From - Wed May 21 10:35:51 1997 Return-Path: Majordomo-Owner@lists.teleport.com Received: (from daemon@localhost) by greta.teleport.com (8.8.5/8.7.3) id KAA10046; Wed, 21 May 1997 10:21:57 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 10:21:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199705211721.KAA10046@greta.teleport.com> To: rossy@teleport.com From: Majordomo@teleport.com Subject: Majordomo file: list 'krnet-l' file 'v01.n015' Reply-To: Majordomo@teleport.com X-UIDL: b0777e34c7833a46ac0e3c6ccaa4054f X-Mozilla-Status: 0001 Content-Length: 40395 -- From: owner-krnet-l-digest@ (krnet-l-digest) To: krnet-l-digest@lists.teleport.com Subject: krnet-l-digest V1 #15 Reply-To: krnet-l-digest Sender: owner-krnet-l-digest@ Errors-To: owner-krnet-l-digest@ Precedence: bulk krnet-l-digest Friday, May 16 1997 Volume 01 : Number 015 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 15 May 97 15:38:51 PDT From: Scott DeLong Subject: Re: KR: KRs for Sale (No Archive) I noticed the TAP ad and I would love to hear your opinion! I plan to buy a KR sometime this summer and I have been reading as much as possible to catch up (I have never built one) but I would hate to miss a good deal! Thanks in advance Scott DeLong skylite@ime.net ________________________________________________ Following from the First May 1997 issue of Trade a Plane 1.KR-2, 300TT, 150 SMOH, 360 N/c, xpdr, 75 hp Revmaster, Q-tip prop, annual 8-97, $8950, Trade T-craft or Champ. 901-968-7349 I have seen this one and will provide my "opinion" by private email if desired. 2. KR-2 Stretch, retractable, 2 place, 44 TT, 1834 cc HAPI, Ellison pressure carb, Sterba prop, aux tanks, $6500 or offer 503-391-0937 3. KR-II, 19 TTSN, fixed gear, 1850 cc, 75 HP, full electric, dual controls, hydraulic brakes, wing tanks, sharp, $6500 OBO, 313-586-3828 4 Not in TAP but I understand Troy Petteways beautiful KR-2 is still available. Price about $15000 with newly rebuilt engine, no starter or electric last time I asked. Pictures are available on several of the KRNET member web sites. 615-381-7680 Ron Lee ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 13:47:02 -0700 From: David Moore Subject: KR: Shadbolt Cam Grinders I had an interesting discussion with Geoff, at Shadbolt Cams concerning cam grind, an there effect on a auto engine converted to aircraft use. He was saying the torque curve of a given engine should be closer to the HP curve, or at cruise, you will not have the torque, to mantain the power to mantain altitude. If an modern auto engine in the family car makes HP at 4800-5200 RPM, and the torque is at 2200 RPM, when you reach cruise(in A/C) and hit head wind you will have to go back to almost full power to mantain alt. Therefore a mild grind on the cam to increase the torque curve to say 4000 RPM(cruise RPM) will solve the problem, and give a better performing engine. Now this converted engine would'nt be worth a darn in the family car, unless you turn up 4000 RPM pulling away from a stop sign. Shadbolt has been doing custom grinds for several different engines used in motorcycle, car racing and anybody who wants a little more out of their stock engine. Give them a call,they can answer alot af question we can only quess about. Shadbolt Cams 1713 5th Ave. Vancover, BC. V6J 1P1 604-738-9505 David Moore Hesperia,Calif. 92345 Turnkey1@MSCOMM.COM ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 14:30:27 -0700 From: Micheal Mims Subject: Re: KR: Shadbolt Cam Grinders At 01:47 PM 5/15/97 -0700, you wrote: If an modern auto engine in the family car makes HP at 4800-5200 RPM, and >the torque is at 2200 RPM, when you reach cruise(in A/C) and hit head wind >you will have to go back to almost full power to mantain alt. Good info but are you sure about this? Last I remember the airplane didn't care if there was a tail wind, only the pilot and the passengers! :-) ________________________________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 15:33:47 -0700 From: David Moore Subject: Re: KR: Shadbolt Cam Grinders At 02:30 PM 05/15/1997 -0700, you wrote: >At 01:47 PM 5/15/97 -0700, you wrote: >If an modern auto engine in the family car makes HP at 4800-5200 RPM, and >>the torque is at 2200 RPM, when you reach cruise(in A/C) and hit head wind >>you will have to go back to almost full power to mantain alt. > >Good info but are you sure about this? Last I remember the airplane didn't >care if there was a tail wind, only the pilot and the passengers! :-) The point is well taken, I was using full power as an example. The actual airspeed may vary, depending on the head wind, aircraft weight, frontal area, and trying to maintain a given airspeed over the ground. But, if the torque, is not in the range of the best HP, the engine is going to labor, just like trying to climb a steep hill in high gear. The closer the torque is to performance speed of the engine, the better performance the aircraft will have, for a given HP. >________________________________ >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >Micheal Mims >Just Plane Nutts >mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com > >http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand > > > David Moore Hesperia,Calif. 