From: To: Subject: krnet Digest 8 Dec 2000 20:09:49 -0000 Issue 136 Date: Friday, December 08, 2000 12:10 PM krnet Digest 8 Dec 2000 20:09:49 -0000 Issue 136 Topics (messages 3252 through 3281): Re: KRNet archive sites 3252 by: Ross Youngblood Re: Filler and Paint?? 3253 by: Ross Youngblood Re: CO Monitors in the cockpit 3254 by: Ross Youngblood Re: Licensing Help Needed!!! 3255 by: Ross Youngblood Re: Questions from a lurking newbie 3256 by: GARYKR2.cs.com 3259 by: Ross Youngblood Fun website 3257 by: Ed Janssen 3260 by: Albert Pecoraro KR2-B 3258 by: Tao000.aol.com 3262 by: Donald Reid PROP EXTENTION 3261 by: Schmidt, Curtis 3264 by: Mark Langford ignition system 3263 by: Oscar Zuniga prop extensions 3265 by: Jim Payne KR weight?? 3266 by: William Tabbert 3268 by: Mark Jones acceptable cg range kr2s 3267 by: jim jacoby getting there 3269 by: Al Friesen 3272 by: Al Friesen KR2S Archives back on-line! 3270 by: John Bouyea VW Question ... 3271 by: Albert Pecoraro 3274 by: Mark Langford 3275 by: Albert Pecoraro kr2s plans 3273 by: Boyers 3276 by: Boyers Main gear question 3277 by: Florin L Pintea Mikuni carb? 3278 by: Dr. No WING SKINS 3279 by: Schmidt, Curtis Many Thanks!! Now What?? 3280 by: Micheal Fox 3281 by: Horn2004.aol.com Administrivia: To subscribe to the digest, e-mail: To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail: To post to the list, e-mail: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2000 16:56:59 -0700 To: Mark Langford From: Ross Youngblood CC: krnet@mailinglists.org Subject: Re: KR> KRNet archive sites Message-ID: <3A2ED24B.74AD4B28@teleport.com> Mark, I think that John Boyuea moved the archive site, and I have not yet updated the links to them... when I get some time (say 2001/2) I will try to update them. Also... caution... I think I may be late paying the krnet.ord domain bill. So if the website locks or goes away... it is temporary... I need to get that taken care of. -- Ross Mark Langford wrote: > KRNetHeads, > > I'm not sure that everybody's aware that we have a KRNet FAQ located at > http://63.69.213.180/ , although it could stand a healthy injection of > attention from some volunteer authors (hint, hint). Also there are two > archive sites. The first consists of early stuff (but it's all still > applicable) on the KRNet website at http://www.krnet.org . Click on > "archives" down on the left pane. Unfortunately I couldn't get any of them > to work, so that stuff may be ancient history unless somebody's got a copy > of it. Too bad, because there was a wealth of information there going > back almost to KRNet's inception. > > The other site is at http://www.hargray.com/~isleno/krnet/krsearch.html and > certainly works, but is a little clunky since it uses digests rather than > messages, so there's a little bit of digging after the search is complete, > especially if the subject line doesn't reflect the messages content. Still, > it's a great way to search for something like "Posa" and get all the info > you'd ever want on it. And if you really want to take a crash course on > KRs, just start at the top and start reading. Newbies should consider > taking a look here before asking questions that have already been posted and > answered several hundred times. This resource was started in April of 97, > and lasted until April 2000, which is when we were forced to switch from > Teleport to Mailinglists. Apparently (and I just noticed this) the site > hasn't collected any mail since that date. > > In light of all this, I signed us up for an archive service, which is > located at http://www.escribe.com/aviation/krnet/ . It's only been > collecting information for a few days, but you can see that it has potential > to be easily searchable. A search for "Posa" won't get you anything, but > "dumb" sure hits the jackpot! No "Rustoleum" yet though. The only downside > is we don't actually control it, and it could go away someday, I suppose. > But it looks to be a substantial site with a lot of lists participating, > including the VW engine list (which is how I found it), so maybe it'll be > with us for a while. Best of all, it's free. > > Any of you super database guru guys who can take these files and do magic > with them are cordially invited to take all of these files of various types > and create a better searchable archive system. I personally have much of > the old mail, but saved as gigantic text files from the mid 90's. I'm sure > other old-timers could fill in the gaps as well. Until then, we're working > on our umpteenth archive system... > > Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama > mailto:langford@hiwaay.net > see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To post to the list, email: krnet@mailinglists.org > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2000 17:03:37 -0700 To: Jack Coranz From: Ross Youngblood CC: krnet@mailinglists.org Subject: Re: KR> Filler and Paint?? Message-ID: <3A2ED3D9.74D9C999@teleport.com> Jack Coranz wrote: > Hey guys (and Gals) I am