From: krnet-bounces@mylist.net on behalf of krnet-request@mylist.net Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2003 12:00 PM To: krnet@mylist.net Subject: KRnet Digest, Vol 228, Issue 1 Send KRnet mailing list submissions to krnet@mylist.net To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://mylist.net/listinfo/krnet or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to krnet-request@mylist.net You can reach the person managing the list at krnet-owner@mylist.net When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of KRnet digest..." Today's Topics: 1. G load - tank question. (Steve and Lori McGee) 2. fuel tanks in the outboard wings would be easier on the wafs (Dan Heath) 3. polyester/epoxy (Larry A Capps) 4. Larry's lap belt attach brackets (Dan Heath) 5. shoulder belt brackets (larry flesner) 6. Laminate information (Steve and Lori McGee) 7. KR-2 vs Eagle 150B 8. Re: G load - tank question. (Justin) 9. G load - tank question. (larry flesner) 10. KR-2 vs Eagle 150B (larry flesner) 11. Re: G load - tank question. (Rick Wilson) 12. Re: G load - tank question. (Bob Sauer) 13. Re: G load - tank question. (Justin) 14. Plywood Listing (Justin) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 15:11:52 -0600 From: "Steve and Lori McGee" To: Subject: KR>G load - tank question. Message-ID: <000801c3b13d$408f7250$0202a8c0@lori8v5h2xi9m3> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: list Message: 1 Does anyone know if the G-load ratings for the KR2s are what they are = mainly because of the wing attach fittings? Are these the "weakest = point"? =20 I ask because I was wondering if the fuel tanks in the outboard wings = would be easier on the wafs than that extra load in the fusealge area. = As it is the wings holding up the fuselage. Safe Flying to ya! Steve McGee Endeavor Wi. Building a KR2S widened. lmcgee@maqs.net=20 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 17:57:04 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) From: "Dan Heath" To: "krnet@mylist.net" Subject: KR>fuel tanks in the outboard wings would be easier on the wafs Message-ID: <3FBFE9C0.000007.01908@Computer> References: <000801c3b13d$408f7250$0202a8c0@lori8v5h2xi9m3> Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: list Message: 2 Steve,=0D =0D Yes, it is easier on the WAFs if the fuel load is carried by the outboard wings and not the WAFs. Don't know the rest. =0D =0D N64KR=0D =0D Daniel R. Heath - Columbia, SC=0D =0D DanRH@KR-Builder.org=0D =0D See you in Mt. Vernon - 2004 - KR Gathering=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 =20From flesner@midwest.net Sat Nov 22 16:15:48 2003 Received: from capitol.mail.pas.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.180]) by lizard.esosoft.net with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1) id 1ANhum-0006tD-00 for krnet@mylist.net; Sat, 22 Nov 2003 16:15:48 -0800 Received: from dsc05-cir-oh-199-35-173-71.rasserver.net ([199.35.173.71] helo=larry-flesner) by capitol.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1ANi0B-0001xO-00 for krnet@mylist.net; Sat, 22 Nov 2003 16:21:24 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20031122181452.0080ce40@pop.midwest.net> X-Sender: flesner@pop.midwest.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 18:14:52 -0600 To: KRnet From: larry flesner In-Reply-To: <20031122023944.34323.qmail@web21205.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: KR>lap belt attach brackets X-BeenThere: krnet@mylist.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1b3 Precedence: list Reply-To: KRnet List-Id: KRnet List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Help: Netters, With all the discussion the last few days I asked Mark Langford to post a picture of my lap belt attach brackets on his web page. This will hopefully help some builders that have not attended any Gatherings to get some ideas from already flying KR's. The plans are rather weak in this area. http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/flesner/fittings.jpg I got the general idea for my brackets from Norm Leonard's KR at one of the Columbia, Tn. Gatherings. I made a quick mental note and sometime later came up with something similar to his. I have them attached to the rear spar and they extend forward approx 4 or 5 inches. Note that one angle coming off the attach point is 90 degrees and the bracket parallels the floor. The top side of the bracket runs down at an angle from the top of the spar to radius around the belt attach hole. I added a gusset for strength and then drilled holes to lighten the brackets. I don't recall the thickness of the 4130 I used but I would guess it to be maybe .090 or .125. Use your best judgement there. The attach bolts are 3/16" top and bottom with, I think, a "wood washer" backing plate. I suspect the spar will have to go to pieces before these brackets turn me loose. Hope the picture helps. Larry Flesner ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 18:26:10 -0600 From: "Larry A Capps" To: "KR Builders List \(E-mail\)" Subject: KR>polyester/epoxy Message-ID: <000401c3b158$6543dad0$0200a8c0@schpankme> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list Message: 3 Hang on, you said you have a pair of wing skins made from