krnet-l-digest Thursday, May 8 1997 Volume 01 : Number 010 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 06 May 1997 17:02:42 +0000 From: Steve Bennett Subject: Re: KR:Prop came off Not true. A hardened washer still can be filed or machined. It depends upon the rockwell hardness the material was brought to and the condition of the material as far as 1020, 4130, etc... steve ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 06 May 1997 15:37:57 -0700 From: Ross Youngblood Subject: Re: KR: Elevator control failure Don, This information was also in the KR newsletter at the time. At that time I decided that the ability to inspect the bellcrank was important. I made an inspection cover for the top of the bellcrank and another for the bottom. I also decided to make the aft deck removable just for ease of working with the control cable rigging. (My seat back is fixed. A removable seat back might accomplish the same access.) -- Ross Donald Reid wrote: > > I spent a number of hours reviewing the archived info since I joined > recently (KUDOS to the folks that did all the work), and I noticed one > thread that was about the fatal crash that involved a failed elevator > control. I got the NTSB report (attached) that I want to share. I also > found a related report that involved a failure on the elevator cable. > -- > NOV-12-94 at PORTLAND, IN > Aircraft: LESSEL KR-2, registration: N95RJ > Injuries: 1 Fatal. > Witnesses reported seeing the airplane touch down followed by the > application of power. The airplane began to veer to the left side of the > runway prior to lifting off. The airplane entered what was described as a > 80 nose up attitude and then, according to a witness, the nose "fell > over" and the airplane descended to impact. Post accident inspection > revealed the nose down elevator cable failed at the elevator attach > point. > Probable Cause > The failure of the elevator control cable attach point and the pilot's > subsequent inability to control the airplane. > > AUG-05-93 at OREGON, IL > Aircraft: DARST KR-1, registration: N585D > > Injuries: 1 Fatal. > Approximately 12 miles southwest of the airplane's departure airport, > witnesses observed the airplane making three erratic excursions in the > vertical. Each ended in a stall and fall off, the last to ground > collision. Pieces of the elevator control cable were sent to the NTSB > metallurgical laboratory for eamination. The lab found a partial > separation of the cable in the area of the pulley assembly which resulted > in the malfunction of the elevator control cable system. > Probable Cause > The partial separation of the elevator control cable. > > In the first case, it sound to me like a failure after touchdown. My > guess is either bad workmanship in the original part and/or cables that > were too tight. > > In the second, a good annual and prefight inspections should have found > the problem early. > > In any case, I added two inspection ports under the elevator, one on each > side, aligned with the control. I used a hole saw to make the port and > a 2.5 mm birch backing ring. Then a round piece of thin plexiglass will > be RTV'd in the recess. On the top, I plan on making a fillet shaped > piece of plexi for each side. My turtleback will be removeable from the > front elevator spar to the cross piece in front of the elevator. > > I hope this helps someone else. > > Don Reid > donreid@erols.com Ross ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 07 May 1997 00:49:44 EDT From: jscott.pilot@juno.com (Jeffrey E. Scott) Subject: Re: (Fwd) KR: Elevator control failure >Since then I have been very interested in going to pushrod control >to mitigate this problem and reduce play in the system. There are >many examples out there, Dart, Kitfox, etc. They involve one >rod from the stick to a walking beam behind the seat, and a second >rod from the beam to the elevator control arm. > >Someone must have done this on a KR, but I'm not aware of it. >I hope someone has good drawings, on a proven installation, that >could be reviewed and published as an optional part of the plans. > >Rex Ellington >ellingto@ gslan.offsys.uoknor.edu >Rex T. Ellington >Science & Public Policy Program >Energy Center, 100 E. Boyd >Normal OK 73019 Rex, Mine is built with the pushrod system with a walking beam about mid span back from the control stick to the elevator horn. I'll let you know how it flies in a few weeks, but for now I can tell you the elevator control is very smooth and tight without binding. - ---- Jeffrey Scott jscott.pilot@juno.com See construction of KR-2S N1213W at http://fly.hiwaay.net/~langford/kjeffs.html - ---- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 06 May 1997 22:26:35 -0700 From: Ross