about to glass my turtle deck on, and fiberglass > the rudder and stabilizer. to it. > > 1.) Do any of you have a suggestion from experience on what type of resin to > use on the turtle to wood fit. Most resins have good bond characteristics with wood Aeropoxy, Dow Der and West systems should be OK > 2.) Do you guys recomend glassing inside as well?? I was trying to stay light, and didn't on my aft deck, but it was Kevlar and flexed a lot, so I glassed about 2' on the inside from the canopy ledge aft to stiffen it up so I could place my weight on it for entry/exit. > 3.) What kind of primer (brand) does anybody recomend for the wood?? For Painting Exterior? I used System III water reducable coatings. It worked OK for me. Interior use spar varnish. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2000 17:05:39 -0700 To: "Seifert, Richard E" From: Ross Youngblood CC: 'Corvaircraft' , 'KRnet' Subject: Re: KR> CO Monitors in the cockpit Message-ID: <3A2ED453.46EEC67@teleport.com> Richard, Thanks for this tip! I also noted in an issue of SOARING magazine, that having leaks from the wing gap seal into the fuselage lowered the glide performance slightly (1-2%) so I'm thinking that if I can seal the retract area somehow, (aka shift boot or somthing) I would block CO, and improve performance (unmeasurably). -- Ross "Seifert, Richard E" wrote: > Mark Langford made a very good point regarding CO monitors when using cabin > heaters. I discovered that KR's with retracts are susceptible to high > levels of CO even if they don't have heaters. On my trip back from Oshkosh > I was almost overcome by CO and it took some time to figure out where it was > coming in from, since I don't have a heater. I eventually discovered that > the slipstream even over well faired-in retract gear will pull a lot of air > out from the cockpit through the holes in front of the main spar where the > retract mechanism extends into the wing. This makes the cockpit a very low > pressure area while in flight ( By the way FORGET cockpit static source for > your instruments). Air rushes into the cockpit from any available source, > and In my case it was coming in from the tailcone. The holes in the tail > fairing at the junction of the rudder and the elevator were allowing the > engine exhaust carried by the propwash from the lower left of my cowling to > enter the tailcone and be drawn into the cockpit through the fresh air vents > I had installed in the bulkhead behind my head. The result was MAJOR > HEADACHE for the last several hundred miles back to Southern CA. It seems > this situation is most pronounced at my cruise speed and I have never really > found a good solution for this problem, so for now I am very careful about > leaving the fresh air vents closed on long trips and I frequently check my > CO monitor. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To post to the list, email: krnet@mailinglists.org > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2000 17:10:13 -0700 To: GARYKR2@cs.com From: Ross Youngblood CC: jsweeks@juno.com, krnet@mailinglists.org Subject: Re: KR> Licensing Help Needed!!! Message-ID: <3A2ED565.F13BFCEE@teleport.com> I dont think the FAA would accept a KR as an ultralight. The statistics on the KR-1 empty weight were above this figure I think, and the KR-2 is heavier. Most KR-2's would be loving to get to the 480 or so empty weight that Ken Rand had. (No electrical system, VFR inst). GARYKR2@cs.com wrote: > In a message dated 12/1/00 8:37:12 PM Eastern Standard Time, jsweeks@juno.com > writes: > > << Another newbie here. From recent discussions at a local USUA club and > EAA ultralight chapter, I don't think the KR-2 will fit the stall speed > requirement that has been kicked around. The new rule will most likely > apply to aircraft 254 pounds to 1232 pounds gross with a maximum stall > speed clean of 39 knots. Don't know if a KR can be made to stall this > slowly without some help. > > Scott Weeks > Hermitage, TN >> > > Mine makes it. It stalls at 43mph. > Gary Hinkle (A/P) Middletown, Pa. > garykr2@cs.com > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To post to the list, email: krnet@mailinglists.org > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2000 19:51:27 EST To: ron.martha@mindspring.com, mrbob4you@yahoo.com, krnet@mailinglists.org From: GARYKR2@cs.com Subject: Re: KR> Questions from a lurking newbie Message-ID: <4c.da6b1ce.2760390f@cs.com> In a message dated 12/5/00 8:30:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, ron.martha@mindspring.com writes: << If the plans were used to build a plane, then you need to purchase a license to build one airplane. When you buy plans from the original seller, you are buying a license to build one aircraft. An interesting point, for a long time, you could buy yhe whole thing for $25. I have a letter from the builder who started my project that details the provenance of the plans. ( 2 copies in my case). What's right and honest??? Ron Freiberger... mailto:ron.martha@mindspring.com >> Someone needs to enlighten me. I have been involed with homebuilts since I was a kid, and have never seen or heard of anyone buying a license to build from used plans. I know what you are referring to. But there is no law that says you can't build more than one plane from the same set of plans. If you know something I don't, let me know. Gary Hinkle (A/P) Middletown, Pa. garykr2@cs.