From: krnet-bounces@mylist.net To: John Bouyea Subject: KRnet Digest, Vol 346, Issue 17 Date: 7/7/2004 6:17:21 PM Send KRnet mailing list submissions to krnet@mylist.net To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://mylist.net/listinfo/krnet or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to krnet-request@mylist.net You can reach the person managing the list at krnet-owner@mylist.net When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of KRnet digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Stalling (Colin & Bev Rainey) 2. Re: CL eqns available ?? Stall speeds (Wesley Scott) 3. Aerobatics in the KR? (Duncan) 4. 80hp KR? (Duncan) 5. Some basic questions... (Duncan) 6. CL eqns available ?? (larry flesner) 7. Re: CL eqns available ?? Stall speeds (Mark Langford) 8. Some basic questions... (larry flesner) 9. Re: 80hp KR? (larry flesner) 10. RE: Some basic questions... (Stephen Jacobs) 11. Re: Aerobatics in the KR? (larry severson) 12. Re: 80hp KR? (larry severson) 13. Re: Some basic questions... (Pat Driscoll) 14. Re: Some basic questions... (Edward Seaman) 15. looking for flying KR2S (michael laing) 16. Re: Some basic questions... (Dan Heath) 17. RE: Aerobatics in the KR? (Brian Kraut) 18. Some basic questions... (larry flesner) 19. Cockpit Width.. (LJHusky1@wmconnect.com) 20. Re: Cockpit Width.. (larry severson) 21. Re: Off subject - air compressor (Harold Wagenknecht) 22. Re: The 'killer turn' (bill kirkland) 23. Re: KR structural analysis (Harold Wagenknecht) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 00:14:15 -0400 From: "Colin & Bev Rainey" Subject: KR> Stalling To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <002101c463d8$de0790a0$34442141@RaineyDay> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Netters I hope everyone read what I posted alittle bit ago about spins. No aircraft will spin if coordinated flight is maintained. Period. Stalls are not bad if they occur when we want them to, after all we are stalling when we land. You just need to choose when it happens and understand how not to have it happen when you don't want it to. Those of you with low experience or no spin time, can avoid such situations by installing a turn coordinator, or at the very least and inclinometer (ball) on your panel and keep the ball centered at all times. You may have a controlled spiral, but the airplane will still be flying and you will not be spinning. If you have a KR without flaps, or you choose to slip under a given situation, than make sure that you keep the airspeed up at your approach speed, and the nose below the horizon. Be smooth on the controls and you should have no problems. In all accident reports that I have read involving high performance aircraft, the KR included, everyone has gotten in trouble when they got low and slow, whether on takeoff or landing. Don't be afraid of spins. Have a healthy respect for them and train on how to deal with them properly. Colin & Bev Rainey KR2(td) N96TA Sanford, FL crainey1@cfl.rr.com http://kr-builder.org/Colin/index.html ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 04:25:26 -0500 From: "Wesley Scott" Subject: Re: KR> CL eqns available ?? Stall speeds To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <002501c46404$58070b80$a62e0704@pbrain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" What altitude did you use for the test? 12 degrees C is 3000 feet for the standard atmosphere. The predicted best glide numbers in the table were computed for zero sink using the AoA for estimated best L/D for the new airfoil without accounting for wing washout. This page is a good discussion of glide performance: http://142.26.194.131/aerodynamics1/Performance/Page3.html Right now I'm having even more fun with numbers My drag numbers are not looking good. From the graph it looks like Cd = 0.008. Using the equation for induced drag, Cdi = CL^2 /(pi AR e) where e is an efficiency constant (the Oswald efficiency factor) typically between 0.7 and 0.9 (it is a perfect 1.0 for an eliptical wing with no fuselage)and the aspect ratio for the KR2 of 5.5, I calculate Cdi = 0.038 using e = 0.8. A 1075 lb plane descending at 566 ft/min is generating 18.44 HP. For the standard atmosphere at 2000 feet, using the graph Cd at 75mph the wing would be generating 1.7 HP of drag. Using Cdi it would be generating 8.0 HP of drag. The max L/D occurs when the induced drag = the parasitic drag. Which means total drag should be 16 HP if this is the best glide speed which translates to a descent rate of 489 fpm. If you use 0.7 for e (lower values are associated with boxy square wings and large fuselages), Cdi = 0.043, induced drag is 9.1 HP and descent rate is 559 fpm. Your numbers for 70 mph, 566 fpm sink give a L/D ratio of 10.9. All three combinations below give an L/D of 10.9 (for AR = 5.5). e | 0.7 | 0.8 | 0.91 Cdp | 0.02545 | 0.02909 | 0.03303 CL | 0.555 | 0.634 | 0.72 Having stared at equations for hours now I think I have an idea on how to predict the best glide speed based on measuring the sink rate at two combinations of weight and velocity. I'll try to describe it after getting some sleep. -- wesley scott