From: To: Subject: krnet Digest 29 Jan 2003 17:06:39 -0000 Issue 615 Date: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 9:07 AM krnet Digest 29 Jan 2003 17:06:39 -0000 Issue 615 Topics (messages 14708 through 14729): Re: Epoxy on wood? 14708 by: Dan Heath 14722 by: Scott Cable Wing surface tolerances 14709 by: Darren Pond 14717 by: Dan Heath Re: New Member 14710 by: lounsbur.midmaine.com Re: KR1s and in-line engines 14711 by: Howcroft 14712 by: Bill Higdon 14723 by: Robert X. Cringely 14725 by: Kevin Re: re epoxy on wood. 14713 by: Ron Freiberger What plywood? 14714 by: jim . synergy design 14715 by: Ron Freiberger 14716 by: Justin 14718 by: TIM BOYER 14720 by: Donald Reid 14721 by: Margiandrick.aol.com 14724 by: Kevin 14729 by: klodhopper.iVillage.com Re: Laminated Spar's/WAR building style 14719 by: Anthony Underwood KR-1 length 14726 by: Frank Ross 14727 by: Robert X. Cringely uncertified wood in aircraft. 14728 by: harold woods Administrivia: To subscribe to the digest, e-mail: To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail: To post to the list, e-mail: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 20:32:06 -0800 (Pacific Standard Time) To: From: "Dan Heath" Subject: Re: KR> Epoxy on wood? Message-Id: <3E375946.000001.01212@dan> --------------Boundary-00=_ILKGQL80000000000000 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Justin,=0D =0D I agree with Mark J. I had to read your post twice to be sure I was read= ing what you wrote. =0D =0D I advise you to give this some serious thought and maybe consider using t= his resource before you decide to take experimentation to that level.=0D =0D N64KR=0D =0D Daniel R. Heath - Columbia, SC=0D =0D DanRH@KR-Builder.org=0D =0D See you in Red Oak - 2003=0D =0D See our KR at http://KR-Builder.org - Click on the pic=0D See our EAA Chapter 242 at http://EAA242.org=0D =0D -------Original Message-------=0D =0D From: KRnet@mailinglists.org=0D Date: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 05:18:40 PM=0D To: KRnet@mailinglists.org=0D Subject: Re: KR> Epoxy on wood?=0D =0D Justin=0D Ronevogt@aol.com wrote:=0D Im almost doen with the second fuselage side but i have jigged up=0D > the first side and it looks nice. I used homedepot exter plywood on the= =0D > outside.... >>=0D =0D =0D You did what??? The plywood you get at Home Depot is far inferior to=0D AIRCRAFT GRADE PLYWOOD. What about the weight? Is it 3/32? What type wood= is=0D it? I know some of you guys like to save money and cut corners but=0D remember...your life depends on how you build your plane. Justin...you ne= ed=0D to re-think this decision....=0D =0D =0D Mark Jones (N886MJ)=0D Wales, WI USA=0D E-mail me at flykr2s@wi.rr.com=0D Visit my KR-2S CorvAIRCRAFT web site at=0D http://mywebpage.netscape.com/n886mj/homepage.html=0D =0D =0D =0D =0D =0D ---------------------------------------------------------------------=0D To post to the list, email: krnet@mailinglists.org , NOT "reply all"=0D =0D To UNsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org =0D For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org=0D =0D See the KRNet archives at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp=0D or http://www.bouyea.net/ for the Word files=0D =0D =2E=20 --------------Boundary-00=_ILKGQL80000000000000-- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 07:14:59 -0800 (PST) To: KRnet@mailinglists.org From: Scott Cable Subject: Re: KR> Epoxy on wood? Message-ID: <20030129151459.95472.qmail@web40808.mail.yahoo.com> --0-1193157011-1043853299=:95408 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Justin, Do you have a death wish? My heart sank when I read you started building your KR from materials bought from Home Depot. Check this out, go to a hobby store or a craft store that sells plywood for model airplane and boats. Look at the same thickness of plywood of what you bought over at Home Depot, and closely compare the two, and you will notice that the model airplane plywood is 5 to 7 plys, you'll also notice that the HD plywood is only 2 or 3 plys. House construction grade plywood is made from pine trees. Aircraft plywood is made from birch or mahogany trees, pine is soft wood, and does NOT have the density or nearly half of the strength of aircraft grade wood. Also take note that you will see a label on the plywood at the craft or Hobby shop: "Not for Aircraft Use" Which means, that even though it is hardwood multiply plywood, it has NOT been qualified or certified for aircraft use. Aircraft grade materials are expensive mainly because of the qualification process REQUIRED by the FAA for use on an aircraft. Using anything else but qualified materials is foolhardy and just asking for trouble. Try this, go over to Home Depot and pick up a length of 1 x 2 of pine, see how far you can bend it without breaking. Now try it on a piece of of like section and length on any piece of hard wood (poplar, maple or oak). You'll notice that it takes a significant increase of effort to bend the hardwood. ( if you can). Do you know why plywood is much stronger than the same thickness of non-laminated (dimensional lumber) wood? Because the grain of the different layers are opposite from the ply adjacent to it. A crack or failure in one ply cannot readily propagate to the next ply. Dimensional lumber will allow a crack or failure to easily propagate throughout the entire length This is the same reason why composites work, actually, plywood is a composite also, but that's another discussion.... So you can see that given the same thickness of material, the more sheer panels or plys, the stronger the result will be. Compare the differences between 1/4 , 1/2, & 3/4 inch plywood. The plys are all basicly the same thickness, the thicker plywood just has more plys. Do you know why architects specify a certain thickness of plywood in their designs? It's because they are requiring the floor or roof structure to carry a certain load, in sheer, between the structural members. The plywood fuselage sides on the