From: To: Subject: krnet Digest 4 Nov 2002 15:47:33 -0000 Issue 544 Date: Monday, November 04, 2002 7:49 AM krnet Digest 4 Nov 2002 15:47:33 -0000 Issue 544 Topics (messages 13036 through 13065): Re: Paint Dan Heath 13036 by: jim wogaman 13037 by: ECLarsen81.aol.com 13040 by: Bobby Muse Re: Paint 13038 by: Jeff York KR1 undercarriage 13039 by: Daren Cogdon 13043 by: Robert X. Cringely 13044 by: Daniel Heath 13050 by: larry flesner 13052 by: Mark Langford 13053 by: Mark Langford 13057 by: mkellems Elevator weight ?? 13041 by: Phillip Matheson 13046 by: Daniel Heath Auro fuel for aircraft 13042 by: Robert Stone 13045 by: Daniel Heath 13047 by: Donald Reid STC 13048 by: Beverly 13051 by: larry flesner 13058 by: Deems Herring Re: Auro fuel for aircraft - RE RE Any homebuilt may use auto fuel at the owner's discretion 13049 by: Daniel Heath flaps and John Roffey 13054 by: Oscar Zuniga Flaps vs Speedbrakes 13055 by: Ronevogt.aol.com Re: Smooth Prime 13056 by: Mark Langford Re: Spruce vs other 13059 by: van Rooyen, Hennie(SF02) Pics/drawings of motorcycle retracts 13060 by: van Rooyen, Hennie(SF02) Corvair info. 13061 by: Apex Industrial Equipment Inc com antenna 13062 by: Apex Industrial Equipment Inc 13064 by: larry flesner Flaps 13063 by: Beverly Auto fuel 13065 by: Kr2dream.aol.com Administrivia: To subscribe to the digest, e-mail: To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail: To post to the list, e-mail: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 12:53:05 -0500 To: "hennie van `rooyan" From: "jim wogaman" Subject: Re: KR> Paint Dan Heath Message-ID: <003501c28361$e5aecde0$27491cd8@jeannielobell> ------=_NextPart_000_0032_01C28337.FBCC37E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dan Heath: My son's friend manages a paint store. It is a new compnay = and branched out into non home type paint. They are selling the same = type of paint as those costly auto coatings, giving warranties etc. but = at extremely low prices. They seel a tuff "clear" to cover the last coat = too. I had my truck cap matched the body. Got a discount because my = friend is a an auto painter as a hobby, but very expert. I paint $120 = per gallon for standard GM Chevy red. Thats all I know. jim w cleo :-) ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Daniel Heath=20 To: krnet@mailinglists.org=20 Sent: November 03, 2002 9:39 AM Subject: KR> Paint We are getting ready to paint the bottom of the plane. I have = use Dupont Centari in the past, but it seems that the Randolf paints are = not quite as expensive. It seems that we can use Laquer, Enamel, or = Urethane. Do any of you have a preferance for paints and primers? See ya in Red Oak --- 2003, Daniel R. Heath See our KR2 at: http://kr-builder.org Click on the Pic. See our EAA Chapter 242 at: http://WWW.EAA242.ORG =20 =20 =20 =20 ____________________________________________________ IncrediMail - Email has finally evolved - Click Here=20 ------=_NextPart_000_0032_01C28337.FBCC37E0-- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 17:08:00 EST To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: ECLarsen81@aol.com Subject: Re: KR> Paint Dan Heath Message-ID: <85.2390aab3.2af6f840@aol.com> Dan, I shoot the PPG brands mostly and have found the basecoat/clearcoat system is the most user friendly for those that have not shot or seldom shoot. The base coats mix at a 1:1, are similar to shooting lacquer and the tack and dry fast. They are a high solids and have great hide/color coverage requiring less material to get the job done. I've masked and shot three colors and cleared the same day. It's that easy. The clear I use is a urethane and are very tough. It also rubs out to an excellent shine (another plus for the average DIY person). Repairing is also simple as you can spot blend very easily, and as on the newer cars, if you do get some small chips, it's only in the clear. Feather it, build it, and rub it. They also carry a new clear that they claim is "graffiti proof". Don't use it . It's impervious to just about everything, including additional paints (itself included). That means any repairing later on will have to be completely stripped. Cost is about mid range. I shot a C-150 with 3 colors for about $450, compared to $600 for the PPG Delfleet urethane or $700 for DuPont Imron. Keep in mind when you are comparing costs the