From: krnet-bounces@mylist.net on behalf of krnet-request@mylist.net Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 12:00 PM To: krnet@mylist.net Subject: KRnet Digest, Vol 232, Issue 2 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. Re: TANKS IN OUTER WINGS (Mark Langford) 2. Re: TANKS IN OUTER WINGS (David Mikesell) 3. Re: Justin's Inappropriate conduct (larry severson) 4. Re: New member (larry severson) 5. Re: Turkey day 6. Re: TANKS IN OUTER WINGS (Clancey D Krumwiede) 7. Re: TANKS IN OUTER WINGS (Steve and Lori McGee) 8. Re: TANKS IN OUTER WINGS (David Mikesell) 9. Re: TANKS IN OUTER WINGS (larry severson) 10. Re: TANKS IN OUTER WINGS (David Mikesell) 11. Re: TANKS IN OUTER WINGS (Les Criscillo) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 10:08:47 -0600 From: "Mark Langford" To: "KRnet" Subject: Re: KR>TANKS IN OUTER WINGS Message-ID: <004401c3b500$bd945bf0$2402a8c0@800Athlon> References: <20031127.073254.2036.2.red-bridge@juno.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list Message: 1 > And just where do most airplanes spend a vast majority of their time? I should have just let this go, but it is not a valid comment. The 1g experienced by an airplane sitting in a hangar is simply not a load case of any significance, and has no bearing on anything in this discussion. Mark Langford, Huntsville, AL N56ML "at" hiwaay.net see KR2S project at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 08:13:26 -0800 From: "David Mikesell" To: "KRnet" Subject: Re: KR>TANKS IN OUTER WINGS Message-ID: <006301c3b501$63b97880$03fea8c0@davids> References: <20031127.073254.2036.2.red-bridge@juno.com> <004401c3b500$bd945bf0$2402a8c0@800Athlon> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list Message: 2 Thanks Mark. I orginially was not going to even enter this discussion but putting in several wing and tip tanks per STC I thought I would be helping the original person get their question answered, not told how many ways I was wrong. David Mikesell 23957 N. Hwy 99 Acampo, CA 95220 209-609-8774 skyguynca@skyguynca.com www.skyguynca.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Langford" To: "KRnet" Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 8:08 AM Subject: Re: KR>TANKS IN OUTER WINGS > > And just where do most airplanes spend a vast majority of their > > time? > > I should have just let this go, but it is not a valid comment. The 1g > experienced by an airplane sitting in a hangar is simply not a load > case of > any significance, and has no bearing on anything in this discussion. > > Mark Langford, Huntsville, AL > N56ML "at" hiwaay.net > see KR2S project at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford > > > > _______________________________________________ > see KRnet list details at http://www.krnet.org/instructions.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 08:27:58 -0800 From: larry severson To: KRnet Subject: Re: KR>Justin's Inappropriate conduct Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.0.20031127082517.0248b610@pop-server.socal.rr.com> In-Reply-To: <003601c3b4b7$d323f5f0$3404070a@t1w419> References: <158.28776306.2cf6aecb@aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 Precedence: list Message: 3 I agree with the below. Justin apparently comes from an area of LA (Compton) that is more noted for street gangs than gentility. Give him the chance to learn courtesy from the example of us older folks. At 05:26 PM 11/27/2003 +1000, you wrote: >I think Justin has got the message. > >I was once young and my mouth exceeded my brain on more than one >occassion (as has been the case with most of us) and still does on the >odd occassion. (Justin, don't prove this to one of >them) > >I disagree with excluding Justin from this list. > >BUT, next time Justin......................................... Larry Severson Fountain Valley, CA 92708 (714) 968-9852 larry2@socal.rr.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 08:29:42 -0800 From: larry severson To: KRnet Subject: Re: KR>New member Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.0.20031127082852.024e2d88@pop-server.socal.rr.com> In-Reply-To: <20031127105257.6896.qmail@web11301.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 Precedence: list Message: 4 > I probably will ask many stupid questions but >please bear with me. The only stupid question is the one not asked! Larry Severson Fountain Valley, CA 92708 (714) 968-9852 larry2@socal.rr.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 12:12:00 -0500 (EST) From: paulwasp@webtv.net To: krnet@mylist.net (KR builders and pilots) Subject: KR>Re: Turkey day Message-ID: <14471-3FC63060-53@storefull-2198.public.lawson.webtv.net> In-Reply-To: "Dan Heath" 's message of Sun, 19 Oct 2003 18:43:16 -0400 (Eastern Standard Time) Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=US-ASCII MIME-Version: 1.0 (WebTV) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Precedence: list Message: 5 ......and if you work on your projects after eating all that turkey, don't fall asleep over your T-88 mixture. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 13:06:00 -0500 From: Clancey D Krumwiede To: krnet@mylist.net Subject: Re: KR>TANKS IN OUTER WINGS Message-ID: <20031127.130601.2544.0.red-bridge@juno.