From: To: Subject: krnet Digest 8 Jan 2001 01:07:36 -0000 Issue 150 Date: Sunday, January 07, 2001 5:07 PM krnet Digest 8 Jan 2001 01:07:36 -0000 Issue 150 Topics (messages 3527 through 3556): Last of KR/IFR 3527 by: John Roffey change of address 3528 by: John Bryhan Re: Last of the KR/IFR 3529 by: Patricia Burger 3531 by: Ross Youngblood 3533 by: Ed Janssen 3549 by: Krwr1.aol.com Re: Transponders/alt. encoders 3530 by: Ross Youngblood Wing fuel line question. 3532 by: Ross Youngblood 3534 by: David R. Christensen 3538 by: Brian Vasseur EGT VS. OAT 3535 by: john wenz widening/premolded parts 3536 by: larry flesner Build time 3537 by: Dave and Tina Goodman 3539 by: Mark Langford 3548 by: w.g. kirkland Langfordkosh---was build time. 3540 by: KR2616TJ.aol.com 3541 by: Mark Langford 3543 by: KR2616TJ.aol.com 3544 by: Mark Langford 3546 by: KR2616TJ.aol.com 3551 by: Edwin Blocher Re: Langfordkosh---was build time.] 3542 by: Mark Jones Dual Ignition 3545 by: Mark Jones Another update. 3547 by: Mark Jones Forrest Erickson, Re: KR> Langfordkosh---was build time. 3550 by: Forrest Erickson EGT 3552 by: Kenneth L Wiltrout Prop Location 3553 by: Kr2skip.aol.com 3554 by: Mark Langford 3555 by: Brian Vasseur Re: corvaircraft: Another update. 3556 by: Mark Jones Administrivia: To subscribe to the digest, e-mail: To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail: To post to the list, e-mail: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2001 23:21:19 -0600 To: "krnet@mailinglists.org" From: John Roffey Subject: Last of KR/IFR Message-ID: <3A56AB4F.1C001545@tir.com> Sorry folks, I ran the spell check before I signed my essay and off it went. John Roffey jeroffey@tir.com VFR/KR ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2001 21:34:43 -0700 To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: John Bryhan Subject: change of address a quick announcement... I got DSL and a new email address. for those of you with links to my site - it's moved it's now: http://www.users.qwest.net/~bje25/ please update you webpages with the new link for those of you who've never heard of me or seen the site - visit it. project update. it's too darn cold to fill and sand - nite temps down to like 5 days barely in the 30s - I still say it'll fly this year. But then again that's what I said the last two years. John Bryhan Los Alamos NM mailto:krjeb@qwest.net http://www.users.qwest.net/~bje25/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 21:25:56 -0800 To: , From: "Patricia Burger" Subject: Re: KR> Last of the KR/IFR Message-ID: <003001c077a1$26a71ce0$813a19d0@default> I have to interject my agreement with most of the comments about IFR in stable platforms. MOST homebuilts are not stable platforms. They were designed to be fun ships which are usually quick and agile. Not for serious IFR work. Stay out of the bad weather and you will live much longer. We have many wrecks in the Sierras of people who were just going to "hop over to Reno" and run into the side of a mountain. Also the well known Stevens Pass in Washington. Just remember the old adage ---- "There are old pilots, bold pilots -- but not very many old bold pilots. Bill ====== Pat & Bill Burger ====== Roseville, California pbburger@inreach.com -----Original Message----- From: John Roffey To: krnet@mailinglists.org Date: Friday, January 05, 2001 8:21 PM Subject: KR> Last of the KR/IFR >After getting your IFR ticket there are a few other important decisions >to make. The first one is setting your own minimums for weather that you >will actually fly in. The second is usually the equipment you will >actually fly IFR in. >There exists a belief that no-one should fly single engine IFR and >no-one should fly single pilot IFR. Many magazine articles are centered >around these theories and continue to surface every fall. The reason for >this phenomena is the discouraging statistics that pretty much backed up >the theory in the past. With the advent of very accurate and reliable >GPS nav information, the Weather Channel, personal computers, the >internet and DUATS, there has been a significant reduction in these >awful stats. This coupled with a greater percentage of the Private Pilot >population getting instrument tickets, we are enjoying an improvement in >our overall accident rate. >The key to remaining out of the accident folder, is primarily in the >choice of equipment. A stable IFR platform. For us SEL PPs, that would >be 172/182/210 , Bonanza, Cherokee/Arrow, Mooney >style of aircraft. The big issue is the ability to accurately trim the >plane, and the likelihood of having a good autopilot. >Having said all that and hearing the rhetoric about the lack of trimming >ability of our KRs, I formulate my own minimum equipment choice that >excludes my own KR for IFR. >No, I am not going to fly cross country scud running . Any one who has >worked hard to get the IFR ticket would realize that. > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >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: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 01:05:28 -0700 To: Patricia Burger From: Ross Youngblood CC: jeroffey@tir.com, krnet@mailinglists.org Subject: Re: KR> Last of the KR/IFR Message-ID: <3A56D1C8.5ED5E71A@teleport.com> I have been doing planning for an IFR flight from Phoenix,AZ to Eugene, OR, and thought it would be quicker to go up near Reno... the problem is the direct route has some pretty high MEA's over 12,500 feet, and that means oxygen for the length of the legs at that altitude (> 30 minutes). It's easier to hop over at 11,000 or so and then fly up the sacremanto valley it appears. So... I guess I can see how you could fly into a mountain if you are below 14,000 feet and get lost in IFR. I wasn't thinking of flying in IFR conditions, just flying VFR under an IFR flight plan. But the MEA's still apply, unless I decide to fly portions under VFR. Patricia Burger wrote: > I have to interject my agreement with most of the comments about IFR in > stable platforms. MOST homebuilts are not stable platforms. They were > designed to be fun ships which are usually quick and agile. Not for serious > IFR work. Stay out of