From: To: Subject: krnet Digest 5 Jun 2000 12:40:26 -0000 Issue 39 Date: Monday, June 05, 2000 4:41 AM krnet Digest 5 Jun 2000 12:40:26 -0000 Issue 39 Topics (messages 871 through 887): Re: Composite Sandwich & Kevlar 871 by: Bob Smith 872 by: Mark Langford Re: KR2S Side Panel Construction 873 by: virgnvs.juno.com 875 by: virgnvs.juno.com Re: New Airfoil for KR1? 874 by: virgnvs.juno.com Re: fittings 876 by: virgnvs.juno.com Re: Gross weight? 877 by: virgnvs.juno.com Re: engine 878 by: virgnvs.juno.com 882 by: Mike Mims Re: Kr1 Prop 879 by: virgnvs.juno.com 883 by: Mike Mims 884 by: virgnvs.juno.com Re: KR's at Airventure vs Golden West EAA Regional Fly-in 880 by: virgnvs.juno.com Re: panel to hdr tank distance 881 by: virgnvs.juno.com 886 by: Livingstone, Danny (DJ) Bolts 885 by: John Roffey engine overheating 887 by: Oscar Zuniga Administrivia: To subscribe to the digest, e-mail: To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail: To post to the list, e-mail: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 19:50:09 -0700 To: "Mark Langford" , From: "Bob Smith" Subject: Re: KR> Composite Sandwich & Kevlar Message-ID: <00c301bfcdcf$99525f60$0e9e1918@nycap.rr.com> It is my understanding that although carbon fiber is the strongest fiber when you try to stretch it (and also very stiff), it shears more easily than glass fibers or kevlar fibers. So I guess that means you should use it where it will not be subjected to any impact that might damage it. Kevlar, on the other hand can suffer impact damage and still hang on. When carbon fiber breaks it really lets go all at once. Kevlar will stretch and bend before it breaks and still try to hang together. Bob Smith ----- Original Message ----- From: Mark Langford To: Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2000 8:39 AM Subject: Re: KR> Composite Sandwich & Kevlar > > Why are people opting for Kevlar as opposed to Carbon Fiber? Is Kevlar > > lighter and stronger than carbon fiber, or are people feeling compelled to > > protect themselves from gunfire? Is price an issue? Whazzzup? > > The only reason Albert's using Kevlar is cause he got a boatload for dirt > cheap. There's no other reason to use it on something as non-structural as > the deck, and even if it was structural, carbon fiber would be a better > choice than Kevlar in most situations, if you don't mind paying 6x as much > as KR glass... > > Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama > mailto:langford@hiwaay.net > see KR2S N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org > For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org > > ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 19:48:07 -0500 To: From: "Mark Langford" Subject: Re: KR> Composite Sandwich & Kevlar Message-ID: <000d01bfcdbe$8d08d5b0$a5f780ce@300emachine> Bob Smith wrote: > It is my understanding that although carbon fiber is the strongest fiber > when you try to stretch it (and also very stiff), it shears more easily than > glass fibers or kevlar fibers. So I guess that means you should use it > where it will not be subjected to any impact that might damage it. Kevlar, > on the other hand can suffer impact damage and still hang on. When carbon > fiber breaks it really lets go all at once. Kevlar will stretch and bend > before it breaks and still try to hang together. While I can't lay my hands on any tables of comparative strengths at the moment (I could, but I'm really not in the mood to do any more homework at the moment), from memory I'll say that carbon fiber does fail quickly, but much further up the strength curve than the point at which fiberglass fails, so it is in fact stronger than glass. But you're still talking about force levels like you'd experience in a crash here. The point of using carbon fiber is reduced weight for the same strength as glass, or improved strength with the same weight. Last time I looked, 282 carbon fiber has a strength to weight ratio about 3-5 times higher than regular 7533 "KR" glass, but then it also costs 6 times as much. And let the record show that I'm not saying the KR2S even needs ANY carbon fiber, but it's a great way to make things stronger and stiffer while saving weight in the process. Also, from "Composite Aircraft Design" by Hollman: 1) "Although fiberglass is the least expensive material, graphite fibers are the most promising for aircraft structures because of their low weight, high strength, and high stiffness as shown in Figure 3. The Starship and Voyager are completely built out of graphite and honeycomb and we can expect to see more and more complete aircraft built of this material." 