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2000 19:19:13 -0700 To: GARYKR2@cs.com From: Ross Youngblood CC: ron.martha@mindspring.com, mrbob4you@yahoo.com, krnet@mailinglists.org Subject: Re: KR> Questions from a lurking newbie Message-ID: <3A2EF3A1.EF38848C@teleport.com> I don't know about a 'law' but every set of plans comes with an agreement we have to sign agreeing that we will only build ONE KR from a set of plans, and this document gives us a right to build the airplane. There is no blanket law but each plans manufacteror OWNS the information in the plans, and grants a license for the plans owner to build one aircraft (typically). Now, of course, you can buy a used set of plans, but legally you don't have permission to use the plans to build an airplane unless this right is given by the plans manufacturer. Of course, this is a way to protect the developer from plans from having someone run duplicate copies of the plans and selling them. If you try to buy parts from Rand Robinson without having a right to build a KR, you won't get any parts... however this dosen't prevent you from going to Wicks or Aircraft Spruce to work around the issue. I think the FAA DAR may wish to see your authorization to build the KR, but I don't think this is really enforced... -- Ross GARYKR2@cs.com wrote: > In a message dated 12/5/00 8:30:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, > ron.martha@mindspring.com writes: > > << If the plans were used to build a plane, then you need to purchase a > license > to build one airplane. When you buy plans from the original seller, you are > buying a license to build one aircraft. An interesting point, for a long > time, you could buy yhe whole thing for $25. I have a letter from the > builder who started my project that details the provenance of the plans. ( 2 > copies in my case). What's right and honest??? > > Ron Freiberger... > mailto:ron.martha@mindspring.com > >> > Someone needs to enlighten me. I have been involed with homebuilts > since I was a kid, and have never seen or heard of anyone buying a license to > build from used plans. > I know what you are referring to. But there is no law that says you > can't build more than one plane from the same set of plans. > If you know something I don't, let me know. > Gary Hinkle (A/P) Middletown, Pa. > garykr2@cs.com > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To post to the list, email: krnet@mailinglists.org > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2000 19:16:09 -0600 To: From: ejanssen@chipsnet.com (Ed Janssen) Subject: Fun website Message-ID: <001901c05feb$4821c5a0$010010ac@dad> ------=_NextPart_000_0016_01C05FB8.FD3C9100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Netters: Just a plug for Marty Hammersmith's well done website. It's a = fun one to visit - and educational too. This is not say that there = aren't many other good ones, too. Ed Janssen ------=_NextPart_000_0016_01C05FB8.FD3C9100-- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2000 22:17:20 -0500 To: From: "Albert Pecoraro" Subject: Re: KR> Fun website Message-ID: <000c01c05ffc$3841af40$8bd1b23f@steelcase.com> <<>> ... and the web address is http://www.geocities.com/capecanaveral/hangar/1071/ Albert ;-) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2000 20:38:38 EST To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: Tao000@aol.com Subject: KR2-B Message-ID: KRNetters, I know your time is precious so I'll try to be brief. I'm new to KRNet, I'm currently rebuilding a FP101 that will end up being a fat, fast Cub style ultralight. I'll use the 101 to have something to fly while building my KR2. Currently I only have a USUA certificate with 11 hours in a T-Bird 2 and 6 hours in a Quicksilver Sport. I bought a set of unused KR2 plans dated 1984. I have read KR archives and web sites for the last several days. My question is: I would like to build a KR2-B motorglider, has this ever been attempted? I hope to just build two sets of wings, one regular set using the new airfoil and one set of glider type wings. KR states in their old KR1-B brochure that the KR2 is not stressed enough for glider wings but, I'm not sure I believe that. I would like to have some comments for you all. The glider wings should be the minimum of thirty feet to a maximum or forty feet. The KR will be a barebone, as light as I can make it, aircraft. Thank you for your time, Robert. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 08:53:41 -0500 To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: Donald Reid Subject: Re: KR> KR2-B Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20001207084145.0095f520@pop.erols.com> --=====================_1996348==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 08:38 PM 12/6/2000 -0500, Tao000@aol.com wrote: > KR states in their old KR1-B brochure that >the KR2 is not stressed enough for glider wings but, I'm not sure I believe >that. You should believe that statement. The only way to be sure is to analyze the wing spar for the longer length. I just did a quick check of the numbers and it is obvious that the spar and fuselage-to-spar intersection would require modification (not to mention the horizontal and vertical tail area) Assuming a 22 foot wing that will fail at 6 G's, the same wing lengthened to 40 feet (an nothing else changed) will fail at approximately 3.3 G's. It can be done safely, but you need to do some significant re-design. Don Reid mailto:donreid@erols.com Bumpass, Va KR2XL construction at http://users.erols.com/donreid/kr_page.htm Ultralights at http://users.erols.com/donreid/usua250.html --=====================_1996348==_.ALT-- ------------------------------ Date: 7 Dec 2000 07:25:00 -0700 To: "krnet@mailinglists.org" From: "Schmidt, Curtis" Subject: PROP EXTENTION Message-ID: <00033BAC@kaydon.com> HEY GUYS: I just got the January copy of KITPLANES last night and was looking throug= h the planes directory when I noticed planes for the V-WITT, at the end of = the add they list a set of planes for a prop extension on the VW. Since AS&S is the dealer for the Wittman line of aircraft, I checked the ca= talog for these plans and sure enough there in there! $25.00 gets them for= you! Has anyone out there bought them or checked to see if they would work= for us? I sure would like to "sleek" the nose down on mine! CURTIS R SCHMIDT CNC TOOLING & PROGRAMMING LARNED KANSAS USA ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 08:49:30 -0600 To: From: "Mark Langford" Subject: Re: KR> PROP EXTENTION Message-ID: <001201c0605c$e86980e0$58e6a58c@tbe.com> CURTIS wrote: > Since AS&S is the dealer for the Wittman line of aircraft, I checked >the catalog for these plans and sure enough there in there! $25.00 >gets them for you! Has anyone out there bought them or checked >to see if they would work for us? I sure would like to "sleek" the >nose down on mine! I have an original set, as done by Wittman. The problem I see with his setup is that it has no thrust bearing of its own, and uses the VW case's thrust bearing. That worked fine for a few Formula Vee races, but I wouldn't swear that reliability would be good enough for general use. Another problem I see with his setup is that there's nothing there to "de-couple" the torsional vibration between engine and prop. And, Wittman's setup was designed for a stock 1600cc engine. We are putting out a lot more power, and the vibrations are much larger which could lead to a broken crank or prop shaft. Note that Great Plains' system has a huge rubber doughnut to damp these out. All of this stuff weighs something though, and it starts to add up. At least it runs off the "right" end of the engine! It's a great place to start though, and you could replace the radial bearing with a radial/thrust bearing with a little redesign work. There is a fair amount of machine work and some welding involved in his setup, but I'd imagine that you could handle it. And there are other things I'd do differently. There is some design work involved though to make this work correctly. Just don't ask me to do it. I've got this airplane to finish! Bottom line though is I just don't think it would be prudent to build it as designed and fly it on a 2180 for very many hours... Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama mailto:langford@hiwaay.net see KR2S N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 14:24:15 To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: "Oscar Zuniga" Subject: ignition system Message-ID: Don wrote: >I noticed one picture of the rear of Steve Bennetts spinner bulhead. >Is that an ignition pickup or what is it. I wasn't there and haven't seen Steve's setup, but I'm pretty sure it's the reluctor which triggers the electronic ignition on his dual-ignition setup. Call Steve at Great Plains and ask him; he seems to be quite willing to help over the phone. Oscar Zuniga Medford, Oregon mailto: taildrags@hotmail.com website at http://www.geocities.com/taildrags/ _____________________________________________________________________________________ Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 13:16:33 -0500 To: From: "Jim Payne" Subject: prop extensions Message-ID: If you want a sleeker look to your cowling, look at the rear drive system that Great Plains sells. It looks like the best alternative. www.greatplainsas.com/pg12.html (I think this is what Mark was referring to....) Jim Payne jim@manufacturingconcepts.