From: KR-net users group digest[SMTP:kr-net@telelists.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 1999 12:11 AM To: kr-net digest recipients Subject: kr-net digest: January 04, 1999 KR-net users group Digest for Monday, January 04, 1999. 1. Re: Folding Wing Kit 2. Re: Link Permissions ... 3. Re: FS: Foam kit for KR-2S 4. Re: KR1 5. Re: FS: EA-81 block 6. Re: KR2 Kit 4 Sale 7. Subaru 8. Re: Folding Wing Kit 9. Re: Folding Wing Kit 10. Re: Folding Wing Kit 11. Re: Folding Wing Kit/ changes 12. Re: Response 13. Re: Folding Wing Kit 14. Re: Ballistic recovery system (plane parachute) 15. Re: Composites 16. Re: Ballistic recovery system (plane parachute) 17. Re: Link Permissions ... 18. Test 19. Jodel 20. Re: KR1 21. Re: Folding Wing Kit/ changes 22. Re: Subaru 23. Re: Jodel 24. Re: Ballistic recovery system (Safety device) 25. Re: Ballistic recovery system (plane parachute) 26. Re: Ballistic recovery system (Safety device) 27. Re: FS: EA-81 block 28. Re: FS: Foam kit for KR-2S 29. Re: Folding Wing Kit/ changes 30. Re: Ballistic recovery system (Safety device) 31. Re: Subaru 32. Re: Folding Wing Kit/ changes 33. Coffee sube 34. Re: Ballistic recovery system (Safety device) 35. Re: Response 36. Re: Ballistic recovery system (plane parachute) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Folding Wing Kit From: KR2616TJ@aol.com Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 07:18:11 EST X-Message-Number: 1 In a message dated 1/3/99 10:15:23 AM Eastern Standard Time, DClarke351@aol.com writes: << s it possible to get some literature on this kit. Maybe some pictures? Don Clarke >> Don, when the resource library CDROM comes out, there is a detailed drawing already made, and published, of a folding wing system. This system is simple and is designed more for trailoring and storage than a quick and easy "fold/unfold and fly" system. It doesn't say whether it was ever used but there are drawings and explanations. If anyone wants it, send me an e-mail off the KRnet and I'll scan it and send it to you. If there are a bunch of responses, I'll post it on my webpage. Dana Overall Richmond, KY mailto:kr2616tj@aol.com http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/7085/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Link Permissions ... From: "Alessandro Pecorara" Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 14:57:18 -0800 X-Message-Number: 2 Albert Pecoraro wrote: > Netheads, > > I am developing a map section that will link visitors to KR builders by > simply clicking on the > state or country. But, before I go ahead and do that I would like to > have permission from everyone who would like to have a link from my > site. It could include any combination of information you would like > "non-KR-Netters" to know such as: > > - web-site address > - e-mail address > - street, city, state > - phone or fax numbers > Good idea; you can add: Alessandro Pecorara e-mail: alessandro.pecorara@telecomitalia.it Torino, Italy Ciao, alessandro mailto:alessandro.pecorara@telecomitalia.it ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: FS: Foam kit for KR-2S From: "Richard Parker" Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 05:59:25 PST X-Message-Number: 3 Thats what I did. Cant use poyester vinyl on it though so I use West Systems which I bought locally. Actually I roughed out the tail surfaces with the hot wire because my technique left a little to be desired and I sanded the rest of the way. I like the way the blue and pink foam sands because you cant take off too much at once. prevents you from going down too far. I even used a palm sander with 100 grit. It worked great. I brought my EA-81 over to the guy I previously mentioned to be converted. He puts on the direct drive for $270, a new lightweight starter for $100. tuned exhaust for $85. I figure my total firewall forward package is going to cost me about $1000 plus the warp drive which he'll sell me at his cost. His work is good. He's got engines being flown in from all over the country including from the president of the Popular Rotorcraft Assn. Its may not be the fastest KR but it will put me in the air cheaper than my Archer. If I want more speed afterwards I'll think about throwing on a redrive and lowering the motor mount or something else. Rich >From: "Tom Andersen" >To: "KR-net users group" >Subject: [kr-net] Re: FS: Foam kit for KR-2S >Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1999 20:11:55 -0500 >Reply-To: "KR-net users group" > >Rich, >Nothing up my sleeve, but since I bought the Diehle wing skins, and I'm >going to buy the stub wing skins from RR and hotwire my tail surfaces from >blue extruded foam, I have no need for the 16 sheets of urethane foam, so >I'm selling them. >-Tom > >-----Original Message----- >From: Richard Parker >To: KR-net users group >Date: Sunday, January 03, 1999 8:02 PM >Subject: [kr-net] Re: FS: Foam kit for KR-2S > > >>So why is it for sale Tom? Whats up your sleeve? >> >>Rich >> >> >>>From: "Tom Andersen" >>>To: "KR-net users group" >>>Subject: [kr-net] FS: Foam kit for KR-2S >>>Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1999 12:06:44 -0500 >>>Reply-To: "KR-net users group" >>> >>>4 Sheets 2" tan