From: To: Subject: krnet Digest 3 Jun 2000 12:24:29 -0000 Issue 38 Date: Saturday, June 03, 2000 4:25 AM krnet Digest 3 Jun 2000 12:24:29 -0000 Issue 38 Topics (messages 848 through 870): Re: FUEL TANK TESTS 848 by: cartera Re: Kr1 Prop 849 by: WA7YXF.aol.com 850 by: Joe Beyer 851 by: Donald Reid 852 by: Joe Beyer 854 by: ROBERT COOPER 855 by: Mark Langford 856 by: HAshraf.aol.com 857 by: HAshraf.aol.com 860 by: Richard Parker 861 by: Mike Mims 865 by: Donald Reid Re: Capactance fuel gauge 853 by: ROBERT COOPER 859 by: Gaston Landry KR's at Airventure vs Golden West EAA Regional Fly-in 858 by: Todd Servaes Kr Prop size 862 by: IMA FLYER 864 by: Jeff LeTempt 866 by: w.g. kirkland Re: resins 863 by: B&B Muse panel to hdr tank distance 867 by: Richard Parker 868 by: peter 869 by: w.g. kirkland 870 by: Mark Langford Administrivia: To subscribe to the digest, e-mail: To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail: To post to the list, e-mail: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 15:27:18 -0600 To: "w.g. kirkland" From: cartera CC: AviationMech@aol.com, Kr2dream@aol.com, shanspur@webtv.net, krnet@mailinglists.org Subject: Re: KR> Re: FUEL TANK TESTS Message-ID: <393583B6.A1FAB88@cuug.ab.ca> "w.g. kirkland" wrote: > > The advise I got from an AME was to test the fiberglass tank with Acetone. > It seems to make sense. > A. testing with water can leave residual water in the tank (tony Bengelis) > B. testing with gas leaves the surface with a residue that makes polyester > not stick. > C. acetone evaporates quicklly and leaves no harmfull residue. > Just use about 1 gal. and rotate the tank to check all the corners and > seams. > D. test with positive air pressure . > above all test before installing. > W.G.(Bill) KIRKLAND > kirkland@vianet.on.ca > > ---------- > > From: AviationMech@aol.com > > To: Kr2dream@aol.com; shanspur@webtv.net; krnet@mailinglists.org > > Subject: Re: KR> Re: resins > > Date: Tuesday, May 30, 2000 8:01 PM > > > > Bob, you are right. My point is that you need to find all the leaks you > can > > before you put fuel in the tank, because once fuel has been in the tank > epoxy > > does not stick well and you need to sand the surface as well as remove > all > > residual fuel. > > > > Orma > > aviationmech@aol.com > > http://members.aol.com/aviationmech > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org Hello Gang, Here we go again on fuel leaks. Just want to put in my 2c again. This is the system I used on my tank and to date has no leaks in it. When you have the tank on the bench, plug all the inlets with the bung/gas cap installed and on one inlet/outlet place a balloon over the outlet. Blow up the balloon for maximum size and let it stand overnight or for a week. If the balloon decreases in size, you got a leak, keep doing the repairs until that balloon remains it the original size. A good simple test without introducing anything into the tank. I know many will disagree, but I just love the KISS principle. Good Luck! -- Adrian VE6AFY Calgary, Alberta Mailto:cartera@cuug.ab.ca http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~cartera ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 19:34:49 EDT To: Kr22278z@aol.com, joejbeyer@earthlink.net, cranks4u@inna.net, krnet@mailinglists.org From: WA7YXF@aol.com Subject: Re: KR> Kr1 Prop Message-ID: <90.50c445c.2666fb99@aol.com> Last time I looked the first number was diameter and the second was pitch. Tony Bingelis thinks so also... Lynn Hyder WA7YXF N37LH Redmond, Oregon ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 05:21:01 -0700 To: , , From: "Joe Beyer" Subject: Re: KR> Kr1 Prop Message-ID: <000701bfcafa$b095b820$8940b23f@earthlink.net> The only way to get the rpm up with my 54x34 prop is to reduce the diameter to 52". I'll probably make another prop instead of cutting mine down. What I have now runs smoother than the best running 0-200 I've ever flown behind. mailto:joejbeyer@earthlink.net Portland, Ore. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: ; ; Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2000 2:33 PM Subject: Re: KR> Kr1 Prop > In a message dated 5/31/00 1:37:05 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > joejbeyer@earthlink.net writes: > > << I'm running a 69mm x 87mm in my KR-2. I use a 54 x34 prop >> > Correct me if I'm wrong. The typical VW cam is designed to reach peak torque > at around 3400 to 3600 rpm. On take off you should want to be in the max > torque range of the engine. At cruise you throttle back to an economy range, > say 3200 rpm. I once ran an almost constant speed Sturba that was 48x46 and > could over rev to 3900, the climb performance was great. My current prop is > a norman blade 54L x 