2) "...this is especially true for Kevlar, which has a tensile strength of 60,000 psi and a compressive strength of 23,000 psi. Because of this low compressive strength, Kevlar is almost solely used for fairings, wheel pants, engine cowls, and other fairings in aircraft structures." 3) "However, because of Kevlar's low crompression strength, Kevlar has found limited structural application in aircraft primary structures. Kevlar is difficult to work with and special tools are needed. The above quotes are not where I formed my opinion about Carbon Fiber vs Kevlar, just the first ones I came across to support my argument. Engineering data from many different sources is where I formed my "opinion". You guys are welcome to carry on this debate, but I really need to get back to the basement... Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama mailto:langford@hiwaay.net see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 16:22:39 -0700 To: WA7YXF@aol.com From: virgnvs@juno.com Cc: ACMan5548@aol.com, krnet@mailinglists.org Subject: Re: KR> KR2S Side Panel Construction Message-ID: <20000603.211754.-380609.4.virgnvs@juno.com> WA7XYF, like in K4VSC,Virg ? On Sun, 28 May 2000 16:14:26 EDT WA7YXF@aol.com writes: > Tony, Don't worry about the "banana boat" situation. > We all start out to build the perfect plane and perfect hasn't been > done yet. > The firewall doesn't even have to be straight if your building your > own engine > mount. Do your best to make the relationship between wing incidence > and > horizontal tail surface true along with engine and landing gear > alignment. > We would all like to just place a level on the top longerons or the > fire wall > and go, > but the reference line can be anywhere. Wherever you chose be sure > and note > it in your builder log. > > Lynn Hyder WA7YXF N37LH Redmond, Oregon > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org > For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org > ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 16:10:01 -0700 To: ACMan5548@aol.com From: virgnvs@juno.com Cc: krnet@mailinglists.org Subject: Re: KR> KR2S Side Panel Construction Message-ID: <20000603.211754.-380609.0.virgnvs@juno.com> Make the top & bottom crosspieces the same length, Virg On Sun, 28 May 2000 12:10:25 EDT ACMan5548@aol.com writes: > I lad out my work table so I can start the sides on my KR2S. The > first thing > I realized is; The plans don't show the true length of the top and > bottom > longerons because of the curve shape. I then started thinking about > some of > the things guys are saying about "Banana Boat" and bending problems > they have > had in their construction. > > My question is; Wouldn't it be best to build the upper longeron and > cross > member structure first, (including the curve in the longeron), then > build the > side and bottom structure? After all that is done, then apply the > plywood to > the exterior? > > I'd like you thoughts? > > Tony > Mission Viejo, CA > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org > For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org > ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 16:57:54 -0700 To: mdlougheed@juno.com From: virgnvs@juno.com Cc: krnet@mailinglists.org, langford@hiwaay.net, c00jeremy.renken@usafa.af.mil Subject: Re: KR> New Airfoil for KR1? Message-ID: <20000603.211754.-380609.6.virgnvs@juno.com> What about the KR-1B wing shape carried all of the way to the root ? Virg On Wed, 17 May 2000 12:32:36 -0700 mdlougheed@juno.com writes: > Jeremy, > > I have been working on using the AS504x foil sections on (designs > similar > to) the KR-1 ever since doing the CFD work on the new KR-2(S) wing. > The > planform I have been using is inspired (and scaled) from the Sequoia > Falco and Embraer Tucano designs. > > For some time I have considered the 6.4 AR wing planform of the > Falco (if > it's good enough for Frati, it's good enough for me), but when it's > scaled down, the wing section becomes too thin to support an > internally > cantilevered spar design - for the loads I would like to support. > > While I was reading recently, I was prompted to look up the Midget > Mustang, on the web, as a plane with similar characteristics to the > KR-1 > - and was pleasantly surprised. After further noodling, I came to > the > conclusion that the Mustang's lower AR wing (around 5.5 - if I > remember > correctly) would be better suited for the lighter KR-1 than the "U2" > 6.4 > AR. Longer chords (i.e. higher RN's) mean more room for spars and > potentially fuel. Another reason for choosing an AR in the 5.5 > ballpark > is that it won't have the tendency to float in ground effect as > much, > while at the same time getting better induced drag performance at > altitude. The change in efficiency from AR 5 to AR 6 or 7 is not > nearly > as dramatic as the change from AR 4.5 (KR-1) to AR 5 or 6. > > As far as the KR-1 is concerned, I kept the wing area the same as > the > original (less parasitic drag than larger area wing). Wing span is > increased to an even 20 feet. Root and Tip chords are changed to > get the > same wing area as the KR-1 and increase the AR to the 5.5 range. > Incidence angles have not yet been determined. > > Another KR-1 change on my drawing board was to lengthen the fuselage > aft > by another 12-1/4" bay, and evening out the stations ahead of the > forward > spar to 3 bays of 8 inches each. I have kept the spar spacing the > same > (for now), but did move the station between them, so that it is > evens out > the spacing in that area. This was done for several reasons. First > was > to increase the tail arm. Doing so increased the horizontal tail > volume > to just under 5.0 (very good). This will yield a greater static > margin > and help increase stability. Second, since I'm planning to use a > Corvair > powerplant, there needed to be more distance between the pilot and > engine > to balance the plane. Another change prompted by my calculations > was to > even the area of the horizontal tail to an even 50/50 split between > stabilizer and elevator. > > Since the KR-1 has a fairly shallow body, I increased the depth to > accommodate a 6 foot pilot in a more supine (lying) position (which > is > another reason for making the stations forward 8" each). Fuselage > width > has been changed to yield a 24" clear opening at the shoulders. > Cockpit > dimensions have been verified with a computer generated ergonomic > character. The topsides in my take on the KR-1 have been changed to > suit > my taste - similar (but different) to the 2S. Landing gear is fixed > type. > > I'm not sure that 270 MPH is realistic, but is only my opinion, not > a > statement of fact. My calculations still revolve around 180 MPH > cruise, > while extending the top end to 220 to 230 with a speed prop. To > design > the wing for a 270 top end would yield a low incidence wing with > lots of > washout. It would be a tall order to design a wing with that speed > range > in mind while keeping the stall speed within FAR 23 guidelines - > you'd > need lots of flaps and a larger wing area. This means optimizing > around > wing area, stall speed, cruise/high speed /landing approach > attitudes, CG > spread, just to name a few of the variables. You'd have to do this > anyway, but I think it would be easier to keep the speed range > within a > more conservative set of limits. It's all a compromise, but hey, > that > why they call it experimental!!! > > Just so you know, I have been number crunching on ideas surrounding > the > KR-1, but not to the level of detail I have on the 2(S) yet. I have > yet > to make a CFD or stability model of these design revisions to verify > my > assumptions. > > If you are interested I can E-Mail you a JPG copy of my KR-1 > planform > drawing as it currently exists. > > Mark D. Lougheed > mdlougheed@juno.com > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Renken, Jeremy, C1C, CS23 > > To: > > Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2000 9:57 AM > > Subject: KR> New Airfoil for KR1? > > > > > > > > I'm wondering if this kind of modification has been done to a > KR1. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org > For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org > ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 16:16:50 -0700 To: kirkland@vianet.on.ca From: virgnvs@juno.com Cc: krnet@mailinglists.org Subject: Re: KR> fittings Message-ID: <20000603.211754.