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list Message: 6 I respectfully disagree. When sitting on the ground, the "1g" weight of the fuel is supported by the landing gear and everything else when the tanks are located in the stub wings. When the fuel is located in the outer wings, the weight, multiplied by the arm of the fuels cg, is supported as torque on the WAFs. I am not saying, nor have said in the past, that this alone invalidates the idea of tanks in this location. I simply suggested it as something that must be considered when making such a design change. As a number of people on this forum have expressed concern about the WAFs in a number of threads, they are obviously something to not take lightly. I, for one, am not intending to make large scale changes on my own to a good proven design. That being said, and risking the beginning of an entire new thread, I am curious if anyone has examined the possibility of replacing the WAFs with a "spar box" similar to those utilized on certified aircraft designs. On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 10:08:47 -0600 "Mark Langford" writes: > > And just where do most airplanes spend a vast majority of their > time? > > I should have just let this go, but it is not a valid comment. The > 1g > experienced by an airplane sitting in a hangar is simply not a load > case of > any significance, and has no bearing on anything in this > discussion. > > Mark Langford, Huntsville, AL > N56ML "at" hiwaay.net > see KR2S project at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford > > > > _______________________________________________ > see KRnet list details at http://www.krnet.org/instructions.html > > Keith C. Krumwiede Rosedale, IN ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 12:20:27 -0600 From: "Steve and Lori McGee" To: "KRnet" Subject: Re: KR>TANKS IN OUTER WINGS Message-ID: <004501c3b513$22093260$0202a8c0@lori8v5h2xi9m3> References: <20031127.130601.2544.0.red-bridge@juno.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list Message: 7 So what do finished wings way? 40 pounds? I just don't see how anyone could be worried about the wafs holding up to lets say 100 pounds with a full tank on one side while it holds up to 400 or even 500 at times from the other direction ( and this is half as the wing on the other side carries half). Some guys have said they have flown grossed out at 1200 pounds. ( ooohh wow GAMBLERS) without wing tanks those wafs were holding 500 to 550 pounds each??? So if you screw up and make a 2 G landing on full tanks they have to support what? I got to touch up on my algebra I guess. Safe Flying to ya! Steve McGee Endeavor Wi. Building a KR2S widened. lmcgee@maqs.net ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 10:22:51 -0800 From: "David Mikesell" To: "KRnet" Subject: Re: KR>TANKS IN OUTER WINGS Message-ID: <001b01c3b513$784faf00$03fea8c0@davids> References: <20031127.130601.2544.0.red-bridge@juno.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list Message: 8 As I stated in the begining, wing tanks are great because they don't figure in the gross weight of a flying airplane, the weight only becomes a issue during landing and on the ground. AS stated in the begining seeing this in several STC wing tank and tip tank installation you burn fuel in those tanks first so that ground time and landings are not a issue and you only put fuel in them if you are planning a long trip where the fuel is needed. David Mikesell 23957 N. Hwy 99 Acampo, CA 95220 209-609-8774 skyguynca@skyguynca.com www.skyguynca.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Clancey D Krumwiede" To: Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 10:06 AM Subject: Re: KR>TANKS IN OUTER WINGS > I respectfully disagree. When sitting on the ground, the "1g" weight > of the fuel is supported by the landing gear and everything else when > the tanks are located in the stub wings. When the fuel is located in > the outer wings, the weight, multiplied by the arm of the fuels cg, is > supported as torque on the WAFs. I am not saying, nor have said in the > past, that this alone invalidates the idea of tanks in this location. > I simply suggested it as something that must be considered when making > such a design change. As a number of people on this forum have > expressed concern about the WAFs in a number of threads, they are > obviously something to not take lightly. I, for one, am not intending > to make large scale changes on my own to a good proven design. That > being said, and risking the beginning of an entire new thread, I am > curious if anyone has examined the possibility of replacing the WAFs > with a "spar box" similar to those utilized on certified aircraft > designs. > > On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 10:08:47 -0600 "Mark Langford" > writes: > > > And just where do most airplanes spend a vast majority of their > > time? > > > > I should have just let this go, but it is not a valid comment. The > > 1g experienced by an airplane sitting in a hangar is simply not a > > load case of > > any significance, and has no bearing on anything in this > > discussion. > > > > Mark Langford, Huntsville, AL > > N56ML "at" hiwaay.net > > see KR2S project at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > see KRnet list details at http://www.krnet.org/instructions.html > > > > > > > Keith C. Krumwiede > Rosedale, IN > > _______________________________________________ > see KRnet list details at http://www.krnet.org/instructions.