urethane foam in 24" x 96" sheets. >>>12 Sheets 1" tan urethane foam in 24" x 96" sheets. >>>This amount of tan urethane foam is what the KR-2 or KR-2S requires for >>the >>>wings and tail. It cost $340 from AS&S including FREIGHT shipping of >>about >>>$70(85lbs with packing). >>>Make offer. >>>-Tom Andersen >>>Orlando FL >> >> >>______________________________________________________ >>Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com >> >>--- >>You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: tomkr2s@t-three.com >>To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com >> >> > > > >--- >You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: richontheroad@hotmail.com >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > > ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: KR1 From: "Richard Parker" Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 06:06:09 PST X-Message-Number: 4 >From: "Tom Cummings" >To: "KR-net users group" >Subject: [kr-net] KR1 >Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1999 20:26:53 -0600 >Reply-To: "KR-net users group" > >Two questions about the KR1 please. > 1. Where can one obtain the 4 rubber firewall/engine mounting bushings? >They install on the firewall and hold the two rectangular beams that bolt >to the Vw case. Great Planes Aircraft Supply $16.95 for 8 if my memory serves me correct. > 2. Are preformed wing skins available for the KR1? >Tom > The deihl wing skins can be used if you want to use the larger wings. actually you could probably shorten them as well if you wanted. ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: FS: EA-81 block From: "Richard Parker" Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 06:10:49 PST X-Message-Number: 5 >Tom Andersen wrote: > >> I have an unrebuilt Subaru EA-81 for sale if anyone's interested. >> -Tom >> P.S. Anyone have an EJ-22 for sale? >> > >Tom are you sure you want to run the EJ22? From everything I have read, heard >the EA81 is a much better engine for running direct drive. There is concern >the crankshaft on the 22 is to light for DD without some sort of support for >the prop end. Also the EJ22 is considerably heavier than the EA81. Not to >mention the Turbo Direct Drive EA81 has a much longer track record than the >22. I guess you have this all figured out but unless things have changed on >the EJ22 in the last year I think your selling the better of the two engines! >:o) > > >-- >zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz >Micheal Mims >SP290 (Sky Pig 290) ,..Building Cowling now >mailto:mikemims@home.com >http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/4136/ >Aliso Viejo Ca >^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ You made me feel good Mike, I'm going with that EA-81 DD you mention above. Rich Parker ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: KR2 Kit 4 Sale From: "Richard Parker" Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 06:15:44 PST X-Message-Number: 6 Looks like this is the kit for Taglieri. He could probably negotiate the building space too! >Email me off net. > >Randy Stein >Soviet Monica, CA >mailto: BSHADR@aol.com >Use subject line: KR2 Kit 4 Sale > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > ><approximately 60% but everything needed to finish it is included, including >instruments, engine (vw 1800 cc 412), etc. > >I would very much appreciate any advice you could provide me with respect to >where and how to advertise, if you are aware of any members in the >Metropolitan New York area who would be willing to inspect the plane and >equipment to give me an idea of how I should price the plane to sell quickly >and any other web sites, people, etc. which might be helpful. I would >appreciate any help you can give. >> ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Subaru From: DClarke351@aol.com Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 10:30:10 EST X-Message-Number: 7 I have a rebuilt EA 81 engine for sale! Anyone interested? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Folding Wing Kit From: Jaccoo@aol.com Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 11:41:59 EST X-Message-Number: 8 Not being familiar with folding wings, I've been wondering how to fold without effecting aileron controls. Are they disconnected, or are there special provisions for the controls? Is any rerigging required after folding? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Folding Wing Kit From: "R.W. Moore" Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 11:51:36 -0500 X-Message-Number: 9 I sure would like a copy R. W. Moore -----Original Message----- From: KR2616TJ@aol.com To: KR-net users group Date: Monday, January 04, 1999 7:19 AM Subject: [kr-net] Re: Folding Wing Kit >In a message dated 1/3/99 10:15:23 AM Eastern Standard Time, >DClarke351@aol.com writes: > ><< s it possible to get some literature on this kit. Maybe some pictures? Don > Clarke >> > >Don, when the resource library CDROM comes out, there is a detailed drawing >already made, and published, of a folding wing system. This system is simple >and is designed more for trailoring and storage than a quick and easy >"fold/unfold and fly" system. It