From: To: Subject: krnet Digest 7 Mar 2002 17:41:32 -0000 Issue 387 Date: Thursday, March 07, 2002 9:41 AM krnet Digest 7 Mar 2002 17:41:32 -0000 Issue 387 Topics (messages 9124 through 9146): Re: spoilers, flaps and other things 9124 by: Stéfan Balatchev 9125 by: Robert X. Cringely Flaperons and adverse yaw 9126 by: James E. Lanier spoilers, flaps,mixers,etc. 9127 by: larry flesner 9128 by: Mark Langford 9129 by: larry flesner 9130 by: larry flesner flaperon 9131 by: rfarmer Rosenhan Aircraft Inc. 9132 by: Jim Morehead 9133 by: flykr2s.execpc.com New Airfoil AS5046 9134 by: Thomas Brown 9135 by: flykr2s.execpc.com TIG welding class 9136 by: Mark Langford Re: A KR with flaperons? 9137 by: ROBERT COOPER 9140 by: Eduardo José Jankosz KR with flaperons? 9138 by: Tony Alderman FLAPERONS 9139 by: Philip J. Visconti 9142 by: JOHN WENZ Weight and Composite Construction 9141 by: James E. Lanier 9143 by: Glasco 9144 by: virgnvs.juno.com 9145 by: Glasco FLAP REFLEX Benefit? 9146 by: Mr. Bryce Guenther Administrivia: To subscribe to the digest, e-mail: To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail: To post to the list, e-mail: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 08:15:51 +0100 To: From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?St=E9fan_Balatchev?= Subject: Re: KR> spoilers, flaps and other things Message-ID: <007b01c1c415$9546ffa0$ba4bfbc1@rn1kk> I still consider using some sort of roll controll and full-span flaps, may-be up-only ailerons. There is quite a difference between the spoilers and the up-only ailerons, the interested people could look through the available on the Internet NACA material for more details. There.ares some very interesting reports on the NACA tech reports server, one of them (from 1933) could be found there: http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1933/naca-report-419/ In the summary of the results of this report we read: "If suitable operating mechanism were developed, the best all-around ailerons of those tested for light and small airplanes are probably the short, wide ones with upward deflection only. This combination gives exceptionally good control at high angles of attack, the value of R C at 20° being 97% of the satisfactory value at 10°. With maximum aileron deflection the yawing moments have strong positive values at all angles of attack, the only adverse values being small and occuring with small aileron deflection. Also, the control against sideslip is most powerful of any aileron combinations tested, it being effective up to an agle of attacke of 25° as compared with 20° for the standard ailerons. The forces required on the control stick at medium and low speeds are slightly more than double those for standard (25% chord) ailerons with equal up-and-down deflection." I think we get virtually all the advantages and drawbacks of the up-only ailerons from the text above as far as the flight qualities are concerned. One "structural" advantage of the up-only ailerons is that they generate positive pitching moment on the wing, compensating or at least decreasing a lot the negative pitching moment of the wing. They also don't need any balancing and are not prone to flutter. Stéfan Balatchev, mailto:Stefan.Balatchev@wanadoo.fr ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Monday, March 04, 2002 11:32 PM Subject: Re: KR> spoilers, flaps and other things In a message dated 3/4/2002 2:22:58 PM Eastern Standard Time, jelanier@chemroc.com writes: > That isn't the craft I was thinking of. The one I was thinking of was > bordering on ultralite. > Interestingly enough, one of the KR-netters informed me that spoilers are > used for turning a B52. The only problem I have with spoilers for roll is > that the roll force is non-symetrical. I can see a couple of ways of > addressing the long-flaps on a KR. One would be by biasing the normal > aileron controls, an another would be a compound surface(ie aileron on a > flap surface). Biasing would obviously be easier. I sketched out such a > biasing mechanism in Autocad. It seems to be easy..