From: KR-net users group digest[SMTP:kr-net@telelists.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 1999 12:24 AM To: kr-net digest recipients Subject: kr-net digest: June 14, 1999 KR-net users group Digest for Monday, June 14, 1999. 1. Re: Young Eagles-Progress Report. 2. To redrive or direct drive 3. re: redrives 4. More on redrives 5. test pilot 6. N415RJ Progress Report 7. Searchable Archives 8. Re: 51 Percent 9. Re: To redrive or direct drive 10. Re: Young Eagles 11. Re: Young Eagles 12. redrives and prop RPM 13. Re: Young Eagles 14. Re: test pilot 15. Re: Young Eagles ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Young Eagles-Progress Report. From: KR2616TJ@aol.com Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 08:05:59 EDT X-Message-Number: 1 Flew 38 of the little rascals myself Saturday (we had two bus loads of kids show up from two schools), non stop from 9AM to 3PM, plus some unofficial parents who "needed" to be with the child.........I'm sure they just wanted a ride. There were a lot of "I think I can, I think I can..........Do you think you could read those instructions to me, this is my first time too.........Well the book says, if I pull back on this thing now, we should fly:-)" We all had a blast. Progress Report Spent 7 hours in the garage yesterday, got the stubs completed yesterday. It's starting to look like an airplane again. Did some more carbon fiber work with "deck" cloth laid over top of it instead of peel ply. I'm kinka leaning towards this deck cloth on finished lay-ups where overlays are not required, you get even fewer pin holes. Remember, if you are going to be laying up on top of other work, use peel ply to fracture the surface for good adhesion. I don't know if this is common knowledge or not, but if you are going to be cutting lengths of foam.......forget using a blade and straight edge, go for the table saw. I know it seems like overkill but you end up with perfect cuts. Just be sure and wear eye protection and breathing mask because the dust will fly. Dana Overall 1999 KR Gathering host Richmond, KY mailto:kr2616tj@aol.com http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/7085/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: To redrive or direct drive From: Oscar Zuniga Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 05:18:58 PDT X-Message-Number: 2 Bruce wrote: >I see some that are direct drive and some >with various kinds of speed reduction units. Can anyone >recommend an info source to get me up to speed on the hows >and whys of this subject? I'm sure there are sources out there, but why bother? It's as simple as this: each engine is designed to develop its maximum horsepower and/or torque at a given RPM. If you look at any engine's power/torque curves, they rise with increasing RPM and then usually peak and flatten out or start dropping off. So what you want to do is to run the engine at that peak to get the most out of it. The problem is that in an aircraft, the engine happens to be driving a prop, which is inefficient when the speed of the prop tips starts going supersonic. So the prop usually limits the efficient range of operation to, say, 3400 RPM (depends on the prop size). Many engines don't develop full power until they get up into the 4000+ RPM range, so you need to add a reduction drive to let the engine run higher RPM while still keeping the prop RPM reasonable. The VW and other engines work fine without redrives, while the naturally aspirated Subaru, Honda (CAM 100), almost all 2-strokes, and others need a redrive to get up into their higher power or torque bands. A turbo Subaru can develop enough power at decent prop RPMs without a redrive, so that's why you've seen posts about a turbo direct-drive Subaru in a KR. Obviously, though, you're loafing the engine because it peaks out at a much higher RPM than when running direct. What you gain is you don't need the weight and complexity of a redrive out there on the nose, not to mention the cost. Now if somebody would develop a lightweight variable-ratio conversion unit to allow "shifting gears"...;o) Oscar Zuniga Medford, Oregon website at http://www.geocities.com/Pipeline/Dropzone/5610/ _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: re: redrives From: "John Bryhan" Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 6:33:34 X-Message-Number: 3 Now if somebody would develop a lightweight variable-ratio conversion unit to allow "shifting gears"...;o) They're called constant speed props!! :*) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: More on redrives From: Tobin Dunham Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 07:33:27 PDT X-Message-Number: 4 Ok, I'm getting confused. Someone correct me if I'm misunderstanding, but I thought a constant-speed prop was controlled by changing the angle of the prop, meaning you could get the same thrust at different rpm ranges, depending on the prop angle. If this is true, how does this help when your engine speed (rpms) make the prop tips go supersonic? You're still going to have the inefficiency due to supersonic prop tips, no matter what the angle. Am I confusing a constant-speed prop with something else? Toby Dunham Houston, TX _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: test pilot From: "Wolf Packs, Inc." Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 08:50:34 -0700 X-Message-Number: 5 --=====================_2211566==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I found a local test pilot to do the first flight of my re-furbished (now tri-gear) KR2. After hearing from local EAA members about some of his 35 prior experimental first flights I feel he's a good pilot, but he's never flown a KR. Any thoughts on what I might tell him to expect other than that the prop goes backwards (VW) and the elevator may be a tad "sensitive" ? Also, any KR2 flyers in northern CA, OR, or maybe NV available to give me a ride so I can get a feel for it before flying mine? E-mail me privately on this (P-mail?) Paul@wolfpacks.com Many thanks, Paul M. Ashland, OR www.wolfpacks.com/KR --=====================_2211566==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" I found a local test pilot to do the first flight of my re-furbished (now tri-gear) KR2.  After hearing from local EAA members about some of his 35 prior experimental first flights I feel he's a good pilot, but he's never flown a KR.
 
Any thoughts on what I might tell him to expect other than that the prop goes backwards (VW) and the elevator may be a tad "sensitive" ? 

Also, any KR2 flyers in northern CA, OR, or maybe NV available to give me a ride so I can get a feel for it before flying mine?  E-mail me privately on this (P-mail?) Paul@wolfpacks.com 

Many thanks,

Paul M.      
Ashland, OR
www.wolfpacks.com/KR
 --=====================_2211566==_.ALT-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: N415RJ Progress Report From: EagleGator@aol.com Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 14:48:54 EDT X-Message-Number: 6 After about a year and a half of no progress for the "usual reasons", the Phantom Eagle is back in production! This weekend saw the fuselage bottom and right side get a layer of 1.45 oz deck cloth applied, the left side happens tonight. The horizontal stabilizer and elevator got more filling and sanding, and will be ready to attach to the fuselage once the glass is cured. The rudder pedals were removed from the floor of the cockpit and are being readied for re-installation on the lower shelf, complete with redesigned toe brakes (still in the fabrication process). The tail wheel was removed and the tail block reshaped to allow better operation of the tailwheel, as well as fair the block into the fuselage (looks REAL nice with the glass on it). I drew the plans for the molds for my stub wing skins last night, and will pick up the Formica(R) later this week to build them. I reviewed some of my collection of "neat things I might want to do with my airplane" and will begin construction of two home-made capacitance fuel senders some time next week. They will work very nicely as baffles in the 6 gal tanks I've devised for each of the wing stubs. I'm sending a shopping list with a friend who's driving over to Wicks' tomorrow, and that should keep me in supplies for the next month or so. All that accomplished with about 12 hours of quality time this weekend. It sure felt good to be building again, I highly recommend it to anyone else who has been idle for a while. Now, just a couple of hours a night for the next year, and I'll be flying in no time! Cheers, Rick Junkin EagleGator@aol.com St. Charles MO N415RJ ~35% complete and progressing rapidly! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Searchable Archives From: john bouyea Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 14:51:43 -0700 X-Message-Number: 7 Hi folks! I've been buried with stuff of late. I've updated the archives at http://kr2s.timberline.com today and ran across this message. My site has a little over 900meg free now hanging off a T1. I just don't have lots of time (and zero interest in learning html right now). If someone is interested in making a searchable archive, that's cool, let me know and I'll see if there is something I can do to help. If we develop a script someone wants to runs on my server, we could probably work something out. I burned a CD with the current archives (at the time) for Oscar a while back. He was making a Archive-on-a-disk project. It seems he's fallen for a high-wing, slow flying Squirrel... I plan on keeping my site open as it is getting 5 - 15 hits daily. While that is not a lot, I hope it is helping someone... Keep on building! John Bouyea kr2s - on the gear kr2s - boat stage johnbou@timberline.com John Bouyea System Administrator Timberline Software > 5. KR-Net Knowledge Archive > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Subject: KR-Net Knowledge Archive > From: "Walter Lounsbery" > Date: Sun, 13 Jun 1999 12:02:09 -0500 > X-Message-Number: 5 > <> I know that I would like > to see an accessible archive of the tremendous knowledge that zips by on > the > daily archive. <> > I would suggest initially hosting the system at my website, which has > about > 60 Mbyte free at this time (it's been sorely neglected, I'm afraid). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: 51 Percent From: "Tom Andersen" Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 18:28:38 -0400 X-Message-Number: 8 No offense taken, this is exactly why I bared my knowledge on the subject. I think there is a very common misconception about what the repairman's certificate really gets a homebuilder. It's all about the annual inspection rather than about repairs, maintenance, and changes, something I was not aware of. -Tom Humble pie tastes good when I've learned something! -----Original Message----- From: Michael Taglieri To: KR-net users group Cc: kr-net@telelists.com Date: Monday, June 14, 1999 1:15 AM Subject: [kr-net] Re: 51 Percent >No offense meant, but the post below is not correct. An experimental >aircraft is not covered AT ALL by Part 43, which is the section setting >all the rules that restrict owners of an aircraft from doing major >maintenance: > >Sec. 43.1 (a) "Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, this >part prescribes rules governing the maintenance, preventive maintenance, >rebuilding, and alteration. . . ." > >Sec. 43.1 (b) "This part does not apply to any aircraft for which an >experimental airworthiness certificate has been issued, unless a >different kind of airworthiness certificate had previously been issued >for that aircraft." > >Therefore, the ONLY thing the buyer of an experimental aircraft can't do >himself is the annual, which must be done by the builder or by an A&P >(but he doesn't have to be an IA). I imagine the "unless..." is for >certified aircraft that have been moved into the experimental category >because a manufacturer is testing a special engine in them, etc., but >these aren't experimental-homebuilt. > >The post below is correct that if you make a major change, you may have >to do another 40-hours of test flying. > >Mike Taglieri >_____________________________________________ > >"Fundamentally the marksman aims at himself." > - from Zen And the Art of Archery > >>Here's my understanding of the process, it'll be interesting to see if >it >>all passes through the collective KR mindmeld smoothly: >> >>Once an experimental aircraft receives it's airworthiness certificate, >it >>has to be treated the same as a type certified aircraft when it comes to >>maintenance and repairs, meaning either an A&P is required to do the >work, >>or the person with the repairman's certificate for that specific >N-number is >>required to do that work. Either one needs to sign off in the >logbook.... > >___________________________________________________________________ >Get the Internet just the way you want it. >Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month! >Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj. > >--- >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: To redrive or direct drive From: "Tom Andersen" Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 18:59:40 -0400 X-Message-Number: 9 I found another source for a direct drive prop shaft for the EA-81 turbos, this one has an elastomeric isolator like the Great Plains rear drive unit. I'll post more about it when I find out more. http://www.globalserve.net/~cobbg/guymdrvs.jpg I imagine that with the turbo quieting the exhaust and the elastomeric isolators dampening vibration it would be a pretty quiet, smooth running engine. With a 3-blade 52" Warp Drive prop, it would be even smoother. -Tom -----Original Message----- From: Oscar Zuniga To: KR-net users group Date: Monday, June 14, 1999 8:19 AM Subject: [kr-net] To redrive or direct drive >Bruce wrote: >>I see some that are direct drive and some >>with various kinds of speed reduction units. Can anyone >>recommend an info source to get me up to speed on the hows >>and whys of this subject? > >I'm sure there are sources out there, but why bother? It's as simple as >this: each engine is designed to develop its maximum horsepower and/or >torque at a given RPM. If you look at any engine's power/torque curves, >they rise with increasing RPM and then usually peak and flatten out or start >dropping off. So what you want to do is to run the engine at that peak to >get the most out of it. The problem is that in an aircraft, the engine >happens to be driving a prop, which is inefficient when the speed of the >prop tips starts going supersonic. So the prop usually limits