kr2@spottedowl.biz ----- Original Message ----- From: "larry flesner" To: "KRnet" Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 2004 6:30 PM Subject: KR> CL eqns available ?? Stall speeds > > > >It wasn't readable so this time I pasted into notepad to convert it > >to plain > >text and then still had to add formatting. It should be in straight ascii > >now. > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > Wes, > > I'm still having trouble making sense of the numbers. My KR at approx > 1075 pounds appears to have a best glide speed, from test flown, of > about 75 mph indicated. If I read my notes correctly it was 12 > degrees C and pressure of 29.99 inches. Does that sound about right. > I figured a decent rate of 535 fpm. Not bad for an airplane with a 20 > foot wingspan. 70 mph indicated was very close with 566 fpm or > a 3 second difference in 500 feet of altitude. I'm not sure > my flying was that percise and either of these figures would > have a + or - error. > > My best rate of climb appears to be between 80 and 90 mph > but it was hard to duplicate the numbers from one test > to the next so I'm not sure how accurate they are. > > Larry Flesner > > > > > _______________________________________ > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html > > > ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2004 22:09:59 +1200 From: Duncan Subject: KR> Aerobatics in the KR? To: krnet@mylist.net Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.2.20040707220923.02438b18@styx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Hi, I've searched the archives of this list, and have not really found much, so here goes with my question: Can one perform 'recreational' aerobatics in a Corvair-powered KR2? Before you dash off a reply pointing out that I should look elsewhere for a more suitable aircraft, let me hasten to add that I'm not asking if it can handle competition type aerobatics, I know it can't. I'm asking because I'm about to do a 15-hr aerobatics course, and I would really like to spend some of those long summer afternoons practising a few loops and rolls. I know the Sonex, for instance, (whose airframe is rated to roughly the same G-forces, and which uses the VW conversion) is certainly rated for mild aerobatics. So, what about the KR? Duncan ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2004 22:10:45 +1200 From: Duncan Subject: KR> 80hp KR? To: krnet@mylist.net Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.2.20040707221010.02431238@styx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Hi, Another question... I know that many builders are opting for the engines at the more powerful end of the 80-120hp continuum, but how successfully does the KR2 perform in general flight powered by something like the 80hp Aerovee engine? Does anyone fly behind one of these engines? Thanks in advance, Duncan ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2004 22:11:33 +1200 From: Duncan Subject: KR> Some basic questions... To: krnet@mylist.net Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.2.20040707221114.0243f0d8@styx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Hi, First, I'm new to this list. I'm still in the throes of decing which plane to build. On my short list are: Sonex, Zodiac XL and the KR-2S. All seem excellent, but the Sonex and Zodiac are aluminum, and the construction seems extremely simple and 'clean'. Their kits arrive with every part required to begin construction. They provide comprehensive lists of tools required as well. However, the KR-2S seems to offer better performance, lower cost and better looks by far. My problem is that the KR website offers almost no information regarding some key concerns faced by any prospective builder. So I went in search of information on the builder sites. I've browsed to every site listed on krnet, and I'm still confused. Hence my email to this list. In particular, I have been trying to find out answers to the following two questions. (1) What tools will I need to buy in order to build the KR-2S kit? I have none at present. (2) When the spruce and plywood kits arrive, how much fabrication is involved? Do I have to cut out each piece, or are they prefabricated? These are my two major concerns. However, because I'm a bit nervous about beginning this project, I have a few more subjective questions... (3) I have never worked with glass-fibre before - is it difficult? (4) How good/accurate/comprehensive are the plans? (5) Is this a one-man job? Or will I need to recruit help from my wife/friends? And finally, some questions regarding the flying characteristics of the plane itself. (6) How 'docile' is the tail-dragger version? I know that the Sonex is really easy to land and manage on the ground, and the view while taxying isn't too bad. What about the KR-2 (7) The Sonex is capable of 'recreational' aerobatics - which is all I'm really interested in doing. Is the KR-2 similarly capable? (8) Finally, how well does the KR-2 fly 'hands-off'? The Sonex is a real handful, and has to be paid constant attention, since it is extremely pitch-sensitive. What is the KR-2 like? Thanks in advance, Duncan ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2004 06:43:29 -0500 From: larry flesner Subject: KR> CL eqns available ?? To: KRnet Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20040707064329.008e6370@pop.midwest.