From: krnet-bounces@mylist.net To: John Bouyea Subject: KRnet Digest, Vol 346, Issue 211 Date: 11/17/2004 4:49:21 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. Re: ailerons (RENOSADLER@aol.com) 2. Re: Facet (Martindale Family) 3. R?f. : KR> Air filter (Serge VIDAL) 4. Re: Air filter (patrusso) 5. Re: R?f. : KR> Air filter (patrusso) 6. Re: Prolong engine life and durability (Dan Heath) 7. Re: Facet (Robert L. Stone) 8. KR ailerons (RENOSADLER@aol.com) 9. Re: KR (paulwasp@webtv.net) 10. KR-2 vs. KR-2S (Derek H. Hudeck) 11. RE: KR-2 vs. KR-2S (Mark Jones) 12. Re: KR-2 vs. KR-2S (larry severson) 13. Legal Question (Robert L. Stone) 14. RE: Legal Question (Jack Cooper) 15. RE: Legal Question (Robert L. Stone) 16. Re: Legal Question [Off-Topic]/ Hirth [On Topic] (Matthew Elder) 17. Re: Facet (Martindale Family) 18. Legal question (Colin & Bev Rainey) 19. Final on legal (Colin & Bev Rainey) 20. flight test after mods (Oscar Zuniga) 21. RE: Air filter (Brian Kraut) 22. Major mods (Colin & Bev Rainey) 23. RE: R?f. : KR> Air filter (Brian Kraut) 24. RE: flight test after mods (Brian Kraut) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 00:42:30 EST From: RENOSADLER@aol.com Subject: Re: KR> ailerons To: krnet@mylist.net Message-ID: <194.32018142.2ecc3ec6@aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Can anyone tell me the lenth parts # & rod bearing size on bell crank and aileron horn if you used the orig plans ... thanks again ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 17:39:56 +1100 From: "Martindale Family" Subject: Re: KR> Facet To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <009e01c4cc70$4134cf80$c19fecdc@athlon2400> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Actually it has a hollow iron coated nylon/teflon plunger with a one way valve in one end. It slides back and forth in a sealed unit powered by electromagnets hence the clacking sound. There are one way spring loaded ball valves at the inlet and outlet. Bloody simple but susceptible to dirt I think. They are easy to disassemble but the little springs have a mind of their own and jump all over your workshop. I don't why a Facet would be any better than any other pressure pump in preventing vapour lock. The Martindale Family 29 Jane Circuit TOORMINA NSW 2452 AUSTRALIA phone: 61 2 66584767 email: johnjanet@optusnet.com.au ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bavo" To: "KRnet" Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2004 10:16 AM Subject: Re: KR> Vapor Lock > Yes, > My understanding is that the facet pump is a diaphram type positive > displacement pump, which will pump air (or fuel vapor) as well as > liquid, which a centrifugal pump will not do(as it relies on the > 'weight' of the liquid to move it). So vapor in the line will not stop > the a facet pump working. > > > On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 17:01:51 -0600, Mark Jones > wrote: > > In my research on the Facet pumps, I found a statement that "the > > facet pump virtually eliminates any possibility of vapor lock due to the fuel being forced through the system under pressure by the pump". Do you believe that? > > _______________________________________ > 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, 17 Nov 2004 12:09:54 +0100 From: "Serge VIDAL" Subject: R?f. : KR> Air filter To: KRnet Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" I have a doughnut-shaped car air filter, clamped to the carb mouth (squeezed between two round aluminium plates). Serge Vidal Paris, France "patrusso" Envoyé par : krnet-bounces+serge.vidal=sagem.com@mylist.net 2004-11-16 14:03 Veuillez répondre à KRnet Remis le : 2004-11-16 14:08 Pour : "KRnet" cc : (ccc : Serge VIDAL/DNSA/SAGEM) Objet : KR> Air filter What method are you people using to filter air to Zenith carb? If pictures are involved use my personal address at patrusso@sover.net. Thanks again to all for help. _______________________________________ 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: 4 Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 06:17:03 -0500 From: "patrusso" Subject: Re: KR> Air filter To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <003301c4cc96$f7df8c40$fea972d8@3z4xt01> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Brian Pictures are great, but could,nt figure out how end of carb heat box connects to cowl intake opening. I have a large foam air filter on my heat box and just a screen on the cowl opening with a three inch space between them to allow getting the cowl on and off. I am wary of my arrangement...don't know why. Noticing your main tank shut off valve which is the same set-up as I have. I find that in an emergency I will not be able to reach that shut off with my seat belts still on. I am still taxi-ing and debugging the system and the faster I taxi, the more I worry!!! