From: owner-krnet-l-digest@teleport.com[SMTP:owner-krnet-l-digest@teleport.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 1997 7:47 PM To: krnet-l-digest@teleport.com Subject: krnet-l-digest V1 #172 krnet-l-digest Wednesday, November 19 1997 Volume 01 : Number 172 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 05:47:18 -0800 From: "John Bouyea" Subject: KR: Re: Aeropoxy Warning Mike: I've read your warning. Thanks for posting it to remind us all that YOU NEED LOTS OF VENTILATION WHILE WORKING WITH RESINS. Every factory container warns the user of this fact. Various articles imply that the results are cumulative as well. Let's be safe out there people... John Bouyea johnbouyea@worldnet.att.net kr2s - fitting the engine rails Hillsboro, Oregon - ---------- > From: Micheal Mims > To: krnet-l@teleport.com > Subject: KR: Aeropoxy Warning > Date: Sunday, November 16, 1997 10:42 PM > > Sports fans, I figured out something today. If I am exposed to Aeropoxy > long enough (on the bigger layups) I get a wicked headache about an hour or > two later! Just thought I would pass this along for those of you > considering various brands of epoxy. I never had any trouble with > Safe-t-poxy or EZpoxy but this Aeropoxy kicks my butt!!! > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Micheal Mims > Just Plane Nutts in Irvine Ca. > mailto:mikemims@pacbell.net > http://home.pacbell.net/mikemims ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 06:23:49 PST From: "Oscar Zuniga" Subject: KR: Hot tub party >Date: Mon, 17 Nov 1997 18:27:36 -0800 >From: "John F. Esch" >To: krnet-l@teleport.com >Subject: Re: KR: Video >Reply-To: krnet-l@teleport.com > >I will be there Ross > >John F. Esch >Salem, OR > >Ross Youngblood wrote: > >> Everyone is invited to a big spa party after I get the engine started! > I'd go, too, except it looks like your spa is getting a bit crowded for too many to get in. I'm not that type of guy- sorry! But, hey- I'll do the chips 'n' salsa, and love to hear your engine run! Oscar ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 10:50:31 -0800 From: Tom Crawford Subject: Re: KR: Wing Skins2 ? steveb@aviation.denel.co.za wrote: > > Hi Guys > Those of you who have tricycle undercarriage. > What reinforcing was done on the wing skin to prevent stepping through the wing when trying to get into the aircraft. > I was thinking of running two 3/32" plywood profiles between the spars with plywood cross pieces. Then fibreglassing the stepping area with 2 layers. > > Any comments? > steve in South Africa > steveb@aviation.denel.co.za Steve, I think the easiest way to do it is when you have the plane upside down before you glass the bottom wing stubs. At this point, I made a layup of the desired width consisting of alternating layers of leftover scrap ply and two layers of glass/epoxy. I ended up using a total of three layers of ply and four layers of cloth (each layer of cloth consisting of two layers of 5oz. BID). The ply is merely a lightweight substrate. The whole thing runs between the spars at a width of ten inches. I also epoxied some 5/8" stock to both spars where the layups meet the spars. This may be slightly overbuilt, especially when we try to build as light as possible, but I would rather have it be a little too strong than a not quite strong enough. Try to picture that in your mind's eye! #:) Tom Crawford tomc@afn.org Gainesville, FL N262TC ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 09:38:27 -0600 (CST) From: Ken Combs Subject: Re: KR: AVgas, MOgas, and fuel leaks. Jeff, The following was extracted from "The Piper Owners'Magazine", November 1, 1997 in an article entitled "All About Those Cherokee Fuel Tanks" by Terry Lee Rogers. It describes the experiences of a 24 year veteran of Cherokee tank repairs, Al Snyder of Skycraft Corporation, North Hampton, New Hampshire. It relates directly to your comments about Piper tanks and sloshing compound: "The first thing you need to know is that Piper changed the method of sealing its tanks in 1967 - they went from a fuel resistant seal to a fuel-proof seal. That was a big change for the better. The fomler sealant required a coating (known as sloshing) to protect the sealer from the fuel. With the fuel-proof sealer they never again sloshed tanks. The pre-1967 tanks were leakers. The seal would begin to leak and the recommended cure was to re-slosh the tanks. Unfortunately, the sloshing compound also had a tendency to break loose and clog fuel lines and strainers. And besides that... it didn't stop the leaks. That method of sealing was used for years, but today it is verbotten. The recent Piper service bulletin 1006 states: "WARNING: Use or evidence of any sloshing compound is prohibited." About ten years ago Randolph Paints, which supplied the sloshing compound to Piper, told its dealers to mark