92345 Turnkey1@MSCOMM.COM ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 19:00:54 -0400 (EDT) From: Baleco@aol.com Subject: Re: KR: KRs for Sale (No Archive) In a message dated 97-05-15 17:23:46 EDT, you write: << Last I talked to Troy (2 or 3 weeks ago) he changed his mind! He said he just couldn't sell his baby! >> Did we ever get to the bottom of that wing flapping, warping or whatever you said you observed? Sure wouldn't want to put the aircraft on the market if their is indeed potentially such a defect. Is it possible he went a little too far with the weight reduction? I missed some posts. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 16:34:24 -0700 From: "John Bouyea" Subject: Re: KR: KRs for Sale (No Archive) I've spent extensive time looking at #2 & will forward my comments via email as well. bou KR2S - Almost ready to glue the first fuse side together... John/Johnna Bouyea johnbouyea@worldnet.att.net - ---------- > From: Scott DeLong > To: krnet-l@teleport.com > Subject: Re: KR: KRs for Sale (No Archive) > Date: Thursday, May 15, 1997 3:38 PM > > I noticed the TAP ad and I would love to hear your opinion! I plan to > buy a KR sometime this summer and I have been reading as much as > possible to catch up (I have never built one) but I would hate to miss a > good deal! Thanks in advance > > Scott DeLong skylite@ime.net > ________________________________________________ > Following from the First May 1997 issue of Trade a Plane > > 1.KR-2, 300TT, 150 SMOH, 360 N/c, xpdr, 75 hp Revmaster, > Q-tip prop, annual 8-97, $8950, Trade T-craft or Champ. > 901-968-7349 > > I have seen this one and will provide my "opinion" by > private email if desired. > > 2. KR-2 Stretch, retractable, 2 place, 44 TT, 1834 cc HAPI, > Ellison pressure carb, Sterba prop, aux tanks, $6500 or offer > 503-391-0937 > > > 3. KR-II, 19 TTSN, fixed gear, 1850 cc, 75 HP, full electric, > dual controls, hydraulic brakes, wing tanks, sharp, $6500 OBO, > 313-586-3828 > > > 4 Not in TAP but I understand Troy Petteways beautiful KR-2 > is still available. Price about $15000 with newly rebuilt > engine, no starter or electric last time I asked. Pictures > are available on several of the KRNET member web sites. > 615-381-7680 > > > Ron Lee > > > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 16:35:23 -0700 From: "John Bouyea" Subject: KR: Re: My GPS Wishlist Ross, I used to work at MentorPlus. Give me a call before you sent $$ anywhere... bou KR2S - Almost ready to glue the first fuse side together... John/Johnna Bouyea johnbouyea@worldnet.att.net - ---------- > From: Ross Youngblood > To: krnet-l@teleport.com > Subject: KR: My GPS Wishlist > Date: Wednesday, May 14, 1997 11:19 PM > > Looking at the website, I've come up with my GPS wish list. > http://www.navtechgps.com/ > > GPS35 TracPac PC #6254 $275 (12 Satellite GPS reciever) > Vista Software #2240-1 $199 (Core software) > US 48 Sectionals #2246-0 $ 0 > --------------------------------- > $474 > > So for $474, I can use my laptop for a moving map display, and > update the maps whenever I buy a new sectional just by running it > into the scanner. If you don't own a scanner, you can take your > sectionals to Kinkos and have them scanned onto a floppy for about > $7.00 a page. > > The only thing you don't get with this setup is WARNINGS when you > fly into RESTRICTED Airspace, and your frequencies don't come up. > However, since the reciever sends ASCII code to your serial port, > you can imagine it would be pretty easy for someone to write software > to fix that. Hmmm... > > I'm really close to cutting a check for this. Anyone have a good > reason I should spend $895 for a handheld instead? I'm listening? > > If I do this, I will let everyone know how it runs on my Omnibook > and my Dell Laptop. (One runs Windows 3.1, the other Windows 95). > > -- Ross > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Ross Youngblood > Product Specialist > Schlumberger Automatic Test Equipment > Snail Mail: 1109 NE Burke Pl > Corvallis Oregon > email: rossy@San-Jose.ate.slb.com (business) > rossy@teleport.com (non-business) > Pager: (800)SKY-PAGE PIN#895-9073 Voicemail (800)538-6838 x1632 > Bus Line: (541)714-1754 Cell Phone:(503)881-0692 > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 