52P and could only be turned by the 2.0 Liter at only > 2900 max and my climb was down to around 400 fpm. Sturba concurred that the > RPM will increase if I trim the length. The length matters as much as the > pitch. Peak HP and torque dont exactly match, however, you wont reach max HP > or torque if you cant turn the engine fast enough because of the prop load. > > Orma > aviationmech@aol.com > http://members.aol.com/aviationmech > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 21:10:08 -0400 To: From: Donald Reid Subject: Re: KR> Kr1 Prop Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20000531205530.0095b680@pop.erols.com> --=====================_1993560==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed >I've heard that when sizing a prop to a plane that the circumference of the >diameter at the tip should be approximately equal to the length of the >fuselage. This is one of the stranger responses that I have ever seen. A standard equation for the ideal propeller diameter is: { HP } 1/4 D = 360 { ----------------------} { N^2 Vmax } N^2 = Propeller speed in rpm, squared HP = engine horsepower Vmax = maximum plane speed in ft per second D = prop diameter in feet. (the stuff inside the { } is raised to the 1/4 power.) For example, my O-200 puts out 100 HP at 2750 rpm. 200 mph is 293.3 ft per sec, so the ideal prop diameter will be approximately 5.25 feet = 63 inches. This equation can be found in almost any aviation design reference. Don Reid mailto:donreid@erols.com Bumpass, Va KR2XL at http://www.erols.com/donreid/kr_page.htm USUA Club 250 at http://www.erols.com/donreid/usua250.html --=====================_1993560==_.ALT-- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 06:18:14 -0700 To: , "Donald Reid" From: "Joe Beyer" Subject: Re: KR> Kr1 Prop Message-ID: <000c01bfcb02$ae5bfb20$8940b23f@earthlink.net> It's not scientific, just approximate. mailto:joejbeyer@earthlink.net Portland, Ore. ----- Original Message ----- From: Donald Reid To: Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2000 6:10 PM Subject: Re: KR> Kr1 Prop > > >I've heard that when sizing a prop to a plane that the circumference of the > >diameter at the tip should be approximately equal to the length of the > >fuselage. > > This is one of the stranger responses that I have ever seen. A standard > equation for > the ideal propeller diameter is: > > > { HP } 1/4 > D = 360 { ----------------------} > { N^2 Vmax } > > N^2 = Propeller speed in rpm, squared > HP = engine horsepower > Vmax = maximum plane speed in ft per second > D = prop diameter in feet. > (the stuff inside the { } is raised to the 1/4 power.) > > For example, my O-200 puts out 100 HP at 2750 rpm. > 200 mph is 293.3 ft per sec, so the ideal prop diameter will be > approximately 5.25 feet = 63 inches. > > This equation can be found in almost any aviation design reference. > > Don Reid mailto:donreid@erols.com > Bumpass, Va > > KR2XL at http://www.erols.com/donreid/kr_page.htm > USUA Club 250 at http://www.erols.com/donreid/usua250.html > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 23:09:02 -0400 To: , "Donald Reid" From: "ROBERT COOPER" Subject: Re: KR> Kr1 Prop Message-ID: <006301bfcb76$c3af7aa0$dc981e3f@pavilion> Don Is there also a formula for determining the proper pitch? Jack Cooper kr2cooper@msn.com http://www.geocities.com/kr2cooper/ Fayetteville, NC. ----- Original Message ----- From: Donald Reid To: Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2000 9:10 PM Subject: Re: KR> Kr1 Prop > > >I've heard that when sizing a prop to a plane that the circumference of the > >diameter at the tip should be approximately equal to the length of the > >fuselage. > > This is one of the stranger responses that I have ever seen. A standard > equation for > the ideal propeller diameter is: > > > { HP } 1/4 > D = 360 { ----------------------} > { N^2 Vmax } > > N^2 = Propeller speed in rpm, squared > HP = engine horsepower > Vmax = maximum plane speed in ft per second > D = prop diameter in feet. > (the stuff inside the { } is raised to the 1/4 power.) > > For example, my O-200 puts out 100 HP at 2750 rpm. > 200 mph is 293.3 ft per sec, so the ideal prop diameter will be > approximately 5.25 feet = 63 inches. > > This equation can be found in almost any aviation design reference. > > Don Reid mailto:donreid@erols.com > Bumpass, Va > > KR2XL at http://www.erols.com/donreid/kr_page.htm > USUA Club 250 at http://www.erols.com/donreid/usua250.html > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 22:11:27 -0500 To: From: "Mark Langford" Subject: Re: KR> Kr1 Prop Message-ID: <003e01bfcb77$13825ac0$a5f780ce@300emachine> > Is there also a formula for determining the proper pitch? That would be 3x the tire diameter... Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama mailto:langford@hiwaay.net see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 23:24:01 EDT To: langford@hiwaay.net, krnet@mailinglists.org From: HAshraf@aol.com Subject: Re: KR> Kr1 Prop Message-ID: <98.5af8e98.26673151@aol.com> In a message dated 5/31/00 8:19:24 PM Pacific Daylight Time, langford@hiwaay.net writes: << > Is there also a formula for determining the proper pitch? That would be 3x the tire diameter... >> There is a lot of good information about this subject and many more in Aircraft Spruce and Wicks catalogs. Haris Ashraf ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 23:30:30 EDT To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: HAshraf@aol.com Subject: Re: KR> Kr1 Prop Message-ID: <5a.5eaa111.266732d6@aol.com> In a message dated 5/31/00 6:08:50 PM Pacific Daylight Time, donreid@erols.com writes: << >I've heard that when sizing a prop to a plane that the circumference of the >diameter at the tip should be approximately equal to the length of the >fuselage. This is one of the stranger responses that I have ever seen. A standard equation for the ideal propeller diameter is: { HP } 1/4 D = 360 { ----------------------} { N^2 Vmax } N^2 = Propeller speed in rpm, squared HP = engine horsepower Vmax = maximum plane speed in ft per second D = prop diameter in feet. (the stuff inside the { } is raised to the 1/4 power.) For example, my O-200 puts out 100 HP at 2750 rpm. 200 mph is 293.3 ft per sec, so the ideal prop diameter will be approximately 5.25 feet = 63 inches. This equation can be found in almost any aviation design reference. >> My Airplane will be 16.5 feet long when done and of course it will be a 200 mph KR. and I am thinking of using an O-200 also. According to the prop dia/fuse lenght formula, I can make the following calculations. d = 16.5*12/3.14159=63.03" How about that :o) Haris Ashraf ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2000 06:37:25 PDT To: langford@hiwaay.net, krnet@mailinglists.org From: "Richard Parker" Subject: Re: KR> Kr1 Prop Message-ID: <20000601133725.92529.qmail@hotmail.com> But if its a taildragger, its 3-1/2 times the tire diameter of the main wheels minus the square root of the radius of the tailwheel. RP >From: "Mark Langford" >Reply-To: "Mark Langford" >To: >Subject: Re: KR> Kr1 Prop >Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 22:11:27 -0500 > > > Is there also a formula for determining the proper pitch? > >That would be 3x the tire diameter... > >Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama >mailto:langford@hiwaay.net >see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org >For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org > ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 08:43:35 -0700 (PDT) To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: Mike Mims Subject: Re: KR> Kr1 Prop Message-ID: <20000601154335.3148.qmail@web1406.mail.yahoo.com> --- HAshraf@aol.com wrote: > My Airplane will be 16.5 feet long when done and of > course it will be a 200 mph KR. and I am thinking of using an O-200 also. According to the prop dia/fuse lenght formula, I can make the following calculations. > > d = 16.5*12/3.14159=63.03" > > How about that :o) > I was waiting for someone to do the math. Thats funny, now lets say I have a 200k shp turbine on the front of a 747!?! :O) In all seriousness there is a chart that is very helpful for getting one in the ballpark. I will scan it and post it on my site if I can find it. Its based on Hp, Speed, and Diameter. You plug those three in and it spits out a pitch reference. IMHO the prop length should be as long as possible to the point of almost going supersonic at max RPM. ===== ........| .......-^- ....-/_____\- ...(O\__o__/O) ...[#]oxxxo[#] -----Y2K Bug--- Yes I drive one! __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2000 20:47:59 -0400 To: From: Donald Reid Subject: Re: KR> Kr1 Prop Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20000601204200.00956d70@pop.erols.com> --=====================_1971426==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 11:09 PM 5/31/00 -0400, ROBERT COOPER wrote: >Don >Is there also a formula for determining the proper pitch? >Jack Cooper Like the "ideal" length, it is easy to find. The problem is that both the ideal length and pitch are only right for one condition. The best article that I know of that is relatively easy for someone to find is from the March 1997 Sport Aviation. There is a set of graphs that come from an old NACA report. With the graphs and a few equations, you can get a real good idea of the prop to use. With that said, the best bet is probably to talk to