all the remaining supply "not for aircraft use." It was just too dangerous. So, the only real cure for a leaking early-model tank is to remove it and reseal it with fuelproof sealer and no sloshing." I hope this helps. I certainly don't" know it all" but the above information is consistent with my experience with Piper aircraft. I run mogas regularly in my Cherokee and do much of my own testing before putting any in my aircraft. I will not criticize any particular brandsof fuels but I have found that the "clean" fuels and those that find it necessary to put words like "techro..." in their ads seem to be able to turn even the best seals and gaskets into something that resembles black foam rubber (with about the same sealing capabilities). Ken.... At 11:58 AM 11/16/97 -0700, Jeffrey E Scott wrote: > >With the recent discussions about mogas, avgas and epoxys, I though I >would add my recent experience with them. As some of you may have noted >from a post a couple of weeks ago, I had my left wing at home to repair a >fuel leak. I found that fuel was leaking through the gasket underneath >my fuel sending unit. I examined the gasket and found no problems with >it so there had to be a problem with the permatex gasket cement. > >The answer is that at about 25 hours into my test flying period, we had a >lightning strike at the airport that damaged the fueling facility and put >it out of service for several days. Since I was flying every morning and >wanted to continue flying the hours off my plnae, I fueled with MOGAS >from a local gas station until the fueling facility could be repaired. I >was fueling the left tank with MOGAS every morning, then transfering fuel >up to the header tank as needed. The left fuel level sending unit mount >was the only one that was constantly imersed in MOGAS for about a week. >Apparently something in the mogas dissolved enough of the gasket sealer >to create the fuel leak. > >My fuel tanks were built with Safe-t-Poxy and were sloshed with Randolf >alcohol resistant sloshing compound. At this point in time, the tanks >are not showing any degradation of the sloshed interior. BTW, this is >the same sloshing compound recommended by Piper for use in many of the >Cherokees. Although I have heard some comments about the evils of >sloshing compounds, I have yet to hear of problems with this compound >sloughing in the Pipers and currently see no evidence of any problem in >my plane. I do and will continue to watch for any problems with it. > >------- >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 > > Rockwell email kenneth_combs@comsys.rockwell.com Offsite email kencombs@onramp.net Work Phone (972) 705-3554 Home Phone (972) 548-8019 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 10:16:59 CDT From: "Rex Ellington" Subject: KR: KR3 by year 2000? G'Day Netters I habitually keep a pretty low profile until I think things through. I got into the KR scene in the mid '70s, with nearly zero contact with other builders and only some builder support from Ken. With low log time, I could easily have become one of the casualties listed in the NTSB reports for the early 80s (but not from construction faults). A new world has come into being with the birth of the Net and the kind of people communicating these days. Item 1: I just got my new plans, etc. and have spent a couple of evenings going through them, carefully, because of the nasty comments recently. Just as I expected, the KR2, as far as R-R Eng. is concerned, is basically the same as the day before his accident. How could it be any different, with the partner out and a young wife trying to keep the thing together and support a family? How many young wives could have done better? Naturally, design changes were not made just because one builder here said he got away with this, and another builder there said he got away with that, and other builders used it as a springboard into kit businesses. The plans detail a success and should not be faulted for not yielding to Formula One racer concepts while being docile in handling for low-time recreational pilots. The plans are a bargain when fuselage shells in the competition approach $20,000, covering lots of money for detailed plans for leggo block assembly. Item 2: I believe the next phase of KR2 life may have opened in the late 80s with Bingham's design review, the new communication and cooperation between builders, plus the Gatherings away from Oshkosh. The design review laid out the facts. With its low wing loading, a KR is going to bounce around in turbulence - especially on landing. With the original short coupling, people with low Cessna-type , etc., times should not consider flying KRs without substantial dual KR time before thinking of flying their projects. Then, flying it should be entered ONLY with a very deliberate program like the one