From: To: Subject: krnet Digest 23 Feb 2003 23:53:21 -0000 Issue 639 Date: Sunday, February 23, 2003 4:54 PM krnet Digest 23 Feb 2003 23:53:21 -0000 Issue 639 Topics (messages 15321 through 15350): Re: Firewall Engine mount bracing 15321 by: JEAN VERON c-150 PARTS[JUSTIN] 15322 by: David Hartz Re: RPM 15323 by: Dana Overall 15326 by: Dan Heath 15332 by: Ross Youngblood 15345 by: Al Friesen Oshkosh 15324 by: Jim Faughn 15325 by: Bob 15329 by: Ron Freiberger Tailwheels 15327 by: Dan Heath Mark Rebuild? 15328 by: Dan Heath Re: Cowling thickness 15330 by: Brian Kraut Update 15331 by: Mark Jones 15333 by: Dan Heath 15335 by: Mark Jones KR2S general flight ops and feedback 15334 by: Brian and Nicole Kehler 15338 by: Justin 15339 by: Ronevogt.aol.com 15340 by: Justin 15341 by: Dana Overall 15342 by: Ron Freiberger 15344 by: Al Friesen 15346 by: Justin Cowling mold release 15336 by: JIM VANCE 15337 by: Mark Jones Re: KR2S cockpit width 15343 by: Mark Langford 15347 by: Justin 15348 by: Mark Jones 15349 by: Mark Langford 15350 by: Edwin Blocher Administrivia: To subscribe to the digest, e-mail: To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail: To post to the list, e-mail: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 18:40:32 -0600 To: "KRNet" From: "JEAN VERON" Subject: Re: KR> Firewall Engine mount bracing Message-ID: ------=_NextPart_001_0000_01C2D9D8.B71DC4E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Old Blue got a new firewall that has fiberglass wrapped from the sides ar= ound to the front of the firewall. in addition i added 3 layers of unidir= ectional on the insides from about 12" back to about 6" in on the firewal= l. I also made a new engine mount that attaches within 2" of the upper an= d lower longerons. Marty used a Hapi mount and added a piece of aluminum = angle across the top and bottom from side to side centered in the engine = mount bolts. And my guess is that NOBODY has stressed a firewall more tha= n Marty. Hope this helps. Jean ----- Original Message ----- From: larry flesner Sent: Friday, February 21, 2003 8:02 AM To: KRnet@mailinglists.org Subject: KR> Firewall Engine mount bracing >That reinforcement looks like monster reinforcement. Is this needed >because the firewall is wider on the S or because you are going to use a >heavier engin >Daniel R. Heath - Columbia, SC ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ The stock firewall on the KR is already extreemly strong and probably =20 needs very little additional reinforcment. If Jean Veron is still on the= =20 net maybe he could tell us if Marty Roberts did any reinforcing on his firewall or if he did any reinforcing on "Ol Blue" for the 0-200. Marty is using a Hapi VW mount with his 0-200 that has the firewall mounts closer to center than to the edges and I doubt that anyone has stressed a firewall any more than Marty ! =20 I did some "minor" reinforcing on my firewall. I used 3/4" spruce cross members instead of the 5/8" and placed several extra spruce blocks in the corners at the firewall to fuselage attach points. At the upper engine m= ount bolt locations I used a 2 1/2" piece of 2 1/2" alum angle with gussets welded in on each end ( picture a cube cut at a 45 degree angle from corner to corner). The side that contacts the firewall has the upper eng= ine mount bolt running through the center and the side that contacts the =20 bottom side of the 1/4" ply on the upper box has four 3/16" bolts through it with wood washers on the top side of the ply. =20 I recall Jeanette Rand making the statement at one of the Gatherings years back that she had an engineer run some numbers on the =20 firewall strength and he indicated it was a 22 G structure. That should be strong enough to hold you pickup truck! How much stronger does it need to be?!! Your results may vary. :-) Larry Flesner --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 ------=_NextPart_001_0000_01C2D9D8.B71DC4E0-- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 22:50:30 -0800 (PST) To: KRnet@mailinglists.org From: David Hartz Subject: c-150 PARTS[JUSTIN] Message-ID: <20030222065030.28293.qmail@web41308.mail.yahoo.com> > JUSTIN I SENT YOU A REQUEST ABOUT A ARTIFICIAL HORIZON,ALSO IF THE MOTOR WAS AVAILABLE? AND PRICES?please let me know one way or the other. THANKS,DAVE-dewrencher@yahoo.com __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more http://taxes.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2003 08:02:47 -0500 To: KRnet@mailinglists.org From: "Dana Overall" Subject: Re: KR> RPM Message-ID: On a fixed pitch prop, you first of all are going to have to find the right prop that gets you the RPMs you want. Sounds like I am contradicting myself but I'm not. You don't want to way under or way over your desired red line RPMs. That is difficult with wood props because the same pitched prop from the same manufacturer is inherently different each time. When you hear people talk of 75% power, the easiest way to reference that is climb to 8000. Now you could get real complicated now and do pressure altitude calculations but then at other altitudes on different days your readings would be different. This will get you in the ballpark. Level off and apply full power. Allow everything to stabilize and look at MP. At 8000' you can't get anymore than 75% power. As