(stay outta here Murphy!) > > I'm new to this list and have been lurking without posting for some time but I have some experience with spoilers on aircraft. When I was stationed in Panama I became involved with a local group of ultralight fliers. After building and flying several of them one of the guys resurrected an old one from parts that had been sitting around. It was a predecessor of the Quicksilver line and looked similar except it had spoilers instead of ailerons. Even with a longer wingspan than the other ultralights on the field it was easily as maneuverable with bank angle speed just as fast. The only thing uncomfortable about flying it was the spoilers were connected to teh peddles and the rudder to teh stick. That took some getting used to! I'm not sure I would want to use spoilers instead of ailerons on a KR however with the short coupling. I don't see how it would be more beneficial than proven aileron designs. As for he B-52, they used spoilers because of anticipated high Q problems which if they'd used ailerons would have twisted the very long wing and could have resulted in control reversal. That's a bad thing and not something the KR has to worry about. Just my $.02 Walt ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 00:19:34 -0800 To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: "Robert X. Cringely" Subject: Re: KR> spoilers, flaps and other things Message-Id: I think split flaps are great and just don't understand why aviation turned away from them in the 1950s. About the last "new" airplane with spilt flaps was the early Cessna 310. Yet the lift figures for split flaps are roughly comparable to slotted flaps! The mechanism is typically simpler, the structure stronger, and they have no gaps that need sealing. Compared to anything less than a fowler flap, there appears to be no downside. As for Larry Lam and his Wanderer, it is indeed a KR on steroids. It started with a VW and now the same airframe has an O-360, which shows Larry was just a little off in his early estimates. It is also the only wooden airframe I know of that uses mahogany as an alternative to spruce or douglas fir. Larry claims that good mahogany is both easier to get and cheaper! Larry's so-called "delta aileron," which most people would call a spoiler, is just an upward-deflecting aileron, the major advantage of which is complete elimination of adverse yaw. There is no reason intrinsic to the control surface, itself, why it should have problems at landing speeds. It is, after all, just effectively half of a regular pair of ailerons, and on the Wanderer they are nearly full span, so there is plenty of surface even if only half of it counts. I blame that damned GAW-1 airfoil, which is no good at KR-like reynolds numbers. On the Wanderer, Larry combines his delta aileron with a plain flap. I'd like to see it paired with a split flap, which would make for a simpler, stronger, and better structure. Bob > > > I recall a light homebuilt aircraft in >> > the 70s that used spoilers for roll. I don't recall the name of the >> > craft. ( I do remember it had a V-tail) > >You're probably thinking of Larry Lamm's "Wanderer". There's an article in >an old Contact magazine about it. I've talked to Larry about that plane, >which is basically a KR on steroids, and he now laments that those spoilers >just didn't have enough roll authority at landing speeds. He said he >wouldn't build them that way if he were to do it again. That's when I went >to split flaps instead. There's nothing wrong with a belly board either, >and you could even make a sort of split flap/belly board thing, using the >stock KR's tiny flap but replacing them with a long belly board that extends >from stub wing to stub wing. > >Usually when you see something that somebody did 30 years ago and you >haven't seen it done since, there's a reason... > >Mark Langford, Huntsville, AL >mailto:langford@hiwaay.net >see KR2S project at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >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: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 08:47:24 -0500 To: From: "James E. Lanier" Subject: Flaperons and adverse yaw Message-ID: <000801c1c44c$59c38930$6601a8c0@jimllaptop> ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C1C422.5EDC1BA0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Flaperons do have their disadvantages. When the flaperons are lowered, a = turn causes a yaw in the opposite direction of the turn. This is because = it increases drag on the side opposite the direction of turn.=20 Just because we are talking about flapperons doesn't mean we want them = on our aircraft. Jim www.chemroc.com ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C1C422.5EDC1BA0-- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2002 09:20:10 -0600 To: From: larry flesner Subject: spoilers, flaps,mixers,etc. Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20020305092010.008df100@mail.midwest.net> Netters, Spoilers are used on a regular basis on production aircraft. The next time you fly the airlines, get a window seat over the wing. All, to my knowledge, use spoilers to aid in low speed roll control. On landing, as soon as the "squat" switch is activated (on the gear) the spoilers deploy to kill the wings lift and transfer the aircraft weight to the gear for improved braking. At high speeds with the wing "cleaned up", they use small outboard ailerons. "Drooped" ailerons have been used on "small" aircraft for years also, usually on STOL type for lower stall speeds. I saw a design for a "mixer" in a model airplane magizine years ago. It consisted of a flat plate on a slide with four pullys for the aileron cables. The forward cable to the ailerons (from stick to ailerons) passes around the two forward pullys on their routing to the ailerons. The rear (cross-over) cable is routed around the two rear pullys. As this slide plate is moved fore and aft by a separate control, similar to a flap handle, it effectively changes the length of the two cables, making one longer and the other shorter. This allows for standard aileron travel in the netrual position and either downward or upward deflection , depending on where you position the slide assy. This could even be set up to give upward deflecting ( reflexed I think they call them) ailerons for a faster cruise. There probably hasn't been any radically new designs in aircraft for the past 50 year except composites and the electronics end. It's like getting the same tie, socks, and underwear for Christmas every year, just in different color paper ! Now off to finish the Tripe brakes. The Ol' Girl hasn't tasted freedom for about two weeks now and has one gear leg setting on a jack. She and I both need an air sample from 500 feet and it looks like spring out today!! Larry Flesner ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 09:55:26 -0600 To: From: "Mark Langford" Subject: Re: KR> spoilers, flaps,mixers,etc. Message-ID: <001201c1c45e$2b71c210$5f0ca58c@mlangford> > This > could even be set up to give upward deflecting ( reflexed I think > they call them) ailerons for a faster cruise. My understanding on "reflexing" ailerons upward for improvements to cruise speed is that if the airfoil is already optimized for the airplane, reflexing the ailerons upward wouldn't do anything for you. Reflexing ailerons is generally viewed as a Band-Aid to fix a design problem. I'm not even going to speculate on the RAF48, but reflexing the AS504x's ailerons would hurt rather than help cruise speed, since it's already optimized for the KR2S. Mark Langford, Huntsville, AL mailto:langford@hiwaay.net see KR2S project at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2002 10:53:39 -0600 To: From: larry flesner Subject: Re: KR> spoilers, flaps,mixers,etc. Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20020305105339.008e3890@mail.midwest.net> Reflexing >ailerons is generally viewed as a Band-Aid to fix a design problem. >Mark Langford, Huntsville, AL ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Mark, Many folks think the RAF48 at 3 1/2 degrees is a design problem and could maybe stand to have a bit of lift "killed" at cruise!! :-) Larry Flesner ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2002 10:56:03 -0600 To: From: larry flesner Subject: Re: KR> spoilers, flaps,mixers,etc. Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20020305105603.00875100@mail.midwest.net> Mark, For sake of discussion, which way would that move the center of lift and would that help or hurt a tail heavy problem? Larry Flesner ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 12:12:15 -0500 To: From: "rfarmer" Subject: flaperon Message-ID: <004301c1c468$e8a2a2a0$e75f62d8@oemcomputer> ------=_NextPart_000_0040_01C1C43E.FD3F8720 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable A sketch of a flaperon control system can be seen in 'elements of sport = airplane design for the home builder' by Vogel Aviation. Just FYI. For a = new design an airfoil like the GOE 683 might be a good one for flaperons. It's almost 20% thick without having = too much drag and 0 pitching moment at cruise. I am thinking about a = 'one of' with this. Any comments are welcome. Remember the slower you = fly the less effective the controls are and might