Rick Junkin is setting forth. Item 3: The next phase may now be starting. Critiques made in the design review that are most critical, are being addressed a). This phase may be the optimization of the design leading to design and building of the KR# prototype. Part of the approach can be gathering data from as many 2Ss as possible to see whether they can be sorted out to show results of changing one variable at a time, with respect to performance. For example, anecdotal evidence may suggest that fuselage extension seems to suggest improved longitudinal stability. Comparative tests need to be made with same pilot, same conditions, same day, etc. For example cruise speed vs type of gear with same engine, etc. Changes with change in airfoil, with everything else the same. Then maybe in '99, after the Gathering, those making significant contributions could become the design team to design the KR3 prototype, including types of materials (Boy, would that be like bobcats on a diet of Jalapenos in a closed room). Of course, RR Eng should be invited to sit at the table and fund the prototype itself - for ownership of the design, with some % of profits going into builder technical support. b. I am going to follow the current discussions of airfoil selection carefully. The 747 series is being used by one builder. The project being developed at U. Ill. Urb. Champ. with Selig will examine the NASA Langley Research Center, natural-laminar-flow NLF(1)-0115 airfoil. A paper describing this appeared in the Journal of Aircraft, vol 32, no. 4, July-Aug 1995, 710-715, Selig, el al, "Natural-Laminar-Flow Airfoil for General Aviation Applications." I e-mailed several questions to Selig and got a reply withing the hour. My concerns were about low Reynolds Number flows; stall characteristics, behavior at low-speed with turbulence, and effects of dirt, dings, bugs, and rain on the leading edge. Laminar flow airfoils are often sharper curves on their leading edges. These considerations are all part of the program according to Selig. This test could be very important to out future and deserves support - even just a few bucks apiece. We should ask for expeditious, careful, and detailed publication ( informal as well as formal) of the results and analysis with credit to the Net. c. I am interested in the fundamental approach of the Smith & Co. Penetrating Epoxy and their glue. I'v ordered sample lots for use in quanitative tests on penetration, and strength. I can get some T88 and West System material locally for comparison. Will keep you posted. Will start my work on tail, spars and sides in a small heated area for the cold weather. Now, I'll shut up for a while. Rex Ellington Rex T. Ellington ellingto@gslan.offsys.ou.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 13:48:15 -0600 (CST) From: Steven A Eberhart Subject: Re: KR: NLF fund hits $1030! On Mon, 17 Nov 1997, Mark Langford wrote: > Troy Petteway > Ross Youngblood > Oscar Zuniga > John Esch > Troy Johnson > Randy Stein > Richard Mole > Rex Ellington > Ron Lee > Mark Lougheed > Robert Covington > Mark Langford > Steve Eberhart > > So far we have $1030 in the kitty. I'm open to suggestions for the > monument. So far Clark foam has been suggested. All options will be > considered... > Mark, We might consider engraving the names on to the carbon fiber airfoil model used for the wind tunnel tests and see if we can get it put into the EAA museum. I don't know but I think this is a first for experimental aviation, a group of EAA members contracting the wind tunnel testing of a super performance airfoil for the benefit of the first composite experimental airplane as well as all of General Aviation. Just a thought. Steve (just doing the legg work) Eberhart newtech@newtech.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 13:53:14 -0600 (CST) From: Steven A Eberhart Subject: Re: KR: NLF fund hits $1030! On Mon, 17 Nov 1997, Mark Langford wrote: > John Roffey wrote: > > > Might be able to help out here Mark. What thickness on the tubing and > > what dia on the rods are you looking for? What thread do you want? How > > much thread (length) do you need? > > John, > > Basically it's a forward and an aft spar setup, both tubes being 33.485" > long high strength steel. Forward spar is 1.75" OD with .125" walls, aft > is 1.00" OD with .0625" walls. The inside ends of each of these tubes is > threaded 4.5 inches deep with 1.5" and .75" threads, respectively. Into > each of the four ends of these two spars is a matching steel rod with 4.5 > inches of thread which when screwed in leaves 3.5-4.5 inches of > non-threaded rod protruding. Maybe I better draw a picture later just to > make sure. I was going to order the stuff from Shapiro's (unless you've > got some laying around), but I could have it shipped straight to you. > Thread pitch isn't specified