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 21:39:49 -0000 To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: "William Tabbert" Subject: KR weight?? Message-ID: I am getting ready to order my engine mount from William Wyyne, do any of you guys with the Corvairs have a finished weight on you KR-2S's?? Mine has the (or will have) the wing tank & the header tank options. I need a close number to have the mount built correctly. Thanks! Bill _____________________________________________________________________________________ Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 20:06:30 -0600 To: William Tabbert From: Mark Jones CC: krnet@mailinglists.org Subject: Re: KR> KR weight?? Message-ID: <3A304226.F5157A7B@execpc.com> Guess I will chime in on this one. William is building a mount for me and I am expecting to receive it very soon. If you are concerned about the CG and the weight of the plane and the engine, consider this. The KR-2S was designed around an engine which weighs less ( 60 to 90 pounds) than the Corvair electric start engine does. In a discussion with a close friend of mine recently, this very fact was pointed out to me. The Corvair engine needs to sit as close to the firewall as possible. Even in this configuration, the CG will be in the forward range if not in front of it. Accept the fact that a KR with a Corvair engine of approximately 225lbs sitting on the nose will most likely have to have some ballast in the tail to bring the plane in the CG range. This can be accomplished by adding lead weight in the tail or by strategically placing your battery where it will bring the CG in range. Doing a rear starter will also help with the weight issue. As far as that goes, keep everything possible on the rear of the engine to minimize compensation to the tail weight to center the CG. On a second issue pointed out to me, the thrust line on the KR-2S should be as close to 1 3/4" below the top longeron as possible. William Tabbert wrote: > I am getting ready to order my engine mount from William Wyyne, do any of > you guys with the Corvairs have a finished weight on you KR-2S's?? Mine has > the (or will have) the wing tank & the header tank options. I need a close > number to have the mount built correctly. > > Thanks! > > Bill > _____________________________________________________________________________________ > Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To post to the list, email: krnet@mailinglists.org > To unsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org > For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org -- Mark Jones (N886MJ) Wales, WI USA E-mail me at mailto:flykr2s@execpc.com Visit my KR-2S CorvAIRCRAFT web site at http://sites.netscape.net/n886mj/homepage ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 16:01:15 -0800 (PST) To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: jim jacoby Subject: acceptable cg range kr2s Message-ID: <12355384.976233676221.JavaMail.imail@hippie.excite.com> somewhere I saw the aceptable range for cg for the kr2s, can anyone tell me where to look, or supply the numbers relative I guess to the main spar location? _______________________________________________________ Tired of slow Internet? Get @Home Broadband Internet http://www.home.com/xinbox/signup.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2000 05:02:59 -0800 To: From: "Al Friesen" Subject: getting there Message-ID: <002701c05ebb$b29cf520$6ccb6cce@s8z8i0> ------=_NextPart_000_0023_01C05E78.A3101300 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0024_01C05E78.A3101300" ------=_NextPart_001_0024_01C05E78.A3101300 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Netters, My KR-2S is now at the airport in a heated hangar. Got one wing on but = the spars are dry from all that indoor sitting and all the bolts need to = be tightened. You guys make sure the internal wing bracket bolts are = accessable for later adjustment. Did 4 runs down the runway, no wings, = she is easily controllable even with a burst of speed and a quick = throttle shutsdown. The brakes I burned in by running at some power and = held the brakes to heat them up, they are very predictable. When I cut = the power the tail snaked a bit but was controllable with brakes and = rudder. I lowered the sling seat and mounted the rear sling rod on top = of the rear spar. May remove the ply seatback and put in a sling there = as well, to get more headroom. It all looks like a go for final = inspection. ------=_NextPart_001_0024_01C05E78.A3101300 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Netters,
 My KR-2S is now at the airport in = a heated=20 hangar. Got one wing on but the spars are dry from all that indoor = sitting and=20 all the bolts need to be tightened. You guys make sure the internal wing = bracket=20 bolts are accessable for later adjustment. Did 4 runs down the runway, = no wings,=20 she is easily controllable even with a burst of speed and a quick = throttle=20 shutsdown. The brakes I burned in by running at some power and held the = brakes=20 to heat them up, they are very predictable. When I cut the power the = tail snaked=20 a bit but was controllable with brakes and rudder. I lowered the sling = seat and=20 mounted the rear sling rod on top of the rear spar. May remove the ply = seatback=20 and put in a sling there as well, to get more headroom. It all looks = like a go=20 for final inspection.