everyone, pick one prop designer, and tell them what kind of plane and engine that you have, and how it compares to what the other guys have. Don Reid mailto:donreid@erols.com Bumpass, Va KR2XL at http://www.erols.com/donreid/kr_page.htm USUA Club 250 at http://www.erols.com/donreid/usua250.html --=====================_1971426==_.ALT-- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 23:06:41 -0400 To: "Parley Byington" , From: "ROBERT COOPER" Subject: Re: KR> Capactance fuel gauge Message-ID: <005601bfcb76$6acd92a0$dc981e3f@pavilion> Parley Can you provide some details on your fuel gauge. How is it built? What parts are needed? Do you have any details on a website, or know where we could find more details. It sounds great. Jack Cooper kr2cooper@msn.com http://www.geocities.com/kr2cooper/ Fayetteville, NC. ----- Original Message ----- From: Parley Byington To: Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2000 12:45 PM Subject: KR> Fw: krnet Digest 26 May 2000 04:38:36 -0000 Issue 33 > > > > >Clay > > > >I used the sight gauge in my aircraft for several years but I didn't like > >the fact that the reading depended on the pitch attitude. This caused me > to > >have to interpolate too much. I rebuilt my tank (to increase it's capacity > >from 13 gal to 18.5) and installed a baffle plate that I designed to act as > >a capacitor. This capacitor changes it's capacitance as a function of the > >amount of fuel in the tank. The nice thing about this is that it is > >independent of the aircraft attitude. > > > >I designed my own capacitive type fuel gauge which has a resolution of 1/2 > >gal. I have been using this gauge for the past three years with no > >problems. The gauge and circuitry cost less than twenty-five US dollars. > >All of the parts with the exception of the 0-1milliamp gauge was available > >at Radio Shack. > > > >Let me know if you need further details. > > > >Regards > >Parley (N54PB) > >parley@anv.net > >Henderson, Nevada USA > >-----Original Message----- > >From: krnet-digest-help@mailinglists.org > > > >To: krnet@mailinglists.org > >Date: Thursday, May 25, 2000 9:39 PM > >Subject: krnet Digest 26 May 2000 04:38:36 -0000 Issue 33 > > > > > >>krnet Digest 26 May 2000 04:38:36 -0000 Issue 33 > >> > >>Topics (messages 705 through 734): > >> > >>Re: fuel gauge > >> > >>what is wrong with using a sight gauge, as suggested in the KR plans? > >>Clay > >>Flykr2@aol.com > >> > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org > For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2000 09:12:10 ADT To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: "Gaston Landry" Subject: Re: KR> Capactance fuel gauge Message-ID: <20000601121210.13539.qmail@hotmail.com> Robert... have you seen the latest issue of Kitplanes? Jim Weir builds a capacitance fuel gauge... IIRC, it's the first of a 2-part story. Gaston Landry (Wahh... I want a kr-2s!! (and my pilot's licence might be nice too...)) >From: "ROBERT COOPER" >Subject: Re: KR> Capactance fuel gauge >Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 23:06:41 -0400 > >Parley >Can you provide some details on your fuel gauge. How is it built? What >parts >are needed? Do you have any details on a website, or know where we could >find more details. It sounds great. >Jack Cooper >kr2cooper@msn.com >http://www.geocities.com/kr2cooper/ >Fayetteville, NC. >----- Original Message ----- >From: Parley Byington >To: >Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2000 12:45 PM >Subject: KR> Fw: krnet Digest 26 May 2000 04:38:36 -0000 Issue 33 ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 12:40:07 -0700 To: bmuse@ev1.net From: Todd Servaes CC: krnet@mailinglists.org Subject: KR's at Airventure vs Golden West EAA Regional Fly-in Message-ID: <39341917.324E9193@netzero.net> --------------F8F4B7B0C28A1AC34BD2E9EC Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello KRNet Crowd, If Airventure is KR unfriendly do not go, come to the Golden West EAA Regional Fly-in 2000. As the Vice President and Exhibitor Services Coordinator as well as a KR-2S builder I can guarntee KR friendliness. Rand Robinson is always there as an exhibitor, this past year with an impressive five KR's in their display area. Jennette and Susan do a great job of prviding KR information to prospective builder and aiding current builders in networking at the event. These ladies are a joy for a haried fly-in worker and the KR people provide my sanity break at the event, great group. Golden West will be holding a KR builders meeting in one of the forum tents on Saturday afternoon. Last year this meeting was one of the best attended of all the builders meetings and was a great 3-4hrs of real world KR information. Our forum tents