KR is required to carry a certain amount of sheer load between the fuselage structural members also, but the loads are many times greater in magnitude than that of a house. The plans are very specific about the type and thickness AND grade of the material REQUIRED to handle this load. Ken Rand had an Engineering degree when he designed the KR, and also a really sharp guy on top of it. Justin, PLEASE read your manual, and please use only qualified materials that are specified in the manual. That means no dime store, or hardware store hardware, and that means no materials bought from Home Depot. As an aviator, you have a responsibility to operate your craft in a manner that does not jepordise the safety and well being of yourself and others, both in the air and on the ground. As an aircraft constructor, you have the same reponsibilities. Please be responsible and destroy any parts you constructed with unqualified materials. It's the right thing to do. Mark Jones wrote: Justin Ronevogt@aol.com wrote: Im almost doen with the second fuselage side but i have jigged up > the first side and it looks nice. I used homedepot exter plywood on the > outside.... >> You did what??? The plywood you get at Home Depot is far inferior to AIRCRAFT GRADE PLYWOOD. What about the weight? Is it 3/32? What type wood is it? I know some of you guys like to save money and cut corners but remember...your life depends on how you build your plane. Justin...you need to re-think this decision.... Mark Jones (N886MJ) Wales, WI USA E-mail me at flykr2s@wi.rr.com Visit my KR-2S CorvAIRCRAFT web site at http://mywebpage.netscape.com/n886mj/homepage.html --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp or http://www.bouyea.net/ for the Word files Scott Cable KR-2S # 735 Livonia, MI s2cable1@yahoo.com --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now --0-1193157011-1043853299=:95408-- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 20:29:39 -0500 To: "KR Net" From: "Darren Pond" Subject: Wing surface tolerances Message-ID: HI Gang Does anyone have any real numbers on how much the surface profile/contour effects the performance of our favourite birds? I have read where glider wings are better than + - .010". The reason I'm asking is my newly acquired old KR needs the wings repainted I could spend the time and effort to improve the wing profile or just get the roller out and go flying. This little bird was said to 110mph with 1835cc vw. Darren Pond CF-VML Taylor Mono plane almost flying. C-GGGW KR2 1835vw coming to a airport near you this spring PondHopper 2 place 2.2 turbo (building stage) Cambridge Ont Canada pond27@rogers.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 07:08:13 -0800 (Pacific Standard Time) To: From: "Dan Heath" Subject: Re: KR> Wing surface tolerances Message-Id: <3E37EE5D.000003.01212@dan> --------------Boundary-00=_P1EHG6G0000000000000 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Darren,=0D =0D I think that is pretty slow, but you can have a lot of fun at 110. I thi= nk you should get from 125 to 145. I got 135 on the Little Beast with an 18= 35 and slightly better after converting it to a 1915.=0D =0D Is this to be a speed machine or a fun machine? That is the question.=0D =0D N64KR=0D =0D Daniel R. Heath - Columbia, SC=0D =0D DanRH@KR-Builder.org=0D =0D See you in Red Oak - 2003=0D =0D See our KR at http://KR-Builder.org - Click on the pic=0D See our EAA Chapter 242 at http://EAA242.org=0D =0D -------Original Message-------=0D =0D From: KRnet@mailinglists.org=0D Date: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 05:35:28 PM=0D To: KR Net=0D Subject: KR> Wing surface tolerances=0D =0D HI Gang=0D =0D Does anyone have any real numbers on how much the surface profile/contour= =0D effects the performance of our favourite birds?=0D I have read where glider wings are better than + - .010".=0D =0D The reason I'm asking is my newly acquired old KR needs the wings repaint= ed=0D I could spend the time and effort to improve the wing profile or just get= =0D the roller out and go flying. This little bird was said to 110mph with=0D 1835cc vw.=0D =0D Darren Pond=0D CF-VML Taylor Mono plane almost flying.=0D C-GGGW KR2 1835vw coming to a airport near you this spring=0D PondHopper 2 place 2.2 turbo (building stage)=0D Cambridge Ont Canada=0D pond27@rogers.com=0D =0D =0D =0D =0D ---------------------------------------------------------------------=0D To post to the list, email: krnet@mailinglists.org , NOT "reply all"=0D =0D To UNsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org =0D For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org=0D =0D See the KRNet archives at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp=0D or http://www.bouyea.net/ for the Word files=0D =0D =2E=20 --------------Boundary-00=_P1EHG6G0000000000000-- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 20:43:05 -0500 To: KRnet@mailinglists.org From: lounsbur@midmaine.com Subject: Re: KR> New Member Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.20030128204305.00690a88@pop3.norton.antivirus> At 11:41 AM 01/27/2003 -0500, you wrote: >I am considering buying a KR2 built in 1986 but would like some advice about plan changes since then (like landing gear) and I would like to fly one with someone before I make a decision, and especially before I just jump in and take off. I live in Glens Falls, New York but am willing to drive 500 miles to get a ride/stick time. That would be anywhere from Richmond Virginia to Detroit to Maine. I am willing to pay for your time. Anyone game? > >Fran Giroux >www.hydrogen-boost.com > Hi Fran my name is Kip Lounsbury and i live in Lincoln Me and have been flying my Kr2 since 1988.It is a standard retract with a 2100 revmaster and at this time i have around 500hrs on it with no problems. I would be glad to give you a ride and some stick time if you would like.Several guys on the net have flown with me that are located here in the northeast. If you would like to give me a call and talk KR's my number is 207 794 6450 Kip > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 13:26:53 +1300 To: From: "Howcroft" Subject: Re: KR> KR1s and in-line engines Message-ID: <002701c2c72d$9bf0cae0$49d91bca@Margaret> Hello, I know of a kr1 fitted with a Walter Micron inline engine at Taupo New Zealand. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 18:03:23 -0800 To: KRnet@mailinglists.org From: Bill Higdon Subject: Re: KR> KR1s and in-line engines Message-ID: <3E37366B.1020409@attbi.com> That's probably the one I was refering to. How about posting a pic of it for all the Fighter Pilot wanabes to look at? Bill Higdon Howcroft wrote: > Hello, > I know of a kr1 fitted with a Walter Micron inline engine at Taupo > New Zealand. > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 08:10:52 -0800 To: KRnet@mailinglists.org From: "Robert X. Cringely" Subject: Re: KR> KR1s and in-line engines Message-Id: I have a Walter Mikron III engine that I bought to put in my KR-1. That was before my 25 year-old Aerolite glue joints began to fail. I have since scrapped that plane and will soon be building a new one with the Walter engine. I will be using the new airfoil with a laminated one-piece spar (no wing attach fittings), though the dihedral break will be in the traditional position, not inside the fuselage. The will allow me a 90 degree attachment to the fuselage, which is supposed to have less interference drag, and the stresses at the break should also be lower. The Mikron is a jewel of an engine. Mine is an older rebuild I bought in Eastern Europe, not the new production you can buy through Moravia. The new engines are better still, but mine is fine. I'll be replacing the carburetor with an Ellison because they've done very well on Tigre engines and Gypsy Majors, which are just Walters all grown up. I will also be replacing the magnetos with a dual electronic system from Klaus Savier because that worked so well on my Glasair. And finally, I've designed a 4-into1 tuned exhaust system that I'll have built in Titanium. My engine is rated 75 HP at 2600 RPM, though I think the carb/ignition/exhaust changes will give me something more than that. The point of my engine changes, though, is not to make greater power but to reduce fuel consumption and increase performance at altitude. The engine weight is an honest 144 lbs, which is 21 lbs. less than the 2180 VW that preceded it. Though the Walter has four inline cylinders, it is only slightly longer than the VW, due to its side mount. The nose will have to be a little longer, of course, to keep the CG in the proper place, but no more than about three inches. It should be a very attractive plane. Of course lower RPM operation requires a longer prop and that's the part I haven't quite figured out. Hoffmann makes a controllable pitch propeller specifically for the Mikron and that's what I am inclined to use, though the price is pretty steep. It really depends on how helpful the Hoffmann folks are with blade design, since this KR will have a much greater speed range than just about anything they've put such a prop on before. The longer prop (68-inches for me) requires a much taller landing gear, so I'll be ordering a custom one from Robbie Grove. To keep the nose from pointing too much to the sky I'll be using the castering Homebuilders' Tailwheel from Aircraft Spruce. My experience with tail springs from Aircraft Spruce has been not very good (they are often warped during heat treating and you have to keep sending them back until they finally understand that you really meant it when you said you wanted one that isn't warped). Though it isn't in his catalog, Grove makes beautiful aluminum tail springs, so that's what I'll be using. My goal is to have the lightest, fastest KR-1 of all. See you in five years. Bob >That's probably the one I was refering to. How about posting a pic >of it for all the Fighter Pilot wanabes to look at? >Bill Higdon >Howcroft wrote: >>Hello, >> I know of a kr1 fitted with a Walter Micron inline engine at Taupo >>New Zealand. >> > > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >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.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp >or http://www.bouyea.net/ for the Word files -- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 08:27:58 -0500 (EST) To: KRnet@mailinglists.org From: Kevin Subject: Re: Re: KR> KR1s and in-line engines Message-ID: <2377796.1043857678084.JavaMail.nobody@gonzo.psp.pas.earthlink.net> That sounds very interesting! I think the cheek cowls on airplanes look terrible. This should do away with those. Kevin. -------Original Message------- From: "Robert X. Cringely" Sent: 01/29/03 11:10 AM To: KRnet@mailinglists.org Subject: Re: KR> KR1s and in-line engines > > I have a Walter Mikron III engine that I bought to put in my KR-1. That was before my 25 year-old Aerolite glue joints began to fail. I have since scrapped that plane and will soon be building a new one with the Walter engine. I will be using the new airfoil with a laminated one-piece spar (no wing attach fittings), though the dihedral break will be in the traditional position, not inside the fuselage. The will allow me a 90 degree attachment to the fuselage, which is supposed to have less interference drag, and the stresses at the break should also be lower. The Mikron is a jewel of an engine. Mine is an older rebuild I bought in Eastern Europe, not the new production you can buy through Moravia. The new engines are better still, but mine is fine. I'll be replacing the carburetor with an Ellison because they've done very well on Tigre engines and Gypsy Majors, which are just Walters all grown up. I will also be replacing the magnetos with a dual electronic system from Klaus Savier because that worked so well on my Glasair. And finally, I've designed a 4-into1 tuned exhaust system that I'll have built in Titanium. My engine is rated 75 HP at 2600 RPM, though I think the carb/ignition/exhaust changes will give me something more than that. The