------=_NextPart_001_0024_01C05E78.A3101300-- ------=_NextPart_000_0023_01C05E78.A3101300-- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2000 10:45:44 -0800 To: From: "Al Friesen" Subject: Getting there Message-ID: <005e01c05eeb$958ac900$6ccb6cce@s8z8i0> ------=_NextPart_000_005B_01C05EA8.854E6D00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Netters, I got one wing on today. Did some prying but it got better as soon as = the top bolts slid in. What do you guys do for a gap seal. I plan on = using metal fairings with some screws to hold it down. afriesen@kootenay.com=20 To post to the list, email: krnet@mailinglists.org To unsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org ------=_NextPart_000_005B_01C05EA8.854E6D00-- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 20:59:26 -0800 To: From: "John Bouyea" Cc: "Mark Langford" Subject: KR2S Archives back on-line! Message-ID: <001201c060d3$a4091b00$0b00a8c0@bouyea.net> Well, I owe a note of Thanks! to Mark L. for finding a missed access permission on the http://kr2s.timberline.com archives site. Seems like the http://www.krnet.org link to the archives references a call that I missed. Not to fear, your archives are back online and all should be well now. I've clipped part of the message I sent to Mark below. Thanks again, Your humble archives librarian, John Bouyea > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John Bouyea" > To: > Cc: > Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 10:21 AM > > > > I am just finding out that our first archives server, > http://kr2s.timberline.com isn't working. I must have missed something when > I moved it over to a new host. Oscar Z. did a bunch of testing for me and > it looked pretty good to both of us... Kimball Anderson (you still out > there?) built the search tool which points to the digests I have maintained > on-line since way before www.krnet.org even existed. I did change my email > address to john@bouyea.net > > Regardless, I obviously have some work to do if you (and anyone else?) are > having problems. The content is still out there http://kr2s.bouyea.net but we > must have a problem with my redirection services. Rats! I'll work on it > tonight. > > I have set up a new server to host the content to improve access to the > data. I've also added to the online storage space, now 12Gig is available. > I hope that would hold us for a while. I'm backing everything up to tape > and have it on a UPS as well. > > I AM behind in moving a large number of the more current mailing list > digests to the server. I'll try to automate that... > > PLEASE let me know when you find something isn't working. I really am > trying guys! > > Sincerely, your humble archives host, > > John Bouyea > who hasn't touched his projects in a long time cause he's been messing with 'puters > > KR2 - in rebuild > KR2 - on the gear > KR2S - boat stage > KR Archives site at( for now!): http://kr2s.timberline.com -or- http://kr2s.bouyea.net > > Email me: john@bouyea.net > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2000 00:09:01 -0500 To: "kr2s group" From: "Albert Pecoraro" Subject: VW Question ... Message-ID: <002901c060d4$fb4043c0$a8d4b23f@steelcase.com> ------=_NextPart_000_0026_01C060AB.11347AE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable VW Heads: Q1: Is the VW Transporter engine a Type II or Type IV? How can you tell = the Type of a VW engine if you are looking at it or inspecting it? Are = there serial numbers that indicate this? Q2: How do you determine the displacement of a VW engine by looking at = it? Is it listed anywhere on the engine?=20 I have been roaming all over the Internet tonight and can't find = specific answers to the above questions. However, I am learning the = history of VW engines! ;-) Thanks. Albert ------=_NextPart_000_0026_01C060AB.11347AE0-- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2000 06:41:34 -0600 To: "kr2s group" From: "Mark Langford" Subject: Re: KR> VW Question ... Message-ID: <001501c06114$3387c570$58e6a58c@tbe.com> Albert wrote: >Q1: Is the VW Transporter engine a Type II or Type IV? How can >you tell the Type of a VW engine if you are looking at it or inspecting >it? Are there serial numbers that indicate this? The VW bus used a Type 1 engine up until 1971, and from 72 on it was a Type 4 The engine is a Type 4, but the bus is called a Type 2, and has been from the beginning. But I think the answer to YOUR question is I don't think there's any such thing as a Type 2 engine. They just stuck the Type 4 into the bus, which is a Type 2, and probably changed the intake and exhaust around a little bit to make it fit. Certainly for our purposes they are exactly the same animal. >Q2: How do you determine the displacement of