have video and overhead equipment so bring things to share. Those with flying KR's should enter the Golden West Air Race sponsored by Aircraft Spruce. Let these speedy, efficiant little airplane prove they are worthy of more respect than they apparently get elsewhere. These races are also great sources of verified performance numbers. The Golden West EAA Regional Fly-In to be held September 8, 9, 10, 2000 . The Golden West EAA Regional Fly-in is pleased to announce that it will move to Sacramento Executive Airport, Sacramento, CA for the third annual fly-in convention . Our expectations for the 2000 fly-in is that participation will reach 30,000 attendees, 1,500 aircraft , 150 exhibitors and the dates should provide great weather! I hope to see even more KR's and their peple at this years event. Please check our site for more information: www.gwfly-in.org . Todd Servaes Fly-in Slave Laborer KR-2S Builder --------------F8F4B7B0C28A1AC34BD2E9EC-- _____________________________________________ NetZero - Defenders of the Free World Click here for FREE Internet Access and Email http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html ------------------------------ Date: 1 Jun 00 11:25:44 CDT To: "Richard Parker" , langford@hiwaay.net, krnet@mailinglists.org From: IMA FLYER Subject: Kr Prop size Message-ID: <20000601162544.5334.qmail@www0r.netaddress.usa.net> Richard Parker wrote: But if its a taildragger, its 3-1/2 times the tire diameter of the main = wheels minus the square root of the radius of the tailwheel. RP _________________________________________________________________________= Have you taken into account whether or not the wheels have mechanically actuated brakes or hydraulic? = Remember that the ballistic coefficient of the internally actuated fluid dynamic multi-phase coupling components necessitates an increased inverse= thermal dispersion factor and subsequently mandates that the laminar flow= properties of redundant asymmetrical transient velocity devises be employ= ed throughout the aerodynamic design thereby superceding the requirement of = the square root factorial in this particular equation. Yes, I am aware that this function is elementary in it's application. How= ever, my intentions are only to offer a simplified presentation of this informa= tion as a reminder for those esteemed colleagues who's understanding of aerody= namic design criteria and engineering principles are more evolved than others. = I hope this helps. ____________________________________________________________________ Get your own FREE, personal Netscape WebMail account today at http://webm= ail.netscape.com. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 17:03:46 -0500 To: "KRNET" From: "Jeff LeTempt" Subject: Re: KR> Kr Prop size Message-ID: <000901bfcc15$48ba1f40$95a3fe3f@default> This is all very fascinating to me, I always thought that you based your propeller design on the HP of the engine, the desired cruise speed, engine RPM, airplane drag and lots of other really silly things. I got a real kick out of all the crazy comments!! If you still did not get an answer to your question check out my web page at htttp://members.xoom.com/_XMCM/texasquadj/index.htm Go to the "Links/Info" page and then "Props". I have a few programs to help you design your prop (I did not create them...I just posted them). I guess I better come out of the closet before you guys find out on your own when you visit my site. I just bought a Dragonfly project. I know what you are thinking.......I need serious help. I heard that there is some kind of 12 step process to get me back over the KR. Jeff ----- Original Message ----- From: IMA FLYER To: Richard Parker ; ; Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2000 11:25 AM Subject: KR> Kr Prop size Richard Parker wrote: But if its a taildragger, its 3-1/2 times the tire diameter of the main wheels minus the square root of the radius of the tailwheel. RP _________________________________________________________________________ Have you taken into account whether or not the wheels have mechanically actuated brakes or hydraulic? Remember that the ballistic coefficient of the internally actuated fluid dynamic multi-phase coupling components necessitates an increased inverse thermal dispersion factor and subsequently mandates that the laminar flow properties of redundant asymmetrical transient velocity devises be employed throughout the aerodynamic design thereby superceding the requirement of the square root factorial in this particular equation. Yes, I am aware that this function is elementary in it's application. However, my intentions are only to offer a simplified presentation of this information as a reminder for those esteemed colleagues who's understanding of aerodynamic design criteria and engineering principles are more evolved than others. I hope this helps. ____________________________________________________________________ Get your own FREE, personal Netscape WebMail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 01:13:51 -0400 To: "Jeff LeTempt" , "KRNET" From: "w.g. kirkland" Subject: Re: KR> Kr Prop size Message-Id: <200006020512.BAA21303@dreams.vianet.on.ca> ------=_NextPart_000_01BFCC2F.CFEFED40 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit fORGET ALL THAT FANCY STUFF AIRPLANES DON'T FLY WITHOUT MONEY W.G.