so I guess it's up to us. Tolerance on this > drawing is .010". > > Having looked this over again, we only need two threaded rods. One 1.50" > and one .75". This apparently is mounted cantilevered by only two at a > time, but then they flip it upside down and screw them into the other end. Beggers can't be choosers but I would like to have threaded ends for both ends of the spars. I am going to use these to mount in a tooling jig made out of 1/4" aluminum, to hold everything dead nuts on while laminating and finishing the cores. Steve (ready to make carbon fiber dust) Eberhart newtech@newtech.com > > So there it is. Two tubes, threaded internally for 4.5 inches each end. > Two rods to correspond to each of the two tubes, externally threaded for 4 > inches, and protruding 3.5-4.5 inches. Clear as mud? I can fax you a > drawing, or sketch one up and post it on my site. > > Whatdaya think? > > Mark Langford, Huntsville, AL > email at langford@hiwaay.net > KR2S project construction at http://fly.hiwaay.net/~langford > > ---------- > > From: John Roffey > > To: krnet-l@teleport.com > > Subject: Re: KR: NLF fund hits $1030! > > Date: Monday, November 17, 1997 7:22 PM > > > > Mark Langford wrote: > > > > > > AirfoilHeads, > > > > > > Well, we reached $980 of our $1000 wind tunnel fund target within 24 > hours > > > of my pathetic solicitation. It's a good thing, 'cause I only got $50 > > > after that. Not that I'm complaining mind you, but we're still going > to > > > have to spend $150 dollars on actual test speciman creation, so if > anybody > > > feels left out, you're welcome to send $10, $20, or whatever you feel > like > > > helping with. To everybody that pledged to help with the wind tunnel > fund, > > > please send your checks to Steve at: > > > > > > Steve Eberhart > > > New TEchnology Associates, Inc. > > > P.O. Box 9227 > > > Evansville, IN 47724 > > > > > > If you've already sent them to me, that's OK. I need some money to buy > a > > > transponder anyway... > > > > > > But seriously, one of the most important things I'm expecting out of > this > > > is not only a faster, more efficient airfoil, but a serious, credible > > > stability analysis by experts in the field. This kind of expertise can > > > shed lots of light on the sorts of issues that we keep arguing about > here. > > > Things like wing and tail incidence, come to mind. Steve says just as > a > > > baseline, a study of the stocker with RAF48 airfoil is in the works. > This > > > can only benefit us all. > > > > > > Steve also needs help constructing a jig fixture to hold the spars in > > > perfect alignment while shaping the airfoil to the required .003" > > > tolerances. If anybody feels like they could help out with some simple > > > machine shop type work, contact Steve or me. We'll need two internal > > > threads and two external threads cut into a 1.00" ID tube, a .50" ID > tube, > > > and the corresponding rods that fit inside them. We could haul them to > a > > > machine shop to have this done, but it would be more appropriate if a > > > suitably equipped KRNetter volunteered to do it for us. We're on a > tight > > > schedule though, so be prepared to do it soon. > > > > > > Thanks to all who've contributed so far. You guys are helping blaze > the > > > trail to a better KR2S! > > > > > > Troy Petteway > > > Ross Youngblood > > > Oscar Zuniga > > > John Esch > > > Troy Johnson > > > Randy Stein > > > Richard Mole > > > Rex Ellington > > > Ron Lee > > > Mark Lougheed > > > Robert Covington > > > Mark Langford > > > Steve Eberhart > > > > > > So far we have $1030 in the kitty. I'm open to suggestions for the > > > monument. So far Clark foam has been suggested. All options will be > > > considered... > > > > > > Thanks again, > > > > > > Mark Langford, Huntsville, AL > > > email at langford@hiwaay.net > > > KR2S project construction at http://fly.hiwaay.net/~langford > > Might be able to help out here Mark. What thickness on the tubing and > > what dia on the rods are you looking for? What thread do you want? How > > much thread (length) do you need? > > John Roffey > > jeroffey@tir.com > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 12:02:52 -0800 From: "John F. Esch" Subject: Re: KR: NLF fund hits $1030! Steve Just sent my check out today. How about design changes to the boat of the KR, how major? John F. Esch Salem, OR Steven A Eberhart wrote: > On Mon, 17 Nov 1997, Mark Langford wrote: > > > Troy Petteway > > Ross Youngblood > > Oscar Zuniga > > John Esch > > Troy Johnson > > Randy Stein > > Richard Mole > > Rex Ellington > > Ron Lee > > Mark Lougheed > > Robert Covington > > Mark Langford > > Steve Eberhart > > > > So far we have $1030 in the kitty. I'm open to suggestions for the > > monument. So far Clark foam has been suggested. All options will > be > > considered... > > > Mark, > > We might consider engraving the names on to the carbon fiber airfoil > model used for the wind tunnel tests and see if we can get it put into > > the EAA museum. I don't know but I think this is a first for > experimental aviation, a group of EAA members contracting the wind > tunnel > testing of a super performance airfoil for the benefit of the first > composite experimental airplane as well as all of General Aviation. > > Just a thought. > > Steve (just doing the legg work) Eberhart > newtech@newtech.