From: To: Subject: krnet Digest 9 Jun 2002 19:48:09 -0000 Issue 446 Date: Sunday, June 09, 2002 12:48 PM krnet Digest 9 Jun 2002 19:48:09 -0000 Issue 446 Topics (messages 10621 through 10650): Re: Aircraft Spruce & Specialty 10621 by: Ron Eason 10622 by: Rick Wilson canopies 10623 by: Tony Alderman 10625 by: Rick elevator removal 10624 by: Rick Wilson carbon fibre parts. 10626 by: w.g. kirkland carbon fiber parts. 10627 by: Larry A. Capps 10637 by: Peg and Mike Meyer 10649 by: Ron Eason Flight Testing ( 6399U ) 10628 by: Kenneth L Wiltrout 10639 by: John and Janet Martindale Carbon parts 10629 by: jim . synergy design 10630 by: Mark Langford 10631 by: Larry A. Capps 10635 by: Steven Eberhart 10636 by: claude denoncourt Canopy 10632 by: clappw.bellsouth.net 10641 by: Mark Langford 10643 by: Mark Langford Mark L - wings 10633 by: clappw.bellsouth.net 10640 by: Mark Langford Sandbagged? 10634 by: Mauryhuntr.aol.com manual trim questions 10638 by: Tim Brown 10642 by: Tim Brown 10644 by: Rick Wilson 10648 by: Audrey and Harold Woods flying experience 10645 by: Rick Wilson 10646 by: Dana Overall 10647 by: Ed Janssen Work Bench Ideas 10650 by: Shane Daly Administrivia: To subscribe to the digest, e-mail: To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail: To post to the list, e-mail: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2002 06:08:39 -0500 To: "Jim Morehead" , "KR- Net" From: "Ron Eason" Subject: Re: KR> Aircraft Spruce & Specialty Message-ID: <001901c20edc$d7f99fd0$d6dc1f41@Administration> Neither have I. KRRon ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Morehead" To: "KR- Net" Sent: Sunday, June 09, 2002 12:03 AM Subject: KR> Aircraft Spruce & Specialty > Netters, > I have order from Aircraft Spruce and Specialty many times over last 20 > years and have never had a problem with deliveries. My last order was made > June 5, 7:45 AM. Three items were shipped from the West Coast Office. It > was delivered today June 7. The other two items had to be shipped from > another location. I received e-mail conformation June 6 that the last two > items were shipped by USPS PRIORITY. I have never had a problem ordering > from Aircraft Spruce . > > See you at Red Oak. > > 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/ > and at http://www.bouyea.net/ for the older ones > > ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2002 06:18:32 -0700 (PDT) To: KRNET@MAILINGLISTS.ORG From: Rick Wilson Subject: aircraft spruce & specialty Message-ID: <20020608131832.63245.qmail@web21206.mail.yahoo.com> I've never had what would be called a problem getting items from aircraft spruce, The only thing I would have a complaint with is when they are out of stock, they backordered the item(s) and then charge me the full shipping price again on each item that came from another location. As far as quality of items, or getting the right thing, they've always been good. Rick Wilson. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2002 09:31:15 -0400 To: "Rick Wilson" , From: "Tony Alderman" Subject: canopies Message-ID: <004b01c20ef0$c429aa40$0cec2104@computer> Here's a thought for your next canopies make your own..... http://recumbents.com/wisil/bubbles/hpvbubbles.htm Tony Tony Alderman Durham NC t-hawk@mindspring.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2002 08:05:59 -0600 To: KRNET@MAILINGLISTS.ORG From: Rick Subject: RE: KR> canopies Message-ID: <41ED2F1280124E4D8B88691C9A9B5FDE011B4F@mail.binoids.com> Speaking of Canopies. Here's a funny article on why NOT to build one. This is not my opinion of course... If you want to build one...go for it... but this is worth the read Link http://www.hubka.com/to_build_a_canopy.htm Rick Hubka http://www.hubka.com/kr_main.htm rick@hubka.com 65 Butler Crescent NW Calgary AB T2L 1K4 Canada -----Original Message----- From: Tony Alderman [mailto:t-hawk@mindspring.com] Sent: Saturday, June 08, 2002 7:31 AM To: Rick Wilson; KRNET@MAILINGLISTS.ORG Subject: KR> canopies Here's a thought for your next canopies make your own..... http://recumbents.com/wisil/bubbles/hpvbubbles.htm Tony Tony Alderman Durham NC t-hawk@mindspring.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/ and at http://www.bouyea.net/ for the older ones ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2002 06:42:12 -0700 (PDT) To: KRNET@MAILINGLISTS.ORG From: Rick Wilson Subject: elevator removal Message-ID: <20020608134212.47379.qmail@web21205.mail.yahoo.com> Hi, can anyone tell me if there's a way to remove the elevator without cutting the tailpost? I found a couple places where the trailing edge on the top side of the horizontal stab. needs reinforcing with flox. The edges move up and down slightly, they just seem to have not been reinforced enough when they were constructed. I am going to remove the elevator and redo the area on the aft side of the h.s. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2002 12:03:14 -0400 To: "krnet" From: "w.g. kirkland" Subject: carbon fibre parts. Message-ID: <000301c20f06$2c4c1800$54b45bd1@utboopki> ------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C20EE4.7804AD60 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The oil pan and intake manifold for my subaru engine make up a = significant portion of the weight and the oil pan is fairly deep. I = would like to remake both in light weight carbon fibre. I know the = intake manifold can be re done but would the oil pan withstand the hot = engine oil. Comments please. W.G.(Bill) KIRKLAND kirkland@vianet.on.ca ------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C20EE4.7804AD60-- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2002 12:26:52 -0500 To: "KR Builders \(E-mail\)" From: "Larry A. Capps" Cc: "'w.g. kirkland'" Subject: carbon fiber parts. Message-ID: <000801c20f11$adbf47d0$0600a8c0@schpankme> Yes, you can make an oil pan and intake manifold from carbon fiber, you'll need to post cure at elevated temps, but this is easily done. http://members.iquest.net/~aca/images/Gall11.jpg << - Oil Pan (Carbon Fiber) http://members.iquest.net/~aca/gallery.htm http://members.iquest.net/~aca/ Regards, Larry A. Capps Naperville, IL -----Original Message----- The oil pan and intake manifold make up a significant portion of the weight I would like to remake both in light weight carbon fiber ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 08 Jun 2002 17:29:41 -0500 To: lacapps@attbi.com, "KR Builders (E-mail)" From: Peg and Mike Meyer Cc: "'w.g. kirkland'" Subject: Re: KR> carbon fiber parts. Message-id: <003101c20f3b$fb685100$0becfea9@o0c8u6> To all those who just blew past the links at the bottom of this page, take a second and look. This is without a shadow of a doubt probably the most sophisiticated and elegant "homebuilt" on planet earth. The level of workmanship is absolutely stunning, and if these guys succeed in their quest, the world will be flying LP-1's someday. Mike Meyer ----- Original Message ----- From: "Larry A. Capps" To: "KR Builders (E-mail)" Cc: "'w.g. kirkland'" Sent: Saturday, June 08, 2002 12:26 PM Subject: KR> carbon fiber parts. > Yes, you can make an oil pan and intake manifold from carbon fiber, you'll > need to post cure at elevated temps, but this is easily done. > > http://members.iquest.net/~aca/images/Gall11.jpg << - Oil Pan (Carbon > Fiber) > > http://members.iquest.net/~aca/gallery.htm > > http://members.iquest.net/~aca/ > > > Regards, > > Larry A. Capps > Naperville, IL > > > -----Original Message----- > The oil pan and intake manifold > make up a significant portion of the weight > I would like to remake both in light weight carbon fiber > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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/ > and at http://www.bouyea.net/ for the older ones > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2002 11:36:15 -0500 To: "Peg and Mike Meyer" , , "KR Builders \(E-mail\)" From: "Ron Eason" Cc: "'w.g. kirkland'" Subject: Re: KR> carbon fiber parts. Message-ID: <003901c20fd3$c60249b0$d6dc1f41@Administration> WOW! this is a very good approach to engineering, craftsmanship and innovation. A DREAM plane indeed. I really like the expression of talent and common since engineering. I don't know where they find the time, if they are working stiffs like us. KRRon ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peg and Mike Meyer" To: ; "KR Builders (E-mail)" Cc: "'w.g. kirkland'" Sent: Saturday, June 08, 2002 5:29 PM Subject: Re: KR> carbon fiber parts. > To all those who just blew past the links at the bottom of this page, take a > second and look. This is without a shadow of a doubt probably the most > sophisiticated and elegant "homebuilt" on planet earth. The level of > workmanship is absolutely stunning, and if these guys succeed in their > quest, the world will be flying LP-1's someday. > > Mike Meyer > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Larry A. Capps" > To: "KR Builders (E-mail)" > Cc: "'w.g. kirkland'" > Sent: Saturday, June 08, 2002 12:26 PM > Subject: KR> carbon fiber parts. > > > > Yes, you can make an oil pan and intake manifold from carbon fiber, you'll > > need to post cure