From: owner-krnet-l-digest@lists.teleport.com (krnet-l-digest) To: krnet-l-digest@lists.teleport.com Subject: krnet-l-digest V1 #32 Reply-To: krnet-l-digest Sender: owner-krnet-l-digest@lists.teleport.com Errors-To: owner-krnet-l-digest@lists.teleport.com Precedence: bulk krnet-l-digest Thursday, June 5 1997 Volume 01 : Number 032 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 21:39:58 -0400 From: "Jim Fields" Subject: KR: Re: Re: Scarf joint Is this information going to be on the new plans? It should be. Take care, Jim SKYTECH Innovations, Inc. Mail To: skytech@iserv.net - ---------- > From: Donald Reid > To: krnet-l@teleport.com > Subject: KR: Re: Scarf joint > Date: Tuesday, June 03, 1997 11:24 AM > > alan wrote: > > > > In fitting your Belly skins where did your Scarf joint fall. Mine will > > fall under the rear spar. Is this location ok? > > > > In certified wooden aircraft construction, the scarf joint must fall on a > reinforcement such as the 5/8" square spruce framework. An alternate > method that is not recommended but that is acceptable is to add a backing > plate that is the same thickness as the plywood being scarfed and extends > beyond the area of the scarf. > -- > Don Reid > donreid@erols.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 08:20:57 -0700 From: Tom Crawford Subject: Re: KR: Project update Bobby Muse wrote: > > At 11:05 PM 6/3/97 -0700, you wrote: > >Micheal Mims wrote: > >> > >> I glassed and floxed the 45 degree edge on the door a > >> few nights ago and then sanded it to a nice smooth finish. Tonight I > >> covered the 45 degree angle with duct tape to act as a release agent and > >> re-mounted it (for the 155th time)!! I made sure it would open and close > >> without rubbing or catching. If this works I should have a perfect > >> door sill with a .003 or .004 of a gap for silicone sealant. My biggest > >> concern is that when I open the door, to much of the flox may stick to the > >> duct tape and tear away from the urethane foam! Fingers are crossed!! > > >Mike, > > The duct tape should work pretty good. I used it as a release barrier for > >my forward deck, and applied lots of dry micro at the joint to get a good > >seal. The stuff released pretty well. > > Ross > > > > > > I used duct tape as a release agent also. I found that the duct tape would sometimes slick a little to the epoxy. I used Johnson's Floor Wax on top of the duct tape . Worked a lot better. > > Bobby Muse > bmuse@mindspring.com If you find that you need a release surface that is thinner- try that thin brown tape used for sealing packages before mailing. You know, the stuff that is "officially" approved by UPS and USPS. This stuff is micro thin and works well. tomc@afn.org KR2 N262TC 95% done, 45% to go ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 08:24:50 -0700 From: Tom Crawford Subject: Re: KR: Re: KRnet * * * help wanted * * * Jim Fields wrote: > > You have heard it from me before, maybe this is a function that RR could > perform on behalf of its own interest in the design. Am I wrong on this > matter? > > Take care, > > Jim > SKYTECH Innovations, Inc. > Mail To: skytech@iserv.net > > ---------- > > From: Carlos Sa > > To: KRnet > > Subject: KR: KRnet * * * help wanted * * * > > Date: Tuesday, June 03, 1997 8:16 PM > > > > 'evening, folks. > > > > I am afraid I have bad news: I will not be able to continue > > performing the archiving function. > > Since many of you depend on the archives as a source of > > information, I think you deserve an explanation: > > > > Number one, I am embarking on a project with a friend. No, > > it is not a KR... but hopefully I will be a couple of > > dollars closer to it when I am done... > > That will be time consumming, and the archiving will have > > to be put aside... > > > > The second reason is $, though I think we could figure a > > solution (we might have to, one way or the other). > > The traffic out of the KRnet pages has been * huge * for a > > humble site like mine: 500 MB/month. That translates into > > about $45/month, or around $500 / year. That sort of messes > > up my KR budget :o( !!! > > Of course this is not unique to my ISP, so we'll probably > > have to deal with the issue. > > > > I propose we find a new volunteer to keep the archives. > > He/she should *not* be a builder ;o)! > > I will supply all the knowledge needed (if any!), as well as > > the programs I created to sort the postings (REXX required!) > > and web pages. > > > > I will keep archiving postings for the next week or two, > > while we look for a new volunteer. > > > > Sorry for the inconvenience, folks. > > > > > > Regards > > > > Carlos After talking with Jeanette at Sun & Fun, she made it quite clear to me that she wanted nothing to do the KRNET. tomc@afn.org ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 12:50:01 +0000 From: Robert Lasecki Subject: KR: Re: revmaster engine sale >To: Robert Lasecki >From: Joe Mount >cc: skipmoo@aol.com >Subject: Re: revmaster engine sale >X-Sender: mount@reallink.com >Date: Wed, 4 Jun 97 05:57:57 +0000 Here is additional info regarding the Revmaster engine listed for sale for anyone who is interested. A lot more detail is given. :-) Bob> >Robert!, > >I have had some inquiries and here is basic info that I think is most >helpful in sizing up what we have for sale. > >You ask "What price is cut in half?" obviously no price is half. I >apologize if our glitzy web-page is mis leading. It was done by a non-EAA >person, more like a 20 yr old cyber guru. However, it did fit the budget , >for it was free! And, I barely know my way around using e-mail. > >With regards to shipping, we can crate it up for nothing here (be happy to). >We are in Austin , Tx. I can quote some outfits and get a couple of >estimates to choose from (i.e. trucking). I had planned to sell the entire >thing off as one item to a good home. If you are indeed serious, then let's >get together on the phone and work out details. Below, I have included some >basic info about the engine for you. > > The correct serial number is A-2322 for model 2100DT. The engine was >purchased by Mel Fowler of Liberty, Texas from Revmaster Aviation of Chino, >CA on June 1, 1983. This is according to the engine log book. Revmaster >aviation is helpful and can confirm information. > >The engine log book shows the following modifications: >1) Turbocharger with plumbing >2) 12-Volt geared starter and ring gear assembly >3) 20 Amp alternator front mounted >4) 20 Amp alternator rear mounted >5) installed forged crankshaft/ starter flywheel and propeller flange. >6) installed steel 92 mm cylinders >7) oil cooler, oil filter system >8) fuel pump - engine driven >9) new engine case, new cylinders >10) anti-reversionary exhaust system >11) engine mount/ engine mount hardware kit >12) alternate air source/ air filter assy/ shut off valve >13) oil sump side drain assy >14) vacuum pump assy >15) dual magnetos >16) dual plugs, sheilded ignition system >17) Rev-flow floatless carburetor > >The original owner (Mel) was building a Rand Robinson KR-1 1/2. He >unfortunately passed away before completion. The engine appears to be in >good condition and apparently stored away from the elements. I also have >airplane stuff like: ELT, instruments, tires, fuel gauges, and other misc stuff. > >I hope this helps. Please forward this on to fellow builders who might be >interested. > >Please feel free to call if genuinely interested. $5000 dollars is an asking >price. I am open to offers. I live in Austin, TX at (512) 719-4039 (evenings). > >Best regards, > >Joe Mount > > >At 12:38 PM 6/2/97 +0000, you wrote: >> >>I have just received literature and prices from Joe at Revmaster. The >>prices show $5185 for the 2100 which includes carburetor, intake manifold, >>flywheel and geared starter. The turbo is $1615 additional for a total of >>$6835 for the 2100TD. What price is cut in half? >> >>Despite the negative comments on the net by Mims and Langford, I am >>interested in the engine. Please advise how old the engine is, how it was >>stored and what type of ignition it has. Thanks. >> > > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 07:51:08 -0500 From: ejanssen@chipsnet.com (Janssen Craig) Subject: Re: KR: Old Dogs, New Tricks? At 01:04 AM 6/4/97 -0400, you wrote: >>> > I really get a kick out of this! And to think it was done to eliminate >>> > confusion! What the hell was wrong with TCA, ARSA, Control Zone and >>> > Uncontrolled Airspace? I never had a problem with it! >>> >>> Now Mike, you know that it's not in a Fed's vested interest to simplify >>> anything(witness the Federal Tax Code). Everything must remain complex >>> to justify their existance. > >Hey, I'm a student pilot, and I never had to learn it the old way. In my >opinion, "A, B, C, and D" are MUCH less confusing than " TCA, ARSA, Control >Zone, and Uncontrolled Airspace." Just new, that's all. > >Mike Taglieri > >I'm sure it's out there somewhere, but has anyone found a good website that explains the new system and compares it with the old? I've seen some handouts given out by FAA at their safety seminars. I read them , study them - and within a couple days have to relearn it. What we need are some good memory aids. Maybe somebody out there has/had an instructor who's