17:10:04 -0700 From: Micheal Mims Subject: Re: KR: KRs for Sale (No Archive) At 07:00 PM 5/15/97 -0400, you wrote: >In a message dated 97-05-15 17:23:46 EDT, you write: > ><< Last I talked to Troy (2 or 3 weeks ago) he changed his mind! He said he > just couldn't sell his baby! >> > > Did we ever get to the bottom of that wing flapping, warping or >whatever you said you observed? Sure wouldn't want to put the aircraft on the >market if their is indeed potentially such a defect. Is it possible he went a >little too far with the weight reduction? I missed some posts. > I don't know what the cause of the deformation? Thin skin, sealed compartments, don't know! He doesn't consider it dangerous because he has seen others do the same thing, but he did admit it was annoying! ________________________________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand ------------------------------ Date: 15 May 97 20:17:31 EDT From: "JOHN F. ESCH" <102702.2712@CompuServe.COM> Subject: KR: Re: Gathering When is the KR-2 gathering and where? I seemed to lost my info on this and also forgot (shame shame). I am saving my leave time to attend this gathering. John F. Esch 102702,2712@compuserve.com Just received my KR-2S plans! Yahoo ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 20:26:20 EDT From: jscott.pilot@juno.com (Jeffrey E. Scott) Subject: Re: KR: /tools/ Progress Report On Mon, 12 May 1997 19:49:17 -0700 Micheal Mims writes: >At 08:05 PM 5/12/97 -0400, you wrote: >>In a message dated 97-05-11 16:00:54 EDT, you write: >> >><< If you wanted to use a power tool for ruff finishing (to get it flat) an >> airboard would be the ticket! >>>>>>>>>> >> >> Mike, >> What is an "airboard" ?? > > >Its a pneumatic sanding tool that is used in autobody repair, it has >a 2 X 14 inch foot that vibrates forward and aft. > >_______________________ >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >Micheal Mims FWIW, I used couple of different types of "airboards". Both were about 15 1/2" x 2 3/4", but one had a rotary motion to it (typically called a body file around here) and the other had two pistons inside it and moved in a straight 1inch fore and aft motion (straight line sander). I found that I really prefered the straight line sander for sanding on the wings and it did a better job when trying to sand a surface level. Just my $.02 worth. - ---- Jeffrey Scott jscott.pilot@juno.com See construction of KR-2S N1213W at http://fly.hiwaay.net/~langford/kjeffs.html - ---- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 11:04:38 +1000 From: ginnwj Subject: Re: KR: inspection covers Robert Lasecki wrote: > > I have been concerned since starting to build as to where to place > inspection covers. Last night I went through the entire set of wonderful > plans and instructions which were not included in the price of my "complete" > KR-2S kit. Nowhere in the documents does it say anything about providing > for any inspection access. I like the idea of clear covers as it makes > inspections easier and allows each preflight to be more thorough. Any > further comments on inspection plates would be quite welcomed. These wonderful plans don't even show where to fit seatbelts, so don't expect details of fancy windows no matter how good an idea they are. Just about everything with the KR-2 is builder choice. In other words a poor set of plans. Bill ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 18:52:19 From: Austin Clark Subject: KR: KR Fly-in at Perry OK What are the dates for the fly-in at Perry Oklahoma. I intend to go and need to schedule some vacation time. Thanks, Austin CLark ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 18:37:27 -0700 From: Micheal Mims Subject: Re: KR: /tools/ Progress Report At 08:26 PM 5/15/97 EDT, you wrote: >FWIW, I used couple of different types of "airboards". Both were about >15 1/2" x 2 3/4", but one had a rotary motion to it (typically called a >body file around here) and the other had two pistons inside it and moved................ Hows your project? Has it crept into the air yet? _______________________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 22:39:09 -0400 (EDT) From: LVav8r@aol.com Subject: KR: Re: KR-2S side panel question In a message dated 97-05-15 19:51:30 EDT, you write: << Basically, don't worry about it till bulkhead time, but if you've only done it to one side, don't do it to the other. >> Thanks for the help Mark and Ross. Since I don't have the skin on and I haven't started the second side yet I think I'll just go ahead and cut it out and pay a little more attention on the second side. It shouldn't be too much trouble to cut it out now whereas it might be more trouble to leave it in, not to mention possibly heavier when it comes time to fix it so it fits right later. Also, I bought a precision miter saw by Jorgensen from Home Depot for $38 and change. It's awesome how easy it is to cut the angles for the side panel and the gussett blocks. Just measure the angle with a protractor (I got that tip when I visited Mark Langford, Thanks) dial in the angle on the miter saw, clamp in the part and cut! Just a little touchup on a piece of sandpaper and it's ready! Tom Kilgore Las Vegas, NV LVav8r@aol.