the bad weather and you will live much longer. We > have many wrecks in the Sierras of people who were just going to "hop over > to Reno" and run into the side of a mountain. Also the well known Stevens > Pass in Washington. > > Just remember the old adage ---- "There are old pilots, bold pilots -- but > not very many old bold pilots. > > Bill > ====== Pat & Bill Burger ====== > Roseville, California > pbburger@inreach.com > > -----Original Message----- > From: John Roffey > To: krnet@mailinglists.org > Date: Friday, January 05, 2001 8:21 PM > Subject: KR> Last of the KR/IFR > > >After getting your IFR ticket there are a few other important decisions > >to make. The first one is setting your own minimums for weather that you > >will actually fly in. The second is usually the equipment you will > >actually fly IFR in. > >There exists a belief that no-one should fly single engine IFR and > >no-one should fly single pilot IFR. Many magazine articles are centered > >around these theories and continue to surface every fall. The reason for > >this phenomena is the discouraging statistics that pretty much backed up > >the theory in the past. With the advent of very accurate and reliable > >GPS nav information, the Weather Channel, personal computers, the > >internet and DUATS, there has been a significant reduction in these > >awful stats. This coupled with a greater percentage of the Private Pilot > >population getting instrument tickets, we are enjoying an improvement in > >our overall accident rate. > >The key to remaining out of the accident folder, is primarily in the > >choice of equipment. A stable IFR platform. For us SEL PPs, that would > >be 172/182/210 , Bonanza, Cherokee/Arrow, Mooney > >style of aircraft. The big issue is the ability to accurately trim the > >plane, and the likelihood of having a good autopilot. > >Having said all that and hearing the rhetoric about the lack of trimming > >ability of our KRs, I formulate my own minimum equipment choice that > >excludes my own KR for IFR. > >No, I am not going to fly cross country scud running . Any one who has > >worked hard to get the IFR ticket would realize that. > > > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- > >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 > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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: Sat, 6 Jan 2001 08:10:54 -0600 To: , From: ejanssen@chipsnet.com (Ed Janssen) Subject: Re: KR> Last of the KR/IFR Message-ID: <009801c077ea$7c0f3d40$020010ac@dad> I know this subject has been hashed many times over before but...... Just a couple cents worth - I have a good friend and relatively hightime KR-2 pilot who describes flying his KR as "like sitting on top of a ball". It may easliy drop a bit in any axis. He meant you need to pretty much constantly fly the airplane. I'm not sure I had that exact kind of experience flying my KR-1, but I felt that I shouldn't divert my attention to any other task for more than a few seconds. On the other hand, though, I never felt unsafe. I really liked its responsiveness. Because the KR-1 was not too wide, my arms were always slightly wedged between the longerons which gave me a real sense of being part of the plane. I'm not IFR rated, but my suggestion would be to keep the plane light, simple, and a day, VFR machine. Maybe the -2S might give the pilot a different experience, but me? --- I'd go rent something else for regular IFR travel. Ed Janssen ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Roffey" To: Sent: Friday, January 05, 2001 11:18 PM Subject: KR> Last of the KR/IFR > After getting your IFR ticket there are a few other important decisions > to make. The first one is setting your own minimums for weather that you > will actually fly in. The second is usually the equipment you will > actually fly IFR in. > There exists a belief that no-one should fly single engine IFR and > no-one should fly single pilot IFR. Many magazine articles are centered > around these theories and continue to surface every fall. The reason for > this phenomena is the discouraging statistics that pretty much backed up > the theory in the past. With the advent of very accurate and reliable > GPS nav information, the Weather Channel, personal computers, the > internet and DUATS, there has been a significant reduction in these > awful stats. This coupled with a greater percentage of the Private Pilot > population getting instrument tickets, we are enjoying an improvement in > our overall accident rate. > The key to remaining out of the accident folder, is primarily in the > choice of equipment. A stable IFR platform. For us SEL PPs, that would > be 172/182/210 , Bonanza, Cherokee/Arrow, Mooney > style of aircraft. The big issue is the ability to accurately trim the > plane, and the likelihood of having a good autopilot. > Having said all that and hearing the rhetoric about the lack of trimming > ability of our KRs, I formulate my own minimum equipment choice that > excludes my own KR for IFR. > No, I am not going to fly cross country scud running . Any one who has > worked hard to get the IFR ticket would realize that. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 08:34:54 EST To: ejanssen@chipsnet.com, jeroffey@tir.com, krnet@mailinglists.org From: Krwr1@aol.com Subject: Re: KR> Last of the KR/IFR Message-ID: In a message dated 01/06/2001 9:09:07 AM Eastern Standard Time, ejanssen@chipsnet.com writes: << He meant you need to pretty much constantly fly the airplane. I'm not sure I had that exact kind of experience flying my KR-1, but I felt that I shouldn't divert my attention to any other task for more than a few seconds. On the other hand, though, I never felt unsafe. I really liked its responsiveness. Because the KR-1 was not too wide, my arms were always slightly wedged between the longerons which gave me a real sense of being part of the plane. I'm not IFR rated, but my suggestion would be to keep the plane light, simple, and a day, VFR machine. Maybe the -2S might give the pilot a different experience, but me? --- I'd go rent something else for regular IFR travel. Ed Janssen >> As a 1500 hr. KR-1 pilot, I had a hard time just reading a map in the craft,because if I looked at a map for more then 10 or 15 seconds, I'd be going some where I didn't want to go. Bill Reents youngstown Ohio krwr1@aol.