From: <krnet-digest-help@mailinglists.org>
To: <krnet@mailinglists.org>
Subject: krnet Digest 9 Feb 2002 15:10:13 -0000 Issue 370
Date: Saturday, February 09, 2002 7:10 AM

krnet Digest 9 Feb 2002 15:10:13 -0000 Issue 370

Topics (messages 8760 through 8779):

Re: Prop hub extention
	8760 by: Jerry Mahurin

Re: Hydraulic Brakes
	8761 by: virgnvs.juno.com

Re: Kevlar rollover bar
	8762 by: Glasco

Re: RR prefab parts
	8763 by: Charles Buddy & Cheryl Midkiff

KR as Sport plane ?
	8764 by: Tony Alderman
	8771 by: Pat Driscoll
	8772 by: virgnvs.juno.com

The KR future and urgent appeals to Sport Pilot NPRM by KR enthusiate imput of official comments to FAA via internet
	8765 by: Mr. Bryce Guenther

KR - Sport plane
	8766 by: GoFlySlow2.aol.com
	8768 by: Philip J. Visconti
	8769 by: GoFlySlow2.aol.com
	8770 by: GoFlySlow2.aol.com

Sterba Props
	8767 by: Philip J. Visconti
	8778 by: Daniel Heath

TET WAFs
	8773 by: ROBERT COOPER

Sport Plane
	8774 by: Steve Bounds

FAA SPORT-CLASS RULES
	8775 by: RICK WILSON

I think I want to build a KR
	8776 by: Ricky Farley

Re: [MyGlassCockpit] Kit Planes Engine monitor
	8777 by: Ron Eason

Phillip Matheson
	8779 by: Mark Jones

Administrivia:

To subscribe to the digest, e-mail:

	<krnet-digest-subscribe@mailinglists.org>



To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail:

	<krnet-digest-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org>



To post to the list, e-mail:

	<krnet@mailinglists.org>




----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2002 12:16:12 -0500
To: "Doug Peyton" <doug_peyton@hotmail.com>,Stickandrudder@cs.com,
  krnet@mailinglists.org
From: "Jerry Mahurin" <jerrymahurin@charter.net>
Subject: Re: KR> Prop hub extention
Message-ID: <web-330852@dc-mxdb11.cluster1.charter.net>

Doug,

I'm not a certified engineer, But.....

A longer bolt is easier to bend.  Most, if not all, prop 
hub extensions that I have seen have two sets of bolt 
holes; one going forward and one going rearward.  That 
way, you have only short bolts.  

We had considered using a prop hub extension on our 
project but decided not to after consulting with several 
highly respected engineer types.....  And we even have the 
Force One front end on our engine which is the strongest 
that I know of....

Jerry Mahurin
Lugoff, SC
http:/www.jerrymahurin.com

On Thu, 07 Feb 2002 12:58:22 +0100
  "Doug Peyton" <doug_peyton@hotmail.com> wrote:
>What would you think about using an aluminum disk 2" 
>thick between the prop and the face-plate, and then 
>attaching with bolts 2" longer?  Do you think that would 
>work?
>
>
>From: Stickandrudder@cs.com
>To: krnet@mailinglists.org
>Subject: KR> Prop hub extention
>Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2002 20:41:23 EST
>
>Anyone know where I can get a prop hub extention for a VW 
>HAPI that moves the
>prop out 2 inches?
>
>Thanks
>
>Paul O'Reilly
>KR2 Stretch
>Derry NH
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To post to the list, email: krnet@mailinglists.org , NOT 
>"reply all"
>
>To UNsubscribe, e-mail: 
>krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: 
>krnet-help@mailinglists.org
>
>See the KRNet archives at 
>http://www.escribe.com/aviation/krnet/
>
>
>
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at 
>http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To post to the list, email: krnet@mailinglists.org , NOT 
>"reply all"
>
>To UNsubscribe, e-mail: 
>krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org For additional 
>commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org
>
>See the KRNet archives at 
>http://www.escribe.com/aviation/krnet/ 

<TEXTAREA NAME="Signature" ROWS="4" COLS="60">Jerry 
Mahurin
Lugoff, SC
http://www.jerrymahurin.com

