From: KR-net users group digest[SMTP:kr-net@telelists.com] Sent: Friday, June 18, 1999 12:13 AM To: kr-net digest recipients Subject: kr-net digest: June 17, 1999 KR-net users group Digest for Thursday, June 17, 1999. 1. Franco Negri I-KRFN Rotax 912 2. Re: redrives and prop RPM 3. Re: Insurance 4. Re: redrives and prop RPM 5. Re: Franco Negri I-KRFN Rotax 912 6. Re: N415RJ Progress Report 7. Re: Porsche engine? WHATS THIS??????????????? 8. Re: Donations/Questions 9. Re: Fw: Need to find 10. Re: Insurance 11. Re: What was that? 12. Re: What was that? 13. Re: Insurance 14. Interesting Site 15. Wide/Lengthed, but do they fly? 16. widened fuselage 17. Re: widened fuselage 18. Re: widened fuselage 19. widened fuselage 20. hahaha 21. Re: [prop bolts 22. Da Gathering 23. Re: hahaha 24. RE: Help!!! Control surface hinges 25. Re: widened fuselage 26. Re: Da Gathering 27. Re: widened fuselage 28. Re: Da Gathering 29. Re: Still reading only 30. Re: widened fuselage 31. Re: [prop bolts 32. Re: widened fuselage ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Franco Negri I-KRFN Rotax 912 From: "Aripo s.r.l." Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 11:03:23 +0200 X-Message-Number: 1 Messaggio a più sezioni in formato MIME. ------=_NextPart_000_005F_01BEB8B1.044F9880 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Does anybody in U.S. have a Rotax 912 on his KR ?? . I am building a = KR2 with a Rotax 912 UL ,(80 hp.) these engine weight only 122 lb (dry = and without radiators) and is wery small (23.2 long X 22.6 large) with a = 60" prop. These engine is very popular in Europe , thousand of ultralights and = aircrafts are equipped with the "912" (in Italy the max weight t.o.for = an U.L. is 450 Kg. 990 lbs. but many exceed these limit.) =20 Any suggestions ??? Franco Negri aripo@micanet.it ------=_NextPart_000_005F_01BEB8B1.044F9880 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Does anybody in U.S. have a = Rotax 912 on=20 his KR ?? . I am building a KR2 with a Rotax 912 UL ,(80 = hp.) these=20 engine weight only 122 lb (dry and without radiators) and is wery small = (23.2=20 long X 22.6 large) with a 60" prop.

These engine is very popular in = Europe ,=20 thousand of ultralights and aircrafts are equipped with the=20 "912" (in Italy the max weight t.o.for an U.L. is 450 = Kg. 990=20 lbs. but many exceed these limit.)

Any suggestions ???

Franco Negri aripo@micanet.it

------=_NextPart_000_005F_01BEB8B1.044F9880-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: redrives and prop RPM From: "Blandford, Carlton C" Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 13:08:04 +0200 X-Message-Number: 2 Hi Chaps, though I'd give some imput on this. My bird has a three blade 55" warp drive running through a 1.47:1 reduction. I've set the pitch so the engine runs at 4000rpm static at full throttle, this gives you about 2700rpm on the prop. Engine is rated at 112HP at 4800rpm and 165ft.lb torque at 2800rpm. Although I'm still busy with high speed taxi tests 60 mph is reached at a little over half throttle (about 3000rpm on engine) with one aboard. With two guys aboard the same speed is reached at almost full throttle (3800rpm). This was about half way down the runway, about 550ft. I would say that the more torque you get from your engine the more course the pitch can be set, hence a better cruise speed at the end of the day. The less torque the finer the pitch the worse the cruise but a better climb will be achieved......I speak under correction on this one. My pitch is set on 14,5 degrees at 1/2 inch from the tip of the blade, I think this is maybe about a 53" pitch...anyone know how to work this out? I'm hoping to have this baby airborne in the next week or so. PS I must apologise to all the guys that requested a copy of the preview of the plans for the Sabaru reduction, I'm still working on getting a copy but the chap hasn't been available lately. Happy landings Regards Carlton Blandford -----Original Message----- From: Mike Mims [mailto:mikemims@home.com] Sent: 16 June 1999 04:09 To: KR-net users group Subject: [kr-net] Re: redrives and prop RPM jscott.pilot@juno.com wrote: > > A shorter prop may not reach the peak efficiency we would all desire, but > I think the statement that "a 60 inch prop at 2500 rpm will make at 110 > mph KR" is simply untrue. > Gee Jeff I cant even have fun with the re-drive guys anymore! :o) When I made that comment obviously I was exaggerating to some extent. But I still had Warp Drive prop on the brain. For some reason I just don't think those skinny little blade profiles would be that affective at such a low RPM. Seems that with the skinny blades one would need as much length as possible to make it work out. We on the other hand with our big fat wooden props get away with that kind of RPM because of all the prop blade area. Sorry for the confusion. And as always there is a chance that I am just blowing smoke and have no idea what I am talking about! :o) -- zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Micheal Mims Filling and Sanding again! http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/4136/ http://members.home.com/mikemims/ Aliso Viejo CA ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ --- You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: CBlandford@mail.sbic.co.za To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Insurance From: Jim Faughn Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 06:33:55 -0500 X-Message-Number: 3 I just received my bill for insurance. It is $212 for Bodily Injury (Excluding Occupants) and Property Damage Liability. $50,000 each person $100,000 property damage $300,000 each accident I don't carry insurance for aircraft damage and or for medical expenses. You are right, I didn't have insurance for the first 40 hours. >>>>>> So, now that we are on the topic of insurance... a friend of mine just finished his Zodiac, and is trying to get insurance for his flying. I have ground only coverage now at about $380 or so a year. I'm wondering what folks are paying, and if they were able to get