The old guard 8898 by: John & Elaine Roffey old guard 8900 by: Stickandrudder.cs.com 8901 by: Jerry Mahurin Administrivia: To subscribe to the digest, e-mail: To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail: To post to the list, e-mail: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 20:00:53 -0700 To: Mark Langford , krnet@mailinglists.org From: Ross Youngblood Subject: Re: KR> THRUST LINE Message-Id: <20020220025523.UGPK23150.femail44.sdc1.sfba.home.com@rypc> I don't recall their being anything specific regarding the "Thrust Line" in the KR Plans. Into this vacuum of information, I decided that the best solution would be to place the engine/mount centered in the firewall area so that all the components would fit under the cowling without too many bumps. I'm also too lazy to consider doing any type of static or dynamic analysis, but I suspect that with such a short fuselage, small changes in the thrust line will be insignificant compared to other factors, such as the CG. So I concurr with Marks post. On the other hand.... if I was considering making my KR into a speed racer and wanted to ensure that I had the most efficient engine installation, I expect paying close attention to the thrust line could get me a 1-2% difference in cruise speed. I can see a couple of situations here, but if you assume that the thrust line is parallel to the direction of travel, then who cares? If you have a slight angle, we are talking about a small force vector I'm thinking. So my guess is that people play with thrust lines to do one of two things. A) Change the climb/cruise performance to ensure that the thrust is parallel to the direction of travel, or to make a compromise in cruise to achieve better climb. B) Counteract P-factor. Or turning tendency. IMHO, small errors in the thrust line will not be noticable. I'm thinking my rudder and elevator will take care of me if I'm wrong on this... how much thrust line error will cause my elevator or rudder to be unable to counter it? I'm thinking CG is more important here. -- Ross >Larry wrote: > >> thrust line and I believe Mark Langford may have dropped his >> a couple inches to accommodate the Corvair(correct me >> if I'm wrong, Mark). > >It's been a while since I looked at the "plans",. but I remember that >actually figuring out where the thrust line is supposed to be is a matter >that's left to your imagination. You can infer from the drawings that it >might be at the top of the top longeron elevation, but I don't think it >actually spells it out anywhere. And if you look at the side view "poster" >drawing of the KR2S that's included with the plans, you'd guesstimate that >it's about 2" below the longeron. I think it's one of those things where >you have to buy an engine mount from somebody, bolt it on, and now you know >where your thrust line is! Of course some of those folks who've actually >bought engine mounts could probably shed considerable light on this subject, >if they would. But I wouldn't want anybody to go out of their way! I will >say that the Revmaster cowling looks to have been designed for the >thrustline to be located at the top of the top longeron, and that seems to >be the way most KRs are constructed. > >I DID see a drawing in an old Newsletter that showed the thrust line to be >about 2" below the longeron's top, but I forget the details. Mine is 2.38" >below the top of the longeron, mainly so my mechanical fuel pump and >distributor wouldn't require bulges in the cowling. That puts my prop's >centerline only 34.6" off the ground, leaving me with only 7-5/8" of prop >clearance with a 54" prop. I'll fix that with some 4130 gear leg extensions >that'll raise me up 3 more inches. > >As far as moving the thrust line up or down an inch or two on a KR, I can't >see that you'd realize any real differnce in flying qualities, especially >compared to all the other variables that individual builders build into >these things, stuff like nosegear vs taildragger vs retracts, for example. >And nothing like the huge change in CG during every flight that you'd get >with a big header tank mounted behind the panel... > >Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama >mailto:langford@hiwaay.net >see KR2S N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >To post to the list, email: krnet@mailinglists.org , NOT "reply all" > >To UNsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org >For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org > >See the KRNet archives at http://www.escribe.com/aviation/krnet/ > > Ross Youngblood rossy@cox.net ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 20:20:52 -0700 To: macwood , ron.martha@mindspring.com From: Ross Youngblood CC: krnet@mailinglists.org Subject: Re: KR> THRUST LINE Message-Id: <20020220031536.VEJQ10443.femail27.sdc1.sfba.home.com@rypc> Ron, Thanks this is a great post! What you are talking about is the couple caused by the moment arm differencce from the center line of the aircraft and where ever the thrust line is/ends up. I think what really ends up happening is that the thrust line will either help or hurt your actual CG envelope. Here is what I came up with thinking on this... I'm not an aerospace engineer so 'netters correct me if I have overlooked somthing. If we are counting on this couple to add to stability, it's contrrbution will be lowest be the weakest at low power and strongest at high power settings. Therefore, in a landing configuration the thrust line issue will not be great as it's component will be neglegable at low power. So in these situations the CG/Center of lift will be the major concern. At high speed and high power settings, the elevator should have more than enough authority to counteract any stability issues due to a thrust line error, so I'm thinking the biggest concern in these situationss would be flutter, or excessive G's and not thrust line. At low speed and high power however, the thrust line has more energy, and the tail may not have effectiveness. So again, CG may become more critical. I think we could do some rule of thumb stuff, but my Physics book is at work. If we assume you could hose up the engine thrust line by 8" or around 17-18cm and still fit everything in the cowling, then we can figure the couple would be 65-75HP * 18cm or 8". (I would convert everything to Newtons). Then we need to figure the difference between the CG, and the center of lift. I'm guessing this is more like 8" difference too, but the mass is greater. 