even need redesigned = for an airplane not designed to fly that slow. =20 ------=_NextPart_000_0040_01C1C43E.FD3F8720-- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2002 10:29:47 -0800 To: KR- Net From: Jim Morehead Subject: Rosenhan Aircraft Inc. Message-ID: Netters, I'm looking for bleeder valves for my Rosenhan disk brake wheel cylinders. I tried to call Rosenhan Aircraft Inc. Salt lake, UT. They are not listed. Are they still in business? Thanks, Jim Morehead Camereon Park, CA ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 12:45:26 -0600 (CST) To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: flykr2s@execpc.com Cc: Subject: Re: KR> Rosenhan Aircraft Inc. Message-Id: <20020305184526.9DB5923A8E@debian.voyager.net> Rosenhan is now Matco. Any 1/8 npt brake bleeder will work. You can get them at an auto parts store for two or three dollars each. Wick's and Aircraft Spruce carry them also. Mark Jones > Netters, > I'm looking for bleeder valves for my Rosenhan disk brake wheel > cylinders. I tried to call Rosenhan Aircraft Inc. Salt lake, UT. They are > not listed. Are they still in business? > > Thanks, > Jim Morehead > Camereon 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: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 11:59:10 -0800 (PST) To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: Thomas Brown Subject: New Airfoil AS5046 Message-ID: <20020305195910.32977.qmail@web14002.mail.yahoo.com> Hi I'm currently working on putting the fuselage sides togeather to form the Boat. My intentions are to use the New AS5046 airfoil for my KR2S Question: Will I need the new templates for the AS5046 prior to this step. Is the Rear vertical stabilizer spar the same measurements for the AS5046 Thanks Tom Brown __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Try FREE Yahoo! Mail - the world's greatest free email! http://mail.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 14:41:12 -0600 (CST) To: Thomas Brown From: flykr2s@execpc.com Cc: krnet@mailinglists.org Subject: Re: KR> New Airfoil AS5046 Message-Id: <20020305204112.94E653FA4D@nm0.voyager.net> Tom, I will take a stab at this for you and most likely Mark Langford (Trailing Edge Technologies) will also chime in. There is no required modification to the fuselage sides. However, if you have the templates, you could shape the bottom of the fuselage to contour more with the bottom shape of the wing. Some have done this and it really streamlines things up but is not necessary. As far as the vertical tail post, no mod ifications are required there either. The horizontal tail spars and main wing spars are where the modifications come into play. Mark Jones Hi > > I'm currently working on putting the fuselage sides > togeather to form the Boat. My intentions are to use > the New AS5046 airfoil for my KR2S > > Question: > > Will I need the new templates for the AS5046 prior to > this step. Is the Rear vertical stabilizer spar the > same measurements for the AS5046 > > Thanks > > Tom Brown > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Try FREE Yahoo! Mail - the world's greatest free email! > http://mail.yahoo.com/ > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 20:44:00 -0600 To: , "KRnet" From: "Mark Langford" Subject: TIG welding class Message-ID: <002701c1c4b8$c57f37c0$7600a8c0@athlon600> I don't usually cross post things between KRnet and CorvAircraft, because I figure the KR guys that are building Corvairs are already on CorvAircraft, and vice-versa. But here's something that might interest both groups, given recent traffic, so bear with me. This weekend I went to the EAA/Sportair Advanced TIG Welding class in Griffin Georgia and learned a LOT about TIG welding. Most importantly, that my welds are "good to go". We specialized in TIG welding 4130 thin-wall tubing. As usual, there are lots more details at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/sportair/ . It was an invaluable experience, and I highly recommend it! I also made 6 new homebuilder friends. I should also mention that I'm now a welding school dropout! After three sessions of burning holes in my jeans and socks while stick welding infinite quantities of quarter inch plate at our "continuing adult education" center, I finally gave it up. It was a complete waste of my time, and a hundred bucks. The teacher gave me a grand total of less than one minute of actual instruction during my 9 hours of frustration. I think we