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 22:06:20 -0600 From: jeb@laintra.com (John Bryhan) Subject: KR: Re: Re: Gathering This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_01BC617C.38388B40 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable gathering info available at my web site. John jeb@laintra.com www.laintra.com/jeb/krpage.htm ---- From: JOHN F. ESCH <102702.2712@CompuServe.COM> To: INTERNET:krnet-l@teleport.com Date: Thursday, May 15, 1997 6:22 PM Subject: KR: Re: Gathering When is the KR-2 gathering and where? I seemed to lost my info on this = and also forgot (shame shame). I am saving my leave time to attend this = gathering. John F. Esch 102702,2712@compuserve.com Just received my KR-2S plans! Yahoo - ------=_NextPart_000_01BC617C.38388B40 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

gathering info available at my web site.

John
jeb@laintra.com
www.laintra.com/jeb/krpage.htm
 

----
From: JOHN F. ESCH <102702.2712@CompuServe.COM>
To: INTERNET:krnet-l@teleport.com
Date: Thursday, May 15, 1997 6:22 PM
Subject: KR: Re: Gathering

When is the KR-2 gathering and where?  I = seemed to=20 lost my info on this and also
forgot (shame shame).  I am saving my leave time to attend this=20 gathering.

John F. Esch
102702,2712@compuserve.com
Just received my KR-2S plans!  Yahoo
 - ------=_NextPart_000_01BC617C.38388B40-- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 00:14:08 -0400 (EDT) From: EagleGator@aol.com Subject: Re: KR: KR-2S side panel question In a message dated 97-05-15 13:58:59 EDT, Tom Kilgore wrote: << In my ethusiastic haste to glue my first side panel together I neglected to remember not to glue in the vertical at position N. Is this a serious screwup requiring cutting that member out or can I just leave it in and not glue the other sides vertical in? Tom Kilgore Las Vegas, NV LVav8r@aol.com >> I'd cut it out, if it isn't too much of a hassle for you (i.e. you haven't skinned it yet). Those verticals are used to mount the horizontal stab forward spar, and they need to be bevelled to make the sides perpendicular to the aircraft centerline so the plywood webs will fit with a 5/8" space between them. I just cut all the pieces for mounting my stab last month, and it was an easy matter to shape these verticals on my disk sander to exactly the right angle. I angled the side that fits against the skin about 7 degrees, and it worked out great. For all the fitting and shimming you will have to do if you leave it in, I think cutting it out is the better option. I'm sure you'll get one or two other opinions..... ;-) Cheers! Rick Junkin EagleGator@aol.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 00:53:04 -0700 From: "David M. Gargasz" Subject: KR: coposite skins In a book by Jack Wiley "WORKING WITH FIBERGLASS" it is stated; dynel acrylic reinforcing fabric weighs about 1/2 of fibreglass of the same thickness, has greater abration resistance, higher tensile strength, does not irritate the skin when handling, is easy to work with, easier to strech around sharp curves, provides a slick finish when sanded better adhesion to wood than fiberglass, polyester and epoxy resins may be used,the fabric is easy to wet out. Isn't that the fabric Rand used? any kr ditto heads know why glass is used instead of dynel? All responses or dialog of this matter is appreciated. thanks Gene Gargasz % dave@erienet.net ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 01:00:27 -0400 (EDT) From: EagleGator@aol.com Subject: KR: Current Plans? Ok, here's a really dumb question, seeing as how I'm about to start on my wings already... I bought my plans in November of 94, have there been any "official" updates since then? The hair started standing up on the back of my neck while I was working on "the bird" today as that thought flashed through my mind. It's always something... Cheers! Rick Junkin EagleGator@aol.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 22:01:04 -0700 From: Micheal Mims Subject: Re: KR: coposite skins At 12:53 AM 5/16/97 -0700, you wrote: Isn't that the fabric Rand used? >any kr ditto heads know why glass is used instead of dynel? All >responses or dialog of this matter is appreciated. I dont think you can get it anymore! _______________________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 22:33:27 -0700 From: Micheal Mims Subject: KR: Current Plans?