at elevated temps, but this is easily done. > > > > http://members.iquest.net/~aca/images/Gall11.jpg << - Oil Pan (Carbon > > Fiber) > > > > http://members.iquest.net/~aca/gallery.htm > > > > http://members.iquest.net/~aca/ > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Larry A. Capps > > Naperville, IL > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > The oil pan and intake manifold > > make up a significant portion of the weight > > I would like to remake both in light weight carbon fiber > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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/ > > and at http://www.bouyea.net/ for the older ones > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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/ > and at http://www.bouyea.net/ for the older ones > > ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2002 14:42:48 -0400 To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: Kenneth L Wiltrout Subject: Flight Testing ( 6399U ) Message-ID: <20020608.144249.-330437.0.klw1953@juno.com> Since I've got several people wanting a ride in my 2S I decided to do the most prudent thing rather than using my first passenger for a crash test dummy. I took 4 sand bags and filled them with sand, weighed each one on a certified scale and came up with a total weight of exactly 160 lbs. I started with 2 bags that totaled 84lbs first, then did a couple of take off's and landings before adding the last 2 bags separately. According to my weight and balance I would still be 2" forward of my aft most CG with the 160lbs in the passenger seat. The only thing I noticed was an increased sink rate on landing and I needed some forward stick momentarily on take off after the mains left the ground. Just thought this might be interesting to someone who's getting ready to fly their first passenger. Believe me, work your way up to a passenger's weight gradually since the handling characteristics are different enough to induce a mild heart attack on take off.------------------------------Kenny ________________________________________________________________ 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: Sun, 9 Jun 2002 09:22:16 +1000 To: , "Kenneth L Wiltrout" From: "John and Janet Martindale" Subject: Re: KR> Flight Testing ( 6399U ) Message-ID: <004401c20f45$56ec9320$b2de12d2@m1g0x7> Ken With two people, how much fuel can you carry? What is your gross weight? I've just been weighed and with two people, I can only carry about 30 ltrs (8 US gals) of fuel? Cheers John and Janet Martindale 29 Jane Circuit TOORMINA NSW 2452 AUSTRALIA ph: 61 2 66584767 ----- Original Message ----- From: Kenneth L Wiltrout To: Sent: Sunday, June 09, 2002 4:42 AM Subject: KR> Flight Testing ( 6399U ) > Since I've got several people wanting a ride in my 2S I decided to do the > most prudent thing rather than using my first passenger for a crash test > dummy. I took 4 sand bags and filled them with sand, weighed each one on > a certified scale and came up with a total weight of exactly 160 lbs. I > started with 2 bags that totaled 84lbs first, then did a couple of take > off's and landings before adding the last 2 bags separately. According to > my weight and balance I would still be 2" forward of my aft most CG with > the 160lbs in the passenger seat. The only thing I noticed was an > increased sink rate on landing and I needed some forward stick > momentarily on take off after the mains left the ground. Just thought > this might be interesting to someone who's getting ready to fly their > first passenger. Believe me, work your way up to a passenger's weight > gradually since the handling characteristics are different enough to > induce a mild heart attack on take > off.------------------------------Kenny > > ________________________________________________________________ > 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/ > and at http://www.bouyea.net/ for the older ones > > ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2002 12:59:48 -0700 To: From: "jim @ synergy design" Subject: Carbon parts Message-ID: <002c01c20f27$0ef9fa80$0101a8c0@pavilion> ------=_NextPart_000_0029_01C20EEC.5F2312C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Carbon is the LAST material you would want to use for engine parts. It = has the least heat resistance of all the composite materials. Ceramic = is at the top of the list.