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >What altitude did you use for the test? 12 degrees C is 3000 feet for >the standard atmosphere. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ I was using the altitude of 3000 feet to 3500 feet for my climb and glide test. I have the RAF 48 wing with a 3 degree washout. I would start above and below that altitude and time the KR as it passed through that altitude sector. Larry Flesner ------------------------------ Message: 7 Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 07:05:56 -0500 From: "Mark Langford" Subject: Re: KR> CL eqns available ?? Stall speeds To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <033901c4641a$c2966520$5e0ca58c@net.tbe.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Wesley Scott wrote: > Did Ashok publish an equation or a set of tabular data for the wind > tunnel results? I hate trying to read data off of graphs. (See > http://www.krnet.org/as504x/repeat_1m.gif ). If it's not published at http://www.krnet.org/as504x , you're probably not going to find it anywhere. Ashok moved to another university years ago, and the server where he stored his information is long gone. I saved what was there before it went away. Ashok designed these airfoils with similar lift and stall characteristics, but lower drag. That's about all I need to know... Mark Langford, Huntsville, AL N56ML at hiwaay.net see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Message: 8 Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2004 07:47:12 -0500 From: larry flesner Subject: KR> Some basic questions... To: KRnet Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20040707074712.007cf1a0@pop.midwest.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >In particular, I have been trying to find out answers to the following >two >questions. >(1) What tools will I need to buy in order to build the KR-2S kit? I have >none at present. =========================== There will be many opinions on that. My opinion, either a table saw or radial arm saw, a small drill press, hand drill, wood clamps, wrenches, small belt sander, random orbital sander, and misc other hand tools. =========================================== >(2) When the spruce and plywood kits arrive, how much fabrication is >involved? Do I have to cut out each piece, or are they prefabricated? ============================================= You will know the pleasure of building a KR. You cut every piece. ========================================== >(3) I have never worked with glass-fibre before - is it difficult? ============================= Neither had I. It's not difficult but is another skill you will have to learn. There is plenty of info available to help you out. ================================ >(4) How good/accurate/comprehensive are the plans? =============================== Not very but the information is there for you to complete the airplane as has been proven by hundreds of builders. If you are the type person that needs instructions like "place bolt A in hole B and install nut C and torque to X foot pounds" I'd suggest you look at something other than the KR. ==================================== >(5) Is this a one-man job? Or will I need to recruit help from my >wife/friends? ================================== >From my experience I'd say 80 to 90 percent is a "one man" job. Several task will require the help of a second person and when you want to turn the KR upside down or back upright you will need probably 3 or 4 friends. Some on the net have devised ways of eliminating that need with special jigs. =================================== >And finally, some questions regarding the flying characteristics of the >plane itself. >(6) How 'docile' is the tail-dragger version? I know that the Sonex is >really easy to land and manage on the ground, and the view while taxying >isn't too bad. What about the KR-2 ====================================== My opinion: The KR lands very well. Ground handling is subject to interpretation based on pilot skills. Like any taildragger you have to fly the airplane when the wheels are on the ground. When I started taxi testing my KR I had a total of 13 hours taildragger time over a 30 year period. I now have 73 hours on the KR without damage. That's not to say there haven't been some exciting moments on takeoff and landing. My KR has never failed to respond to a control input during landing or takeoff. The key is knowing when, how much, and which way to move the controls. =================================== >(7) The Sonex is capable of 'recreational' aerobatics - which is all I'm >really interested in doing. Is the KR-2 similarly capable? ================================== I''ve seen KR's do loops and rolls. That will be pretty much dependant on pilot skills. The one problem I see is lack of cockpit room to wear a parachute to make it legal and safe. ================================== >(8) Finally, how well