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 01:00:23 -0700 To: "Stefan B." From: Ross Youngblood CC: KR-Net Subject: Re: KR> Transponders/alt. encoders Message-ID: <3A56D097.C575F36@teleport.com> Stefan, Yes they are, as far as I know... however you may need to build up your own wiring harness. In my case I wired up my transponder and encoders wiring harness myself... I don't recall if I had a wiring diagram for my encoder or if it was printed, or if the pinout was standard, but the radio and transponder had wiring diagrams and I was able to make sense out of it and build it up. In fact, if you check on the web, you can make a digital readout for the encoder so you can see what altitude is being reported to ATC. I thought about doing this, but it meant another connector, and more time... maybe someday. I think Jim Weir from RST electronics www.rstengr.com (I think) -- Regards Ross "Stefan B." wrote: > Are the transponders and altitude encoders from different manufacturers > compliant to each other? > > Thanks in advance for your answers. > > Stefan Balatchev, > France > mailto:Stefan.Balatchev@wanadoo.fr > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 01:13:57 -0700 To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: Ross Youngblood Subject: Wing fuel line question. Message-ID: <3A56D3C5.30D37927@teleport.com> OK KR netters... I have a question that you folks may be able to help. I have played with three different methods of connecting my wing tanks to the fuel line at the spar. First I used aluminum tubing, but decided it would be too difficult to rig and de-rig the wings as you would need a wrench in a tight spot, and you would have to drain the tanks to keep fuel from flowing all over everywhere. Then I discovered the quick disconnects at aircraft spruce that are barb type hose fittings. These work great with tygon or rubber fuel hose, but don't fit the surplus braided hose I have (i.d. of hose too big). So.. I have been using rubber automotive fuel line, which works great when the wings are on a dolly and the line is connected. The bad news is that when I mount the wings, the location of my hose is such that it is prone to get a kink in it. And... no fuel flows. At first I had a fuel pump priming problem, then with the wings jigged on boxes I verified that I have terrific fuel flow and priming capability if I don't jam the hose such that it folds. Now I'm thinking that my idea of flexible hose and quick disconnects wasn't so hot, and I should return to aluminum tubing, and a shutoff valve at the fuel pick up end. Any ideas... I will be playing with this over the weekend and doing some more fuel flow tests to check that I have no leaks in the cockpit. Thanks! By the way... I've put in two 6 hour KR building sessions in the last three days. If I keep this up, I might actually be flying this year. - Ross ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2001 08:17:32 -0800 To: "krnet mailing lists" From: "David R. Christensen" Subject: Fw: KR> Wing fuel line question. Message-ID: <002a01c077fc$2c9e2700$ba785ad1@davec> Ross - I used alumunum tubing and an AN coupler. A couple of small wrenches are required only to break the seal. Then the nut can be removed with the fingers. The nut is right next to the skin. This is the easiest part of the wing removal process. You won't be wanting to take your wings off and on much once you find out what a pain it is removing and installing the wing attach fitting bolts, especially putting them back in. I only use my wing tanks occaisionally for long flights. I have drains in the wing tanks to drain off any residual fuel if I need to before removing the wings. If the wings have fuel in them it can be syphoned out quickly. When I use the wing tanks I always pump them dry in flight with my Facet transfer pump which buzzes when a tank has been emptied, loud enough to be heard above the engine noise. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Ross Youngblood To: krnet@mailinglists.org Date: Saturday, January 06, 2001 1:20 AM Subject: KR> Wing fuel line question. >OK KR netters... I have a question that you folks may be able to help. > >I have played with three different methods of connecting my wing tanks >to the fuel line at the spar. > > First I used aluminum tubing, but decided it would be too difficult to > >rig and de-rig the wings as you would need a wrench in a tight spot, >and you would have to drain the tanks to keep fuel from flowing >all over everywhere. > > Then I discovered the quick disconnects at aircraft spruce that are >barb type hose fittings. These work great with tygon or rubber >fuel hose, but don't fit the surplus braided hose I have (i.d. of hose >too big). > > So.. I have been using rubber automotive fuel line, which works >great when the wings are on a dolly and the line is connected. The >bad news is that when I mount the wings, the location of my >hose is such that it is prone to get a kink in it. And... no fuel >flows. >At first I had a fuel pump priming problem, then with the wings >jigged on boxes I verified that I have terrific fuel flow and priming >capability if I don't jam the hose such that it folds. > > Now I'm thinking that my idea of flexible hose and quick disconnects >wasn't so hot, and I should return to aluminum tubing, and a shutoff >valve at the fuel pick up end. > >Any ideas... I will be playing with this over the weekend and doing >some more fuel flow tests to check that I have no leaks in the cockpit. > >Thanks! > >By the way... I've put in two 6 hour KR building sessions in the last >three days. >If I keep this up, I might actually be flying this year. > > - Ross > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >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: Sat, 6 Jan 2001 13:30:15 -0700 To: "Ross Youngblood" , From: "Brian Vasseur" Subject: Re: KR> Wing fuel line question. Message-ID: <003f01c0781f$7a447540$2c45e4cf@C5477> I used the quick connects in my Minimax without problems. My solution was to use a 90 out of the tank pointing to the wingtip. Then the fuel line would loop out towards the tip and then back to the wing root. This gave me slack fuel line when I pulled the wing apart and resolved the problem with kinks. I don't know how much space you have to work with so this may or may not work for you. You also want to make sure you don't leave a low spot in the fuel line that will allow water to accumulate, you want to keep water in the tank where it can be drained there. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ross Youngblood" To: Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2001 1:13 AM Subject: KR> Wing fuel line question. > OK KR netters... I have a question that you folks may be able to help. > > I have played with three different methods of connecting my wing tanks > to the fuel line at the spar. > > First I used aluminum tubing, but decided it would be too difficult to > > rig and de-rig the wings as you would need a wrench in a tight spot, > and you would have to drain the tanks to keep fuel from flowing > all over everywhere. > > Then I discovered the quick disconnects at aircraft spruce that are > barb type hose fittings. These work great with tygon or rubber > fuel hose, but don't fit the surplus braided hose I have (i.d. of hose > too big). > > So.. I have been using rubber automotive fuel line, which works > great when the wings are on a dolly and the line is connected. The > bad news is that when I mount the wings, the location of my > hose is such that it is prone to get a kink in it. And... no fuel > flows. > At first I had a fuel pump priming problem, then with the wings > jigged on boxes I verified that I have terrific fuel flow and priming > capability if I don't jam the hose such that it folds. > > Now I'm thinking that my idea of flexible hose and quick disconnects > wasn't so hot, and I should return to aluminum tubing, and a shutoff > valve at the fuel pick up end. > > Any ideas... I will be playing with this over the weekend and doing > some more fuel flow tests to check that I have no leaks in the cockpit. > > Thanks! > > By the way... I've put in two 6 hour KR building sessions in the last > three days. > If I keep this up, I might actually be flying this year. > > - Ross > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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: Sat, 6 Jan 2001 11:41:30 -0500 To: "krnet" From: "john wenz" Subject: EGT VS. OAT Message-ID: ------=_NextPart_001_0000_01C077D5.9CAB8640 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In regards to the question of how the OAT affects the EGT; If all other v= ariables are the same, as the Outside air temp goes down so should the Ex= haust gas temps. We all know as the OAT drops, the density of the air inc= reases ( yes, this is a generality). If you adjust your mixture the same = way (ie. 25 deg. rich or lean of peak, or what ever specs you use) , and = adjust your power setting for the higher air density, your egt should dro= p the corrisponding amount, assuming the same power setting, pressure alt= itude etc. =20 The same drop should be seen in your Cylinder head temp. As a matter of f= act when you install a Intercooler on a certified engine you would see a = good 25 to 35 degree drop in the CHT and EGT, Real, not advertized number= s. ( Same output power.) =20 ------=_NextPart_001_0000_01C077D5.9CAB8640-- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 14:02:16 -0600 To: "Mark Langford" , From: larry flesner Subject: widening/premolded parts Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20010106140216.008647b0@pop3.norton.antivirus> >And while it's true that you can't use the premolded parts if you widen past >an inch or more, from what I've heard you'd be surprised at how much time it >takes to make the premolded parts fit anyway! After all, these planes are >all different, and you'd have to be dreaming to think you could pull the >parts off of one and make them fit perfectly on another. > >Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama ============================================================================= Mark and Netters, I haven't been able to put this thought to rest since reading Mark's post so I'll share my thoughts and put it to bed. I see no reason a premolded turtledeck, at least, can't be used on a widened fuselage with less work than a build from scratch. My KR is stretched 24 inches and I used a stock KR turtledeck that I widened, lengthened, raised,and reshaped. A simple width change should be a piece of cake. Your results may vary. Here is how I'd do it. First let's assume that we will need additional width at the canopy and very little change at the tail. Set the turtledeck on the "boat" using some furing strips or other stock laid across the top longerons and center the turtledeck on the boat. Take the measurements to see how much additional width you need. On some type of flat stock, lay up a strip of glass (6 to 8 layers?) that is approx. 2 inches wider then the additional width you need and let cure. Now comes the gutsy part. Using a Dremel or such, cut the turtledeck down the spine from the canopy end to within a foot or so of the tail. Set the turtledeck back on the "boat" on the strips. Take a 2"X 4" board about 18 inches long and drive two nails into the wood about 3 or 4 inchs from one end and about 1.5 inches apart. Leave the heads of the nails out of the wood just slightly greater than the thickness of the turtledeck. Line up the two nails, heads down, with the cut and insert into the turtledeck. By rotating the board, the turtledeck will widen to the distance between the nails. For additional width, tap the board down the length of the cut until you get the spread you want. Now, using screws or rivets to hold in place, flox the cured strip of glass to the underside of the turtledeck. Once cured, finish the top any way you want, foam and glass ,filler and glass, or whatever. If you use foam fill, try taking a 1/8" thick strip of plywood, about 2"wide by about 30" long and glue sandpaper to one side that is maybe 4" or so