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Kraut" ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 06:26:16 -0500 From: "patrusso" Subject: Re: R?f. : KR> Air filter To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <003901c4cc98$411f92a0$fea972d8@3z4xt01> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Serge,...and Brian Sometimes I don't know how to ask the right question. Put again another way, judging from your two reponses, I do NOT need to have cold air rushing in thru cowl opening DIRECTLY into the carb via a filter/screen,.....right?Mycowl opening is screened and just 2-3 inches beyond that is the clamp on filter. It does introduce some inside cowl air into the system, and that isn't so bad is it?? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Serge VIDAL" To: "KRnet" Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2004 6:09 AM Subject: Réf. : KR> Air filter > I have a doughnut-shaped car air filter, clamped to the carb mouth > (squeezed between two round aluminium plates). > > Serge Vidal > Paris, France > > > > > > > "patrusso" > > Envoyé par : krnet-bounces+serge.vidal=sagem.com@mylist.net > 2004-11-16 14:03 > Veuillez répondre à KRnet > Remis le : 2004-11-16 14:08 > > > Pour : "KRnet" > cc : (ccc : Serge VIDAL/DNSA/SAGEM) > Objet : KR> Air filter > > > > What method are you people using to filter air to Zenith carb? If > pictures are involved use my personal address at patrusso@sover.net. > Thanks again to all for help. _______________________________________ > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html > > > _______________________________________ > 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: 6 Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 06:56:47 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) From: "Dan Heath" Subject: Re: KR> Prolong engine life and durability To: "Ron Eason (E-mail)" , "krnet@mylist.net" Message-ID: <419B3C7F.000017.02848@DANHOMECOMPUTER> Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Ron, Their site has no information about coatings. What is the price of coating the exhaust? Is this similar to what Jet Hot does? There is a time for building and a time for FLYING and the time for building has expired. See N64KR at http://KR-Builder.org - Then click on the pics Daniel R. Heath - Columbia, SC See you in Mt. Vernon - 2005 - KR Gathering ------------------------------ Message: 7 Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 06:55:44 -0600 (Central Standard Time) From: "Robert L. Stone" Subject: Re: KR> Facet To: Message-ID: <419B4A50.000001.01232@YOUR-AT5QGAAC3Z> Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Maybe you should proof read your posts before you press the send button I don't ??????????????? why a Facet would be any better than any other pressure pump in preventing vapour lock. -------Original Message------- From: KRnet Date: 11/17/04 00:40:50 To: KRnet Subject: Re: KR> Facet Actually it has a hollow iron coated nylon/teflon plunger with a one way valve in one end. It slides back and forth in a sealed unit powered by electromagnets hence the clacking sound. There are one way spring loaded ball valves at the inlet and outlet. Bloody simple but susceptible to dirt I think. They are easy to disassemble but the little springs have a mind of their own and jump all over your workshop. I don't why a Facet would be any better than any other pressure pump in preventing vapour lock. The Martindale Family 29 Jane Circuit TOORMINA NSW 2452 AUSTRALIA phone: 61 2 66584767 email: johnjanet@optusnet.com.au ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bavo" To: "KRnet" Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2004 10:16 AM Subject: Re: KR> Vapor Lock > Yes, > My understanding is that the facet pump is a diaphram type positive > displacement pump, which will pump air (or fuel vapor) as well as > liquid, which a centrifugal pump will not do(as it relies on the > 'weight' of the liquid to move it). So vapor in the line will not stop > the a facet pump working. > > > On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 17:01:51 -0600, Mark Jones > wrote: > > In my research on the Facet pumps, I found a statement that "the > > facet pump virtually eliminates any possibility of vapor lock due to the fuel being forced through the system under pressure by the pump". Do you believe that? > > _______________________________________ > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html _______________________________________ 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: 8 Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 09:33:20 EST From: RENOSADLER@aol.com Subject: KR> KR ailerons To: krnet@mylist.net Message-ID: <100.6c2a329.2eccbb30@aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Dan Heath SC. i thank you for all your help< I'm new at this building yours abd jerry web page have been a big help eberyone at KRNET been a BIG and I thank you ALL... Bill IN reno ------------------------------ Message: 9 Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 