point of my engine changes, though, is not to make greater power but to reduce fuel consumption and increase performance at altitude. The engine weight is an honest 144 lbs, which is 21 lbs. less than the 2180 VW that preceded it. Though the Walter has four inline cylinders, it is only slightly longer than the VW, due to its side mount. The nose will have to be a little longer, of course, to keep the CG in the proper place, but no more than about three inches. It should be a very attractive plane. Of course lower RPM operation requires a longer prop and that's the part I haven't quite figured out. Hoffmann makes a controllable pitch propeller specifically for the Mikron and that's what I am inclined to use, though the price is pretty steep. It really depends on how helpful the Hoffmann folks are with blade design, since this KR will have a much greater speed range than just about anything they've put such a prop on before. The longer prop (68-inches for me) requires a much taller landing gear, so I'll be ordering a custom one from Robbie Grove. To keep the nose from pointing too much to the sky I'll be using the castering Homebuilders' Tailwheel from Aircraft Spruce. My experience with tail springs from Aircraft Spruce has been not very good (they are often warped during heat treating and you have to keep sending them back until they finally understand that you really meant it when you said you wanted one that isn't warped). Though it isn't in his catalog, Grove makes beautiful aluminum tail springs, so that's what I'll be using. My goal is to have the lightest, fastest KR-1 of all. See you in five years. Bob >That's probably the one I was refering to. How about posting a pic >of it for all the Fighter Pilot wanabes to look at? >Bill Higdon >Howcroft wrote: >>Hello, >> I know of a kr1 fitted with a Walter Micron inline engine at Taupo >>New Zealand. >> > > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >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.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp >or http://www.bouyea.net/ for the Word files -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp or http://www.bouyea.net/ for the Word files > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 21:04:55 -0500 To: From: "Ron Freiberger" Subject: RE: KR> re epoxy on wood. Message-ID: Harold, what's the name of a good reactive diluent then ? Ron Freiberger mailto:rfreiberger@swfla.rr.com -----Original Message----- From: harold woods [mailto:audreyandharoldwoods@rogers.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 5:41 PM To: KRnet@mailinglists.org Subject: KR> re epoxy on wood. If you want to encapsulate or seal the wood with epoxy use your laminating epoxy that you are using on your fibreglass. The thinner the epoxy that you are using the deeper the penetration. As a sealer it does not have to penetrate too far. Using thinned epoxy (with acetone) may give you good penetration but after the epoxy hardens and the acetone diffuses out you can be sure that the epoxy is porous.Thus water can diffuse in. Bad scene. So I suggest that regular laminating epoxy should be used as a sealer. Epoxy can be thinned with a reactive dilutant (up to 10%) The dilutant does not diffuse out of the epoxy as it hardens, thus it is not porous. These are just my thoughts on the matter. Harold Woods Orillia, ON. Canada. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.445 / Virus Database: 250 - Release Date: 1/21/03 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 20:03:59 -0800 To: From: "jim @ synergy design" Subject: What plywood? Message-ID: <004101c2c74b$769758e0$0101a8c0@pavilion> ------=_NextPart_000_003E_01C2C708.6569E620 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Justin, Please tell us you are not using 1/4 inch cdx!!!!!!!!!!(that is = the thinnest You can get at H.D. around here) . If you have somehow = gotten hold of 1/8 luan door skins, that is just as bad. Of course you = could just leave the wings off, and put a sail on it.:-). Are you using = A/C spruce for the framework? What kind of glue? Are you related to the = long lost Hennie ? ( look it up in the net archives) . All kidding = aside, If you can' t afford to use the proper materials and methods , = and you become a lawn dart, It reflects poorly on all of us. If you = just have the itch to fly, try Hang Gliding. There is nothing better = than looking down on a 182 from 17,999 ft' ;-) . Good Luck, Jim = Sporka=20 ------=_NextPart_000_003E_01C2C708.6569E620-- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 21:52:25 -0500 To: , "jim @ synergy design" From: "Ron Freiberger" Subject: RE: KR> What plywood? Message-ID: Now that you mention it, where is Hennie?? Ron Freiberger mailto:rfreiberger@swfla.rr.com -----Original Message----- From: jim @ synergy design [mailto:synergydesign@sopris.net] Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 11:04 PM To: KRnet@mailinglists.org Subject: KR> What plywood? Justin, Please tell us you are not using 1/4 inch cdx!!!!!!!!!!(that is the thinnest You can get at H.D. around here) . If you have somehow gotten hold of 1/8 luan door skins, that is just as bad. Of course you could just leave the wings off, and put a sail on it.:-). Are you using A/C spruce for the framework? What kind of glue? Are you related to the long lost Hennie ? ( look it up in the net archives) . All kidding aside, If you can' t afford to use the proper materials and methods , and you become a lawn dart, It reflects poorly on all of us. If you just have the itch to fly, try Hang Gliding. There is nothing better than looking down on a 182 from 17,999 ft' ;-) . Good Luck, Jim Sporka ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 21:31:40 -0600 To: KRnet@mailinglists.org From: Justin Subject: Re: KR> What plywood? Message-ID: <3E374B1C.3040309@socal.rr.com> I am using 1/8" plywood from home depot. It is exterier and I have put it through tests just as i tested the mahogany. The results will be in tommorow. The homedepot plywood held together in boiling water over night and still didnt deform. Though it was weaker when streesed but im sure all wood is? Give your opinion. Justin jim @ synergy design wrote: >Justin, Please tell us you are not using 1/4 inch cdx!!!!!!!!!!