(but hard to find) regular S glass would be = better(second in terms of heat resistance). Carbon is also last as far = as fatigue resistance,and impact resistance. I also thought of making = the corvair crankcase plate out of composites, but was worried about = heat and structural integrity. Personally, I would fabricate mine out of = aluminum. I know the INDY racers make gearboxes and stuff out of = carbon, but they have huge budgets, and replace parts on a daily basis. = In a related(sort of) story, I just received my antenna kit from RST. I = was unaware that Carbon is not 'invisible" to radio waves. Sure glad I = didn't build my wings/ vert.stab. etc. out of carbon with the antennas = buried in them!. Hope this helps, Jim Sporka ------=_NextPart_000_0029_01C20EEC.5F2312C0-- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2002 13:59:32 -0500 To: From: "Mark Langford" Subject: Re: KR> Carbon parts Message-ID: <002301c20f1e$a0885540$7600a8c0@athlon600> >>Carbon is the LAST material you would want to use for engine parts. It has the least heat resistance of all the composite materials. Ceramic is at the top of the list<< The temperature at which you should get excited about carbon fiber "going away" is way higher than the thing that's common to both S glass and carbon fiber composites, the epoxy that binds the material together. It's the epoxy that has to post cure to raise the temperature that it will later have to withstand. There are plenty of folks running carbon fiber engine parts, with sucess. I'm not sure which chart you were looking at, but it must not have had any numbers on it... Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama mailto:langford@hiwaay.net see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2002 14:06:49 -0500 To: From: "Larry A. Capps" Cc: "'jim @ synergy design'" Subject: Carbon parts Message-ID: <000801c20f1f$a53dd190$0600a8c0@schpankme> The use of Carbon composites has been used to make all types of internal and external engine components, i.e. carbon pistons for two stroke engines can be made ring less, with virtually no thermal expansion or contraction. Currently, the limiting factor for carbon fiber in engine use, would be the exhaust system. There are no matrix resins, epoxy, Phenolic, bismaleimides, or polymides, that will handle exhaust temperatures. Larry A. Capps Naperville, IL -----Original Message----- Carbon is the LAST material you would want to use for engine parts. Hope this helps ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2002 15:41:46 -0500 (CDT) To: Mark Langford From: Steven Eberhart cc: Subject: Re: KR> Carbon parts Message-ID: On Sat, 8 Jun 2002, Mark Langford wrote: > > > >>Carbon is the LAST material you would want to use for engine parts. It has > the least heat resistance of all the composite materials. Ceramic is at the > top of the list<< > Guess I better not fly this too close to the sun. http://63.69.213.180/newtech/photos/P1010073.JPG If you see two carbon fiber RV-7 R/C models flying around it will probably be Dana and me. Steve Eberhart RV-7A - just a whole bunch of aluminum, in various states of attachment, filling up my half of the garage. Some of it looks like it might belong on the back end of an airplane. The rest looks like it might, some day, help hold it up in the air.... but what do I know. N14SE reserved ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 08 Jun 2002 21:03:39 +0000 To: krnet@mailinglists.org From: "claude denoncourt" Subject: Re: KR> Carbon parts Message-ID: u guys never heard of carbon carbon composite,they happen to be the heat shield on the space shuttle or aircraft and formula one disk break basicaly some carbon fiber pile up and some resin ( phenolic) then heat process to full carbonisation that should be good enough to take some heat :) claude montreal >From: "Larry A. Capps" >Reply-To: >To: >CC: "'jim @ synergy design'" >Subject: KR> Carbon parts >Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2002 14:06:49 -0500 > >The use of Carbon composites has been used to make all types of internal >and >external engine components, i.e. carbon pistons for two stroke engines can >be made ring less, with virtually no thermal expansion or contraction. > >Currently, the limiting factor for carbon fiber in engine use, would be the >exhaust system. There are no matrix resins, epoxy, Phenolic, >bismaleimides, >or polymides, that will handle exhaust temperatures. > > >Larry A. Capps >Naperville, IL > > > >-----Original Message----- >Carbon is the LAST material you would want to use for engine parts. >Hope this helps > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >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/ >and at http://www.bouyea.net/ for the