coverage for the first flights. Looks like it is difficult to get coverage for those first 40 hours. Comments? -- Ross -- Jim Faughn N8931JF St. Louis, MO (314) 652-7659 or Cell (314) 346-4038 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: redrives and prop RPM From: "Tom Andersen" Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 08:03:01 -0400 X-Message-Number: 4 Hi Carlton, It seems that your prop is unloading a lot, even at the low speeds reached on taxi tests. You might want to set your pitch lower like to 12 degrees for your first flights. This will give better climb, and allow the engine to come up to the 4800rpm in that climb. On your first flights you want altitude and you want it as fast as possible. It sounds like you've got puuulennnty of power from that watercooled 2.1L VW with reduction drive and 3-blade warp drive. With that adjustable pitch prop you'll be able to maximize your cruise speed in subsequent flights, and the third blade will help transfer some of that 112hp. I really like your innovative use of the watercooled VW and redrive. I think you've got the ratio correct at 1.47. I just posted yesterday I thought the ideal for a Subaru powered KR was 1.55. I wasn't far from your thinking. You really have the right idea for a reduction drive on a KR, what with the short 3-blade Warp drive and 1.47 gear ratio. I can't wait to see your numbers when you get it all tuned up after test flying. Did you ever get rubber dampeners installed in your redrive? -Tom Andersen Orlando, FL -----Original Message----- From: Blandford, Carlton C To: KR-net users group Date: Thursday, June 17, 1999 7:10 AM Subject: [kr-net] Re: redrives and prop RPM >Hi Chaps, >though I'd give some imput on this. >My bird has a three blade 55" warp drive running through a 1.47:1 reduction. >I've set the pitch so the engine runs at 4000rpm static at full throttle, >this gives you about 2700rpm on the prop. Engine is rated at 112HP at >4800rpm and 165ft.lb torque at 2800rpm. >Although I'm still busy with high speed taxi tests 60 mph is reached at a >little over half throttle (about 3000rpm on engine) with one aboard. With >two guys aboard the same speed is reached at almost full throttle (3800rpm). >This was about half way down the runway, about 550ft. >I would say that the more torque you get from your engine the more course >the pitch can be set, hence a better cruise speed at the end of the day. >The less torque the finer the pitch the worse the cruise but a better climb >will be achieved......I speak under correction on this one. > My pitch is set on 14,5 degrees at 1/2 inch from the tip of the blade, I >think this is maybe about a 53" pitch...anyone know how to work this out? > >I'm hoping to have this baby airborne in the next week or so. > >PS I must apologise to all the guys that requested a copy of the preview of >the plans for the Sabaru reduction, I'm still working on getting a copy but >the chap hasn't been available lately. > >Happy landings >Regards >Carlton Blandford > > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Mike Mims [mailto:mikemims@home.com] >Sent: 16 June 1999 04:09 >To: KR-net users group >Subject: [kr-net] Re: redrives and prop RPM > > >jscott.pilot@juno.com wrote: >> >> A shorter prop may not reach the peak efficiency we would all desire, but >> I think the statement that "a 60 inch prop at 2500 rpm will make at 110 >> mph KR" is simply untrue. >> > >Gee Jeff I cant even have fun with the re-drive guys anymore! :o) When >I made that comment obviously I was exaggerating to some extent. But I >still had Warp Drive prop on the brain. For some reason I just don't >think those skinny little blade profiles would be that affective at such >a low RPM. Seems that with the skinny blades one would need as much >length as possible to make it work out. We on the other hand with our >big fat wooden props get away with that kind of RPM because of all the >prop blade area. Sorry for the confusion. And as always there is a >chance that I am just blowing smoke and have no idea what I am talking >about! :o) > >-- >zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz >Micheal Mims >Filling and Sanding again! >http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/4136/ >http://members.home.com/mikemims/ >Aliso Viejo CA >^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >--- >You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: CBlandford@mail.sbic.co.za >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.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: Franco Negri I-KRFN Rotax 912 From: ejanssen@chipsnet.com (Ed Janssen) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 07:45:25 -0500 X-Message-Number: 5 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0015_01BEB895.5C9EC720 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Franco, No good reason why a 912 wouldn't work. They're about 132 lbs with a = gearbox. Think the main drawback is the price (around $9500.00 or so) = for most of the KR builders. Entire KRs are being built for less than = what the 912 costs. Ed Janssen -----Original Message----- From: Aripo s.r.l. To: KR-net users group Date: Thursday, June 17, 1999 4:09 AM Subject: [kr-net] Franco Negri I-KRFN Rotax 912 =20 =20 Does anybody in U.S. have a Rotax 912 on his KR ?? . I am building = a KR2 with a Rotax 912 UL ,(80 hp.) these engine weight only 122 lb = (dry and without radiators) and is wery small (23.2 long X 22.6 large) = with a 60" prop. These engine is very popular in Europe , thousand of ultralights and = aircrafts are equipped with the "912" (in Italy the max weight t.o.for = an U.L. is 450 Kg. 990 lbs. but many exceed these limit.) =20 Any suggestions ??? =20 Franco Negri aripo@micanet.it =20 ------=_NextPart_000_0015_01BEB895.5C9EC720 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Franco,

No good reason why a 912 wouldn't work. = They're about=20 132 lbs with a gearbox. Think the main drawback is the price (around = $9500.00 or=20 so) for most of the KR builders. Entire KRs are being built for = less than=20 what the 912 costs.