Youngblood Subject: KR: Non-Member Selling KR2 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - --------------446B9B3D794BDF3215FB7483 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Ross Youngblood From: kustom@sound.net To: rossy@teleport.com Subject: unsure Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'm new on the KR-Net and I.m not sure how to or who to send mail to in order to communicate with other users....can you explain it to me...thanks I have a beautiful 95% finished KR2 in my basement, I purchased it about 4 years ago from an A&P mechanic in Ohio. I immediately took out the retractable gear and proceeded to replace it with the Diehl fixed gear legs. It is sitting on those now and only needs minor work to be flying again. The aircraft was flying before I purchased it and even won a trophy at an airshow one time with the original builder. The engine is a Revmaster 2100D and sitting dissembled on the workbench, I have all of the new parts and gaskets to reassemble it. I work two jobs and finally came to the realization that I will probably never finish it....IT IS FORSALE...I can be reached at kustom4@juno.com If there is any kind of classified section on the KR-Net I would appreciate it being listed......awaiting further instructions....rod sebby ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 02:13:22 -0400 (EDT) From: MikeTnyc@aol.com Subject: Re: (Fwd) KR: Elevator control failure >In helping review the large drawings for the KR2S, I have gone back >and reviewed notes on my earlier effort. In a couple of places, >there were references to binding of the elevator cables. It seems >the argument was based on unequal length. >Since then I have been very interested in going to pushrod control >to mitigate this problem and reduce play in the system. There are >many examples out there, Dart, Kitfox, etc. . . . >Someone must have done this on a KR, but I'm not aware of it. >I hope someone has good drawings, on a proven installation, that >could be reviewed and published as an optional part of the plans. All you need to solve the binding problem is a control stick assembly of current design. As discussed in the early newsletters, some of the early builder-designed stick arrangements set up the pivot point for the stick so far in front of the stick itself that when you pulled it all the way back, the stick would swing down and away from its original position, measurably stretching the elevator cables. The current single and twin-stick designs put the pivot near the stick itself, so this doesn't occur. Obviously, you may perceive other advantages in a pushrod-controlled system, but you don't need one just to prevent binding. Mike Taglieri ------------------------------ Date: 07 May 97 02:16:14 EDT From: "Driessen, Marcel" Subject: KR: Speedbrake for KR2S Hello all you KR-people, I am a KR2S-builder from the Netherlands. My KR is in the boat stage (after 9 months building time) and I am just about to start installing the main spars. What's botering me at the moment is the fact if I'm going for the flaps (very small, not very effective, more difficult to build) or install a belly- speedbrake (easier to build, more effective). I would like to hear some opinions about this matter. Does anybody have plans for a belly speedbrake for the KR2 ? Hope to hear from you guys soon. Marcel Driessen KR2S-Builder The Netherlands e-mail: driessen@krohne.mhs.compuserve.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 07 May 1997 02:39:04 EDT From: wolfpacks@juno.com (Linda & Paul Martin) Subject: KR: Prop clearance I'm curious how close the prop gets to the ground on a basic tri-gear KR with a 56" prop on a VW, and standard Diehl gear legs? Or, how many inches did you cut off the nose gear post? Paul M. "How many nights until Oshkosh?" ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 06 May 1997 23:53:02 -0700 From: Micheal Mims Subject: KR: Elevator pushrod(was Elevator control failure) At 02:13 AM 5/7/97 -0400, you wrote: <<>> Mike is right, the older sticks had the pivot point in the wrong location and caused binding. Before everyone gets all fired up about push-pull rods being safer than cables, here is something to think about. A pushrod system creates a single point failure while the cable system can lose one side and still function. Of course this would take some quick thinking and a pilot who is on the ball but it can be done! In the example posted a few days ago, if the pilot could/would have realized his down elevator cable had broken, he could have went to full nose down trim and flown the airplane against the pressure of the trim system. This is normal training procedure for 135 Air Taxi training along with run-a-way trim and autopilot