doesn't say whether it was ever used but >there are drawings and explanations. If anyone wants it, send me an e-mail >off the KRnet and I'll scan it and send it to you. If there are a bunch of >responses, I'll post it on my webpage. > >Dana Overall >Richmond, KY >mailto:kr2616tj@aol.com >http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/7085/ > >--- >You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: rwmoore@alltel.net >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Folding Wing Kit From: KR2616TJ@aol.com Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 11:51:44 EST X-Message-Number: 10 In a message dated 1/4/99 11:43:18 AM Eastern Standard Time, Jaccoo@aol.com writes: << Not being familiar with folding wings, I've been wondering how to fold without effecting aileron controls. Are they disconnected, or are there special provisions for the controls? Is any rerigging required after folding? >> There's only one pushrod per wing that would be removed by taking out one bolt. The pushrod length would not be changed upon removal and theoretically would be reattached leaving the rigging the same. Dana Overall Richmond, KY mailto:kr2616tj@aol.com http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/hangar/7085/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Folding Wing Kit/ changes From: JKM001@aol.com Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 12:12:38 EST X-Message-Number: 11 I sure am reading alot about changes in the KR's that guys are wanting to make i.e. folding wings, wing tanks, engines other than the VW, etc. Call me a stickler but I am not changing anything on mine for the simple reason that so many of these planes have been built to plan specs and those are the ones that seem to have fewer problems. I guess some changes would be ok, but please guys, keep it safe!!! Build your plane the way you want it, but remember there are no side roads to pull off on up there and you only get one chance up there if something major goes wrong. I just don't weant to see anyone get hurt. Regards Keith ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Response From: Ross Youngblood Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 09:13:04 -0800 X-Message-Number: 12 > You know, after sending you both snail mail and e-mail asking about > the folding wing setup for the KR you were involved with and being > ignored > both times, I'd be quite hesitant dealing with anything you were > connected > with. I am assuming, of course, that you are the same R.W. Moore from > Georgia that the newsletter articles and ads were about. > > Jim Hayward Jim, I can understand your frustration, but I can see the other side of this now that I have been admin for a while. Not many of those who are supporting the KR are millionares, and many of us have families and day jobs. If this folding wing information was a big seller and Mr Moore had a business with a receptionist to take calls and answer his mail, then perhaps I would agree that being ignored was a bad thing, otherwise, it could have just been an oversight. -- Regards Ross ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Folding Wing Kit From: "R.W. Moore" Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 11:58:37 -0500 X-Message-Number: 13 The aileron is disconnected at the aileron rod ends where it fastens to the aileron no re rigging is required R. W. Moore -----Original Message----- From: Jaccoo@aol.com To: KR-net users group Date: Monday, January 04, 1999 11:47 AM Subject: [kr-net] Re: Folding Wing Kit >Not being familiar with folding wings, I've been wondering how to fold without >effecting aileron controls. Are they disconnected, or are there special >provisions for the controls? Is any rerigging required after folding? > >--- >You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: rwmoore@alltel.net >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Ballistic recovery system (plane parachute) From: Ross Youngblood Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 09:26:47 -0800 X-Message-Number: 14 John M. Wadleigh wrote: > > I think the BRS system is a very interesting safety device. I plan on > ordering one when I get to that point. The company's name is: > Ballistic Recovery System,inc. > 1845 Henry Av. > S. St. Paul, MN 55075-3541 > e-mail BRSchutes@aol.com > web http://users.aol.com/BRSchute/BRS.HTML > They already have the setup for the KR2S. > > John Wadleigh > jwnw1@juno.com My 2 cents.... If someone installs the BRS, I would like to see the routing of the lanyards. I considered a BRS, but decided on a personal parachute instead. If my KR breaks up, I don't care to save it, and also wondered if I would be in the portion of the KR saved by the BRS. Having my own chute solves this problem. However we had some threads on the minimum chute altitude, which I think would be much lower with a BRS. Additionally the accident statistics for KR's hint that a BRS may not save your bacon, many problems are fuel system related and occur on departure. I don't know if the BRS will recover at low altitudes, and think flying the plane would be the best bet. -- Ross ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Composites From: Ross