From: Majordomo@teleport.com[SMTP:Majordomo@teleport.com] Sent: Monday, December 08, 1997 1:48 PM To: john bouyea Subject: Majordomo file: list 'krnet-l' file 'v01.n113' -- From: owner-krnet-l-digest@lists.teleport.com (krnet-l-digest) To: krnet-l-digest@lists.teleport.com Subject: krnet-l-digest V1 #113 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 Saturday, October 4 1997 Volume 01 : Number 113 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 14:03:16 -0700 From: Ross Subject: KR: [Fwd: BOUNCE krnet-l@lists.teleport.com: Non-member submission from [kr2builder@juno.com (Richard E Pitman)]] This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - --------------B8C510B8A13CA29E02FCEEA9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Whoops, Seems several of those juno.com addresses are people who are still there! I will add you back in! Sorry. (Early last week I had +100 dead juno.com email address bounced emails) -- Ross - --------------B8C510B8A13CA29E02FCEEA9 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: owner-krnet-l@lists.teleport.com Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp2.teleport.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id SAA02775; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 18:14:40 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 18:14:40 -0700 (PDT) From: owner-krnet-l@teleport.com Message-Id: <199710030114.SAA02775@smtp2.teleport.com> To: owner-krnet-l@teleport.com Subject: BOUNCE krnet-l@lists.teleport.com: Non-member submission from [kr2builder@juno.com (Richard E Pitman)] >From krnet-l-owner Thu Oct 2 18:14:36 1997 Received: from m5.boston.juno.com (m5.boston.juno.com [205.231.100.197]) by smtp2.teleport.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id SAA02748 for ; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 18:14:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from kr2builder@juno.com) by m5.boston.juno.com (queuemail) id VzN24873; Thu, 02 Oct 1997 21:12:58 EDT To: krnet-l@teleport.com Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 20:13:15 -0500 Subject: Re: KR:Trade-a-Plane Message-ID: <19971002.201319.4238.0.kr2builder@juno.com> References: <2.2.32.19971001191224.00947d60@popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Mailer: Juno 1.38 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-9,11-19 From: kr2builder@juno.com (Richard E Pitman) Greetings All, If the following is a repeat, please forgive me. I just found that Trade-a-Plane is now online at: http://www.trade-a-plane.com As I said, if this is old news please forgive me. If not then enjoy. PS Healing nicely. Chest bone( sternum) is starting to itch like crazy. Sleeping all night now too. See y'all at Perry next year. Ricky Pitman KR2 Builder Marion, Arkansas E-Mail to: KR2Builder@juno.com Web Page: http://pw2.netcom.com/~rnricky/Ricky/Default.htm - --------------B8C510B8A13CA29E02FCEEA9-- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 14:05:35 -0700 From: Ross Subject: Re: KR: Measuring to fit the stern post I'd have to look in my logbook, but I think I did some scribbled trig calculations to figure out where the ends would need to be cut and what angle. I used a coping saw to make the cuts, and left about 1" of plywood beyond the 5/8 blocks. I think I eventually sanded the surface to get good surface to surface contact with the vertical spar. (not approved approach, but possibly ok with epoxy) John Bouyea wrote: > > Throughout the construction of the fuselage sides, the plans call to leave > the longerons and skins a bit long "to be trimmed laer when the stern post > is fitted." > > Well, that moment is at hand and I'm wondering what others did to trim to > length while setting the angle of the stern post. > > Any tips on cutting to fit? > > John Bouyea > johnbouyea@worldnet.att.net > kr2s - gluing the cross-members in the belly > Hillsboro, Oregon ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 14:06:31 -0700 From: Ross Subject: KR: [Fwd: swpc: Static Electricity] This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - --------------B911725CF43C7BE5FF553EF0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This is a post from a member of my local EAA chapter. It deals with static electricity... and fuel. - --------------B911725CF43C7BE5FF553EF0 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: null@list.dnc.net Received: from natasha.list.dnc.net ([206.58.127.12]) by smtp1.teleport.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA19624 for ; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 21:14:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sherman.dnc.net by natasha.list.dnc.net (NTList 3.02.12) id ta087379; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 21:15:39 +0100 Received: from speedy.proaxis.com ([198.68.7.14]) by sherman.dnc.net (Netscape Mail Server v2.02) with ESMTP id AAA442; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 21:15:05 -0700 Received: from artfish (pr05-18.proaxis.com [206.163.143.144]) by speedy.proaxis.