does the KR-2 fly 'hands-off'? The Sonex is a real >handful, and has to be paid constant attention, since it is extremely >pitch-sensitive. What is the KR-2 like? ========================================= IT DOESN'T. Probably much like the Sonex. If you want something that flies like a Cessna I'd suggest something like the Zenair 601. My KR will fly hands-off for maybe 5 or 10 seconds in "perfectly" smooth air. That said , my KR is stable in flight. I'm not having to fight the controls but the controls are very light and require very little movement to fly. I like the way I can roll into a turn without the need for rudder and the KR tracks the turn with nearly zero need for pitch input. I can watch a point on the ground and complete the turn at the same altitude I started. One thing about the KR because of it's size is that additional weight (passanger/fuel) affects the performance noticably. Fly a C-172 solo and then add a passanger and you hardly notice the difference. You will notice in a KR. It might easily cut your climb rate by 1/3. Of course, if you started with 1000 fpm you still have nearly 700 fpm (totally dependent on power) and that's better than a C-150 given the same conditions. I'm sure you'll get conflicting opinions. You'll just have to sort it all out and make your own decission. Larry Flesner ------------------------------ Message: 9 Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2004 07:56:28 -0500 From: larry flesner Subject: Re: KR> 80hp KR? To: KRnet Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20040707075628.008eac10@pop.midwest.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Another question... I know that many builders are opting for the engines >at the more powerful end of the 80-120hp continuum, but how successfully >does the KR2 perform in general flight powered by something like the 80hp >Aerovee engine? Does anyone fly behind one of these engines? >Duncan > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ It should perform just fine on 80 hp IF you keep the empty weight down. My GUEST-amate is you should keep the empty weight at 600 pounds or less to perform well on 80 hp. I'll throw in something here on the Zenair 601 also. From my limited experience with that model, I'd suggest at least 100 hp to make it perform well. I'm talking 700 to 800 fpm climb (solo) and 110 to 120 mph cruise. Larry Flesner ------------------------------ Message: 10 Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 16:05:23 +0200 From: "Stephen Jacobs" Subject: RE: KR> Some basic questions... To: "'KRnet'" Message-ID: <000001c4642b$75c088a0$b164a8c0@home> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" There will be many opinions on that. My opinion, either a table saw or radial arm saw, a small drill press, hand drill, wood clamps,wrenches, small belt sander, random orbital sander, and misc other hand tools. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++ It is still the best bang for the proverbial buck that requires the lowest skill level and the smallest budget to get started. For the cost of a Zodiac horizontal stab "starter kit" you can buy enough timber, foam and glue to keep you going for a year (if you really work at it). You will acquire skills (and tools) that will make you extremely popular with the good lady and provide enormous self satisfaction. Don't buy anything from anyone (including RR) until you have bounced it off someone that has already built one or is at an advanced stage of doing so. Don't waste much time pondering about the engine for another year, maybe two. Things are changing all the time, by the time you get there, you will have several options ranging from a $19.95 DIY manual to off-the-shelf and ready to run; $1500 to $5000; VW's; Corvair; Hog are already there. Remember the saying:- you can teach a wise man anything (and a fool nothing) - ask /listen. Maybe add a bit to uncle Larry's tool list: table saw or radial arm saw, wood clamps, a small drill press, wood clamps, hand drill, wood clamps, wrenches, wood clamps, small belt sander, wood clamps, random orbital sander, wood clamps and misc other hand tools (and maybe a few wood clamps). Also check with your neighbours - ask them if they have any wood clamps you can borrow some days. Good luck Steve J ------------------------------ Message: 11 Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2004 07:59:27 -0700 From: larry severson Subject: Re: KR> Aerobatics in the KR? To: KRnet Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.0.20040707075733.02442bc0@pop-server.socal.rr.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Janette Rand has an article about a test pilot who did the full range of aerobatics in a KR with no problems. She promised me the article, but I never got it. Can one perform 'recreational' aerobatics in a Corvair-powered KR2? Larry Severson Fountain Valley, CA 92708 (714) 968-9852 larry2@socal.rr.com ------------------------------ Message: 12 Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2004 08:01:02 -0700 From: larry severson Subject: Re: KR> 80hp KR? To: KRnet Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.0.20040707080010.024a4e10@pop-server.socal.rr.