were expected to just practice until we got good. Only problem is practicing the wrong way doesn't tend to improve anything. On my last night, on one of his two nightly 10 second visits, the teacher told me I wasn't welding, I was just melting metal all over the place! Then he tried it and his bead didn't look any better than mine. It turned out that the amperage was too low, but then he's never mentioned what amperage we should be welding at either! This was shortly after he informed me that the best way to weld 4130 was using MIG, and that gas-welding 4130 tubing was sure to "burn holes all in it". Keep in mind that I've already done some fairly respectable TIG welding on quarter inch 4130 plate, as evidenced by the photo at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/01111002.jpg (and I did this three months ago) . Why I need to learn how to stick weld wasn't entirely clear to me, so I quit and will spend the time working on my airplane instead. I can tell you that trying to stick and gas weld my "practice" engine mount will go down as one of the most frustrating periods of my life. The day I bought the Lincoln Square Wave 175 at Oshkosh, my life changed for the better. If you want to buy one of these, buy it at SNF or Oshkosh, as it's as cheap as you'll find a new one anywhere ($1340, which is practically dealer cost, I believe), and shipping is free. Used ones are hard to find. If I sound like a Lincoln Electric ad, it's because I'm still convinced that it was some of the best money I've ever spent! By the way, avoid the cheap Miller EconoTIG in the Sunday paper, as it's lower end is only 30 amps. The Lincoln now occupies the lion's share of this market, because it goes down to an amp or so. Do your own research, and you won't find anybody that thinks they shouldn't have bought a 175. Thanks Dr. Dean, for turning me on to the Square Wave! I realize that life is too short for many of you to consider buying a TIG welder and learning to use it, but my next project is going to be a 4130 tube chassis for the worlds fastest Karmann Ghia! I highly recommend that you try YOUR local equivalent night school welding class though if you want to learn how to weld. There are good ones out there that actually teach you something, but my particular class just wasn't one of them. I'm off to the basement, to install my new longer pushrods into my Vair engine. Don't forget to visit http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/sportair/ ... Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama mailto:langford@hiwaay.net see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 22:14:48 -0500 To: , "krnet" From: "ROBERT COOPER" Subject: Re: KR> A KR with flaperons? Message-ID: ------=_NextPart_001_0000_01C1C493.29D13E60 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable ----- Original Message ----- From: Serge F. VIDAL Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2002 2:01 AM To: krnet@mailinglists.org Subject: KR> A KR with flaperons? Now, if there is a way to build a simple and reliable mechanism to do the same on a KR, I think this would solve all the operational limitations on= a KR. Serge VIDAL KR2 ZS-WEC Johannesburg, South Africa I have been thinking of doing this exact thing. I have not yet experiment= ed with a control system for this but I have a design in mind which I wan= t to work on. I'm thinking of using torque tubes attached to the aft spar= as aileron controls. The torque tubes would be attached to a bell crank = which will be placed on the fwd spar near the stick with a control tube f= rom the stick to the bell crank. The torque tubes will be attached to the= bellcrank by control tubes. By making the bell crank movable fwd and aft= this would activate the ailerons collectively and would create flaperons= . If anyone is interested I might draw a sketch of this plan and email it= to you. Jack Cooper ------=_NextPart_001_0000_01C1C493.29D13E60-- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 18:08:37 -0300 To: "ROBERT COOPER" From: "=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Eduardo_Jos=E9_Jankosz?