From: Majordomo@teleport.com[SMTP:Majordomo@teleport.com] Sent: Monday, December 08, 1997 12:44 PM To: john bouyea Subject: Majordomo file: list 'krnet-l' file 'v01.n095' -- From: owner-krnet-l-digest@lists.teleport.com (krnet-l-digest) To: krnet-l-digest@lists.teleport.com Subject: krnet-l-digest V1 #95 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 Friday, September 12 1997 Volume 01 : Number 095 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 20:59:42 -0700 From: Peter Hudson Subject: Re: KR: Gross weight Guys, I meant 800 lbs at 7gs (not 6) = 5600 lbs was limit loads (oops) Donald Reid wrote: > > This is a quick but reasonably accurate analysis. A real one would require >[good napkin type analysis is snipped] > The distance between the centroid of the spar caps is ~5 3/16" = 5.19" > so the limit load for one side of the wing is > (15,223# X 5.19") / 45.84" = 1723# Total = 3446# > the ultimate load for one side of the wing is > (20,269# X 5.19") / 45.84" = 2295# Total = 4590# > > Assuming the total wing weight is 75# and does not contribute to the bending > moment of the main spar, then, at 800# gross weight, the wing will be > supporting 725#. > > Limit load = 3446# / 725# = 4.75 G's > Ultimate load = 4590# / 725# = 6.33 G's The 3446# figure was for one wing panel so shouldn't it be Limit load = 3446#(x2)/725#= 9.5 g or 6892/gross = gs (which conservatively neglects the load reduction due to wing weight, fuel tanks in wings etc.) (Based on the spar cap analysis I snipped rather than the 800lb x 7g number.) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 21:56:18 -0700 From: Micheal Mims Subject: KR: Stub Tanks Sports Fans, I started glassing the ribs for the aux tanks tonight, you can see progress at: http://pw2.netcom.com/~mimsmand/fuel.html Scroll to the bottom of the page, and Enjoy! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts in Irvine Ca. mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand \ / _\/\/_ _____/_//\\_\_____ F-117 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 01:24:49 -0400 (EDT) From: BSHADR@aol.com Subject: KR: KR Gathering In a message dated 97-09-10 23:51:07 EDT, Bobby wrote: << 2) My plan is to start my Dad to talking and then sit back and watch. If you know my dad and I you'll know what I mean. >> This will be COOL... Randy Stein ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 02:28:23 -0400 (EDT) From: MikeTnyc@aol.com Subject: KR: Re: Gliders >> > Glider lessons is a good option for learning that an AIR-plane will >still >> > fly without an engine. And it's a heck of a lot of fun, just quiet. >> >> It's a lot of fun and must be safer too, as you can solo in a glider >> at 14. >There is nothing like it...give it a try if you can. Speaking of gliders, is there any reason why you couldn't build long wings like the KR1-B and swap them onto a KR-2? Is that the only difference between a 1-B and a regular KR-1? It would be nice to have a quick conversion between a sometimes-glider and a regular plane. Mike Taglieri ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 01:43:11 -0500 From: kr2builder@juno.com (Richard E Pitman) Subject: KR: Re:KR Parts and Supplies Hello all, Well I am continuing to improve daily from my surgery. Really excited about getting to go to the gathering after all. Still won't be able to return to work until November though. Anyhow, Some people had indicated items they wanted to purchase from me, but were unable to do so. Please look again at my web page: http://pw2.netcom.com/~rnricky/ricky/KR2.htm (note: it is RNRicky not MRicvky) I am planning on bringing everything to the Gathering. If there is anything that you woul like, please E-mail me direct at: RNRicky@juno.com I will put a hold on said item and deliver it to you at the gathering. Payment may be made at time of delivery. Ricky Pitman KR2 Builder Marion, Arkansas E-Mail to: KR2Builder@juno.com Web Page: http://pw2.netcom.com/~rnricky/Ricky/Default.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 00:01:03 -0700 From: Micheal Mims Subject: Re: KR: Re:KR Parts and Supplies At 01:43 AM 9/11/97 -0500, you wrote: Please look again at my web page: >http://pw2.netcom.com/~rnricky/ricky/KR2.htm >(note: it is RNRicky not MRicvky) > I got there by going to: http://pw2.netcom.com/~rnricky/ricky/kr2.html URLs are case sensitive so people may have had trouble getting there. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts in Irvine Ca. mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand \ / _\/\/_ _____/_//\\_\_____ F-117 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 04:42:49 -0700 From: enewbold@sprynet.com Subject: Re: KR: Prop markings >>W68T 6EM2 78 >>AB8199 >OK, I'll take a guess, but you've probably figured most of it out. >W = Wood >68 = Diameter >*T = Tip style >*6EM2 = Blade style >78 = pitch >*AB8199 = Serial Number >* denotes a wild guess that might be close to right. >78 pitch on a 68" diameter prop sure seems like alot to me. Must have a >180 or 200 HP engine up front. >Jeff Scott - Los Alamos, NM Thanks Jeff. I also took a guess that 78 indicated pitch. It's on a SIDEWINDER running an O-320 160hp Lycoming. I asked the owner about the prop and he said it was a climb prop, but didn't know what the pitch was. When I suggested 78" he laughed and said that's way too much! I agree with you, that it must indicate 78" of pitch, AND I agree with him that this is too much. It's obviously a cruise prop, isn't it? I believe you use low pitch for climb and high pitch for cruise (or do I have it backwards). Ed Newbold Columbus, OH ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 04:50:43 -0700 From: enewbold@sprynet.com Subject: Re: KR: URL address error Hi Mike. >I got there by going to: >http://pw2.netcom.com/~rnricky/ricky/kr2.html >URLs are case sensitive so people may have had trouble getting there. I just did a cut & paste of the above URL into my browser, and received the following error message: ============================================================================ An Error has Occurred The page you are looking for does not exist, or is temporarily not accessible. Please try to find what you were searching for via one of the following main headings: Netcom Homepage Netcom Homeport Personal Page Browser Search Support Netcom user's often reorganize their individual pages. Some old pages may have been removed or moved to a new address. If you have questions, contact the WebMaster. ============================================================================ I used to be a Netcom subscriber (years ago) and I had this problem occur on my pages way too often. That's why I left them and went with another ISP. What's probably happening is that the particular server this particular page resides on is temporarily out of service. I'll try again tonight or tomorrow to see what happens. Ed Newbold Columbus, OH ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 10:13:32 -0400 From: "Cary Honeywell" Subject: Re: KR: Re:KR Parts and Supplies Email (repy) to cary@storm.ca Web page http://www.storm.ca/~cary/ KR2 area http://www.storm.ca/~cary/kr2.shtml - ---------- > From: Micheal Mims > > Please look again at my web page: > >http://pw2.netcom.com/~rnricky/ricky/KR2.htm > >(note: it is RNRicky not MRicvky) > > > > > I got there by going to: > > http://pw2.netcom.com/~rnricky/ricky/kr2.html > > > URLs are case sensitive so people may have had trouble getting there. > I tried both and got same error as Ed. - - Cary - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 07:35:26 -0700 From: Micheal Mims Subject: Re: KR: Prop markings At 04:42 AM 9/11/97 -0700, you wrote: >I agree with you, that it must indicate 78" of pitch, AND I agree with him that this is too much. It's obviously a cruise prop, isn't it? I believe you use low pitch for climb and high pitch for cruise (or do I have it backwards). > >Ed Newbold >Columbus, OH > > Nope you got it right! I think a C-172 runs about 60 inches of pitch. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts in Irvine Ca. mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand \ / _\/\/_ _____/_//\\_\_____ F-117 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 11:16:18 -0400 From: "Cary Honeywell" Subject: KR: Re:Whats "up ducts" Email (repy) to cary@storm.ca Web page http://www.storm.ca/~cary/ KR2 area http://www.storm.ca/~cary/kr2.shtml For those of you using Volks, Revs and Hapi's, here is one. When I got my project, the original builder had installed air scoops on the sides of the cowel to pass cooling air over the fins on the valve lifter covers. I thought it was a neat idea as these covers do not ordinarily get any cooling air unless this is done. I have considered using NACA/NASA submerged inlets to provide for this cooling since I had to cut a hole in the cowel to get it to fit over the mounting bolt. I am using the RR prefab cowel, and is not me desire to do too much cutting here. The whole unit did not properly fit the Revmaster installation despite it being designed for it. A lot of cutting has been done already, plus I installed air-flow directors and dams on the lower cowel to direct the flow of air to the oil cooler mounted on the bottom of the engine. If any of you are using the Revmaster oil cooler, perhaps you could tell me how you directed the airflow to it. I put a half-moon air scoop on the front of the cowel, building an air director behind it to strengthen the scoop and to direct the airflow to the