malfunction, all this while under the hood! Sometime while your out playing around in your favorite spam can or KR, try flying the plane with just the trim, pick an altitude to call the ground and see if you can get the plane slowed down from cruise and in the landing configuration with about a 250 fpm rate of decent. Its kinda fun and makes you aware of what kind of rabbits you can pull out of a hat when the pressure is on! So after saying all that guess what Im using? BOTH!! Micheal Mims ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 04:30:20 -0700 From: enewbold@sprynet.com Subject: Re: (Fwd) KR: Elevator control failure >Mine is built with the pushrod system with a walking beam about mid span >back from the control stick to the elevator horn. I'll let you know how >it flies in a few weeks, but for now I can tell you the elevator control >is very smooth and tight without binding. >Jeffrey Scott jscott.pilot@juno.com >See construction of KR-2S N1213W at >http://fly.hiwaay.net/~langford/kjeffs.html What kind of materials did you use in this setup. While I have the opportunity, I'd also like to make this change. I'm at the stage where I'm installing the control stick and associated linkages. Thanks, =Ed Newbold= ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 04:44:07 -0700 From: enewbold@sprynet.com Subject: Re: KR: Elevator control failure On Tue, 06 May 1997, Ross Youngblood wrote: >At that time I decided that the ability to inspect the bellcrank was >important. I made an inspection cover for the top of the bellcrank >and another for the bottom. Also decided to make the aft deck >removable just for ease of working with the control cable rigging. >(My seat back is fixed. A removable seat back might accomplish the >same access.) I used three hinges on the bottom of my seat back, so it folds forward and lays flat to allow me access and inspection of all the goodies to the rear of the seat. The 3 hinges are equally spaced apart along the top of the rear spar // // // seat back -> // // <-Forward // // // hinges -> :== .--. rear spar -> | | | | =Ed Newbold= ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 07:43:52 -0700 From: Bill Reents Subject: Re: (Fwd) KR: Elevator control failure At 12:49 AM 5/7/97 EDT, you wrote: > >>Since then I have been very interested in going to pushrod control >>to mitigate this problem and reduce play in the system. There are >>many examples out there, Dart, Kitfox, etc. They involve one >>rod from the stick to a walking beam behind the seat, and a second >>rod from the beam to the elevator control arm. >> >>Someone must have done this on a KR, but I'm not aware of it. >>I hope someone has good drawings, on a proven installation, that >>could be reviewed and published as an optional part of the plans. >> >>Rex Ellington >>ellingto@ gslan.offsys.uoknor.edu >>Rex T. Ellington >>Science & Public Policy Program >>Energy Center, 100 E. Boyd >>Normal OK 73019 > >Rex, > >Mine is built with the pushrod system with a walking beam about mid span >back from the control stick to the elevator horn. I'll let you know how >it flies in a few weeks, but for now I can tell you the elevator control >is very smooth and tight without binding. >---- >Jeffrey Scott jscott.pilot@juno.com >See construction of KR-2S N1213W at >http://fly.hiwaay.net/~langford/kjeffs.html >---- > HI I found when building my KR-1,That when you have the same distance between the holes where the cables fit,on the stick bellcrank and the elevator bellcrank,you should not have any slack or binding. I used the plans of Fred Keller from alaska on the stick, and Rands on the elevator. The dimensions were different on where to attache the cables I had binding and a slack cable (only one at a time ).I run the cable through nylon at two points per cable. After 20 years it still works good. Bill Bill Reents http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/3050 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 07 May 1997 10:44:37 -0700 From: Owen Davies Subject: Re: (Fwd) KR: Elevator control failure Rex Ellington wrote: (snip) > Since then I have been very interested in going to pushrod control > to mitigate this problem and reduce play in the system. There are > many examples out there, Dart, Kitfox, etc. They involve one > rod from the stick to a walking beam behind the seat, and a second > rod from the beam to the elevator control arm. > > Someone must have done this on a KR, but I'm not aware of it. > I hope someone has good drawings, on a proven installation, that > could be reviewed and published as an optional part of the plans. I wonder also about those super-Bowden cables that some of the ultralight manufacturers use for their controls. Any thoughts? Owen