Vinyl Ester resin, well that's a horse of a different color. Did you know, epoxy resin and methacrylic acid form the base for Vinyl Ester resin; Styrene monomer is then added as a diluent to give the Vinyl Ester a lower viscosity. Promoters and accelerators are used to help initiate cure at room temperature. Vinyl esters are inherently unstable and will slowly polymerize/gel on their own. Vinyl esters are not cured or cross linked with curing agents like epoxies, they are catalyzed like polyester resins through the use of MEKP. NOTE: Vinyl Esters - Styrene component - will dissolve Styrofoam. However, this changes nothing as it relates to using polyester putty to fill with. Polyester will absorb moisture, swell and ruin your paint job. Larry A Capps KR Newsletter Naperville, IL "Quantum mechanics: The dreams stuff is made of." ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 19:31:58 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) From: "Dan Heath" To: "krnet@mylist.net" Subject: KR>Larry's lap belt attach brackets Message-ID: <3FBFFFFE.000017.01908@Computer> References: <3.0.6.32.20031122181452.0080ce40@pop.midwest.net> Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: list Message: 4 Larry,=0D =0D Yes, I think those will hold just about anything. What about the shoulde= r harness? =0D =0D N64KR=0D =0D Daniel R. Heath - Columbia, SC=0D =0D DanRH@KR-Builder.org=0D =0D See you in Mt. Vernon - 2004 - KR Gathering=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 =20From flesner@midwest.net Sat Nov 22 16:28:01 2003 Received: from capitol.mail.pas.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.180]) by lizard.esosoft.net with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1) id 1ANi6b-0007Ac-00 for krnet@mylist.net; Sat, 22 Nov 2003 16:28:01 -0800 Received: from dsc05-cir-oh-199-35-173-71.rasserver.net ([199.35.173.71] helo=larry-flesner) by capitol.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1ANiC0-0003jg-00 for krnet@mylist.net; Sat, 22 Nov 2003 16:33:37 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20031122182713.007c7240@pop.midwest.net> X-Sender: flesner@pop.midwest.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 18:27:13 -0600 To: KRnet From: larry flesner In-Reply-To: <000801c3b13d$408f7250$0202a8c0@lori8v5h2xi9m3> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: KR>G load - tank question. X-BeenThere: krnet@mylist.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1b3 Precedence: list Reply-To: KRnet List-Id: KRnet List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Help: >I ask because I was wondering if the fuel tanks in the outboard wings would be easier on the wafs than that extra load in the fusealge area. As it is the wings holding up the fuselage. >Steve McGee +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ That's the route I went because I knew my KR would be heavy and I wanted to take some of the load off the WAF's. You must also consider what moving the fuel rearward will do to your CG and also to the handling qualities when you move up to maybe 150 pounds from the fuselage and hang it out in the outer wing panels. I did more taxi text today with the tail up! If I can't get the inspector to schedule a visit real soon this thing is going to fly without me !! :-) Larry Flesner ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 19:09:24 -0600 From: larry flesner To: KRnet Subject: KR>shoulder belt brackets Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20031122190924.00814100@pop.midwest.net> In-Reply-To: <3FBFFFFE.000017.01908@Computer> References: <3.0.6.32.20031122181452.0080ce40@pop.midwest.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Precedence: list Message: 5 >Yes, I think those will hold just about anything. What about the >shoulder harness? Daniel R. Heath - Columbia, SC +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ My shoulder belt attach points are less than ideal and I wouldn't recommend them to other builders. My seat back and cross member is considerably strengthened to support the weight of pilot and passanger entering and exiting the cockpit so that is my attach point. While I think the attach point is strong enough on "my" KR, it places the attach point below the level of the sholders and this will will cause a considerable download on the back and shoulders on a high G impact. The attach really should be closer to shoulder level to prevent this. I had considered placing "risers" on my seatback to raise the shoulder belts but I have my gullwing door positioned so I can use the seatback to enter and exit. These "risers" would make it VERY inconvienent to enter and exit so I had to compromise. Larry Flesner ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 19:34:28 -0600 From: "Steve and Lori McGee" To: Subject: KR>Laminate information Message-ID: <000a01c3b161$ef9b6af0$0202a8c0@lori8v5h2xi9m3> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: list Message: 6 This may be old news to some, but I feel this is an excellent = information site on carbon, s and e glass and resins. http://www.netcomposites.com/education.asp?sequence=3D31 Safe Flying to ya! Steve McGee Endeavor Wi. Building a KR2S widened. lmcgee@maqs.net=20 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 23:36:45 -0700 From: kleirfall@ecomail.org To: KRnet Subject: KR>KR-2 vs Eagle 150B Message-ID: <1069569405.3fc0557d9d29d@www.ecomail.