-380609.2.virgnvs@juno.com> Get the Rand Robinson stuff, it fits fine, Virg On Sun, 28 May 2000 13:44:37 -0400 "w.g. kirkland" writes: > I tried to make all my fittings out of sheet stock but when u use > 6061 to > make a 1" hinge bracket you have a problem. The two 1/2" radius > bends don't > leave enough room in the throat for the bolts. Extrusions make much > neater > fittings but 1" channel doesn't fit inside 1 1/4" channel without > removing > some material. You also need something for bearings "oilite". I > think 4130 > would wear better . Better yet for hinges try using rod ends a la > Doc. > W.G.(Bill) KIRKLAND > kirkland@vianet.on.ca ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 20:37:02 -0700 To: g-hudson@mindspring.com From: virgnvs@juno.com Cc: krnet@mailinglists.org Subject: Re: KR> Gross weight? Message-ID: <20000603.211754.-380609.8.virgnvs@juno.com> Stop buying the girlfriend beer, cut your intake in half. (joke) Virg On Tue, 30 May 2000 01:05:56 -0400 "Gene Hudson" writes: > Hi, > > I have just purchased a set of plans for a Sonerai II LTS, but I am > having second thoughts due to the lack of support groups such as > KRNET. > Of the 2 other planes I considered, I dismissed the Dragonfly, as > the wings are not removable. That leaves the KR2S. > > I am going to use a Corvair engine, but I am concerned with the > gross weight capability of the KR2S. I and my girlfriend will be > flying together most of the time and between us, we go about 400lbs. > > > How is this going to work in the real life everyday flying? What > kind of performance do people seem to get with this engine (100HP > T/O and about 80HP 75%) and weight loading. What seems to be the > real life Gross? > Thanks, > Gene ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 17:14:05 -0700 To: skypilot@frognet.net From: virgnvs@juno.com Cc: krnet@mailinglists.org Subject: Re: KR> engine Message-ID: <20000603.211754.-380609.7.virgnvs@juno.com> How about a bullet proof Mazda single rotor , Virg On Mon, 29 May 2000 17:41:55 -0400 david barner writes: > if you had your choice between these engines what one would you > choose? > 1800cc m.p.f.i. overhead cam subaru from a '90 wagon > the turbo subaru engine > 1835cc VW > 140 corvair > I've been leaning toward the turbo, I want to put an in flight > adjustable prop on it in the future. appreciate any comments > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org > For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org > ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2000 19:06:09 -0700 To: virgnvs@juno.com From: Mike Mims CC: krnet@mailinglists.org Subject: Re: KR> engine Message-ID: <3939B991.6FB387EC@home.com> virgnvs@juno.com wrote: > > How about a bullet proof Mazda single rotor , Virg > Probably because he would like to "fly" the plane. Count up all those "flying" mazdas and get back to me. -- __________________ Micheal Mims Trying to get this thing done! http://www.fortunecity.com/marina/anchor/270/ http://explanes.com/ Aliso Viejo Ca ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 21:32:32 -0700 To: kr2sflyer@yahoo.com From: virgnvs@juno.com Cc: krnet@mailinglists.org Subject: Re: KR> Kr1 Prop Message-ID: <20000603.215310.-380609.12.virgnvs@juno.com> Seven tenths Mach max, Virg On Thu, 1 Jun 2000 08:43:35 -0700 (PDT) Mike Mims writes: > > --- 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/ > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org > For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org > ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2000 19:08:12 -0700 From: Mike Mims CC: krnet@mailinglists.org Subject: Re: KR> Kr1 Prop Message-ID: <3939BA0C.F678DDA@home.com> virgnvs@juno.com wrote: > > Seven tenths Mach max, Virg > Disagree. (I love your one liners so I thought I would respond with one) -- __________________ Micheal Mims Trying to get this thing done! http://www.fortunecity.com/marina/anchor/270/ http://explanes.com/ Aliso Viejo Ca ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2000 15:12:21 -0700 To: mikemims@home.com From: virgnvs@juno.com Cc: krnet@mailinglists.org Subject: Re: KR> Kr1 Prop Message-ID: <20000604.151221.