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2002 10:53:01 -0500
To: kr2jm@d-web.com
From: virgnvs@juno.com
Cc: krnet@mailinglists.org
Subject: Re: KR> Hydraulic Brakes
Message-ID: <20020207.130333.-305461.0.virgnvs@juno.com>

        Teflon tape PROPERLY applied. Teflon paste?
If it is a flare fitting it will not need anything, Virg

On Tue, 05 Feb 2002 19:18:21 -0800 Jim Morehead <kr2jm@d-web.com> writes:
> Netters,
>     What type of ³pipe dope² should you use in the 1/8² pipe fitting 
> in the
> brake system.  I will be using Red brake fluid.
> 
> Thanks,
> Jim Morehead
> Cameron Park, CA
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To post to the list, email: krnet@mailinglists.org , NOT "reply 
> all"
> 
> To UNsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org 
> For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org
> 
> See the KRNet archives at http://www.escribe.com/aviation/krnet/ 
> 
> 

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2002 11:39:14 -0800
To: mailto:
From: Glasco <Glasco@ridgenet.net>
Subject: Re: KR> Kevlar rollover bar
Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20020207113914.007c0cc0@mail.ridgenet.net>

Frank,
	YEAH,	that was always the idea in my sprint car also.  However after
several years I managed to put it into a steel retaining wall cage first at
110 mph.  When they finally let me out of medical I loaded it on the
trailer and pulled it home.  I wasn't out of action but it took a couple of
weeks to get the car back together and back on the track.

	Look at Indy cars and speedboat technology.  Within limits crashes should
be survivable.  I don't want to total my project ever but if it happens...

Brad

At 02:59 PM 2/6/02 -0800, you wrote:
>Brad,
>Just try not to land upside-down.
>
>
>=====
>Frank Ross, San Antonio, TX,
>

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2002 17:37:36 -0800
To: "Dave and Tina Goodman" <zipperts@whidbey.net>,
	<krnet@mailinglists.org>
From: "Charles Buddy & Cheryl Midkiff" <cmidkiff@gte.net>
Subject: Re: KR> RR prefab parts
Message-ID: <004d01c1b041$30aa1420$9d733e3f@cmidkiff>

Dave,
It's good to hear from you again after the long period of silence. I bet
you're glad to be back home. Have you done much more on your KR2S? Did you
actually have time while out to sea to work on your instrument panel like
you planned? I still have those VCR tapes you loaned to me. I'll try to copy
them and get them back to you soon.

Bud (Lynnwood, WA)

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave and Tina Goodman" <zipperts@whidbey.net>
To: <krnet@mailinglists.org>
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2002 1:00 AM
Subject: Re: KR> RR prefab parts

Gents,

I have the KR-2S prefab turtle decks, canopy, and canopy frame.  They are
very nice workmanship, with honeycomb on the turtle decks.  Very light
weight materials!  Unless you were really good with fiberglass, you would be
hard pressed to make a set lighter than these.

The only drawback I can think of on using the decks and prefab parts is that
they will leave the builder with virtually no ability to widen the fuselage.
I extended the widest part of my fuselage aft about 8 inches without
widening the fuselage beyond the plans maximum and still had some difficulty
with the front of the turtle deck fitting my fuselage.  Other than that, the
parts are great, in my opinion, and I recommend them.

Good luck with your building!

Respectfully,
Dave "Zipper" Goodman

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.309 / Virus Database: 170 - Release Date: 12/17/2001

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2002 10:36:02 -0800
From: "Tony Alderman" <t-hawk@mindspring.com>
Cc: <krnet@mailinglists.org>
Subject: KR as Sport plane ?
Message-ID: <003801c1b0cf$7670b020$719bf7a5@computer>

I know this is a bit off the subject but ........ I was thinking about
building a KR-2 as a sport plane.  I know that it would have to be modified
some but what exactly would it take to do it?   
Thanks   

Tony

> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To post to the list, email: krnet@mailinglists.org , NOT "reply all"
> 
> To UNsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org 
> For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org
> 
> See the KRNet archives at http://www.escribe.com/aviation/krnet/ 
> 

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2002 12:41:42 -0600
To: "Tony Alderman" <t-hawk@mindspring.com>
From: "Pat Driscoll" <patrick36@usfamily.net>
Cc: <krnet@mailinglists.org>
Subject: Re: KR> KR as Sport plane ?
Message-ID: <002201c1b0d0$41a800e0$84dc6843@oemcomputer>

Tony,
   I was thinking about adding wing area,(Hershey Bar Wings) and using a
climb prop. Not sure if that will do the entire thing or not.
   Pat Driscoll

----- Original Message -----
From: Tony Alderman <t-hawk@mindspring.com>
Cc: <krnet@mailinglists.org>
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 12:36 PM
Subject: KR> KR as Sport plane ?