you descend, your MP will increase by 1" per 1000 feet. So.....at 6000', on that same day, a reduced power setting will be required to maintain a 75% power setting. I use the 75% because it is a standard setting along with the 8000' mark. Anything above 8000' you cannot achieve anything greater than 75% unless you go turbo, thus the turbo is maintaining as high a MP as possible until it finally runs out. They great thing about maintaining a given MP is you know your power setting a given fuel usage for that power. An added benefit is you are able to maintain a given power setting on your descent so as to aid in not shock cooling your engine. Add this to the fact that most engines like to be leaned at anything below 75% power, remember lean on climb, richen on descent. Great, inexpensive and easy to use engine moniter. Like I said, a MP gauge is not just for constant speed props. If you install one, you will use it more than you will the tach. Dana Overall Richmond, KY http://rvflying.tripod.com do not archive >From: "Dan Heath" >Reply-To: KRnet@mailinglists.org >To: >Subject: Re: KR> RPM >Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 18:13:30 -0800 (Pacific Standard Time) > >Dana, > >What indicates 100%, 75%..... on the MP? > >N64KR > >Daniel R. Heath - Columbia, SC > >DanRH@KR-Builder.org > >See you in Red Oak - 2003 > > _________________________________________________________________ Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2003 14:17:10 -0800 (Pacific Standard Time) To: From: "Dan Heath" Subject: Re: KR> RPM Message-Id: <3E57F6E5.000001.01124@dan> --------------Boundary-00=_MWDQQL80000000000000 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dana,=0D =0D This one is going in my archive. I have a MP guage, but never used it because I did not know how. =0D =0D Thank you,=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: Saturday, February 22, 2003 05:03:22 AM=0D To: KRnet@mailinglists.org=0D Subject: Re: KR> RPM=0D =0D On a fixed pitch prop, you first of all are going to have to find the rig= ht =0D prop that gets you the RPMs you want. Sounds like I am contradicting myse= lf =0D but I'm not. You don't want to way under or way over your desired red lin= e =0D RPMs. That is difficult with wood props because the same pitched prop fro= m =0D the same manufacturer is inherently different each time.=0D =0D When you hear people talk of 75% power, the easiest way to reference that= is =0D climb to 8000. Now you could get real complicated now and do pressure =0D altitude calculations but then at other altitudes on different days your = =0D readings would be different. This will get you in the ballpark. Level off= =0D and apply full power. Allow everything to stabilize and look at MP. At =0D 8000' you can't get anymore than 75% power. As you descend, your MP will = =0D increase by 1" per 1000 feet. So.....at 6000', on that same day, a reduce= d =0D power setting will be required to maintain a 75% power setting. I use the= =0D 75% because it is a standard setting along with the 8000' mark. Anything = =0D above 8000' you cannot achieve anything greater than 75% unless you go =0D turbo, thus the turbo is maintaining as high a MP as possible until it =0D finally runs out. They great thing about maintaining a given MP is you kn= ow =0D your power setting a given fuel usage for that power. An added benefit is= =0D you are able to maintain a given power setting on your descent so as to a= id =0D in not shock cooling your engine. Add this to the fact that most engines = =0D like to be leaned at anything below 75% power, remember lean on climb, =0D richen on descent. Great, inexpensive and easy to use engine moniter.=0D =0D Like I said, a MP gauge is not just for constant speed props. If you =0D install one, you will use it more than you will the tach.=0D =0D =0D =0D Dana Overall=0D Richmond, KY=0D http://rvflying.tripod.com=0D do not archive=0D =0D =0D =0D =0D =0D >From: "Dan Heath" =0D >Reply-To: KRnet@mailinglists.org=0D >To: =0D >Subject: Re: KR> RPM=0D >Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 18:13:30 -0800 (Pacific Standard Time)=0D >=0D >Dana,=0D >=0D >What indicates 100%, 75%..... on the MP?=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 >=0D =0D _________________________________________________________________=0D Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. =0D http://join.msn.com/?page=3Dfeatures/junkmail=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=_MWDQQL80000000000000-- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2003 22:29:08 -0800 To: KRnet@mailinglists.org, KRnet@mailinglists.org From: Ross Youngblood Subject: Re: KR> RPM Message-Id: Dana, This is a terrific Idea... Thanks! 