offered some easy way to remember the rules for the different categories of airspace. Don't want to appear stupid when my next BFR comes 'round. :-) :-) Ed Janssen ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 07:55:20 -0500 From: ejanssen@chipsnet.com (Janssen Craig) Subject: Re: KR: Tiedown At 01:04 AM 6/4/97 EDT, you wrote: > > >On Tue, 3 Jun 1997 19:29:39 +0000 Robert Lasecki > writes: >>There is an excellent tiedown method shown in the Diehl wing >construction >>video which uses inexpensive boat fittings which are also lightweight. >The >>video shows how and where to put them. They bolt to the outer main spar >>from the bottom between the last two vertical members. >> >>Bob Lasecki > Bob, How about a little more detail - fitting type, how mounted, etc. used - for those of us who don't have KR-2 plans?. Thanks. Ed Janssen ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 09:02:39 -0700 From: Owen Macpherson Subject: KR: And now for someting completly different... This was forwarded to me recently... Subject: Thought you'd enjoy... Author: John Garner at US-TECH-MA25-Nmobile Date: 5/23/97 11:31 AM >>Here are some actual maintenance complaints submitted by US Air Force >>pilots and the replies from the maintenance crews. "Squawks" are >>problem listings that pilots generally leave for maintenance crews. >> >> >> Squawk: "Left inside main tire almost needs replacement." >> Reply: "Almost replaced left inside main tire." >> >> Squawk: "Test flight OK, except autoland very rough." >> Reply: "Autoland not installed on this aircraft." >> >> Squawk #1: "#2 Propeller seeping prop fluid." >> Reply #1: "#2 Propeller seepage normal." >> Squawk #2: "#1, #3, and #4 propellers lack normal seepage." >> >> Squawk: "The autopilot doesn't." >> Signed off: "IT DOES NOW." >> >> Squawk: "Something loose in cockpit." >> Reply: "Something tightened in cockpit." >> >> Squawk: "Evidence of hydraulic leak on right main landing gear." >> Reply: "Evidence removed." >> >> Squawk: "Number three engine missing." >> Reply: "Engine found on right wing after brief search." >> >> Squawk: "DME volume unbelievably loud." >> Reply: "Volume set to more believable level." >> >> Squawk: Dead bugs on windshield. >> Reply: Live bugs on order. >> >> Squawk: Autopilot in altitude hold mode produces a 200 fpm descent. >> Reply: Cannot reproduce problem on ground. >> >> Squawk: IFF inoperative. >> Reply: IFF inoperative in OFF mode. > Kinda takes you back, don't it. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 07:08:32 -0600 (MDT) From: Ron Lee Subject: Re: KR: Old Dogs, New Tricks? >>I'm sure it's out there somewhere, but has anyone found a good website that >explains the new system and compares it with the old? I've seen some >handouts given out by FAA at their safety seminars. I read them , study >them - and within a couple days have to relearn it. What we need are some >good memory aids. Maybe somebody out there has/had an instructor who's >offered some easy way to remember the rules for the different categories of >airspace. Don't want to appear stupid when my next BFR comes 'round. :-) :-) > >Ed Janssen > I concur with Ed. Last night I looked at a sectional to try to understand these airspaces and how they look but it was not apparent at first glance. Ron Lee ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 01:44:02 -0700 From: Donald Reid Subject: Re: KR: ??? from a newbie Bryce R. Kehoe wrote: > Getting back to the question at hand , I'm not an engineer when you guys > start throwing around formulas my grey matter swirls and becomes less > grey. Oh yea the question! > Can I build one of these things without being an engineer, assuming that I > am a competant builder. > > Thanks > > Bryce Kehoe I am an engineer, and IMNSHO (not so humble opinion) a good one. I know it would be easier to build any plane but I have to stop and analysis every aspect and try to come tup with a better way. Build to the plan, get lots of experienced people to look over your work, be prepared to throw out anything that isn't perfect, and read the Tony Bengelis books available from EAA. It will be great. - -- Don Reid donreid@erols.