> I know this is a bit off the subject but ........ I was thinking about
> building a KR-2 as a sport plane.  I know that it would have to be
modified
> some but what exactly would it take to do it?
> Thanks
>
> Tony
>
>
>
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To post to the list, email: krnet@mailinglists.org , NOT "reply all"
> >
> > To UNsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org
> >
> > See the KRNet archives at http://www.escribe.com/aviation/krnet/
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To post to the list, email: krnet@mailinglists.org , NOT "reply all"
>
> To UNsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org
>
> See the KRNet archives at http://www.escribe.com/aviation/krnet/
>

------ http://USFamily.Net/info - Unlimited Internet - From $8.99/mo! ------

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2002 16:21:20 -0500
To: t-hawk@mindspring.com
From: virgnvs@juno.com
Cc: krnet@mailinglists.org
Subject: Re: KR> KR as Sport plane ?
Message-ID: <20020208.163215.-149089.0.virgnvs@juno.com>

        Slow it down ?? Virg

On Fri, 8 Feb 2002 10:36:02 -0800 "Tony Alderman" <t-hawk@mindspring.com>
writes:
> I know this is a bit off the subject but ........ I was thinking 
> about
> building a KR-2 as a sport plane.  I know that it would have to be 
> modified
> some but what exactly would it take to do it?   
> Thanks   
> 
> Tony
> 
> 
> 
> > 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To post to the list, email: krnet@mailinglists.org , NOT "reply 
> all"
> > 
> > To UNsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org 
> > For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org
> > 
> > See the KRNet archives at http://www.escribe.com/aviation/krnet/ 
> > 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To post to the list, email: krnet@mailinglists.org , NOT "reply 
> all"
> 
> To UNsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org 
> For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org
> 
> See the KRNet archives at http://www.escribe.com/aviation/krnet/ 
> 
> 

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2002 10:40:48 -0500
To: krnet@mailinglists.org
From: flykrs@netscape.net (Mr. Bryce Guenther)
Subject: The KR future and urgent appeals to Sport Pilot NPRM by KR enthusiate imput of official comments to FAA via internet
Message-ID: <27A11B2E.7E335080.00062CFF@netscape.net>

The very immediate need for krnetters to voice their individual views on the Light Sport Pilot and Aircraft NPRM is highly recommended.
If you all EVER had an opportunity to STAND for your FREEDOM and SPEAKOUT on behalf of your aviation future it is NOW!!!
 The FAA has given us a "window" of a few days to recieve comments world wide as to the rules for which we are governed. The rules basically are out of character for the aviation community interests and only the NIEVE would be willing to herded into the slaughter house of the restrictiveness stated in the NPRM.
 AS we all know the KR is well suited and is the "best bang for the buck" aircraft for all of us and many would be KR's pilots. The KR and many aircraft are so perfect why should we agree to wording of the NPRM that displaces the KR out of the Light Sport Aircraft/Pilot range? We shouldn't the NPRM takes away rather than accomodates small aircraft enthusiates access to flying. The fact is many Private Pilots don't want the CLASS III medical at all and believe if you can command driving a car a small aircraft in NO DIFFERENT. 
 BE BOLD and take the innitiative to email your comments in a dignifying respectful manner for best effectiveness to:
 http://dms.dot.gov/search
type in  11133 for the Docket Number
then click on ES SUBMIT
then scroll down to the "last bullet" (very appropriate it might be our last chance to fight) and click on UNREGISTERED USER SUBMISSION
Then fill out all the information and write your comments:
 As Far as I know the Feds won't castrate you for comments now!
It will be published as did mine and I really feel good about that because I did my part and all KR enthusiates can to so PLEASE do an comment!
-- 
Flying is Fun and a Thrill that nearly nothing else can compare.