(what color is your foam?) At 01:00 AM 5/16/97 -0400, you wrote: >Ok, here's a really dumb question, seeing as how I'm about to start on my >wings already... I bought my plans in November of 94, have there been any >"official" updates since then? I don't think anything has changed since then, I think your good to go. I have a question though, what color urethane foam have you guys been getting from your suppliers? Pink (red) , tan , green? AS&S has been giving me the pink stuff and Im thinking the tan stuff is much better. Anyone out there fondled both? _______________________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 22:38:40 -0700 From: David Moore Subject: Re: KR: coposite skins I don't believe dynel is offered anymore, that's why RR went to fiberglass. I have a copy of the original plans, and yes they call for dynel. At 12:53 AM 05/16/1997 -0700, you wrote: >In a book by Jack Wiley "WORKING WITH FIBERGLASS" it is stated; dynel >acrylic reinforcing fabric weighs about 1/2 of fibreglass of the same >thickness, has greater abration resistance, higher tensile strength, >does not irritate the skin when handling, is easy to work with, easier >to strech around sharp curves, provides a slick finish when sanded >better adhesion to wood than fiberglass, polyester and epoxy resins may >be used,the fabric is easy to wet out. Isn't that the fabric Rand used? >any kr ditto heads know why glass is used instead of dynel? All >responses or dialog of this matter is appreciated. >thanks Gene Gargasz % dave@erienet.net > > David Moore Hesperia,Calif. 92345 Turnkey1@MSCOMM.COM ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 18:49:49 -0700 From: Donald Reid Subject: Re: KR: composite skins David M. Gargasz wrote: > > any kr ditto heads know why glass is used instead of dynel? All > responses or dialog of this matter is appreciated. > thanks Gene Gargasz % dave@erienet.net In the Aircraft Spruce and Spec. catalog of circa 1993, they said that Dynel was no longer made, but that they had a supply on stock and would sell until it was gone. - -- Don Reid donreid@erols.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 12:27:52 +0000 From: Robert Lasecki Subject: Re: KR: inspection covers At 01:04 AM 5/16/97 +0000, you wrote: >Robert Lasecki wrote: >> >> I have been concerned since starting to build as to where to place >> inspection covers. Last night I went through the entire set of wonderful >> plans and instructions which were not included in the price of my "complete" >> KR-2S kit. Nowhere in the documents does it say anything about providing >> for any inspection access. I like the idea of clear covers as it makes >> inspections easier and allows each preflight to be more thorough. Any >> further comments on inspection plates would be quite welcomed. > >These wonderful plans don't even show where to fit seatbelts, so don't >expect details of fancy windows no matter how good an idea they are. > >Just about everything with the KR-2 is builder choice. In other words >a poor set of plans. > >Bill They also don't show where or how to mount something called an instrument panel!> Bob ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 18:53:04 -0700 From: Donald Reid Subject: Re: KR: Current Plans?(what color is your foam?) Micheal Mims wrote: > > I have a question though, what color urethane foam have you guys been > getting from your suppliers? Pink (red) , tan , green? AS&S has been > giving me the pink stuff and Im thinking the tan stuff is much better. > Anyone out there fondled both? > > _______________________ > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Micheal Mims > Just Plane Nutts > mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com > > http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand I have gotten both pink and tan from AS&S and I couldn't tell the difference. - -- Don Reid donreid@erols.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 09:37:11 -0400 (EDT) From: JEHayward@aol.com Subject: Re: KR: KR Fly-in at Perry OK <> Hi Austin... here's the site for the gathering's web page. http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/9904/ Jim Hayward ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 10:42:21 -0400 (EDT) From: MikeTnyc@aol.com Subject: Re: KR: Shadbolt Cam Grinders >I had an interesting discussion with Geoff, at Shadbolt Cams concerning >cam grind, an there effect on a auto engine converted to aircraft use. >He was saying the torque curve of a given engine should be closer to the >HP curve, or at cruise, you will not have the torque, to mantain the power >to mantain altitude. Is the cam the reason why VW engines have to