2/22/2003 5:02:47 AM, "Dana Overall" wrote: >On a fixed pitch prop, you first of all are going to have to find the right >prop that gets you the RPMs you want. Sounds like I am contradicting myself >but I'm not. You don't want to way under or way over your desired red line >RPMs. That is difficult with wood props because the same pitched prop from >the same manufacturer is inherently different each time. > >When you hear people talk of 75% power, the easiest way to reference that is >climb to 8000. Now you could get real complicated now and do pressure >altitude calculations but then at other altitudes on different days your >readings would be different. This will get you in the ballpark. Level off >and apply full power. Allow everything to stabilize and look at MP. At >8000' you can't get anymore than 75% power. As you descend, your MP will >increase by 1" per 1000 feet. So.....at 6000', on that same day, a reduced >power setting will be required to maintain a 75% power setting. I use the >75% because it is a standard setting along with the 8000' mark. Anything >above 8000' you cannot achieve anything greater than 75% unless you go >turbo, thus the turbo is maintaining as high a MP as possible until it >finally runs out. They great thing about maintaining a given MP is you know >your power setting a given fuel usage for that power. An added benefit is >you are able to maintain a given power setting on your descent so as to aid >in not shock cooling your engine. Add this to the fact that most engines >like to be leaned at anything below 75% power, remember lean on climb, >richen on descent. Great, inexpensive and easy to use engine moniter. > >Like I said, a MP gauge is not just for constant speed props. If you >install one, you will use it more than you will the tach. > > > >Dana Overall >Richmond, KY >http://rvflying.tripod.com >do not archive > > > > > >>From: "Dan Heath" >>Reply-To: KRnet@mailinglists.org >>To: >>Subject: Re: KR> RPM >>Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 18:13:30 -0800 (Pacific Standard Time) >> >>Dana, >> >>What indicates 100%, 75%..... on the MP? >> >>N64KR >> >>Daniel R. Heath - Columbia, SC >> >>DanRH@KR-Builder.org >> >>See you in Red Oak - 2003 >> >> > >_________________________________________________________________ >Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. >http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >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 > > Ross Youngblood http://N541RY.com mailto:rossy65@attbi.com (Home) mailto:ross_youngblood@credence.com (Work) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 13:27:01 -0800 To: From: "Al Friesen" Subject: Re: KR> RPM Message-ID: <006e01c2db82$993f7760$95cb6cce@s8z8i0> Dana and Dan, Thanks for the input on manifold pressure. A fellow I fly with has a Bonanza. At cruise altitude he sets the RPM at 2500 and the pitch of the prop to bring the MAP to 25 and his fuel consumption goes down to 11 or 12 GPH I think. If my bird was lighter I would put in a MAP, might do it anyway. Al ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2003 11:57:01 -0600 To: "KR Net Response" From: "Jim Faughn" Subject: Oshkosh Message-ID: <000001c2da9b$ce234840$8e466ad8@jfaughn> Since I gave a presentation at Oshkosh last year, the EAA sent me a form asking if I wanted to present again this year. The purpose is to prepare their preliminary speakers list. Well, what do you think. I don't think I want to do the historical presentation again, but since I'm going, it wouldn't be a problem to work up a presentation. I was thinking about a 15-20 min general presentation and then a pilots discussion. I could get pictures of the peoples planes and put them into the presentation even if they just showed up at Oshkosh. Bottom line is since I'm planning on going this year again to help Steve and because I can, should I do this? Also, what is a better idea? By the way, I haven't talked to Jeanette yet about this but I'm sure she wouldn't have a problem with me promoting the plane. Let me know your feedback. Thanks Jim - N891JF Jim Faughn 4323D Laclede Ave. St. Louis, MO 63108 (314)652-7659 Mailto:jfaughn@mvp.net Web Site http://members.socket.net/~jfaughn/index.html ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2003 13:50:23 -0500 To: "KRnet \(E-mail\)" From: "Bob" Subject: Re: Oshkosh Message-ID: <000101c2daa3$41f89610$280c0b0a@bubba9> Netheads, I think that Oshkosh presents a great opportunity to promote the KR series. Since we have some time to prepare, it would be possible to develop a flight test profile that we could have many KR pilots fly and then present the data to show the performance of KR aircraft as built and flown today. We could start with accurate weight and balance and full fuel, fly the profile to show time to climb to say 8000 feet. Then a top speed run to the north for five minutes a 180 degree turn and top speed run to the south for five minutes. Then a power off glide to 5000 feet timed to determine glide angle then stall speed clean and dirty. Some method to calibrate the airspeed, GPS etc and refill the fuel when the test flight is complete to determine fuel used. This is just an example profile, but the idea is a simple flight profile that we could have several pilots fly and e-mail in the resulting test flight card. I would be happy to reduce the data and put together a few slides that would illustrate the values of rate of climb / airspeed / stall speed / gross weight / engine / etc for today's flying KRs. Jim Faughn could present this information as the introduction to a panel of pilots talking about their KR experiences at Oshkosh this summer. Regards. Bob Lee ______________________________ N52BL KR2 Suwanee, GA 30024 91% done only 51% to go! Phone/Fax: 770/844-7501 mailto:bob@flyboybob.com http://flyboybob.