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 15:34:02 -0800 From: Robert Maniss Subject: KR: Georgetown (Texas) Fly-in I just heard that the decision was made last Saturday to move the annual fly-in from Georgetown to Abilene (TX). Will post additional info as it becomes available. Surely would like to see a bunch of you bring your KRs to West Texas. Bobby (Muse), hope you will be able to make it - shouldn't take more than about 30-40 minutes from your hangar. Bob Maniss ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 20:21:58 -0600 From: "Mark Langford" Subject: KR: RE: boat changes for NLF? John F. Esch wrote: > Just sent my check out today. How about design changes to the boat of > the KR, how major? No changes are required to the fuselage. But, if you lower the incidence, the aft spar comes up. Mine is something like 1.5" above the longeron for my 1 degree of incidence, while the main spar is in direct contact with the longeron.. If I had it do over again, I'd recontour the fuselage sides to bring the bottom up to hit the bottom of the aft spar like the original version does. Also, if I had it to over, I'd make the firewall extend down another 2" using the same method, mainly to produce a more harmonious looking cowling to fuselage junction. It usually looks a little disjointed the way most have worked out. Les Palmer did this on his, and you've probably noticed how neat looking his cowling is. Mark Langford, Huntsville, AL email at langford@hiwaay.net KR2S project construction at http://fly.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 18:28:18 -0800 From: Micheal Mims Subject: Re: KR: RE: boat changes for NLF? At 08:21 PM 11/18/97 -0600, you wrote: Also, if I had it to over, I'd make the firewall extend down another 2" using the same method, mainly to produce a more harmonious >looking cowling to fuselage junction. It usually looks a little disjointed >the way most have worked out. Les Palmer did this on his, and you've >probably noticed how neat looking his cowling is. Mikey did this on his last night! I added 2 inch foam to the forward belly and contoured a nice channel for the hot air to exit. Looks cool! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts in Irvine Ca. mailto:mikemims@pacbell.net http://home.pacbell.net/mikemims ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 21:51:07 -0600 From: John Roffey Subject: Re: KR: NLF fund hits $1030! Mark Langford wrote: > > John Roffey wrote: > > > Might be able to help out here Mark. What thickness on the tubing and > > what dia on the rods are you looking for? What thread do you want? How > > much thread (length) do you need? > > John, > > Basically it's a forward and an aft spar setup, both tubes being 33.485" > long high strength steel. Forward spar is 1.75" OD with .125" walls, aft > is 1.00" OD with .0625" walls. The inside ends of each of these tubes is > threaded 4.5 inches deep with 1.5" and .75" threads, respectively. Into > each of the four ends of these two spars is a matching steel rod with 4.5 > inches of thread which when screwed in leaves 3.5-4.5 inches of > non-threaded rod protruding. Maybe I better draw a picture later just to > make sure. I was going to order the stuff from Shapiro's (unless you've > got some laying around), but I could have it shipped straight to you. > Thread pitch isn't specified so I guess it's up to us. Tolerance on this > drawing is .010". > > Having looked this over again, we only need two threaded rods. One 1.50" > and one .75". This apparently is mounted cantilevered by only two at a > time, but then they flip it upside down and screw them into the other end. > > So there it is. Two tubes, threaded internally for 4.5 inches each end. > Two rods to correspond to each of the two tubes, externally threaded for 4 > inches, and protruding 3.5-4.5 inches. Clear as mud? I can fax you a > drawing, or sketch one up and post it on my site. > > Whatdaya think? > > Mark Langford, Huntsville, AL > email at langford@hiwaay.net > KR2S project construction at http://fly.hiwaay.net/~langford > > ---------- > > From: John Roffey > > To: krnet-l@teleport.com > > Subject: Re: KR: NLF fund hits $1030! > > Date: Monday, November 17, 1997 7:22 PM > > > > Mark Langford wrote: > > > > > > AirfoilHeads, > > > > > > Well, we reached $980 of our $1000 wind