turn faster than conventional aircraft engines and have to use smaller, less-efficient props? If so, I don't see why someone doesn't make a custom cam to correct the problem. Mike Taglieri ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 10:49:32 -0700 From: "Johnny Galindo" Subject: Re: KR: KRs for Sale (No Archive) I am considering buying a KR-2, and I would like your opnion on plane #2. also I would prefer a tricle gear plane so I was wonering if I converted it to tricycle gear, do you know if I would be able to keep the main gear Retractable. I spoke with Bob Muse and he converted his Tail Dragger KR-2 to a Tricycle gear, but his wasn't a Retracable. Thanks, Johnny At 11:46 AM 5/15/97 -0600, you wrote: >Following from the First May 1997 issue of Trade a Plane > >1.KR-2, 300TT, 150 SMOH, 360 N/c, xpdr, 75 hp Revmaster, >Q-tip prop, annual 8-97, $8950, Trade T-craft or Champ. >901-968-7349 > >I have seen this one and will provide my "opinion" by >private email if desired. > >2. KR-2 Stretch, retractable, 2 place, 44 TT, 1834 cc HAPI, >Ellison pressure carb, Sterba prop, aux tanks, $6500 or offer >503-391-0937 > > >3. KR-II, 19 TTSN, fixed gear, 1850 cc, 75 HP, full electric, >dual controls, hydraulic brakes, wing tanks, sharp, $6500 OBO, >313-586-3828 > > >4 Not in TAP but I understand Troy Petteways beautiful KR-2 >is still available. Price about $15000 with newly rebuilt >engine, no starter or electric last time I asked. Pictures >are available on several of the KRNET member web sites. >615-381-7680 > > >Ron Lee > > Johnny Galindo Wk (512)339-5394 Pager - ---------------------------- 1167029@SkyMail.com - or - (800)PAGE-MCI Pin - 1167029 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 11:38:25 -0600 (MDT) From: Ron Lee Subject: KR: Freeflight Software Question (no archive) This is the response to a question I had on nearest airports of the Freeflight software recently discussed: Ron, Good question. We list out the 10 nearest airports with mag. heading and distance to them constantly updated. The closest one is on the top of the list. Best, Jorj Ron Lee wrote: > > Does your software allow for the identification, and navigation > data needed, of the nearest airports? This is crucial in the event > of an in-flight emergency. > > Ron Lee ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 12:43:57 -0500 From: Paul Eberhardt Subject: Re: KR: Shadbolt Cam Grinders I don't have numbers, but I think what VW's lack is displacement. They lose weight this way, but have to spin faster. MikeTnyc@aol.com wrote: > > >I had an interesting discussion with Geoff, at Shadbolt Cams concerning > >cam grind, an there effect on a auto engine converted to aircraft use. > >He was saying the torque curve of a given engine should be closer to the > >HP curve, or at cruise, you will not have the torque, to mantain the power > >to mantain altitude. > > Is the cam the reason why VW engines have to turn faster than conventional > aircraft engines and have to use smaller, less-efficient props? If so, I > don't see why someone doesn't make a custom cam to correct the problem. > > Mike Taglieri ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 14:03:13 -0700 From: David Moore Subject: Re: KR: Shadbolt Cam Grinders At 10:42 AM 05/16/1997 -0400, you wrote: >>I had an interesting discussion with Geoff, at Shadbolt Cams concerning >>cam grind, an there effect on a auto engine converted to aircraft use. >>He was saying the torque curve of a given engine should be closer to the >>HP curve, or at cruise, you will not have the torque, to mantain the power >>to mantain altitude. Mike, Call Shadbolt Cams and ask! Dave Moore >Is the cam the reason why VW engines have to turn faster than conventional >aircraft engines and have to use smaller, less-efficient props? If so, I >don't see why someone doesn't make a custom cam to correct the problem. > >Mike Taglieri > > David Moore Hesperia,Calif. 92345 Turnkey1@MSCOMM.COM ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 18:38:42 -0400 From: "Curt Martin" Subject: KR: Re: Current Plans? I'll let you know when mine arrive, Just dropped the check in the mail for the KR-2 and KR-2S supplement (also asked for the KR-1B supplement as a design starting point for long wings..we'll see if they include them or force me to pay another $60 for the KR-1 plans too.) I would guess the plans have a revision date on them somewhere. Curt Martin (cmartin@america.com) Ormond Beach, FL http://www.america.com/~cmartin - ---------- > From: EagleGator@aol.com > To: krnet-l@teleport.com > Subject: KR: Current Plans? > Date: Friday, May 16, 1997 1:00 AM > > Ok, here's a really dumb question, seeing as how I'm about to start on my > wings already... I bought my plans in November of 94, have there been any > "official" updates since then? The hair started standing up on the back of > my neck while I was working on "the bird" today as that thought flashed > through my mind. It's always something... > > Cheers! > Rick Junkin > EagleGator@aol.