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 06:03:29 -0700 From: Micheal Mims Subject: Re: KR: Re: Re: Scarf joint At 09:39 PM 6/3/97 -0400, you wrote: >Is this information going to be on the new plans? It should be. > This information is in the old plans, at least on my set it points out where the scarf joint should fall and it does say it needs to be right over one of the 5/8s members. I used 4 x 8 sheets of plywood so my scaf joints fell on the cross member that was the closest to 8' from the firewall, right on station "K" I think. _______________________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 01:52:25 -0700 From: Donald Reid Subject: Re: KR: Re:Tiedown ideas Micheal Mims wrote: > > You could cold bend a piece of 1/8 inch 4130 to form an L shape, etc. > > ____ > | | > | | <--Spar > |____| > | | > | | > | ___ | > | || > < |----- -||D <--AN3 mounting bolt > | || _ > |____||__H__ <--4130 L bracket with welded nut > > > Mine is similar, but I ran a piece of 5/16 X 0.058 tubing (with mounting plate welded on) up along the outside of the spar near the tip. The tie downs will be 3/16 rod, made into an eyebolt. The eyebolt will have a padded shoulder, and a large padded bearing plate that will fit on top over the spar. The entire thing will be held on with a wing nut. - -- Don Reid donreid@erols.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 10:12:42 -0400 (EDT) From: LVav8r@aol.com Subject: Re: KR: Airspace In a message dated 97-06-03 18:38:19 EDT, you write: << I really get a kick out of this! And to think it was done to eliminate confusion! What the hell was wrong with TCA, ARSA, Control Zone and Uncontrolled Airspace? I never had a problem with it! ________________________________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand >> Actually, it was to bring the US airspace classifications into line with the ICAO classifications in the rest of the world. I never had a problem with the old way either, thought it worked just fine, but they didn't consult with me before they made the change. Come to think of it they haven't consulted with me on ANYTHING!!! ;-( What do a bunch of foreigners know anyway ;-) . Tom Kilgore Las Vegas, NV LVav8r@aol.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 12:38:26 -0400 From: Patrick Flowers Subject: Re: KR: Old Dogs, New Tricks? Janssen Craig wrote: > > I'm sure it's out there somewhere, but has anyone found a good website that > explains the new system and compares it with the old? I've seen some > handouts given out by FAA at their safety seminars. I read them , study > them - and within a couple days have to relearn it. What we need are some > good memory aids. Maybe somebody out there has/had an instructor who's > offered some easy way to remember the rules for the different categories of > airspace. Don't want to appear stupid when my next BFR comes 'round. :-) :-) > > Ed Janssen The tough part is not the airspace classification, but all the different separation and visibility requirements that go along with each one. The way I learned it was using the Kings Airspace Review video tape with a sectional laid out on the floor in front of the TV. Lots of wear and tear on the VCR and remote doing 5 sec. rewinds:o) I'm getting close to BFR time(November) and I'll probably be going through the same drill again in October. Hmm, my tape is three years old. Wonder if anything's changed... Patrick - -- Patrick Flowers Mailto:patri63@ibm.net ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 17:26:17 -0400 (EDT) From: ATLAS2@aol.com Subject: Re: KR: And now for someting completly different... yes these are real complaints but if ya want the orginal copy of it it came from AVWEB last week...from their weekly newsletter DREW ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 14:29:49 -0700 From: Ross Youngblood Subject: Re: KR: Radios? Transponders Bobby Muse wrote: > > At 12:07 AM 6/2/97 -0700, you wrote: > > > > > I'm considering getting a Terra COM and Terra Xponder, I believe unless > >I'm hosed on the regs, that a Xponder is required since I have an electrical > >system. Am I correct? > > > > > >-- > >Ross Youngblood > > You are right. By the way I have a Terra Com and Xponder...works great. I have often been told by other pilots that they have heard me talking over 40 miles > > Bobby Muse > bmuse@mindspring.com I'd like to buy the II Morrow unit they are local to me (Salem Oregon), the unit is only 1.3" but I think the Terra Com/Xponder package deals are better. For example I think I can get both the COM and Xponder for under $2500 from Chief Aircraft and/or Aircraft Spruce and I think that includes the encoder. Now if I could only find $2500. :( -- Ross - -- Ross Youngblood KRNET-L administrator mailto:rossy@teleport.com http://www.teleport.com/~rossy/N541RY.