Youngblood Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 09:35:29 -0800 X-Message-Number: 15 Steven Welebny wrote: > > My questions to you builders out there is, what's composite construction > like nowadays? From my studying of plans and construction, composites > combined with wood understructures sure seem to give you a lot of bang for > the buck in terms of ease of building, strength and smoothness. But at what > cost, and can those factors be mitigated? Are you guys all wearing > respirators and spacesuits? How toxic is today's goop compared to the stuff > I used twenty years ago? Does anyone successfully keep their completed > aircraft tied down outdoors? Does anyone do it safely with covers or other > means of protecting the structure from light? > > I think you folks get the idea. Any input appreciated. > > Steve Welebny > Avonlea Farm NH Steve, Aeropoxy is a much improved epoxy system. Earlier epoxies were rather nasty. I would still recommend a resperator and gloves. Not worried about allergic reactions, but any to date, unknown nasty agents. Working with glass is still MESSY. And requires planning, I'm glad I'm done with most of my glass work, I still have to fill my cowling to get it to look less like the lumpy mess it currently is. I recommend buying pre molded stuff to save on the SANDING and FILLING..... my next project will not be a hand lay up that's for sure. Otherwise, it's a lot of fun working with glass. -- Ross ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Ballistic recovery system (plane parachute) From: "Albert Pecoraro" Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 12:56:05 EST X-Message-Number: 16 I would like to add to what Ross is saying: I used to skydive a few years back using a system called Vulcan. The chute is designed like a wing and it is maneuvarable by pulling a toggle-chord on the side you want to turn. It can also flare for landing. The other parachutes, the round ones such as those used in the military, are not as maneuvarable. In order to jump from a plane using this rig you have to learn PLFs (Parachute Landing Falls) so you can fall and roll according to the angle at which you are approaching the ground. You have limited flare and control of these parachutes in comparison to the Vulcan type. So, what does this have to do with BRS? ... A BRS, to me, is very similar to using the round parachute, except that a KR does not know how to do a PLF! Unless you are deploying the BRS over flat and level land I would opt to maneuver the plane to safety (like the Vulcan parachute). There are more options available to a pilot in an emergency by gliding a plane to safety rather than deploying a BRS and leaving yourself to the mercy of any strong winds and obstacles below (i.e. lakes, power lines, trees, highways, etc.) Part of the parachuting emergency procedures include what to do in case you find yourself landing over lakes, power lines, trees and highways ... what do you do with a BRS in such circumstances? Are you willing to land on the above mentioned obstacles in a plane with a BRS deployed? ... These are only my opinions. Now, I must apologize if I missed out any details about BRS. Perhaps some BRSs ARE maneuverable, and that would completely throw (parts of) my opinion right out the window! ;-) The beauty of this KR-NET and Freedom of Speech - we can agree to disagree! ;-) Cheers everyone, Albert ----Original Message Follows---- Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 09:26:47 -0800 From: Ross Youngblood To: "KR-net users group" Subject: [kr-net] Re: Ballistic recovery system (plane parachute) Reply-To: "KR-net users group" My 2 cents.... If someone installs the BRS, I would like to see the routing of the lanyards. I considered a BRS, but decided on a personal parachute instead. If my KR breaks up, I don't care to save it, and also wondered if I would be in the portion of the KR saved by the BRS. Having my own chute solves this problem. However we had some threads on the minimum chute altitude, which I think would be much lower with a BRS. Additionally the accident statistics for KR's hint that a BRS may not save your bacon, many problems are fuel system related and occur on departure. I don't know if the BRS will recover at low altitudes, and think flying the plane would be the best bet. -- Ross John M. Wadleigh wrote: > > I think the BRS system is a very interesting safety device. I plan on > ordering one when I get to that point. The company's name is: > Ballistic Recovery System,inc. > 1845 Henry Av. > S. St. Paul, MN 55075-3541 > e-mail BRSchutes@aol.com > web http://users.aol.com/BRSchute/BRS.HTML > They already have the setup for the KR2S. > > John Wadleigh > jwnw1@juno.com --- You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: apec97@hotmail.com To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Link Permissions ... From: "Cary Honeywell" Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 11:35:15 -0500 X-Message-Number: 17 Email (reply) to cary@storm.ca or ve3ev@rac.ca Web page http://www.storm.ca/~cary/ KR2 area http://www.storm.ca/~cary/kr2.shtml ---------- > > Albert Pecoraro wrote: > > > Netheads, > > > > I am developing a map section that will link