White, Red, and Metallics are the heaviest and most costly. My two cents. Ed Larsen Luscombe S115 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 17:02:45 -0600 To: , From: "Bobby Muse" Subject: Re: KR> Paint Dan Heath Message-ID: <008401c2838d$203b9bc0$25053fd1@computer> Dan, I painted my KR2 with PPG paints also. I used a basecoat/clearcoat because I had read that a twelve year could paint using this system with great results. I never have buffed out the clearcoat finish and it is very shinny, clear and hard. Best of all, it was easy, paint the KR in the driveway and did it in a weekend. By the way, I painted the belly and the topside during the same painting process. Bobby Muse(N122B) ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2002 04:08 PM Subject: Re: KR> Paint Dan Heath > Dan, > I shoot the PPG brands mostly and have found the basecoat/clearcoat system > is the most user friendly for those that have not shot or seldom shoot. > The base coats mix at a 1:1, are similar to shooting lacquer and the tack > and dry fast. They are a high solids and have great hide/color coverage > requiring less material to get the job done. I've masked and shot three > colors and cleared the same day. It's that easy. > The clear I use is a urethane and are very tough. It also rubs out to an > excellent shine (another plus for the average DIY person). > Repairing is also simple as you can spot blend very easily, and as on the > newer cars, if you do get some small chips, it's only in the clear. Feather > it, build it, and rub it. > They also carry a new clear that they claim is "graffiti proof". Don't use it > . It's impervious to just about everything, including additional paints > (itself included). That means any repairing later on will have to be > completely stripped. > Cost is about mid range. I shot a C-150 with 3 colors for about $450, > compared to $600 for the PPG Delfleet urethane or $700 for DuPont Imron. > Keep in mind when you are comparing costs the White, Red, and Metallics are > the heaviest and most costly. > My two cents. > Ed Larsen > Luscombe S115 > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp > or http://www.bouyea.net/ for the Word files > > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 03 Nov 2002 17:17:44 -0500 To: danrh@att.net, krnet@mailinglists.org From: "Jeff York" Subject: Re: KR> Paint Message-ID: In my humble opinion, and I am sure there are several out there who have painted more than me but, Lacquer is a lot of work and I have had trouble in the past with it yellowing. On the up side if you make a mistake you can go back to it in a short period of time and fix it and for repairs it can be easily blended to match. Enamel- It does not require all the buffing and extra work that Lacquer requires, it is also easier to spray on a very good gloss finish with out the worries associated with Lacquer, but then again you can wet sand and buff the overspray on Lacquer to come out pretty good. ( Assuming you don't spray it to dry) I guess what I am saying is it's a lot easier to spray enamel and it come out looking good. The down side. If you make a mistake it's not as easy to fix as Lacquer and the cure time on enamel is longer which will have an effect on your ability to do any paint repairs for several months. All in all though I think it's very easy to spray a good finish. Urethane- Ok.. this is my opinion. This is hands down the best. In the 80's there was a lot of problems with this paint. Separation and lifting. But that has been worked out. Anybody out there that owns or owned a GM product from the 80's should know what I mean. But (again this is my opinion) Urethane base coat clear coat will give you a superior finish to enamel or Lacquer. It is easier to apply a good finish and can be repaired fairly easy if you make a mistake during application. You spray on the base color and as long as you don't have runs or other blems caused by a not so good pre paint prep, you then spray on the clear finish and you will end up with a mirror like finish that enamel and Lacquer can't give. The down side could be argued that there are more chemicals to mix ( at least with the brand I have used) and you have to be pretty accurate but that's just making sure you measure fairly well. Also the chemicals in the air spraying urethane are very harsh. At least that's what I