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 14:39:04 -0700 From: Ross Youngblood Subject: Re: KR: Re:Tiedown ideas Donald Reid wrote: > > Micheal Mims wrote: > > > > You could cold bend a piece of 1/8 inch 4130 to form an L shape, etc. > > > > ____ > > | | > > | | <--Spar > > |____| > > | | > > | | > > | ___ | > > | || > > < |----- -||D <--AN3 mounting bolt > > | || _ > > |____||__H__ <--4130 L bracket with welded nut > > > > > > > > Mine is similar, but I ran a piece of 5/16 X 0.058 tubing (with mounting plate > welded on) up along the outside of the spar near the tip. > The tie downs will be 3/16 rod, made into an eyebolt. The eyebolt will have > a padded shoulder, and a large padded bearing plate that will fit on top over > the spar. The entire thing will be held on with a wing nut. > > -- > Don Reid > donreid@erols.com This sounds interesting, how about a picture. The rod creates a "hole" through the spar? (He asks?) -- Ross - -- Ross Youngblood KRNET-L administrator mailto:rossy@teleport.com http://www.teleport.com/~rossy/N541RY.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 14:42:31 -0700 From: Ross Youngblood Subject: Re: KR: Old Dogs, New Tricks? Janssen Craig wrote: > > > >I'm sure it's out there somewhere, but has anyone found a good website that > explains the new system and compares it with the old? I've seen some > handouts given out by FAA at their safety seminars. I read them , study > them - and within a couple days have to relearn it. What we need are some > good memory aids. Maybe somebody out there has/had an instructor who's > offered some easy way to remember the rules for the different categories of > airspace. Don't want to appear stupid when my next BFR comes 'round. :-) :-) > > Ed Janssen I'd be interested too. I sat down, got some paper and my kids crayons and colored a diagram to try and help me remember. I passed the written exam last year at 97% the only two questions I missed were on METAR/TAF. Not bad considering the new tests came out in July and I took the test July 15th or so. What was a METAR/TAF I thought. My two failing questions were on METAR/TAF. Now, I couldn't remember the floor of a particular airspace if my life depended on it... I guess I have some studying to do before my oral test coming up... -- Ross - -- Ross Youngblood KRNET-L administrator mailto:rossy@teleport.com http://www.teleport.com/~rossy/N541RY.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 14:43:46 -0700 From: Ross Youngblood Subject: Re: KR: Old Dogs, New Tricks? Ron Lee wrote: > > >>I'm sure it's out there somewhere, but has anyone found a good website that > >explains the new system and compares it with the old? I've seen some > >handouts given out by FAA at their safety seminars. I read them , study > >them - and within a couple days have to relearn it. What we need are some > >good memory aids. Maybe somebody out there has/had an instructor who's > >offered some easy way to remember the rules for the different categories of > >airspace. Don't want to appear stupid when my next BFR comes 'round. :-) :-) > > > >Ed Janssen > > > > I concur with Ed. Last night I looked at a sectional to try to understand these > airspaces and how they look but it was not apparent at first glance. > > Ron Lee Sectionals are tough for me as I have red/green color problems which for me makes magenta and blue seem almost identical. Now what was the difference between the blue and magenta? I forget. -- Ross - -- Ross Youngblood KRNET-L administrator mailto:rossy@teleport.com http://www.teleport.com/~rossy/N541RY.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 15:19:56 -0700 From: Ross Youngblood Subject: Re: KR: Re: KRnet * * * help wanted * * * Jim Fields wrote: > > You have heard it from me before, maybe this is a function that RR could > perform on behalf of its own interest in the design. Am I wrong on this > matter? > > Take care, > > Jim > SKYTECH Innovations, Inc. > Mail To: skytech@iserv.net > Well I think it would have to be funded by someone. I can understand Jeanette not wanting to have the liability associated with KRNET. There are a lot of unverified opinions expressed here, which is as it should be. Try http://www.refrence.com and search for krnet They are a member of krnet, and archive everything for us. Although it's not as nicely packaged as the work Carlos has done, it has all the stuff in since June 4th. Try it out and see what you think! I tried it today and it appears to work. -- Regards Ross Ross Youngblood KRNET-L administrator mailto:rossy@teleport.com http://www.teleport.com/~rossy/N541RY.