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed > how successfully >does the KR2 perform in general flight powered by something like the 80hp >Aerovee engine? Built light, per plans, it was designed to fly with a 70HP engine. Larry Severson Fountain Valley, CA 92708 (714) 968-9852 larry2@socal.rr.com ------------------------------ Message: 13 Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 10:43:28 -0500 From: "Pat Driscoll" Subject: Re: KR> Some basic questions... To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <002f01c46439$26d938a0$6e8dd440@oemcomputer> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Duncan, If you want to "build" an airplane, get the plans for a KR2S. If you want to assemble an airplane, go for any kit you can afford. Pat Driscoll patrick36@usfamily.net Saint Paul, MN ------ http://USFamily.Net/info - Unlimited Internet - From $8.99/mo! ------ ------------------------------ Message: 14 Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 19:34:07 +0100 (BST) From: Edward Seaman Subject: Re: KR> Some basic questions... To: KRnet Message-ID: <20040707183407.38930.qmail@web25308.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Ello!! ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - sooooo many all-new ways to express yourself http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Message: 15 Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 15:21:15 -0700 (PDT) From: michael laing Subject: KR> looking for flying KR2S To: krnet@mylist.net Message-ID: <20040707222115.90091.qmail@web54006.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I am very interested in buying a completed and flying KR2S. Does anyone know of any that are for sale? I am motivated ready to buy the right one. thank you, michael. exlration@yahoo.com 3178563421 --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! ------------------------------ Message: 16 Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 18:48:55 -0400 (Eastern Standard Time) From: "Dan Heath" Subject: Re: KR> Some basic questions... To: "krnet@mylist.net" Message-ID: <40EC7DD7.000001.03744@COMPUTER> Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" First of all, I need to advise you to come to the KR Gathering in Mt. Vernon Illinois. This is going to be one of the best ever and you will get all your questions answered and may learn how to work with fiberglass and some other things. You wrote: (However, the KR-2S seems to offer better performance, lower cost and better looks by far. ) You are correct. (My problem is that the KR website offers almost no information regarding some key concerns faced by any prospective builder. ) KR Net is the best place for information (questions.) (1) What tools will I need to buy in order to build the KR-2S kit? ) Shop Vac;Drill:Dremmel is handy:Drill Press is nice:Disk and belt sander is convenient;Table or Radial Arm saw is a must and I prefer the Radial Arm Wrenches and screwdrivers;Vice;Band Saw will be used a lot if you have one. I cut foam on my band saw to get a clean streight cut. As much room and climate control as you can afford. (2) When the spruce and plywood kits arrive, how much fabrication is involved? Do I have to cut out each piece, or are they prefabricated?) You are the fabricator, cutter, and assembler all in one. (3) I have never worked with glass-fibre before - is it difficult?) Same for me and I have not found it to be a problem. It gets easier as you go, and you have the KR Net. (4) How good/accurate/comprehensive are the plans? They are OK, mostly accurate but not very comprehensive. Between them, the KR Net and builder web sites, you will not go wanting. (5) Is this a one-man job? 90+% one man. You will need friends for some 4 and 6 handed stuff. (6) How 'docile' is the tail-dragger version? I know that the Sonex is really easy to land and manage on the ground, and the view while taxying isn't too bad. What about the KR-2? Docile and KR2 are mutually exclusive but I would not build it any other way than in a conventional gear and almost all my tail dragger time is in my first KR2 View requires S turns. Little to no visibility over the nose in conventional gear I think that it is very easy to land, you just have to pay attention. Ground handling is like a go cart. It Goes where you point it. (7) The Sonex is capable of 'recreational' aerobatics - which is all I'm really interested in doing. Is the KR-2 similarly capable? I have seen KRs do simple aerobatics, but I was always "chicken" (8) Finally, how well does the KR-2 fly 'hands-off'? It doesn't. You have to fly this plane all the time. That is one reason that we put in a dual stick, so we can always have one hand on the stick while reaching for stuff and to clamp it between our legs while messing with maps. What is it like. It is like a hot little sports car that can give you the roller coaster ride of your life and can take you places fast for old Volkswagen prices. "There is a time for building and a time for flying, and the time for building has long since expired." See N64KR at http://KR-Builder.org - Then click on the pics Daniel