(Bill) KIRKLAND kirkland@vianet.on.ca ---------- > From: Jeff LeTempt > To: KRNET > Subject: Re: KR> Kr Prop size > Date: Thursday, June 01, 2000 6:03 PM > > This is all very fascinating to me, I always thought that you based your > propeller design on the HP of the engine, the desired cruise speed, engine > RPM, airplane drag and lots of other really silly things. > > I got a real kick out of all the crazy comments!! > > If you still did not get an answer to your question check out my web page at > > htttp://members.xoom.com/_XMCM/texasquadj/index.htm > > Go to the "Links/Info" page and then "Props". I have a few programs to help > you design your prop (I did not create them...I just posted them). > > I guess I better come out of the closet before you guys find out on your own > when you visit my site. I just bought a Dragonfly project. I know what you > are thinking.......I need serious help. I heard that there is some kind of > 12 step process to get me back over the KR. > > Jeff > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: IMA FLYER > To: Richard Parker ; ; > > Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2000 11:25 AM > Subject: KR> Kr Prop size > > > Richard Parker wrote: > But if its a taildragger, its 3-1/2 times the tire diameter of the main > wheels minus the square root of the radius of the tailwheel. > > RP > _________________________________________________________________________ > > Have you taken into account whether or not the wheels have mechanically > actuated brakes or hydraulic? > > Remember that the ballistic coefficient of the internally actuated fluid > dynamic multi-phase coupling components necessitates an increased inverse > thermal dispersion factor and subsequently mandates that the laminar flow > properties of redundant asymmetrical transient velocity devises be employed > throughout the aerodynamic design thereby superceding the requirement of the > square root factorial in this particular equation. > > Yes, I am aware that this function is elementary in it's application. > However, > my intentions are only to offer a simplified presentation of this > information > as a reminder for those esteemed colleagues who's understanding of > aerodynamic > design criteria and engineering principles are more evolved than others. I > hope this helps. > > ____________________________________________________________________ > Get your own FREE, personal Netscape WebMail account today at > http://webmail.netscape.com. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org > For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org > For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org ------=_NextPart_000_01BFCC2F.CFEFED40-- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2000 11:50:08 -0500 To: AviationMech@aol.com From: B&B Muse CC: Kr2dream@aol.com, shanspur@webtv.net, krnet@mailinglists.org Subject: Re: KR> Re: resins Message-ID: <3936943F.6CAB2964@ev1.net> --------------7555A154678D29500472B888 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit AviationMech@aol.com wrote: > Bob, you are right. My point is that you need to find all the leaks you can > before you put fuel in the tank, because once fuel has been in the tank epoxy > does not stick well and you need to sand the surface as well as remove all > residual fuel. > > Orma > aviationmech@aol.com > http://members.aol.com/aviationmech > I have never had a fuel leak in my fiberglass tank. I believe the reason is because I laid up the first two layers of fiberglas on my tank mold and allowed it to cure. After removing the tank from the mold, I sanded the inside, built the baffles and coated the inside with resin and . I sanded the outside and laid the last two layers of fiberglass while bonding the tank to the forward deck at the same time. I believe that using this two/three step lay-up process seals any small pin holes. --------------7555A154678D29500472B888-- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 07:44:22 PDT To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: "Richard Parker" Subject: panel to hdr tank distance