cooler. You can see the oil cooler in the photos of my web page. I know cooling is a big thing here, but am I overdoing it? - - Cary - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 11:56:20 -0400 (EDT) From: BSHADR@aol.com Subject: Re: KR: Mike Graves In a message dated 97-09-11 06:00:12 EDT, Bobby wrote: << Where is Mike today? Does he live in Austin, TX? Why did he resign? >> Bobby: He is in Oregon, not too far from Ross (I think). He gave the list to Ross because of getting married, building/remodeling his house, business considerations, etc., that lead to a serious shortage of funds for building an airplane. Plus Ross (fool that he is) was too nice to say no. The update is: Marriage - He said a bit shaky right now. House - Postponed, too expensive too. Like the airplane, house construction took a back seat Work - His home based business is hectic and he is expanding, thus extra short on bucks right now. Sort of sounds like the rest of us at some point in life. Randy Stein BSHADR@aol.com Soviet Monica, CA ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 12:02:16 -0400 From: "Cary Honeywell" Subject: KR: Re: Re:Whats "up ducts" Email (repy) to cary@storm.ca Web page http://www.storm.ca/~cary/ KR2 area http://www.storm.ca/~cary/kr2.shtml Hey! I'm actually answering my own question. How 'bout that! Seems I'm working here with someone who used to be one of the AME's for the Snowbirds (CF Snowbirds). I asked him and he recommended using three small holes, a-la Buick, on the cowel sides and allow the venturi effect to draw air out. This would prevent a structural weakening of the cowel and still provide for airflow over the fins of the covers. Three parallel slats was considered, but this might result in spider-web cracking. Any takers on this one? - - Cary - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 09:35:00 -0700 From: David Moore Subject: Re: KR: Re: Gliders Mike, It sounds like a great idea, but if I remember right Ken Rand said "This long wing modification is not for the KR2 only the KR1". Some concern about the spar being strong enough to support the weight of two people and the additional wing. Dave Moore At 02:28 AM 9/11/97 -0400, you wrote: >>> > Glider lessons is a good option for learning that an AIR-plane will >>still >>> > fly without an engine. And it's a heck of a lot of fun, just quiet. >>> >>> It's a lot of fun and must be safer too, as you can solo in a glider >>> at 14. > >>There is nothing like it...give it a try if you can. > >Speaking of gliders, is there any reason why you couldn't build long wings >like the KR1-B and swap them onto a KR-2? Is that the only difference >between a 1-B and a regular KR-1? It would be nice to have a quick >conversion between a sometimes-glider and a regular plane. > >Mike Taglieri > > David Moore Turnkey1@mscomm.com Hesperia, California ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 12:43:10 -0700 From: Donald Reid Subject: Re: KR: Gross weight Peter Hudson wrote: > > Guys, > > I meant 800 lbs at 7gs (not 6) = 5600 lbs was limit loads (oops) > > Donald Reid wrote: > > > > This is a quick but reasonably accurate analysis. A real one would require > >[good napkin type analysis is snipped] > > The distance between the centroid of the spar caps is ~5 3/16" = 5.19" > > so the limit load for one side of the wing is > > (15,223# X 5.19") / 45.84" = 1723# Total = 3446# > > the ultimate load for one side of the wing is > > (20,269# X 5.19") / 45.84" = 2295# Total = 4590# > > > > Assuming the total wing weight is 75# and does not contribute to the bending > > moment of the main spar, then, at 800# gross weight, the wing will be > > supporting 725#. > > > > Limit load = 3446# / 725# = 4.75 G's > > Ultimate load = 4590# / 725# = 6.33 G's > > The 3446# figure was for one wing panel so shouldn't it be > Limit load = 3446#(x2)/725#= 9.5 g > > or 6892/gross = gs (which conservatively neglects the load reduction due > to wing weight, fuel tanks in wings etc.) > > (Based on the spar cap analysis I snipped rather than the 800lb x 7g > number.) Sorry, but no. The 3446 is for both wing halves. Notice where I said that yield load on one side is 1723 and multiplied by 2 to get the total yield load. I still stand by an approximate yield load of 4.75 G's at 800 pound gross weight. - -- Don Reid donreid@erols.