__________________________________________________________________
Your favorite stores, helpful shopping tools and great gift ideas. Experience the convenience of buying online with Shop@Netscape! http://shopnow.netscape.com/

Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Mail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2002 10:50:20 EST
To: krnet@mailinglists.org
From: GoFlySlow2@aol.com
Subject: KR - Sport plane
Message-ID: <8.20f5caff.29954dbc@aol.com>

--part1_8.20f5caff.29954dbc_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Letter sent to news media:

>   In the wake of 9-11, the FAA has proposed a reduction in flight training 
> and medical standards for new and existing general aviation pilots.
>    In a new category, called Sport Pilot, the FAA proposes to eliminate the 
> now required medical and psychiatric examinations for continued licensure 
> to fly small aircraft.  
>    Pressed by aging but affluent groups like the Aircraft Owners and Pilots 
> Association, (AOPA), and the Experimental Aircraft Association, (EAA), the 
> FAA /DOT on February 6, 2002  put forth a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 
> (NPRM).
> 
>   It should be noted that many, if not all administrative FAA officials are 
> current members of both groups.
> 
>    In this NPRM is outlined a new lower category of Pilot, Aircraft and 
> Training requirements.
> Pilots that no longer are able to obtain medical clearance will now be able 
> to fly half ton aircraft at 150mph over urban areas and into busy metro 
> airports.  All that will be required is that they have a State Driver 
> License.
> 
>   The new proposal also lowers the flight training standards for new pilots 
> in total flight time instruction, Dual and Solo, by 55%.  Currently a 
> private pilot is required a minimum of 40 hours instruction.  The new 
> proposal states 18 hours of instruction to be required.  See sumary at EAA 
> web site -  <A HREF="http://www.sportpilot.org/nprm/executive_summary.html">Sport Pilot NPRM Executive Summary</A> 
> 
>   The FAA position is that by decreasing costs and time for instruction, 
> and to reduce the certification standards for applicable aircraft, and 
> allow the owner of such aircraft to perform work upon that aircraft,  the 
> general public to save expenses and will be more inclined to take up 
> aviation.  This, in an apparent attempt to stimulate the sagging economic 
> atmosphere that General Aviation finds itself.
> 
>   This proposal is being pushed thru the bureaucratic channels with little 
> fanfare, and there is no doubt as to the reasons why.   A Public Comment 
> Procedure, required by law, is in effect now and for the next 90 days (May 
> 6, 2002). It is little known or advertised.
> 
>   Interestingly, there are already two avenues that the pilot without 
> medical clearance can still pursue within the sport of flying.  One is 
> Glider flying, motorized and pure glider.  These are typically not flown 
> over populated areas.  Two, is Ultralight flying.
> Again, restricted from flight over populated areas and controlled 
> airspace's.
> 
>   Both of these types of flying require lesser amounts of training  (10 
> hours) due to their restrictive areas of operations and no operations 
> within busy controlled airspace's and airports.
> 
>   Both, Glider flight and Ultralight flight and training have shown to be 
> statistically safer in all areas of operations per the FAA incident data 
> System web site  -  <A HREF="http://nasdac.faa.gov/asp/fw_fids.asp">FAA Incident Data System (FIDS)</A>  and Aviation Accident 
> Data base Querry. <A HREF="http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/query.asp#query_start">Aviation Accident Database Query</A>   ie, out of 78,000 
> aviation incidents / accidents, 50 were ultralight related over the last 7 
> years.
> 
>   Another statement that FAA makes, is that there are numerous unlicensed 
> pilots, flying unregistered aircraft thruout the country.  And that this 
> condition has shown or has potential to create increased numbers of 
> accidents.  Again, the data bases do not reflect this assertion.  
> 
>   But If, in fact, there are numerous unlicensed pilots with unregistered 
> aircraft, it would appear that FAA is attempting to resolve the issue by 
> regulation as opposed to oversight and enforcement.  Checks for credentials 
> at airports would seem to be the most logical procedure.  That is where the 
> pilots and aircraft are or will have to be at some point.  FAA is mandated 
> with that responsibility and have the ability to issue very costly fines. 
> They have apparently fallen down on this duty, if they are to be believed 
> that there are numerous abuses.
> 
>    Twelve years ago, 1989,  in another economic downturn cycle, the FAA 
> implemented a similar pilot program called "Recreational Pilot"  It's 
> hallmark was for decreased flight instruction time. (less expensive) It was 
> touted as "the new beginning for recreational flight for the public"  It 
> was restrictive in areas of operations.  It required a 3rd class medical 
> certificate. It is still in effect.  
>    
>    The total number of current licensed "Recreational Pilots" under that 
> program is 336 by FAA Data Base.  That equates to 28 pilots per year at a 
> cost of millions of dollars to implement. 
> 
>    Eighteen years ago FAA implemented Ultralight Regulations.  To date 
> there are over 18,000 registered Ultralight pilots to which, a significant 
> number advance to Private pilot status as a natural progression.
> 
>     The new Sport Pilot Proposal is a public danger.  It is ill though out. 
> It is self-serving to the above special interest groups.  
> 
> Charles L. Scrivner 
> - Private Pilot - EAA member - Aircraft owner - Airport owner (L00)
> e-mail goflyslow2@aol.com
> 