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: list Message: 7 I was wondering how the KR-2 compares to the Eagle 150B. I recently had the oppertunity to fly the Eagle 150B. That is a dream to fly!!! Is the KR-2 like the Eagle 150B? <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< This email comes to you via EcoMail! Swim over to http://www.ecocity.com and sign up for your *FREE* account ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 22:37:29 -0600 From: "Justin" To: "KRnet" Subject: Re: KR>G load - tank question. Message-ID: <001201c3b17b$80beaf60$47da1818@computer> References: <3.0.6.32.20031122182713.007c7240@pop.midwest.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list Message: 8 Speaking about outer wing tanks, whats the advantages and disadvantages of this. The plans say to put the fuel out there but I haven't seen any KR's with that setup. Justin N116JW www.geocities.com/attngrabber14/Home ----- Original Message ----- From: "larry flesner" To: "KRnet" Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2003 6:27 PM Subject: KR>G load - tank question. > >I ask because I was wondering if the fuel tanks in the outboard wings > would be easier on the wafs than that extra load in the fusealge area. As > it is the wings holding up the fuselage. > >Steve McGee > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > That's the route I went because I knew my KR would be heavy and > I wanted to take some of the load off the WAF's. You must also > consider what moving the fuel rearward will do to your CG and > also to the handling qualities when you move up to maybe 150 > pounds from the fuselage and hang it out in the outer wing > panels. > > I did more taxi text today with the tail up! If I can't get the inspector > to schedule a visit real soon this thing is going to fly without me !! :-) > > Larry Flesner > > > > _______________________________________________ > see KRnet list details at http://www.krnet.org/instructions.html > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 08:30:11 -0600 From: larry flesner To: KRnet Subject: KR>G load - tank question. Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20031123083011.00813100@pop.midwest.net> In-Reply-To: <001201c3b17b$80beaf60$47da1818@computer> References: <3.0.6.32.20031122182713.007c7240@pop.midwest.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Precedence: list Message: 9 >Speaking about outer wing tanks, whats the advantages and disadvantages of >this. The plans say to put the fuel out there but I haven't seen any KR's >with that setup. >Justin +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Justin, I don't recall the plans suggesting tanks in the "outer wing panels". I seem to recall they suggested additional fuel in the stub wings. It's been a while since I looked at that part of the plans so I'll let that stand. As to the advantages and disadvantages I'm assuming you mean eliminating the header tank and putting all fuel in the wings. If not you can pick and choose from the following. Advantages - It removes the fuel storage from the cockpit and places it the greatest possible distance from the occupants. - The weight being outboard of the WAF's helps to "unload" that part of the structure. - In my case the tanks are long and narrow and my CG shift from full fuel to no fuel is only 1 inch and it moves forward. Disadvantages - Your lose the reliability of gravity feed although I think a gravity feed system with a low head pressure is probably less tolerant of system problems. - The fuel system will be more complicated and weigh more as well as increasing the complexity of attaching the outer wing panels. - If not designed properly you could have a more aggravated failure mode. For example, if you were to put a pump in each wing and one failed and you had no way of pumping fuel from that wing, you'd probably want to land very soon. With 10 gallon tanks you could have one wing get up to 60 pounds heavier than the other if the flight is continued till near empty fuel. Your options here are to design those types of failure modes out of the system. In my case I have a simple ( I think ) system that allows me to pump from either/both wing tanks with either/both pumps. I also have backup power for the elect fuel pumps if I have to shut down my elect system. Remember what I said about more complexity and weight? There's no such thing as a FREE LUNCH. Only the builder can decide what they are the most comfortable with. If you're not going to be comfortable flying the airplane you're building you may as well shoot it now. :-) Larry Flesner ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 08:30:27 -0600 From: larry flesner To: KRnet Subject: KR>KR-2 vs Eagle 150B Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20031123083027.00816c80@pop.midwest.net> In-Reply-To: <1069569405.3fc0557d9d29d@www.ecomail.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Precedence: list Message: 10 >I was wondering how the KR-2 compares to the Eagle 150B. I recently had the >oppertunity to fly the Eagle 150B. That is a dream to fly!!! Is the KR-2 >like the Eagle 150B? ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++= Not having seen or flown an Eagle 150B I can only judge by the info and photos on the web. My first impression is NO ! The Eagle is a very refined $120,000.00 airplane with a 125hp Continental engine. The KR probably has less room and is much more primitive looking. I'm also guessing that the handling qualities of the Eagle more closely resemble a certified aircraft than a homebuilt. To the KR's credit, you could save $100,000.00, pick up 30 to 50 mph cruise, and have an aircraft that would more closely reflect your personal identity and preferences. For most KR builders the difference between the two could simply be stated as "REALITY CHECK". Larry Flesner ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 08:27:52 -0800 (PST) From: Rick Wilson To: KRnet Subject: Re: KR>G load - tank question. Message-ID: <20031123162752.45945.qmail@web21207.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <001201c3b17b$80beaf60$47da1818@computer> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii MIME-Version: 1.0 Precedence: list Message: 11 Justin, What plans are you reading? Mine for the KR2 say to build the tank under the forward deck, if additional tanks are wanted put them in the stub wings. Rick Wilson. --- Justin wrote: > Speaking about outer wing tanks, whats the > advantages and disadvantages of > this. The plans say to put the fuel out there but I > haven't seen any KR's > with that setup. > > Justin > N116JW > www.geocities.com/attngrabber14/Home > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "larry flesner" > To: "KRnet" > Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2003 6:27 PM > Subject: KR>G load - tank question. > > > > >I ask because I was wondering if the fuel tanks > in the outboard wings > > would be easier on the wafs than that extra load > in the fusealge area. As > > it is the wings holding up the fuselage. > > >Steve McGee > > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > That's the route I went because I knew my KR would > be heavy and > > I wanted to take some of the load off the WAF's. > You must also > > consider what moving the fuel rearward will do to > your CG and > > also to the handling qualities when you move up to > maybe 150 > > pounds from the fuselage and hang it out in the > outer wing > > panels. > > > > I did more taxi text today with the tail up! If I > can't get the inspector > > to schedule a visit real soon this thing is going > to fly without me !! > :-) > > > > Larry Flesner > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > see KRnet list details at > http://www.krnet.org/instructions.html > > > > > _______________________________________________ > see KRnet list details at http://www.krnet.org/instructions.html ===== Rick Wilson, Haleyville, Alabama KR2-0200A -99% rwdw2002@yahoo.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now http://companion.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 10:19:56 -0700 From: "Bob Sauer" To: "KRnet" Subject: Re: KR>G load - tank question. Message-ID: <001301c3b1e6$03f6b480$a43a3818@ph.cox.net> References: <20031123162752.45945.qmail@web21207.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list Message: 12 Ric, My plans for the KR2S indicate outer wing section tanks for more fuel, and a small (5 gal.) header tank. Mine is all in a header tank (20 gals. ) built similar to NASCAR race car fuel tanks including explosafe foam. Bob Sauer From: resauer@cox.net ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rick Wilson" To: "KRnet" Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2003 9:27 AM Subject: Re: KR>G load - tank question. > Justin, What plans are you reading? Mine for the KR2 > say to build the tank under the forward deck, if > additional tanks are wanted put them in the stub > wings. Rick Wilson. > --- Justin wrote: > > Speaking about outer wing tanks, whats the > > advantages and disadvantages of > > this. The plans say to put the fuel out there but I > > haven't seen any KR's > > with that setup. > > > > Justin > > N116JW > > www.geocities.com/attngrabber14/Home > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "larry flesner" > > To: "KRnet" > > Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2003 6:27 PM > > Subject: KR>G load - tank question. > > > > > > > >I ask because I was wondering if the fuel tanks > > in the outboard wings > > > would be easier on the wafs than that extra load > > in the fusealge area. As > > > it is the wings holding up the fuselage. > > > >Steve McGee > > > > > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > > > That's the route I went because I knew my KR would > > be heavy and > > > I wanted to take some of the load off the WAF's. > > You must also > > > consider what moving the fuel rearward will do to > > your CG and > > > also to the handling qualities when you move up to > > maybe 150 > > > pounds from the fuselage and hang it out in the > > outer wing > > > panels. > > > > > > I did more taxi text today with the tail up! If I > > can't get the inspector > > > to schedule a visit real soon this thing is going > > to fly without me !! > > :-) > > > > > > Larry Flesner > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > see KRnet list details at > > http://www.krnet.org/instructions.html > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > see KRnet list details at > http://www.krnet.org/instructions.html > > > ===== > Rick Wilson, Haleyville, Alabama KR2-0200A -99% rwdw2002@yahoo.com > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now > http://companion.yahoo.com/ > > _______________________________________________ > see KRnet list details at http://www.krnet.org/instructions.html > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 11:10:41 -0600 From: "Justin" To: "KRnet" Subject: Re: KR>G load - tank question. Message-ID: <001101c3b1e4$b9792510$47da1818@computer> References: <20031123162752.45945.qmail@web21207.mail.yahoo.com> <001301c3b1e6$03f6b480$a43a3818@ph.cox.