Ed Janssen

-----Original = Message-----
From:=20 Aripo s.r.l. <aripo@micanet.it>
To: = KR-net=20 users group <kr-net@telelists.com>
D= ate:=20 Thursday, June 17, 1999 4:09 AM
Subject: [kr-net] = Franco Negri=20 I-KRFN Rotax 912

Does anybody in U.S. have = a Rotax 912=20 on his KR ?? . I am building a KR2 with a Rotax 912 UL ,(80 = hp.) =20 these engine weight only 122 lb (dry and without radiators) and is = wery=20 small (23.2 long X 22.6 large) with a 60" prop.

These engine is very popular in = Europe ,=20 thousand of ultralights and aircrafts are equipped with the=20 "912" (in Italy the max weight t.o.for an U.L. is = 450 Kg.=20 990 lbs. but many exceed these = limit.)

Any suggestions ???

Franco Negri aripo@micanet.it

------=_NextPart_000_0015_01BEB895.5C9EC720-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: N415RJ Progress Report From: Ross Youngblood Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 09:53:31 -0700 X-Message-Number: 6 I used red food coloring, it didn't help too much. I had to cut the wing open and flox the entire tank seal area... then I posted to KR-net that the plans should have people build the tanks and leak test them BEFORE enclosing them into the wing. -- Ross R.W. Moore wrote: > > If you wanted to put some coloring in water to help find a leak in a wing > tank what would you use. Can anyone help. me. I have a KR 1, that has a leak > in one of the wing tanks. or what could be used. > R. W. Moore > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Ross Youngblood > To: KR-net users group > Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 1999 1:51 PM > Subject: [kr-net] Re: N415RJ Progress Report > > > Go Rick GO!!!! > > I know about this! I have a friend who has gone from crate to > > airplane in about two an a half years on a Zenair Zodiac. He phoned > > me this week with the "bad" news. He needs to share my hanger after > > he gets the DAR sign-off. And I'm still fumbling around... > > -- Ross > > > > EagleGator@aol.com wrote: > > > > > > 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! > > > > > > --- > > > You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: rossy@teleport.com > > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > > > > --- > > You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: rwmoore@alltel.net > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > > > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: rossy@teleport.com > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Porsche engine? WHATS THIS??????????????? From: Ross Youngblood Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 09:58:32 -0700 X-Message-Number: 7 Rod, I think you blew it with this posting, I had to reply 1) First of all Rick Junkin is a frequent contributor to KR-net. 2) Porsche and VW engines are SIMILAR. Porsche engines would be a potential candidate for KR building. 3) Check Rick Junkins website, he has a KR test pilots manual available for download. 4) Rick Junkin gets to fly F-16 for work, you may have blown any chance of ever getting a ride. -- Ross Rod Kelso wrote: > > What kind of a post is this. Dont you think your friend should go to a > Porsche deal and ask them instead of using and waisting this space and the > rest of our times reading this kind of stuff............ Is this a place > where we talk airoplanes??????????????? Wake up you guys.....I need a set > of spark plugs for my car, but im sure not going to ask the kr net guys > what I should buy. I will go to a AUTO PARTS house for the > answer.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and your friend should do the > same.......:o(( > > ---------- > > From: EagleGator@aol.com > > To: KR-net users group > > Subject: [kr-net] Porsche engine? > > Date: Wednesday, June 16, 1999 1:15 PM > > > > A friend of mine picked up an engine with another project he bought and > is > > trying to find out what it is worth. He thinks it is a Porsche Type 4, > but > > isn't sure. The only info he has is the numbers on the case: SJ12, > > 004-101-101A. Does this mean anything to anyone? Thanks for your help. > Please > > respond directly to eaglegator@aol.com. > > > > Cheers, > > Rick Junkin > > EagleGator@aol.com > > St. Charles MO > > KR-2S N415RJ 37% complete and progressing rapidly! > > > > --- > > You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: rbk@orci.com > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: rossy@teleport.com > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Donations/Questions From: Ross Youngblood Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 10:11:52 -0700 X-Message-Number: 8 Bob, Send your KR-net donations to KR-net c/o Ross Youngblood 1109 NE Burke Pl Corvallis, OR 97330 Some items of note: 1) Make the check payable to Ross Youngblood, I don't have a dba (doing business as) account at the bank, and just put the donations into a seperate savings account until the annual ISP bill becomes due. (This is cheaper). 2) I keep trying to make some token of appriciation, decals are the latest idea. However I haven't got the $$$ to invest in kicking them off. These would be 4" in dia (suitible for sticking on your KR, or toolchest). At any rate, if I can get them for under $1.00 ea, I might be able to send them to folks who contribute. Current bids include start up charges, and I don't have enough yet to do this (perhaps next year). 