tunnel fund target within 24 > hours > > > of my pathetic solicitation. It's a good thing, 'cause I only got $50 > > > after that. Not that I'm complaining mind you, but we're still going > to > > > have to spend $150 dollars on actual test speciman creation, so if > anybody > > > feels left out, you're welcome to send $10, $20, or whatever you feel > like > > > helping with. To everybody that pledged to help with the wind tunnel > fund, > > > please send your checks to Steve at: > > > > > > Steve Eberhart > > > New TEchnology Associates, Inc. > > > P.O. Box 9227 > > > Evansville, IN 47724 > > > > > > If you've already sent them to me, that's OK. I need some money to buy > a > > > transponder anyway... > > > > > > But seriously, one of the most important things I'm expecting out of > this > > > is not only a faster, more efficient airfoil, but a serious, credible > > > stability analysis by experts in the field. This kind of expertise can > > > shed lots of light on the sorts of issues that we keep arguing about > here. > > > Things like wing and tail incidence, come to mind. Steve says just as > a > > > baseline, a study of the stocker with RAF48 airfoil is in the works. > This > > > can only benefit us all. > > > > > > Steve also needs help constructing a jig fixture to hold the spars in > > > perfect alignment while shaping the airfoil to the required .003" > > > tolerances. If anybody feels like they could help out with some simple > > > machine shop type work, contact Steve or me. We'll need two internal > > > threads and two external threads cut into a 1.00" ID tube, a .50" ID > tube, > > > and the corresponding rods that fit inside them. We could haul them to > a > > > machine shop to have this done, but it would be more appropriate if a > > > suitably equipped KRNetter volunteered to do it for us. We're on a > tight > > > schedule though, so be prepared to do it soon. > > > > > > Thanks to all who've contributed so far. You guys are helping blaze > the > > > trail to a better KR2S! > > > > > > Troy Petteway > > > Ross Youngblood > > > Oscar Zuniga > > > John Esch > > > Troy Johnson > > > Randy Stein > > > Richard Mole > > > Rex Ellington > > > Ron Lee > > > Mark Lougheed > > > Robert Covington > > > Mark Langford > > > Steve Eberhart > > > > > > So far we have $1030 in the kitty. I'm open to suggestions for the > > > monument. So far Clark foam has been suggested. All options will be > > > considered... > > > > > > Thanks again, > > > > > > Mark Langford, Huntsville, AL > > > email at langford@hiwaay.net > > > KR2S project construction at http://fly.hiwaay.net/~langford > > Might be able to help out here Mark. What thickness on the tubing and > > what dia on the rods are you looking for? What thread do you want? How > > much thread (length) do you need? > > John Roffey > > jeroffey@tir.com Mark, why don't you mail me a copy of the drawing you described. I'll order the tubing from Wicks and if mild steel is OK for the rods, I can get that localy. Sounds simple enough to do on a lunch hour at work. Please include where the stuff is to be sent once done. Heres my home adress. John Roffey 3471 Birch Grove Trail Fort Gratiot MI 48059 jeroffey@tir.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 22:42:27 -0500 (EST) From: MikeTnyc@aol.com Subject: Re: KR: Wing Skins2 ? >I have the little wheel in the back (thoughts of real men and training >wheels just crossed my mind) but I needed to reinforce the wing walk >area. . . . I didn't realize a taildragger KR needed a wing walk area. Mike Taglieri ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 19:47:03 -0800 From: Micheal Mims Subject: Re: KR: Wing Skins2 ? At 10:42 PM 11/18/97 -0500, you wrote: >>I have the little wheel in the back (thoughts of real men and training >>wheels just crossed my mind) but I needed to reinforce the wing walk >>area. . . . > > I didn't realize a taildragger KR needed a wing walk area. > >Mike Taglieri > Only the ones with real landing gear and more than 2 inches of ground clearance! :o) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts in Irvine Ca. mailto:mikemims@pacbell.net http://home.pacbell.net/mikemims ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 22:12:09 -0600 From: rmccall Subject: Re: KR: Wing Skins2 ? Steve, That should work fine! If I remember all I read in the manual, it recommended using 3/32" strips to reinforce the walkway on the wing. Rich "Doing mine now" McCall Junction City, KS steveb@aviation.denel.co.za wrote: > Hi Guys > Those of you who have tricycle undercarriage. > What reinforcing was done on the wing skin to prevent stepping through the wing when trying to get into the aircraft. > I was thinking of running two 3/32" plywood profiles between the spars with plywood cross pieces. Then fibreglassing the stepping area with 2 layers. > > Any