(that is the thinnest You can get at H.D. around here) . If you have somehow gotten hold of 1/8 luan door skins, that is just as bad. Of course you could just leave the wings off, and put a sail on it.:-). Are you using A/C spruce for the framework? What kind of glue? Are you related to the long lost Hennie ? ( look it up in the net archives) . All kidding aside, If you can' t afford to use the proper materials and methods , and you become a lawn dart, It reflects poorly on all of us. If you just have the itch to fly, try Hang Gliding. There is nothing better than looking down on a 182 from 17,999 ft' ;-) . Good Luck, Jim Sporka > > > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 05:37:54 -0800 (PST) To: KRnet@mailinglists.org From: TIM BOYER Subject: Re: KR> What plywood? Message-Id: <20030129133754.99DA63B42@sitemail.everyone.net> Justin You really need to listen to these guys on the net what your doing isn't sa= fe the test your putting your wood through isn't anything compaired to what= the Fed's have done The standards they require are there for a reason. I h= ave built several aircraft from wood and would never dream of going to H De= pot or Lowes. I can understand that building a aircraft is very costly but = the saving you get isn't worth placing your life or those under you at risk= . If this isn't getting the piont accross that I feel everyone on the net i= s trying to make Then maybe I should email the pictures of a good friend of= mind that did just what your doing the first is the hole in the ground an= d the little pieces of his aircraft that he made the second is the hole in = which was dig to bury him. The NSTB did determined the crash was caused by = structural failure do to the aircraft being constructed from a low grade ma= terials He had almost 100 hours on his aircraft it may work for a while but= it will fail. Listen to these guys they know their stuff...... Tim --- Justin wrote: >I am using 1/8" plywood from home depot. It is exterier and I have put=20 >it through tests just as i tested the mahogany. The results will be in=20 >tommorow. The homedepot plywood held together in boiling water over=20 >night and still didnt deform. Though it was weaker when streesed but im=20 >sure all wood is? Give your opinion. > >Justin > >jim @ synergy design wrote: > >>Justin, Please tell us you are not using 1/4 inch cdx!!!!!!!!!!(that is t= he thinnest You can get at H.D. around here) . If you have somehow gotten= hold of 1/8 luan door skins, that is just as bad. Of course you could jus= t leave the wings off, and put a sail on it.:-). Are you using A/C spruce = for the framework? What kind of glue? Are you related to the long lost Hen= nie ? ( look it up in the net archives) . All kidding aside, If you can' t= afford to use the proper materials and methods , and you become a lawn dar= t, It reflects poorly on all of us. If you just have the itch to fly, try = Hang Gliding. There is nothing better than looking down on a 182 from 17,99= 9 ft' ;-) . Good Luck, Jim Sporka=20 >> >>=20=20 >> > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >To post to the list, email: krnet@mailinglists.org , NOT "reply all" > >To UNsubscribe, e-mail: krnet-unsubscribe@mailinglists.org=20 >For additional commands, e-mail: krnet-help@mailinglists.org > >See the KRNet archives at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp >or http://www.bouyea.net/ for the Word files _____________________________________________________________ A free email account your friends will never forget! Get YOURNAME@EmailAccount.com at http://www.emailaccount.com/ _____________________________________________________________ Select your own custom email address for FREE! Get you@yourchoice.com w/No = Ads, 6MB, POP & more! http://www.everyone.net/selectmail?campaign=3Dtag ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 09:47:56 -0500 To: KRnet@mailinglists.org From: Donald Reid Subject: Re: KR> What plywood? Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.0.20030129093056.00a4aa80@pop.erols.com> --=====================_2787255==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 09:31 PM 1/28/2003 -0600, you wrote: >I am using 1/8" plywood from home depot. It is exterier and I have put it >through tests just as i tested the mahogany. The results will be in >tommorow. The homedepot plywood held together in boiling water over night >and still didnt deform. Though it was weaker when streesed but im sure all >wood is? Give your opinion. > >Justin I am a licensed Professional Engineer in Mechanical Engineering. My passion for the past ten years has been Aeronautical Engineering. I have taken a number of graduate level engineering classes that include several in structural design and analysis, materials, and related topics. If you did in fact use lumber yard grade plywood in your airplane, it is my professional opinion that: 1) No FAA DAR will approve it for flight. (DAR means a Designated Airworthiness Representative. The person who says that you can legally fly it.) 2) If you fly it, the airframe will fail with potentially catastrophic effect. In other words, you will stand an excellent chance of becoming a smoking hole in the ground 3) You must never subject any other person to the potential risk of flying with you. To do so would be criminal negligence. Very small pieces of the low grade plywood will be more or less the same as high grade material; however, it will have voids, knot holes, pitch pockets, glue starved joints, and other flaws throughout the wood. If it is lumber yard grade plywood, please think of it as a mockup and practice work. Once you are done, please dispose of it. Don Reid mailto:donreid@erols.com Bumpass, Va Visit my web sites at: KR2XL construction: http://users.erols.com/donreid/kr_page.htm