From: KR-net users group digest[SMTP:kr-net@telelists.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 1999 11:14 PM To: kr-net digest recipients Subject: kr-net digest: October 13, 1999 KR-net users group Digest for Wednesday, October 13, 1999. 1. Re: Brain Fart (cloth Weight) 2. Re: Flap Magic 3. Testing new wing, was: Changing your incidence. 4. Re: Changing your incidence. 5. Re: The Jury is out indefinitely 6. Re: field repairs for wood prop nicks 7. 45 deg. vs. 90 deg. cloth 8. Re: wing attachment fittings 9. Re: Changing your incidence. 10. Re:Plywood kit 11. Re: Paul's KR 12. Re: Control rods 13. Clarification 14. Re: Carb Heat 15. Re: Carb Heat 16. Re: Carb Heat 17. Sport Aviation 18. wing seam covers 19. Re: They Jury is out indefinitely 20. Re: The Jury is out indefinitely 21. Wing and Things 22. Re: They Jury is out indefinitely 23. Re: wing seam covers 24. Re: Clarification 25. Re: Just a start, and two big lessons 26. Grandson's First Flight 27. Re: Wing and Things 28. Re: The Jury is out indefinitely 29. Re: [kr-net]Airfoils are like opinions.... 30. Re: KR Aircraft/People at SW Regional Fly-In 31. TLAR 32. RE: wings and things 33. Re: TLAR 34. Re: wing seam covers 35. Re: 45 deg. vs. 90 deg. cloth 36. Re: wing seam covers 37. Re: TLAR 38. Re: TLAR 39. Carbon fiber and galvanic corosion 40. Re: TLAR Martin Holman 41. Re: Carbon fiber and galvanic corosion 42. Re: wing seam covers 43. Re: wing seam covers 44. Re: Carb Heat 45. Re: Carb Heat 46. Re: Paul's KR ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Brain Fart (cloth Weight) From: "John Weikel" Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 06:12:38 -0500 X-Message-Number: 1 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000B_01BF1541.F3311180 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Weight per sq yd. John W -----Original Message----- From: Capps Family To: KR-net users group Date: Tuesday, October 12, 1999 9:12 PM Subject: [kr-net] Brain Fart (cloth Weight) =20 =20 To All; =20 When they determine the weight of cloth (i.e. UNI 7.02, BID 8.8), = what do they base this weight on? Is they weight of the cloth based on it's width (whatever that might = be), and it's length? Or is the weight based on 36x36" of the material being used? =20 Your assistance with this would be appreciated. =20 Blue Skies; =20 Larry =20 Larry A. Capps Naperville, IL ------=_NextPart_000_000B_01BF1541.F3311180 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Weight per sq yd.
John W
-----Original = Message-----
From:=20 Capps Family <cappsfan@ameritech.net>
= To:=20 KR-net users group <kr-net@telelists.com>
D= ate:=20 Tuesday, October 12, 1999 9:12 PM
Subject: [kr-net] = Brain Fart=20 (cloth Weight)

To All;
 
When they determine the weight of = cloth (i.e.=20 UNI 7.02, BID 8.8), what do they base this weight on?
Is they weight of the cloth based on it's = width=20 (whatever that might be), and it's length?
Or is the weight based on 36x36" of the = material=20 being used?
 
Your assistance with this would be=20 appreciated.
 
Blue Skies;
 