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 12:15:17 -0500 From: kr2builder@juno.com (Richard E Pitman) Subject: KR: Re: KR Parts and Supplies Well if all else fails, try going in the front door: http://pw2.netcom.com/~rnricky/ricky/default.htm note htm (NOT html) Ricky Pitman KR2 Builder Marion, Arkansas E-Mail to: KR2Builder@juno.com Web Page: http://pw2.netcom.com/~rnricky/Ricky/Default.htm On Thu, 11 Sep 1997 10:13:32 -0400 "Cary Honeywell" writes: >Email (repy) to cary@storm.ca >Web page http://www.storm.ca/~cary/ >KR2 area http://www.storm.ca/~cary/kr2.shtml > >---------- >> From: Micheal Mims > >> >> Please look again at my web page: >> >http://pw2.netcom.com/~rnricky/ricky/KR2.htm >> >(note: it is RNRicky not MRicvky) >> > >> >> >> I got there by going to: >> >> http://pw2.netcom.com/~rnricky/ricky/kr2.html >> >> >> URLs are case sensitive so people may have had trouble getting >there. >> > >I tried both and got same error as Ed. > >- Cary - > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 10:55:49 -0700 From: Micheal Mims Subject: Re: KR: Re: KR Parts and Supplies At 12:15 PM 9/11/97 -0500, you wrote: >Well if all else fails, try going in the front door: > >http://pw2.netcom.com/~rnricky/ricky/default.htm > Its case sensitive so you will need to use: http://pw2.netcom.com/~rnricky/Ricky/kr2.htm the second ricky needs to be Ricky with a uppercase R not lowercase, Otherwise you will get: "An Error has Occurred The page you are looking for does not exist, or is temporarily not accessible." ________________________________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 10:56:54 -0700 From: Micheal Mims Subject: Re: KR: Re: KR Parts and Supplies At 12:15 PM 9/11/97 -0500, you wrote: >Well if all else fails, try going in the front door: > >http://pw2.netcom.com/~rnricky/ricky/default.htm > Or go to my LINKS page at: http://pw2.netcom.com/~mimsmand/links.html and go from there! It works I promise! :o) ________________________________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 11:14:03 -0700 From: Micheal Mims Subject: KR: Website Cool picture of Lion Heart on my homepage for those interested! ________________________________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 14:32:49 -0700 From: enewbold@sprynet.com Subject: Re: KR: KRs for sale FYI, I just opened up my September 1997 issue of Sport Aviation and found the following two aircraft in the 'For Sale' section: KR-2, TTAF 190, SMOH 190, Continental A65, nav/com, fuel pump, accelerometer, VFR instruments, single seat. Excellent construction. $9,000. (908) 234-7687 KR-2 - 80% complete on retract gear, fiberglass components, canopy, tank. 0 1835 VW with accessories, mount, prop, spinner, carburetor, more. $3,900 OBO. (205) 764-8913 Ed Newbold Columbus, OH ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 20:03:09 From: Austin Clark Subject: Re: KR: wing tank fuel feeds - a different approach At 22:46 9/10/97 -0400, you wrote: >I was going through my hundred or so emails... I'm on another KRnet type of >service...reading about how you guys are trying to solve a fuel pickup >problem when a thought struck me. > >I was looking at the original KR2 about 8 years ago and I remember >something in the product literature about the KR2 being built just like a >big model airplane. Thats when it hit me.... > >Why don't you do what us R/Cers' do in our fuel tanks.....CLUNKS!!! Have a >piece of flexible fuel hose witha brass weight on one end with a hole in it >so the fuel flows through. That way when the fuel sloshes from end to end >or side to side the clunk will move with it. > >Maybe someone could test it out. > >Just a thought from a Scale R/C Modler whose thinking about getting into >homebuilts and is still looking around...maybe I'll have to take a closer >look at the KR2S...... > >Jim "Mid-Air" (it's a loooong story, don't ask) Daly >Mississauga Ontario Canada >mailto:rcscale@interlog.com > > > Stay with us Jim, I like your thinking. That's how the fuel pickup in the RV6 is designed. Austin Clark Pascagoula Mississippi ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 18:46:41 -0600 From: jscott.pilot@juno.com (Jeffrey E Scott) Subject: Re: KR: wing tank fuel feeds - a different approach On Wed, 10 Sep 1997 22:46:28 -0400 "Jim Daly" writes: >Why don't you do what us R/Cers' do in our fuel tanks.....CLUNKS!!! Have a >piece of flexible fuel hose witha brass weight on one end with a hole in it >so the fuel flows through. That way when the fuel sloshes from end to end >or side to side the clunk will move with it. > >Maybe someone could test it out. > >Just a thought from a Scale R/C Modler whose thinking about getting into >homebuilts and is still looking around...maybe I'll have to take a closer >look at the KR2S...... > >Jim "Mid-Air" (it's a loooong story, don't ask) Daly >Mississauga Ontario Canada >mailto:rcscale@interlog.com > In the aerobatic world that's known as a "flop tube". They work well enough. The tube itself is prone to fatigue and failure, so you need to plan to make it removeable for periodic inspections and/or replacement. Aw com'on Jim. I told a war story, we can handle your long "Mid-Air" story. Jeff - ------- Jeff Scott - Los Alamos, NM jscott.pilot@juno.com See N1213W construction and first flight at http://fly.hiwaay.net~langford/kjefs.html & http: //www.thuntek.net/~jeb/krpage.