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 20:59:41 -0400 From: "Curt Martin" Subject: KR: VW Cam Specs/ PC-Dyno Runs: Hi Y'all, Been doing some number crunching using a software package called "Desktop Dyno" by Motion Software Inc. and thought I'd report the results. I've had good luck with this stuff as a predictor of engine performance in larger V8 & V6 motors, but never threw a VW motor into it until now (so take these with a grain of salt..they seem rather high) I plotted several runs with different cam specs to see how that would effect the torque and power curves (with all other things remaining constant.) There are a few items I need clarified on, like the actual CFM ratings on different carbs in use. I opted for 500 CFM, which may be too large to provide good idle/smooth carburation on such a small displacement. Another unknown is whether the SCAT cam specs provided by Ross are seat-to-seat or 0.050 lift numbers. I assume them to be seat-to-seat. The common values used: The motor: Great Plains 1915cc Type I (116.9cu.in.) Bore: 94mm (3.701in.) Stroke: 69mm (2.717in.) Heads: Stock Ports & Valves (no porting) Compression: 8.0:1 Induction: 500 CFM, Individual Runner Exhaust: Small Tube Header/ Open exhaust (i.e. no muffler) Valvetrain: Pushrod, Solid Flat Tappet Lifters Timing Advance: 0 Run 1: camshaft: SCAT C-20: 0.338" Lift (I&E) - -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - -- IO: 31 BTDC IC: 67 ABDC EO: 67 BBDC EC: 31 ATDC 2000 RPM, 39 HP, 103 lb.-ft 2500 RPM, 52 HP, 109 lb.-ft 3000 RPM, 66 HP, 115 lb.-ft 3500 RPM, 82 HP, 123 lb.-ft 4000 RPM, 98 HP, 128 lb.-ft 4500 RPM, 107 HP, 125 lb.-ft 5000 RPM, 111 HP, 116 lb.-ft 5500 RPM, 110 HP, 105 lb.-ft 6000 RPM, 106 HP, 93 lb.-ft 6500 RPM, 99 HP, 80 lb.-ft. Run 2: camshaft: Hypothetical Torque Cam: 0.327" Lift (I) 0.311" (E) (this is a pre-defined cam in the software) - -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ------------------ IO: 12 BTDC IC: 62 ABDC EO: 66 BBDC EC: 10 ATDC 2000 RPM, 45 HP, 117 lb.-ft 2500 RPM, 58 HP, 121 lb.-ft 3000 RPM, 72 HP, 127 lb.-ft 3500 RPM, 87 HP, 131 lb.-ft 4000 RPM, 98 HP, 129 lb.-ft 4500 RPM, 101 HP, 118 lb.-ft 5000 RPM, 98 HP, 103 lb.-ft 5500 RPM, 94 HP, 90 lb.-ft 6000 RPM, 84 HP, 74 lb.-ft 6500 RPM, 78 HP, 63 lb.-ft Ok, so what does this show? Well, like I said, I don't trust the actual numbers; However, I do trust the trend they show.. Run 1 has a HP peak at 5000 RPM and a torque peak at 4000 RPM. Run 2 has a HP peak at 4500 RPM and a torque peak at 3500 RPM. While the first cam actually produces a higher peak HP, it also must spin faster to do it. The second hypothetical (short duration) cam produce higher torque and actually leads in HP in the low end of the RPM band. It would be interesting to discuss this with a cam manufacturer with an actual engine dyno to see if it is feasible to produce a VW cam geared towards producing nothing but low-end HP and torque. Thanks Ross for the cam specs, and if anybody has some other detailed specs on other parts of the VW aircraft conversions (like carb CFM ratings, etc.) Please post them, I'd like to refine the model a bit. TIA, Curt Martin (cmartin@america.com) Ormond Beach, FL http://www.america.com/~cmartin ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 22:31:15 -0400 (EDT) From: BSHADR@aol.com Subject: KR: KR Flight Testing Manual KRNetheads: Rick Junkin sent me a preview copy of his work in progress KR Flight Test Manual. Pretty good stuff - I MEAN IT IS GREAT! (doing my best Tony the Tiger bit) Wait 'till you see it for yourself. Very professionally done and well adapted for KRs. He did it for his own consumption, but has offered it to all of us. Now the catch - please don't pester the poor guy until he uploads it to his net site. He'll announce it here when it is ready for everyone to nab and download. The trial version I got was 27 pages long. It is adapted from a number of sources. In Rick's words: "...It's based on AC 90-89A, with some additions and editorializing pertinent to my test preferences and KR's in general. I know there are a few folks very near their first flights, and I just finished up the "first flight" section here at work (I'm supervising the night flight ops for a couple of F-18's here at McD, not a particularly demanding duty, but very time consuming...). I think folks might find it helpful in building their own plans, so I wanted to get it out ASAP." I guess I can figure out the "Eagle" in his Email name now...good work Rick. We will all gain from your efforts...the KRNet way. Later Randy Stein BSHADR@aol.