Larry
 
Larry A. Capps
Naperville, = IL
------=_NextPart_000_000B_01BF1541.F3311180-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Flap Magic From: "Wayne DeLisle Sr." Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 07:55:49 -0400 X-Message-Number: 2 At 10:03 PM 10/12/1999 -0500, you wrote: >Somebody opened the door by asking what the pros and cons of various flap >types are. So here is one viewpoint, hopefully not a blast of blustery >opinion. That was me. What I want to accomplish with flaps is, 1. lower nose on landing 2. lower touchdown speed on landing. 3. More drag on landing Any other benefits are secondary. Any negatives need to be well understood and engineered out if necessary. >So my vote is with a good, light split flap arrangement. Good drag control, >incidence and pitch moment change is equivalent to half the flap deflection >of a regular flap (average of top and bottom surface at TE). Fowler is out >of the question. Plain flaps likewise not a good idea. > >Walter Lounsbery >POB 54266 >Hurst, TX 76054 >(817) 285-8520 >Walt@Lounsbery.com Some good thoughts. Thanks Walter, WD --------------------------------------------------------- Wayne DeLisle Sr. Charlotte, North Carolina USA mailto:dodger@accessnode.net http://accessnode.net/~dodger --------------------------------------------------------- Project Viking "Daring to venture forward from the Dark Ages" online FAQ/manual at http://www.evansville.net/~boeing/project_viking ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Testing new wing, was: Changing your incidence. From: Steven Eberhart Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 07:40:18 -0500 (CDT) X-Message-Number: 3 I need to apologize to Bobby Muse for the adversarial tone of my response to his comments of caution toward the new wing. His clarifications, that are included here, are some of the best thought out comments that I have heard about how you should aproach the testing phase after any significant changes have been made to your aircraft. I will be contacting Bobby, Dr. Selig, Dr. Gopalarathnam, Dr. Mole, Mark Lougheed and Troy later today about the cautions that Bobby has raised. It is my hope that the group can come up with scientific answers to the questions raised. There are several factors that could be viewed as contributing to the longer takeoff roll that Troy is using with the new wing. THis is something that we need to completely understand. Several factors may be contributing to this. I think the most significant is the difference in incidence between Troy's airplane and the stock KR-2. THe stock KR-2 uses 3 1/2 degrees of incidence while Troy is using 1 degree of incidence. Troy reports the same stall speed for both configurations which would lead me to think that with the tail dragger configuration he is establishing a lower angle of attack at rotation which is resulting in lower lift. THe lift vs angle of attack at rotation should probably be investigated for both configurations. Since only the 18% and 15% airfoils were wind tunnel tested, not the 16% that Troy is using, we may want to do some more CFD testing of the 16% vis-a-vis the RAF 48. Another factor may be, as Troy has said, "nothing finer that 180 grit sand paper has touched the wing." THis is a laminar flow airfoil and surface finish is a factor. He also has some more profiling to do over the spars as you can see minor depressions where the spars are. We should only see improvements as the surface finish improves. Anyway, this group should be able to come up with defendable conclusions. I am very encouraged with the test results to date. The flight performance is validating the wind tunnel testing. As Bobby Mise has prudently cautioned, "the testing phase is not completed yet", but it surely looks like we have a winner here. On Tue, 12 Oct 1999, Bobby Muse wrote: > At 07:01 AM 10/12/1999 -0500, you wrote: > >Bobby Muse wrote: > > > >> WARNING TO ALL! > >> > >> The jury is still out on th new airfoil. That's all I will say but please > >> make sure that you have the piloting skills required. > > [snip] > > Troy and I have been friends for awhile. I had a brief conversation at the > KR Gathering with Troy about the new airfoil and I assure you that he he > very excited about how it performs for the type of flying that Troy wants > to do. Troy has airplane racing in his blood and will do almost anything > to go faster and faster.. > > Troy told me that the airplane is faster, much more stable at high speed > and climbs better than the old configuration. Mark is right, Troy made > multiple mods at the same time and most all improved the performance of his > KR. Also, Troy said that the time to get off the ground was much longer > and slow fight perforamnce needed more testing. He really thought that the > mods to the tail feathers helped a lot with the way it handled inflight. > > This is not meant to stop the movement to the new airfoil. All that I am > saying is that more testing needs to be done before I will suggest that > everyone tear apart their KRs to make the change to the new airfoil. The > jury is still out. If the new airfoil does prove itself, I will make the > change over to the new airfoil. > Steve Eberhart mailto:newtech@newtech.com THE WING FLIES! - http://www.newtech.com/nlf for info on the new, flight tested, KRnet/UIUC airfoils. Good job KRnet, you can be proud of your contribution to Sport Aviation. Special thanks to Dr. Ashok Gopalarathnam and Dr. Michael Selig for some great Sport Aviation airfoils. One test is worth a thousand expert opinions but a thousand opinions are easier to get. --plagiarized from an unknown author All information, in any of my aircraft related correspondence, is strictly food for thought requiring additional, qualified, engineering analysis. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Changing your incidence. From: MARVIN MCCOY Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 19:03:34 -0700 X-Message-Number: 4 -------------------------- I have one question. For those of us with our spars already installed and wing attach fittings installed. It seems to me that to change the incidence for the new wing I will need to remount the wing attach fittings. Or can I leave them as shown on the original plans??? Maybe I am mixing apples and oranges here. Regarding the jury out question, I will have to agree with Bobby Muse. Looks like a great improvement but I still have some questions that aer unanswered. Marvin McCoy Seattle WA. North end of Boeing field ---------------- Bobby Muse wrote: > > > This is not meant to stop the movement to the new airfoil. All that I am > saying is that more testing needs to be done before I will suggest that > everyone tear apart their KRs to make the change to the new airfoil. The > jury is still out. If the new airfoil does prove itself, I will make the > change over to the new airfoil. > > Yes, I know that this an experimental airplane. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: The Jury is out indefinitely From: DClarke351@aol.com Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 10:21:27 EDT X-Message-Number: 5 Common Guys! This is not what the net is for! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: field repairs for wood prop nicks From: WGLIDE78@aol.com Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 10:26:21 EDT X-Message-Number: 6 Regarding marinetex for fixing prop nicks.------If people can't readily find same you might try your local auto paint store.they have the equivalent (I 'm guessing) called duraglass,which apply,s like bondo but has the strength of reinforced fiberglass. I've used it from everything from piecing back together the side of a shattered corvette , securing the porcelain knobs back on kitchen cabinet hardware, hole in the differential of a lawn tractor, base of a floor lamp, cracks in tiltnose semi hoods and fenders etc etc.It sets up in about 10 minutes ---great stuff to keep around. They also have the stuff with longstrands of glass mixed in for when your really serious, called long and strong.This stuff isn't cheap but compared to the paint supplies I buy it's kind of irelevant.I keep at least a small quart can of each around at all times.the other day I used some dura to hold nut's on back of a panel that was hard access---made things alittle easier. Hope some of this helps,as a sonerai owner I'm not really as up to speed on composit but have been picking up a few pearls of wisdom when you guy's are getting along. Later Jeff Grover Seattle ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: 45 deg. vs. 90 deg. cloth From: "Stefan B." Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 17:13:03 +0200 X-Message-Number: 7 I wonder if it is better to use +/-45 degree discontinues piece of glass cloth on the wing skins instead of several pieces of 0/90 deg. cloth oriented at 45 degree. Any ideas about the advantages and disadvantages of each solution? Stefan Balatchev, Paris, France Stefan.Balatchev@wanadoo.fr ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: wing attachment fittings From: "Richard McCall" Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 13:26:49 -0500 X-Message-Number: 8 BOB, When I did my attachment fitings I had the same type of problem, as I suspect others have. The only answer I came up with was to redrill the holes and plug the odd holes with T-88. After testing the T-88, I found it stronger than the original wood. I found the only true way to get a perfect alignment, even with a drill jig, was to clamp undrilled fiiitngs in place, then drill both the metal and wood at the same time. Rich McCall KR2SXLL Harker Hts, TX ----- Original Message ----- From: Bob Whisenant To: KR-net users group Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 1999 7:00 PM Subject: [kr-net] wing attachment fittings > I am having problems attaching the wing attachment fittings to the center > main spar. They will not line up with existing wings on a rebuilding > project. Some of the fittings line up, but two on each side lack an eighth > of an inch and I can't get the bolt into the fittings because one fitting > is too low. Is there any way to fix this without having to drill extra > holes in main spar? > > --- > You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: planecraft@earthlink.net > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Changing your incidence. From: KR2616TJ@aol.com Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 14:32:54 EDT X-Message-Number: 9 In a message dated 10/13/99 10:05:01 AM Eastern Daylight Time, mr.marvin@worldnet.att.net writes: << For those of us with our spars already installed and wing attach fittings installed. It seems to me that to change the incidence for the new wing I will need to remount the wing attach fittings. >> You don't need to change the WAFs. Simply work the aft spar loose from the uprights and raise it the desired height, block it underneath and reglue it in. I really feel you will see improvement by doing this even if you use the RAF48 airfoil. Hey, Mims....................I've changed my airplane so dam!#@$ many times even if the elevator is one BAE (Big As$%@%#$ Elevator) it's flying with this baby.......I ain't changing nothing else!!!!!!!!!!!!! :-) JOKE ;+), Funny one, That's a good one..................everybody get the drift. Guys, this thread Bobby started is rather tame to some we have had, good lively discussion. Bobby made some good points, Mark made some, Steve made some, Dean made some, Mike flamed my elevator (couldn't resist), Marvin expressed his thoughts........I just fueled the fire to get some discussion going. It's the only way to generate ideas. I think that a couple guys will need to buy new keyboards after pounding the keys........."Maybe if I hit this key really hard, I'll get my point across". At least we all aren't in our bunkers raising up to take a shot just to piss the other guy off. That being said, I think I'll try and find that helmet......might come in handy. Dana Overall 2000 KR Gathering host Richmond, KY mailto:kr2616tj@aol.com http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/7085/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re:Plywood kit From: "Richard McCall" Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 13:44:51 -0500 X-Message-Number: 10 JACK, Get a WICK's Catalog. It lists all of the parts for a KR2. Rich McCall KR2SXLL Harker Hts, TX ----- Original Message ----- From: To: KR-net users group Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 1999 10:27 AM Subject: [kr-net] Re:Plywood kit > I've been looking for a material list for the plywood kit and can't find it > in the plans. Have I overlooked it or is it not included in the plans? Does > anyone have a list of plywood needed to build a KR-2s? Should the plywood be > 45 or 90 degree plys? > Jack Cooper > kr2cooper@aol.com > Fayetteville, NC. > > --- > You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: planecraft@earthlink.net > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Paul's KR From: "Richard McCall" Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 14:11:04 -0500 X-Message-Number: 11 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_01CB_01BF1584.C97DE280 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Do you have a prop cutter? Rich ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Wolf Packs, Inc.=20 To: KR-net users group=20 Sent: Friday, October 01, 1999 2:03 AM Subject: [kr-net] Re: Paul's KR I just re-read my last message. To be clear...I don't want to cut up = someone's prop, just use one "as is" to see how well it works. If someone out there has a used VW prop, anything from 54 X 44 to 52 = X 42, that I could borrow/test, I'd sure like to try it out before I cut = mine.=20 Paul Martin, Ashland, Oregon mailto:paul@wolfpacks.com ------=_NextPart_000_01CB_01BF1584.C97DE280 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Do you have a prop cutter?
 