3) If you send Canadian funds, my bank charges me a $7.00 processing fee and returns the check. So in the case of a $15.00 Canadian cashiers check (worth about $10us), I'm now looking to figure out how to cash this. 4) I had some checks stacked up from December, that I just deposited (About $50.00 worth). What I'm saying here is that while I appriciate donations ALL year round... I don't have the time to run this like a business, so if you want to feel guilty about donating, wait until July when we put the pressure on. Thats just before the bill comes due. 5) As always, if we miss our target to pay our ISP bill annually we can drop from month to month. By paying annually we get two months free for everything (Web hosting, email list services). I checked last year around this time, and still found Teleport one of the few ISP's that offer email list services, and of the two or three, our monthly charge was at least less than the others who are targeting businesses. -- Regards Ross RFG842@aol.com wrote: > > Once again, today's posts confirm my belief that 99% of KR builders wear > white hats. > > Please let me know where to send my check. > > Tnks, Bob > > --- > You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: rossy@teleport.com > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Fw: Need to find From: Ross Youngblood Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 10:15:23 -0700 X-Message-Number: 9 Mike, Jim posted this to the KR-net some time ago. I don't think it will be in the Lyris archive, but it could be in the archives maintained by John Bouyea. If I recall it was titled somthing like "perfect landings in a KR". I think you can reach John's archives via the archive link at KR-net (Let me know if this is wrong)... I don't believe they are searchable. I could make a searchable CD-ROM if I had time, but I don't at the moment. The good news is that I'm cleaning up my house to prepare it for sale, if I find it (I printed it out), I will post it again. -- Regards Ross garbez wrote: > > Dear KR-net, > I am trying to find an article written by Jim Faughn on the KR flight > primer. I can't seem to find it in Mark Langford's web page. If anyone > knows where I can find it or other flight testing articles please advise me > where to look. > > Thanks, > Mike Garbez N998MG > msgtlg@netins.net > > --- > You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: rossy@teleport.com > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Insurance From: Ross Youngblood Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 10:17:26 -0700 X-Message-Number: 10 My understanding is that all we are talking about is liability. In your case you have a great well rounded logbook. My friend is a low time pilot (100 hours or so like me). -- Regards Ross jscott.pilot@juno.com wrote: > > On Wed, 16 Jun 1999 10:44:56 -0700 Ross Youngblood > writes: > > So, now that we are on the topic of insurance... a friend of mine > >just finished his Zodiac, and is trying to get insurance for his > >flying. I have ground only coverage now at about $380 or so a year. > >I'm wondering what folks are paying, and if they were able to get > >coverage for the first flights. Looks like it is difficult to get > >coverage for those first 40 hours. > > Comments? > > -- Ross > > > > Are you talking about hull insurance or simple liability? And how much > liability? > > I did get $1,000,000 liability for the first flight through Avemco. The > first two years were at $411/year. This year it went down to $373. Your > mileage may vary depending on time in similar airplanes, your total > hours, and taildragger hours if your plane is a taildragger. > > 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. > > --- > You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: rossy@teleport.com > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: What was that? From: Ross Youngblood Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 10:29:29 -0700 X-Message-Number: 11 I checked, Rod has signed off... we are now at 408 members. Whew, some excitement! I'm glad thats over. We now return to your normal programming. Rod Kelso wrote: > > OK, sorry I ticked everyone off. You neednt worry about me upsetting this > group again. > > BYE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: What was that? From: cobrajad jad Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 11:04:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Number: 12 laughing...ok...now that rod is gone, i have a newby question. i see discussed the merits of kr2, kr2s, widened kr2, LENGTHENED kr2s, and most any other permutation i can think of.... my question is. are there FLYING examples of these different variations? with my big butt i could only squeeze in a 6 pack with me in a standard width cockpit. a KR-2S sounds good for stability...and a LENGTHENED KR-2S sounds even better...especially if weight and balance could be worked out so some of the extra length could be used for...oh...maybe TWO 6 packs...or even a toothbrush!! it's a long winded way of finally getting to the question...but...are there REAL planes and plans in existence for a widened and lengthend KR-2s? jim dixon --- Ross Youngblood wrote: > I checked, Rod has signed off... we are now at 408 > members. > > Whew, some excitement! I'm glad thats over. We now > return > to your normal programming. > > Rod Kelso wrote: > > > > OK, sorry I ticked everyone off. You neednt worry > about me upsetting this > > group again. > > > > BYE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! > > --- > You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: > cobrajad@yahoo.com > To unsubscribe send a blank email to > leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > > _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Insurance From: NFCKR3@aol.com Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 14:08:46 EDT X-Message-Number: 13 I don't know, Avemco would not insure the KR that I bought last year. I had over 3000 hours of which 500 was tailwheel. In fact as I recall they told me that they didn't insure experimentals. I went with FALCON they not only insured it for 1 mill they also insured the hull for my full purchase price ($14,000.00). The charge was somewhere around $700.00 and as I remember very small deductables on the ground and in the air. This was also for someone that had only 3 or 4 hours in a KR 2. The phone number is 1-800-661-9341. See everyone at National Fly-In. Skip Carden & 250KB ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Interesting Site From: FLYKR2S@aol.com Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 15:14:57 EDT X-Message-Number: 14 Hi KR'ers, Found a web site called www.askjeeves.com. Go there and ask the question "What is a KR2S?" You will get some interesting facts there. See Ya, Mark Jones (N886MJ) Waukesha, WI flykr2s@aol.