-426165.1.virgnvs@juno.com> Over .7Mach it takes an overly necessary amount of power to increase RPM. Better to reduce the prop diameter so this does not happen. If the HP is there then increase pitch( that oily stuff). Virg On Sat, 03 Jun 2000 19:08:12 -0700 Mike Mims writes: > virgnvs@juno.com wrote: > > > > Seven tenths Mach max, Virg > > > > > Disagree. > > (I love your one liners so I thought I would respond with one) > > -- > __________________ > Micheal Mims > Trying to get this thing done! > http://www.fortunecity.com/marina/anchor/270/ > http://explanes.com/ > Aliso Viejo Ca > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org > For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org > ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 21:27:03 -0700 To: taservaes@netzero.net From: virgnvs@juno.com Cc: bmuse@ev1.net, krnet@mailinglists.org Subject: Re: KR> KR's at Airventure vs Golden West EAA Regional Fly-in Message-ID: <20000603.215310.-380609.10.virgnvs@juno.com> Still like Lakeland, Virg On Tue, 30 May 2000 12:40:07 -0700 Todd Servaes writes: > 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 > ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 21:41:12 -0700 To: pjg@primus.com.au From: virgnvs@juno.com Cc: richontheroad@hotmail.com, krnet@mailinglists.org Subject: Re: KR> panel to hdr tank distance Message-ID: <20000603.215310.-380609.13.virgnvs@juno.com> U operate C W ? Virg On Fri, 2 Jun 2000 23:01:10 +0800 "peter" writes: > 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 > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org > For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org > ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagh. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 09:06:49 +0200 To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: "Livingstone, Danny (DJ)" Subject: RE: KR> panel to hdr tank distance Message-ID: <042104686D63D311B51A0000C110B8E4449ABD@SASLTD06> Hello KR builders, pilots, lovers...... Does any body have an idea what the shipping costs would be on a 6 meter lenght of extruded aluminum piano hinge Part number (MS20257 - P5/P6) to South Africa? Or who can I contact to find out? Your help will be greatly appreciated. Danny Livingstone E-Mail: livd0124@natref.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2000 22:04:29 -0500 To: "krnet@mailinglists.org" From: John Roffey Subject: Bolts Message-ID: <393B18BC.BF412BC9@tir.com> Anyone using the Deil gear, what size bolts are used to hold the castings to the spar and what is used on the opposite side to back up the bolts (washer, plate etc.)? Also, what size bolts hold the gear legs to the castings and the lower weldment to them as well? Thanks in advance John Roffey jeroffey@tir.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2000 05:39:32 PDT To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: "Oscar Zuniga" Subject: engine overheating Message-ID: <20000605123932.8864.qmail@hotmail.com> Rich wrote: >The problem here doesnt sound like a problem with the engine, >it sounds like a problem with improper airflow over the radiator >or poor engine temperature mananagement. My assumption is that the latter is the case. Temp gauges are there for a reason, and should be marked according to the engine ops recommendations. When you see the needle out of the green, wishing and hoping won't get it back down... only proper operating technique can. In reading articles in homebuilding magazines and publications, it seems to me that the majority of engine "teething problems" center around cooling and fuel. As far as cooling, many of the reports openly state that engine temps went out of limits and operation was continued, so either the operator was in the air and was willing to sacrifice the engine in order to get the plane back down in one piece, or else the element of unbelief had the operator thinking that operation out of the recommended range wouldn't do any lasting harm. As far as fuel, again many of the reports indicate that the operator experienced rough running, erratic running, or loss of power... and went on trying to get it off the ground. Get a clue! Groundloop it or nose it into the fence at the end of the runway, don't corkscrew it into the ground from 100' AGL with you in it! Your test plan should have rigid operational parameters to be followed, and if the temps start to go out of limits or the RPM isn't up where it should be, save your $$$engine$$$ and your Levi's and shut it down! Oscar Zuniga Medford, Oregon mailto: taildrags@hotmail.com website at http://www.geocities.com/taildrags/ ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ End of krnet Digest ***********************************