Rich
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Wolf = Packs,=20 Inc.
Sent: Friday, October 01, 1999 = 2:03=20 AM
Subject: [kr-net] Re: Paul's = KR

I just re-read my last=20 message.  To be clear...I don't want to cut up someone's prop, = just use=20 one "as is" to see how well it works.


If someone out there has a used VW = prop,=20 anything from 54 X 44 to 52 X 42, that I could borrow/test, I'd sure = like to=20 try it out before I cut mine.

Paul Martin, Ashland, = Oregon
mailto:paul@wolfpacks.com
------=_NextPart_000_01CB_01BF1584.C97DE280-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Control rods From: "Richard McCall" Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 14:29:24 -0500 X-Message-Number: 12 I would like a drawing. Rich McCall KR2SXLL Harker Hts, TX ----- Original Message ----- From: To: KR-net users group Sent: Monday, September 27, 1999 8:35 AM Subject: [kr-net] Re: Control rods > I installed a push rod system in my KR that I designed. It goes from the > stick to a bell crank assembly mounted at the rear of the rear spar. Another > one mounted at the top of the bell crank goes on to the elevator. If you > would like a drawing of this system I would be happy to send it to you. Let > me know. By the way the system has been proven as I am flying it. Don Clarke > > --- > You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: planecraft@earthlink.net > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Clarification From: KR2616TJ@aol.com Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 15:21:26 EDT X-Message-Number: 13 Sorry for the "old timers" to hear this but maybe a statement needs to be said concerning the "new wing" The wing in question was funded by donations from the KRnet with the goal of designing a wing that more closely matched the speeds and weights of the current KR airplane. It was the hope that the new wing would provide flight improvement using the heavier and faster KRs of today. The RAF48 was not designed for the KR, it was simply borrowed from another airplane on the day (early 70s) and put onto Ken Rand and Stu Robinson's fuselage design. I am a firm believer that if it looks like an airplane (ie, it looks like a wing) it will probably fly. That being said, Chev. does not keep making the same Corvette year after year. Changes are made to take into consideration changing technology. The goal of the wing design followed the same course. The KR airplane of today is much heavier and faster than the original ones. It seemed to make sense that if new technology was used, a more efficient airfoil could be designed especially for the KR. The KRnet went so far as to place an airfoil section in a wind tunnel for testing. The RAF48, as far as I know was never wind tunnel tested. The results of the wind tunnel tests matched the projected results to a T within the range tested. I have no problem extending these findings to the opposite ends of the flight envelope and expecting corresponding results during Troy's actual flight testing. I also feel that if Ken Rand were still alive, he would have changed this airplane as improvements came along. The RAF48 flies the airplane, along with just about any other airfoil you would want to put on it. The only difference with the RAF48 and this new wing, is the new wing has been scientifically tested. As with anything, it needs to perform in the real world, witch the RAF48 has done for many years. Now be honest here guys.......who on the this net has not looked at something and thought....."I can improve on that"? This airfoil has not and is not, endorsed by Rand Robinson, as the plans have not been changed except for the S supplement. Jeanette knew the airfoil forum was going to be put on the gathering and was looking forward to seeing it. She was there for the entire thing. My only stipulation to those giving the forum was that nothing bad was to be said concerning the RAF48. Guys, sometimes there are two schools of thought on something like this. One group says that the RAF48 has flown for years so that means there is nothing wrong with it. The other groups says that the RAF48 was not designed for the KR airplane, much less the speeds and weights the current KRs fly at so yes, there is something wrong with the RAF48. It's what you define "wrong" as. The latter groups says that "wrong" is what can be improved upon with the former says "why change something that actually works". Neither group is wrong. Off the soapbox now. Dana ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Carb Heat From: "JC Marais" Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 21:04:01 +0200 X-Message-Number: 14 Ross said: >2) S T R E T C H the screen door spring which will make nicely > spaced loops, and coil this around and around and around the > exhaust stack. Ross, If I understand correctly, you will and up with a door spring wound around an exhaust pipe, and some form of shrouding around it. What is the idea of the spring? Does it help to increase the area of metal exposed to the air, or what? JC ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Carb Heat From: Horn2004@aol.com Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 16:32:11 EDT X-Message-Number: 15 In a message dated 10/13/99 2:55:44 PM, jcmarais@lantic.co.za writes: <> Exactly! Plus it (the spring) works nicely to keep an equadistant space between the exhaust pipe and the shroud. Steve Horn horn2004@aol.com Dallas, Tejas ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Carb Heat From: cartera Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 14:13:36 -0600 X-Message-Number: 16 JC Marais wrote: > > Ross said: > >2) S T R E T C H the screen door spring which will make nicely > > spaced loops, and coil this around and around and around the > > exhaust stack. > > Ross, > > If I understand correctly, you will and up with a door spring wound around > an exhaust pipe, and some form of shrouding around it. > > What is the idea of the spring? Does it help to increase the area of metal > exposed to the air, or what? > > JC > > --- > You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: cartera@cuug.ab.ca > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com Hello Gang, Elementary my Dear Watson, more area, better heat transfer, added heat exchanger via the springs. Take a look at my website I have a comment on it. Ross knows what he is talking about!!!!;-) -- Adrian VE6AFY Calgary, Alberta Mailto:cartera@cuug.ab.ca http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~cartera ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Sport Aviation From: "Edwin Blocher" Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 18:17:22 -0500 X-Message-Number: 17 Sure a lot of stuff going on this week on the net. Just wanted to let you all know that my article about the gathering is now on the Sport Aviation Association "Web Flyer" at www.SportAviation.org. Check it out when you get a chance and also read Paul P.s editorial. Cheers Ed Blocher Moody, AL e-mail me at: ed_blocher@msn.com Check out all the latest on my home page. http://homepages.msn.com/Terminus/edsKR/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: wing seam covers From: "garbez" Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 18:51:05 -0500 X-Message-Number: 18 The gathering was great as always, this was my fourth year and the first to be able to bring my KR, it was on a trailer but next year I will fly, can't wait. Last week Jeff Scott from New Mexico came by for a visit. It was really nice to have a KR buddy stop by and visit for a while, thanks Jeff. Any way since I have the wings off and it is at home i"m doing some repairs that needed soome attention. The bottom of the wing panels never dried (bad paint) so the company that sold me the paint gave me all the stuff to repaint had to strip the paint off with thinner, which was NO FUN then repainted the wings and also re-did the cowl and top deck. The cowling was cracking where the screws were, now there is no screws. The top deck and cowling have piano hinges, looks great. O.K. now for my question; I never made anything to cover the wing seams and now is a good time. I'm going to use 