900# * 32f/s(squared), or 9.8m/s(squared). To balance all of this out we take a small tail force multiplied by a large moment arm. (distance from CG or Center of Lift) to tail. I think if we were to put a 200HP engine on a KR, we would want to worry about thrust line... but for 65/75HP, I'm guessing the effort may not be worth the solar power for the calulator to do the math. I like the rule of thumb, make the thrust line counteract the CG/center of lift couple. 2/19/2002 5:20:34 AM, "macwood" wrote: >Back in the dark ages,when I did my basic aerodynamics, we were taught that >the thrust line and the drag component had to form an anticlockwise couple >to counter the clockwise couple of lift and c of g. (Centre of lift behind >c of g. and thrust below drag) So in theory if you got your thrust line too >high you could run into stability problems. >----- Original Message ----- Regards Mac W >From: "RONALD.FREIBERGER" >To: "larry flesner" ; "Philip J. Visconti" > >Cc: >Sent: Monday, February 18, 2002 10:19 PM >Subject: RE: KR> THRUST LINE > > >> I have experience with several airplanes that we mounted the engine >"square >> and in the middle of the cowl opening. They all flew well. The backwards >> turning VW might benefit from a little offset, but apparently no-one >bothers >> to do so . >> >> Ron Freiberger... >> mailto:ron.martha@mindspring.com >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: larry flesner [mailto:flesner@midwest.net] >> Sent: Monday, February 18, 2002 3:55 PM >> To: Philip J. Visconti >> Cc: krnet@mailinglists.org >> Subject: Re: KR> THRUST LINE >> >> >> >Why ask thrust question ??? Tony's "Firewall Forward" got me thinking >> >about it. He suggested that thrust line should be where designer placed >> >it in original plans. However, if some have already changed thrust line, >> >with their different engine installations, I guess I shouldn't worry. >> >Just make sure engine/cowling combination fits properly. >> >Phil >> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++== >> >> Phil and netters, >> >> In my earlier reply, I didn't intend to suggest that builders >> were changing the thrust line with the different engines. >> I was speaking about aircraft design in general. The only >> changes to KR's that I'm aware of is the physical layout of >> the different engines and mounts maybe changing the vertical >> thrust line and I believe Mark Langford may have dropped his >> a couple inches to accommodate the Corvair(correct me >> if I'm wrong, Mark). I know of no builder that has offset >> the thrust line horizontally with any of the different engines. >> The one builder that had to shim his mount (he never said >> which way) said when he installed the 0-200 the aircraft >> wanted to roll on the first flight. He had to hold continuous >> side stick and bring it back in. What the problem was there >> is beyond me but I suspect it was unique to that airframe >> or engine installation. He claimed the shims took care >> of the problem but I suspect it is just hiding a problem >> somewhere else. >> >> By the way, The HAPI (I hope I'm right on this one) mount >> fits the 0-200. If I have the correct mount here, it's the >> same one Marty Roberts is using and also the one I have >> my 0-200 on. I moved mine out with 1 inch spacers on >> the firewall to help the C.G. with my 24 inch stretch. >> The spacers also allowed me to use the older pull type >> starter which my engine had. The original 55 amp alternator >> could not be used as it hit the mount so I'm using a B&C >> that I traded for mine. I'm still trying to get the drawing >> for the adaptor that Marty made so he could install a >> Nippendenso (SP) , pronounced rice burner, on his. >> >> Hope that was all clear enough........... >> >> Larry Flesner >> >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To post to the list, email: krnet@mailinglists.org , NOT "reply all" >> >> To UNsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org >> >> See the KRNet archives at http://www.escribe.com/aviation/krnet/ >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To post to the list, email: krnet@mailinglists.org , NOT "reply all" >> >> To UNsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org >> >> See the KRNet archives at http://www.escribe.com/aviation/krnet/ >> > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >To post to the list, email: krnet@mailinglists.org , NOT "reply all" > >To UNsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org >For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org > >See the KRNet archives at http://www.escribe.com/aviation/krnet/ > > Ross Youngblood rossy@cox.net ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 08:57:32 +0200 To: From: "Serge F. VIDAL" Subject: KR on grass Message-ID: ------=_NextPart_000_0004_01C1B9EC.A2353160 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I