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2003 15:07:55 -0500 To: From: "Ron Freiberger" Subject: RE: KR> Oshkosh Message-ID: Jim, you did such a good job last Summer, just redo and touch up a bit with info from the gathering, etcetra. Thanks, Ron Freiberger mailto: rfreiberger@swfla.rr.com -----Original Message----- From: Jim Faughn [mailto:jfaughn@mvp.net] Sent: Saturday, February 22, 2003 12:57 PM To: KR Net Response Subject: KR> Oshkosh Since I gave a presentation at Oshkosh last year, the EAA sent me a form asking if I wanted to present again this year. The purpose is to prepare their preliminary speakers list. Well, what do you think. I don't think I want to do the historical presentation again, but since I'm going, it wouldn't be a problem to work up a presentation. I was thinking about a 15-20 min general presentation and then a pilots discussion. I could get pictures of the peoples planes and put them into the presentation even if they just showed up at Oshkosh. Bottom line is since I'm planning on going this year again to help Steve and because I can, should I do this? Also, what is a better idea? By the way, I haven't talked to Jeanette yet about this but I'm sure she wouldn't have a problem with me promoting the plane. Let me know your feedback. Thanks Jim - N891JF Jim Faughn 4323D Laclede Ave. St. Louis, MO 63108 (314)652-7659 Mailto:jfaughn@mvp.net Web Site http://members.socket.net/~jfaughn/index.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 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2003 14:19:11 -0800 (Pacific Standard Time) To: "Krnet@Mailinglists.Org (E-mail)" From: "Dan Heath" Subject: Tailwheels Message-Id: <3E57F75F.000005.01124@dan> --------------Boundary-00=_ZZDQ6RO0000000000000 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I took off the tailwheel to make it easier to paint and when I put it bac= k on, I realized that it would not be acceptable to use it as is.=0D =0D I would like to read all the great ideas about how you set up your tailwh= eel =0D =0D Thanks for your time. =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 =20 --------------Boundary-00=_ZZDQ6RO0000000000000-- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2003 14:20:14 -0800 (Pacific Standard Time) To: "Krnet@Mailinglists.Org (E-mail)" From: "Dan Heath" Subject: Mark Rebuild? Message-Id: <3E57F79E.000009.01124@dan> --------------Boundary-00=_Q1EQMY50000000000000 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mark,=0D =0D You said you rebuilt your stick. What did you do to it? Any pictures? =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 =20 --------------Boundary-00=_Q1EQMY50000000000000-- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2003 18:55:37 -0500 To: KRnet@mailinglists.org From: Brian Kraut Subject: Re: KR> Cowling thickness Message-ID: <3E580DF9.2050807@earthlink.net> I would add several more plies. Mine is about .093 (3/32"). I just modified the cowl with a bump on the bottom and used about eight plies. That seemed to come to about the correct thickness. JIM VANCE wrote: >I made my cowling with three plies of BID. It measures 0.038" to 0.040" (~1.0 mm) thick. Is this about right? I am planning to build up the edges to about 0.20", plus some reinforcing ribs to help maintain shape. Am I in the right ballpark? My 1978 KR plans says "Build the cowling", and little more, so I'm kind of flying blind. > >Thanks in advance for your help. > > Jim Vance > Vance@ClaflinWildcats.com > ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2003 21:28:41 -0600 To: "KR-Net" From: "Mark Jones" Subject: Update Message-ID: <004f01c2daeb$a9aaada0$6401a8c0@wi.rr.com> ------=_NextPart_000_004C_01C2DAB9.5ED641E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Check out my web page "Photo of the Week" section to see what I finished = up today. http://mywebpage.netscape.com/n886mj/homepage.html Mark Jones (N886MJ) Wales, WI USA=20 E-mail me at flykr2s@wi.rr.com Visit my KR-2S CorvAIRCRAFT web site at =20 http://mywebpage.netscape.com/n886mj/homepage.html ------=_NextPart_000_004C_01C2DAB9.5ED641E0-- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 09:19:53 -0800 (Pacific Standard Time) To: From: "Dan Heath" Subject: Re: KR> Update Message-Id: <3E5902B9.00000E.01124@dan> --------------Boundary-00=_5TURXFP0000000000000 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mark,=0D =0D I got the first picture and it looks great. The second one did not show.= =0D =0D N64KR=0D =0D Daniel R. Heath - Columbia, SC=0D =0D DanRH@KR-Builder.org=0D =0D See you in Red Oak - 2003=0D =0D See our KR at http://KR-Builder.org - Click on the pic=0D See our EAA Chapter 242 at http://EAA242.org=0D =0D -------Original Message-------=0D =0D From: KRnet@mailinglists.org=0D Date: Saturday, February 22, 2003 07:28:08 PM=0D To: KR-Net=0D Subject: KR> Update=0D =0D Check out my web page "Photo of the Week" section to see what I finished = up today.