3" fiberglass tape, but I don't know what I should use to cover the wing so the layup won't stick to the wing. I heard Bobby Muse talking about it to someone a couple of years ago at one of the gatherings, maybe he or anyone else who knows can post it on the net so we will all know. Thanks, Mike Garbez N998MG Griswold, IA (712) 778-2449 msgtlg@netins.net ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: They Jury is out indefinitely From: "Dean Collette" Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 19:03:16 -0500 X-Message-Number: 19 Mike Mims wrote: >one > could surmise (or guess) that the tail destabilized his plane but what > could you base that on? I made this as a rather tongue-in check type of comment. My point was that due to the large number of changes that were made, it's difficult to sort out which thing is effecting what. As I mentioned before, the pure test is to take an airplane that was previously flying, and change one thing. Then fly it and see how the change has effected the flight. When you change many, many things, it becomes impossible to sort out the effects of an unique alteration. I have no doubt, that the changes that Troy made to his tail contribute to what he percieves (and probably is) a more stable airplane. My point is that it is impossible to tell. > I think when it comes down to it Troy made almost (still needs an O-200) > all the right mods to possibly have the perfect KR2. . . Possibly the AS wing needs more AOA at lower speeds to > produce the lift that the RAF did and the short gear legs wont allow > it? Who knows? My point exactly. > As far as that goes all my flight experience tells me the elevator setup > that you and Dana are using is wrong but who knows? Well, I personally think that this is one area where a stability analysis is better then a "seat-of-the-pants" best guess. The analysis that I have show that the numbers look better. I can't say that it is the end-all-be-all in tails for the KR-type aircraft, but then, it hasn't flown yet. Who knows. The one thing that I will say, is that when you look at the plan form of the airplane with the BAT (Bigass tail) it looks closer to normal then the tiny little KR tail. I think it was you, Mike, that illustrated that so well on your web site. I am certainly not condoning the BAT yet, I haven't flown it. But I do think that before changing the tail considerably, a guy should take a look at the theory behind it. TLAR (That Looks About Right) engineering and aircraft don't mix very well. > One could go as far to say that the jury is still out on the KR is a > properly designed airplane, period. Well said. By the way - DClarke351@aol.com - This is precisely what KRNet is for. It's called a discussion, with many differing viewpoints made. You and everybody else are free to pick and choose the points that you like the most and build your airplane accordingly. Dean Collette Milwaukee, Wisconsin mailto:drdean@execpc.com Web Page at http://www.execpc.com/~drdean/home.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: The Jury is out indefinitely From: "Larry Jacks" Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 18:11:15 -0600 X-Message-Number: 20 ----- Original Message ----- From: Ron Lee To: KR-net users group Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 1999 11:55 PM Subject: [kr-net] Re: The Jury is out indefinitely > At 10:37 PM 10/12/99 -0700, you wrote: > > >One last thing, everybody remember if someone on this list says your dog > >is ugly, don't sweat it. Its no big deal! > > Just a hint for a long life. Do NOT call my dog ugly. Call me butt > ugly if you wish but say NADA bad about my boy. > > Ron Lee > > PS. troy needs to get some high altitude work in. Meadow Lake airport > is just the place. > > --- > You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: ljacks@codenet.net > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Wing and Things From: Jim Faughn Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 19:25:32 -0500 X-Message-Number: 21 I've found it interesting the conversations on the new wing. I was thinking that the RAF wing was probably the best for the 1835 or a heavy KR that isn't going to fly as fast. The new wing is probably better for the high performance light aircraft. Just an idea. The other thought I had , probably the better one, was that after placing my little plaque in my plane from this years gathering I figured out that next year is the 20th KR Gathering. At least from the plaques in the plane that is what it comes out to. So now, the real questions are: How many planes can we get to the Gathering next year to celebrate given the Gathering will start with fly-ins on Thursday? What can be done special to honor the fact that we have had 20 great Gatherings? Should we expand the awards? What kind of "little plaque" could be designed to honor the fact that someone flys into the 20th Gathering? What can be done to honor everyone that attends? Should we have a new award or ???? for those that trailer projects in? Could we have a pilot inspection of builder's aircraft's so that we would give them more confidence that they are doing the "right thing"? Do you really want me to continue the questions? Yes, it is true, I will NOT help anyone sand their airplane at the next Gathering. Keep Building! -- Jim Faughn N8931JF St. Louis, MO mailto:jfaughn@mvp.net (314) 652-7659 or Cell (314) 346-4038 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: They Jury is out indefinitely From: Mike Mims Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 17:16:47 -0700 X-Message-Number: 22 Dean Collette wrote: > > > Well, I personally think that this is one area where a stability > analysis is better then a "seat-of-the-pants" best guess. The analysis > that I have show that the numbers look better. I can't say that it is > the end-all-be-all in tails for the KR-type aircraft, but then, it > hasn't flown yet. >>> Its not the size I was concerned about, it was the aerodynamic balance. For example we rebuilt an old PA-11 (I think that's what it was) and installed PA-18 tail feathers on it. I had flown it before the mods as well as other PA-11s and 12s and after installing the PA-18 tail feathers the controls were extremely light. The only difference between the two is the PA-18 units have the aerodynamic balance. It really wasn't a seat of the pants kinda thing it was a holy cow this thing has power steering kinda of a thing. Then again I don't know the whole picture. If the BAT elevator itself is larger it may need the aerodynamic balance to keep control pressures in the normal range. I am sure the Richard Mole knows much, much more than I do about the design of elevators and such. Also I agree about this being exactly what this list is for. This kind of chat is worth more to builders than 90% of the other crap that we post here. But I disagree about TLAR, it does work on some aspects of this airplane homebuilding stuff. :o) -- zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Micheal Mims Sanding and Filling AGAIN! :o( http://www.fortunecity.com/marina/anchor/270/ http://www.evansville.net/~boeing/project_viking/ http://members.home.com/mikemims/ Aliso Viejo CA ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: wing seam covers From: Ron Lee Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 18:34:38 -0600 X-Message-Number: 23 O.K. now for my question; I never >made anything to cover the wing seams and now is a good time. I'm going to >use 3" fiberglass tape, but I don't know what I should use to cover the wing >so the layup won't stick to the wing. DUCT TAPE. Ahhhh, are there any more magical words on the English language than "duct tape"? Ron Lee ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Clarification From: Mike Mims Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 17:31:47 -0700 X-Message-Number: 24 KR2616TJ@aol.com wrote: > The RAF48 was not designed for the KR, it was simply borrowed from another airplane on the day (early 70s) and put onto Ken Rand and Stu Robinson's fuselage design. >>>> You can go a little further back than that. The KR inherited the RAF 48 from a English design of the 1950s