wider than the strip you are shaping. Pull the strip down over and in contact with the turtledeck and shape the foam. This will give you the perfect shape you are looking for in the fill area. Mounting a turtledeck can be an easy job for one person. Here's how I did it. Cut some 3/16" thick(approx) strips off the edge of a 2"X 4" to the necessary length. Cover one side with duct tape and with tape to inside, secure with several screws to the top longeron (outside)on the turtledeck area. You will want approx 3/4" of the stock extended above the longeron. Test fit and then flox turtledeck into position using screws to pull the turtledeck out against the strips if necessary. Let cure, remove strips, and finish glassing. As I say, your results may vary. Other than the cure time of the strip, I see no reason that one person could not widen and mount a premolded deck in one day and get good results. If you are building a separate instrument panel, you may be able to use the same routine on the forward deck. I've not tried that. Just my thought on the subject. It worked for me but don't hold me responsible if you screw up a $400 turtledeck, please. Larry Flesner ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2001 12:17:43 -0800 To: "KR-POST" From: "Dave and Tina Goodman" Subject: Build time Message-ID: <001501c0781d$bc3134e0$1245a6d1@oemcomputer> ------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C077DA.ABED37C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Folks in KR land. At the risk of starting another thread that may go = for awhile, I would like to put my two cents on the table with regards = to build time and the KR. Mark Langford wrote a few days ago about the average build time being = 1500- 2500 hours. Mark personally has 2800-plus hours on his aircraft = and is not done. This is a far cry from the 800 hours listed in the EAA = Aerocrafter. For those of you who are lurkers or just investigating = what aircraft to build, think about these numbers in light of what I am = going to say before you make your decision. Mark and those on the upper end of the build time have far more invested = in their projects than just building a plane to fly. As Mark said, he = has seen one aircraft that was completed in 800 hours, but he would not = have wanted to show it off to his friends. This, and one other key = factor I will get to in a moment, define why he and so many others have = so much time in their projects. Mark's airplane is most likely the benchmark in the KR world for a = beautiful aircraft. Everything on it is a piece of art, finely crafted, = and well engineered. This is the type of plane I personally would = trailer to airshows to show off because it is going to put every other = plane on the flight line to shame. This is part of the 2800 hour = figure. The second part of the time equation for some builders is the burning = desire to improve or personalize their aircraft. The KR is ideal for = this. Mark has not only changed minor things like the width of the = fuselage, he has spearheaded (with the help, interest and passion of = many others, lest I not give credit where it is due) a completely new = wing, new airfoils for the empennage, use of carbon fiber, new (and far = better) WAFs, the Corvair motor modification, among other things. One = trip to his web page will tell you this man spends a great deal of time = in the CAD world just thinking up ways to make this aircraft better! At = the risk of putting him too high on a pedestal (and I hope to still be = able to see him at the top of it when I am near his home in two weeks), = everyone out there who has taken an idea from his web page or written = him and gotten a personal response to a question in 2 hours owes him a = great debt of gratitude in my opinion. I am certainly in that bunch, = and this has made my build time go down immeasurably. Now, back to time to build. I have scoured the internet for web pages = dedicated to building aircraft, and most obviously the KR. I have taken = those ideas that I think work best for my needs, desires and abilities = and have incorporated them into my aircraft. At 460 hours of building, = I am at the following stage: H Stab and elevator installed, glassed, and smoothed V Stab installed, foamed and airfoil shape sanded Landing gear complete All aluminum parts for controls complete I have contracted the fuel tanks out to a local machine shop because I = do not want to build the fiberglass version and I wanted aluminum tanks = anyway. I may put a Corvair motor on my ride, or not, depending on if = William will get back to me via e-mail or phone in the next week, or I = will put a 2180 VW from Great Plains in front. I expect to have my aircraft done in 800-1000 hours build time. Will it = be the incredible machine Mark is making? No, not even close. Having = said that, the EAA tech rep who has looked at my plane three times now = has told me it has some of the best craftsmanship he has ever seen = (well, his eyes are going bad on him and the light was bad that day in = the shop). I am building a plane to fly, pure and simple. It will not = win any airshow prizes, but it will not be the nastiest looking plane on = the flight line either. As you consider what plane to build, or work on the project you have = already started in your own shop, remember to take the numbers, = opinions, and inputs from other as guidance only. If your project is = satisfying you and you are comfortable with how it is going, do not = strive meet the same numbers as the next guy, unless that is part of = YOUR goal. Again, to Mark, you are the man when it comes to knowing this design = inside and out. My hat is off to you for all of your help and input I = have used. Personally, I think you and Dean ought to take all of the = mods you have made to this design, put them into plans and market it as = a new aircraft, since Rand Robinson will never upgrade the KR designs = and it has many parts of other aircraft in it. Having a good friend = from church who is friends with Mr. Robinson, I know that this was never = the intent of this design to be the end all be all, and you have = certainly