=0D http://mywebpage.netscape.com/n886mj/homepage.html=0D =0D =0D Mark Jones (N886MJ)=0D Wales, WI USA =0D E-mail me at flykr2s@wi.rr.com=0D Visit my KR-2S CorvAIRCRAFT web site at =0D http://mywebpage.netscape.com/n886mj/homepage.html --------------Boundary-00=_5TURXFP0000000000000-- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 11:11:50 -0600 To: From: "Mark Jones" Subject: Re: KR> Update Message-ID: <001f01c2db5e$b54c9920$6401a8c0@wi.rr.com> Hi Dan, Try again, it worked for me. Thanks Mark Jones (N886MJ) Wales, WI USA E-mail me at flykr2s@wi.rr.com Visit my KR-2S CorvAIRCRAFT web site at http://mywebpage.netscape.com/n886mj/homepage.html ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan Heath" To: Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2003 11:19 AM Subject: Re: KR> Update Mark, I got the first picture and it looks great. The second one did not show. N64KR Daniel R. Heath - Columbia, SC DanRH@KR-Builder.org See you in Red Oak - 2003 See our KR at http://KR-Builder.org - Click on the pic See our EAA Chapter 242 at http://EAA242.org -------Original Message------- From: KRnet@mailinglists.org Date: Saturday, February 22, 2003 07:28:08 PM To: KR-Net Subject: KR> Update Check out my web page "Photo of the Week" section to see what I finished up today. http://mywebpage.netscape.com/n886mj/homepage.html Mark Jones (N886MJ) Wales, WI USA E-mail me at flykr2s@wi.rr.com Visit my KR-2S CorvAIRCRAFT web site at http://mywebpage.netscape.com/n886mj/homepage.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 08:38:42 -0700 To: From: "Brian and Nicole Kehler" Subject: KR2S general flight ops and feedback Message-ID: <001101c2db51$a52cb640$9fc7ba89@ab.hsia.telus.net> Hello All, New to the list and have some ? on the KR2 prior to looking into it further. I currently own a beech bonanza, I am a Canadian AME, my woodworking skills are I feel above average. I am looking at the KR2S as an alternative to the above. I can find nowhere the G limits on the KR2S? what is it stressed to? Is it a good xcountry touring machine and comfortable? I assume the seats are as comfortable as the maker, but is there enough room in the cabin to accommodate comfort? Is the C of G flexible to accommodate a larger baggage compartment load? where is the baggage, behind the seats or other door? We do travel and this is important. I am 6'1" and my wife 5'10", are we physically outside the envelope?(standard weights just on height :-) I started a Mustang 1 when single, a Mustang 11 when married, the children imposed a certified four seater, Mark Langford's website is truly inspiring, and shows great detail on construction. I'm interested. Thanks in advance to all Brian J Kehler C-GZFZ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 11:21:45 -0600 To: From: "Justin" Subject: Re: KR> KR2S general flight ops and feedback Message-ID: <001001c2db60$0db08210$dcda1818@computer> The G-load limits are +7 -7 at 800lbs "gross". That is with the KR2, the S model comes in a few hundred pounds heavyer. With 1 person and not much fuel you could make the 800lbs but most S models are porking out to 1100 gross so do the math and you can figure your new G loading. With the new S model the cockpit is wider by 1 1/8" on the top and 1 1/2 on the bottom yeilding a 38" cockpit inside at the sholders and about 36" at the ass. Justin KR2S 16 years old, Preparing 2 sides to install bulkheads (JIGS) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian and Nicole Kehler" To: Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2003 9:38 AM Subject: KR> KR2S general flight ops and feedback > Hello All, New to the list and have some ? on the KR2 prior to looking into > it further. > > I currently own a beech bonanza, I am a Canadian AME, my woodworking skills > are I feel above average. I am looking at the KR2S as an alternative to the > above. > > I can find nowhere the G limits on the KR2S? what is it stressed to? > > Is it a good xcountry touring machine and comfortable? I assume the seats > are as comfortable as the maker, but is there enough room in the cabin to > accommodate comfort? > > Is the C of G flexible to accommodate a larger baggage compartment load? > where is the baggage, behind the seats or other door? We do travel and this > is important. > > I am 6'1" and my wife 5'10", are we physically outside the > envelope?(standard weights just on height :-) > > I started a Mustang 1 when single, a Mustang 11 when married, the children > imposed a certified four seater, > > Mark Langford's website is truly inspiring, and shows great detail on > construction. I'm interested. > > Thanks in advance to all > > Brian J Kehler > C-GZFZ > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 14:30:05 EST To: KRnet@mailinglists.org From: Ronevogt@aol.com Subject: Re: KR> KR2S general flight ops and feedback Message-ID: --part1_a2.33ec6033.2b8a7b3d_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Justin; Did you use the term "ass" in your last post? I can't believe my eyes! Let's keep this aviation venue clean. Such language is truely shocking. RV --part1_a2.33ec6033.2b8a7b3d_boundary-- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 11:38:35 -0600 To: From: "Justin" Subject: Re: KR> KR2S general flight ops and feedback Message-ID: <001201c2db62$645c8c60$dcda1818@computer> ok, ill remember to watch it. Justin ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2003 1:30 PM Subject: Re: KR> KR2S general flight ops and feedback > Justin; > Did you use the term "ass" in your last post? I can't believe my eyes! > Let's keep this aviation venue clean. Such language is truely shocking. > > RV > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 15:00:25 -0500 To: KRnet@mailinglists.org From: "Dana Overall" Subject: Re: KR> KR2S general flight ops and feedback Message-ID: Brian, While the KR2 and S are fun airplanes to bore holes in the sky with and people go cross country in them, I will have to honestly say they are not cross country cruisers for two on board. You have to fly this airplane, it doesn't go where you point it on it's own. I'm trying to be really careful in what I say, as I still feel there is not an airplane out there that gives you the same bang for the buck. CG, very limited in it's range. The baggage area is behind your head and is limited in both size and weight. I call this a UPS airplane. UPS your cloths, if two are going stay aloft any period of time, and pick them up at the FBO. You can widen the fuselage very easily to give you more room. If your plans are to cruise the country in retirement with two aboard, this may not be the airplane to satisfy your requirements. Other comments are surely welcome and will surely come. I don't bad mouth the airplane, it is a riot at what it is good at. Dana Overall 1999 & 2000 National KR Gathering host. Richmond, KY http://rvflying.tripod.com do not archive _________________________________________________________________ Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 15:12:28 -0500 To: From: "Ron Freiberger" Subject: RE: KR> KR2S general flight ops and feedback Message-ID: RoneVogt, What do you call an ass? Ron Freiberger mailto: rfreiberger@swfla.rr.com -----Original Message----- From: Ronevogt@aol.com [mailto:Ronevogt@aol.com] Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2003 2:30 PM To: KRnet@mailinglists.org Subject: Re: KR> KR2S general flight ops and feedback Justin; Did you use the term "ass" in your last post? I can't believe my eyes! Let's keep this aviation venue clean. Such language is truely shocking. RV ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 12:20:53 -0800 To: From: "Al Friesen" Subject: Re: KR> KR2S general flight ops and feedback Message-ID: <006d01c2db82$982b4840$95cb6cce@s8z8i0> Brian, To certify a KR2S you have to keep it to design plan (no mods) keep it light and max gross 980lbs or you will have to register it and do the paper work as a Brian one off design. This I was told I could register it as an Al Friesen design but I was too far in the paper work to change the paper work and start all over. I have an empty weight of 691lbs and a limit of 980 gross. Fiqure your load needs subtract it from the design gross of 980lbs and build it to that weight, or go as a Brian one off, do all the paper work and go with that. I was told no engineering load studes were needed in a one off but you must meet the wing loading and engine minimum Etc. formulas. Get the RAA's AMATEUR BUILT AIRCRAFT BUILDERS MANUAL (Canadian Regulations and Procedures) It gets complicated but you would be familiar with GOV paper work. This is an email I got from Bill Marcy who did a structural analysis for Rand. This for Al Friesen in Canada, afriesen@kootenay.com, but also for all the rest of the kr net Al, concerning my conversation with you this afternoon (Feb 22), my March 1996 analysis of the KR-2S wing attach fittings showed that at a gross weight of 1050 lbs, the wing attach fittings had a 16.4% reserve of strength at an ultimate load of 6 g. That is 4.0 g limit load, compared to 3.8 g limit load required of CAR 3 and FAR 23 aircraft such as Cessna and Piper single engine aircraft. For 3.8 g, the weight could be raised to 1105 lb. What this means is that the real ultimate strength of the wing attach fittings is 1.164 x 1050 = 1222 lb gross weight with no reserve for variations in strength of materials, tolerances on dimensions, eccentric loading, etc. From this you can probably say that about half the time, the wing attach fittings will not fail if they are loaded to the equivalent of 1222 lb gross weight at 6.0 g loading. However, you can also say about half the time, they WILL fail at this loading. I cannot in good conscience recommend that you can safely fly at 1222 lb gross weight, even though at this weight and 4.0 g limit loading, the wing attach fittings will not fail completely, but will probably experience permanent deformation. That is, the wing attach fittings will not return to their undeformed shape when the load is removed, and you will have to make new fittings to restore your wing to its original shape. On the other hand, a gross weight of 1105 lb would meet the requirements of FAR 23. However, this does not say anything about the remainder of the structure. Jeannette Rand advertises the KR-2 as a 6g (ultimate) airplane, but wants to retain the safety margin that goes with 1050 lb, and is adamant that she will not approve any higher weight. You are the builder of the airplane; it should be up to you to decide what strength margin you want, but it should not venture into danerous territory. There is a misstatement at the end of my report JJ-5 that Jeannette is sending to you; it says that the margin of safety in the spar at the fuselage attach point, which is where the loads from the fuselage and tail assembly are transferred to the wing, is less than the margin of safety at the wing attach fittings. This is not true; the margin of safety in the spar caps is 30%. The reason that the Canadian DOT wants the gross weight to be at least empty weight plus 2 x 175 for passengers plus 1/2 pound for each horsepower is because a rough estimate of fuel consumption is 1/2 pound per horsepower per hour, and this gives you one hour of flying at max rated power. You probably wouldn't want to have less than this; FAA requires that you plan your flights to land with at least 30 minutes of fuel at cruise power, so you couldn't fly for long if you had less than the required fuel capacity. Bill Marcy Hired Gun for Jeannette Rand Old pencil and paper aeronautical engineer ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 14:35:20 -0600 To: , From: "Justin" Subject: Re: KR> KR2S general flight ops and feedback Message-ID: <000901c2db7b$157a4470$dcda1818@computer> the bottom of the airplane. Where you sit. Understand? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ron Freiberger" To: Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2003 2:12 PM Subject: RE: KR> KR2S general flight ops and feedback > RoneVogt, > What do you call an ass? > > Ron Freiberger > mailto: rfreiberger@swfla.rr.com > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ronevogt@aol.com [mailto:Ronevogt@aol.com] > Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2003 2:30 PM > To: KRnet@mailinglists.org > Subject: Re: KR> KR2S general flight ops and feedback > > Justin; > Did you use the term "ass" in your last post? I can't believe my eyes! > Let's keep this aviation venue clean. Such language is truely shocking. > > RV > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 12:28:16 -0600 To: "kr net" From: "JIM VANCE" Subject: Cowling mold release Message-ID: <001301c2db69$55e7d160$0300a8c0@oemcomputer> ------=_NextPart_000_0010_01C2DB37.0A593D60 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I bought some Plastilease mold release from Spruce that someone on the = net had recommended. When I got the bottle, the label stated "Use = caution with epoxy."=20 Does anyone know what that means? Their customer service didn't. Jim Vance Vance@ClaflinWildcats.com ------=_NextPart_000_0010_01C2DB37.0A593D60-- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 12:45:06 -0600 To: From: "Mark Jones" Subject: Re: KR> Cowling mold release Message-ID: <002f01c2db6b$af1b9800$6401a8c0@wi.rr.com> Jim, This is just my 2 cents worth but I feel they are referring to being careful to not let the Plastilease get on any surface which you intend epoxy to adhere to. 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 ----- Original Message ----- From: "JIM VANCE" To: "kr net" Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2003 12:28 PM Subject: KR> Cowling mold release I bought some Plastilease mold release from Spruce that someone on the net had recommended. When I got the bottle, the label stated "Use caution with epoxy." Does anyone know what that means? Their customer service didn't. Jim Vance Vance@ClaflinWildcats.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 14:23:07 -0600 To: From: "Mark Langford" Subject: Re: KR> KR2S cockpit width Message-ID: <000f01c2db79$60a1afd0$1202a8c0@basement> Justin wrote: > With the new S model the cockpit is wider by 1 1/8" on the top and 1 1/2 > on the bottom yeilding a 38" cockpit inside at the sholders and about 36" at > the ass. I don't know what plans you are looking at, but for fuselage width in the plan view, both KR2 and KR2S are identical in every way except the last few inches toward the firewall, at least according to the plans that RR sent me. Between the main spar and firewall the S goes from identical to the KR2 width to 1.75" wider to accomodate the larger S firewall. Most of us don't sit at the firewall, so I don't think it's relevant to this conversation. For all practical purposes the KR2 and KR2S are exactly the same width in the cockpit. It's always been funny to me that the S is stretched a little in every direction, except the one that needed it most, the width... Mark Langford, Huntsville, AL mailto:langford@hiwaay.net see KR2S project at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 14:36:31 -0600 To: From: "Justin" Subject: Re: KR> KR2S cockpit width Message-ID: <001301c2db7b$3f722220$dcda1818@computer> In my builders manual it says " RR Jeanette, Make cockpit wider 1 1/8" at top and 1 1/2" at the bottom:" It was in my manual with a RR stamp on it. Justin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Langford" To: Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2003 2:23 PM Subject: Re: KR> KR2S cockpit width > Justin wrote: > > > With the new S model the cockpit is wider by 1 1/8" on the top and 1 > 1/2 > > on the bottom yeilding a 38" cockpit inside at the sholders and about 36" > at > > the ass. > > I don't know what plans you are looking at, but for fuselage width in the > plan view, both KR2 and KR2S are identical in every way except the last few > inches toward the firewall, at least according to the plans that RR sent me. > Between the main spar and firewall the S goes from identical to the KR2 > width to 1.75" wider to accomodate the larger S firewall. Most of us don't > sit at the firewall, so I don't think it's relevant to this conversation. > For all practical purposes the KR2 and KR2S are exactly the same width in > the cockpit. > > It's always been funny to me that the S is stretched a little in every > direction, except the one that needed it most, the width... > > 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.