Chuck

--part1_8.20f5caff.29954dbc_boundary--

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2002 11:10:35 -0500
To: GoFlySlow2@aol.com
From: "Philip J. Visconti" <viscan@juno.com>
Cc: krnet@mailinglists.org
Subject: Re: KR> KR - Sport plane
Message-ID: <20020208.111036.-411367.1.viscan@juno.com>

Chuck,

What was the source of the letter "...sent to the media "  that seemed to
be so negative about pilots ?

Phil
________________________________________________________________
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/web/.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2002 12:17:36 EST
To: laheze@ev1.net, krnet@mailinglists.org
From: GoFlySlow2@aol.com
Subject: Re: KR> KR - Sport plane
Message-ID: <27.228e4196.29956230@aol.com>

--part1_27.228e4196.29956230_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

In a message dated 2/8/02 8:34:11 AM Pacific Standard Time, laheze@ev1.net=20
writes:
> One more thing, where did he come up with that psychiatric crap, that is n=
ot=20
> true, that is a blatant lie.
>=20

> An evaluation is incorporated, even in a 3rd class medical.
 <A HREF=3D"http://www.flightphysical.com/">FAA Flight Physical: Pilot Medic=
al Exams Facilitated</A>=20

=A7 67.307 Mental. <A HREF=3D"http://www.flightphysical.com/part67/#top">Ret=
urn to Top</A>

Mental standards for a thirdclass airman medical certificate are: (a) No=20
established medical history or clinical diagnosis of any of the following:=20
(1) A personality disorder that is severe enough to have repeatedly man
ifested itself by overt acts; (2) A psychosis. As used in this section,=20
"psychosis" refers to a mental disorder in which (i) The individual has=20
manifested delusions, hallucinations, grossly bizarre or disorganized=20
behavior, or other commonly accepted symptoms of this condition; or (ii) The=
=20
individual may reasonably be expected to manifest delusions, hallucinations,=
=20
grossly bizarre or disorganized behavior, or other commonly accepted symptom=
s=20
of this condition. (3) A bipolar disorder. (4) Substance dependence, except=20
where there is established clinical evidence, satisfactory to the Federal Ai=
r=20
Surgeon, of recovery, including sustained total abstinence from the=20
substance(s) for not less than the preceding 2 years. As used in this=20
section-- (i) "Substance" includes: alcohol; other sedatives and hypnotics;=20
anxiolytics; opioids; central nervous system stimulants such as cocaine,=20
amphetamines, and similarly acting sympathomimetics; hallucinogens;=20
phencyclidine or similarly acting arylcyclohexylamines; cannabis; inhalants;=
=20
and other psychoactive drugs and chemicals; and (ii) "Substance dependence"=20
means a condition in which a person is dependent on a substance, other than=20
tobacco or ordinary xanthinecontaining (e.g., caffeine) beverages, as=20
evidenced by-- (A) Increased tolerance; (B) Manifestation of withdrawal=20
symptoms; (C) Impaired control of use; or (D) Continued use despite damage t=
o=20
physical health or impairment of social, personal, or occupational=20
functioning. (b) No substance abuse within the preceding 2 years defined as:=
=20
(1) Use of a substance in a situation in which that use was physically=20
hazardous, if there has been at any other time an instance of the use of a=20
substance also in a situation in which that use was physically hazardous; (2=
)=20
A verified positive drug test result conducted under an anti-drug rule or=20
internal program of the U.S. Department of Transportation or any other=20
Administration within the U.S. Department of Transportation; or (3) Misuse o=
f=20
a substance that the Federal Air Surgeon, based on case history and=20
appropriate, qualified medical judgment relating to the substance involved,=20
finds-- (i) Makes the person unable to safely perform the duties or exercise=
=20
the privileges of the airman certificate applied for or held; or (ii) May=20
reasonably be expected, for the maximum duration of the airman medical=20
certificate applied for or held, to make the person unable to perform those=20
duties or exercise those privileges. (c) No other personality disorder,=20
neurosis, or other mental condition that the Federal Air Surgeon, based on=20
the case history and appropriate, qualified medical judgment relating to the=
=20
condition involved, finds-- (1) Makes the person unable to safely perform th=
e=20
duties or exercise the privileges of the airman certificate applied for or=20
held; or (2) May reasonably be expected, for the maximum duration of the=20
airman medical certificate applied for or held, to make the person unable to=
=20
perform those duties or exercise those privileges. <A HREF=3D"http://www.fli=
ghtphysical.com/part67/#top">Return to Top</A>