fly a stock KR2, taildragger, fixed gear, fitted with 500x5 tires. I have found landing on grass (at a local glider base) a non issue. I think the only problem is the wheel spats, that might be damaged quickly. You always have the option of removing them. Now, uneven surface, whether they are grass, dirt, or old tar, are a different issue. My landing gear is soft, my propeller clearance low, and pitch control on a bumpy ground roll is tricky. In short, the wheels are OK for all surfaces except tundra. The plane is not. Serge VIDAL KR2 ZS-WEC Johannesburg, South Africa ------=_NextPart_000_0004_01C1B9EC.A2353160-- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 06:47:13 -0600 To: From: larry flesner Subject: Re: KR> KR on grass Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20020220064713.008ca100@mail.midwest.net> At 08:57 AM 2/20/02 +0200, Serge F. VIDAL wrote: >>Now, uneven surface, whether they are grass, dirt, or old tar, are a >different issue. My landing gear is soft, my propeller clearance low, and >pitch control on a bumpy ground roll is tricky. >In short, the wheels are OK for all surfaces except tundra. The plane is >not. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ I'm hoping my 24 inch stretch, longer stiffened gear that give me 9 inches of ground clearance with a 60 inch prop, and 600X6 wheels will correct all those problems for me. I hope to know soon........... Larry Flesner ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 08:02:48 -0300 To: "krnet" From: "=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Eduardo_Jos=E9_Jankosz?=" Subject: Flexion Test of Sitka Spruce Message-Id: <200202201111.g1KBBxI54747@cwbone.bsi.com.br> Hi, KR Builders! Somebody does would make a simple flexion test with a piece of Sitka? With that small pressing machine of mechanical shops? The manometer of that must be graduated of 0 to 21kgf/sq.cm ( 0 - 300 lbs/sq.in) , for use a piece with dimensions: 30 cm x 2 cm x 2 cm. The supports (narrows, but not cutters) must be 28 cm between. The point of applying force must be spherical (for example- a 2 cm piece of a bolt with 1/4" diameter)! I am making some tests with different woods and I would like know this for sitka spruce, for a comparison! Other question: what is the specific gravity of Sitka spruce? I visited the site of FPL (Forest Products Laboratory)http://www.fpl.fs.fed.us , and I found for sitka 0,33 specific gravity! Who confirm to me this? Visit the KRNet in Brasil at http://br.groups.yahoo.com/group/kr2-brasil/ Thank to all! Eduardo José Jankosz jankosz@bsi.com.br http://www.bsi.com.br/cbcb Curitiba - PR - BRASIL ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 08:04:43 -0600 To: "krnet" From: "Mark Langford" Subject: Re: KR> Flexion Test of Sitka Spruce Message-ID: <001b01c1ba17$8c8c8cc0$5f0ca58c@mlangford> There's some Sitka spruce info at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/spruce.jpg that might be helpful. Mark Langford, Huntsville, AL mailto:langford@hiwaay.net see KR2S project at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 01:07:33 EST To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: HAshraf@aol.com Subject: Re: KR> Flexion Test of Sitka Spruce Message-ID: --part1_f7.16cb4cc1.29a5e8a5_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 2/20/02 3:03:11 AM Pacific Standard Time, jankosz@bsi.com.br writes: > for sitka 0,33 specific gravity! Who confirm to me this? Spruce weighs about 28lbs/cu.ft average. That will make its specific gravity 0.448. Although I have measured pieces that are as low as 0.36, which is what Aircraft Spruce catalog says should me the mimimum sp. gr. Haris --part1_f7.16cb4cc1.29a5e8a5_boundary-- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 08:51:25 EST To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: Bo124rs@aol.com Subject: Tom Crawford?? Message-ID: <9e.2235d65b.29a503dd@aol.com> Sorry guys, quick way to find Tom. Hey Tom, send me a quick e-mail off the list. Want to talk about something. How's the world of KR's guys??? Dana Overall 1999 & 2000 Gathering host ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 10:24:40 EST To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: Aughaus@cs.com Subject: KR2-S for sale Message-ID: <7c.2339f566.29a519b8@cs.com> --part1_7c.2339f566.29a519b8_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To the Group Our EAA chapter #234, Traverse City, MI, has a KR2-S that needs a home. I have been unable to access the newsletter due to my ISP and am hoping one of you subscribers could post an ad for us. The plane is in the "boat stage" and is being built as a tri-gear (Toth Design I'm told). Has Cleveland wheels, brakes and master cylinders with new tires and tubes.. The main gear fittings are in the spar box and are attached to fiberglass gear legs. The nose gear leg and fork are fabricated. The spars are complete as is the horizontal stab. Ailerons started. Rudder pedals, control quadrant and other weldments completed. Seat sling and foam, EXP- BUS load center. Stainless firewall material. Lots of AN hardware and control cables. Large box of foam. Drawings and newsletters. and more! There is no FWF stuff or instruments. The Chapter will sell this project at a very, very reasonable price with a donation to the webmaster or newsletter. Its stored in a heated shop and we are about to loss the space. Any help would be most appreciated. Lou Aug Ph (231)228 5918 or email aughaus@cs.com --part1_7c.2339f566.29a519b8_boundary-- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 13:47:55 -0300 To: From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Edson_N=F3brega?