Davies ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 07 May 1997 09:57:11 -0700 From: Micheal Mims Subject: KR: Project update Well sports fans, between NHL Stanley Cup playoff games (Anaheim Mighty Ducks are in trouble!) I have been able to get some work done on the KR. I built the canopy frame and started adding the foam and fiberglass. There are a few new pictures at the bottom of: http://pw2.netcom.com/~mimsmand/canopy.html and I started a second canopy page at: http://pw2.netcom.com/~mimsmand/canopy2.html Enjoy! ________________________________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 19:16:09 -0400 From: Carlos Sa Subject: KR: RE: Speedbrake for KR2S Marcel, Belly speedbrakes and flaps have been discussed at length in this list. You will find the postings in http://www.axess.com/users/wings/krorg.htm Look for the "wings" file. Cheers Carlos PS: should I add you to "the map"? e-mail me direct at mailto:wings@axess.com - ---------- From: Driessen, Marcel[SMTP:Driessen@KROHNE.MHS.CompuServe.COM] Sent: May 7, 1997 02:16 To: KRNET Message Subject: KR: Speedbrake for KR2S Hello all you KR-people, I am a KR2S-builder from the Netherlands. My KR is in the boat stage (after 9 months building time) and I am just about to start installing the main spars. What's botering me at the moment is the fact if I'm going for the flaps (very small, not very effective, more difficult to build) or install a belly-speedbrake (easier to build, more effective). I would like to hear some opinions about this matter. Does anybody have plans for a belly speedbrake for the KR2 ? Hope to hear from you guys soon. Marcel Driessen KR2S-Builder The Netherlands e-mail: driessen@krohne.mhs.compuserve.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 07 May 1997 18:30:35 -0500 From: ejanssen@chipsnet.com (Janssen Craig) Subject: Re: (Fwd) KR: Elevator control failure At 10:44 AM 5/7/97 -0700, you wrote: >I wonder also about those super-Bowden cables that some of the >ultralight >manufacturers use for their controls. Any thoughts? > >Owen Davies > Owen, Good comment. I've often thought about how they would work on the KR - sure could use a flexible push/pull type tube, especially in tight places like when routing under the seat. Seems like it would make a simple control installation. I've looked at them on the TEAM airplanes - MiniMax, Eros, AirBike, etc. and they really appear to be top quality. Does anybody have a performance or other reason why they wouldn't work on a KR? Ed Janssen ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 22:18:39 -0400 (EDT) From: JEHayward@aol.com Subject: Re: KR: adjustable horizontal stabilizer In a message dated 97-05-06 00:45:58 EDT, you write: << I made my horizontal stabilizer adjustable, but for various other reasons... Mark Langford >> Just wondering if there was a lot involved in making it adjustable. I like that idea in case something is off a bit. Jim Hayward ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 22:38:00 -0400 (EDT) From: JEHayward@aol.com Subject: Re: KR: adjustable horizontal stabilizer In a message dated 97-05-06 18:37:56 EDT, you write: << A detailed photo of my adjustable setup is available from the URL above, or http://fly.hiwaay.net/~langford/kmlht14.jpg. Mark Langford >> Sorry Mark...I hadn't read far enough thru the postings when I asked you about how you did your elevator. Disregard my question. Thanks.... Jim Hayward ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 21:57:00 -0500 From: "Mark Langford" Subject: KR: Diehl gear geometry KRNetHeads, You guys that have installed the Diehl fixed gear: I wonder if you would change the angle that the gear legs extend from the center main spar, if you had it to do over again? It's waay to hard to guess how much bending will occur in the fiberglass leg to guestimate if the angle is going to work out. I guess the reason I ask is seeing somebody's photos on the web that looked like the rear end of a swing axle VW, kinda cambered in at the bottom. Of course all the weight was not on it yet, which is why I ask. Are you guys that used it, and have all of the weight sitting on it, happy with the camber? I'm about to install my spar/leg adapters, and would rather avoid shimming the lower axle attach fittings if I can. Of course, silly me, my thinner airfoil won't allow me to use the castings unless I lop off half an inch, so I'll weld up something similiar in a 6.7" version. You know what they say about changing things... Mark Langford langford@hiwaay.net http://fly.