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Wide/Lengthed, but do they fly? From: Ross Youngblood Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 13:10:40 -0700 X-Message-Number: 15 Jim, I think Jeff Scott has a flying example of a standard KR2S... the best place to see flying KR's is at the KR gathering. I made the trip last year, and saw a lot of KR's. Most were the standard KR variety, I think there were a couple of nice KR2-S planes, including the one used on the KR ads. (I'm thinking this used to be Roy Marsh's but I am frequently confused). The first LENGTHENED KR2 I know of was in Sport Aviation back in 88-91 (when I was in the boat stage.) The article was "Irish KR-2", and showed a lengthed KR which used a Dragonfly canopy. My personal opinion is this was the first KR2-S. It looks a lot like the KR2-S today, but I can't be sure that this is the original inspiration. I didn't do anything special to widen my cockpit, but tried not to let it get any slimmer. I'm a hefty 220# and 5'10" so I will need to loose about 40# to take passengers of any stature, but there is room for a small beer cooler. (One of the folks at the last Gathering flew in with a full size coleman beer cooler as a passenger-- needless to say I was impressed. My next favorite passenger was a guitar. When I go to the next fly-in, I'll bring my 12 string, so I can learn the tune for the KR-song! -- Ross cobrajad jad wrote: > > laughing...ok...now that rod is gone, i have a newby question. > > i see discussed the merits of kr2, kr2s, widened kr2, LENGTHENED kr2s, > and most any other permutation i can think of.... > > my question is. are there FLYING examples of these different > variations? with my big butt i could only squeeze in a 6 pack with me > in a standard width cockpit. a KR-2S sounds good for stability...and a > LENGTHENED KR-2S sounds even better...especially if weight and balance > could be worked out so some of the extra length could be used > for...oh...maybe TWO 6 packs...or even a toothbrush!! > > it's a long winded way of finally getting to the question...but...are > there REAL planes and plans in existence for a widened and lengthend > KR-2s? > > jim dixon > > --- Ross Youngblood wrote: > > I checked, Rod has signed off... we are now at 408 > > members. > > > > Whew, some excitement! I'm glad thats over. We now > > return > > to your normal programming. > > > > Rod Kelso wrote: > > > > > > OK, sorry I ticked everyone off. You neednt worry > > about me upsetting this > > > group again. > > > > > > BYE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! > > > > --- > > You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: > > cobrajad@yahoo.com > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to > > leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > > > > > > _________________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > --- > You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: rossy@teleport.com > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: widened fuselage From: Tobin Dunham Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 14:52:34 PDT X-Message-Number: 16 To further this discussion of lengthening/widening the fuselage, I have a question of my own. I'm not a big guy (5'7", 160lb), but I do want to widen the fuselage by about 2" or 3" at the cockpit, and lengthen it by 2". Anyone who has done this, I would appreciate any advice. For example, how are you doing it? When the fuselage is widened, do you translate that to the wings? I mean, if the fuselage is 2" wider, does the whole plane become wider? Or can you just slip it in and keep the wingspan the same? Do you need additional reinforcement? By the way, who is going to Oshkosh this year? I don't think I can make it due to a busy work schedule. But my brother and father are going and I want them to take KR pictures and gather info for me..... Toby Dunham Houston, TX _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: widened fuselage From: "Mark Langford" Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 17:56:08 -0500 X-Message-Number: 17 > For example, how are you doing it? When the fuselage is widened, do you > translate that to the wings? I mean, if the fuselage is 2" wider, does the > whole plane become wider? Or can you just slip it in and keep the wingspan > the same? Do you need additional reinforcement? Tobin, I've widened mine and it's a piece of cake. RR doesn't even discourage it until you get past the point of using the "factory" premolded parts. I've heard of 6" widenings, but 3 or 4 is getting to be pretty standard. Anybody who's never sat it one should do so before making the decision. There just isn't enough room in the stocker for two adjults, unless you don't mind flying for 3 hours with your passenger's arm around your neck. Widening is easy. If you want to leave your firewall stock so that you can use the RR cowling, start making the boat with standard dimensions there. Then gradually widen as you go back. The smart thing to do is leave the shape about the same but keep widening after the plans start converging. Make the widest point at your shoulders (4" aft of the aft spar) and then start converging. Stretch the bottom the same amount as the top, or even more so that the dreaded "banana boat" is less pronounced. If you need more on the banana boat or other modifications, check out my lunatic opinions at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/kopinion.html . I just left the spars and wings the same length, since I suspect that I'd like a tad less wing loading anyway, and that's what I had on hand. No additional reinforcement required. One more thing I'd do if I were you is to add 1" to each bay aft of the aft spar. That'll get you a little more moment arm on the tail for very little added weight. Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama mailto:langford@hiwaay.net see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: widened fuselage From: Kenneth L Wiltrout Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 19:25:38 -0400 X-Message-Number: 18 On Thu, 17 Jun 1999 14:52:34 PDT Tobin Dunham writes: >To further this discussion of lengthening/widening the fuselage, I >have a >question of my own. I'm not a big guy (5'7", 160lb), but I do want to >widen >the fuselage by about 2" or 3" at the cockpit, and lengthen it by 2". > >Anyone who has done this, I would appreciate any advice. > >For example, how are you doing it? When the fuselage is widened, do >you >translate that to the wings? I mean, if the fuselage is 2" wider, >does the >whole plane become wider? Or can you just slip it in and keep the >wingspan >the same? Do you need additional reinforcement? > >By the way, who is going to Oshkosh this year? I don't think I can >make it >due to a busy work schedule. But my brother and father are going and >I want >them to take KR pictures and gather info for me..... > >Toby Dunham >Houston, TX > > > >_______________________________________________________________ >Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com > >--- >You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: klw1953@juno.com >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > I widened my 2s fuse 1.25" as per R.R. Eng. I also gave the Bottom an additional 2"" in width. The wing span stays the same. But rest assured any changes you make to the plans will give you some grief from that point on. If you go with the pre molded turtle deck , you will have to pull a lot harder to open it up enough to fit it on your project. The canopy is another story but it can be done. Just remember as you widen the fuse you also change the sweep of the aircraft to the rear as well as to the front. I'm 6" 230 and I had a head room problem, so I had a alum. seat rolled as per my specs to get my rear low enough so my head didn"t get bashed when I closed the canopy. Mine will fly this summer some time. Good luck! Kenny ___________________________________________________________________ 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: widened fuselage From: Tobin Dunham Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 17:02:48 PDT X-Message-Number: 19 Mark Langford wrote: >check out my lunatic opinions at >http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/kopinion.html > Mark, I gotta say I'm impressed with your knowledge and expertise on this whole affair. Hey, I don't suppose you could build it for me?? :o) Anyone who hasn't checked out that website needs to see it. Sounds like you have a lot of the same ideas I'm having. But you have done a lot more research than I. I agree with you about replacing the header tank with stub wing tanks. But I want to take it further. I think I'm gonna go with wingtip tanks, kinda like that South African KR-2. I fell in love with the tip-tanks after looking at a Navion at the FBO a couple weeks back. I would think, though, that this would require additional structural support, mostly for while you're on the ground. The moment on the wing would be pretty high with full tanks. Comments, anyone? Toby Dunham Houston, TX _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: hahaha From: Tobin Dunham Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 17:06:05 PDT X-Message-Number: 20 Kenny wrote >I'm 6" 230 and I had a head room problem, > Geez, Kenny. How could you have a headroom problem when you're only 6 inches tall? :o) Toby _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: [prop bolts From: TONY WRIGHT Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 20:37:33 -0400 X-Message-Number: 21 I'm trying to determine what size and type prop bolts should be used. Should washers be used with backing plate? Need info on cutting spinner . Thanks in advance. Tony Wright N6654 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Da Gathering From: KR2616TJ@aol.com Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 20:45:29 EDT X-Message-Number: 22 Plug time here............the 1999 KR Gathering will be held at Lake Barkley State Resort Park in far western KY Sept. 24 thru Sunday morning Sept. 26th. On site, other than the airport, is the lodge overlooking Lake Barkley, boat rental, golf, swimming, hiking, tennis, airport lies (had to throw that one in:-) all on the grounds of the resort. The phone number of the lodge is 1-800-325-1708. Be sure and ask for the KR Gathering rates. All rooms not booked prior to July 25th. will be released to the public. These rooms will have a waiting list, so don't put it off. Nashville is the closest major airport and is serviced by the major carriers, including the inexpensive Southwest. Things are starting to come together. We have several forums to be held and I'm looking for a couple more. I'm trying to talk the TN guy (sorry, forgot the name and I don't have my file in front of me) into putting a forum on about prop making. You Subaru guys (big, loud, heavy........better stop here, it's a joke guys, sorry, sorry, sorry......I said it three times so you can't flame