=" Cc: "krnet" Subject: Re: KR> A KR with flaperons? Message-Id: <200203062118.g26LI0s06760@cwbone.bsi.com.br> Hi, Jack Cooper! Your flaperon command system is very interesting!!!!!!! Do you would can make a sketch for me in Autocad of this "flaperon"? I am interest in this! It works what an airelon in turn and a flap in landing? Then, is not necessary build the flap in the Stub Wings? Or your area is not sufficient for this, and I must make both (airelons and flaps)? Regards! Eduardo José Jankosz jankosz@bsi.com.br http://www.bsi.com.br/cbcb Curitiba - PR - BRASIL ---------- De: ROBERT COOPER Para: svidal@icon.co.za; krnet Assunto: Re: KR> A KR with flaperons? Data: Quarta-feira, 6 de Março de 2002 00:14 ----- Original Message ----- From: Serge F. VIDAL Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2002 2:01 AM To: krnet@mailinglists.org Subject: KR> A KR with flaperons? Now, if there is a way to build a simple and reliable mechanism to do the same on a KR, I think this would solve all the operational limitations on a KR. Serge VIDAL KR2 ZS-WEC Johannesburg, South Africa I have been thinking of doing this exact thing. I have not yet experimented with a control system for this but I have a design in mind which I want to work on. I'm thinking of using torque tubes attached to the aft spar as aileron controls. The torque tubes would be attached to a bell crank which will be placed on the fwd spar near the stick with a control tube from the stick to the bell crank. The torque tubes will be attached to the bellcrank by control tubes. By making the bell crank movable fwd and aft this would activate the ailerons collectively and would create flaperons. If anyone is interested I might draw a sketch of this plan and email it to you. Jack Cooper ---------- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 23:02:11 -0800 To: "ROBERT COOPER" , , "krnet" From: "Tony Alderman" Subject: KR with flaperons? Message-ID: <001701c1c4dc$deccd6a0$1e99f7a5@computer> for all involved in the continuing debate and discussion you will find this page from the KRnet in Sport Aviation pages.... enjoy Tony : ) http://users.erols.com/donreid/sportaviation/Kr80-8.HTM It's a safe link. Tony Alderman Durham NC t-hawk@mindspring.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 23:26:18 -0500 To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: "Philip J. Visconti" Subject: FLAPERONS Message-ID: <20020305.232619.-521091.0.viscan@juno.com> There was a KR-2 named "Mildred" that had flaperons. Built by Lance Neibauer and he stated that the flaperons worked very well. He was going to put the drawings of them in a later KR Newsletter (after 1983) but I think he became interested in something else. He may have sold the KR. 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: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 21:16:58 -0500 To: "krnet" From: "JOHN WENZ" Subject: flaperons Message-ID: ------=_NextPart_001_0000_01C1C554.3FEFF620 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I helped build a Taylor Mini Imp and it used flaparons (sp?). The interes= ting feature was that besides being able to droop your ailerons for landi= ng, in a cruise configuration you could reflex the flap/ailerons up to "= reduce lift/drag". It used push pull tubes with a bellcrank that you could move the pivot po= int. I would like to qualify that I don't know how well the system worked= but I am pretty sure that it had a laminar series wing =20 ------=_NextPart_001_0000_01C1C554.3FEFF620-- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 18:18:15 -0500 To: From: "James E. Lanier" Subject: Weight and Composite Construction Message-ID: <000c01c1c565$43fedef0$6601a8c0@jimllaptop> ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01C1C53B.48BB95C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I had first purchased plans for the KR2 back in the mid seventies = and never acted on them. In fact I lost the plans! Here I am again with the bug to build. I thought I was going to be creative and modify the basic design by = using composite material for the fuselage as well as the aerodynamic = surfaces. I thought I would gain a significant weight advantage plus a = great deal of strength. But..I notice another homebuilt aircraft = (vision) of roughly the same dimensions as a KR2s that is all composite = and has an empty weight of 800 pounds! Ouch! Not to compare apples with = oranges, but shouldn't it be lighter? Or maybe I am wrong about the = physical dimesions of the other craft. Jim www.chemroc.com ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01C1C53B.48BB95C0-- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2002 18:36:11 -0800 To: mailto: From: Glasco Subject: Re: KR> Weight and Composite