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) with SMTP id VAA23609; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 21:13:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19971002211040.0076cba8@proaxis.com> X-Sender: artfish@proaxis.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 21:10:40 -0700 To: glastarnet@insync.net From: Art Fish Subject: Re: swpc: Static Electricity Cc: opa@dnc.net, oregon-rvlist@dnc.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-ListMember: rossy@teleport.com [opa@list.dnc.net] For all of you who have mogas stc's or are fueling your own a/c, I picked this up on the ShortWing Piper Club net, and I think it's worth reading. It could save someone's life and/or theirs and someone elses birds. STATIC ELECTRICITY CAN BE DEADLY. The static electricity does not necessarily have to come from the fuel moving through a hose etc. Our bodies generally have 1000 to 3000 volt of static electricity at any one time, more if you are wearing silk or rayon clothing. It takes 4000 volts to feel the tingle, and 5-6000 volts to create a VISIBLE spark, much, much less to create enough of a spark to ignite fuel vapors. For 4 years, I taught static control for the electronic firm I worked for, which included one of the computer departments of the State of Washington. Please read and be aware. It's kind of long and detailed, and it is worth reading. Art Fish, GlaStar 5289, Tri-Pacer N9026D >From: John.Ritchie@Sciatl.COM >Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 13:53 -0500 (EST) >Subject: Re: swpc: Static Electricity >X-Envelope-to: swpc@pbm.com, kwbrown2@tva.gov >To: kwbrown2@tva.gov, swpc@pbm.com >Sender: owner-swpc@rt.com > > > Kenny: > > Well said. > > Thanks, > > John > TriPacer '11A > > >______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ >Subject: swpc: Static Electricity >Author: kwbrown2@tva.gov at PMDF >Date: 10/1/97 11:26 AM > > >SWPC Members, > >I'll give it a shot to try and describe whats going on with the plastic >containers and static electricity. > >Static Electricity is defined as - An accumulation of an electric charge >on an insulated body (your plastic gas container). So how does this >happen? If a large number of atoms in a piece of neutral material >(plastic) loses or gains electrons, that material will become charged >(either - or +). Meaning it has a deficiency or surplus of electrons. >Atoms can be made to do this in a number of ways, but the method that >the ancient Greeks discovered was by friction. If we rub a glass rod >with a piece of silk, the glass rod will give up electrons to the silk. >The glass rod will become positively charged, and the silk will become >negatively charged. > >The reason these charges result is because the glass ( or it could be >plastic) has surface electrons that are easily dislodged by friction. >This same thing will happen when two materials are rubbed together, as >long as one material can give up electrons easily, and the other >material will execpt those electrons readily ( dry air flowing over the >plastic container in the back of your truck, or fuel flowing out of the >plastic container thru a plastic funnel into a metal tank, esp in dry >weather). > >Comb your hair (esp. during dry air peroids) with a rubber or plastic >comb. You can see the effects of the static by attracting pieces of >paper (electrostatic field). If you rub a rubber rod against fur, the >rod will be charged negatively because it picks up electrons from the >fur. Electrostatically charged. > >The problem begins when the strength of the electrostatic field between >the two differently charged objects ( the plastic container and the fuel >tank) is high and they come into close proximity with each >other................we get spark. A small bolt of lightning if you >will. When this happens between our plastic containers and the fuel >tank, you have all the ingredience for disaster. > >Solution............. Use a metal can and ground between the metal can >and the fuel tank or airframe. > >End of Electricity 101 > >Be careful and forewarned, > >Kenny Brown >Tri-Pacer N2848P > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from this list, send email to majordomo@pbm.com containing >the words "unsubscribe swpc". To contact a human about problems, send >mail to owner-swpc@pbm.com > > >Received: from 192.168.190.1 by ALPHA.CORP.SCIATL.COM (PMDF V4.3-13 #7203) > id <01IOAJMSLZWG000V1U@ALPHA.CORP.SCIATL.COM>; Wed, > 01 Oct 1997 12:33:03 -0500 (EST) >Received: from [207.126.116.160] by gatekeeper.sciatl.com for > id MAA10822; Wed Oct 1 12:38:09 1997 >Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by xkey.com id JAA21500 for swpc-outgoing; > Wed, 1 Oct 1997 09:27:49 -0700 >Received: (from smtp@localhost) by xkey.com id JAA21490 for ; > Wed, 1 Oct 1997 09:27:46 -0700 >Received: from tvainet.tva.gov(152.85.133.14) by xkey.com via smtp (V1.3) > id sma021460; Wed Oct 1 09:27:45 1997 >Received: from topaz_hme.cha.tva.gov by tvainet.tva.gov via smtpd > (for xkey.com [207.126.116.160]) with SMTP; 1 Oct 1997 16:02:48 UT >Received: from chachaois2b.cha.tva.gov (chachaois2b.cha.tva.gov [152.85.66.29]) > by topaz.cha.tva.gov (8.8.6/8.7.3/8.7.5-topaz) with SMTP id MAA07765 for > ; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 12:27:34 -0400 (EDT) >Received: by chachaois2b.cha.tva.gov with SMTP > (Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.994.63) > id <01BCCE65.67BC8C80@chachaois2b.cha.tva.gov>; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 12:27:38 - -0400 >Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 12:26:51 -0400 >From: "Brown, Kenneth W." >Subject: swpc: Static Electricity >Sender: owner-swpc@rt.com >Message-id: > > >X-Envelope-to: "Ritchie, John%SA-TSBD"@ccmail.corp.sciatl.com >MIME-version: 1.0 >X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.994.63 >Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit >Precedence: bulk > artfish@proaxis.com - --------------B911725CF43C7BE5FF553EF0-- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 14:07:59 -0700 From: Ross Subject: Re: KR: Thanks and progress Man a list with more than 10 items... you must be a type "A" KR builder! Micheal Mims wrote: > > I want to thank those of you (Bobby Muse and others) who encouraged me to > try building the fuel caps the way the plans say! Worked pretty darn slick > and didn't cost a cent! Those kinds of things are gona help me meet my > goal! (in the air for less than $10k) > > Stuff that's happened in my garage since Perry: > > 1)Ripped out elevator controls and re-installed them the way the plans say > (works better this way) > 2)Mounted aileron control hardware and rigged cables > 3)Mounted rudder pedals and brake cylinders > 4)Reduced the size of the elevator and started on new tip extensions on for > the horizontal (increase of 2 square feet in area) > 5)Installed elevator counter weight bracket > 6)Mounted tail spring > 7)Finished up aux tank and plumb to inside of cockpit > 8)Built fuel caps from orange juice jugs > 9)Built two pretty slick fuel gauges (sight type) > 10)Cut spars to airfoil shape in preparation of adding foam and glassing stubs > 11)Designed and started building special wing root fairings like Tom Taylors > Glasair (see Oct Sport Aviation) > 12)Contemplating ripping out main landing gear and building lighter ones > (retracts???Randy are you listening??) :o) > > I think I better take a break and take the wife out to dinner and a movie > this weekend, has anyone seen her? :o) > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Micheal Mims > Just Plane Nutts in Irvine Ca. > mailto:mikemims@pacbell.net > http://home.pacbell.net/mikemims > > \ / > _\/\/_ > ____/_//\\_\_____ > > F-117 > All better now! ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 14:09:13 -0700 From: Ross Subject: KR: [Fwd: BOUNCE krnet-l@lists.teleport.com: Non-member submission from [taildrag@juno.com (Oscar J. Zuniga, Jr.)]] This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - --------------9D080BD037A89D9EAB9F1250 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Another Juno.com post lost this week... sorry - --------------9D080BD037A89D9EAB9F1250 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: owner-krnet-l@lists.teleport.com Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp2.teleport.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id GAA13900; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 06:29:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 06:29:05 -0700 (PDT) From: owner-krnet-l@teleport.com Message-Id: <199710031329.GAA13900@smtp2.teleport.com> To: owner-krnet-l@teleport.com Subject: BOUNCE krnet-l@lists.teleport.com: Non-member submission from [taildrag@juno.com (Oscar J. Zuniga, Jr.)] >From krnet-l-owner Fri Oct 3 06:29:02 1997 Received: from m13.boston.juno.com (m13.boston.juno.com [205.231.100.193]) by smtp2.teleport.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id GAA13881 for ; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 06:29:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from taildrag@juno.com) by m13.boston.juno.com (queuemail) id JpM06692; Fri, 03 Oct 1997 09:27:46 EDT To: krnet-l@teleport.com Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 06:26:00 -0700 Subject: Facts Message-ID: <19971003.062623.14670.0.taildrag@juno.com> X-Mailer: Juno 1.38 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 1-2,8-11,18-19,21-22,26-29 From: taildrag@juno.com (Oscar J. Zuniga, Jr.) Just had to do this. Here are a few items from catching up on my reading (been reading too much KRNet archives, and have let other stuff pile up): 1. From this month's PC Magazine; the American Psychological