= Subject: Text Message-ID: <003a01c1ba2e$5e461e00$3331f9c8@edson> Text ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 12:39:43 -0500 To: "'krnet@mailinglists.org'" From: "Conley, Paul W." Subject: Info request/ Wing tanks also Message-id: <070AE2805DAC5F409222E15F3FCA421602B49042@uuhil-354> --Boundary_(ID_/ypZZwLB/Ajuar3z7prNug) Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII > Ok I'm new , > I purchased a KR II that was built in 77 by J. Aldrich. N38 > TF...Serial JA1.. She is slightly apart (wings, interior, landing gear) > but > that's not the problem... I need to find any information that I can > regarding this bird cause the logs have been lost.... No Engine or > airframe > logs....Nuts... So, if anyone could help me re: N38TF I sure would > appreciate the information......... > > P.S. I started this this mail to respond about Fuel tanks..... Just for > curiosity, see the URL below to see a KR w/ outboard wing tanks..Kinda > like > an Apache.... > > http://www.geocities.com/Pipeline/Valley/2636/uku.html > > Thank you, > Paul Conley > LAN-WAN Engineer, Global Hosting > WorldCom > (614) 723-7647 / pconley@wcom.net > > --Boundary_(ID_/ypZZwLB/Ajuar3z7prNug)-- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 23:07:26 -0800 To: KR- Net From: Jim Morehead Subject: Rudder Peddle Stops Message-ID: Netters, I need some help designing rudder peddle stops. Mine are hinged on the floorboards. Does anyone have good pictures of how they did theirs? Thanks, Jim Morehead Cameron, Park, CA ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 20:03:48 -0600 To: "KR- Net" From: "Ron Eason" Subject: Re: KR> Rudder Peddle Stops Message-ID: <002f01c1bb45$2c47e010$b0621e41@Administration> This may help. Refer to http://krron.freeyellow.com/ KRRon ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Morehead" To: "KR- Net" Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 1:07 AM Subject: KR> Rudder Peddle Stops > Netters, > I need some help designing rudder peddle stops. Mine are hinged on the > floorboards. Does anyone have good pictures of how they did theirs? > > Thanks, > Jim Morehead > Cameron, Park, CA > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To post to the list, email: krnet@mailinglists.org , NOT "reply all" > > To UNsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org > For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org > > See the KRNet archives at http://www.escribe.com/aviation/krnet/ > > > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 10:21:13 -0700 To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: "Jerry Morris" Subject: KR FOLDING WING PLANS Re: KR> Folding wing Message-ID: <3C752C89.B0E20920@nsc.com> 2-21-2002 I spoke to R.W. Moore today about the kr wing fold kit.. He no longer sells the kit just the plans for $99.95. It is not a quick fold just allows one person to fold back leading edge down in about 30min. You have to disconnect controls and fuel line and remove the 8 wing mounting bolts, then you can fold the wing. I was hopeing for a quick fold... for easy take home after every flight kind of wing but this is not the case. If anyone is interested plans can be ordered at address below. R.W.Moore The Truth Newspapper POBox 622 1478 Highway 106 Toccoa, GA 30577 OR HIS PHONE NUMBER IS (706) 779-3446 Has anyone thought of a alum tube spar for wing removal or quick fold? pro or con comments ? anyone? anyone? thnks jerrym@nsc.com >virgnvs@juno.com wrote: Col. R.W.Moore Moore Folding Wing Attachment Kit POB 622 Toccoa, Ga. 30577-0622 This info good in 1991, Virg He is/was EAA 228096 On Sat, 2 Feb 2002 17:37:05 -0600 "norm-ruth" writes: > Phil > Could you provide more information about the folding wing setup by > Col. Robert Moore? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 09:31:43 -0800 To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: "Robert X. Cringely" Subject: Re: KR> KR FOLDING WING PLANS Re: KR> Folding wing Message-Id: At 10:21 AM -0700 2/21/02, Jerry Morris wrote: >Has anyone thought of a alum tube spar for wing removal >or quick fold? pro or con comments ? anyone? anyone? > >thnks >jerrym@nsc.com This is not a good idea. It will be heavier than the wooden spar and you'll have to design new attachments for the landing gear and wing-to-fuselage. While it may make folding easier (no guarantee there) it will make everything else harder. I'm sure there are some folding wing designs out there that could be copied more easily like, perhaps, the Stits Playmate. Bob -- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 14:35:04 EST To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: Bo124rs@aol.com Subject: Parting out my KR Message-ID: <2b.22d78cfe.29a6a5e8@aol.com> The time has come to shi%@#$% or get off the pot for me. I am in the process of starting to build a different experimental than the KR I have been working on for several years. A guy was supposed to stop by and pick up the KR today but I haven't heard from him yet. Here's the deal I am going to part out the airplane. Basically what I will be selling is a KR without the fuselage. I am doing this so I am not selling an airplane. I will sell it as a whole package or break it up into packages. Wing package: I will remove the spars form the fuselage and you will get a set of inboard Rand Robinson honeycomb skins attached to the inboard spars. Attached to these spars and stub wings are Diehl landing gear legs with hydraulic brakes from Great Plains. The outer skins are Diehl skins with electric run to wingtip lights. If you are in the boat stage, this is the deal for you........you will have instant wings. What I would do is build up the side and the floor according to