Aviation Surplus: http://users.erols.com/donreid/Airparts.htm EAA Chapter 231: http://eaa231.org Ultralights: http://usua250.org VA EAA State Fly-in: http://vaeaa.org --=====================_2787255==_.ALT-- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 10:08:11 EST To: KRnet@mailinglists.org From: Margiandrick@aol.com Subject: Re: KR> What plywood? Message-ID: <5b.34f2c0d9.2b69485b@aol.com> --part1_5b.34f2c0d9.2b69485b_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit PERFECT REPLY --part1_5b.34f2c0d9.2b69485b_boundary-- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 08:24:13 -0500 (EST) To: KRnet@mailinglists.org From: Kevin Subject: Re: Re: KR> What plywood? Message-ID: <1610423.1043857453360.JavaMail.nobody@gonzo.psp.pas.earthlink.net> Wow! What kind of fire alarm has been set off here? Seems it is similar to the one I set off a couple of months ago when I first came onto this site. There are those who think that "Aircraft" quality only comes from some government stamp. Not so and has been proven for years. Do your homework, study what the standards are, talk to the people at the FAA and the EAA. Study the history of what airplanes have been built of in the past. You would be surprised at what they say. I had an old friend that said you couldn't use anything but DOM steel tubing. When he mentioned that he knew that to the tech counselor in Oshkosh he corrected him and said welded seam tubing is fine if it meets the load requirements. When we buy wood stamped "aircraft", what does that mean? Buy EAA books on wood. Study what it is all about. There is nothing that says you cannot get an airplane licensed though you used materials bought from somewhere other than an aircraft supply house. I guess what amazes me about this group is the fact that Ken Rand built the KR with unproven aircraft construction materials, and yet we are giving this kid hell for doing the same thing. Ken had to prove that these materials were airwothy himself. I have read people were so concerned about the construction that he actually walked out the wing panel to prove its strength. Many postings have been put up here about the use of a Corvair engine. I believe this is a good thing, but it is all EXPERIMENTAL. Build carefully, read and get advice from the appropriate places, and test, test, test. Let the grilling begin....... Kevin. -------Original Message------- From: Justin Sent: 01/28/03 10:31 PM To: KRnet@mailinglists.org Subject: Re: KR> What plywood? > > I am using 1/8" plywood from home depot. It is exterier and I have put it through tests just as i tested the mahogany. The results will be in tommorow. The homedepot plywood held together in boiling water over night and still didnt deform. Though it was weaker when streesed but im sure all wood is? Give your opinion. Justin jim @ synergy design wrote: >Justin, Please tell us you are not using 1/4 inch cdx!!!!!!!!!!(that is the thinnest You can get at H.D. around here) . If you have somehow gotten hold of 1/8 luan door skins, that is just as bad. Of course you could just leave the wings off, and put a sail on it.:-). Are you using A/C spruce for the framework? What kind of glue? Are you related to the long lost Hennie ? ( look it up in the net archives) . All kidding aside, If you can' t afford to use the proper materials and methods , and you become a lawn dart, It reflects poorly on all of us. If you just have the itch to fly, try Hang Gliding. There is nothing better than looking down on a 182 from 17,999 ft' ;-) . Good Luck, Jim Sporka > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp or http://www.bouyea.net/ for the Word files > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 09:07:29 -0800 To: From: Cc: Subject: KR> What plywood? Message-ID: ------=_NextPart_000_F052_01C2C775.D9A95710 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I logged on this morning just to say much the same thing Justin has said after reading some of the messages late last night. One additional thought. Kevin indicated he planned to add a fiberglass cover over the wood. Has anyone done the math to say that his boat will not be as strong or stronger then per plans. Since he hasn't identified the resin and style of glass, carbonfiber, or kevlar he plans to use, obviously not. From my reading, it seems that the original concept of the KR was to make an affordable aircraft. Over the years we have migrated towards aircraft quality materials and higher expense, I would guess because of the environment. There is less legal liability in specifying tested aircraft materials in the plans and, except in the experimental area, the mindset of the whole aviation community is certified everything. Kevin, I hope you have thought about what you are building. Airplanes are unforgiving. There have been more than a few builders and volunteer test pilots (friends of builders) killed by experimental aircraft falling out of the sky on the first flight due to failures of various parts. I am not willing to risk a friend so will test my own and do not have a death wish so am being cautious. So much so that I am going to trash a boat I bought with controls installed because I don't have confidence in the workmanship. It doesn't have any safety defects that I am aware of, I just don't have the confidence of having built it myself and have decided to build my own. Brad Glasco China Lake, CA _______________________________________________________________ Sign up for FREE iVillage newsletters . From health and pregnancy to shopping and relationships, iVillage has the scoop on what matters most to you. <-----Original Message-----> > > From: Kevin > Sent: 1/29/2003 5:18:13 AM > To: KRnet@mailinglists.org > Subject: Re: Re: KR> What plywood? > > Wow! What kind of fire alarm has been set off here? Seems it is similar to the one I set off a > couple > of months ago when I first came onto this site. There are those who think that "Aircraft" quality > only comes from some government stamp. Not so and has been