am told. And I believe it from spraying all the above types and I believe Urethane is the most harsh. I would suggest that no matter what kind of paint you use you protect your skin and nose and mouth. I have painted other planes and cars as well as re doing the cowling and other areas of my KR 2 that was painted by someone else using Urethane and the results are a beautiful paint job. And I have some pretty cheap paint equipment. I think if you could get an HVLP system and paint with Urethane you could come out with a finish that looks as good as many professionals your first time. my opinion, Jeff York Lexington, KY N839BG >From: "Daniel Heath" >To: "krnet@mailinglists.org" >Subject: KR> Paint >Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 06:39:45 -0800 (Pacific Standard Time) > >We are getting ready to paint the bottom of the plane. I have use Dupont >Centari in the past, but it seems that the Randolf paints are not quite as >expensive. It seems that we can use Laquer, Enamel, or Urethane. > >Do any of you have a preferance for paints and primers? >See ya in Red Oak --- 2003, > >Daniel R. Heath > >See our KR2 at: http://kr-builder.org Click on the Pic. > >See our EAA Chapter 242 at: http://WWW.EAA242.ORG > > _________________________________________________________________ Broadband? Dial-up? Get reliable MSN Internet Access. http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/default.asp ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 03 Nov 2002 22:53:05 +0000 To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: "Daren Cogdon" Subject: KR1 undercarriage Message-ID: Hey dudes Kinda close to my previous subject of warbird lookalike KRs, has anyone redesigned the layout of the undercarriage so that they retract outwards/inwards like a Spitfire/Me109/Mustang or Hurricane? And what about an in-line engine? _________________________________________________________________ Surf the Web without missing calls! Get MSN Broadband. http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/freeactivation.asp ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 19:25:39 -0500 To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: "Robert X. Cringely" Subject: Re: KR> KR1 undercarriage Message-Id: The Hurricane retracts inward. Bob On Sunday, November 3, 2002, at 05:53 PM, Daren Cogdon wrote: > > > Hey dudes > > Kinda close to my previous subject of warbird lookalike KRs, has=20 > anyone redesigned the layout of the undercarriage so that they retract=20= > outwards/inwards like a Spitfire/Me109/Mustang or Hurricane? > > And what about an in-line engine? > > _________________________________________________________________ > Surf the Web without missing calls!=86Get MSN Broadband. =20 > http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/freeactivation.asp > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To post to the list, email: krnet@mailinglists.org , NOT "reply all" > > To UNsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org For=20 > additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org > > See the KRNet archives at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp > or http://www.bouyea.net/ for the Word files > > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 19:46:47 -0800 (Pacific Standard Time) To: From: "Daniel Heath" Subject: Re: KR> KR1 undercarriage Message-Id: <3DC5EDA7.000001.01016@dan> --------------Boundary-00=_Z591QL80000000000000 Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; boundary="------------Boundary-00=_Z591LVC0000000000000" --------------Boundary-00=_Z591LVC0000000000000 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable There is a KR with a gear that retracts inwards. It was recently for sal= e.=20 Don't know if it ever got sold or not. The gear used motorcycle parts fo= r some of it. I wish I could remember the name of the person who built it.= =20 It was one of the best looking KRs I have ever seen. When it went up for sale, I was surprised to find out that it only had an 1835 in it.=0D =0D See ya in Red Oak --- 2003,=0D =0D Daniel R. Heath=0D =0D See our KR2 at: http://kr-builder.org Click on the Pic.=0D =0D See our EAA Chapter 242 at: http://WWW.EAA242.ORG=0D =0D =20 --------------Boundary-00=_Z591LVC0000000000000 Content-Type: Text/HTML; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