comments? > steve in South Africa > steveb@aviation.denel.co.za ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 23:45:52 EST From: leperkins@juno.com (Lloyd Perkins,Jr.) Subject: KR: 5151 kit for sale or trade Hello one and all , Recently some have asked if I would be willing to sell one of my Mustangs? SURE, I will sell my unopened kit or Trade it for a KR-2. The price for my kit is 5000.00 smackers. Not bad if you price the same kit from the factory at $7995.00. Plus this kit has retracts and long range fuel...... another 1800.00 worth of options. If anybody is interested call me @540-786-2838 nights or E-Mail me here. Thanks , Lloyd Perkins > > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Nov 97 9:12:17 ÿÿÿ From: steveb@aviation.denel.co.za Subject: Re: KR: Wing Skins2 ? Mike I am building a nose gear arrangement on my aircraft. Since I extended the fuselage some 28" aft, my undercarriage legs ended up slightly longer. Hence the aircraft also stands slightly higher. You need to be double jointed to keep one foot on the ground and place the other in the cockpit. steve in south africa - ---------- From: SMTP1@K1 - Server@Servers[] To: Cc: Subject: Re: KR: Wing Skins2 ? Date: Tuesday, November 18, 1997 10:42PM >I have the little wheel in the back (thoughts of real men and training >wheels just crossed my mind) but I needed to reinforce the wing walk >area. . . . I didn't realize a taildragger KR needed a wing walk area. Mike Taglieri ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 05:50:06 PST From: "Oscar Zuniga" Subject: KR: boat changes for NLF? Mark wrote: > >No changes are required to the fuselage. But, if you lower the >incidence, the aft spar comes up. Mine is something like 1.5" above >the longeron for my 1 degree of incidence, while the main spar is in >direct contact with the longeron.. If I had it do over again, I'd >recontour the fuselage sides to bring the bottom up to hit the bottom >of the aft spar like the original version does. Ah, but Mark- if you raised/recontoured the bottom of the fuselage up to meet the bottom of the aft spar, you couldn't run your elevator control from the stick back to behind the seat using a control tube, without making a big hole in the web. As it is, I thought it was really clean the way you did it with the tube passing under the aft spar and over the lower fuselage 5/8" framing, to the horn which converts back to control cables. Oscar Zuniga Medford, Oregon ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 06:15:50 PST From: "Oscar Zuniga" Subject: KR: NLF: A modest proposal Hello, Netters Since a builder can call his homebuilt any model name he wants, if the NLF wing proves out to be the new way to go, can we designate the new model "/N", as in, "KR-2S/N" (designating, of course, the NLF airfoil option, and read as 'slant-November', coincidentally the month in 1997 when this is coming together)? Does it sound like I'm already thinking about my FAA-required aircraft info plate, to be permanently and securely attached to the aft fuselage? ;o) Or is everybody just going to call it "the Langford wing", as in "the Diehl gear" or whatever? Oscar Zuniga Medford, Oregon ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 13:00:47 -0500 (EST) From: BSHADR@aol.com Subject: KR: Ellison woes, part 2 KRNetheads: Looks like we struck out on this one so far. Following is an update note from Rob on status. Any other bright ideas? Randy Stein ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ <<...Any way, I did the splitter and eased the 90 degree bend and ya know what - didn't help one bit - I'm getting desperate now, and moving the carb up top is sounding better all along. I may even go to a parts place to see how big the VW manual fuel pump really is and how it will look poking out of my cowl. Still hate the thought of running just an electric pump solo. or maybe I could weld an extension on the arm and put a ball on the end and mount it in the cockpit and reinvent the wobble pump-I know I got the motion down!>> ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 10:39:34 -0800 From: Micheal Mims Subject: Re: KR: Ellison woes, part 2 At 01:00 PM 11/19/97 -0500, you wrote: > >KRNetheads: > >Looks like we struck out on this one so far. Following is an update note >from Rob on status. Any other bright ideas? > >Randy Stein > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > ><<...Any way, I did the splitter and eased the 90 degree bend and ya know >what - didn't help one bit - I'm getting desperate now, What did Ellison say? I don't remember if he mentioned it but I am sure he realizes that the Ellison is very sensitive to head pressure. What did Brad say? I think intake turbulence is the answer but hey, 90% of the time it hurts when I think! PS My favorite intake turbulator is a IHI turbocharger! :o) ____________________________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts in Irvine CA http://home.pacbell.net/mikemims ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 13:37:18 CDT From: "Rex Ellington" Subject: KR: Smith & Co. epoxy G'Day netters Boy, did I get the phone slammed in my ear!!! I was ordering samples of their materials, and happened to mention aircraft. "I won't sell you anything." Slam. So. Even to get material for test, it will have to be under different name and for porches or something else. Rex Ellington Rex T. Ellington ellingto@gslan.offsys.ou.