a VW engine by >looking at it? Is it listed anywhere on the engine? Obviously, you can't, assuming that somebody could've easily changed something after 30 years. But generally speaking there was the stock 1600cc, a later 1700cc, and eventually a 2 liter. I have an el-cheapo Type 2 manual at home that details this stuff and serial numbers that identify them. I'll scan it tonight and post it, unless I forget. I dare say that no matter what it is, you're going to want to put big bore cylinders on it anyway, and go for almost max displacement (2.4 or 2.6 liters). You've probably read it already, but I did a little diatribe on the Type 4 at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/kvw.html which details what you need to do to it to get it up to speed. I'll try to add the info you're looking for to it tonight. Just as a point of interest, the VW bus that I have came with no engine (but it was free). At about the same time a buddy gave me his VW 411 which had lived up north and was completely rusted out. I took the 411 down to the long block and sealed up all the leaks with new gaskets and cleaned it all up, put it back together and in my bus, but with a pair of dual Weber carburetors (since the 411 used fuel injection), headers, and an 050 distributor. It still runs fine, but I'll admit to only driving it to Home Depot and back three times a year. Later on I traded a 356 Porsche engine that I got in Germany for another bus, this one with a V-6 mounted in the engine compartment! Considering how unstable buses are anyway, and the fact that the brakes require upgrading to Porsche 911 brakes, I removed the V-6 and put my 411 in it, saving the V-6 and adpater for later duty in a mid engine Karmann Ghia application. But that was ten years ago, and now I want to stick a 250 hp Audi 1.8Turbo engine in the back seat of the Ghia (http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/ghia2.jpg) . That will be my next project after the plane is finished, and yes, I will need a pilot's license... Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama mailto:langford@hiwaay.net see KR2S N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2000 08:04:15 -0500 To: "kr2s group" From: "Albert Pecoraro" Subject: Re: KR> VW Question ... Message-ID: <000f01c06117$5f5ac460$77d4b23f@steelcase.com> Mark, You are a saviour! 0_:-) After I sent the email yesterday I found several websites about VW Transporters. I became confused between Engine Type (which I believe is designated with Roman numerals x= I, II, III, IV) and Transporter Type (using Arabic numerals x=1,2,3,4). Thanks for the explanation. Also, I have a copy of your VW conversion web-page on disk. (It's required reading! ;-) As always ... thanks for your help. Albert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Langford" To: "kr2s group" Sent: Friday, December 08, 2000 7:41 AM Subject: Re: KR> VW Question ... > Albert wrote: > > >Q1: Is the VW Transporter engine a Type II or Type IV? > The VW bus used a Type 1 engine up until 1971, and from 72 on it was a Type > 4 The engine is a Type 4, but the bus is called a Type 2, and has been from > the beginning. But I think the answer to YOUR question is I don't think > there's any such thing as a Type 2 engine. They just stuck the Type 4 into > the bus, which is a Type 2, and probably changed the intake and exhaust > around a little bit to make it fit. Certainly for our purposes they are > exactly the same animal. > > >Q2: How do you determine the displacement of a VW engine by >looking at it? > Is it listed anywhere on the engine? > > Obviously, you can't, assuming that somebody could've easily changed > something after 30 years. But generally speaking there was the stock > 1600cc, a later 1700cc, and eventually a 2 liter. I have an el-cheapo Type > 2 manual at home that details this stuff and serial numbers that identify > them. I'll scan it tonight and post it, unless I forget. I dare say that > no matter what it is, you're going to want to put big bore cylinders on it > anyway, and go for almost max displacement (2.4 or 2.6 liters). You've > probably read it already, but I did a little diatribe on the Type 4 at > http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/kvw.html which details what you need to do > to it to get it up to speed. I'll try to add the info you're looking for to > it tonight. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 16:39:45 -0600 To: From: "Boyers" Subject: kr2s plans Message-ID: <000001c0609f$874e5c20$942be6cf@ou812> ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C0606C.4E5E20E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Decided to build different plane. I have the Kr2s plans,yes with the s = supplement.With newsletters 1982-1985&1975-1981 in binders.Bendix = ,revmaster, and hapi paper manuals. $200.00 firm. I also have molds for = the revmaster cowling for the KR2 $350. heavy molds with reinforcement. = Best of luck to everyone with there kr's, the wife and I decided we = needed something bigger for cross country. Thanks to all. Ken Boyer = ou812@brick.net=20 ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C0606C.4E5E20E0-- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2000 04:01:58 -0600 To: From: "Boyers" Subject: KR2S PLANS Message-ID: <000001c0611c$4eccd840$82a24ad1@ou812> ------=_NextPart_000_000F_01C060CB.9C6890E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The wife and I have decided that we need a bigger plane for cross = country. I have the kr2s plans 75- 85 newsletters , 2 gathering tapes = and bendix,hapi and revmaster floppy paper manuals.