There is a KR with a gear that retracts inwards.&= nbsp; It=20 was recently for sale.  Don't know if it ever got sold or not.=  =20 The gear used motorcycle parts for some of it.  I wish I could= =20 remember the name of the person who built it.  It was one of t= he best=20 looking KRs I have ever seen.  When it went up for sale, I was= =20 surprised to find out that it only had an 1835 in it.

 

See ya in Red Oak --- 2003,

Da= niel R.=20 Heath

See our KR2 at: http://kr-builder.org  Clic= k on the=20 Pic.

See our EAA Chapter 242 at: http://WWW.EAA242.ORG

&nb= sp;
=20

=09 =09 =09 =09 =09 =09 =09
____________________________________________________
  IncrediMai= l -=20 Email has finally evolved -
Click=20 Here
--------------Boundary-00=_Z591LVC0000000000000-- --------------Boundary-00=_Z591QL80000000000000-- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 03 Nov 2002 20:15:51 -0600 To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: larry flesner Subject: KR1 undercarriage Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20021103201551.00877370@mail.midwest.net> At 10:53 PM 11/3/02 +0000, Daren Cogdon wrote: , has anyone >redesigned the layout of the undercarriage so that they retract >outwards/inwards like a Spitfire/Me109/Mustang or Hurricane? >And what about an in-line engine? +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ There is a KR2 that has that type of gear that has been to the Gathering and if I had to guess you should be able to find pictures of it on the KRnet as shot by Mark Langford. The W.A.R replicas (all based on KR type construction) have this type of gear also. The P-51 I think uses an inline Honda engine. My guess is everything you want to do has been done before. Go to www.warreplica.homestead.com for the website and I think you'll find everything you need. Larry Flesner ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 20:39:47 -0600 To: From: "Mark Langford" Subject: Re: KR> KR1 undercarriage Message-ID: <004c01c283ab$713a7d20$0100a8c0@TD310> Daren Cogdon wrote: > Kinda close to my previous subject of warbird lookalike KRs, has anyone > redesigned the layout of the undercarriage so that they retract > outwards/inwards like a Spitfire/Me109/Mustang or Hurricane? If you go to the KRnet archive search engine at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/search and key in "motorcycle gear" you'll have 33 hits that tells you exactly who built it, what he used, where the drawings of the system are, and where the photos are. What's it gonna take to entice you guys into using this incredibly valuable resource? It's been in operation for months, and there still have only been 1900 hits, and I'll bet at least a hundred of them are mine! You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink... Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama mailto:langford@hiwaay.net see KR2S N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 20:47:58 -0600 To: From: "Mark Langford" Subject: Re: KR> KR1 undercarriage Message-ID: <005201c283ac$9fc81a20$0100a8c0@TD310> Make that http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp . I'm allowed one URL screwup per year you know. This thing goes all the way back to 1996, day ONE of KRnet. And I want to thank Larry Capps once again for setting this archive search engine up for us. Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama mailto:langford@hiwaay.net see KR2S N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 22:05:33 -0600 To: From: "mkellems" Subject: Re: KR> KR1 undercarriage Message-ID: <00ad01c283b7$70b6d7c0$27ee3cd0@yourze8cxvr8tt> ------=_NextPart_000_00AA_01C28385.254F53C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Don Betchen was the builder of that KR2, I think.=20 ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Daniel Heath=20 To: krnet@mailinglists.org=20 Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2002 9:46 PM Subject: Re: KR> KR1 undercarriage There is a KR with a gear that retracts inwards. It was = recently for sale. Don't know if it ever got sold or not. The gear = used motorcycle parts for some of it. I wish I could remember the name = of the person who built it. It was one of the best looking KRs I have = ever seen. When it went up for sale, I was surprised to find out that = it only had an 1835 in it. See ya in Red Oak --- 2003, Daniel R. Heath See our KR2 at: http://kr-builder.org Click on the Pic. See our EAA Chapter 242 at: http://WWW.EAA242.ORG =20 =20 =20 =20 ____________________________________________________ IncrediMail - Email has finally evolved - Click Here=20 ------=_NextPart_000_00AA_01C28385.254F53C0-- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2002 10:47:36 +1100 To: "krnet listing" From: "Phillip Matheson" Subject: Elevator weight ?? Message-ID: <009d01c28393$65876b40$0100a8c0@barry> ------=_NextPart_000_009A_01C283EF.971121E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Could someone please help me if possible. My KR2 has the tail finished and fitted. I have had a few people look at it, and we think the elevator is very = heavy. Of course, I can not remove it to weigh, because it will not fit = out from under the fitted fin. Question: Would someone be able to weight their elevator the following way.: With the KR2 sitting in the level position. with no controls or counter = balance connected, Please weight the elevator in the central position at = the wides point, near the rudder, with a good and fine set of scales. This will give me an idea of the weight of the elevator hanging on it's = hinges. But ,I still think I will have to cut the glass off the V/Fin and remove = the H / Stab. The builder , I think ,got very carried away with the amount of Resin he = used to build the tail. Phil Matheson matheson@dodo.com.au 61 3 58833588 NSW Australia. See our VW engines at; www.vw-engines.com ------=_NextPart_000_009A_01C283EF.971121E0-- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 19:51:53 -0800 (Pacific Standard Time) To: "krnet@mailinglists.org" From: "Daniel Heath" Subject: Re: KR> Elevator weight ?? Message-Id: <3DC5EED9.000007.01016@dan> --------------Boundary-00=_HE91WCW0000000000000 Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; boundary="------------Boundary-00=_HE91RN00000000000000" --------------Boundary-00=_HE91RN00000000000000 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Phil,=0D If you are concerned about it, just cut out the glass and foam, sand it d= own to the wood and start all over again with it on the plane. That should b= e easier than removing it.=0D See ya in Red Oak --- 2003,=0D =0D Daniel R. Heath=0D =0D See our KR2 at: http://kr-builder.org Click on the Pic.=0D =0D See our EAA Chapter 242 at: http://WWW.EAA242.ORG=0D =0D =20 --------------Boundary-00=_HE91RN00000000000000 Content-Type: Text/HTML; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Phil,

If you are concerned about it, just cut out the glass and foam, = sand it=20 down to the wood and start all over again with it on the plane.&nbs= p; That=20 should be easier than removing it.