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 18:39:35 -0600 From: jscott.pilot@juno.com (Jeffrey E Scott) Subject: Re: KR: kitplanes On Wed, 10 Sep 1997 21:57:51 -0500 "Mark Langford" writes: > Not to put down Sport Aviation, because I love it too, >but SA seems to concentrate on the "show planes" and blowing EAA's horn, >not so much on the nuts and bolts of construction. Maybe I'm one of those >idiots who enjoys building, but you won't catch me selling mine when it's >finished, just so I can start another one. I may build another one, but I >plan to get some use out of my KR2S. You guys are gonna have to put up >with me for a long time... > >Mark Langford, Huntsville, AL >email at langford@hiwaay.net >KR2S project construction at http://fly.hiwaay.net/~langford > I couldn't agree more. Seems like Tony Bingelis was the last of the Tech writers. SA and the EAA Leadership seems to be dedicated to museums, showplanes, and warbirds. They need to take a serious look at their membership rolls and try to regain the spirit of the real homebuilders. I don't consider a $700,000 Lancair 4P with a $70,000 rendition of an automotive V-8 or a Rutan built Jet to be very applicable to the average Joe building an airplane in a 1 or 2 car garage. The place where I have found the true homebuilding spirit is right here on KRNet. I really enjoy all of Mark Langford's unique engineering ideas and Mike Mims ideas on how to keep every last penny in his bank account. I may not necessarily agree with all the ideas, but that's what building your own and the spirit of the homebuild airplane is all about. All of the free thinking spawns new ideas that get used by others including many net lurkers that don't beat their own drums on the net. Jeff - ------- Jeff Scott - Los Alamos, NM jscott.pilot@juno.com See N1213W construction and first flight at http://fly.hiwaay.net~langford/kjefs.html & http: //www.thuntek.net/~jeb/krpage.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 23:22:50 -0400 (EDT) From: bvermeul@concentric.net Subject: Re: KR: The Perry Report 9/8/97 >Video Bob will have two cameras going full time, so we should have some good >material from the sessions to distill into contruction videos. Randy, Make that three cameras. The 97 KR Gathering Video will be the best ever. Geesh, I can hardly wait to get there and see everyone again. One week and counting. Video Bob ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 21:02:55 -0600 From: jscott.pilot@juno.com (Jeffrey E Scott) Subject: Re: KR:Brake Pedals On Wed, 10 Sep 1997 22:11:25 -0500 Bobby Muse writes: > >(1) I don't believe I have a alignment problem, except that both main tires >wear the the same on the outside. I will shim a little toe out at the axle. >With the tire wear being even, I am more concerned with the amount of wear. > > > Bobby Muse(N122B) > bmuse@mindspring.com If it's any comfort to you, my friend with the Hummelbird (much smaller and lighter than a KR) wore out a set of Lamb tires in about the same time. They just seem to be a soft compound that wears fast. Last I talked to him, David is still planning to fly the Hummelbird to the gathering. - ------- Jeff Scott - Los Alamos, NM jscott.pilot@juno.com See N1213W construction and first flight at http://fly.hiwaay.net~langford/kjefs.html & http: //www.thuntek.net/~jeb/krpage.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 21:17:08 -0600 From: jscott.pilot@juno.com (Jeffrey E Scott) Subject: Re: KR: Prop markings On Thu, 11 Sep 1997 04:42:49 -0700 enewbold@sprynet.com writes: >>>W68T 6EM2 78 >>>AB8199 > >>OK, I'll take a guess, but you've probably figured most of it out. >>W = Wood >>68 = Diameter >>*T = Tip style >>*6EM2 = Blade style >>78 = pitch >>*AB8199 = Serial Number >>* denotes a wild guess that might be close to right. >>78 pitch on a 68" diameter prop sure seems like alot to me. Must >have a >>180 or 200 HP engine up front. >>Jeff Scott - Los Alamos, NM > >Thanks Jeff. I also took a guess that 78 indicated pitch. It's on a SIDEWINDER >running an O-320 160hp Lycoming. I asked the owner about the prop and he said it >was a climb prop, but didn't know what the pitch was. When I suggested 78" he >laughed and said that's way too much! > >I agree with you, that it must indicate 78" of pitch, AND I agree with him that >this is too much. It's obviously a cruise prop, isn't it? I believe you use low >pitch for climb and high pitch for cruise (or do I have it backwards). > >Ed Newbold >Columbus, OH > > You are correct, lower pitch number