taken it much farther than either Mr. Rand or Mr. Robinson = ever imagined it would go. Good on you. Now, back to the shop, Dave "Zipper" Goodman zipperts@whidbey.net ------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C077DA.ABED37C0-- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2001 15:29:57 -0600 To: From: "Mark Langford" Subject: Re: KR> Build time Message-ID: <003701c07827$d1bf0b70$561cf618@600athlon> Zipper wrote: >Mark Langford wrote a few days ago about the average build time being 1500- 2500 hours. You KNOW I have to disagree. Actually what I said was 1500-2000 hours. And the only reason Aerocrafter says 800 is because RR says 800, and we all know what THOSE numbers mean. I used to be VW mechanic at a dealership, and had to do "warranty" work all the time. One job that I'll never forget was "R&R engine block" on 1981 diesel Rabbit. It seems VW opened a new assembly line that year, and the guy that zipped the head bolts in (with a torqueing impact wrench) wasn't told to turn the block upside down and drain the cleaning solvent before he put the head on. Hydrostatic lock from the resulting high speed "screwing" cracked the bottom of the bolt holes, resulting in black diesel oil in the customer's coolant reservoir at about 500 miles (or the first time they opened the hood). I got to "R&R block" (that means literally remove the engine, take EVERYTHING off the block, and put it all back on a NEW one) and I got paid 5.5 hours to do it! I did EIGHT of them in a row, and the best I ever got was the last one, which took a full nine hour day, but I was determined to say I did it! That was a pretty slim paycheck that pay period. Maybe you get my point. They say a house is only 25% complete when it's framed, but it looks a lot like a house. If you don't have wings yet, you're not even "framed" yet. There was a KR Newsletter reader survey once that detailed how far along you were based on what stuff you had completed. About the only number I remember is that if your fuselage was built you were at 10% (maybe somebody else remembers which issue that was and what the numbers were). I'm afraid you have a lot further to go than you think. Even mounting and plumbing the engine is very time consuming (not to mention rebuilding one), as is wiring up the panel. If you have almost 500 hours in yours now, I'll venture to say there's no way you'll be done at 1000. Now one factor might be WHAT you consider to be time "working" on the KR. I have a builder's log that's very accurate with regards to how much time I spend working on my plane. I don't count "redesign" work, just actual construction time. But I DO count cleaning up the basement after I make a mess, and the time I spend doing stuff like walnut hull blasting my engine parts.. And I think I SHOULD could that time, because if I wasn't building an airplane, I'd spend that time doing something entirely different. I don't count the redesign time because I don't HAVE to redesign stuff, I do it because I want to. Of course you're dead on with your kudos regarding me and my work. : ) But mine's not going to be a show plane either. I'd be hard pressed to beat the quality of Tom Crawford's, Jim Faughn's, Bobby Muse's or Lester Palmer's finish work. But it will be exactly like I want it in most other respects. In fact, Troy has just about convinced me to leave it in primer so that I can continue to experiment and make changes after I get it flying, kinda like Klaus Savier does with his Long EZ (or whatever it is). That will also remove a large obstacle to my finishing it before the 2001 Gathering. I'll likely paint the bottom so the primer doesn't absorb a bunch of engine oil, but other than that I may very well leave it in primer. Back to the basement... Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama mailto:langford@hiwaay.net see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 02:05:49 -0500 To: "krnet" From: "w.g. kirkland" Subject: build time Message-ID: <012101c07878$57970ea0$9c905bd1@kirkland> ------=_NextPart_000_011E_01C0784E.5B35AB40 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable If time is of the essence don't build an airplane. If you are building your own airplane to save money go get a job at = MacDonalds you will be further ahead. If you are building because you enjoy the challenge and the learning = experience come join our happy group. You will get lots of both. W.G.(Bill) KIRKLAND kirkland@vianet.on.ca ------=_NextPart_000_011E_01C0784E.5B35AB40-- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2001 16:41:47 EST To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: KR2616TJ@aol.com Subject: Langfordkosh---was build time. Message-ID: In a message dated 1/6/01 3:18:51 PM Eastern Standard Time, zipperts@whidbey.net writes: << At the risk of putting him too high on a pedestal (and I hope to still be able to see him at the top of it when I am near his home in two weeks), >> OH, It's St. Langford again residing at Langford Manor:-). What's this I hear about something in two weeks. I was thinking about giving Mark a call this morning and flying down to his house but gave it up to be safety pilot for someone today (he pasted 1200 VSI down while under the hood, turning to a 90 degree heading and descending 500'....but that's a different story). Anybody within a 4-5 hour drive of Huntsville up for a Landfordkosh IV, V, VI or whatever it is now???? I'm game, hell the beers cold and the hangar lies told are worth the a gathering:-). For the newbees, Landfordkosh is nothing more than a bunch of us gathering in Mark's basement, around his airplane, looking, talking KR's. It is a great learning experience. Seriously, anyone up for a mass gathering at the holy ground? Oh, Mark I guess we should ask first. Dana Overall 2000 KR Gathering host Richmond, KY mailto:kr2616tj@aol.com http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/hangar/7085/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2001 16:10:19 -0600 To: From: "Mark Langford" Subject: Re: KR> Langfordkosh---was build time. Message-ID: <005101c0782d$75ebe830$561cf618@600athlon> Dana wrote: > Seriously, anyone up for a mass