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 10:31:55 -0800 From: larry severson To: KRnet Subject: Re: KR>TANKS IN OUTER WINGS Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.0.20031127102907.024e1008@pop-server.socal.rr.com> In-Reply-To: <004501c3b513$22093260$0202a8c0@lori8v5h2xi9m3> References: <20031127.130601.2544.0.red-bridge@juno.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 Precedence: list Message: 9 Why the continued discussion? The plane was designed with retract gear and wing tanks, at least in the January 1990 manual. Nowhere have I seen stub tanks in the manuals that I have access to. Larry Severson Fountain Valley, CA 92708 (714) 968-9852 larry2@socal.rr.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 10:41:06 -0800 From: "David Mikesell" To: "KRnet" Subject: Re: KR>TANKS IN OUTER WINGS Message-ID: <004301c3b516$056f6400$03fea8c0@davids> References: <20031127.130601.2544.0.red-bridge@juno.com> <5.2.1.1.0.20031127102907.024e1008@pop-server.socal.rr.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list Message: 10 That is true Larry, they are in my plans too. I am off this one. David Mikesell 23957 N. Hwy 99 Acampo, CA 95220 209-609-8774 skyguynca@skyguynca.com www.skyguynca.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "larry severson" To: "KRnet" Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 10:31 AM Subject: Re: KR>TANKS IN OUTER WINGS > Why the continued discussion? The plane was designed with retract gear > and wing tanks, at least in the January 1990 manual. Nowhere have I > seen stub tanks in the manuals that I have access to. > > Larry Severson > Fountain Valley, CA 92708 > (714) 968-9852 > larry2@socal.rr.com > > > _______________________________________________ > see KRnet list details at http://www.krnet.org/instructions.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 14:33:33 -0500 From: "Les Criscillo" To: "KRnet" Subject: Re: KR>TANKS IN OUTER WINGS Message-ID: <02ae01c3b51d$58c32950$0300a8c0@your1rnfg39627> References: <20031127.130601.2544.0.red-bridge@juno.com> <001b01c3b513$784faf00$03fea8c0@davids> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: list Message: 11 I understand the concern of the others. They are the first to be emptied = of fuel, but as always we have to be concerned about the emergency that = may arise on the initial take off, requiring a return to base landing = with full fuel in the wing tanks. I believe this would be the maximum = stress the WAF's would have to carry. However, as it has been pointed = out, the plans do call for building such outboard wing tanks-placing = them in the bay closest to the WAF's. If kept reasonably sized, and = figured into the total gross weight of the aircraft during a potential = landing, they are safe, and have been used for years without being = implicated as causing any kind of operational difficulties.=20 A review of KR accidents and their causes on Mark Langford's site = indicates many different causes for accidents, one of the most often = recurring themes was fuel starvation. I would be more concerned about = this than if my wings were going to fall off-which has never been = implicated in any accident.=20 Les Criscillo Tampa, FL Lcriscil@tampabay.rr.com http://groups.msn.com/LesLifeandfriends/homepage ----- Original Message -----=20 From: David Mikesell=20 To: KRnet=20 Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 13:22 Subject: Re: KR>TANKS IN OUTER WINGS As I stated in the begining, wing tanks are great because they don't = figure in the gross weight of a flying airplane, the weight only becomes a = issue during landing and on the ground. AS stated in the begining seeing = this in several STC wing tank and tip tank installation you burn fuel in those = tanks first so that ground time and landings are not a issue and you only = put fuel in them if you are planning a long trip where the fuel is needed. David Mikesell 23957 N. Hwy 99 Acampo, CA 95220 209-609-8774 skyguynca@skyguynca.com www.skyguynca.com ----- Original Message -----=20 From: "Clancey D Krumwiede" To: Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 10:06 AM Subject: Re: KR>TANKS IN OUTER WINGS > I respectfully disagree. When sitting on the ground, the "1g" weight = of > the fuel is supported by the landing gear and everything else when = the > tanks are located in the stub wings. When the fuel is located in the > outer wings, the weight, multiplied by the arm of the fuels cg, is > supported as torque on the WAFs. I am not saying, nor have said in = the > past, that this alone invalidates the idea of tanks in this = location. I > simply suggested it as something that must be considered when making = such > a design change. As a number of people on this forum have expressed > concern about the WAFs in a number of threads, they are obviously > something to not take lightly. I, for one, am not intending to make = large > scale changes on my own to a good proven design. That being said, = and > risking the beginning of an entire new thread, I am curious if = anyone has > examined the possibility of replacing the WAFs with a "spar box" = similar > to those utilized on certified aircraft designs. > > On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 10:08:47 -0600 "Mark Langford" = > writes: > > > And just where do most airplanes spend a vast majority of their > > time? > > > > I should have just let this go, but it is not a valid comment. = The > > 1g > > experienced by an airplane sitting in a hangar is