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list Message: 13 Yes, Im building the KR2S and it says just like Bob said. For my fuel setup im thinking something along the lines like a Aircoupe. I want both wing tanks R & L and a small 5 Gallon header tank. I want the Engine driven pump to pump into the header tank constantly and overflow back into the selected tank. Of course I would have an electric fuel pump as back-up. My plan of thought is with that 5 gallon header tank I will be able to keep that full all the time and for whatever reason I run out of gas in the wing tanks I have my VFR reserve already met with that header-tank. Any thoughts, comets,suggestions are welcome, of course I have a long time before my fuel system comes along. Justin N116JW www.geocities.com/attngrabber14/Home ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Sauer" To: "KRnet" Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2003 11:19 AM Subject: Re: KR>G load - tank question. > Ric, > > My plans for the KR2S indicate outer wing section tanks for more fuel, and a > small (5 gal.) header tank. Mine is all in a header tank (20 gals. ) built > similar to NASCAR race car fuel tanks including explosafe foam. > > Bob Sauer > From: resauer@cox.net > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Rick Wilson" > To: "KRnet" > Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2003 9:27 AM > Subject: Re: KR>G load - tank question. > > > > Justin, What plans are you reading? Mine for the KR2 > > say to build the tank under the forward deck, if > > additional tanks are wanted put them in the stub > > wings. Rick Wilson. > > --- Justin wrote: > > > Speaking about outer wing tanks, whats the > > > advantages and disadvantages of > > > this. The plans say to put the fuel out there but I > > > haven't seen any KR's > > > with that setup. > > > > > > Justin > > > N116JW > > > www.geocities.com/attngrabber14/Home > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "larry flesner" > > > To: "KRnet" > > > Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2003 6:27 PM > > > Subject: KR>G load - tank question. > > > > > > > > > > >I ask because I was wondering if the fuel tanks > > > in the outboard wings > > > > would be easier on the wafs than that extra load > > > in the fusealge area. As > > > > it is the wings holding up the fuselage. > > > > >Steve McGee > > > > > > > > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > > > > > That's the route I went because I knew my KR would > > > be heavy and > > > > I wanted to take some of the load off the WAF's. > > > You must also > > > > consider what moving the fuel rearward will do to > > > your CG and > > > > also to the handling qualities when you move up to > > > maybe 150 > > > > pounds from the fuselage and hang it out in the > > > outer wing > > > > panels. > > > > > > > > I did more taxi text today with the tail up! If I > > > can't get the inspector > > > > to schedule a visit real soon this thing is going > > > to fly without me !! > > > :-) > > > > > > > > Larry Flesner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > see KRnet list details at > > > http://www.krnet.org/instructions.html > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > see KRnet list details at > > http://www.krnet.org/instructions.html > > > > > > ===== > > Rick Wilson, Haleyville, Alabama KR2-0200A -99% rwdw2002@yahoo.com > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now > > http://companion.yahoo.com/ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > see KRnet list details at http://www.krnet.org/instructions.html > > > > > _______________________________________________ > see KRnet list details at http://www.krnet.org/instructions.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 11:26:59 -0600 From: "Justin" To: Subject: KR>Plywood Listing Message-ID: <001f01c3b1e7$005fdcb0$47da1818@computer> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: list Message: 14 I was reading my Sport Aviation magazine (march 2003) and found a = listing in the back saying: "Aircraft Plywood, GL2 Rated" Does that mean it is certified for = Aircraft use/ is ok for skinning the boat? Here's the website, take a = peak and let me know guys. http://www.boulterplywood.com/ Justin N116JW www.geocities.com/attngrabber14/Home ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ See KRnet list details at http://www.krnet.org/instructions.html End of KRnet Digest, Vol 228, Issue 1 *************************************