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 08:08:16 -0700 From: Donald Reid Subject: Re: KR: Re:Tiedown ideas Ross Youngblood wrote: > > > > Mine is similar, but I ran a piece of 5/16 X 0.058 tubing (with mounting plate > > welded on) up along the outside of the spar near the tip. > > The tie downs will be 3/16 rod, made into an eyebolt. The eyebolt will have > > a padded shoulder, and a large padded bearing plate that will fit on top over > > the spar. The entire thing will be held on with a wing nut. > > > This sounds interesting, how about a picture. The rod creates > a "hole" through the spar? (He asks?) > > -- Ross I don't have an E'camera or scanner yet, so I will try a few different words. I welded two flanges to the 5/16" tubing about 2" X 1" X 0.0625". 3/16" bolts went through the flange plates and then through the spar caps. The 5/16" tubing is just a little shorter than the spar is high, and located on the back face of the spar. Each end of the tubing is about 1/16" inside the wing skin. After one wing surface was covered, I ran a drill through the tube to open up the hole so I wouldn't loose it. With tie downs removed, the only thing there is a 3/16" hole in the wing. I hope this helps. - -- Don Reid donreid@erols.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 18:43:22 From: brian whatcott Subject: Re: KR: Thermometer + Permanent Marker Bobby, the ad. holds out that the oil temp sender indicates sump oil temp., and that the hottest parts of the engine get 50 to 70 degrees hotter. They suggest you calibrate the oil gauge in the way I indicated. Then if your oil temp at cruise is below 150-160 deg F you don't shed water from the oil. If your real temp goes above 180degF ( Especially above 200-210degF they say) check baffles and seals. "Keep a close eye on your CHT, EGT, leaning procedure and other operating conditions." What oil temp is correct? They seem to imply quite strongly that 180degF is the magic number. Regards brian At 01:09 6/4/97 -0500, you wrote: >At 06:29 PM 6/1/97 -0600, you wrote: >>Browsing Trade-A-Plane, I ran across a full page ad. >>It seemed so sensible, I wanted homebuilders to know. >> >>It was headed, " How a Thermometer And A Permanent >>Marker Can Keep Your Engine Running Longer". >> Nobody will argue with THAT idea! >> >>Put your oil temp sender and a decent thermometer in a >>steel can and heat it slowly. >> Mark the pointer position in pencil as the thermometer >> reads 180 degF on the way up and again as it cools. >> Repeat this two or three times. >> Then mark the gauge with the average position for 180degF in >>permanent marker. >> >>Justification: the oil hot spot is about 50 deg higher than sump >> temp in a normally aspirated engine, and 70 degF in a turbo. >> Cruise below 180 indicated and the moisture doesn't blow off; >>cruise above this and you get increased deposits and increased >> wear ( it says here). >> >>Makes sense to me. >>From Aeroshell. No relation. Bet ya sweet BP. >> >>Regards >>brian whatcott Altus OK >> > > >Brian, I am not sure what you are trying to say. If 180 is degrees, then what oil temp is correct? > >Bobby Muse >bmuse@mindspring.com > > > > > brian whatcott Altus OK ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 20:38:57 -0400 (EDT) From: JEHayward@aol.com Subject: Re: KR: Radios? In a message dated 97-06-03 12:02:17 EDT, you write: << Tell me, how does one tie down their KR. There doesen't seem to be any obvious tie down points. Dennis >> My brother made mine from some 1" eyebolts with 3/8" shaft (if I remember correctly) which are removable by unscrewing from a t-nut/acorn nut setup welded together and epoxied into a hole drilled in the lower wing spar about 5 or 6 inches from the spar end. The nut assembly was pressed into the hole and epoxied. The t-nut prevents the assembly from turning and the acorn nut welded to the t-nut weather seals the eyebolt hole for me and I coated the remainder of the exposed wood hole with epoxy. The nut assembly was mounted on the inside of the lower spar. I had him also weld a washer on the eyebolt where the shaft meets the ring to limit how far I can screw it in. I wound up going to this method since I couldn't find some nice looking eyes for boats like the plans said. Turns out I like this better because I can remove them if I want. Jim Hayward ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 20:42:38 -0400 (EDT) From: JEHayward@aol.com Subject: Re: KR: Re: Scarf joint In a message dated 97-06-03 12:41:50 EDT, you write: << An alternate method that is not recommended but that is acceptable is to add a backing plate that is the same thickness as the plywood being scarfed and extends beyond the area of the scarf. -- Don Reid donreid@erols.com >> Do to a cutting error, I would up with my belly scarf being a few inches beyond a cross member so just installed another cross member. Probably would have saved a few ounces by doing the extra plywood piece instead. Jim Hayward ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 20:49:44 -0400 (EDT) From: JEHayward@aol.com Subject: Re: KR: ??? from a newbie In a message dated 97-06-03 19:32:50 EDT, you write: << Can I build one of these things without being an engineer, assuming that I am a competant builder. Thanks Bryce Kehoe >> Don't wait another moment!! It's just like building a big model! Jim Hayward ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 20:50:23 -0400 From: Carlos Sa Subject: Re: KR: Re: KRnet * * * help wanted * * * > Try http://www.refrence.com and search for krnet > > They are a member of krnet, and archive everything for us. > > Although it's not as nicely packaged as the work Carlos has done, > it has all the stuff in since June 4th. Try it out and see what > you think! > > I tried it today and it appears to work. > > -- Regards > Ross - --------------- That would seem to solve the problem, but how long/how many of the postings will they keep?? Carlos ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 21:32:39 -0400 (EDT) From: JEHayward@aol.com Subject: Re: KR: Re: KRnet * * * help wanted * * * In a message dated 97-06-04 09:03:24 EDT, you write: << fter talking with Jeanette at Sun & Fun, she made it quite clear to me that she wanted nothing to do the KRNET. tomc@afn.org >> Did she say why? Maybe this just hit me wrong when I read it but I sure didn't like the sound of it. Jim Hayward ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 21:05:58 -0500 From: Paul Eberhardt Subject: Re: KR: Re: KRnet * * * help wanted * * * I really don't blame her. Although we are all interested in promoting the KR and building them safely, most of what we talk about is changes to or diversions from the plans. This is healthy for those of us who are competent enough to follow through with enough research and courage to make the changes work out for the best (or to decide that no changes are in order), but I can see why she isn't interested in an affiliation with such tamperings. Just my opinion Paul Eberhardt JEHayward@aol.com wrote: > > In a message dated 97-06-04 09:03:24 EDT, you write: > > << fter talking with Jeanette at Sun & Fun, she made it quite clear to me > that she wanted nothing to do the KRNET. > > tomc@afn.org > > >> > Did she say why? Maybe this just hit me wrong when I read it but I sure > didn't like the sound of it. > > Jim Hayward ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 19:19:28 -0700 From: Micheal Mims Subject: KR: Canopy Doorsill Well sports fans I just got back from the garage and there is a very big smile on my face! The duct tape in the doorsill trick worked perfect! With a little touch up sanding and a little bit of micro it will look and function just fine! You can see the results at: http://pw2.netcom.com/~mimsmand/canopy3.html The pictures don't do it justice though, it looks really good and will require minimal micro and sanding. With the windows and windshield temporarily tape into position I got a good idea of what the final product will look like and I am very HAPPY! :-) I think she will slice through the air with no problems at all! _______________________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 19:32:27 -0700 From: Micheal Mims Subject: Re: KR: Re: KRnet * * * help wanted * * * At 09:05 PM 6/4/97 -0500, you wrote: most of what we talk about is changes to or diversions from the >plans. , but I can >see why she isn't interested in an affiliation with such tamperings. > I agree with you 250% besides that,... the non computer literate or internet savvy business person is scared of the internet. They think they will lose lots of money if they use it, whether it be from lose of product sales or information to getting sued for publishing misinformation. Its still that old school business mentality. When the internet was mentioned at the 96 gathering all I heard from various vendors/builders was "That aint nothing but a good way to get yourself in trouble" I am sure Randy and Mark Langford heard more of the same, and in a way they are right, why do you think the responses from some of our builders here on the KRnet has came to a screeching halt? I gave it a lot of thought too, but I have this trouble keeping my mouth shut! Like no-one notices right! :-) _______________________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 20:58:31 -0600 (MDT) From: Ron Lee Subject: KR: Mike's Mouth and Canopy Frame (No archive) snip >why do you think the responses from some of our builders here on the KRnet >has came to a screeching halt? I gave it a lot of thought too, but I have >this trouble keeping my mouth shut! Like no-one notices