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 07 May 1997 23:23:53 EDT From: wolfpacks@juno.com (Linda & Paul Martin) Subject: Re: KR: Prop clearance Oops! The prop is 52" long, not 56". Will I still need the lawn mower to cut the grass or can I just taxi around the yard? Paul M. >I'm curious how close the prop gets to the ground on a basic tri-gear >KR with a 56" prop on a VW, and standard Diehl gear legs? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 07 May 1997 22:31:48 -0500 From: Jim Faughn Subject: Re: KR: Diehl gear geometry Mark Langford wrote: > > KRNetHeads, > > You guys that have installed the Diehl fixed gear: I wonder if you would > change the angle that the gear legs extend from the center main spar, if > you had it to do over again? It's waay to hard to guess how much bending > will occur in the fiberglass leg to guestimate if the angle is going to > work out. I guess the reason I ask is seeing somebody's photos on the web > that looked like the rear end of a swing axle VW, kinda cambered in at the > bottom. Of course all the weight was not on it yet, which is why I ask. > Are you guys that used it, and have all of the weight sitting on it, happy > with the camber? I'm about to install my spar/leg adapters, and would > rather avoid shimming the lower axle attach fittings if I can. Of course, > silly me, my thinner airfoil won't allow me to use the castings unless I > lop off half an inch, so I'll weld up something similiar in a 6.7" version. > You know what they say about changing things... > > Mark Langford > langford@hiwaay.net > http://fly.hiwaay.net/~langford I wouldn't change a thing! I can wheel land the plane or 3 point it without problems. In both cases I can do it with one or two on board. Once again I have a tail dragger and I think this is one of the best things that Dan came up with! - -- Jim Faughn N8931JF St. Louis, MO (314) 652-7659 or (573) 465-8039 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 May 1997 00:20:28 -0400 (EDT) From: MikeTnyc@aol.com Subject: Re: KR: Speedbrake for KR2S Your question has been well-covered in the past and should be in the archives. Mike Taglieri ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 22:34:58 -0600 (MDT) From: Ron Lee Subject: KR: Kudos to the KRNET folks (No archive) While looking at one of Mark's pics on his adjustable elevator, and someones (sorry..I am old) pics of his gullwing canopy, then checking the archives for info on tail wheels, I realized how much help is available here for KR builders/owners. >From the KRNET (Ross) to the archives (Carlos) to the many web pages with info and pics, what you guys do to help others is amazing. I wish I had something like this when I started my Long-EZ. To have so many folks with unique viewpoints and "been there" expertise is great. keep up the good work....and now get back to work. Ron ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 23:27:55 -0600 From: jeb@laintra.com (John Bryhan) Subject: KR: Re: Diehl gear geometry Using the toe-in and such like things from instructions I was amazed how the tires were not perpendicular to floor/driveway but then I said to myself "self, there ain't no weight on them there gear legs" In fact, I think you can see the slight bow on Jeff's legs, he's got about 345 lbs on each main and legs do flex jeb@laintra.com http://www.laintra.com/jeb/krpage.htm - ---------- : From: Mark Langford : To: krnet-l@teleport.com : Subject: KR: Diehl gear geometry : Date: Wednesday, May 07, 1997 8:57 PM : : KRNetHeads, : : You guys that have installed the Diehl fixed gear: I wonder if you would : change the angle that the gear legs extend from the center main spar, if : you had it to do over again? It's waay to hard to guess how much bending : will occur in the fiberglass leg to guestimate if the angle is going to : work out. I guess the reason I ask is seeing somebody's photos on the web : that looked like the rear end of a swing axle VW, kinda cambered in at the : bottom. Of course all the weight was not on it yet, which is why I ask. : Are you guys that used it, and have all of the weight sitting on it, happy : with the camber? I'm about to install my spar/leg adapters, and would : rather avoid shimming the lower axle attach fittings if I can. Of course, : silly me, my thinner airfoil won't allow me to use the castings unless I : lop off half an inch, so I'll weld up something similiar in a 6.7" version. : You know what they say about changing things... : : Mark Langford : langford@hiwaay.net : http://fly.