older ones _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2002 03:47:58 -0400 To: From: Subject: Canopy Message-ID: <002c01c20f89$f9825680$de3dd6d1@h1x1g0> ------=_NextPart_000_0029_01C20F68.71EA6F80 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Do you believe that I can use the Dragonfly canopy on a standard width = KR2S? Am about ready to purchase one but need to make sure it will fit. = I know it fits on the widened KRs but need to make sure. Next = question. I want to make my control stick left of center (between = legs). Since I am using a pushrod to a bellcrank behind aft spar for = the elevator, would you forsee any problem running the pushrod at an = angle (no binding of course) to the center mounted bellcrank. Or would = it be better to manufacture a dual system using that pushrod? Ideas? =20 ------=_NextPart_000_0029_01C20F68.71EA6F80-- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2002 19:50:23 -0500 To: From: "Mark Langford" Subject: Re: KR> Canopy Message-ID: <009c01c20f4f$a37e9490$7600a8c0@athlon600> Bill Clapp wrote: >>Do you believe that I can use the Dragonfly canopy on a standard width KR2S? << It'll fit. Both Jim Hill ( http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/kjhf1.jpg ) and Don Betchan have one in their KR2s, which are the same width as the S. There are probably 20 or more others as well. The Dragonfly canopy is lighter and more flexible than the RR KR2S canopy. After bending the sides in they are almost vertical, so outward visibility to the ground is excellent. There is lots more info on the Dragonfly canopy at http://www.fortunecity.com/marina/skipper/388/dflycanopysurvey/ , but the downloadable files haven't been downloadable for years now, and I don't have a copy of them either... Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama mailto:langford@hiwaay.net see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2002 21:30:01 -0500 To: From: "Mark Langford" Subject: Re: KR> Canopy Message-ID: <00b701c20f5d$8edc69a0$7600a8c0@athlon600> I wrote: > There is lots more info on the Dragonfly canopy at > http://www.fortunecity.com/marina/skipper/388/dflycanopysurvey/ , but the > downloadable files haven't been downloadable for years now, and I don't have > a copy of them either... Well, I lied. Larry Capps was kind enough to send them to me, so they are now available in a zip file at: http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/dflycanopysurvey.zip Thanks Larry! Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama mailto:langford@hiwaay.net see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2002 03:51:38 -0400 To: From: Subject: Mark L - wings Message-ID: <003701c20f8a$7cda9b00$de3dd6d1@h1x1g0> ------=_NextPart_000_0034_01C20F68.F542B400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mark - I noticed that you did not incorporate wing extensions(foam) on = your wings but left them standard KR2 length. Reasons? Would the wing = extensions help because of running the Corvair - better climb and cruise = speeds due to less loading - or is there more drag? Have you researched winglets or modified tips at all in your wing = changes? ------=_NextPart_000_0034_01C20F68.F542B400-- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2002 19:02:53 -0500 To: From: "Mark Langford" Subject: Re: KR> Mark L - wings Message-ID: <008801c20f49$0109bd80$7600a8c0@athlon600> Bill Clapp wrote: >>Mark - I noticed that you did not incorporate wing extensions(foam) on your wings but left them standard KR2 length. Reasons? Would the wing extensions help because of running the Corvair - better climb and cruise speeds due to less loading - or is there more drag? Have you researched winglets or modified tips at all in your wing changes?<< I'm ditching the extensions mainly to raise the wing loading to smooth the ride at high speed. With over 130 horsepower in the nose, I don't think I'm going to have problems with climb speed. I'll play around with longer wingtips and other stuff later, after I'm flying, and time is not so precious... Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama mailto:langford@hiwaay.net see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2002 16:19:22 EDT To: KRNet@mailinglists.org From: Mauryhuntr@aol.com Subject: Sandbagged? Message-ID: <127.11fa610c.2a33c0ca@aol.com> --part1_127.11fa610c.2a33c0ca_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit A comment on the good advice and suggestions in the following note from Kenny Wiltrout-- =================================== Since I've got several people wanting a ride in my 2S I decided to do themost prudent thing rather than using my first assenger for a crash test dummy. I took 4 sand bags and filled them with sand, weighed each one on a certified scale and came up with a total weight of exactly 160 lbs. I started with 2 bags that totaled 84lbs first, then did a couple of take off's and landings before adding the last 2 bags separately. According to my weight and balance I would still be 2" forward of my aft most CG with the 160lbs in the passenger seat. The only thing I noticed was an increased sink rate on landing and I needed some forward stick momentarily on take off after the mains left the ground. Just thought this might be interesting to someone who's getting ready to fly their first passenger. Believe me, work your way up to a passenger's weight gradually since the handling characteristics are different enough to induce a mild heart attack on take off. -----------------------------Kenny ================================= Several years ago, one of our KR-2 fellows was doing similar testing during his 40 hr flyoff. There were no witnesses so the facts will never be known. However, one logical explanation was that one of the sandbags, either not secured or that had slipped loose, lodged against the right stick or pedals and he bored in. Kenny was following the old admonition that there in no such thing as a "small" change in an aircraft and suggesting caution. Another old admonition, "always prepare for the impossible to happen---because it will". Maury Hunter 4108 Columbia St Des Moines, IA 50313-3612 515 244 7980 fax 515 244 7952 --part1_127.11fa610c.2a33c0ca_boundary-- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2002 16:13:50 -0700 (PDT) To: Group KR NET From: Tim Brown Subject: manual trim questions Message-ID: <20020608231350.47776.qmail@web9506.mail.yahoo.com> Netters: They say a picture is worth a thousand words so if you have the blue Tony B book take a look at pgs 130 and 131 which will help with what I am trying to explain and questions posed. I am building a manual trim lever connected by cables or maybe piano wire from cockpit to lever at back, then piano wire from lever to trim tab. I am building a lever similar to figure 10 on pg 130 and using a set up similar to that on pg 130 diagram 'C'. My thought is that I would like more movement of the lever in the cockpit to achieve less movement at the rear lever. My thought is that this will allow me to move the lever by hand a bit at a time...ie 1/4" to 1/2" movements resulting in only minor trim tab movement. If my thought process is in error or you all think this is not what I want/need...please advise. If this is what I want, am I correct thinking that I want the holes for the cables closer to the pivot point in the cockpit than at the rear lever. For example....at the hand lever, 2" from center and at the rear lever maybe 1 1/8". Final, Tony shows piano wire from rear lever to cockpit but I am considering cable. Any thoughts? Thanks all.... Tim __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2002 17:57:31 -0700 (PDT) To: Tim Brown , Group KR NET From: Tim Brown Subject: Re: KR> manual trim questions Message-ID: <20020609005731.29995.qmail@web9503.mail.yahoo.com> > If this is what I want, am I correct thinking > that I want the holes for the cables closer to > the pivot point in the cockpit than at the rear > lever. For example....at the hand lever, 2" > from > center and at the rear lever maybe 1 1/8". On first post I got this ....oops....backwards to what I waas saying/meaning. Do I want cables closer to the pivot point in the cockpit that at the rear lever....for example, in the cockpit at say 1 1/8" from pivot to cable and at the rear, 2" from pivot to cable. Tim __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2002 20:57:30 -0700 (PDT) To: KRNET@MAILINGLISTS.ORG From: Rick Wilson Subject: manual trim questions Message-ID: <20020609035730.58728.qmail@web21205.mail.yahoo.com> Think of the movement of the trim tab in the same way as you would the movement of a bicycle wheel when being turned by sprockets. With the larger radius sprocket in front and smaller one behind, the wheel moves much faster with less movement of the larger sprocket. So it seems you would want your holes closer together at the control lever and farther apart at the trim tab if you want less movement of the tab with more movement of the lever or wheel. Just my thinking, Rick Wilson. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2002 11:12:48 -0400 To: From: "Audrey and Harold Woods" Subject: manual trim questions Message-ID: <004301c20fc8$1e1eb540$b0046418@baol.