Association says that people who spend more than 38 hours a week participating in newsgroups, chatting, or sending e-mail may be at risk of developing an addiction-- dubbed Pathological Internet Use. (I'm not making this up). Says that for some dependents, the craving to go online is similar to the craving that smokers have for cigarettes. Not me! No sir! I can quit anytime I want. 2. From Sept. AOPA Pilot; headline: "Cessna Steals the Show at Oshkosh. By far, the biggest news at the EAA Fly-In and Convention was the pricing of the reintroduced Cessna 206 Stationair." $289,900 for the IFR/normally aspirated; $324,900 for the Turbo. Am I missing something here? I didn't go to Oshkosh, but any of you who did- was this by far the biggest news there? Don't get me wrong, guys; I've been a member of AOPA since 1971, but somebody seems to be eating at Cessna's table here. 3. From Oct. AOPA Pilot, "Launching Columbia": the new production Lancair, VFR, lists at $185,000. IFR- $205,000. My conclusion: KR people are bottom feeders. Scavengers. For the price of ONE T-206, a guy could build and equip at least TEN KRs! I guess that's why I'm here right now and not out preflighting my T-206 or Lancair Columbia...? Oscar Zuniga Medford, Oregon - --------------9D080BD037A89D9EAB9F1250-- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 14:18:18 -0700 From: Ross Subject: Re: KR: Measuring to fit the stern post > If you ever had a chance to see my KR or any KR for that matter, compound > curves using foam and fiberglass are no problem. Don't be concerned. > > Hint for all builders: 1. Be creative, it's A.O.K.. > 2. No one can tell that the left side is > different from the right side. > > Bobby Muse(N122B) > bmuse@mindspring.com > Wimberly, TX I agree with this. I built my own top side (fwd deck, canopy and aft deck,cowling). The cowling is not symmetrical, but it's growing on me, I think it looks neat. The aft deck has compound curves in it but it looks terrific! (I like it). So the risk was worth it. Plus it's all removable, so I can change it later and put a new top deck on at some future date... perhaps with gull wing doors. -- Ross ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 14:28:03 -0700 From: Ross Subject: Re: KR: FAA & Inspections MARVIN MCCOY wrote: > > ----------- > The plans say to have the spars inspected by FAA before you > enclose them with the plywood. When I contacted the Seattle FAA a few > months ago and told them I was starting to build an experimental > airplane, they were not interested. They told me to contact them when I > get close to finishing it. > Anyone else enclose their spars without the inspection, or > have any experience with this? I did not get anything in writing, just > a phone conversation with the FAA. > > Marvin McCoy > Seattle, WA. North end of Boeing field > Mr.Marvin@worldnet.att.net > -------------- Marvin, I had a similar encounter with the FAA back in '90 in Phoenix. They were very nice but they said they don't do pre-cover inspections any longer. Now is the time to get hooked up with an EAA technical counselor. I hooked up and the gentleman who looked at my project was a retired shop teacher who had built 3-5 wood airplanes. He told me to vent the compartments to atmosphere, and to VARNISH the inside, but DONT varnish the spar caps remember you have to glue there. He also looked at a couple of items I had questions with on the boat itself. One was an area where a C-clamp had gotten epoxied to the plywood and pulled away material. He indicated that epoxy could be used to fill the area. In general he had good things to say about epoxy. That was several years ago, but it was a terrific visit. I'd say go find a technical counselor and have him/her take a look. They usually will not sign your builders logbook, you will have to make an entry saying... xxx tech counselor visit today. Or somthing like that. The tech counselor sends a form into the EAA however recording the event. -- Ross ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 15:36:01 From: Ron Lee Subject: KR: why so many posts? I just got about 20 posts from you, some duplicates. Ron ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 14:36:35 -0700 From: Ross Subject: Re: KR: FAA & Inspections Tom, At my EAA chapter most of the builders are RV builder... heck I even got a demo ride in that yellow RV-8 that is on the cover of Kitplanes this month. But they are generally friendly as long as you don't bring up how much they will have to pay for a new powerplant compared to a VW. Also, to those who would slight the VW powerplant, most the engine failures I read in the FAA database seemed to be fuel system related. Sooo... debug the heck out of this before you leave the earth. -- Ross Tom Brown wrote: > > Micheal Mims wrote: > > > My experience with EAA members > > around here hasnt been all that positive, we have a problem with "homebuilt > > snobs" that's is to say, if you are not building a Glasair, RV, or Lancair > > 4P then you are nothing more than a piece of scum building a toy that will > > surely kill you. Ask Robert Covington, he has to deal with it every time he > > tries to work on his project. > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > Micheal Mims > > Just Plane Nutts in Irvine Ca. > > mailto:mikemims@pacbell.net > > http://home.pacbell.net/mikemims > > > > \ / > > _\/\/_ > > ____/_//\\_\_____ > > > > F-117 > > All better now! > > Mike > > Funny you should mention that. I recently joined the Local EAA chapter > and at the first meeting I introduced myself and told them about my KRs > project. Prior to me finishing what I had to say one of the many RV fans > there felt the need to tell me "good luck at 6' you will never fit in > it" with a attitude. I know what you mean about snobs. > > On the more positive side the individual sitting right next to me at the > same meeting who I also found out later was the tech counslor for that > chapter, was very interested in my project. He believed in wood built > aircraft and also pointed me in the direction of another KR builder in > the local area. > > I guess some people today can have no respect for other's interest and > ambitions. Thank good EAA was not founded on that note. > > Tom Brown > tbrown@pcpros ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 14:46:48 -0700 From: Ross Subject: Re: KR: why so many posts? Ron, When you say "you" is that me as in Ross or me as in krnet-l? I have had some netscape email problems, so perhaps it is me that is stuttering. If it is krnet-l, I dunno... Ron Lee wrote: > > I just got about 20 posts from you, some duplicates. > > Ron ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 14:48:02 -0700 From: Ross Subject: Re: KR: KRnet subscriber lost I will add him back in. -- Ross Rob Matthews wrote: > > Hi Ross > There is a krnet subscriber called Steve Boshoff whom seems to have been > dropped from the krnet group. He contacted me to ask if the krnet was still > functioning. Please could you check to see if he is on the list still or if he > is off so we can decide if he must try to join again. His email address is > steveb@aviation.denel.co.za. > Many thanks > -- > Rob Matthews Have a nice day > South Africa > email mathewrz@iafrica.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 11:11:38 -0700 From: Ted & Louisa Jones Subject: Re: KR: Foam Ron Lee wrote: > > At 04:31 97/10/04 GMT, you wrote: > >Does anybody know if there is any difference between polyurethane foam > >and urethane boat foam? I can get urethane boat foam locally and from > >what I can find out it sounds just like polyurethane foam. Is there > >any difference? > > >Brian J. Bland > >Claremore, OK > > > > I have not looked in the plans to see what is specified for the application > you are talking about, but if you are looking for an easily sandable foam > to make compound curves, urethane is the one. You can scratch it apart easily > with your fingernails and it comes apart in small pieces......dust if you use > sand paper. > > Ron Lee Brian: Can you be more specific about "boat foam?" I once tried to hot-wire an airfoil (for a boat's sail) out of large (approximately 2 x 3 x 8 feet) billets of blue foam sold for floating docks. It has about the same density (2-lbs/cubic foot, I think) as the blue foam insulation. It comes with a smooth skin, but is much coarser when cut or sanded. It worked okay for my application (after my wife and I nearly gassed ourselves hot-wiring it) but I think its' best left for use as flotation. Ted Jones By the big lake in New Hampshire ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 17:55:34 -0400 (EDT) From: JEHayward@aol.com Subject: Re: KR: FAA & Inspections In a message dated 97-10-04 10:09:31 EDT, you write: << ---------- The plans say to have the spars inspected by FAA before you enclose them with the plywood. When I contacted the Seattle FAA a few months ago and told them I was starting to build an experimental airplane, they were not interested. They told me to contact them when I get close to finishing it. Anyone else enclose their spars without the inspection, or have any experience with this? I did not get anything in writing, just a phone conversation with the FAA. Marvin McCoy >> I just took pictures for my "album" and was told that would do just fine. The FAA doesn't have the manpower any longer to do what they used to do. Jim Hayward ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 16:01:49 -0700 From: Micheal Mims Subject: Re: KR: Stronger wings.... At 08:47 AM 10/4/97 +0000, you wrote: >In general response to the discussion about wing strength and the kr's >strength in general, I would simply ask you to look at how many in >flight structrual failures there have been with the aircraft that have >been built per plans, to my knowledge, not