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 14:21:31 -0600 From: "Smyre, Nathaniel J." Subject: [none] Hello all. I was wondering, what are the dimensions of the hinges for the tail sections? I'm not totally sure what this means, It is for my father. He is the real one building the plane. Thank you for your help. Nate Smyre ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 18:51:50 -0500 (EST) From: TANDEM2@aol.com Subject: Re: KR: Video ya, you don't bark so often tandem2 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 19:58:45 -0800 From: Robert Maniss Subject: KR: Computer virus I hope all of you have already received the following. My daughter sent it to me this afternoon. > Bob Maniss >> > > > >I received a message today from a friend cautioning me not opening > >any e-mail titled "Join the Crew". It supposedly will erase everything > >on your hard drive! Feel free to pass this on. The caution originally came from someone at IBM. > > > > > > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 19:04:39 -0700 From: jscott.pilot@juno.com (Jeffrey E Scott) Subject: Re: KR: Computer virus On Wed, 19 Nov 1997 19:58:45 -0800 someone writes: >>> > > >> >I received a message today from a friend cautioning me not opening >> >any e-mail titled "Join the Crew". It supposedly will erase everything >> >on your hard drive! Feel free to pass this on. The caution originally came from someone at IBM. >> > Please do NOT send stuff like this to mailing lists. I know you think you are doing us all a favor, but you've just been had. Part of my day job is computer security. I see stuff like this every day. They are known as "Urban Legends". In short, there is no such thing as an e-mail message that will automatically run an executable file that can damage your system. A virus may be attached as an executable, but you would have to be foolish enough to run an unknown executable program. Most people should know better. These "Urban Legends" only affect computers and networks by users continuously resending the same messages to large numbers of people. Again, you've been had and hopefully educated. - ------- 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: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 18:32:42 -0800 From: "John F. Esch" Subject: Re: KR: Georgetown (Texas) Fly-in How about Corvallis, OR? Rats, I think I was dreaming again! Slap...I was. John F. Esch Salem, OR Robert Maniss wrote: > I just heard that the decision was made last Saturday to move the > annual > fly-in from Georgetown to Abilene (TX). Will post additional info as > it > becomes available. Surely would like to see a bunch of you bring your > > KRs to West Texas. Bobby (Muse), hope you will be able to make it - > shouldn't take more than about 30-40 minutes from your hangar. > Bob Maniss ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 19:05:24 -0800 From: Micheal Mims Subject: KR: interesting site http://www.eaze.net/~kaiser/hangar.htm ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Micheal Mims Just Plane Nutts in Irvine Ca. mailto:mikemims@pacbell.net http://home.pacbell.net/mikemims ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 21:14:37 -0800 From: Donald Reid Subject: Re: KR: Wing Skins2 ? MikeTnyc@aol.com wrote: > >I have the little wheel in the back (thoughts of real men and training > >wheels just crossed my mind) but I needed to reinforce the wing walk > >area. . . . > > I didn't realize a taildragger KR needed a wing walk area. > Mike Taglieri I am the one who mentioned that. The A/C will be regestered as a KR-2XL, meaning extra large. When I designed the landing gear, I looked at ground clearance and angle of attack in the three point configuration. I deceided on a combination that gives at least 9 inches between the prop blade and ground as my design condition. This gave a wing angle of attack of about 15 degrees at three point attitude. The stall will occur at about 16 degrees (on paper at least), so the three point condition is minimum speed. I am 6'-8" tall, and I can't get in without standing on the wing. - -- Don Reid mailto:donreid@erols.com http://www.erols.com/donreid/kr_page.htm ------------------------------ End of krnet-l-digest V1 #172 *****************************