R. Heath - Columbia, SC See you in Mt. Vernon - 2004 - KR Gathering ------------------------------ Message: 17 Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 18:58:20 -0400 From: "Brian Kraut" Subject: RE: KR> Aerobatics in the KR? To: "KRnet" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I know someone that did a few loops and rolls in a KR. He also told me that he rolled fine in one direction, but when he tried the other way he wound up in a spin and didn't think he would make it out. As a last ditch effort he grabbed the bottom of the instrument panel and pulled all his weight forward and came out. I may have done loops, rolls, a split S, and a few Immlemans in 152s a long time ago, but I never got up the nerve to try anything in the KR. It builds up speed way too fast if you do something wrong. I also don't like the idea of trying any aerobatics in a plane that I am not at all comfortable with the idea of spinning. Brian Kraut Engineering Alternatives, Inc. www.engalt.com -----Original Message----- From: krnet-bounces@mylist.net [mailto:krnet-bounces@mylist.net]On Behalf Of Duncan Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2004 6:10 AM To: krnet@mylist.net Subject: KR> Aerobatics in the KR? Hi, I've searched the archives of this list, and have not really found much, so here goes with my question: Can one perform 'recreational' aerobatics in a Corvair-powered KR2? Before you dash off a reply pointing out that I should look elsewhere for a more suitable aircraft, let me hasten to add that I'm not asking if it can handle competition type aerobatics, I know it can't. I'm asking because I'm about to do a 15-hr aerobatics course, and I would really like to spend some of those long summer afternoons practising a few loops and rolls. I know the Sonex, for instance, (whose airframe is rated to roughly the same G-forces, and which uses the VW conversion) is certainly rated for mild aerobatics. So, what about the KR? Duncan _______________________________________ to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html ------------------------------ Message: 18 Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2004 18:00:08 -0500 From: larry flesner Subject: KR> Some basic questions... To: KRnet Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20040707180008.007cc610@pop.midwest.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >However, the KR-2S seems to offer better performance, lower cost and better >looks by far. My problem is that the KR website offers almost no >information regarding some key concerns faced by any prospective >builder. So I went in search of information on the builder sites. I've >browsed to every site listed on krnet, and I'm still confused. Hence my >email to this list. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Silly me. I totally forgot to suggest you attend the KR Gathering which will take place this September 24 - 26 (last weekend in September) at Mt. Vernon , Illinois, the crossroads of America. You can miss Sun-N-Fun, you can miss Oshkosh, but if you're a KR builder you can't miss the Gathering. Go to www.krgathering.org for all the details. See you there. Larry Flesner - 2004 Gathering host ------------------------------ Message: 19 Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 19:21:12 EDT From: LJHusky1@wmconnect.com Subject: KR> Cockpit Width.. To: krnet@mylist.net Message-ID: <116.34c8883e.2e1ddf68@wmconnect.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" What is the widest cockpit anyone in the group has build for shoulder width? What is the widest you could build a KR2S. I have seen alot of modifications to KR's on this site and this would be one that I am interested in. Thanks Larry (Not yet building) but flying!!!! ------------------------------ Message: 20 Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2004 16:41:00 -0700 From: larry severson Subject: Re: KR> Cockpit Width.. To: KRnet Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.0.20040707164006.024a7148@pop-server.socal.rr.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed The one that I bought, but not yet finished as 40 inches and a Dragonfly canopy. >What is the widest cockpit anyone in the group has build for shoulder width? >What is the widest you could build a KR2S. I have seen alot of modifications >to KR's on this site and this would be one that I am interested in. Larry Severson Fountain Valley, CA 92708 (714) 968-9852 larry2@socal.rr.com ------------------------------ Message: 21 Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 18:01:47 -0700 (PDT) From: Harold Wagenknecht Subject: Re: KR> Off subject - air compressor To: KRnet Message-ID: <20040708010147.9612.qmail@web51504.