=A7 67.309 Neurologic. Neurologic standards for a thirdclass airman medical=20
certificate are: (a) No established medical history or clinical diagnosis of=
=20
any of the following: (1) Epilepsy; (2) A disturbance of consciousness=20
without satisfactory medical explanation of the cause; or (3) A transient=20
loss of control of nervous system function(s) without satisfactory medical=20
explanation of the cause; (b) No other seizure disorder, disturbance of=20
consciousness, or neurologic condition that the Federal Air Surgeon, based o=
n=20
the case history and appropriate, qualified medical judgment relating to the=
=20
condition involved, finds-- (1) Makes the person unable to safely perform th=
e=20
duties or exercise the privileges of the airman certificate applied for or=20
held; or (2) May reasonably be expected, for the maximum duration of the=20
airman medical certificate applied for or held, to make the person unable to=
=20
perform those duties.

>=20
>=20

--part1_27.228e4196.29956230_boundary--

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2002 12:45:48 EST
To: laheze@ev1.net, krnet@mailinglists.org
From: GoFlySlow2@aol.com
Subject: Re: KR> KR - Sport plane
Message-ID: <c5.1dbbc639.299568cc@aol.com>

--part1_c5.1dbbc639.299568cc_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

 laheze@ev1.net writes:
> Wow,
> 
> Sounds like a bad attitude. When obtaining a pilots license, you are 
> required to spend 20 hours with an instructor and aprox 20 hours by
> yourself. Seems to me that 18 hours of instruction is not that different.
> A guy would spend another 20 hours by himself anyway just practicing 
> takeoff and landings I would think. Whoever wrote this may be self
> serving himself in that he may have a flight training program at his 
> airport and wants to preserve the right to ripoff students as a lot
> of flight training facilities do. I soloed in 6 hours and by 20 hours was 
> tired of going with my instructor, and he probably tired of
> going with me.
> larry howell

Actually, if FAA is to be believed, MORE students should show up at flight 
schools. Due to lowered costs and no medical restrictions except for State 
Driver License.

Chuck

--part1_c5.1dbbc639.299568cc_boundary--

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2002 11:03:11 -0500
To: krnet@mailinglists.org
From: "Philip J. Visconti" <viscan@juno.com>
Subject: Sterba Props
Message-ID: <20020208.110312.-411367.0.viscan@juno.com>

I received an E-mail from Bob Gibfried that he wanted me to pass on to
the krnet. Bob has AOL and sometimes has problem getting krnet news.

I don't know how to pass on an excerpt from an E-mail. I'll just retype
what Bob sent to me.

"When you talk about all the poor service, something happens that
restores your faith in people, and you might want to pass this on to the
net.