from which it was copied. The designer was named John F Taylor and he designed two airplanes, the JT1 Monoplane, JT2 Titch. The JT1 used the RAF48. Interesting enough he set out to design one of his little planes to race (the JT2) and changed the airfoil to a 23012 in hopes of going a little faster on the same hp. -- zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Micheal Mims Sanding and Filling AGAIN! :o( http://www.fortunecity.com/marina/anchor/270/ http://www.evansville.net/~boeing/project_viking/ http://members.home.com/mikemims/ Aliso Viejo CA ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Just a start, and two big lessons From: HAshraf@aol.com Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 21:30:18 EDT X-Message-Number: 25 In a message dated 99-10-10 23:28:12 EDT, you write: << Harris reminded me, and I glued it up and really clamped her down tight. So I spent this after noon sanding T-88 off the wood, and re-setting up the clamps, and this evening I glued her back up, again, It's cooler and I resisted tighting the clamps so tight,next week when I get back, we'll get started on the gussets >> You need to put gussetts before the clamps come off,. Also In hot weather you need to put one coat of epoxy wait two minutes and recoat. At 95-100 deg epoxy get absorbed in the wood very easily anfd the resulting joint is dry. I alway glue some scrap wood also. I break it later in a vise to test the integrety of the design. Also, the regular two inch clamps (Home Depot or Homebase type) apply too much force. I use some cheap clamps I bought from the 'Toolman' at Sun 'n' Fun. They are perfect fo gussett work. I have a picture of them on my web site. Haris mailto:hashraf@aol.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Grandson's First Flight From: GARYKR2@cs.com Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 21:47:23 EDT X-Message-Number: 26 Today turned out to one of those days were all the hard is worth it. Only had to work 1/2 day, so I took the wife and 3yr. old grandson to the airport. I have been getting him used to the sights, sounds, and smells since june. Kyle has always liked "flying" in the KR since he was 1yr old( never too young to start 'em, at least that's my theory). So today we tried our first taxi tests around the airport. Everything went fine. Pulled up at the hanger and shut down the engine. I got out, told Kyle to stay with "Memaw" while I go fly. The plan was to have him watch me takeoff, around the pattern, and land. One of those things that if "Pop Pop can do it, then I can do it". Well, we never got to that step. He said "I'm going flying with Pop Pop", so off we went. One lap around the field and land. Everything went great. Then as we pulled up at the hanger, Kyle wanted to go again. How could I say no? Off again for about 15mins. then land. Had a hard time getting him out of the plane. Elisabeth got all the pictures of the takeoff, landing, and taixing back. I'm not sure who had a better time, Kyle or myself. Now I need to get him a headset and flying jacket, he said so, "like Pop Pop's". Those of you who are building, stay at it. No amount of money can buy these moments in time. If the good Lord took me tonight, I would go with a smile on my face. Gary Hinkle Middletown, Pa. garykr2@cs.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Wing and Things From: "w.g. kirkland" Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 21:47:22 -0400 X-Message-Number: 27 How about specially engraved sheets of sandpaper! W.G. KIRKLAND kirkland@vianet.on.ca ---------- > From: Jim Faughn > To: KR-net users group > Subject: [kr-net] Wing and Things > Date: Wednesday, October 13, 1999 8:25 PM > > I've found it interesting the conversations on the new wing. I was > thinking that the RAF wing was probably the best for the 1835 or a heavy > KR that isn't going to fly as fast. The new wing is probably better for > the high performance light aircraft. Just an idea. > > The other thought I had , probably the better one, was that after > placing my little plaque in my plane from this years gathering I figured > out that next year is the 20th KR Gathering. At least from the plaques > in the plane that is what it comes out to. So now, the real questions > are: > > How many planes can we get to the Gathering next year to celebrate given > the Gathering will start with fly-ins on Thursday? > What can be done special to honor the fact that we have had 20 great > Gatherings? > Should we expand the awards? > What kind of "little plaque" could be designed to honor the fact that > someone flys into the 20th Gathering? > What can be done to honor everyone that attends? > Should we have a new award or ???? for those that trailer projects in? > Could we have a pilot inspection of builder's aircraft's so that we > would give them more confidence that they are doing the "right thing"? > > Do you really want me to continue the questions? Yes, it is true, I will > NOT help anyone sand their airplane at the next Gathering. > > Keep Building! > -- > Jim Faughn N8931JF > St. Louis, MO > mailto:jfaughn@mvp.net > (314) 652-7659 or Cell (314) 346-4038 > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: kirkland@vianet.on.ca > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: The Jury is out indefinitely From: "w.g. kirkland" Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 22:01:44 -0400 X-Message-Number: 28 The polite saying is "don't get your testicals in a termoil" W.G. KIRKLAND kirkland@vianet.on.ca ---------- > From: Ron Lee > To: KR-net users group > Subject: [kr-net] Re: The Jury is out indefinitely > Date: Wednesday, October 13, 1999 1:55 AM > > At 10:37 PM 10/12/99 -0700, you wrote: > > >One last thing, everybody remember if someone on this list says your dog > >is ugly, don't sweat it. Its no big deal! > > Just a hint for a long life. Do NOT call my dog ugly. Call me butt > ugly if you wish but say NADA bad about my boy. > > Ron Lee > > PS. troy needs to get some high altitude work in. Meadow Lake airport > is just the place. > > --- > You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: kirkland@vianet.on.ca > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: [kr-net]Airfoils are like opinions.... From: WilliamTCA@aol.com Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 22:18:08 EDT X-Message-Number: 29 Dear Friends: My turn to throw a little fuel on the fire, now that the last few letters seemed to agree that debate is good. I don't know the full background on the new airfoil, but it sounds like the homework was done on it. My thoughts are just general observations on the subject. Airfoils are all about camber. It is the most defining characteristic, and the first thing I look at. In most cases, more camber, more lift, more pitching moment, more tail needed. The RAF 48 seems to have much more camber than the new wing. My guess why the Take off is longer is that the new wing has less camber. I would bet a million dollars to a doughnut it has nothing to do with the fact it is not perfectly smooth. Laminar flow does not apply here. I am yet to see a 'drag bucket' anywhere near rotation AOA. Several comments were made about flaps which ignored the fact you cannot make 3D assumptions of behavior based on 2D airfoil data. The KR is a very complex 3 dimensional airfoil/flap problem because of ground effect issues. Tail incidence is one of the most complex decisions a designer makes. On most prototypes its variable, because even the pros know that your best calculation is still a rough number. Go back and read John Roncz's 1990 articles in sport aviation they are great on this subject. I think the new wing is a good thing for any plane which is going to cruise at higher speed. At higher speeds the pitching moment of the RAF is very strong, and the Wing operates at a AOA it was not designed for. This is true for many homebuilts which have gotten more HP applied to old airfoils and wing areas. A RAF KR2 at 180mph is bound to be a lot like a Pietenpol at 100mph. They have too much area and camber for these speeds. I don't care what the stall speed of a plane is if it can't land there because of landing gear length/AOA limitations. I want to see CAFE style data if we can get it, if not lets at least have a performance run like the Dragonfly/Q2 guys did in Kansas last week. Lets bring electronic scales and a radar gun to the next gathering and learn something. Improvements are inevitable in homebuilts, this is why some of us love them. Lets share the data as numbers not as adjectives. Thanks, William the Corvair Authority. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: KR Aircraft/People at SW Regional Fly-In From: SkyHawk11@aol.com Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 22:32:52 EDT X-Message-Number: 30 808BS flown by Bobby Smith of Brownwood Texas will be there. Bobby built his from plans and has a great plains VW that he built from parts as a power plant. Does a great job. Start to finish 19 mo. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: TLAR From: "Dean Collette" Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 21:57:50 -0500 X-Message-Number: 31 ----- Original Message ----- From: Mike Mims > Also I agree about this being exactly what this list is for. This kind > of chat is worth more to builders than 90% of the other crap that we > post here. But I disagree about TLAR, it does work on some aspects of > this airplane homebuilding stuff. :o) In my opinion, you reach a point when building anything where some TLAR engineering comes into play. Trying to mathematically model a simple structure is difficult enough, but when you're talking about an entire airplane (like this) it's just not worth the effort. However, when doing some of the bigger things - it's better to have an idea of what the changes will do for you. The info is out there. The Roncz spreadsheets are on the web (I forget where at the moment, but I know they're out there). There are also several great books that won't cost you an arm and a leg. If we use an example - ahhh, let's see (what to pick on, and what to avoid) - the motor mount. That's a good 'un. You can whip one together that will hold the engine to the front of the airplane. That's no problem at all. But the question becomes "is it the best?" If it's too long or too short, it'll screw up the CG - you could wind up carrying a bunch of lead around for no reason at all other then to adjust the CG. You spend energy lifting it up with you every time you fly, sacrificing performance. If you guess right and happen to get the length close, it may be WAY overbuilt, or underbuilt (TLAR engineers usually overbuild the hell out of stuff.) So, again, you're carrying extra weight around. Over time, the TLAR guy will figure out where the mistake was made and rebuild it. Time, money and energy spent - for nothing. If you spend some time doing a little engineering on it - vavoom - the CG is right, the structure is right, and you never have to rebuild. Time and energy well spent. You can rest easy. (This analogy does not apply to guys that have spent huge amounts of time building motor mounts.) Analogy aside, the same thing applies to the flight surfaces, but maybe to a more critical degree. I am not an aerodynamic engineer, but I can sure appreciate one. I would have no problem making small TLAR changes to the tail, but big ones . . . I don't think so. I have read just enough about aero-engineering to scare the hell out of me. It's a lot easier to screw up an airplane then it is to make it better. The biggest problem being, without any numbers behind you, you have no idea how it will fly until you're in the air. Mike, you probably have enough hours behind you to get you out of most bad airborne situations, but that's not the case for a lot of us. Since I don't have the experience, I'd just as soon have the numbers. Dean Collette Milwaukee, Wisconsin mailto:drdean@execpc.com Web Page at http://www.execpc.com/~drdean/home.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: wings and things From: "garbez" Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 21:48:05 -0500 X-Message-Number: 32 Really only about "things". The largest gathering yet with recoginition for all who make the effort to get their plane to the gathering is a great idea and would promote more building. Perhaps a special invitation to all KR owners, particularly those not on the KRNET or who don't subscribe to the newsletter would increase the attendence. Notifying the EAA chapters of the gatherings would help also. More media attention couldn't hurt business! Maybe if we got the word out to the right people we could make the 20th gathering a news worthy event. The fact that people come from everywhere and that our little KR's are built the world over would be of interest to people. We will help anyway we can to make the 20th annual KR gathering of the year 2000 the best yet. Mike and Teri Garbez Griswold, IA (712) 778-2449 msgtlg@netins.net ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: TLAR From: "JEAN" Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 22:26:07 -0500 X-Message-Number: 33 For those contemplating changes I would suggest at the minimum two resources: Design For Flying by David B. Thurston McGraw-Hill1978 and Modern Aircraft Design by Martin Holman 1968 ( he is the one that did all the analysis on the Lanceair aircraft and designed the Stallion). Both were highly recommended by an aeronautical engineer I work with. Jean N4DD Broken Arrow, OK -----Original Message----- From: Dean Collette To: KR-net users group Date: Wednesday, October 13, 1999 9:53 PM Subject: [kr-net] TLAR > >----- Original Message ----- >From: Mike Mims > >> Also I agree about this being exactly what this list is for. This >kind >> of chat is worth more to builders than 90% of the other crap that we >> post here. But I disagree about TLAR, it does work on some aspects >of >> this airplane homebuilding stuff. :o) > >In my opinion, you reach a point when building anything where some >TLAR engineering comes into play. Trying to mathematically model a >simple structure is difficult enough, but when you're talking about an >entire airplane (like this) it's just not worth the effort. However, >when doing some of the bigger things - it's better to have an idea of >what the changes will do for you. The info is out there. The Roncz >spreadsheets are on the web (I forget where at the moment, but I know >they're out there). There are also several great books that won't cost >you an arm and a leg. > >If we use an example - ahhh, let's see (what to pick on, and what to >avoid) - the motor mount. That's a good 'un. You can whip one together >that will hold the engine to the front of the airplane. That's no >problem at all. But the question becomes "is it the best?" If it's too >long or too short, it'll screw up the CG - you could wind up carrying >a bunch of lead around for no reason at all other then to adjust the >CG. You spend energy lifting it up with you every time you fly, >sacrificing performance. If you guess right and happen to get the >length close, it may be WAY overbuilt, or underbuilt (TLAR engineers >usually overbuild the hell out of stuff.) So, again, you're carrying >extra weight around. Over time, the TLAR guy will figure out where the >mistake was made and rebuild it. Time, money and energy spent - for >nothing. If you spend some time doing a little engineering on it - >vavoom - the CG is right, the structure is right, and you never have >to rebuild. Time and energy well spent. You can rest easy. (This >analogy does not apply to guys that have spent huge amounts of time >building motor mounts.) > >Analogy aside, the same thing applies to the flight surfaces, but >maybe to a more critical degree. I am not an aerodynamic engineer, but >I can sure appreciate one. I would have no problem making small TLAR >changes to the tail, but big ones . . . I don't think so. I have read >just enough about aero-engineering to scare the hell out of me. It's a >lot easier to screw up an airplane then it is to make it better. The >biggest problem being, without any numbers behind you, you have no >idea how it will fly until you're in the air. Mike, you probably have >enough hours behind you to get you out of most bad airborne >situations, but that's not the case for a lot of us. Since I don't >have the experience, I'd just as soon have the numbers. > >Dean Collette Milwaukee, Wisconsin >mailto:drdean@execpc.com >Web Page at http://www.execpc.com/~drdean/home.htm > > > >--- >You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: N4DD@prodigy.net >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: wing seam covers From: "JEAN" Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 22:31:50 -0500 X-Message-Number: 34 3M makes a clear tape about 2 in. wide. Vinyl ester resin will not stick to this even without mold release. It is about .005 in. thick . 