plans (wider will do fine but front to back has to be to plans), cut the bottom longeron, insert the spars then scarf the longeron back into one piece. Instant wings on gear. The buyer of this gets all of the hardware including aileron hardware, rudder pedals and control stick assembly. Oh, you get the horizontal stab also. Price for insta wings $3500.00 Firewall forward: Great Plains built up 2185 with force1 prop hub, Sterba prop, Revflow carb, intake, 4-1 tuned exhaust, Bendix mag, high torque starter, aviation plugs, Diehl assessory case, engine mount................everything. Bolt it on and start it up. 0 time on engine. Price for firewall forward, bolt it on and fly $3500.00 Instrument panel including MX-11 com, artificial horizon, VSI, Airspeed, tach, oil pressure, altimeter, oil temp, hobbs, breakers, and MAC trim servo. Panel $1500.00 If someone wants everything I've got in one package I will also throw in every single KR piece I have (bunches of stuff). You build the fuse, buy the rest here and you will be flying for less than 10K with premolded wing skins and the safety of the Force1 (I sound like a carpet salesman, don't I:-) Dana Overall 859 369-3156 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 14:41:55 EST To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: Bo124rs@aol.com Subject: Parting out...continued. Message-ID: <174.3ec86d3.29a6a783@aol.com> Whoever get the engine also gets a Rand Robinson Revmaster cowling to go along with it. Dana Overall 859 369-3156 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 17:19:28 EST To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: Bo124rs@aol.com Subject: Going once, going twice...........sold. Message-ID: <91.18a4552b.29a6cc70@aol.com> Sorry gang, someone already grabbed it up...........whole kit and caboodle. I just told Ron F., I just might come back to the KRNet now as a non builder:-) Don't sigh in relief, I "ain't" going anywhere, you can't get rid of me this easy, unless we get back on the dynamics of stock horizontal stab...................... Dana Overall Former KR guy ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 19:48:06 -0500 To: "KR Mailing Lists" From: "John & Elaine Roffey" Subject: The old guard Message-ID: <005801c1bb3a$982148e0$36a828d8@default> ------=_NextPart_000_0050_01C1BB10.AE4F7BC0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Wow the old guard is almost all gone Mark!!!!!=20 Dana sold out, Mims sold out Dr.Dean parked his, Steve E. jumped to the = RV side, Albert P got married and moved, Oscar has been quiet and Ross = is only here from time to time. It's interesting how time moves on but the KR manages to grab new = builders/dreamers year after year. Hail to the KRNET. It lives on, as do some of us that have been here a = long time (maybe too long) . Any one remember the guy from New York who used to keep thing = interesting ? I've been around too long-------. John Roffey jeroffey@tir.com Yes I'm still building, when time permitts. ------=_NextPart_000_0050_01C1BB10.AE4F7BC0-- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 21:01:37 EST To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: Stickandrudder@cs.com Subject: old guard Message-ID: <78.2272c00b.29a70081@cs.com> I guess that I must be in that OG company. I've been slowly building and listening and reading about KR's for over 10 years. To those who might be discouraged, I've been flying a spamcan to stay current. Down side is that building funds go into the "can each annual. Paul O'Reilly KR2 Stretch Derry NH ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 21:53:47 -0800 (Pacific Standard Time) To: From: "Jerry Mahurin" Subject: Re: KR> old guard Message-Id: <3C75DCEB.000001.73157@mahu4362> --------------Boundary-00=_N17XQL80000000000000 Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; boundary="------------Boundary-00=_O17XLVC0000000000000" --------------Boundary-00=_O17XLVC0000000000000 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable And I would be embarassed to tell you how long I've been working on my KR= =2E.. !! If Dan had not come along to ring my bell, I would still be way behin= d.. =2E. And to think, in '81 I built an original Quickie in just 9 months. = Of course I was single then too....=0D =0D Keep on keeping on,=0D =0D =0D =0D Jerry L. Mahurin=0D Lugoff, SC=0D See our KR2 at http://www.jerrymahurin.com =0D =0D -------Original Message-------=0D =0D From: Stickandrudder@cs.com=0D Date: Thursday, February 21, 2002 06:07:20 PM=0D To: krnet@mailinglists.org=0D Subject: KR> old guard=0D =0D I guess that I must be in that OG company. I've been slowly building and = =0D listening and reading about KR's for over 10 years. To those who might be= =0D discouraged, I've been flying a spamcan to stay current. Down side is tha= t =0D building funds go into the "can each annual.=0D =0D Paul O'Reilly=0D KR2 Stretch=0D Derry NH=0D =0D ---------------------------------------------------------------------=0D To post to the list, email: krnet@mailinglists.org , NOT "reply all"=0D =0D To UNsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org =0D For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org=0D =0D See the KRNet archives at http://www.escribe.com/aviation/krnet/ =0D =0D =2E --------------Boundary-00=_O17XLVC0000000000000 Content-Type: Text/HTML; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =0D =0A
And I would be embarassed to tell you how long I've been worki= ng on=20 my KR....!!  If Dan had not come along to ring my bell, I woul= d still=20 be way behind.....  And to think, in '81 I built an original Q= uickie=20 in just 9 months.  Of course I was single then too....
 