one. That's exactly what I said but I am being told over and over the stock spar is only good for about 4 Gs @ 900 pounds and could break if any more load is applied! Something else I was curious about, the data says the spar will break at the point where it enters the fuselage, is the program applying all the load in this area? Only the empty weight plus fuel and baggage is resting on the spars in that area, the people are sitting in a sling seat that is supported only by the spars not by the fuselage. Is that being figured in? Mike "just curious why the computer says it wont work but it does" Mims ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts in Irvine Ca. mailto:mikemims@pacbell.net http://home.pacbell.net/mikemims ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 04 Oct 1996 17:01:12 -0700 From: Al Hawkins Subject: Re: KR: 1997 Gathering Photos I finally got around to writing a web page, it is not much ,just pictures from the 1997 gathering. Alastair Hawkins Port Coquitlam, B.C. Canada goto http://members.tripod.com/~Alastair_H/index.html ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 17:29:34 -0700 From: Ross Subject: KR: [Fwd: BOUNCE krnet-l@lists.teleport.com: Non-member submission from [rmccall ]] This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - --------------A1A601AAEEB697DEBDA04B2E Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit - --------------A1A601AAEEB697DEBDA04B2E Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: owner-krnet-l@lists.teleport.com Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp3.teleport.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id RAA10602; Sat, 4 Oct 1997 17:21:51 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 17:21:51 -0700 (PDT) From: owner-krnet-l@teleport.com Message-Id: <199710050021.RAA10602@smtp3.teleport.com> To: owner-krnet-l@teleport.com Subject: BOUNCE krnet-l@lists.teleport.com: Non-member submission from [rmccall ] >From krnet-l-owner Sat Oct 4 17:21:46 1997 Received: from oz2 ([208.149.58.1]) by smtp3.teleport.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id RAA10574 for ; Sat, 4 Oct 1997 17:21:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from oz-online.net (s32.oz-online.net [208.149.58.42]) by oz2 (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA11315 for ; Sat, 4 Oct 1997 19:22:13 -0500 Message-ID: <3436DE0E.D110C34@oz-online.net> Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 19:23:43 -0500 From: rmccall X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.02 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: krnet-l@teleport.com Subject: Re: KR: 97 Gathering page References: <2.2.32.19970930133600.00a34d3c@popd.ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Does anybody have this design or pictures, etc? I would like to build a retractable trigear and am stuck with running around airports looking for ideas. By the way, I've already been told its more trouble than its worth but gotta try it. Rich McCall Junction City, KS Micheal Mims wrote: > At 01:44 AM 9/30/97 -0700, you wrote: > > > >Can I stick my nose in here? What the heck is a defreeze gear? > >If it's none of my business I'll back off, but I am curious. > > > >Dave Moore > > > > > > He (Bill Defreeze) designed a reatractable tri-cycle gear back in the 70's I > think! > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Micheal Mims > Just Plane Nutts in Irvine Ca. > mailto:mimsmand@ix.netcom.com > http://www.netcom.com/~mimsmand > > \ / > \ _\/\/_ > / __/_//\\_\_____ > > F-117 > Having structural failure! - --------------A1A601AAEEB697DEBDA04B2E-- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 21:40:43 -0700 From: Donald Reid Subject: Re: KR: FAA & Inspections Micheal Mims wrote: > I am not a member of the EAA or any EAA chapter for that matter > and don't plan to be in the near future. My experience with EAA members > around here hasnt been all that positive, we have a problem with "homebuilt > snobs" that's is to say, if you are not building a Glasair, RV, or Lancair > 4P then you are nothing more than a piece of scum building a toy that will > surely kill you. Ask Robert Covington, he has to deal with it every time he > tries to work on his project. > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Micheal Mims > Just Plane Nutts in Irvine Ca. > mailto:mikemims@pacbell.net > http://home.pacbell.net/mikemims You must live in an upscale neighborhood. I belong to two chapters and we have a full range of types; some that would not build a plane under any circumstances, to ultralights, to Glassairs. My experience with EAA has been great. - -- Don Reid mailto:donreid@erols.