4 layers of 8 oz. glass will do it, Jean N4DD Broken Aarrow, OK -----Original Message----- From: garbez To: KR-net users group Date: Wednesday, October 13, 1999 6:58 PM Subject: [kr-net] wing seam covers >The gathering was great as always, this was my fourth year and the first to >be able to bring my KR, it was on a trailer but next year I will fly, can't >wait. Last week Jeff Scott from New Mexico came by for a visit. It was >really nice to have a KR buddy stop by and visit for a while, thanks Jeff. >Any way since I have the wings off and it is at home i"m doing some repairs >that needed soome attention. The bottom of the wing panels never dried (bad >paint) so the company that sold me the paint gave me all the stuff to >repaint had to strip the paint off with thinner, which was NO FUN then >repainted the wings and also re-did the cowl and top deck. The cowling was >cracking where the screws were, now there is no screws. The top deck and >cowling have piano hinges, looks great. O.K. now for my question; I never >made anything to cover the wing seams and now is a good time. I'm going to >use 3" fiberglass tape, but I don't know what I should use to cover the wing >so the layup won't stick to the wing. I heard Bobby Muse talking about it >to someone a couple of years ago at one of the gatherings, maybe he or >anyone else who knows can post it on the net so we will all know. > >Thanks, >Mike Garbez N998MG >Griswold, IA >(712) 778-2449 >msgtlg@netins.net > > > > >--- >You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: N4DD@prodigy.net >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: 45 deg. vs. 90 deg. cloth From: Laheze@aol.com Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 23:48:01 EDT X-Message-Number: 35 The continuous 45 degree glass cloth would be stronger if you use the unwoven type and easier, it is called biaxial cloth and usually comes in 50" widths. Larry Howell ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: wing seam covers From: Laheze@aol.com Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 23:55:10 EDT X-Message-Number: 36 Saran Wrap works really well in this case run it length wise down the crack (between the wing stub and outer wing panel) full width, tape off edges to hold in place and lay up your glass cloth where you want it and have some extra area on each side of layup for drips and such. Aluminum airconditioning tape has worked for me also, and as mentioned good ole duct tape is quick and easy but leaves glue all over sometimes. The Saran Wrap is very thin and leaves your part pretty close to original fit. Larry Howell ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: TLAR From: WilliamTCA@aol.com Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 00:10:52 EDT X-Message-Number: 37 Friends, I just read the suggestion to use Holmans book to learn. As I am perhaps the only person on the Krnet who has built a Stallion and a Lancair IV, I am in the unique position to say that this mans books are worthless to people who wish to learn about aircraft design. You need to be an industry insider to hear what the people at Lancair think of him and you should wonder why nine years after the Stallions introduction only the prototype is flying. Thurston is a great designer, but his books are philosophical and statistical in nature. To learn about flight in general, everyone needs a copy of Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators. John Roncz's articles, which Dean mentioned, are a great work on aerodynamics. For structures, there is Stress without Tears by Welsh for an introduction and the last word is Analysis of Flight Vehicle Structures by Bruhn. I own a few hundred books on the subject, but these are the ones I commonly recommend to homebuilders who want to learn "why". William ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: TLAR From: Laheze@aol.com Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 00:16:14 EDT X-Message-Number: 38 Jean wrote about a book Martin Holman wrote, According to some of my sources his engineering was as a regular homebuilder on the Lancair. He gave his design to them and they did and load tested to just over 1 g and failure, then again and another failure, several times, well any of us could do that, right ? (This engineering was on the wing and spar) I have sat through some of Martins seminars at Oshkosh waiting for another over the years and I know enough to know a lot of bull sometimes and I for one would not trust my life to Martin Holman This is my opinion only ! but this story is true ! Larry Howell ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Carbon fiber and galvanic corosion From: Laheze@aol.com Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 00:27:29 EDT X-Message-Number: 39 I have seen on some of the web sites guys using carbon fiber. I just thought I would remind all and anyone who is not aware that it is a good idea to keep your carbon separate from your hardware. For example if you had a solid carbon shear web, bulkhead, landing gear or what ever, it would be a good idea to put a solid fiberglass hard point here or phonolic (spelling to lazy to look) to bolt through. The carbon will cause corosion in your hardware and maybe failure at some point. I thought you all probably knew this but I thought maybe someone may not. Larry Howell ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: TLAR Martin Holman From: Laheze@aol.com Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 00:50:25 EDT X-Message-Number: 40 Sorry guys I got mad thinking about Martin and did not tell the story right. Martin was hired to do some engineering for Lancair. His wing design was given to Lancair and they built the wing according to his instruction. They load tested and easy break He gave another design with a few more layers of glass and it broke and so on until they got one that would hold up. That is why I said any of us could do that, this was not engineering, it was homebuilding, just keep doing it until you get it right. Larry Howell ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Carbon fiber and galvanic corosion From: Laheze@aol.com Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 01:14:58 EDT X-Message-Number: 41 Sorry but it is late and maybe I wasn' t clear . Do not bolt directly through carbon. Put a hardpoint of fiberglass or phonolic or hardwood at the point where you want to bolt through. Make the hard point bigger than the diameter of your bolt of course. Flox the hardpoint in and fiberglass over it onto your carbon fiber. There does that make sense ? Larry Howell ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: wing seam covers From: "Ross R. Youngblood" Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 22:34:24 +0000 X-Message-Number: 42 Mike, Don't use DUCT tape, it will leave a residue. I'd use Electrical tape. Then plastic sheeting or mylar attached to the wing with Electrical tape. Actually this is one of those spur of the moment ideas, that gets posted to KR-net to see if anyone else thinks it's good before one trys it one-self. I will be watching the net on this, as I need to make wing gap seals eventually too. At one point I was considering using tape (like sailplane pilots do) as a permanent solution, but I'm not sure it will work for such a wide gap. -- Ross garbez wrote: > The gathering was great as always, this was my fourth year and the first to > be able to bring my KR, it was on a trailer but next year I will fly, can't > wait. Last week Jeff Scott from New Mexico came by for a visit. It was > really nice to have a KR buddy stop by