for climb, higer pitch number for climb. Of course the prop could have been stamped incorrectly. You could take the prop to any competant prop shop to have it guaged, or if you can find the specs, you can guage it yourself. They measure several stations measure by distance from the center of the hub, then take protractor measurements compared to the flat hub at each station. When I watched the prop shop repitch my metal prop, he only measured on the front side of the prop and compared it to a lookup table in the McCauley prop book to verify that the stamped pitch was correct before he started bending the prop. Of course if the engine turns what you want for rpm and performs the way you want, you don't care what the numbers on the prop say. :o) - ------- Jeff Scott - Los Alamos, NM jscott.pilot@juno.com See N1213W construction and first flight at http://fly.hiwaay.net~langford/kjefs.html & http: //www.thuntek.net/~jeb/krpage.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 21:40:02 -0700 From: David Moore Subject: KR: Rudder Pedals KRnetters, Several years ago, RR advertised a cast aluminum set of rudder pedals with the KR on the pedal. Not realizing what I had, I sold the set I had to a builder who just had to have them. Does anyone on KRnet have or know someone who might have a set they would want to part with? I talked to Jeannette, she said they were a bit to heavy, and she hasn't had them in a long time. Dave Moore David Moore Turnkey1@mscomm.com Hesperia, California ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Sep 1997 00:40:55 -0400 (EDT) From: MikeTnyc@aol.com Subject: Re: KR: kitplanes >Here's my two cents worth on Kitplanes. It's certainly better than nothing >at all. > >I really get a lot out of it each month. There's always something that I >copy and put in a binder. Either the "Aerodynamics" binder, the "Engine" >binder, the "Miscellaneous articles" binder, or the "Avionics" binder (the >list goes on). I'm always reminded of some things I should already know >from "Wind Tunnel" too. And the annual supplier directory is invaluable. One thing that always irritates me about the supplier directory is that it NEVER lists Great Plains among the suppliers of VW conversions, although they include several others, some of them very obscure. Two years in a row I've sent them a letter saying they forgot what is probably the leader in this field and I have not gotten a reply or a correction. Mike Taglieri ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 21:53:28 -0600 From: jscott.pilot@juno.com (Jeffrey E Scott) Subject: Re: KR: The Perry Report 9/8/97 On Thu, 11 Sep 1997 23:22:50 -0400 (EDT) bvermeul@concentric.net writes: > >>Video Bob will have two cameras going full time, so we should have some good >>material from the sessions to distill into contruction videos. > >Randy, > >Make that three cameras. The 97 KR Gathering Video will be the best ever. >Geesh, I can hardly wait to get there and see everyone again. One week and >counting. > >Video Bob > Video Bob, Do you still have any videos of the '96 Gathering left and are you going to bring some to sell. I'll bet they could be sold from the fly market. I'll be happy to sell during my watch. Besides, I still haven't bought my '96 video yet. - ------- Jeff Scott - Los Alamos, NM jscott.pilot@juno.com See N1213W construction and first flight at http://fly.hiwaay.net~langford/kjefs.html & http: //www.thuntek.net/~jeb/krpage.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Sep 1997 07:24:00 -0700 From: MARVIN MCCOY Subject: Re: KR: kitplanes Jeffrey E Scott wrote: > > Seems like Tony Bingelis was the last of the Tech > writers. SA and the EAA Leadership seems to be dedicated to museums, > showplanes, and warbirds. They need to take a serious look at their > membership rolls and try to regain the spirit of the real homebuilders. > I don't consider a $700,000 Lancair 4P with a $70,000 rendition of an > automotive V-8 or a Rutan built Jet to be very applicable to the average > Joe building an airplane in a 1 or 2 car garage. > > The place where I have found the true homebuilding spirit is right here > on KRNet. I really enjoy all of Mark Langford's unique engineering ideas > and Mike Mims ideas on how to keep every last penny in his bank account. > I may not necessarily agree with all the ideas, but that's what building > your own and the spirit of the homebuild airplane is all about. All of > the free thinking spawns new ideas that get used by others including many > net lurkers that don't beat their own drums on the net. > > Jeff > ------- > Jeff Scott - Los Alamos, NM > ------------------------------------- Yes!! Have you ever noticed how most of the magazines only feature the planes and products