me) willing to put on something about your power, Tom you out there? About Langford building a plane for someone else.................we just got him back working on his own, don't get him going in another direction just yet:-) Whew, just got back from the baseball field................drove the Porsche, sure glad I didn't need to ask someone about the engine:-) Dana Overall 1999 KR Gathering host Richmond, KY mailto:kr2616tj@aol.com http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/hangar/7085/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: hahaha From: Kenneth L Wiltrout Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 20:47:55 -0400 X-Message-Number: 23 On Thu, 17 Jun 1999 17:06:05 PDT Tobin Dunham writes: >Kenny wrote >>I'm 6" 230 and I had a head room problem, > > >Geez, Kenny. How could you have a headroom problem when you're only 6 > >inches tall? :o) > >Toby > > >_______________________________________________________________ >Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com > >--- >You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: klw1953@juno.com >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > OOPS !!! Did I say that? ___________________________________________________________________ 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: Help!!! Control surface hinges From: "Eduardo Iglesias" Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 23:51:28 -0300 X-Message-Number: 24 Bob One of the ways you can aligning the hinges is tightening a tanza line or wire that it goes by the center of the holes. I believe that if you put behind a 3mm or so plywood reinforcement with epoxi, the difference of 3/16 in the holes doesn't have structural importance. Eduardo ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: widened fuselage From: "Mark Langford" Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 20:06:56 -0500 X-Message-Number: 25 > I gotta say I'm impressed with your knowledge and expertise on this whole > affair. Hey, I don't suppose you could build it for me?? :o) Yep, it's amazing how only 6 years of research can make me look informed on the subject. As for building it for you, I've been looking for a good excuse to start over, but I'd probably better finish mine first. One other ramification of widening the fuselage without widening the stub wings is that you make your wingtanks a little smaller. But even after stretching mine about 3 inches, and throwing away another 3 inches each side between fuselage and tank, I still will have19 gallons, which should be enough to get me there. One piece of advice to folks who are installing wingtanks is "don't forget your aileron cables have to run somewhere". I'd run them first, then build the wing tanks. Tip tanks are cool, but putting weight that far out on the wing is going to make for interesting roll trim control as fuel burns off. You may be spending a lot of time on fuel management, something I'm hoping to avoid altogether. Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama mailto:langford@hiwaay.net see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Da Gathering From: "Tom Andersen" Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 22:00:30 -0400 X-Message-Number: 26 I may get out there yet by KR if Foster Schuren will have me as navigator in his KR-2. I would only do a forum after my engine experiment has shown to be a sucess. No sense in the blind leading the blind. We will be seeing some very interesting KR engines in the next few years. The 0-290 has got to be the biggest engine ever used on a KR, and it seems only 1 in 3 new KR builders is considering a VW. I've been thinking about what a 4500rpm Subaru DD turbo with three-blade warp drive sounds like on a low, fast pass. They say the coffee plane sounds like an Indy car due to the turbo muffling the high rpm. -Tom -----Original Message----- From: KR2616TJ@aol.com To: KR-net users group Date: Thursday, June 17, 1999 8:49 PM Subject: [kr-net] Da Gathering >Plug time here............the 1999 KR Gathering will be held at Lake Barkley >State Resort Park in far western KY Sept. 24 thru Sunday morning Sept. 26th. >On site, other than the airport, is the lodge overlooking Lake Barkley, boat >rental, golf, swimming, hiking, tennis, airport lies (had to throw that one >in:-) all on the grounds of the resort. > >The phone number of the lodge is 1-800-325-1708. Be sure and ask for the KR >Gathering rates. All rooms not booked prior to July 25th. will be released >to the public. These rooms will have a waiting list, so don't put it off. >Nashville is the closest major airport and is serviced by the major carriers, >including the inexpensive Southwest. > >Things are starting to come together. We have several forums to be held and >I'm looking for a couple more. I'm trying to talk the TN guy (sorry, forgot >the name and I don't have my file in front of me) into putting a forum on >about prop making. You Subaru guys (big, loud, heavy........better stop >here, it's a joke guys, sorry, sorry, sorry......I said it three times so you >can't flame me) willing to put on something about your power, Tom you out >there? > >About Langford building a plane for someone else.................we just got >him back working on his own, don't get him going in another direction just >yet:-) > >Whew, just got back from the baseball field................drove the Porsche, >sure glad I didn't need to ask someone about the engine:-) > > >Dana Overall >1999 KR Gathering host >Richmond, KY >mailto:kr2616tj@aol.com >http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/hangar/7085/ > >--- >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: widened fuselage From: "Tom Andersen" Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 22:09:55 -0400 X-Message-Number: 27 The KR is a small airplane