$225.00 I also have = molds of the revmaster cowl for the kr2. $350.00 Thanks Ken B = ou812@brick.net=20 ------=_NextPart_000_000F_01C060CB.9C6890E0-- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2000 10:03:12 -0700 To: "KR-Net" From: "Florin L Pintea" Subject: Main gear question Message-ID: Hi, I was contemplating for the past little while on an alternate method of anchoring the main gear. As I said before, I will have "tri-gear". This would take a good chunk out of my fuel tank space in the wing stubs (I've already lost a bit of tank space since I have widened the fuse by a few inches). I would also like to stay away (if it is at all possible) from having a header fuel tank and the gained space to be used as "extra" baggage compartment. So then, I was wondering if there would be anything wrong with attaching the gear legs and brackets behind the main wing spar but instead of having them out in the stubs what if I installed them inside the cockpit as close as possible to the fuselage sides. I know now that the stance will be somehow narrowed (maybe), but again, I will be using longer gear legs to get extra ground clearance and I will also angle them outwards to gain extra (wider) stance (which will probably bring the wheels themselves to the same position as in the retract configuration)for more ground stability and easier landings. From my point of view, by doing this I will gain a few good extra gallons of fuel, make the stub wing surface a lot easier to build since the gear leg isn't there when sanding, don't have to build an access door, very easy access later on, since all the bolts would be under the seat and out of the way, probably less stress on the centre spar since forces are applied closer to its centre (stronger during hard landings), and some weight savings and ease of build since brake lines would be shorter and don't have to go out of the cockpit into the wing stubs. Can you guys think of any reason why this wouldn't be a feasible thing to do and why? I know you didn't have that problem since your gear was mounted on the front of the spar, just some food for thought. What do you think? Thanks, FLORIN L. PINTEA KR-2S SKUNKWORKS @ CALGARY, ALBERTA, CANADA mailto: florinpi@home.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 11:08:41 -0600 To: krnet From: "Dr. No" Subject: Mikuni carb? Message-ID: <3A311592.39AB8E7A@pol.net> Has anyone had any good or bad experience with Mikuni carbs? I am thinking of putting one on my HAPI 1835. Thanks, Scott ------------------------------ Date: 8 Dec 2000 11:35:00 -0700 To: "krnet@mailinglists.org" From: "Schmidt, Curtis" Subject: WING SKINS Message-ID: <000346D1@kaydon.com> Hey guys: Does anyone know of a set of Deihl wing skins that someone needs to get rid= of cheep! (mama said so) The thought of all that foam work makes me nauseous! CURTIS R SCHMIDT CNC TOOLING & PROGRAMMING LARNED KANSAS USA ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 14:01:57 -0600 To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: Micheal Fox Subject: Many Thanks!! Now What?? Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.0.20001208134757.009f7ec0@pop3.quixnet.net> To All KT Net, Many Thanks for your help and advice with my "Licensing Help" problem. Next Question: How and where do I obtain Flight Instruction & Licensing for a Motor Glider?? No one at the local Greater Kankakee Airport 60 miles South of Chicago, Ill. seems to know. The Motor Glider seems to be my best hope for obtaining licensed flight without a class 3 medical. Could someone please help?? Micheal J. Fox RN,BSN (Not The Actor) foxyrn@quixnet.net OR foxyrn@usa.net OR KR Net I can not seem to find help on the FAA website. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2000 15:08:20 EST To: foxyrn@quixnet.net, krnet@mailinglists.org From: Horn2004@aol.com Subject: Re: KR> Many Thanks!! Now What?? Message-ID: <77.d3399f3.276299b4@aol.com> In a message dated 12/8/00 2:00:28 PM, foxyrn@QuixNet.net writes: <> You may want to ask around about any soaring clubs in the area. I'm sure there are some. If you strike out there, ask some of the local FBO's. If they can't help, jump on the web and do some searches, or contact AOPA and ask for assistance. Between those, you should find several solid leads. Steve Horn horn2004@aol.com Dallas, TX ------------------------------ End of krnet Digest ***********************************