See ya in Red Oak --- 2003,

Da= niel R.=20 Heath

See our KR2 at: http://kr-builder.org  Clic= k on the=20 Pic.

See our EAA Chapter 242 at: http://WWW.EAA242.ORG

&nb= sp;
=20

=09 =09 =09 =09 =09 =09 =09
____________________________________________________
  IncrediMai= l -=20 Email has finally evolved -
Click=20 Here
--------------Boundary-00=_HE91RN00000000000000-- --------------Boundary-00=_HE91WCW0000000000000-- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 18:29:30 -0600 To: "KRNet" From: "Robert Stone" Subject: Auro fuel for aircraft Message-ID: <000801c28399$3e1391a0$05d81a18@hot.rr.com> ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C28366.F3253540 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Netters: Can anyone out there explain to me what STC auto fuel in an = aircraft add means? Has the engine been modified to burn the same gas = we use in our cars or what? What do the initials S. T. C. stand for? Bob Stone, Harker Heights, TX rstone4@hot.rr.com ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C28366.F3253540-- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 19:49:24 -0800 (Pacific Standard Time) To: "krnet@mailinglists.org" From: "Daniel Heath" Subject: Re: KR> Auro fuel for aircraft Message-Id: <3DC5EE44.000004.01016@dan> --------------Boundary-00=_CA91BHK0000000000000 Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; boundary="------------Boundary-00=_CA916RO0000000000000" --------------Boundary-00=_CA916RO0000000000000 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Robert,=0D As I understand it, there is a mod that can be made to some carbs on certified aircraft that will allow the STC for auto fuel. Don't know wha= t it means, but I would guess, Supplementary Type Certification.=0D =0D See ya in Red Oak --- 2003,=0D =0D Daniel R. Heath=0D =0D See our KR2 at: http://kr-builder.org Click on the Pic.=0D =0D See our EAA Chapter 242 at: http://WWW.EAA242.ORG=0D =0D =20 --------------Boundary-00=_CA916RO0000000000000 Content-Type: Text/HTML; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Robert,

As I understand it, there is a mod that can be made to some carb= s on=20 certified aircraft that will allow the STC for auto fuel.  Don= 't know=20 what it means, but I would guess, Supplementary Type Certification.=

 

See ya in Red Oak --- 2003,

Da= niel R.=20 Heath

See our KR2 at: http://kr-builder.org  Clic= k on the=20 Pic.