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 20:58:56 -0600 (MDT) From: Ron Lee Subject: KR: Re: KR Flight Testing Manual (no archive) At 22:31 97/5/16 -0400, you wrote: > >Rick Junkin sent me a preview copy of his work in progress KR Flight Test >Manual. Pretty good stuff - I MEAN IT IS GREAT! (doing my best Tony the >Tiger bit) Wait 'till you see it for yourself. Very professionally done and >well adapted for KRs. He did it for his own consumption, but has offered it >to all of us. > >Now the catch - please don't pester the poor guy until he uploads it to his >net site. He'll announce it here when it is ready for everyone to nab and >download. The trial version I got was 27 pages long. It is adapted from a >number of sources. ME! Pester? Never. Good timing since I know of one person about to start flying his KR and I may need it within a few weeks as well. Not for a new KR but new to me..and following well proven procedures would allow me to become well acquainted with a new plane that handles differently than the spam cans I am used to flying. Ron Lee ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 23:16:03 EDT From: jscott.pilot@juno.com (Jeffrey E. Scott) Subject: Re: KR: /tools/ Progress Report On Thu, 15 May 1997 18:37:27 -0700 Micheal Mims writes: >At 08:26 PM 5/15/97 EDT, you wrote: >>FWIW, I used couple of different types of "airboards". Both were >about >>15 1/2" x 2 3/4", but one had a rotary motion to it (typically called >a >>body file around here) and the other had two pistons inside it and >moved................ > >Hows your project? Has it crept into the air yet? > >_______________________ >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >Micheal Mims >Just Plane Nutts >mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com > >http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand > > It hasn't even crept out of the garage yet. After a painting disaster and several days of scraping the fuselage with a razer blade, then sanding it down even farther, then a week out of town, I'm ready to prime it again tomorrow morning and hope to shoot it with paint Sunday or Monday. It should be at the airport in a week or two. I'm currently trying to get the inspection scheduled. - ---- Jeffrey Scott jscott.pilot@juno.com See construction of KR-2S N1213W at http://fly.hiwaay.net/~langford/kjeffs.html - ---- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 22:26:28 -0500 From: "Mark Langford" Subject: KR: cams Motorheads, I would think that you'd want your peak HP to occur at your max RPM, say 3800 to 4000, if going fast was your goal. As luck would have it, that's just about where the stock cam's peak is. But you DO need higher lift, and a special cam would be most reliable to achieve it. I've wondered for years why many aircraft engine builders put longer duration "racing" cams good for high revs in engines that would never see 3400 RPM. Seems a waste of powerband. I talked to Jack Engle (Engle Racing Cams) a while back about this and asked him the same question. He agreed with me and recommended a 222 degree duration with .345" of lift at the cam. He makes a hydraulic profile like this for a Chrysler, that he calls the 904. Said he'd grind me one for remarkably cheap. I plan to take him up it. By the way, he's a pilot too. Mark Langford langford@hiwaay.net http://fly.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 22:19:48 -0700 From: R Covington Subject: Re: KR: Shadbolt Cam Grinders >>I had an interesting discussion with Geoff, at Shadbolt Cams concerning >>cam grind, an there effect on a auto engine converted to aircraft use. >>He was saying the torque curve of a given engine should be closer to the >>HP curve, or at cruise, you will not have the torque, to mantain the power >>to mantain altitude. > >Is the cam the reason why VW engines have to turn faster than conventional >aircraft engines and have to use smaller, less-efficient props? If so, I >don't see why someone doesn't make a custom cam to correct the problem. > >Mike Taglieri The reason the VW turns that fast is that is makes its best power at a higher rpm. If it could make the same torque and HP at a lower rppm I suppose it could turn slower. The reason one has to use a smaller diameter prop is to keep the tips from going supersonic at the higher rotational speeds that occur when using it in a direct drive setup. Most VW cruise RPM's that I hear about are generally from 3100 to 3300. The people using them say that you can turn it faster but your don't want to be running it at 4000 RPM all day. Robert Covington ------------------------------ End of krnet-l-digest V1 #15 ****************************