gathering at the holy ground? That's fine with me, but my plane's upside down right now, and not much to look at. Y'all can help me flip it over when you get here as long as you put it back like you found it when you leave. I can't do it Sunday the 14th, but any other day is fine (including week days, which just might be even better). How about Saturday or Sunday the 21st or 22nd? Or Wednesday the 17th? I guess it would depend on when Zipper is going to be here too. Ed Blocher and David Taylor have been threatening to show up too, so that would work out well. And anybody else is welcome, as long as you don't bring any Rustoleum with you. Ed wanted to watch me throw the Corvair together, which I was going to get ready to do for him. I could postpone that until then. Actually, I just put the case halves together a few minutes ago, but that's pretty anticlimactic, as there's nothing in it but crank and cam. You don't even glue the case halves together. Way easier than a VW engine! Pistons, cylinders, heads, etc are next, as well as excruciating details on the web page. Be prepared for a let-down though. My plane's not nearly as nice in person as it is on the web... Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama mailto:langford@hiwaay.net see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2001 17:45:57 EST To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: KR2616TJ@aol.com Subject: Re: KR> Langfordkosh---was build time. Message-ID: <35.f09ff10.2788fa25@aol.com> In a message dated 01/06/2001 5:07:28 PM Eastern Standard Time, langford@hiwaay.net writes: << How about Saturday or Sunday the 21st or 22nd? I guess it would depend on when Zipper is going to be here too.>> What do you think guys, the 21st. or 22nd. would work great for me. Guys, like I said, if you are within a 4 to 5 hour drive..........it is worth the trip. <> Yea, right Mark.................been there, seen it................am still impressed. Dana Overall 2000 KR Gathering host Richmond, KY mailto:kr2616tj@aol.com http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/7085/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2001 17:09:04 -0600 To: From: "Mark Langford" Subject: Re: KR> Langfordkosh---was build time. Message-ID: <008401c07835$aa325900$561cf618@600athlon> > << How about Saturday or Sunday the 21st or 22nd? Zipper says he'll be here the 23, 24, and 25, but that's in the middle of the week. I might point out that I screwed up (again) and said 21st and 22nd, but Saturday is the 20th, and Sunday is the 21st. I could go either way, depending on who wants to come when. We might want to make it a weekend though, in case somebody wants to fly in from Europe... Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama mailto:langford@hiwaay.net see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2001 20:31:34 EST To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: KR2616TJ@aol.com Subject: Re: KR> Langfordkosh---was build time. Message-ID: In a message dated 01/06/2001 6:06:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, langford@hiwaay.net writes: << but Saturday is the 20th, and Sunday is the 21st. I could go either way, depending on who wants to come when. We might want to make it a weekend though, in case somebody wants to fly in from Europe... >> Kentucky is beautiful country but it still is within the US:-) I didn't look at the calender either but that weekend is good for me. Chim in guys. Dana Overall 2000 KR Gathering host Richmond, KY mailto:kr2616tj@aol.com http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/7085/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 09:52:00 -0600 To: "Mark Langford" , From: "Edwin Blocher" Subject: Re: KR> Langfordkosh---was build time. Message-ID: <006901c078c1$cb4fcdc0$d3e279a5@computer> Sat. the 20th and/or Sunday the 21st sound good to me. Ed Blocher Moody, Alabama kr-n899eb@mindspring.com ----- Original Message ----- From: Mark Langford To: Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2001 5:09 PM Subject: Re: KR> Langfordkosh---was build time. > > << How about Saturday or Sunday the 21st or 22nd? > > Zipper says he'll be here the 23, 24, and 25, but that's in the middle of > the week. I might point out that I screwed up (again) and said 21st and > 22nd, but Saturday is the 20th, and Sunday is the 21st. I could go either > way, depending on who wants to come when. We might want to make it a > weekend though, in case somebody wants to fly in from Europe... > > 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: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 16:12:34 -0600 To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: Mark Jones Subject: [Fwd: KR> Langfordkosh---was build time.] Message-ID: <3A579852.3DAE780C@execpc.com> --------------05607CB610AD29A7F25EC86F Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -- 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 --------------05607CB610AD29A7F25EC86F Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 Message-ID: <3A579721.AB0F0D29@execpc.com> Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 16:07:29 -0600 From: Mark Jones X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD NSCPCD47 (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: KR2616TJ@aol.com Subject: Re: KR> Langfordkosh---was build time. References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit You can count me in on this one. I am sure there are plenty of exceptional ideas to steal from you guys. KR2616TJ@aol.com wrote: . For the newbees, Landfordkosh is nothing more than a bunch of us gathering in Mark's basement, around his airplane, looking, talking KR's. It is a great learning experience. Seriously, anyone up for a mass gathering at the holy ground? Oh, Mark I guess we should ask first. -- 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 --------------05607CB610AD29A7F25EC86F-- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 19:05:52 -0600 To: CorvAIRCRAFT , KR-Net From: Mark Jones Subject: Dual Ignition Message-ID: <3A57C0F0.F337E335@execpc.com> I posted a dual ignition fail-safe system in excel format on my site. Click on