the efficient >range of operation to, say, 3400 RPM (depends on the prop size). Many >engines don't develop full power until they get up into the 4000+ RPM range, >so you need to add a reduction drive to let the engine run higher RPM while >still keeping the prop RPM reasonable. > >The VW and other engines work fine without redrives, while the naturally >aspirated Subaru, Honda (CAM 100), almost all 2-strokes, and others need a >redrive to get up into their higher power or torque bands. A turbo Subaru >can develop enough power at decent prop RPMs without a redrive, so that's >why you've seen posts about a turbo direct-drive Subaru in a KR. Obviously, >though, you're loafing the engine because it peaks out at a much higher RPM >than when running direct. What you gain is you don't need the weight and >complexity of a redrive out there on the nose, not to mention the cost. > >Now if somebody would develop a lightweight variable-ratio conversion unit >to allow "shifting gears"...;o) > >Oscar Zuniga >Medford, Oregon >website at http://www.geocities.com/Pipeline/Dropzone/5610/ > > >_______________________________________________________________ >Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.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 > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Young Eagles From: Bobby Muse Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 18:21:03 -0500 X-Message-Number: 10 At 01:14 PM 06/13/1999 EDT, you wrote: >No but I flew some this morning in an Air Coupe. We had about 40 of the >little buggers. We and they all enjoyed it. Don > > Can you fly Young Eagles in an experimental airplane? What kind of insurance is needed, if any? Bobby Muse mailto:bmuse@mindspring.com Wimberly, TX ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Young Eagles From: DClarke351@aol.com Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 19:47:49 EDT X-Message-Number: 11 As far as I know one can fly young Eagles in the experimental aircraft. I have seen it done a number of times. I do not know the particulars concerning insurance but it might be it is the same as for the other aircraft supplied by the National EAA. Don Clarke ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: redrives and prop RPM From: Mike Mims Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 17:23:03 -0700 X-Message-Number: 12 Tobin Dunham wrote: > > Ok, I'm getting confused. Someone correct me if I'm misunderstanding, but I > thought a constant-speed prop was controlled by changing the angle of the > prop, meaning you could get the same thrust at different rpm ranges, > depending on the prop angle. Well there are at least two kinds of props that can be mentioned here. One is the "constant speed" type that you will find on most certified aircraft. You select an RPM with the prop lever and the prop governor will try to maintain that RPM by varying the pitch of the prop blade. The other is the type you will find on most homebuilts and that's the "in flight adjustable" type. All you do with this unit is adjust the pitch of the blade from the cockpit. It does not maintain a constant RPM. Something to think about when it comes to props and prop tip speed. Most homebuilders tend to be WAY to conservative when it comes to tip velocity. A common thing I have found is that on a good performing aircraft (certified and eXperimental) the prop tip speed is very close to supersonic at max power. Usually in the 80% to 90% mach range. With that in mind a 54 inch prop can turn 3700rpm which is about 80% mach. When I flew a C-185 in the back woods (bush) in Alaska we always installed the long float plane prop and the performance gain was considerable. Same thing on the Beaver, the old two bladed prop on the R985 was much better in the thrust department but man was it LOUD!! And yes the tips were at 95% mach. Of course you might run into some weird problems with wood props at that speed! :o) -- zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Micheal Mims Filling and Sanding again! http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/4136/ http://members.home.com/mikemims/ Aliso Viejo CA ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Young Eagles From: jscott.pilot@juno.com Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 19:04:10 -0700 X-Message-Number: 13 On Mon, 14 Jun 1999 18:21:03 -0500 Bobby Muse writes: >At 01:14 PM 06/13/1999 EDT, you wrote: >>No but I flew some this morning in an Air Coupe. We had about 40 of >the >>little buggers. We and they all enjoyed it. Don >> >> > >Can you fly Young Eagles in an experimental airplane? What kind of >insurance is needed, if any? > > > > Bobby Muse > mailto:bmuse@mindspring.com > Wimberly, TX The insurance requirements are the same as for a certified airplane. There is a link off from our chapter web page to an article detailing the EAA's requirements. I have flown Young Eagles in my KR and was scheduled to on Saturday, but was out of town due to a family emergency. Jeff Scott - Los Alamos, NM mailto:jscott.pilot@juno.com See N1213w construction and first flight at http://www.thuntek.net/~jeb/krjeff.htm ___________________________________________________________________ Get the Internet just the way you want it. Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month! Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: test pilot From: jscott.pilot@juno.com Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 19:15:39 -0700 X-Message-Number: 14 On Mon, 14 Jun 1999 08:50:34 -0700 "Wolf Packs, Inc." writes: >I found a local test pilot to do the first flight of my re-furbished (now >tri-gear) KR2. After hearing from local EAA members about some of his 35 prior >experimental first flights I feel he's a good pilot, but he's never flown a KR. > >Any thoughts on what I might tell him to expect other than that the prop goes >backwards (VW) and the elevator may be a tad "sensitive" ? > >Also, any KR2 flyers in northern CA, OR, or maybe NV available to give me a >ride so I can get a feel for it before flying mine? E-mail me privately on >this (P-mail?) Paul@wolfpacks.com > >Many thanks, > >Paul M. >Ashland, OR >www.wolfpacks.com/KR I would suggest handing him a copy of the KR flight primer written by Jim Faughn. I think it is posted on one of Mark Langford's web pages. In general, the plane is clean and likes to go fast if you let the nose drop on approach. Fly the pattern for landing at 80 mph, over the fence at 70, and she'll land very smoothly and he won't see the Pilot induced oscillation problem. If he flies a hot approach, the plane will happily fly right past the runway without ever touching down. I think many first flight problems come from flying too fast of an approach in a very slick airplane, then not having a means to scrub the speed off. I did this on the first approach of my first two flights. Never since then. Jeff Scott - Los Alamos, NM mailto:jscott.pilot@juno.com See N1213w construction and first flight at http://www.thuntek.net/~jeb/krjeff.htm ___________________________________________________________________ Get the Internet just the way you want it. Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month! Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Young Eagles From: "Doug Raine" Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 22:26:56 -0400 X-Message-Number: 15 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_01BEB6B5.0294E200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Yes, you can fly them in experimental aircraft. The insurance requirements are the same as for any passenger, but if you are an EAA member, you are elegible for additional coverage, check it out at http://www.eaa.org/youngeagles/pilot_info.html and at http://www.eaa.org/youngeagles/yefaq.html Some other flying clubs, such as the Canadian Owners and Pilots Association, also offer additional coverage, so if you are a member of other groups, check their coverage as well. ---------- > From: DClarke351@aol.com > To: KR-net users group > Subject: [kr-net] Re: Young Eagles > Date: Monday, June 14, 1999 7:47 PM > > As far as I know one can fly young Eagles in the experimental aircraft. I > have seen it done a number of times. I do not know the particulars concerning > insurance but it might be it is the same as for the other aircraft supplied > by the National EAA. Don Clarke > > --- > You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: draine@sprint.ca > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com ------=_NextPart_000_01BEB6B5.0294E200 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Yes, you can fly them in experimental = aircraft. The insurance requirements are the same as for any passenger, = but if you are an EAA member, you are elegible for additional coverage, = check it out at http://www.eaa.org/youngeagles/pilot_info.html
and at = http://www.eaa.org/youngeagles/yefaq.html
Some other flying clubs, = such as the  Canadian Owners and Pilots Association,  also = offer additional coverage, so if you are a member of other groups, check = their coverage as well.
----------
> = From: DClarke351@aol.com
> To: KR-net users group <kr-net@telelists.com>
> Subject: [kr-net] Re: Young = Eagles
> Date: Monday, June 14, 1999 7:47 PM
>
> As = far as I know one can fly young Eagles in the experimental aircraft. I =
> have seen it done a number of times. I do not know the = particulars concerning
> insurance but it might be it is the same = as for the other aircraft supplied
> by the National EAA. Don = Clarke
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to = kr-net as: draine@sprint.ca
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com

------=_NextPart_000_01BEB6B5.0294E200-- --- 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