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 19:59:05 -0600 From: jscott.pilot@juno.com (Jeffrey E Scott) Subject: Re: KR: FAA & Inspections (A history Lesson) On Sat, 4 Oct 1997 17:55:34 -0400 (EDT) JEHayward@aol.com writes: > ><< ---------- > The plans say to have the spars inspected by FAA before you > enclose them with the plywood. When I contacted the Seattle FAA a few > months ago and told them I was starting to build an experimental > airplane, they were not interested. They told me to contact them >when I get close to finishing it. > Anyone else enclose their spars without the inspection, or > have any experience with this? I did not get anything in writing, just > a phone conversation with the FAA. Many years ago, a FAA signoff was required before you closed up almost anything on a homebuilt plane. At that time, nobody was allowed to do an annual inspection on a homebuilt other than the FAA. That's right. A&Ps, AIs, and original builders weren't even allowed to sign off the annuals. Every GADO office held periodic inspecion days at various airports for people flying homebuilt planes to fly them in for an annual condition inspection. If you couldn't make one of their fly-ins, you had to fly to their office or make a special appointment. The first inspection I had done after I bought my Starduster required me to fly the plane into the big commercial airport in Des Moines, IA even though I didn't have a radio. Thankfully, in 1980 the FAA changed the rules concerning homebuilt aircraft. Annual inspections could now be signed off by an A&P or higher rated mechanic. Original builders were grandfathered in and issued repairmans certificates for their planes if they applied for one. New builders are also allowed to apply for a repairmans certificate. The only time the FAA wants to see your airplane is for the airworthyness inspection to give you approval to fly, and even much of that is now contracted out. Much of the change was brought about by the lobbying efforts of the EAA. The FAA is now relying heavily upon the builders honesty about what he/she is putting into the plane and the EAA Technical counselor program. As a builder, you are not required to use the EAA Tech Counselors, but I highly recommend it as will the future insurance carrier for the plane you are building. In general, it is a good idea to have another set of knowlegeable eyes look everything over prior to covering or closing that part. The Tech Counselors no longer sign off or endorse your builders log. Instead, they fill out a Technical Counselor Visit Report. One copy goes to the EAA and the Tech counselor keeps the other copy for his records. It is a good time for you to put an entry into your builders log stating that the Tech Counselor looked you project over and record his/her comments. The EAA recommends 3 visits during construction and one final visit prior to the first flight. If you plan to carry hull insurance on your project, the insurance carrier will also require that you have participated in both the EAA Tech Counselor program and the EAA Flight advisor program. Jeff "yes, I am a Tech Counselor and Flight Advisor" Scott - ------- 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: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 22:12:33 -0700 From: Donald Reid Subject: Re: KR: Stronger wings.... Micheal Mims wrote: > Something else I was curious about, the data says the spar will break at the > point where it enters the fuselage, is the program applying all the load in > this area? Only the empty weight plus fuel and baggage is resting on the > spars in that area, the people are sitting in a sling seat that is supported > only by the spars not by the fuselage. Is that being figured in? > > Mike "just curious why the computer says it wont work but it does" Mims > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Micheal Mims > Just Plane Nutts in Irvine Ca. > mailto:mikemims@pacbell.net > http://home.pacbell.net/mikemims The airload on the wing is a distributed load, highest at the root and zero at the tip. The moment on the wing spar is the load on the wing times the distance from the wing root. The failure will occur where the stress caused by the moment exceeds the maximum strength of the material. The spar can be designed to fail at any desired point, the KR spar is tapered in order to maintain an approximately uniform strength along its length. Since the center section main spar is not tapered, it has an excess amount of strength at the outer portion of the center section. The wing spar really doesn't care where the load is concentrated in and around the fuselage. The fuselage structure will tranfer all of its loads through various paths, mostly the longerons, to the spar at the fuselage spar intersection. In other words, if you want to perform a proof load test, you would support the wing as close as possible to the fuselage and then load the wing in a distribution that approximates the air load. - -- Don Reid mailto:donreid@erols.