Mailed a check to Ed Sterba for a prop on Saturday after e-mailing
details about my plane and engine. Yesterday I got a phone call from Ed
to confirm some of the details and he said he would have the prop shipped
by the end of the week. Can't believe this wonderful service. And Ed's
props have an excellent reputation in this area. Most builders with the
small engines wouldn't go anywhere else." 

Phil
________________________________________________________________
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/web/.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2002 06:22:43 -0800
To: <krnet@mailinglists.org>
From: "Daniel Heath" <danrh@att.net>
Subject: Re: KR> Sterba Props
Message-ID: <002801c1b175$3f21e340$f72b5d0c@dan>

Ed is the best, it is too bad that all businesses don't operate like Ed.  He
was like that 15 years ago.  I wouldn't buy a prop anywhere else and I tell
everyone who asks, the same thing.

Daniel R. Heath

www.EAA242.com

See our KR2 at:
www.JerryMahurin.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "Philip J. Visconti" <viscan@juno.com>
To: <krnet@mailinglists.org>
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 8:03 AM
Subject: KR> Sterba Props

> I received an E-mail from Bob Gibfried that he wanted me to pass on to
> the krnet. Bob has AOL and sometimes has problem getting krnet news.
>
> I don't know how to pass on an excerpt from an E-mail. I'll just retype
> what Bob sent to me.
>
> "When you talk about all the poor service, something happens that
> restores your faith in people, and you might want to pass this on to the
> net.
>
> Mailed a check to Ed Sterba for a prop on Saturday after e-mailing
> details about my plane and engine. Yesterday I got a phone call from Ed
> to confirm some of the details and he said he would have the prop shipped
> by the end of the week. Can't believe this wonderful service. And Ed's
> props have an excellent reputation in this area. Most builders with the
> small engines wouldn't go anywhere else."
>
> Phil
> ________________________________________________________________
> 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/web/.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To post to the list, email: krnet@mailinglists.org , NOT "reply all"
>
> To UNsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org
>
> See the KRNet archives at http://www.escribe.com/aviation/krnet/
>

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2002 16:58:36 -0500
To: "krnet_1" <krnet@mailinglists.org>
From: "ROBERT COOPER" <kr2cooper@msn.com>
Subject: TET WAFs
Message-ID: <OE36GQOuE3chAHrey7d0000beff@hotmail.com>

------=_NextPart_001_0001_01C1B0C1.D9690640
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

KR Newtters
I have a set of TET WAFs that I would like to sell. Check them out at the=
 link below. The WAFs were installed only on the Forward center spar and =
then removed. These show some light scratches to the finish (Powder coat)=
, the rest of the fittings have never been installed and are in new condi=
tion. The reason for selling is that I'm repairing Gene Byrd's wings and =
will use his fwd center spar and his WAFs. Price is $235 which is $50 off=
 original price plus I will pick up the shipping. First come first served=
.  Email me off net.
http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/tet/
Jack Cooper
mailto:kr2cooper@msn.com
http://www.geocities.com/kr2cooper/
Fayetteville, NC.

------=_NextPart_001_0001_01C1B0C1.D9690640--

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2002 20:06:30 -0600
To: <krnet@mailinglists.org>
From: "Steve Bounds" <mbounds@intop.net>
Subject: Sport Plane
Message-ID: <001501c1b10e$64f4ae20$bf4095d0@hppav>

------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C1B0DC.194F36C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

BlankHey guys, the new Sport Plane is a spinoff from the Far 103 =
Ultralight Class aircraft. These rules were written at the earliest =
stages of the UL evolution and have never been amended as the new sport =
grew. It wasn't long before the UL manufacturers found, as well as the =
owners and pilots that you cannot build a realisticly safe aircraft with =
the weight, stall, fuel compacity rules that the FAA had given them. =
Then they started building 2 seaters with bigger engines.
 The so called "fat ultralights" badly needed either a class for =
themselves or the Far103 rules needed to be amended. The new Sport Class =
is the outcome. There are a few true experimental/ homebuilts that can =
be funneled into this new class with some careful planning by the =
builders and manufacturers. BUT, if people try to slip 150 mph+ aircraft =
into this class, there will be problems for all involved, causing closer =
scrutiny by the who-know-who. So, everyone must do their part and decide =
what is best for the sport of aviationa and not just for themselves.