Keep on keeping on,
 
 
 
Jerry L. Mahurin
Lugoff, SC
See our KR2 at http://www.jerrymahurin.com
 
-------Original Message-------<= /I>
 
From: Stickandrudder@cs.com
Date: Thursd= ay,=20 February 21, 2002 06:07:20 PM
To: krnet@mailinglists.org
Subject: KR&= gt; old=20 guard
 
I guess that I must be in that OG company. I've be= en=20 slowly building and
listening and reading about KR's for over 1= 0=20 years. To those who might be
discouraged, I've been flying a sp= amcan=20 to stay current. Down side is that
building funds go into the "= can=20 each annual.

Paul O'Reilly
KR2 Stretch
Derry=20 NH

---------------------------------------------------------= ------------
To=20 post to the list, email: krnet@mailinglists.org ,= NOT=20 "reply all"

To UNsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscrib= e@mailinglists.org=20
For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists= =2Eorg

See=20 the KRNet archives at http://www.escribe.= com/aviation/krnet/=20

.
=09 =09 =09 =09 =09 =09 =09
____________________________________________________
  IncrediMail - Email has finally evolved -=20
Click=20 Here
--------------Boundary-00=_O17XLVC0000000000000-- --------------Boundary-00=_N17XQL80000000000000-- ------------------------------ End of krnet Digest ***********************************