simply not a = load > > case of > > any significance, and has no bearing on anything in this > > discussion. > > > > Mark Langford, Huntsville, AL > > N56ML "at" hiwaay.net > > see KR2S project at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > see KRnet list details at http://www.krnet.org/instructions.html > > > > > > > Keith C. Krumwiede > Rosedale, IN > > _______________________________________________ > see KRnet list details at http://www.krnet.org/instructions.html _______________________________________________ see KRnet list details at http://www.krnet.org/instructions.htmlFrom donreid@erols.com Thu Nov 27 11:43:55 2003 Received: from smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.4.61]) by lizard.esosoft.net with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1) id 1APS3P-000IvH-00 for krnet@mylist.net; Thu, 27 Nov 2003 11:43:55 -0800 Received: from 208-59-102-111.s111.tnt1.grst.va.dialup.rcn.com ([208.59.102.111] helo=HOMEBASE.erols.com) by smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 1APS90-0006x6-00 for krnet@mylist.net; Thu, 27 Nov 2003 14:49:43 -0500 Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.0.20031127135411.01c77e18@pop.erols.com> X-Sender: donreid@pop.erols.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 14:49:36 -0500 To: KRnet From: Donald Reid Subject: Re: KR>TANKS IN OUTER WINGS In-Reply-To: <004401c3b500$bd945bf0$2402a8c0@800Athlon> References: <20031127.073254.2036.2.red-bridge@juno.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1b3 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 have not posted a reply to the KR network in a long while, but I think that it is time to break my silence. I have wing tanks it the outer panels of my project. I have not measured the capacity yet but they are on the order of 20+ gallons . . . each. That goes along with the 4+ gallon header tank. Yes, I will have something like 8 hours of tankage for my O-200, more if I throttle back to increase the range. How many people know that Ken Rand's KR-2 was retrofit with wing tanks in the outer panels? There was a very bad photo published in Sport Aviation in the late 70's or early 80's that showed one of Ken's wings opened up for the work. He had removed the bottom wing surface from rib to tip between the spars. I do not remember how large the actual tankage was. I suspect that it was most of the available volume. I never published that photo on my web site due to the poor quality. With turbo VW, increased tankage, and portable O2, he did travel very long distances. I think that he could go from California to Sun-n-Fun with one fuel stop. One big point is ... just because you have it does not mean you need to use it all of the time. There is nothing wrong with taking off with less than full tanks. If you are going to be flying for one hour, why take along eight hours worth of fuel? Three will be more than enough. (Please don't remind me about the three most useless things, one being fuel in the truck. That is entirely too simplistic) To those of you who ask how I can consider sitting in a KR for more than a few hours, please note that I have made a real seat. When I started building my project I knew that I did not have any desire to sit in a canvas sling seat. My seat is contoured for my backside and I can sit in it for as long as I want. It is very comfortable even without padding. I will have a relief tube running down the back of the left gear leg and exiting at the trailing edge of the wheel pant. (I plan on testing it out for the first time at a low altitude over a certain person's house) Random thoughts on wing tanks: Air loading on the spars is reduced by carrying fuel in the wings. Landing loads on the spar are increased, but they are significantly lower than the air loads. If you land hard enough to damage a wing due to fuel load, then something else will have broken, like your landing gear or firewall. Negative wing loading while just sitting on the ramp is so trivial that it need not be considered. Installation in the outer panels is very easy and there is no interface with controls or gear mounts. It does require one extra fitting in the fuel line compared to a stub wing installation. Fuel burn will cause CG to shift forward, this is a good thing. With a large header tank, it goes the wrong way. My transfer system is very simple, both tanks drain to a common low point behind the baggage area. One fuel pump to the header tank. An auto transfer based on level switches and a manual override. The header tank is vented back to one wing tank and wing tank vents are arranged to give a slight positive pressure. The transfer system has a green power-on light and a yellow light for transfer-in-progress. Transfer is started on a low level switch and secured on a high level switch. There is a separate low-low switch that turns on the bright red light. There is a separate header tank level gauge that only comes on-scale when I reach the low-low level. On a loss of transfer capability, I will have 45 minutes of fuel I would never consider having a large header tank. The advantages of having fuel in the wings far outweighs any drawbacks. 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------------------------------ _______________________________________________ See KRnet list details at http://www.krnet.org/instructions.html End of KRnet Digest, Vol 232, Issue 2 *************************************