Message-ID: <20000602144422.19911.qmail@hotmail.com> Can anyone tell me what the distance from the back of the header fuel tank to the back of the instrument panel should be so as to allow instruments to fit properly. My panel is lined up with the front of the spar Rich Parker Also I posted a couple of items for sale on e-bay. if any kr builder wins the bidding i'll pay for the shipping. Posa Carburetor minumum bid $10:00 http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=348377172 NOMEX FLIGHT SUIT Size 42S Minimum bid: $5.00 http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=348348508 ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 23:01:10 +0800 To: "Richard Parker" , From: "peter" Subject: Re: KR> panel to hdr tank distance Message-ID: <004101bfcca3$65895da0$397386cb@jane> hi group i am in the stage of mounting my try gear would some one kindy till me what the toe deg in should be thanks peter -----Original Message----- From: Richard Parker To: krnet@mailinglists.org Date: Friday, June 02, 2000 10:45 PM Subject: KR> panel to hdr tank distance >Can anyone tell me what the distance from the back of the header fuel tank >to the back of the instrument panel should be so as to allow instruments to >fit properly. My panel is lined up with the front of the spar > >Rich Parker > >Also I posted a couple of items for sale on e-bay. if any kr builder wins >the bidding i'll pay for the shipping. > >Posa Carburetor minumum bid $10:00 >http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=348377172 > >NOMEX FLIGHT SUIT Size 42S Minimum bid: $5.00 >http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=348348508 > > > >________________________________________________________________________ >Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org >For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 11:18:31 -0400 To: "Richard Parker" , From: "w.g. kirkland" Subject: Re: KR> panel to hdr tank distance Message-Id: <200006021516.LAA23585@dreams.vianet.on.ca> ------=_NextPart_000_01BFCC84.48990340 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Richard; I believe Tony Bingelis says 7" for the instruments and 11" for the radios although I think smaller radios, gps's etc are available now. Thats what I'm allowing on mine. W.G.(Bill) KIRKLAND kirkland@vianet.on.ca ---------- > From: Richard Parker > To: krnet@mailinglists.org > Subject: KR> panel to hdr tank distance > Date: Friday, June 02, 2000 10:44 AM > > Can anyone tell me what the distance from the back of the header fuel tank > to the back of the instrument panel should be so as to allow instruments to > fit properly. My panel is lined up with the front of the spar > > Rich Parker > > Also I posted a couple of items for sale on e-bay. if any kr builder wins > the bidding i'll pay for the shipping. > > Posa Carburetor minumum bid $10:00 > http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=348377172 > > NOMEX FLIGHT SUIT Size 42S Minimum bid: $5.00 > http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=348348508 > > > > ________________________________________________________________________ > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org > For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org ------=_NextPart_000_01BFCC84.48990340-- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 07:23:35 -0500 To: From: "Mark Langford" Subject: Re: KR> panel to hdr tank distance Message-ID: <000b01bfcd56$8a7c59b0$a5f780ce@300emachine> Rich Parker wrote: > Can anyone tell me what the distance from the back of the header fuel tank > to the back of the instrument panel should be so as to allow instruments to > fit properly. My panel is lined up with the front of the spar When I built my header tank (that I didn't use) I left myself way too much room because I didn't want to get into the situation of needing another 1/2" somewhere. But looking at my panel now, I only needed 5" between panel and tank for anything other than the radio, and that's including static and pitot line clearance. My radio is REALLY deep (12") because it's only 3.125" wide, and it's normally 14.25" deep if you keep the mounting tray that I ditched. I made a pocket in my header tank for that radio to extend into, but it might be smarter to try to dodge the thank altogether by mounting the radio lower on the panel and angling it down below the tank. The clearance problem is also a great excuse to use a handheld with a microphone. Jim Hill uses one that sits in a cutout in his panel and he's very happy with it. Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama mailto:langford@hiwaay.net see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ End of krnet Digest ***********************************