See our EAA Chapter 242 at: http://WWW.EAA242.ORG

&nb= sp;
=20

=09 =09 =09 =09 =09 =09 =09
____________________________________________________
  IncrediMai= l -=20 Email has finally evolved -
Click=20 Here
--------------Boundary-00=_CA916RO0000000000000-- --------------Boundary-00=_CA91BHK0000000000000-- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 03 Nov 2002 19:56:47 -0500 To: "KRNet" From: Donald Reid Subject: Re: KR> Auro fuel for aircraft Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.0.20021103195040.00a33890@pop.erols.com> --=====================_38414000==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 06:29 PM 11/3/2002 -0600, Robert Stone wrote: >Netters: > Can anyone out there explain to me what STC auto fuel in an aircraft > add means? Has the engine been modified to burn the same gas we use in > our cars or what? What do the initials S. T. C. stand for? Supplementary Type Certificate. No modification are generally required to the engine or any engine related components, like carb or fuel pump. Non-metallic stuff like fuel lines may require replacement. Any certificated airplane that has an engine that was originally designed to run on 80 octane fuel can be STC'd for auto fuel. In spite of what some people say, there are no adverse effects associated with auto fuel. There is no increase in the likelihood of vapor lock, carb ice, accelerated engine wear, etc. Any homebuilt may use auto fuel at the owner's discretion. Don Reid mailto:donreid@erols.com Bumpass, Va Visit my web sites at: KR2XL construction: http://users.erols.com/donreid/kr_page.htm Aviation Surplus: http://users.erols.com/donreid/Airparts.htm EAA Chapter 231: http://eaa231.org Ultralights: http://usua250.org VA EAA State Fly-in: http://vaeaa.org --=====================_38414000==_.ALT-- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 19:59:01 -0500 To: From: "Beverly" Subject: STC Message-ID: <004e01c2839d$5df078e0$38c02141@Beverly> ------=_NextPart_000_004B_01C28373.74890650 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hey, STC stands for supplemental type certificate - it means that the = original type certificate issued when the aircraft was originally built = and issued its airworthiness certificate has been supplemented or = modified by an approved procedure authorized by the FAA. These usually = have to be purchased from the FAA and are procedures derived by some A&P = or builder and then approved by the FAA. The auto gas STC can be = purchased from the FAA and then by following and documenting the = modifications to the aircraft in the aircraft maintenance logs, the = aircraft is once again legal to fly, with the new modifications. The = reason this lengthy process must be followed is that certified aircraft = cannot have any modifications of the original construction that does not = conform to original drawings and specifications without approval and = documentation with the FAA. This is tracked throught the filing of a = Form 337, which documents all major repairs and alterations to a = certified aircraft. Hope this helps, Colin ------=_NextPart_000_004B_01C28373.74890650-- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 03 Nov 2002 20:29:56 -0600 To: "Beverly" , From: larry flesner Subject: Re: KR> STC Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20021103202956.007cfd60@mail.midwest.net> At 07:59 PM 11/3/02 -0500, Beverly wrote: These usually have to be purchased from the FAA and are procedures derived by some A&P or builder and then approved by the FAA. The auto gas STC can be purchased from the FAA and >Colin ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Colin, I think you nailed most points with your response but as I recall the STC is not purchased from the FAA but from the person or company that developed the change/modification and got the approval of the FAA. I think the "EAA" has the (or at least one of ) STC for auto fuel. I believe there may be more than one STC on this matter and available from several sources. Selling the STC (sometimes it is only paper) is the way a person or company recoupes their expenses for developing the mod's. Capitalism at work. Ain't it great ??!! Larry Flesner ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 22:21:05 -0600 To: From: "Deems Herring" Subject: RE: KR> STC Message-ID: <001601c283b9$9818dd70$6400a8c0@BackOffice> The FAA web sight has a searchable data base of all STC's and it lists who owns it. Deems Herring, Baudette Minnesota mailto:ballross@wiktel.com -----Original Message----- From: larry flesner [mailto:flesner@midwest.net] Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2002 8:30 PM To: Beverly; krnet@mailinglists.org Subject: Re: KR> STC At 07:59 PM 11/3/02 -0500, Beverly wrote: These usually have to be purchased from the FAA and are procedures derived by some A&P or builder and then approved by the FAA. The auto gas STC can be purchased from the FAA and >Colin ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.410 / Virus Database: 231 - Release Date: 10/31/2002 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 20:10:22 -0800 (Pacific Standard Time) To: "krnet@mailinglists.org" From: "Daniel Heath" Subject: Re: KR> Auro fuel for aircraft - RE RE Any homebuilt may use auto fuel at the owner's discretion Message-Id: <3DC5F32E.000010.01016@dan> --------------Boundary-00=_A9A1N0X1VA4000000000 Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; boundary="------------Boundary-00=_A9A1IA11VA4000000000" --------------Boundary-00=_A9A1IA11VA4000000000 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Don,=0D You might want to add on that a caution regarding compression ratio. As some builders like to set up their own engines, you can get the compressi= on ratio up too high for 93 octane fuel.=0D =0D See ya in Red Oak --- 2003,=0D =0D Daniel R. Heath=0D =0D See our KR2 at: http://kr-builder.org Click on the Pic.=0D =0D See our EAA Chapter 242 at: http://WWW.EAA242.ORG=0D =0D =20 --------------Boundary-00=_A9A1IA11VA4000000000 Content-Type: Text/HTML; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Don,

You might want to add on that a caution regarding compression=20 ratio.  As some builders like to set up their own engines, you= can=20 get the compression ratio up too high for 93 octane fuel.

 

See ya in Red Oak --- 2003,

Da= niel R.=20 Heath

See our KR2 at: http://kr-builder.org  Clic= k on the=20 Pic.