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 22:46:40 -0400 (EDT) From: JEHayward@aol.com Subject: Re: KR: Stronger wings.... In a message dated 97-10-04 19:14:12 EDT, you write: << n general response to the discussion about wing strength and the kr's >strength in general, I would simply ask you to look at how many in >flight structrual failures there have been with the aircraft that have >been built per plans, to my knowledge, not one. That's exactly what I said but I am being told over and over the stock spar is only good for about 4 Gs @ 900 pounds and could break if any more load is applied! Something else I was curious about, the data says the spar will break at the point where it enters the fuselage, is the program applying all the load in this area? Only the empty weight plus fuel and baggage is resting on the spars in that area, the people are sitting in a sling seat that is supported only by the spars not by the fuselage. Is that being figured in? Mike "just curious why the computer says it wont work but it does" Mims ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims >> I guess I'm gonna have to go see where I got the figures in my mind. I've had it in my head that it was 6G's @ 900lbs. I had planned to license my 2-S at 1200 lbs for 4.5G's so there would be no problem with overgross. The FAA Inspector in our EAA chapter said that would be okay to do that. Jim Hayward ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 20:53:40 -0600 From: jscott.pilot@juno.com (Jeffrey E Scott) Subject: Re: KR: FAA & Inspections On Sat, 04 Oct 1997 21:40:43 -0700 Donald Reid writes: >Micheal Mims wrote: > >> I am not a member of the EAA or any EAA chapter for that matter >> and don't plan to be in the near future. My experience with EAA members >> around here hasnt been all that positive, we have a problem with "homebuilt >> snobs" that's is to say, if you are not building a Glasair, RV, or Lancair >> 4P then you are nothing more than a piece of scum building a toy that will >> surely kill you. Ask Robert Covington, he has to deal with it every time he >> tries to work on his project. >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> Micheal Mims > >You must live in an upscale neighborhood. I belong to two chapters and we have >a full range of types; some that would not build a plane under any >circumstances, to ultralights, to Glassairs. My experience with EAA has been >great. >-- >Don Reid >mailto:donreid@erols.com > JEB expressed some similar sentiments about his former chapter in Austin. Must be a problem with big cities where you tend to have alot of big $$$ airplane builders. They will be snobs regardless of what they do. I think I can safely say that the experience in smaller chapters is just the opposite. There was a great deal of excitement when David Roe finished his Hummelbird a couple of years ago and more of the same when I flew my KR this year. We will also celebrate getting a Glassair IITD's first flight this month, an Avid probably next month, and possibly a Long-Eze the following month. Ours is a small chapter, but there is currently lots of building activity and Kudos all around to anyone that is working on anything that might fly someday. Wouldn't matter if it's a Lancair IVP, an Ultralight, or a new cover job on an old Aeronca or Cub. We like 'em all and see each project as the opportunity to learn. I feel bad for those of you that avoid the EAA because ot some snobbish EAA members. You are missing out on a lot. Even if you are not an EAA chapter member, you can still use the services of EAA Tech Counselors or Flight Advisors. They are worthwhile services with your safety as the goal. BTW, I participate in EAA because I love aviation and airplanes, NOT because I like organizations. The EAA chapters are supposed to be there to support the homebuilders, although I question the direction I see the EAA going as whole. It is an interesting contrast to read through a copy of Sport Avaition from thirty years ago, then compare it to a copy from this year. Today the emphasis is on warbirds, big $$$ high performance airplanes, and anything that resembles a P-51. There is little emphasis on the grass roots of sport aviation which is those building on a budget. Organizations like KRNet are starting to fill that void. Jeff Scott Chapter 691 VP, Tech Counselor, Flight Advisor. - ------- 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: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 22:02:06 -0500 From: "Mark Langford" Subject: KR: Terra avionics Rossy wrote: > I was wondering if anyone out there in KRNET land has > Terra Avionics. I don't have them yet, but plan to because you can get com and transponder in the same panel space as most coms. The downside is that the tray requires something like 14.25" of clearance behind the panel, so be prepared. Mark Langford, Huntsville, AL email at langford@hiwaay.net KR2S project construction at http://fly.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ End of krnet-l-digest V1 #113 *****************************