09:46:09 -0500 From: paulwasp@webtv.net Subject: KR> Re: KR To: krnet@mylist.net (KRnet) Message-ID: <1943-419B6431-354@storefull-3235.bay.webtv.net> Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=US-ASCII Netters; Still looking for the single port intake manifolds, if any of you have a surplus set you want to sell. Paul http://community.webtv.net/paulwasp/paulwaspspad ------------------------------ Message: 10 Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 11:05:47 -0600 (CST) From: "Derek H. Hudeck" Subject: KR> KR-2 vs. KR-2S To: krnet@mylist.net Message-ID: <1541.158.135.14.173.1100711147.squirrel@158.135.14.173> Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Hello Everyone, I was just looking at the Rand website and I was trying to figure out if the KR-2S is worth the extra $2000. I am 6'1" and weigh about 200 lbs. Do you guys think that I need the extra room or would the KR-2 suit me well enough? Also, does the KR-2S have better landing characteristics (conventional gear), etc. Thank you, Derek Hudeck ----------------------------------------- This email was sent using SamMail. Sam Houston State University ------------------------------ Message: 11 Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 11:28:08 -0600 From: Mark Jones Subject: RE: KR> KR-2 vs. KR-2S To: 'KRnet' Message-ID: <370D915E4564D611B0530050DABB9FC2025ED0AD@SIC-EXCHANGE> Content-Type: text/plain Derek, Personally, I would go with the 2S, especially with your height. Now if you make the 2 a single seater you may get by with the 2. Apparently you are looking to buy the kit. Why? If you are planning on widening the fuselage or making other mods you may want to rethink that. I have just finished my 2S and have just shy of 14K invested including the engine. http://mywebpage.netscape.com/n886mj/ Mark Jones (N886MJ) Wales, WI. -----Original Message----- From: Derek H. Hudeck [mailto:stddhh11@shsu.edu] I was just looking at the Rand website and I was trying to figure out if the KR-2S is worth the extra $2000. I am 6'1" and weigh about 200 lbs. Do you guys think that I need the extra room or would the KR-2 suit me well enough? Also, does the KR-2S have better landing characteristics (conventional gear), etc. ------------------------------ Message: 12 Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 09:35:05 -0800 From: larry severson Subject: Re: KR> KR-2 vs. KR-2S To: KRnet Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.0.20041117092832.03206e70@pop-server.socal.rr.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed > I was just looking at the Rand website and I was trying to >figure out if the KR-2S is worth the extra $2000. I am 6'1" and weigh >about 200 lbs. Do you guys think that I need the extra room or would >the KR-2 suit me well enough? The KR2 and KR2S are designed the same width, so there is no more room. However, for either plane many have made the fuselage wider. > Also, does the KR-2S have better landing >characteristics (conventional gear), etc. The KR2S has more distance between the wing and the tail surfaces. This will make it a more docile plane to fly. The GeeBee of the 1930 was a killer because of extreme short coupling. The KR2 is no where near that bad, but every little bit helps. Also, the extra wing area will allow slower landing speeds for a given weight. In either case, build it light! Spending more money and buying the prebuilt parts for the KR2S will aid in the lightness - which will add to the weight that you can carry safely. Larry Severson Fountain Valley, CA 92708 (714) 968-9852 larry2@socal.rr.com ------------------------------ Message: 13 Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 12:04:58 -0600 (Central Standard Time) From: "Robert L. Stone" Subject: KR> Legal Question To: "KR Builders Pilots" Message-ID: <419B92CA.000005.03360@YOUR-AT5QGAAC3Z> Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" I have heard that it is legal for a pilot/aircraft owner to take people flying for pleasure and charge them for the fuel used for the flight only. To charge them beyond the cost of the fuel the pilot would have to have a commercial license. Any of you lawyers out there please respond with what ever the law is on this. There is an individual in our local EAA chapter who is willing to pay for the fuel used by EAA members using their aircraft to take children flying during "Young Eagle Rally's". I would also like to know if there is anything illegal about this. Bob Stone, Harker Heights, Tx rstone4@hot.rr.com ------------------------------ Message: 14 Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 13:36:56 -0500 From: "Jack Cooper" Subject: RE: KR> Legal Question To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <410-2200411317183656687@earthlink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII I'm not a lawyer but it is legal to take a passenger flying and have them pay all expenses involved with the