See our EAA Chapter 242 at: http://WWW.EAA242.ORG

&nb= sp;
=20

=09 =09 =09 =09 =09 =09 =09
____________________________________________________
  IncrediMai= l -=20 Email has finally evolved -
Click=20 Here
--------------Boundary-00=_A9A1IA11VA4000000000-- --------------Boundary-00=_A9A1N0X1VA4000000000-- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 03 Nov 2002 20:49:41 -0600 To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: "Oscar Zuniga" Subject: flaps and John Roffey Message-ID: Howdy, netters; If we haven't gotten done with the flap discussion yet, here's a question. I have some time in older Mooneys (M20C), and my brother taught me a technique that I used and liked but don't know how this fits with the KR flap discussion. In the Mooney, flaps would be deployed on final, then when a couple of feet off the runway in the flare, dumping the flaps would result in "greaser" landings almost every time. It seems that there must have been significant lift being added by the flaps in ground effect, and dumping that lift would plant the plane nicely on the pavement. Maybe the KR's flaps don't add any lift at all so this technique would only result in ballooning or more float? And to those of you who don't recognize John Roffey (who just posted about being able to get back to building his KR), he holds a place in KR history as having hand-made the tubular 4130 spars used for the wind tunnel models of the AS50XX-series airfoils developed for the KR. Welcome back, John (still driving that Ford pickup?) Oscar Zuniga San Antonio, TX mailto: taildrags@hotmail.com website at http://www.flysquirrel.net _________________________________________________________________ Surf the Web without missing calls! Get MSN Broadband. http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/freeactivation.asp ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 22:06:20 EST To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: Ronevogt@aol.com Subject: Flaps vs Speedbrakes Message-ID: <116.19eaccf3.2af73e2c@aol.com> --part1_116.19eaccf3.2af73e2c_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Netters; I'm glad that my post regarding flaps has generated so much discussion. Actually, what I was trying to solicit was comments regarding the comparison between flaps and speedbrakes on KRs. Has anyone flown KRs in both configurations? If so, please compare the two and share your opinion with us. Ron Vogt --part1_116.19eaccf3.2af73e2c_boundary-- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 21:57:22 -0600 To: "Group KR NET" From: "Mark Langford" Subject: Re: KR> Smooth Prime Message-ID: <006501c283b6$48079c20$0100a8c0@TD310> im Brown wrote: > I noted Mark L's latest post re what priming his > bottom (or at least his plane's). I was maybe > thinking of using Smooth Prime now on the bottom > while she's belly side up staying away from every > place where additional glass or work will be done > (ie near the firewall and leading edges). Any > thoughts? Tim, I never saw anybody answer this one, so I'll give you my two cents worth. I used Smooth Prime, and it worked great filling weave. You have to roll on several coats and then dry sand, but the result is smooth. I've not heard anything particularly good about the same manufacturer's top coat system, but I haven't heard anything bad about Smooth Prime. I'm about to shoot a coat of urethane primer on top of Smooth Prime and don't expect any problems. At least the guy at the paint store problem didn't seem concerned. By the way, a gallon of urethane primer is only $80, which will get you by for quite a while. I'll probably put a coat of Imron over this urethane primer, after all the mods are finalized....if ever. Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama mailto:langford@hiwaay.net see KR2S N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 22:37:13 -0600 To: "'krnet@mailinglists.org'" From: "van Rooyen, Hennie(SF02)" Subject: RE: KR> Spruce vs other Hi Pedro, I'm afraid I'm no expert on any wood species or their origin - howler, = if it's used for scaffolding, then this is it. When I made my hunt for = cheaper wood, one wood dealer took one of these saligna planks (no more than = 25mm in thickness), put an end on each side on a 44 gallon drum and start = jumping up and down on the middle section like it was a trampoline - and he was a = BIG fellow. I bough mine then, long before anyone advocated the use of this = over here. Today it is recommended by many "design your own aircraft" = manuals as a good and acceptable choice for aircraft building use. Regards, Hennie -----Original Message----- From: Eduardo Jos=E9 Jankosz [mailto:jankosz@bsi.com.br] Sent: Friday, November 01, 2002 12:40 PM To: krnet Subject: Re: KR> Spruce vs other Hennie? This Saligna does not would be a specimen of Eucalyptus (natural from Austr=E1lia)? I know Eucalyptus saligna, a tree with a thick skin and = a red wood! Is this? Thank you!!!!! Eduardo Jos=E9 Jankosz jankosz@bsi.com.br http://www.bsi.com.br/cbcb http://br.groups.yahoo.com/group/kr2-brasil ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 23:20:19 -0600 To: "'krnet@mailinglists.org'" From: "van Rooyen, Hennie(SF02)" Subject: Pics/drawings of motorcycle retracts Hi Mark, Dene and all, I cannot access the web pages hosting these info - won't you please reply e-mail these to me - file sizes are no problem for me. Regards, Hennie "I think I can help out here with a full set of pictures of the gear in question. Skip very generously posted me a set of hard copy pics of the gear from various angles. I will scan them and send them to anyone interested. I also have some knowlege of the internals from personal contact with Skip. Cheers Dene Collett South Africa" ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2002 07:34:29 -0500 To: From: "Apex Industrial Equipment Inc" Subject: Corvair info. Message-ID: <002f01c283fe$78fc2ec0$0100a8c0@leigh> I would like to ask anyone that is flying a corvair engine to post or = send me some information.