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp > or http://www.bouyea.net/ for the Word files > > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 17:04:01 -0600 To: From: "Mark Jones" Subject: Re: KR> KR2S cockpit width Message-ID: <00af01c2db8f$daed8280$6401a8c0@wi.rr.com> I can not find that statement in my manual or drawings. However, my KR2S drawing shows the maximum width at station F to be 38.125" at the top and 32.50" at the bottom. I actually made mine 41.125" at the top and 36.75" at the bottom. Note: I purchased my manual in 1998 but the 2S supplemental drawing on the fuselage was dated 1992 drawing A. 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 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Justin" To: Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2003 2:36 PM Subject: Re: KR> KR2S cockpit width > In my builders manual it says " RR Jeanette, Make cockpit wider 1 1/8" at > top and 1 1/2" at the bottom:" > > It was in my manual with a RR stamp on it. > > Justin > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mark Langford" > To: > Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2003 2:23 PM > Subject: Re: KR> KR2S cockpit width > > > > Justin wrote: > > > > > With the new S model the cockpit is wider by 1 1/8" on the top and 1 > > 1/2 > > > on the bottom yeilding a 38" cockpit inside at the sholders and about > 36" > > at > > > the ass. > > > > I don't know what plans you are looking at, but for fuselage width in the > > plan view, both KR2 and KR2S are identical in every way except the last > few > > inches toward the firewall, at least according to the plans that RR sent > me. > > Between the main spar and firewall the S goes from identical to the KR2 > > width to 1.75" wider to accomodate the larger S firewall. Most of us > don't > > sit at the firewall, so I don't think it's relevant to this conversation. > > For all practical purposes the KR2 and KR2S are exactly the same width in > > the cockpit. > > > > It's always been funny to me that the S is stretched a little in every > > direction, except the one that needed it most, the width... > > > > 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.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: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 17:23:57 -0600 To: From: "Mark Langford" Subject: Re: KR> KR2S cockpit width Message-ID: <003701c2db92$a40d7a10$1202a8c0@basement> Justin wrote: > In my builders manual it says " RR Jeanette, Make cockpit wider 1 1/8" at > top and 1 1/2" at the bottom:" That's a new one on me. My January 1990 (bought in 1995) KR manual doesn't have a single "RR stamp" in it. What other changes are stamped in your copy? Did you buy this straight from RR or get it secondhand? If these are authentic changes from RR, we might as well list them here and let everybody update their manuals, since RR isn't doing it for us... Mark Langford, Huntsville, AL mailto:langford@hiwaay.net see KR2S project at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 17:52:39 -0600 To: From: "Edwin Blocher" Subject: Re: KR> KR2S cockpit width Message-ID: <003701c2db96$a6cb16a0$0201a8c0@computer> Hey guys and gals, Isn't it nice to have real KR expert on the net now? Don't forget to get your wood at Home Depot. (-: Have you thought about using the yellow Elmers glue as it for woodworking. I may have to scrap my "boat" because I don't have a manual with an RR stamp and I used aircraft approved birch and plywood. Sorry about this. Build them right or not at all. ED Ed Blocher Santa Rosa Beach, FL eblocher@earthlink.net ----- Original Message ----- From: "Justin" To: Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2003 2:36 PM Subject: Re: KR> KR2S cockpit width > In my builders manual it says " RR Jeanette, Make cockpit wider 1 1/8" at > top and 1 1/2" at the bottom:" > > It was in my manual with a RR stamp on it. > > Justin > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mark Langford" > To: > Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2003 2:23 PM > Subject: Re: KR> KR2S cockpit width > > > > Justin wrote: > > > > > With the new S model the cockpit is wider by 1 1/8" on the top and 1 > > 1/2 > > > on the bottom yeilding a 38" cockpit inside at the sholders and about > 36" > > at > > > the ass. > > > > I don't know what plans you are looking at, but for fuselage width in the > > plan view, both KR2 and KR2S are identical in every way except the last > few > > inches toward the firewall, at least according to the plans that RR sent > me. > > Between the main spar and firewall the S goes from identical to the KR2 > > width to 1.75" wider to accomodate the larger S firewall. Most of us > don't > > sit at the firewall, so I don't think it's relevant to this conversation. > > For all practical purposes the KR2 and KR2S are exactly the same width in > > the cockpit. > > > > It's always been funny to me that the S is stretched a little in every > > direction, except the one that needed it most, the width... > > > > 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.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 > ------------------------------ End of krnet Digest ***********************************