proven for years. Do your homework, study > what the standards are, talk to the people at the FAA and the EAA. Study the history of what > airplanes have been built of in the past. You would be surprised at what they say. > > I had an old friend that said you couldn't use anything but DOM steel tubing. When he mentioned that > he knew that to the tech counselor in Oshkosh he corrected him and said welded seam tubing is fine > if > it meets the load requirements. > > When we buy wood stamped "aircraft", what does that mean? Buy EAA books on wood. Study what it is > all > about. There is nothing that says you cannot get an airplane licensed though you used materials > bought from somewhere other than an aircraft supply house. > > I guess what amazes me about this group is the fact that Ken Rand built the KR with unproven > aircraft > construction materials, and yet we are giving this kid hell for doing the same thing. Ken had to > prove that these materials were airwothy himself. I have read people were so concerned about the > construction that he actually walked out the wing panel to prove its strength. Many postings have > been put up here about the use of a Corvair engine. I believe this is a good thing, but it is all > EXPERIMENTAL. Build carefully, read and get advice from the appropriate places, and test, test, > test. > > Let the grilling begin....... > > Kevin. > > > -------Original Message------- > From: Justin > Sent: 01/28/03 10:31 PM > To: KRnet@mailinglists.org > Subject: Re: KR> What plywood? > > > I am using 1/8" plywood from home depot. It is exterier and I have put > it through tests just as i tested the mahogany. The results will be in > tommorow. The homedepot plywood held together in boiling water over > night and still didnt deform. Though it was weaker when streesed but im > sure all wood is? Give your opinion. > > Justin > > jim @ synergy design wrote: > > >Justin, Please tell us you are not using 1/4 inch cdx!!!!!!!!!!(that is > the thinnest You can get at H.D. around here) . If you have somehow gotten > hold of 1/8 luan door skins, that is just as bad. Of course you could > just leave the wings off, and put a sail on it.:-). Are you using A/C spruce > for the framework? What kind of glue? Are you related to the long lost > Hennie ? ( look it up in the net archives) . All kidding aside, If you can' t > afford to use the proper materials and methods , and you become a lawn > dart, It reflects poorly on all of us. If you just have the itch to fly, try > Hang Gliding. There is nothing better than looking down on a 182 from > 17,999 ft' ;-) . Good Luck, Jim Sporka > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp > or http://www.bouyea.net/ for the Word files > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp > or http://www.bouyea.net/ for the Word files > > . ------=_NextPart_000_F052_01C2C775.D9A95710-- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 08:48:42 -0500 To: "'KRnet@mailinglists.org'" From: Anthony Underwood Subject: RE: KR> Laminated Spar's/WAR building style Message-ID: <01C2C773.40FBB780.xbs4fiverivers@xrxgsn.com> Hay Frank, The WAR plans i have are just the frist half of the set, which you can build anythig from a P-51 to a Zero.I was just like most people that gets started in homebuilt's,we pick the hardest thing to start on, and then comes reality, then we wake up and settle on something we can really build, like a KR or a model.I doubt i'll ever even start on a fighter. Anthony. -----Original Message----- From: Frank Ross [SMTP:alamokr2@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 10:55 AM To: KRnet@mailinglists.org Subject: Re: KR> Laminated Spar's/WAR building style Anthony, What WAR plans do you have? [Anthony Underwood] I have pieces of about three corsair plan sets. All are brittle and tear REAL easy when you try to unroll them. One of the big draw-backs of the 'Full size' plans. Here are some web-sites that have excellent information and photos of the WAR planes under construction, including laminated, curved spars. WAR FW-190 half scale http://www.warfw190.homestead.com/index.html WAR Corsair F4U half Scale http://corsairhalfscale.homestead.com/f4u.html Bill Stevens Memorial "War Buddies" Site: http://warbuddies.homestead.com/index.html WAR Newsletter ZIP file: http://corsairhalfscale.homestead.com/OLDWARcatalog.html It should be noted that the WAR designs copied heavily from the KR designs and were significantly heavier. A lot of this weight is in the wings and landing gear design (a LOT of heavy hard-ware) and the fact that they use 3/4 in instead of 5/8 in wood for longerons and cross-pieces. A good example of how effective was Ken Rand's original design. The WAR planes soon had to give up any hope of flying with VWs and went to 0-200 or other 100 hp engines. EXCELLENT platform for Corvair! Frank Ross, San Antonio, TX, USA --- Anthony Underwood wrote: > Mark and the other guy who was asking about > laminated spar's. I > went and dug out my War Aircraft Repicla plans and > they use bent laminated > spars. The spar caps are 4 layers of half inch .... > Thes are fairley nice plans which are all > full size, sure would > be nice if we had plans like that.If you want to > know more haler before i > put'em back up. Anthony __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.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.