http://sites.netscape.net/n886mj/homepage and then go to the engine site to view this if you would like. Please give feedback on this system. -- 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: Sun, 07 Jan 2001 00:38:17 -0600 To: CorvAIRCRAFT , KR-Net From: Mark Jones Subject: Another update. Message-ID: <3A580ED8.7ECB47CC@execpc.com> Just added photos to my instrument panel page. -- 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: Sun, 07 Jan 2001 09:19:45 -0500 To: KR2616TJ@aol.com From: Forrest Erickson CC: krnet@mailinglists.org Subject: Forrest Erickson, Re: KR> Langfordkosh---was build time. Message-ID: <3A587B01.7C87572@ntown.net> --------------69160E7CF5895F99048632EC Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I live in Maryville TN and so am interested if it is a weekend or at least continues into a weekend. Forrest, call me Lee, Erickson Home phone 865-977-1242 KR2616TJ@aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 01/06/2001 6:06:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, > langford@hiwaay.net writes: > > << but Saturday is the 20th, and Sunday is the 21st. I could go either > way, depending on who wants to come when. We might want to make it a > weekend though, in case somebody wants to fly in from Europe... >> > > Kentucky is beautiful country but it still is within the US:-) > > I didn't look at the calender either but that weekend is good for me. > > Chim in guys. > > Dana Overall > 2000 KR Gathering host > Richmond, KY > mailto:kr2616tj@aol.com > http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/7085/ > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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 --------------69160E7CF5895F99048632EC-- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 13:11:35 -0500 To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: Kenneth L Wiltrout Subject: EGT Message-ID: <20010107.131135.-66517.0.klw1953@juno.com> Just curious, what is the maximum EGT for a 2100 Revmaster? I got to admit, when I fly 172'S I just lean it out till the engine starts to run rough, then turn it in till it smooths out. I do have a EGT gauge in the S. I'm currently writing the manual as per the FAA. Thanks guys----------------Kenny (Pennsylvania) N6399U ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 17:43:05 EST To: krnet@mailinglists.org (krnet) From: Kr2skip@aol.com Subject: Prop Location Message-ID: <53.ac7479.278a4af9@aol.com> I have replaced the prop on my KR but seem to have a bit more vibration than before. Would like to have some comments on the proper location of the prop relative to #1 at TDC. Skip ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 16:55:13 -0600 To: "krnet" From: "Mark Langford" Subject: Re: KR> Prop Location Message-ID: <008601c078fc$e647f0e0$561cf618@600athlon> > I have replaced the prop on my KR but seem to have a bit more vibration than > before. Would like to have some comments on the proper location of the prop > relative to #1 at TDC. Same prop or different prop? And if different, what brand and was it balanced? (dumb question, I hope). Troy has installed two brand new props straight from the manufacturers with substantial vibration. The third one was a charm... Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama mailto:langford@hiwaay.net see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 16:04:34 -0700 To: , "krnet" From: "Brian Vasseur" Subject: Re: KR> Prop Location Message-ID: <003301c078fe$33dfb8a0$2c45e4cf@C5477> I built a prop balancer a while back and was surprised that mine wasn't balanced very well. It was pretty simple, just a dowel thru the prop center with a 1/4" rod thru it. I embedded 2 razor knife blades in the stand to reduce friction. Just a quick note if you do this, once you have the prop balanced then rotate the prop 180 degrees looking down from the cieling. This will eliminate errors because the stand wasn't perfectly level. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: "krnet" Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2001 3:43 PM Subject: KR> Prop Location > I have replaced the prop on my KR but seem to have a bit more vibration than > before. Would like to have some comments on the proper location of the prop > relative to #1 at TDC. > > Skip > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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: Sun, 07 Jan 2001 19:07:29 -0600 To: corvaircraft@usm.edu, krnet@mailinglists.org From: Mark Jones Subject: Re: corvaircraft: Another update. Message-ID: <3A5912D0.4F8FE265@execpc.com> You know I could just say "ditto" to that but that would be too easy. I love what I am doing with the KR and the Corvair engine and I know Langford feels the same way. However, I could not have progressed as far as I have without all of you. The wealth of knowledge between the two groups I am associated with is phenomenal and can not be replaced. Yes, I am praising all of you for what you are doing or have done in the experimental aviation world. We are all one big family and an elite group in this huge world. Let's keep it this way and continue to learn from each other. THANK YOU Mark Jones Mark Langford wrote: > ===============================CorvAIRCRAFT=============================== > Pat wrote: > > > Between the two Marks (Langford and Jones) you KR builders > > are EXTREMELY lucky to have such talented and innovative craftsman > > to follow. I'm not a KR builder, but I love looking at everything > > on these guy's sites. > > Thanks. It's kinda nice having you CorvAIRCRAFTers around too! I'm working > on an engine disassembly/assembly page now, so stay tuned... > > Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama > mailto:langford@hiwaay.net > see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford > > > > > ===============================CorvAIRCRAFT=============================== > To unsubscribe send "unsubscribe corvaircraft" to"majordomo@usm.edu" > For help send "info corvaircraft" or "help" to "majordomo@usm.edu" -- 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 ------------------------------ End of krnet Digest ***********************************