that do the most advertising in their magazine????? Marvin McCoy Seattle, WA. North end of Boeing Field Mr.Marvin@worldnet.att.net See you all at Perry - ----------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Sep 1997 10:12:26 -0500 (CDT) From: Steven A Eberhart Subject: Re: KR: kitplanes On Fri, 12 Sep 1997, MARVIN MCCOY wrote: > Jeffrey E Scott wrote: > > > > Seems like Tony Bingelis was the last of the Tech > > writers. SA and the EAA Leadership seems to be dedicated to museums, > > showplanes, and warbirds. They need to take a serious look at their > > membership rolls and try to regain the spirit of the real homebuilders. I subscribed to Experimenter two years ago as it was advertized as a must have for the experimenter. Well, if you are into Ultra Lights then maybe - but, if you are interrested in real airplanes then it to is severly lacking. I subscribe to SA, Exp., Kitplanes and the British magazine Flyer. At least Flyer is actually building a Europa and run an article on their progress every other month. Refreshing to see a magazine practice what it preaches. Peter Lert, one of the Editors of Sport Pilot and Air Progress is also building a Europa and has written several articles about his plane. Seems that he is distancing himself from Sport Pilot, of late, as I have seen his articles in Kitplane recently. > > I don't consider a $700,000 Lancair 4P with a $70,000 rendition of an > > automotive V-8 or a Rutan built Jet to be very applicable to the average > > Joe building an airplane in a 1 or 2 car garage. > > True, but, there are some of Rutans ideas that make sence to atleast investigate for use on our planes. Case in point is his recent use of forward swept wings. When you think about it, you can place the occupants on the planes center of gravity. Can also put wing LE mounted fuel tanks on the planes center of gravity. THese two items go a long way in removing a lot of weight and ballance concerns. > > The place where I have found the true homebuilding spirit is right here > > on KRNet. I really enjoy all of Mark Langford's unique engineering ideas > > and Mike Mims ideas on how to keep every last penny in his bank account. > > I may not necessarily agree with all the ideas, but that's what building > > your own and the spirit of the homebuild airplane is all about. All of > > the free thinking spawns new ideas that get used by others including many > > net lurkers that don't beat their own drums on the net. The Internet is rapidly becoming the universal medium for research. Really is a fun time to be living in and also to be participating in the homebuilt movement. Looks like the EAA is following the same path that the Indianapolis 500 is. Giving up the glory of what made it great for a self serving image of what the future should become. Both need to change their name - The Greatest Spectacle in Racing does not describe the current 500 and Experimental Aircraft Association does not describe what the EAA is presenting on its TV shows or any of its other publicity endevers. [snip] > Have you ever noticed how most of the magazines only feature the > planes and products that do the most advertising in their magazine????? > When ever a new model is released, it immediately is featured on the cover of every aircraft publication. Many times with the same photograph! Steve Eberhart newtech@newtech.com Perry or Bust! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Sep 1997 11:24:37 -0400 From: smithr Subject: Re: KR: wing tank fuel feeds - a different approach Austin Clark wrote: ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Sep 1997 08:46:40 -0700 From: Micheal Mims Subject: Re: KR: kitplanes Something I noticed about Kitplanes and the relationship it has with builders, Kitplanes is a fun publication to browse when your in the ideas stage (deciding what powerplant, airplane, engine, avionics, etc.) but once he has made up his mind and construction starts, the builder is busy building and if there is nothing published that the builder can utilize at that particular moment,... well the magazine becomes pretty useless,..because of the builders bias,..not the magazines fault at all. I once read an article in Airline Pilot that 80% of the readers to Flying magazine held a student pilot rating or less. Coincidence,....???? I think not! ________________________________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Sep 1997 13:18:43 -0400 From: "Cary Honeywell" Subject: KR: Updated Web site Email (repy) to cary@storm.ca Web page http://www.storm.ca/~cary/ KR2 area http://www.storm.ca/~cary/kr2.shtml I added a new section to the site covering my cowel installation. Instead of having to bring everything up, I have divided the whole thing into sections