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 08 May 97 14:11:25 GMT From: mathewrz@iafrica.com (Rob Matthews) Subject: Fw: RE: Re: KR: Is the turtledeck structural? - -- Rob Matthews Have a nice day South Africa email mathewrz@iafrica.com - ----------------------------Forwarded Message-------------------------------- > If the foam for the ribs is not made into a sandwich and sealed; then I feel > more comfortable to make the assumption that the urethane foam does not carry > any load. The reason behind this is that it deteriates if exposed to the > elements. > Steveb > > ---------- > From: SMTP1@K1 - Server@Servers[] > To: > Cc: > Subject: Fw: Re: KR: Is the turtledeck structural? > Date: Tuesday, May 06, 1997 4:11PM > > > -- > Rob Matthews Have a nice day > South Africa > email mathewrz@iafrica.com > ----------------------------Forwarded Message-------------------------------- > > > Hi guys, > > > > I feel the need to interject some thoughts here. During the last few > > weeks it has been said that the ribs, fiberglass, and turtledeck are > > "not structural". > > We can't forget that the fiberglass wing skins ARE structural because > > the provide the required torsional stiffness to the wings. They also > > transfer the lift to the spars. > > The ribs are structural in that they are required to stabilize the > > skin so it can do it's jobs and so your airfoil stays roughly the same > > shape under loads. > > The turtle deck is structural in that it provides torsional stiffness > > to the fuselage. > > > > These parts are lightly loaded and may not carry primary bending loads > > which are the biggies but we still need to use some caution when > > modifying them. If the turtledeck is made removable, be sure that it > > can provide the torsional stiffness when attached. if the wing skins > > are not per plan, make sure they are STIFF enough to limit the torsion > > on the wing in flight and strong enough to handle taking the lift loads > > to the spars. Keep the ribs two inches thick and don't put -big- holes > > in them. > > > > Well I've said my piece...these things do perform some structural tasks > > even if just to stabilize the "primary" structure so take the > > "non-structural" statements as "secondary structure" and you'll be > > alright. > > > > -Peter- > > > > > > > > The turtledeck,indeed the whole top everything is not structural, so > > > >you could make it removeable, some people have done that. > > > > > > > > Robert Covington > > > > > > > > Gee, since the weight is already there, it seems that someone would > > > have made it structural... > > > Vince Bozik - Athens, Georgia > > > > > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 08 May 97 14:11:28 GMT From: mathewrz@iafrica.com (Rob Matthews) Subject: Fw: RE: Re: KR: adjustable horizontal stabilizer - -- Rob Matthews Have a nice day South Africa email mathewrz@iafrica.com - ----------------------------Forwarded Message-------------------------------- > Bill Ginn comments > Quote "I have my doubts about the incidence stated in the plans being correct. > > As the CofG varies so will the position of the stick (elevator) to > > maintain the correct pitch. In the end with a tail heavy aircraft you > > are likely to be flying with a displaced stick, preseumably forward. I > > wonder how the incidence was determined" > > I refer to Darrol Stinton s book 'The Design of the Aeroplane' > The question of stabilizer incidence angle (rigging angle) is part of the > considerations of longitudinal stability. The expressions for static, > stick-fixed stability boils down to the > (stabilizer angle of attack) = (effective angle of attack) - (downwash angle) > +(stabilizer setting angle). Further more the considerations of the lift > slope of the tail and the elevator deflection alone are brought into the > expressions. Therefore knowing the characteristics of the main plane and tail > goes a long way in understanding the aeronautics of the aircraft > > Steveb > ---------- > From: SMTP1@K1 - Server@Servers[] > To: > Cc: > Subject: Fw: Re: KR: adjustable horizontal stabilizer > Date: Tuesday, May 06, 1997 4:22PM > > > -- > Rob Matthews Have a nice day > South Africa > email mathewrz@iafrica.com > ----------------------------Forwarded Message-------------------------------- > > > Mark Langford wrote: > > > > > > Bobby Muse wrote: > > > > > > > Mark, Aren't you concerned with any changes in angle of incidence of > the > > > horizonal stablizer? > > > > > > Bobby, > > > > An adjustable stabilizer would be the ideal way to go, however the > > structural problems seem to be huge. Most jets have an elevator and > > automatic stabilizer incidence change system so that the elevator is > > kept in the neutral position at all times which gives minimum drag and > > the stick is kept centred. With the stick centred you also have full > > elevator control available at all times. > > > > I have my doubts about the incidence stated in the plans being correct. > > As the CofG varies so will the position of the stick (elevator) to > > maintain the correct pitch. In the end with a tail heavy aircraft you > > are