right! :-) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >Micheal Mims Notice what????? Your gullwing canopy frame looks great. Are there specs on how you did that located for others to steal.... I mean copy? I think another advantage of the canopy/door as you (and Troy Petteway) have it is that you have some shade. PLus your could conceivably put overhead lights or switches there...just like the Space Shuttle! Ron Lee ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 20:07:45 -0700 From: Micheal Mims Subject: Re: KR: Mike's Mouth and Canopy Frame (No archive) At 08:58 PM 6/4/97 -0600, you wrote: >Notice what????? Your gullwing canopy frame looks great. Are there specs on how you did that located for others to steal.... I mean copy? Yes the shade will be nice! It gets pretty warm over here in Southern California! I am writing a article on how I built my canopy frame. I owe a lot to Troy, he took the time to draw me a few sketches, take a few pictures and write a short bit on how he did his and then send it to me in the mail! Mine is a pretty close copy of his. Besides the shade, the ability of this type of frame to fit any fuselage no matter how wide is nice and the fact you are using the $300 canopy to make the windows instead of the $600 KR2S unit! I guess all that work was worth $300! _______________________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 22:53:49 -0700 From: Ross Youngblood Subject: Re: KR: Re: KRnet * * * help wanted * * * Carlos Sa wrote: > > > Try http://www.refrence.com and search for krnet > > > > They are a member of krnet, and archive everything for us. > > > > Although it's not as nicely packaged as the work Carlos has done, > > it has all the stuff in since June 4th. Try it out and see what > > you think! > > > > I tried it today and it appears to work. > > > > -- Regards > > Ross > --------------- > That would seem to solve the problem, but how long/how many of the > postings will they keep?? > > CarlosI don't know about that... - -- Ross Youngblood KRNET-L administrator mailto:rossy@teleport.com http://www.teleport.com/~rossy/N541RY.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 00:09:29 -0700 From: Micheal Mims Subject: KR: Transponder stuff Those of you who have mounted your transponder, I need to know what is the typical size of the mounting tray? Im guessing like most aviation electronics they are about 14 inches deep 7 inches wide and 2 inches tall. My main concern is that if I build a place to mount a typical tray how big does it need to be to insure it will fit? I will measure the one in the Dragonfly this weekend if no-one has any ideas, right now my brain is whirling about where Im gona mount this over priced piece of avionics that ATC doesn't have the time or man power to watch anyway! Oh well, man against the machine! _______________________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 19:54:22 -0700 From: Ted & Louisa Jones Subject: Re: KR: Project update Tom Crawford wrote: > > Bobby Muse wrote: > > > > At 11:05 PM 6/3/97 -0700, you wrote: > > >Micheal Mims wrote: > > >> > > >> I glassed and floxed the 45 degree edge on the door a > > >> few nights ago and then sanded it to a nice smooth finish. Tonight I > > >> covered the 45 degree angle with duct tape to act as a release agent and > > >> re-mounted it (for the 155th time)!! I made sure it would open and close > > >> without rubbing or catching. If this works I should have a perfect > > >> door sill with a .003 or .004 of a gap for silicone sealant. My biggest > > >> concern is that when I open the door, to much of the flox may stick to the > > >> duct tape and tear away from the urethane foam! Fingers are crossed!! > > > > >Mike, > > > The duct tape should work pretty good. I used it as a release barrier for > > >my forward deck, and applied lots of dry micro at the joint to get a good > > >seal. The stuff released pretty well. > > > Ross > > > > > > > > > > I used duct tape as a release agent also. I found that the duct tape would sometimes slick a little to the epoxy. I used Johnson's Floor Wax on top of the duct tape . Worked a lot better. > > > > Bobby Muse > > bmuse@mindspring.com > > If you find that you need a release surface that is thinner- try that > thin brown tape used for sealing packages before mailing. You know, the > stuff that is "officially" approved by UPS and USPS. This stuff is micro > thin and works well. > > tomc@afn.org > KR2 N262TC > 95% done, 45% to go Excellent tip, Tom. How difficult is it to get the tape off the part it is protecting? Ted Jones ------------------------------ End of krnet-l-digest V1 #32 ****************************