flight, They can't pay you for flying (piloting) them but they can pay the expenses involves in the flight including aircraft rental or maintenance on your personal airplane if you have an average coat of operating the aircraft. Jack Cooper > [Original Message] > From: Robert L. Stone > To: KR Builders Pilots > Date: 11/17/2004 1:05:00 PM > Subject: KR> Legal Question > > I have heard that it is legal for a pilot/aircraft owner to > take people > > flying for pleasure and charge them for the fuel used for the > flight only. > > To charge them beyond the cost of the fuel the pilot would have to have > a > > commercial license. Any of you lawyers out there please respond > with what > > ever the law is on this. There is an individual in our local EAA > chapter > > who is willing to pay for the fuel used by EAA members using their > aircraft > > to take children flying during "Young Eagle Rally's". I would > also like > to > > know if there is anything illegal about this. > > Bob Stone, Harker Heights, Tx > > rstone4@hot.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: 15 Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 12:48:56 -0600 (Central Standard Time) From: "Robert L. Stone" Subject: RE: KR> Legal Question To: , Message-ID: <419B9D18.00000A.01128@YOUR-AT5QGAAC3Z> Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Jack, Thanks much for your response. Bob Stone -------Original Message------- From: kr2cooper@earthlink.net; KRnet Date: 11/17/04 12:41:37 To: KRnet Subject: RE: KR> Legal Question I'm not a lawyer but it is legal to take a passenger flying and have them pay all expenses involved with the flight, They can't pay you for flying (piloting) them but they can pay the expenses involves in the flight including aircraft rental or maintenance on your personal airplane if you have an average coat of operating the aircraft. Jack Cooper > [Original Message] > From: Robert L. Stone > To: KR Builders Pilots > Date: 11/17/2004 1:05:00 PM > Subject: KR> Legal Question > > I have heard that it is legal for a pilot/aircraft owner to take > people > > flying for pleasure and charge them for the fuel used for the flight > only. > > To charge them beyond the cost of the fuel the pilot would have to have > a > > commercial license. Any of you lawyers out there please respond with > what > > ever the law is on this. There is an individual in our local EAA > chapter > > who is willing to pay for the fuel used by EAA members using their > aircraft > > to take children flying during "Young Eagle Rally's". I would also like > to > > know if there is anything illegal about this. > > Bob Stone, Harker Heights, Tx > > rstone4@hot.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 _______________________________________ 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: 16 Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 11:23:49 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Elder Subject: Re: KR> Legal Question [Off-Topic]/ Hirth [On Topic] To: KRnet Message-ID: <20041117192349.1995.qmail@web13907.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Actually, I believe if you look in the FAR's, you will find that it's not legal to charge for more than the pro-rata share for the flight (divide the cost by the total number of heads on board) unless you are a commercial pilot. However, there are clauses with the EAA that allow the chapter to charge for flights to make money (fund raising), even when the pilots aren't commercial rated. We (our chapter) does this every year for rides around town at an annual event. Young Eagles would fall into this category too. Our club reimburses us for the fuel costs (and the club gets a discount from the airport on fuel). On a KR related note... Does anyone have any experience with a Hirth engine? Email me off list if you do. Hope this helps. Matt melder@infinigral.com http://kr1.infinigral.com "Robert L. Stone" wrote: I have heard that it is legal for a pilot/aircraft owner to take people flying for pleasure and charge them for the fuel used for the flight only. To charge them beyond the cost of the fuel the pilot would have to have a commercial license. Any of you lawyers out there please respond with what ever the law is on this. There is an individual in our local EAA chapter who is willing to pay for the fuel used by EAA members using their aircraft to take children flying during "Young Eagle Rally's". I would also like to know if there is anything illegal about this. Bob Stone, Harker Heights, Tx rstone4@hot.