with small control surfaces and small control forces. A few gallons of fuel out of balance means a lot. Think of a KR as a Jet-ski. You would like a pontoon boat where you can have a whole party, but they don't go very fast and aren't much fun to drive. The V-8 powerd jet boat is very fast and powerful but costs too much, so you compromise with the small, fun, Jet-ski which is cheap to purchase and economical to fuel and maintain, but you wouldn't want to load it down with too much extra stuff because the floating capability is limited. Balance is important too, you can't strap 5 gallons of fuel to a 10' pole off one side of the little machine. -Tom -----Original Message----- From: Tobin Dunham To: KR-net users group Date: Thursday, June 17, 1999 8:02 PM Subject: [kr-net] widened fuselage >Mark Langford wrote: >>check out my lunatic opinions at >>http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/kopinion.html > > >Mark, > >I gotta say I'm impressed with your knowledge and expertise on this whole >affair. Hey, I don't suppose you could build it for me?? :o) > >Anyone who hasn't checked out that website needs to see it. > >Sounds like you have a lot of the same ideas I'm having. But you have done >a lot more research than I. I agree with you about replacing the header >tank with stub wing tanks. But I want to take it further. I think I'm >gonna go with wingtip tanks, kinda like that South African KR-2. I fell in >love with the tip-tanks after looking at a Navion at the FBO a couple weeks >back. I would think, though, that this would require additional structural >support, mostly for while you're on the ground. The moment on the wing >would be pretty high with full tanks. Comments, anyone? > >Toby Dunham >Houston, TX > > > >_______________________________________________________________ >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: Da Gathering From: Mike Mims Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 19:16:53 -0700 X-Message-Number: 28 Tom Andersen wrote: > > We will be seeing some very interesting KR engines in the next few years. The 0-290 has got to be the biggest engine ever used on a KR,>>> There is a derivative running a 180 hp Lycoming 360. -- zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Micheal Mims Filling and Sanding again! http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/4136/ http://members.home.com/mikemims/ Aliso Viejo CA ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Still reading only From: "Rod Kelso" Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 21:48:33 -0600 X-Message-Number: 29 ---------- > From: Rod Kelso > To: [kr-net] > Subject: Unsubscribe????????????????????????????NOT > Date: Thursday, June 17, 1999 9:35 PM > > Nope, Rod is still here!! > > BUT he has promised himself and all the kr-net group that he will sit in > the corner on his hands and away from the keyboard and just read, and make > no comments either good, bad, or ugly. > > Rod Kelso > Denver..............................................:o) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: widened fuselage From: John Bryhan Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 22:35:40 -0600 X-Message-Number: 30 Mark Langford wrote: > > For example, how are you doing it? When the fuselage is widened, do you > > translate that to the wings? I mean, if the fuselage is 2" wider, does > the > > whole plane become wider? Or can you just slip it in and keep the > wingspan > > the same? Do you need additional reinforcement? > > Tobin, > > I've widened mine and it's a piece of cake. RR doesn't even discourage it > until you get past the point of using the "factory" premolded parts. I've > heard of 6" widenings, but 3 or 4 is getting to be pretty standard. Anybody > who's never sat it one should do so before making the decision. There just > isn't enough room in the stocker for two adjults, unless you don't mind > flying for 3 hours with your passenger's arm around your neck. > I'll second that - I wish I'd widened mine. But - I didn't know you could or should. I wasn't on KRnet back then, (I'm not sure there was a krnet 5 1/2 years ago!) So, I made a 2 or 3 inch wide center console to cover up the elevator cables and have a place to mount my throttle. I climbed in - and my butt shoved that console over 2 inches! That's it= I decided there and then IT IS GOING TO BE SINGLE PLACE KR. I can re-vamp the rudder pedals - anybody want to trade a single stick for my dual stick? jeb@thuntek.net http://www.thuntek.net/~jeb/krpage.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: [prop bolts From: jscott.pilot@juno.com Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 22:42:36 -0700 X-Message-Number: 31 On Thu, 17 Jun 1999 20:37:33 -0400 TONY WRIGHT writes: > >I'm trying to determine what size and type prop bolts should be used. >Should washers be used with backing plate? Need info on cutting >spinner . > >Thanks in advance. > >Tony Wright N6654 > Tony, This depends on your engine and prop. Most VW and smaller engines are using 5/16" (AN5) bolts for the prop bolts. When you get into the small Continentals and Lycomings, they are using 3/8" (AN6) botls. The bigger engines not usually found on KRs are typically using 7/16" (AN7) bolts. Yes, you should include a washer even with the back plate and crush plate. 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: widened fuselage From: Totryroma@aol.com Date: Fri, 18 Jun 1999 02:59:09 EDT X-Message-Number: 32 Toby -- If Wing tip tanks look "COOL" and as Mark says may cause you some control problems, Who says there has to be anything in them but AIR? I always loved the Navion too. My Dad flew me around in one when I was a kid back in the 40's. Just a though! Ron Macomber South Sioux City, NE --- 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