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> ------=_NextPart_000_0040_01C20FA6.96979720 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The distances moved by the lever in the cockpit and that of the trim tab = are really a simple highschool physics problem in levers. Draw each to = scale. Mark out a movement on the first lever drawing . Mease the = distance that the trim cable would move. Take this measurement to the = next drawing. Draw it in . Measure the distance that you trim tab = moved. Repeat for different movements. Do you like the results? If not = ,change the leverage at one of the horns. Good luck . Harold Woods. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.351 / Virus Database: 197 - Release Date: 4/19/02 ------=_NextPart_000_0040_01C20FA6.96979720-- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2002 05:49:46 -0700 (PDT) To: KRNET@MAILINGLISTS.ORG From: Rick Wilson Subject: flying experience Message-ID: <20020609124946.6711.qmail@web21205.mail.yahoo.com> Hi, This probably sounds like a dumb question, but I would like to ask if anyone has any experience in a grumman AA5A cheetah and could tell me if the kr2 flies anything like the grumman. I learned to fly in a cheetah which is a fairly slippery little airplane itself. Cruises around 140, takes off around 55-60, and lands about 60-65. It is fairly responsive on the controls. If anyone has flown a cheetah and a kr2, I would appreciate your comments on the differences or similarities, Thanks, Rick Wilson. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2002 09:29:17 -0400 To: KRNET@MAILINGLISTS.ORG From: "Dana Overall" Subject: Re: KR> flying experience Message-ID: Sorry Rick, but I've flown both and they are two different animals. The KR ailerons will be heavier than the 5 and the elevator will be much, much lighter. About the only similarity are their penchants for aft CG. Contrary to calling the KR elevator responsive............well, lets just say that responsive is not the right word:-) Dana Overall aka Assembler Richmond, KY 1999 & 2000 National KR Gathering host http://rvflying.tripod.com (wings sch. for delivery 6/14) _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2002 08:39:39 -0500 To: "Rick Wilson" , From: ejanssen@chipsnet.com (Ed Janssen) Subject: Re: KR> flying experience Message-ID: <003601c20fbb$1a801da0$0200a8c0@dad> Rick, Not a dumb question. Way , way back in my earlier KR flying experiences, I was advised to get some time in a Yankee, which many flyers thought was the best production aircraft to get some transition time in before flying the KR. It was supposed to be more "responsive" than say a Cherokee. The Cheetah must be similar. I never did get to fly a Yankee. I did have nearly a hundred hours in a '39 T-Craft which helped with the tailwheel thing. Then, I just did almost 10 hours of taxiing before I flew the KR-1 for the first time. Except for some mild porpoising on my first takeoff, everything went real well. Ed ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rick Wilson" To: Sent: Sunday, June 09, 2002 7:49 AM Subject: KR> flying experience > Hi, This probably sounds like a dumb question, but I > would like to ask if anyone has any experience in a > grumman AA5A cheetah and could tell me if the kr2 > flies anything like the grumman. I learned to fly in a > cheetah which is a fairly slippery little airplane > itself. Cruises around 140, takes off around 55-60, > and lands about 60-65. It is fairly responsive on the > controls. If anyone has flown a cheetah and a kr2, I > would appreciate your comments on the differences or > similarities, Thanks, Rick Wilson. > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup > http://fifaworldcup.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/ > and at http://www.bouyea.net/ for the older ones > > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2002 13:48:44 -0700 To: KR list From: Shane Daly Subject: Work Bench Ideas Message-id: <011401c20ff7$0bacadc0$84194f18@cg.shawcable.net> --Boundary_(ID_ZJBxViGKBDpgqTbNqi1OmQ) Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Hello All, Does anyone out in KR land have a good resource for how to build a good straight, flat, solid work bench that does not require welding? I finally have some space, and if I'm lucky some time, to get back into my KR project. Thanks in advance, Shane Daly Calgary, Canada --Boundary_(ID_ZJBxViGKBDpgqTbNqi1OmQ)-- ------------------------------ End of krnet Digest ***********************************