visitors to KR builders by > > simply clicking on the > > state or country. But, before I go ahead and do that I would like to > > have permission from everyone who would like to have a link from my > > site. It could include any combination of information you would like > > "non-KR-Netters" to know such as: > > > > - web-site address > > - e-mail address > > - street, city, state > > - phone or fax numbers > > You can add mine too. Have not updated it in a year (cuz I have not done too much this year). www.storm.ca/~cary cary@storm.ca 5 Woodview Cr., Gloucester, Ont Canada Fax (613)830-9930 (can phone there too) - Cary - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Test From: jeb@thuntek.net Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 12:10:10 X-Message-Number: 18 Just a test, don't respond. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Jodel From: JKM001@aol.com Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 15:47:21 EST X-Message-Number: 19 Has anyone seen or heard of a 4 seat Jodel? I f anyone has any info. please pass it along to me. Main concerns are: Is it a good plane? Easy to build? Expensive? Any help is appreciated. Regards Keith ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: KR1 From: Steve Bennett Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 16:15:45 -0600 X-Message-Number: 20 Richard Parker wrote: > > >From: "Tom Cummings" > >To: "KR-net users group" > >Subject: [kr-net] KR1 > >Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1999 20:26:53 -0600 > >Reply-To: "KR-net users group" > > > >Two questions about the KR1 please. > > 1. Where can one obtain the 4 rubber firewall/engine mounting > bushings? > > >They install on the firewall and hold the two rectangular beams that > bolt > >to the Vw case. > > Great Planes Aircraft Supply $16.95 for 8 if my memory serves me > correct. > > > 2. Are preformed wing skins available for the KR1? > >Tom > > > > The deihl wing skins can be used if you want to use the larger wings. > actually you could probably shorten them as well if you wanted. > > ______________________________________________________ > Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com > > --- > You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: gpasc@earthlink.net > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com these are lord mounts. I used them on my KR-1. They are available from bearing supply houses. a word of caution. do not use aluminum channel. the right hand side one will eventually fail from torque. steve bennett ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Folding Wing Kit/ changes From: DClarke351@aol.com Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 17:35:40 EST X-Message-Number: 21 thankyou! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Subaru From: Olga Saunders Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 18:27:42 -0500 X-Message-Number: 22 Where are you at? What are you asking? Mike Saunders Cumberland, Md. At 10:30 AM 1/4/99 EST, you wrote: >I have a rebuilt EA 81 engine for sale! Anyone interested? > >--- >You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: ods@mindspring.com >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Jodel From: "stonet" Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 18:57:49 -0500 X-Message-Number: 23 Go to this site and check out the DR-400 series http://www.decollage.org/jodel/mainframe.htm Tim S. >Has anyone seen or heard of a 4 seat Jodel? snip >Regards >Keith ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Ballistic recovery system (Safety device) From: "Tom Andersen" Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 21:02:04 -0500 X-Message-Number: 24 Hi Ross, I have the BRS 1050 with the KR harness. It attaches two straps around the main spar on each side of the fuselage on the outside, with fiberglass tape over the Kevlar strap to fair it. Another strap goes to a bracket which bolts under the tailwheel spring bolts on the inside of the tail, and the straps are fiberglassed using 6 oz cloth up the ridge of the turtledeck, so that the plane will be suspended level from outside the cockpit in three places. At the risk of getting people excited I offer my $.0199 on the subject of BRS deployment decisions. The KR is ten times stronger than the ultralights which inspired it but several scenarios come to mind where a BRS will be useful to have on board besides major structural failure: 1. Anything which might incapacitate the pilot such as medical emergency, temporary blindness caused by injury from canopy failure or bird strike. For example a longtime KR flyer who is on his third KR said on his first KR-2 the canopy blew open during flight and it broke his arm in the process. He flat spun all the way down to the ground, trying to get it straightened out for over 30 seconds. He broke several more bones including some ribs when he hit and when the rescue crews found him he was near death. I asked him straight out if a BRS would have done him any good. He said "HELL YEA! I would have had plenty of time to deploy a BRS chute." 2. Engine failure over open water. I'd rather splash down under canopy than flip over at 35 or 40mph. 3. Loss of control surface. You can't land what you can't control. 