which you access separately. Anyway, I keep trudging along. There are only 2 pictures there, but... - - Cary ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Sep 1997 13:18:55 -0500 (CDT) From: Steven A Eberhart Subject: Re: KR: Updated Web site What was the event that necessitated the repair to the stub wings? Looks nasty. If this was already covered I apologize for not consulting the archives first. Your plane looks nice, I am just at the "trying to make sence out of the plans" stage. Have most of the composite materials but no wood yet. Plan to build the tail first. Steve Eberhart newtech@newtech.com On Fri, 12 Sep 1997, Cary Honeywell wrote: > Email (repy) to cary@storm.ca > Web page http://www.storm.ca/~cary/ > KR2 area http://www.storm.ca/~cary/kr2.shtml > > I added a new section to the site covering my cowel installation. Instead > of having to bring everything up, I have divided the whole thing into > sections which you access separately. Anyway, I keep trudging along. There > are only 2 pictures there, but... > > - Cary > > > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Sep 1997 14:47:12 -0400 From: smithr Subject: KR: flexible fuel feed For what its worth, I have used the flexible fuel feed (silicone tubing and "clunk weight") on RC planes. While it was generally reliable, on 2 occasions it malfunctioned resulting in sucking air and engine stoppage: 1) tubing came off the rigid connection 2)tubing broke in half at the rigid connection. Bob Smith, Albany, NY (previous note got chopped off, sorry) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Sep 1997 15:16:57 -0400 From: smithr Subject: KR: progress report Roll Bars: I just finished my aft canopy stiffener and roll bar. Both were made from a 1.5" thick x 2" core of lastafoam shaped into an arch with layers of 8oz glass/aeropoxy (2 layers for stiffener, 3 for roll bar) (Langford's roll bar has 6 layers and I figure I'm only half as crazy as he is). The corners where the layers come together were floxxed. The finished products seem very strong. The one with 3 layers is noticibly stronger than the 2 layer one. I will later incorporate the roll bar into the front of the aft deck. Front deck: I have wasted much time trying to make the forward deck out of 1/4 inch lastafoam bent around formers to avoid sanding. One advantage of this method might be that the core is made of a higher density, more uniform foam and might be stronger for the same weight. I had hoped to bend the foam miraculously into the perfect shape- letting the foam itself define the curve. However, I found using this method there are 3 basic problems: 1) the foam "droops" slightly in places-- so I shim it up 2) the foam lacks adequate thickness to sand to shape (remove 3/32) to fuselage curve where required -- so I glued in foam doublers and 3) I must glass the outside first which doesn't allow for minor fitting to final shape. However, stubborn as I am, I continue trying with this method, knowing that Mark Langfords method (2" foam, shape,glass inside first, place on fuse, shape outside, glass outside)is probably easier and may produce a better product. I will keep you posted on my final product. Bob Smith , building at considerably less than warp speed ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Sep 1997 12:39:53 -0700 From: Micheal Mims Subject: Re: KR: progress report At 03:16 PM 9/12/97 -0400, you wrote: However, stubborn as I am, I continue trying >with this method, knowing that Mark Langfords method (2" foam, >shape,glass inside first, place on fuse, shape outside, glass outside)is >probably easier and may produce a better product. I will keep you >posted on my final product. > >Bob Smith , building at considerably less than warp speed > Actually the way you want to do it is the RIGHT way! If you have access to a set of dragonfly plans you can see how its done. If not here is a quick rundown. Make a jig by cutting three or four formers that will fit the outside of the finished piece (see Marks website). Make these formers 3/4 inch oversize, bondo them to your work bench at the appropriate locations and connect them with 3/4 inch stringers. Use dental floss to sew the foam down into the jig (through the foam and around the stringers. Glass the inside first and let cure. After cure , reach under the stringers and cut the floss. Remove the piece from the jig and flox it into place on your fuselage. Do some light sanding on the outside for touch up and glass the outside. Wha La your done! Thats how it should be done on both fron and rear t-decks! ________________________________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand ------------------------------ End of krnet-l-digest V1 #95 ****************************