Construction Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20020306183611.007b58b0@mail.ridgenet.net> Jim, I have plans for both the KR-2S (Set #250) and for the Vision (Set # 185). The Vision is larger and requires more power so comparing material weights by these two examples is comparing apples and oranges. How did I end up with 2 sets of plans basicly aimed at the same requirements? Like this, I was really torn between the two and had settled on the Vision with a Corvair engine when I found a partially built KR. I am now working on the KR (verrrry slowly) with a Corvair. When (if) I finish the KR I will probably start on the Vision (or maybe I will work on both.) My objective was to find an interesting project first and if I end up with an airplane... ...well, that would be alright. Brad ----------------------- At 06:18 PM 3/6/02 -0500, you wrote: > I had first purchased plans for the KR2 back in the mid seventies and never acted on them. In fact I lost the plans! >Here I am again with the bug to build. > I thought I was going to be creative and modify the basic design by using composite material for the fuselage as well as the aerodynamic surfaces. I thought I would gain a significant weight advantage plus a great deal of strength. But..I notice another homebuilt aircraft (vision) of roughly the same dimensions as a KR2s that is all composite and has an empty weight of 800 pounds! Ouch! Not to compare apples with oranges, but shouldn't it be lighter? Or maybe I am wrong about the physical dimesions of the other craft. > >Jim >www.chemroc.com > > > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 21:41:11 -0500 To: jelanier@chemroc.com From: virgnvs@juno.com Cc: krnet@mailinglists.org Subject: Re: KR> Weight and Composite Construction Message-ID: <20020306.214842.-108453.0.virgnvs@juno.com> Aluminum craft are lighter than glass, may be the same with wood, Virg On Wed, 6 Mar 2002 18:18:15 -0500 "James E. Lanier" writes: > I had first purchased plans for the KR2 back in the mid seventies > and never acted on them. In fact I lost the plans! > Here I am again with the bug to build. > I thought I was going to be creative and modify the basic design > by using composite material for the fuselage as well as the > aerodynamic surfaces. I thought I would gain a significant weight > advantage plus a great deal of strength. But..I notice another > homebuilt aircraft (vision) of roughly the same dimensions as a KR2s > that is all composite and has an empty weight of 800 pounds! Ouch! > Not to compare apples with oranges, but shouldn't it be lighter? Or > maybe I am wrong about the physical dimesions of the other craft. > > Jim > www.chemroc.com > > > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2002 20:01:53 -0800 To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: Glasco Subject: Re: KR> Weight and Composite Construction Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20020306200153.007cf720@mail.ridgenet.net> Some of the variances: The The Vision boat is 40" (or 44") wide and 170" firewall to tail and varies in depth being 23.84375" at station 54 (54" from the front of the firewall.) The horizontal span is 96" and extends 15" in front of the spar at BL8 and 6.625 at BL42 (approx. as measured from templates) plus there is a 7x14 dorsal and 7x14 strakes that are optional on the SP but required on the EX. The elevator is 11.875" at BL 7.5 and 8.125" at BL 42.5 for the SP and add 2.25 for the EX. The wing span is 300" for the SP and 348" for the EX. And the chord varies from 52" to 36"(I am quoting the chord form memory in the interest of peace and harmony at dinner, if you want the true answer I will look it up.) Also the plans use 4.5 oz. last-a-foam and Rutan BID and UNI which is heavier that the 5.85 oz fiberglass used on the KR. Gotta run, Brad ------------------------------ At 09:37 PM 3/6/02 -0500, you wrote: >What are the dimensions of the vision? (wingspan and overall length) > >Thanks, > >Jim ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2002 12:40:51 -0500 To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: flyKRS@netscape.net (Mr. Bryce Guenther) Subject: FLAP REFLEX Benefit? Message-ID: <298248E1.649D0AEE.0006291F@netscape.net> Has anyone flight tested their KR and demonstrated cruise speed gains by simply altering flap mechanism geometry to REFLEX flaps ? -- 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/ ------------------------------ End of krnet Digest ***********************************