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I sell compressed air systems for a living and there is only one way to get rid of water, which is installing a compressed air dryer. It works like a refrigerator as it cools the air down to 38 degrees and vapor turns into condensate (water) and is removed. Now the air has to cool down to 38 before moisture forms. Moisture traps by themselves do not work, because when you pull the trigger at the tool or gun, the air (which might be almost moisture free after a good separator) is cooling as the air expands (about 25 to 30 degrees) and water forms right at the tool or gun/paint. Also in order to clean the air up for a good paint job you need a quality filter (oil removal filter) AFTER the dryer. If you have a piston compressor, make sure you buy a high temperature dryer as any other dryer will be overloaded. Anyway... for more info visit www.kaeser.com and request a free brochure on this subject. Harold Wagner larry severson wrote: At 02:13 PM 6/25/2004 -0400, you wrote: >My air compressor is about 20 years old and seems to work fine except I'm >getting excessive amounts of moisture through the tools. Is there a good >system for removing the moisture from the air? Is my compressor just too >old? would a compressor overhall help the problem? I drain the tank and >separator often, but not every day. Home Depot and most paint stores can sell you a moisture trap. It should be placed as close as possible to the gun. Draining the tank can help, but it is not fool proof and the longer you spray the greater the probability that you will get moisture in the paint. In humid climates, even a long hose can cause problems if you don't trap the moisture right before the gun. Larry Severson Fountain Valley, CA 92708 (714) 968-9852 larry2@socal.rr.com _______________________________________ to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! ------------------------------ Message: 22 Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 21:06:46 -0400 From: "bill kirkland" Subject: Re: KR> The 'killer turn' To: , "KRnet" Message-ID: <004701c46487$d9aa5d80$2a95c145@lndn.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Ron; nothing works. We had one pilot land a Harvard wheels up. When asked why he hadn't heeded the towers warning to overshoot he replied " I couldn't hear you for the horn blaring in my ears" W.G.(Bill) KIRKLAND wkirkland@rogers.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ron Freiberger" To: "KRnet" Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 2004 5:08 PM Subject: RE: KR> The 'killer turn' > Maybe an A of A > indicator that has a warning device that is a big fist that comes > out of > the panel and smacks us between the eyes to get our attention is > the > answer. :-) > > Larry Flesner > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~` > > Perfect answer Larry; where can I get one? > > Ron Freiberger > mailto: rfreiberger at swfla.rr.com > > > > > > > > _______________________________________ > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html ------------------------------ Message: 23 Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 18:17:10 -0700 (PDT) From: Harold Wagenknecht Subject: Re: KR> KR structural analysis To: KRnet Message-ID: <20040708011710.13171.qmail@web51504.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Yes, there were quite a few analysis done on the KR and references and part excerpts can be found in the KR newsletter. I also know that the plans in the past have been slightly updated to reflect the "weak" points (as found in the analysis) in the design, which were a reinforced web structure at the empanage and addition of an addition V-brace on the top of one of the fuselage bays. The spars, fittings and everything else has been found to be very strong as attested in the very few if any breakups when looking through the NTSB reports. It was also recommended to use reinforcement aluminum channels at the front if larger engines i.e. the 80 hp is used KR 2 (no larger engines are recommended!!!!! as the increased weight requires structural changes resulting in......). KR 2 S is different and beyond my experience. I also want to point out that Ken Rand was an aeronatical engineer and was very capable of designing this aircraft. Second guessing the design after hundreds or close to thousand flying KR's does not help to instill confidence in our cause. Regards, Harold larry severson wrote: At 05:47 PM 6/23/2004 -0400, you wrote: >Did you ask her why you can't get the complete analysis? Can you get any >part of the analysis? The KR is a radio control model scaled up to one carrying people. It was not "engineered" at any time. The critical factor in the design is the wing spars vs the weight and G loading. Calculation of this information is fairly trivial with formulas in many book, including at least one high school physics book by Saxon Publishing. Of course, another factor is having a strong enough front end to support the chosen engine. Bottom line, don't waste time looking for a structural analysis - it doesn't exist, at least not from Rand Robinson and Jeanette isn't trained to do one. Larry Severson Fountain Valley, CA 92708 (714) 968-9852 larry2@socal.rr.com _______________________________________ to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ See KRnet list details at http://www.krnet.org/instructions.html End of KRnet Digest, Vol 346, Issue 17 ************************************** ================================== ABC Amber Outlook Converter v4.20 Trial version ==================================