4. Engine breaking off due to prop failure and resulting CG change. 5. Engine failure over poor terrain. The minimum safe altitude seems much more to do with your pre-deployment rate of descent and forward speed. The speed makes it deploy faster, and if you aren't pointed straight down, one hundred feet can be 10 seconds. -Tom -----Original Message----- From: Ross Youngblood To: KR-net users group Date: Monday, January 04, 1999 12:39 PM Subject: [kr-net] Re: Ballistic recovery system (plane parachute) >John M. Wadleigh wrote: >> >> I think the BRS system is a very interesting safety device. I plan on >> ordering one when I get to that point. The company's name is: >> Ballistic Recovery System,inc. >> 1845 Henry Av. >> S. St. Paul, MN 55075-3541 >> e-mail BRSchutes@aol.com >> web http://users.aol.com/BRSchute/BRS.HTML >> They already have the setup for the KR2S. >> >> John Wadleigh >> jwnw1@juno.com > >My 2 cents.... > >If someone installs the BRS, I would like to see the routing of the >lanyards. I considered a BRS, but decided on a personal parachute >instead. If my KR breaks up, I don't care to save it, and also wondered >if I would be in the portion of the KR saved by the BRS. Having my own >chute solves this problem. However we had some threads on the minimum >chute altitude, which I think would be much lower with a BRS. > >Additionally the accident statistics for KR's hint that a BRS may >not save your bacon, many problems are fuel system related and occur >on departure. I don't know if the BRS will recover at low altitudes, >and think flying the plane would be the best bet. > >-- Ross > >--- >You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: tomkr2s@t-three.com >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Ballistic recovery system (plane parachute) From: Mike Mims Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 18:19:25 -0800 X-Message-Number: 25 Ross Youngblood wrote: > << not save your bacon, many problems are fuel system related and occur on > departure. I don't know if the BRS will recover at low altitudes, and > think flying the plane would be the best bet.>>> Giving these two scenarios I also decided the BRS is nothing more then a "false sense of security" in KR type aircraft. Not a single KR has had an in flight structural failure and if it did, computer analysis has shown (thanks to Mark Lougheed) that the main spar would fail where it enters the fuselage. So the mounting of the lanyards in my opinion is a problem on the KR (who's to say you would end up in the part saved by the chute). I would (and will) opt for the personal chute because if the airframe fails I would rather get out and away from it. If the engine fails I would rather fly the plane to MY intended point of landing instead of drifting along with the BRS in control. Just another opinion that's worth what you paid for it! :o) -- zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Micheal Mims SP290 (Sky Pig 290) ,..Building Cowling now mailto:mikemims@home.com http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/4136/ Aliso Viejo Ca ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Ballistic recovery system (Safety device) From: Mike Mims Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 18:27:32 -0800 X-Message-Number: 26 Tom Andersen wrote: > << 2. Engine failure over open water. I'd rather splash down under canopy than > flip over at 35 or 40mph. > 3. Loss of control surface. You can't land what you can't control. > 4. Engine breaking off due to prop failure and resulting CG change. > 5. Engine failure over poor terrain.>>> I agree these are all good reasons to install a BRS but, (here goes) any of these things could happen in a certified aircraft and I don't exactly see hoards of folks running out to install them on their Beechcrafts, Cessnas, Pipers, etc.. Guys just because its certified in the eXperimental category don't get caught up in the mindset that it is more likely to crash! -- zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Micheal Mims SP290 (Sky Pig 290) ,..Building Cowling now mailto:mikemims@home.com http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/4136/ Aliso Viejo Ca ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: FS: EA-81 block From: Mike Mims Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 18:48:42 -0800 X-Message-Number: 27 Tom Andersen wrote: > << uses fuel injection and the ECM unit, thus eliminating carburetor icing (one > less system and control required), mixture control (another control not > required because the oxygen sensor is retained, although some guys want to > mess with it anyway)>>> Boy after the BRS comments and now more Subaru comments your gonna get mad at me, nah! :o) Anyway as far as the Subaru goes, (remember this my my opinion based on my observations) keeping the EFI in tact is much more of a risk than using an Ellison and a turbocharger! Keep in mind this is what caused several accidents on Canada claiming a few souls and I think these accidents are what prompted Avemco to add the Subaru exclusion to their policy. They will not cover a Subaru powered aircraft until after X amount of hours have been flown off