and visit for a while, thanks Jeff. > Any way since I have the wings off and it is at home i"m doing some repairs > that needed soome attention. The bottom of the wing panels never dried (bad > paint) so the company that sold me the paint gave me all the stuff to > repaint had to strip the paint off with thinner, which was NO FUN then > repainted the wings and also re-did the cowl and top deck. The cowling was > cracking where the screws were, now there is no screws. The top deck and > cowling have piano hinges, looks great. O.K. now for my question; I never > made anything to cover the wing seams and now is a good time. I'm going to > use 3" fiberglass tape, but I don't know what I should use to cover the wing > so the layup won't stick to the wing. I heard Bobby Muse talking about it > to someone a couple of years ago at one of the gatherings, maybe he or > anyone else who knows can post it on the net so we will all know. > > Thanks, > Mike Garbez N998MG > Griswold, IA > (712) 778-2449 > 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: wing seam covers From: "Ross R. Youngblood" Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 22:35:30 +0000 X-Message-Number: 43 I don't know, I've got some duct tape glue residue on my plexiglass canopy, so if it sticks to plexiglass, I'm sure it will stick to my wing. How about saran wrap? -- Ross Ron Lee wrote: > O.K. now for my question; I never > >made anything to cover the wing seams and now is a good time. I'm going to > >use 3" fiberglass tape, but I don't know what I should use to cover the wing > >so the layup won't stick to the wing. > > DUCT TAPE. Ahhhh, are there any more magical words on the English language > than "duct tape"? > > Ron Lee > > --- > 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: Carb Heat From: "Ross R. Youngblood" Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 22:49:19 +0000 X-Message-Number: 44 JC, It acts as a heat exchanger. The heat will flow rapidly from the metal to metal contact, but you need lots of surface area for good metal to air thermal transfer. The spring gives you this, so that you can transfer a lot of heat in a small amount of area. (I've learned a lot about heat transfer lately... turns out that soon your PC will probably need liquid cooling to keep from overheating... they are making too many transistors in too small a space... I'd much rather learn about heat muffs for my KR, then Computer Chip cooling.) There is a photo of a nifty Heat muff at http://www.krnet.org/Perry98/JF2%209-18-98%202_43%20PM.jpg If the link doesn't work, go to http://www.krnet.org/Perry98, and look for the JF2 photo in the list. The heat muff in the photo is wrapped with fiberglass tape. Don't use the tape unless you plan to nickel plate the exhaust stack (As Jim did). I went with Ceramic coating, about the same price as nickel plate, but I don't have to wrap my stack. This is, I'm told what racers do these days... it's a plasma coating... I don't know how well my heat muff will work with the Ceramic coating on mine however. JC Marais wrote: > Ross said: > >2) S T R E T C H the screen door spring which will make nicely > > spaced loops, and coil this around and around and around the > > exhaust stack. > > Ross, > > If I understand correctly, you will and up with a door spring wound around > an exhaust pipe, and some form of shrouding around it. > > What is the idea of the spring? Does it help to increase the area of metal > exposed to the air, or what? > > JC > > --- > 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: Carb Heat From: "Capps Family" Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 00:52:01 -0500 X-Message-Number: 45 Now that's a sweet set up and very clean. Larry ----- Original Message ----- From: Ross R. Youngblood To: KR-net users group Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 1999 5:49 PM Subject: [kr-net] Re: Carb Heat > JC, > It acts as a heat exchanger. The heat will flow rapidly from the > metal to metal contact, but you need lots of surface area for good > metal to air thermal transfer. The spring gives you this, so that you > can transfer a lot of heat in a small amount of area. > (I've learned a lot about heat transfer lately... turns out that > soon your PC will probably need liquid cooling to keep from > overheating... they are making too many transistors in too small > a space... I'd much rather learn about heat muffs for my KR, then > Computer Chip cooling.) > > There is a photo of a nifty Heat muff at > > http://www.krnet.org/Perry98/JF2%209-18-98%202_43%20PM.jpg > > If the link doesn't work, go to http://www.krnet.org/Perry98, and look for > the JF2 photo in the list. > > The heat muff in the photo is wrapped with fiberglass tape. Don't use > the tape unless you plan to nickel plate the exhaust stack (As Jim did). > I went with Ceramic coating, about the same price as nickel plate, but > I don't have to wrap my stack. This is, I'm told what racers do these > days... it's a plasma coating... I don't know how well my heat muff > will work with the Ceramic coating on mine however. > > JC Marais wrote: > > > Ross said: > > >2) S T R E T C H the screen door spring which will make nicely > > > spaced loops, and coil this around and around and around the > > > exhaust stack. > > > > Ross, > > > > If I understand correctly, you will and up with a door spring wound around > > an exhaust pipe, and some form of shrouding around it. > > > > What is the idea of the spring? Does it help to increase the area of metal > > exposed to the air, or what? > > > > JC > > > > --- > > 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: cappsfan@ameritech.net > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Paul's KR From: "Wolf Packs, Inc." Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 23:33:14 -0700 X-Message-Number: 46 --=====================_52623600==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by smtp5.mindspring.com id CAA12264 No, I don't have a prop cutter, but I might need one soon. At this point= =20 I'm hoping to find what pitch and length works best on MY plane. Once=20 that's established I'll look into how to alter my prop, or buy a new one. I've seen posts from people who have trimmed their props. So how do they= =20 get that perfect curve, width, and pitch angles along the whole length,=20 while staying symmetrical with the other end? Let me guess...with a prop= =20 cutter? >Do you have a prop cutter? > >>I just re-read my last message. To be clear...I don't want to cut up=20 >>someone's prop, just use one "as is" to see how well it works. >> >>>If someone out there has a used VW prop (not type IV), anything from 5= 4=20 >>>X 44 to 52 X 42, that I could borrow/test, I'd sure like to try it out= =20 >>>before I cut mine. Paul Martin Ashland, OR mailto:paul@wolfpacks.com Linda von Hanneken-Martin Wolf Packs=AE - Gear for Working Dogs Phone/FAX: 541-482-7669 web: http://wolfpacks.com ~ email: mailto:traildog@wolfpacks.com=20 --=====================_52623600==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by smtp5.mindspring.com id CAA12264 No, I don't have a prop cutter, but I mi= ght need one soon.  At this point I'm hoping to find what pitch and length works best on MY plane. Once that's established I'll look into how to alter my prop, or buy a new one. 

I've seen posts from people who have trimmed their props.  So how do they get that perfect curve, width, and pitch angles along the whole length, while staying symmetrical with the other end?  Let me guess...with a prop cutter?

Do y= ou have a prop cutter?
 
I just re-read my last message.  To be clear...I don't want to cut up someone's prop, just use one "as is" to see how well it works.

If someone out there has a used VW prop (not type IV), anything from 54 X 44 to 52 X 42, that I could borrow/test, I'd sure like to try it out before I cut mine.

Paul Martin
Ashland, OR
mailto:paul@wolf= packs.com

Linda von Hanneken-Martin
Wolf Packs=AE - Gear for Working Dogs
Phone/FAX: 541-482-7669
web: http://wolfpacks.com= ~ email: mai= lto:traildog@wolfpacks.com
--=====================_52623600==_.ALT-- --- 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