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp or http://www.bouyea.net/ for the Word files ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 08:30:18 -0800 (PST) To: KRnet@mailinglists.org From: Frank Ross Subject: KR-1 length Message-ID: <20030129163018.59959.qmail@web40903.mail.yahoo.com> Bob, Are you lengthening your new KR-1 at all? Frank Ross in San Antonio, Texas, USA --- "Robert X. Cringely" wrote: > I have a Walter Mikron III engine that I bought to > put in my KR-1. > My goal is to have the lightest, fastest KR-1 of > all. See you in five years. > Bob __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 08:56:03 -0800 To: KRnet@mailinglists.org From: "Robert X. Cringely" Subject: Re: KR> KR-1 length Message-Id: No, I'm not lengthening my fuselage and let me explain why. I flew my original KR-1 for 25 years and more than 1000 hours with 1600, 1835, and 2180 engines and both the RR retractable gear and the Diehl fixed gear. You don't put that many hours on a plane if you are uncomfortable with it. My major concerns were clearly lack of adequate power (give me more POWER!!!!) and that darned retractable gear that punched through the top of the wing on hard landings and every five years collapsed completely, taking out the prop. Handling was never a concern for me and handling is what makes people want to lengthen the fuselage. Yes, it was very pitch sensitive, but I took care of that long, long ago by adjusting the control geometry until the plane had the feel I liked. I am surprised more people don't do this, because it is just a matter of drilling holes until it feels right. The Questair Venture shows you don't have to have a long fuselage for good handling characteristics. Notice on that plane that the tail surfaces are high aspect ratio. What I WILL be doing on the new KR is making the vertical stabilizer about six inches taller and -- like the Tailwind -- not extend the rudder all the way to the new top. There is no lack of rudder authority on a KR-1, but it could definitely use more vertical stabilizer. My horizontal tail will also be wider, but there I am taking a radically different approach out of pure laziness. I have a Glasair into which I have delusions of someday installing what my Mama would call a Big-ass Engine. Anticipating that, a couple years ago I got a chance to buy from a wreck a carbon fiber Glasair III horizontal stabilizer and elevator in perfect condition, which I then installed on my Glasair. Though my engine is not yet bigger, now I have a tail that won't flutter no matter what (G-III flutter tests showed the horizontal tail was marginal in that respect, hence the carbon part -- the only carbon part in the whole plane). This means I have my old e-glass horizontal tail up in the rafters and that's what I propose to put on the new KR-1. It is greater span and higher aspect ratio, though the smaller chord elevators are actually about the same size, so I think it will do the job nicely. And of course the price is right. I'll make it adjustable a la Mark Langford until everything is working right, than glass it down. Bob >Bob, >Are you lengthening your new KR-1 at all? >Frank Ross in San Antonio, Texas, USA > >--- "Robert X. Cringely" wrote: >> I have a Walter Mikron III engine that I bought to >> put in my KR-1. > >> My goal is to have the lightest, fastest KR-1 of >> all. See you in five years. >> Bob > > >__________________________________________________ >Do you Yahoo!? >Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. >http://mailplus.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.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp >or http://www.bouyea.net/ for the Word files -- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 12:04:51 -0500 To: From: "harold woods" Subject: uncertified wood in aircraft. Message-ID: <002c01c2c7b8$89befbe0$03000004@baol.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> ------=_NextPart_000_0029_01C2C78E.A07375C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable An inspecter in a large lumber mill in British Columbia picked out for = me a 2" x 8" x 10 foot piece of Douglas fir. It was good edge grain , straight and had all the nice properties of = garin and density etc. It was of better quality than the Sika Spruce = that I had used for the wings fuselage and tail fins. I have used it = here and there in the aircraft. If I would have had it available before = I had started ythe project , I would not have hesitated to use it = throughout.The inspecter took great care in choosing this lumber for me. I have used a lot of Finnish Birch aircraft grade plywood in the plane. = The bottom and sides of the fuselage are another story. I found some mahogany doorskins in one lumber yard. They were 3/32" = thick. I bought one sheet for about $7.00 and took it home. In a dark = room I used a spot light on the other side to view the interior core. It = was flawless , not one knot. Both exterior back and front sheets were also flawless. Next I cut out two 4 inch square pieces and boiled them for 2 hours in a = pot of water. After that I dried one piece and the other was subjected to bending and = the adherence of the glue.It passed with flying colors. The dried piece also met my standards as did a = piece of the original. I rushed back and bought enough to cover the = fuselage. I wish that I had bought more. I have never found any like it = again. Never the less I have covered this plywood with one layer os 6 = oz.fibreglass. I am confident that it will hold together. At a recent Department of Transport (Canada) symposium we were showen a = photo of a plane constructed by a man that had been watching "Junk Yard = Wars" It was something else.He did not have a pilots liscence. The plane = was not inspected. He flew it. No brakes but on landing he hit a tree.No = problem, back to the junkyard for material. Same thing on a second = flight. The third flight ended when he hit another plane on the ground. = That is when the legal dung hit the fan. We all have a responsibility to caution others about our building = methods and activities. This man should have been warned. Be very = careful about substituting materials in critical areas. Listen to all = words of wisdom that will come your way. They may not all be right but = only you can chart your own course. Mine is not flying yet so the jury on me is still out. Harold Woods Orillia, ON. Canada. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.449 / Virus Database: 251 - Release Date: 1/27/03 ------=_NextPart_000_0029_01C2C78E.A07375C0-- ------------------------------ End of krnet Digest ***********************************