the engine. This may have changed in the last year. It seems that the EFI and Ignition on these units operate down to a specific voltage and quit without warning. (ask the Europa pilot about that one, he lived) Also when buying a Subaru conversion from a company that "specializes" in them I would bring my own scale and weigh it myself. Most of those guys are lying through their teeth when it comes to weights and HP! Got a portable dyno? :o) Again always refer back to the "track record" when dealing with these guys. There is one company that has (had) a Dragonfly with Italian Coffee written down the side that I wouldn't use their engine to power my lawn mower. They have crashed Dragonfly number 2 twice now and I don't think it made it through the second crash (yes due to engine failure). I also met someone who operated out of their (coffee guys) airport and said if he had a dollar for every time he saw the Dragonfly dead stick back to the ground he could afford to buy a new engine from GPASC! :o) I don't mean to hurt anyone's feelings but do LOTs of research when buying an engine from a "aero converter". One of our "aero converters" bought the farm a few weeks ago when one of his reduction drives failed on his personal aircraft. This is the same unit he has been selling for the past year or so. I friend of mine has one and its as useless as tits on a bull now! Humm,.....$1500 down the drain and no milk! -- zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Micheal Mims SP290 (Sky Pig 290) ,..Building Cowling now mailto:mikemims@home.com http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/4136/ Aliso Viejo Ca ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: FS: Foam kit for KR-2S From: Mike Mims Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 18:53:13 -0800 X-Message-Number: 28 Richard Parker wrote: > <<< Its may not be the fastest KR but it will put me in the air cheaper > than my Archer. If I want more speed afterwards I'll think about throwing > on a redrive and lowering the motor mount or something else.>>>> I was under the impression that the redrive was designed to make the KR fly slower! :o) -- zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Micheal Mims SP290 (Sky Pig 290) ,..Building Cowling now mailto:mikemims@home.com http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/4136/ Aliso Viejo Ca ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Folding Wing Kit/ changes From: Mike Mims Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 18:58:15 -0800 X-Message-Number: 29 JKM001@aol.com wrote: > << reason that so many of these planes have been built to plan specs and those are > the ones that seem to have fewer problems.>>> If you call incredibly strange (some say dangerous) flight characteristics at gross weight "fewer problems" then I guess your right! Oh yeah,....Stickler! :o) -- zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Micheal Mims SP290 (Sky Pig 290) ,..Building Cowling now mailto:mikemims@home.com http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/4136/ Aliso Viejo Ca ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Ballistic recovery system (Safety device) From: NFCKR3@aol.com Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 21:55:43 EST X-Message-Number: 30 When I bought my KR I got a complete list of ALL KR2 accidnts. There has NEVER been a recorded in flight failure of a KR2! I have flown lots of factory built planes and wish that I could say that about them! The KR is a strong plane, but any plane can fail...and if you think that a BRS is for you then go for it! Those that said that they used a personal chute I would like to know what kind you use...my head almost hits my canopy now! Skip Carden ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Subaru From: DClarke351@aol.com Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 22:11:29 EST X-Message-Number: 31 I am in El Paso Tex. I'm asking $850.00 + shipping. Need some more info? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Folding Wing Kit/ changes From: "R.W. Moore" Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 22:25:08 -0500 X-Message-Number: 32 MY KIT DOES NOT CHANGE THE STRENGHT OF THE AIRPLANE IN ANY WAY. IN SOME WAYS IT MAY IMPROVE ON THE AIRPLANE. RWM -----Original Message----- From: JKM001@aol.com To: KR-net users group Date: Monday, January 04, 1999 12:15 PM Subject: [kr-net] Re: Folding Wing Kit/ changes >I sure am reading alot about changes in the KR's that guys are wanting to make >i.e. folding wings, wing tanks, engines other than the VW, etc. Call me a >stickler but I am not changing anything on mine for the simple reason that so >many of these planes have been built to plan specs and those are the ones that >seem to have fewer problems. I guess some changes would be ok, but please >guys, keep it safe!!! Build your plane the way you want it, but remember there >are no side roads to pull off on up there and you only get one chance up there >if something major goes wrong. I just don't weant to see anyone get hurt. > >Regards >Keith > >--- >You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: rwmoore@alltel.net >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Coffee