=20 1.) Weight of your craft 2.) Propeller size, pitch, material and manufacturer 3.) Speed of the aircraft at various RPMs I am trying to determine how fast to turn the prop without the tips = going super sonic, and still be able to turn about 4,000 RPM. I think = this should be about the right range for the engine for full power, but = that's why I am asking. Leigh Plymale apexinc@btitelecom.net ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2002 07:35:41 -0500 To: From: "Apex Industrial Equipment Inc" Subject: KR> com antenna Message-ID: <000401c283fe$a947c4e0$0100a8c0@leigh> I liked the idea for the antenna installation below the glass. I have a = question though, could the antenna be installed using the copper strip = method in the horizontal stabilizer? It seams that this could poossibly = solve two problems. One, it would move the metal antenna strips as far = away from other metal pieces as possible. Two, I think this is how the = dipole antenna on the cessna I fly is oriented. If my two questions or = statements are correct it seams to me to be the way to go. Comments = please. Leigh Plymale apexind@btitelecom.net ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2002 07:44:32 -0600 To: From: larry flesner Subject: com antenna Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20021104074432.00898950@mail.midwest.net> At 07:35 AM 11/4/02 -0500, Apex Industrial Equipment Inc wrote: >I liked the idea for the antenna installation below the glass. I have a question though, could the antenna be installed using the copper strip method in the horizontal stabilizer? >Leigh Plymale +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ I seem to recall that the com antenna needs to be mounted in the vertical plane and nav antennas mounted in the horz plane. It has to do with the orientation of the radio waves from the ground stations or something like that. I think the two elements you see mounted horz on the tail of Cessnas are the nav antennas. Experts, correct me if this is wrong. Larry Flesner ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2002 08:26:43 -0500 To: From: "Beverly" Subject: Flaps Message-ID: <002a01c28405$d109f9b0$38c02141@Beverly> ------=_NextPart_000_0027_01C283DB.E7D704A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Gentlemen, As a note about flaps, any true flap will add a certain amount of lift = to any wing. The amount added is proportional to the amount of the = camber/chordline length increase. Part of the problem with the early KR = flaps is the small area of increase, therefore a nominal amount of lift = increase. Keep in mind that the purpose of flaps is to decrease the = approach speed, and increase the descent angle without increasing the = approach airspeed. This allows the pilot greater visibility and higher = approaches into the pattern, with added engine/power loss protection. Also, the FAA did studies years back and found that power off = approaches are in fact hard on the engine due to arriving from the cross = country high output demand, then idle in the pattern, then full power = go-around causing too much rapid change in the engine loads. By adding = about 400-500 RPMs to the idle approach power setting, the engine is = given a "cushion" of load, which increases its reliability. This = combined with an effective set of flaps, should give much more = consistent approaches and landings, if one will fly into ground effect = and then flair, instead of attempting to flare during the descent, as is = so often the case. The Mooneys greasers came from the reduction of lift by losing the = flaps, which is a faster way of accomplishing the same process as a = normal landing, by simply flying into ground effect and then waiting for = the performance increase in ground effect to go away, then continue the = landing with a flare. Colin ------=_NextPart_000_0027_01C283DB.E7D704A0-- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2002 10:48:52 EST To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: Kr2dream@aol.com Subject: Auto fuel Message-ID: <25.304a2954.2af7f0e4@aol.com> --part1_25.304a2954.2af7f0e4_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit A word of warning to those interested in using auto fuel if you have a high wing bird. It takes very little auto fuel to destroy plexiglass. A close friend recently lost his windows because he splashed auto gas when he was filling the wing tank. There are additives in auto gas that are not in av gas. Bob Lasecki Chicago --part1_25.304a2954.2af7f0e4_boundary-- ------------------------------ End of krnet Digest ***********************************