likely to be flying with a displaced stick, preseumably forward. I > > wonder how the incidence was determined > > > > - relative to the top longerons? this will change depending on the > > bowing of the fuselage. > > > > - for what CofG position? > > > > - for what speed? > > > > However I might be barking up the wrong tree. > > > > Bill Ginn > > > > > > I made my horizontal stabilizer adjustable, but for various other > > > reasons... > > > > > > Mark Langford > > > langford@hiwaay.net > > > http://fly.hiwaay.net/~langford > > > > > > ---------- > > > > From: Bobby Muse > > > > To: krnet-l@teleport.com > > > > Subject: Re: KR: Fuselage Widening > > > > Date: Monday, May 05, 1997 4:58 AM > > > > > > > > At 05:28 PM 5/1/97 -0500, you wrote: > > > > > > > > > > L.Palaniappan wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> Many have widened several inches at the shoulder of the fuse. > > > > >> Does this involve a corresponding widening of the fuse base? If so > > > > >> in what proportions? > > > > >> > > > > >I just let the bottom assume whatever shape it wanted except for > > > slightly "helping" it to bend in a manner similar to the top, so that the > > > top longerons didn't have to do all of the bending. But I didn't > > > purposely try to keep the bottom dimensions to anything in particular. > > > > > > > > > The tail will get slightly shorter, but the plans are already way off > > > > >in that view. What's another fraction of an inch? > > > > > > > > > >Mark Langford > > > > >langford@hiwaay.net > > > > >http://fly.hiwaay.net/~langford > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mark, Aren't you concerned with any changes in angle of incidence of > the > > > horizonal stablizer? > > > > > > > > Bobby Muse > > > > bmuse@mindspring.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 May 1997 10:08:05 -0400 (EDT) From: JEHayward@aol.com Subject: Re: (Fwd) KR: Elevator control failure In a message dated 97-05-08 05:13:32 EDT, you write: << Good comment. I've often thought about how they would work on the KR - sure could use a flexible push/pull type tube, especially in tight places like when routing under the seat. Seems like it would make a simple control installation. I've looked at them on the TEAM airplanes - MiniMax, Eros, AirBike, etc. and they really appear to be top quality. Does anybody have a performance or other reason why they wouldn't work on a KR? Ed Janssen >> Wouldn't the load forces be substantially higher at the KR cruise speeds than what they are with ultralight cruise speeds? Maybe this is not a problem since I'm not familiar with these cables. Jim Hayward ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 08 May 1997 09:43:05 -0700 From: David Moore Subject: Re: (Fwd) KR: Elevator control Hey Guys, I believe these are the same cables used on the Velocity (canard pusher), The builder/designer was first a boat builder. They are used for rudder (outboard motor) control on pleasore boats. You might want to check with Velocity Aircraft and see if they are still using them. At 10:08 AM 05/08/1997 -0400, you wrote: >In a message dated 97-05-08 05:13:32 EDT, you write: > ><< > Good comment. I've often thought about how they would work on the KR - sure > could use a flexible push/pull type tube, especially in tight places like > when routing under the seat. Seems like it would make a simple control > installation. I've looked at them on the TEAM airplanes - MiniMax, Eros, > AirBike, etc. and they really appear to be top quality. Does anybody have a > performance or other reason why they wouldn't work on a KR? > > Ed Janssen > > >> > Wouldn't the load forces be substantially higher at the KR cruise speeds >than what they are with ultralight cruise speeds? Maybe this is not a >problem since I'm not familiar with these cables. > >Jim Hayward > > David Moore Hesperia,Calif. 92345 Turnkey1@MSCOMM.COM ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 08 May 1997 09:53:34 -0700 From: Micheal Mims Subject: Re: (Fwd) KR: Elevator control At 09:43 AM 5/8/97 -0700, you wrote: > Hey Guys, > I believe these are the same cables used on the Velocity (canard pusher),The builder/designer was first a boat builder. They are used for rudder >(outboard motor) control on pleasore boats. You might want to check with Velocity Aircraft and see if they are still using them. Do you guys realize you are talking about replacing $20 worth of aviation stainless steel control cable and pulleys with $300 worth of heavy outboard motor steering cable! Something is wrong with this picture. ________________________________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand ------------------------------ End of krnet-l-digest V1 #10 ****************************