sube From: jeroffey@tir.com (jeroffey) Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 22:41:12 -0500 (EST) X-Message-Number: 33 I ordered the tapes from the "coffee guys" back when I thought a Subaru was for me. There is an element of information there but after hearing the claim of "bluprinted" and watching the retired "drag race mechanic" assemble this thing without a mike or a dial indicator, I was not impressed. As a mater of fact I was ammused watching this guy hammer the seal into the case and having all the bolts jump out of thier holes and fall on the floor. Back woods stuff for sure. I did have a talk with the driver of the "coffee" Dfly at Oshkosh a couple of years ago, and he claimed to have over 400 trouble free hours on the thing, but he was trying to sell his service. Someone made the comment some time ago about wanting to fly your plane or wanting to tinker with your engine. I took a good look at that statement and watched Marty Roberts fly his KR. I'm shopping for an O200 when that time comes. John Roffey O200KR2S Someday!!! PS I have both an EA81 and EJ22. Thier not worth crating and shipping, but if any one in the MI area wants them, let me know. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Ballistic recovery system (Safety device) From: "R.W. Moore" Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 23:15:49 -0500 X-Message-Number: 34 ARE YOU THE SAME SKIP CARDEN THAT WAS THE EDITOR OF THE ERCOUPE NEWSLETTER. IF YOU ARE I ONCE BELONGED. I OWNED ERCOUPE N94074 FOR TEN YEARS AT ONE TIME. THE PLANE IS STILL HERE IN TOCCOA GA. SINCERELY, R. W. MOORE -----Original Message----- From: NFCKR3@aol.com To: KR-net users group Date: Monday, January 04, 1999 10:03 PM Subject: [kr-net] Re: Ballistic recovery system (Safety device) >When I bought my KR I got a complete list of ALL KR2 accidnts. There has NEVER >been a recorded in flight failure of a KR2! I have flown lots of factory built >planes and wish that I could say that about them! The KR is a strong plane, >but any plane can fail...and if you think that a BRS is for you then go for >it! Those that said that they used a personal chute I would like to know what >kind you use...my head almost hits my canopy now! > >Skip Carden > >--- >You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: rwmoore@alltel.net >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Response From: JEHayward@aol.com Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 22:56:48 EST X-Message-Number: 35 In a message dated 1/4/99 10:18:14 AM Mountain Standard Time, rossy@saber.slb.com writes: << If this folding wing information was a big seller and Mr Moore had a business with a receptionist to take calls and answer his mail, then perhaps I would agree that being ignored was a bad thing, otherwise, it could have just been an oversight. >> I could agree with you Ross except that one particular R.W. Moore had articles in Newsletter issues #166 p.5, #168 p.3 (with pictures), #173 p.4 (more pictures), and was soliciting sales for the apparatus for $169.50. I sent the SASE as requested when I inquired about it but had no response. In issue #217 p.17 was mention of Rick Hunan's project along with changes he'd made one of which was a folding wing mechanism. He was the other gentleman whom I sent a SASE requesting information. He replied a couple months later that he wasn't comfortable releasing any information on his since it hadn't been tested. I respected that reply and had no further contact with him. I certainly don't mind if the R.W. Moore on the list is not the one from Toccoa, Georgia who was in those Newsletter articles but it seemed strange that another gentleman with the same initials and last name was selling a folding wing mechanism now. My intention was to prevent disappointment for someone who might be ordering from the one that (I presumed) was the same as in the articles and then have problems with the order. Jim ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Ballistic recovery system (plane parachute) From: "WARRON GRAY" Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 23:28:45 -0500 X-Message-Number: 36 -----Original Message----- From: Albert Pecoraro To: KR-net users group Date: Monday, January 04, 1999 12:58 PM Subject: [kr-net] Re: Ballistic recovery system (plane parachute) >I would like to add to what Ross is saying: > > I used to skydive a few years back using a system called Vulcan. The >chute is designed like a wing and it is maneuvarable by pulling a I'm Going to add my 2 cents..If you can't handle an engine out emergency than stay the hell on the ground you don't belong in the air in the first place, been there done that (blew a cylinder head off on a "certified" 152 . as far as frame failures if you can't trust your quality of building stay on the ground you probably shouldn't fly anyway your project. Follow the damn plans and you will be ok. as far as engines go , certified engines blow vw's blow and probably soobs blow, so what learn how to fly the right way and stop your whining. Warron --- END OF DIGEST --- You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: johnbou@timberline.com To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com