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 ------------------------------------------------- Matthew Elder Orangeburg, SC http://www.infinigral.com/melder ------------------------------ Message: 17 Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 08:03:31 +1100 From: "Martindale Family" Subject: Re: KR> Facet To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <001f01c4cce8$e4e7ec20$c19fecdc@athlon2400> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" With respect Robert. What are you talking about.....my message went perfectly so far as I can see and as Ron Freiberger has copied just now. Whatever it is it wasn't from this end :-) John The Martindale Family 29 Jane Circuit TOORMINA NSW 2452 AUSTRALIA > Maybe you should proof read your posts before you > press the > send button......................................... ------------------------------ Message: 18 Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 16:53:12 -0500 From: "Colin & Bev Rainey" Subject: KR> Legal question To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <005401c4ccef$d5db0fd0$2d432141@RaineyDay> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Netters and Bob Stone It is NOT legal to charge someone for ALL costs related to a flight or get paid to fly unless you have a commercial pilot's license. The exceptions are clearly listed in FAR part 61.113 a,b,c. 61.113 a clearly states that no private pilot may act as PIC for compensation or for hire. Paragraph b states some of the exceptions if the flight is incidental to the pay, that is the pay would happen anyway regardless of the method of travel, ie: you choose to fly you and your boss instead of driving to a meeting. Paragraph c outlines the legal exceptions along with d and clearly states again that a private pilot MUST pay his pro-rata share of the costs of a flight, provided those costs only involve rental, fuel, airport costs, and oil. Compensation is defined as any other method of re-imbursement or exchange for service other than monetary to the person in exchange for those services, ie: paying for hotel room, dinner, car rental etc... 91.319 a clearly states that no aircraft with an Experimental Airworthiness Certificate may be operated for hire. This means you cannot charge for use of your KR anyway, even if you HAVE a commercial ticket as I do. Recent additions to the regs have allowed for CFIs who have the required number of hours to teach in the aircraft, that is to be rated, signed off (tailwheel in my case since ours is conventional ) and have at least the 5 hours of experience required by the Regs can give transition training to ALREADY rated pilots, not primary training. The hourly limit is subjective to the Inspector, but has been suggested that it is limited to a total of 10 hours flight time. In your example you must pay your half of the fuel when you reach the destination, even if he offers to do so. It would be a shame for an Inspector to witness this, and make a fun flight turn into a long car ride home because of a violation. The FAA is very sensitive about this. Colin & Bev Rainey KR2(td) N96TA Sanford, FL crainey1@cfl.rr.com http://kr-builder.org/Colin/index.html ------------------------------ Message: 19 Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 17:23:13 -0500 From: "Colin & Bev Rainey" Subject: KR> Final on legal To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <008b01c4ccf4$070d86b0$2d432141@RaineyDay> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" For your EAA Chapter they need to read part 61.113 paragraph 4 which states that all aircraft used in a charitable event to raise money, and are compensated are required to have a Standard Airworthiness Certificate, or they are not legal to use. Advance approval is also required. As a private pilot you can be totally compensated for assistance given during search and rescue, if you commissioned by the authorities to perform, and you can be compensated for all direct expenses, except salary, ie gas oil etc... Twice in the regs there is a limit placed on Experimental Certificates that does not allow use for hire. EAA won't pay the fines and won't be violated if an Inspector decides to look closely at this practice of Chapters. It is the responsibility of the PIC to be legal to fly in ALL respects. At Wings and Things in Lakeland last year, the pilots donated their time, and the airport gave discounts on the fuel, but the pilots paid their own fuel cost, not EAA. This event was partially sponsored by the local FSDO 15 through personnel support of volunteers, and the Young Eagles of a local EAA Chapter. Also be aware that local FSDOs may interpret the regs differently, and so you could call 2 different ones and get 2 different interpretations on the same reg, as well as what I think Larry Flesner brought up once which was a question answered with a question of how you interpret it, and either confirmation that you are correct or not. Your plane may be every bit as safe if not safer than a certified aircraft, and we all know it. But, it does NOT carry a Standard Airworthiness and so is treated VERY differently by the FAA. BE CAREFUL.... Colin & Bev Rainey KR2(td) N96TA Sanford, FL crainey1@cfl.rr.com http://kr-builder.org/Colin/index.html ------------------------------ Message: 20 Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 17:31:42 -0600 From: "Oscar Zuniga" Subject: KR> flight test after mods To: krnet@mylist.net Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Howdy, netters; I've been unable to locate anything definitive about what is required in the way of flight test requirements after "major" modifications are made to an experimental. All I find is hearsay; nothing clear in the FARs. I'm assuming that most tweaks do not require restriction to a flight test area and/or logbook entry (or anything else), such as adding wheel pants, fairings, lights, belly brake, changes to cowling or prop, gap seals, and so forth. What I'm wondering about is, an the case of Troy Petteway changing his wing from the RAF to the AS50xx airfoil, or changing from an air-cooled VW to a water-cooled Subaru. A major change. If someone out there has something definitive (not "I think you can...", or "a guy I know did..."), I'd appreciate it. Oscar Zuniga San Antonio, TX mailto: taildrags@hotmail.com website at http://www.flysquirrel.net ------------------------------ Message: 21 Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 19:12:40 -0500 From: "Brian Kraut" Subject: RE: KR> Air filter To: "KRnet" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I had a short length of SCAT tubing hose clamped on the carb heat box and on the fiberglass filter box I made. I had inertia reals on my seat belts so I could lean forward. Brian Kraut Engineering Alternatives, Inc. www.engalt.com -----Original Message----- From: krnet-bounces@mylist.net [mailto:krnet-bounces@mylist.net]On Behalf Of patrusso Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2004 6:17 AM To: KRnet Subject: Re: KR> Air filter Brian Pictures are great, but could,nt figure out how end of carb heat box connects to cowl intake opening. I have a large foam air filter on my heat box and just a screen on the cowl opening with a three inch space between them to allow getting the cowl on and off. I am wary of my arrangement...don't know why. Noticing your main tank shut off valve which is the same set-up as I have. I find that in an emergency I will not be able to reach that shut off with my seat belts still on. I am still taxi-ing and debugging the system and the faster I taxi, the more I worry!!! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Kraut" _______________________________________ 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: 22 Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 19:13:36 -0500 From: "Colin & Bev Rainey" Subject: KR> Major mods To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <00cd01c4cd03$72d20920$2d432141@RaineyDay> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Oscar and netters Major modifications such as airframe changes or engine/prop changes require a 5 hour test period where the airplane basically goes back to Phase I testing, restrictions and all, until the 5 hours has been completed and then the Phase I limits are lifted and you are unrestricted to perform whatever has been tested in Phase I. That is straight from my DAR. If the aircraft is purchased after the Phase I testing has been completed, then you must apply for a test area and be approved and then conduct the 5 hours in that area. After that you are released so to speak. Colin & Bev Rainey KR2(td) N96TA Sanford, FL crainey1@cfl.rr.com http://kr-builder.org/Colin/index.html ------------------------------ Message: 23 Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 19:23:01 -0500 From: "Brian Kraut" Subject: RE: R?f. : KR> Air filter To: "KRnet" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" I have seen others use this arrangement. You get just slightly less power because you are using a litle bit warmer air and it is not really warm air. You may have just a little bit more trouble keeping the engine cool that way also because you are getting ram air blowing into the bottom half of the cowl which decreases the air flowing over the cylinders from the top of your baffels. You may have to compensate a little by enlarging the air outlets in the back of the cowl or inlarging the inlets on the front of the cowl on the top side of the baffels, or it may just not be a problem. Brian Kraut Engineering Alternatives, Inc. www.engalt.com -----Original Message----- From: krnet-bounces+brian.kraut=engalt.com@mylist.net [mailto:krnet-bounces+brian.kraut=engalt.com@mylist.net]On Behalf Of patrusso Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2004 6:26 AM To: KRnet Subject: Re: Réf. : KR> Air filter Serge,...and Brian Sometimes I don't know how to ask the right question. Put again another way, judging from your two reponses, I do NOT need to have cold air rushing in thru cowl opening DIRECTLY into the carb via a filter/screen,.....right?Mycowl opening is screened and just 2-3 inches beyond that is the clamp on filter. It does introduce some inside cowl air into the system, and that isn't so bad is it?? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Serge VIDAL" To: "KRnet" Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2004 6:09 AM Subject: Réf. : KR> Air filter > I have a doughnut-shaped car air filter, clamped to the carb mouth > (squeezed between two round aluminium plates). > > Serge Vidal > Paris, France > > > > > > > "patrusso" > > Envoyé par : krnet-bounces+serge.vidal=sagem.com@mylist.net > 2004-11-16 14:03 > Veuillez répondre à KRnet > Remis le : 2004-11-16 14:08 > > > Pour : "KRnet" > cc : (ccc : Serge VIDAL/DNSA/SAGEM) > Objet : KR> Air filter > > > > What method are you people using to filter air to Zenith carb? If > pictures are involved use my personal address at patrusso@sover.net. > Thanks again to all for help. _______________________________________ > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html > > > _______________________________________ > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html _______________________________________ 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: 24 Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 19:47:42 -0500 From: "Brian Kraut" Subject: RE: KR> flight test after mods To: "KRnet" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" This is something I have a good bit of experience with. As Colin stated you need a 5 hour test period. Following is a little long, but is copied from a letter I received from my FSDO after asking them the question: Dear Sir: After a review of order 8130 it has been determined that you must perform a minimum of five hours of flight-testing after incorporating a major change. In addition, due to the nature of the change you have incorporated on your aircraft, you must perform an actual reweigh to determine the correct weight and ballance information. This includes computing the most forward and most aft center of gravity. The following paragraph is the reference used to make this determination. Please advise this office of the proposed flight test area. Do not conduct any flight-testing until you receive verification from this office as to the suitability of the proposed flight test area. (19) After incorporating a major change as described in 21.93, the aircraft owner is required to reestablish compliance with 91.319(b) and notify the geographically responsible FSDO of the location of the proposed test area. The aircraft owner must obtain concurrence from the FSDO as to the suitability of the proposed test area. If the major change includes installing a different make and model of engine or propeller, the aircraft owner must fill out a revised Form 8130-6 to update he aircraft's file in the FAA Aircraft Registry. All operations must be conducted under day VFR conditions in a sparsely populated area. The aircraft must remain in flight test for a minimum of 5 hours or for the time the FSDO assigns. Persons nonessential to the flight must not be carried. The aircraft owner must make a detailed logbook entry describing he change before the test flight. Following satisfactory completion of the required number of flights in the test flight area, the pilot must certify in the records that the aircraft has been shown to comply with 91.319(b). Compliance with 91.319(b) must be recorded in the aircraft records with the following, or a similarly worded, statement: "I certify that the prescribed flight test hours have been completed and the aircraft is controllable throughout its normal range of speeds and throughout all maneuvers to be executed, has no hazardous characteristics or design features, and is safe for operation. The followin aircraft operating data has been demonstrated during the flight testing: speeds Vso____, Vx____, and Vy____, and he weight____, and CG location____at which they were obtained." Sincerely, XXX Aviation Safety Inspector Note that this information is probably also listed in your operating limitations. The starting point is to send a letter of fax to the FSDO, call first and get a name is best, describing the mod and sugesting a test area and suggesting to them a five hour test flight phase in accordance with order 8130. Get their response back IN WRITING before test flying and be sure to put the entry in your log book before when you are done with the test phase. I also called the tech specialists at EAA and they told me that to be in compliance you need to test up to your established max gross weight during the test phase. You also need to reestablish your V speeds which means doing your climb and descent tests and making the graph to get the speeds. I have the faxes I sent to the FSDO if you need any help on the wording. Good luck! Brian Kraut Engineering Alternatives, Inc. www.engalt.com ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ See KRnet list details at http://www.krnet.org/instructions.html End of KRnet Digest, Vol 346, Issue 211 *************************************** ================================== ABC Amber Outlook Converter v4.20 Trial version ==================================