my 2cts. worth on the subject..................( running for cover) :-)

------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C1B0DC.194F36C0--

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2002 18:38:25 -0800 (PST)
To: KRNET@MAILINGLISTS.ORG
From: RICK WILSON <rwdw2002@yahoo.com>
Subject: FAA SPORT-CLASS RULES
Message-ID: <20020209023825.55735.qmail@web21201.mail.yahoo.com>

WE ALL NEED TO TAKE THE TIME TO SUBMIT OUR FEELINGS
ABOUT THE PROPOSED FAA SPORT-CLASS RULES. I HAVE
ALREADY SENT MINE ASKING THEM TO LEAVE THE RULES AS
THEY HAVE BEEN. YOU CAN READ MR. GUENTHER'S E-MAIL AND
GET THE ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION ADDRESS AND
INSTRUCTIONS. IF WE DON'T STICK TOGETHER, WE MAY FIND
OURSELVES WITH PLANES WE CAN'T EVEN FLY WHEN FINISHED.
THANKS, RICK WILSON

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings!
http://greetings.yahoo.com

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2002 22:01:09 -0600
To: <krnet@mailinglists.org>
From: "Ricky Farley" <geek92@satx.rr.com>
Subject: I think I want to build a KR
Message-ID: <!~!UENERkVCMDkAAQACAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABgAAAAAAAAA+IKQC05cCEqr3rqODQ8Y8sKAAAAQAAAAKdOIpGXxuUWjdEjDTiFuwwEAAAAA@satx.rr.com>

------=_NextPart_000_0000_01C1B0EC.2075B540
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

My name is Ricky Farley and I've been looking at building an airplane.
I do not yet have my license yet but I'm saving for that now, so that by
the time I do get it, I want to have something to fly that I don't have
to pay out the nose to rent.  I've looked at several kits and plans
build airplanes, and it looks as if the KR is the one I think I will
start with (cost factors are a major contributor).  I would like to find
someone close by who is actually building one that I can talk to and
look at the progress he or she has made to help solidify my decision.  I
currently live in San Antonio Texas (I think I've seen a few posts from
someone in SA on the list), but will soon be moving to San Angelo Texas
(Thanks to the US Air Force) so either location will help.  Thanks for
your help,
 
Ricky Farley, San Antonio Texas
geek92@satx.rr.com
(210) 378-5862

------=_NextPart_000_0000_01C1B0EC.2075B540--

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2002 22:24:24 -0600
To: "krnet" <krnet@mailinglists.org>
From: "Ron Eason" <ron@jrl-engineering.com>
Subject: Fw: [MyGlassCockpit] Kit Planes Engine monitor
Message-ID: <005b01c1b121$a939f730$b0621e41@Administration>

Check this out.

KRRon

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Mireley" <mireley@cem.msu.edu>
To: <MyGlassCockpit@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 7:17 AM
Subject: [MyGlassCockpit] Kit Planes Engine monitor

> "using a digital meter that The Shack sells for about
> $25 (p/n 910-4919 $24.99)"
>
> "a sophisticated -- digital engine monitor that will accept
> any number of inputs and give you a digital readout of
> the input sensor."
>
> http://www.rst-engr.com/kitplanes/KP0202/KPtext.pdf
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
> Get your FREE credit report with a FREE CreditCheck
> Monitoring Service trial
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/ACHqaB/bQ8CAA/ySSFAA/jrDrlB/TM
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> MyGlassCockpit-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 09 Feb 2002 09:11:16 -0600
To: KR-Net <krnet@mailinglists.org>
From: Mark Jones <flykr2s@execpc.com>
Subject: Phillip Matheson
Message-ID: <3C653C14.5B405D21@execpc.com>

Hello All,
Phillip sent me a couple more photos of his KR-2. One of them is on a
trailer for all of you trailer guys.  I posted them at this link:
http://mywebpage.netscape.com/n886mj/pmkr2.html

--
Mark Jones (N886MJ)
Wales, WI   USA
E-mail me at mailto:flykr2s@execpc.com
Visit my KR-2S CorvAIRCRAFT web site at
http://mywebpage.netscape.com/n886mj/homepage.html

------------------------------

End of krnet Digest
***********************************