From: krnet-bounces@mylist.net To: John Bouyea Subject: KRnet Digest, Vol 346, Issue 116 Date: 6/24/2004 4:15:52 PM 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. lost messages? (larry flesner) 2. Re: seat belts and spar strength (Barry Kruyssen) 3. RE: lost messages? (Stephen Jacobs) 4. Re: Ailerons (StRaNgEdAyS) 5. Power (Dan Heath) 6. Re: lost messages? (Mark Jones) 7. Speed Brake Location (JIM VANCE) 8. RE: High Alt (Doug Rupert) 9. Re: seat belts and spar strength (Mark Langford) 10. Re: seat belts and spar strength (Mark Langford) 11. Re: lost messages? (Mark Langford) 12. Re: seat belts and spar strength (larry flesner) 13. RE: High Alt (larry severson) 14. Re: KR structural analysis (larry severson) 15. RE: High Alt (larry severson) 16. RE: High Alt (larry severson) 17. Widening the fuselage (Ron Smith) 18. Barry Kruyssen - GRS ballistic chute (Stephen Jacobs) 19. Re: seat belts and spar strength (Jack Cooper) 20. Re: Widening the fuselage (Mark Langford) 21. Re: KR structural analysis (cartera) 22. Re: Widening the fuselage (Donald Reid) 23. RE: Ailerons (Brian Kraut) 24. RE: Speed Brake (Brian Kraut) 25. Re: lost messages? (Phil Matheson) 26. RE: seat belts and spar strength (Brian Kraut) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 22:57:42 -0500 From: larry flesner Subject: KR> lost messages? To: KRnet Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20040623225742.00896720@pop.midwest.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Has anyone posted to the net lately only to have the post disappear into cyber space? I've had two in as many days now. Larry Flesner ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 14:46:13 +1000 From: "Barry Kruyssen" Subject: Re: KR> seat belts and spar strength To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <012a01c459a6$30fb8650$4700a8c0@T1W419b> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >From what I've seen of the posts on KR2 accidents they virtually >disintegrate, just like a crumple zone on a car, dissipating energy. If you hit something hard enough to tear the belt mounts out then you'll probably be nursing a very hot engine and have much shorter legs :-) It's rare that an impact is dead head on, therefore your load on the belts, mounting points and airframe will from an angle (which angle ????? :-). I wouldn't change from the plans. If you want to be real safe though, I use to build roll cages for stock cars that protected the driver form stopping in 4ft from 100mph (the length of the bonnet from the concert wall to the roll cage), I even tested one myself, accidentally. As I didn't build my KR2, I bought it 99.9% completed and have spent the last 9 months checking and finishing it, I have fitted a GRS ballistic chute because I don't know how the airframe will hold together (it looks good but........) . The ballistic chute is only for a structural failure or a forced landing in inhospitable country, TREES, MOUNTAINS !!! :-), hopefully to never be used, just to help fix my weights and balance problem. regards Barry Kruyssen Cairns, Australia RAA 19-3873 kr2@BigPond.com http://users.tpg.com.au/barryk/KR2.htm ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 09:03:30 +0200 From: "Stephen Jacobs" Subject: RE: KR> lost messages? To: "'KRnet'" Message-ID: <000501c459b9$5ebc3130$8a64a8c0@home> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Has any one from Larry lately? ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 17:30:32 +1000 From: "StRaNgEdAyS" Subject: Re: KR> Ailerons To: Message-ID: <40DA8318.00000B.03976@motherfucker> Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Mark L: That's one absolutely beautiful set of wings! This certainly makes things easier for me! I was planning on using friese style ailerons as well, and that split flap is perfect! Cheers Peter Bancks strangedays@dodo.com.au http://www.homebuiltairplanes.com http://canardaviationforum.dmt.com ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 05:55:55 -0400 (Eastern Standard Time) From: "Dan Heath" Subject: KR> Power To: "krnet@mylist.net" Message-ID: <40DAA52B.000007.01800@COMPUTER> Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Larry, I was just poking fun, and I agree completely. We have the LONG Diehl wings and I really wish we had stock wings because of loosing speed and we really don't need whatever additional climb these wings will give. That said, I love these wings but I wish they came in different length for others to choose from. But now with the new wing gaining popularity, that is probably not much of an issue. "There is a time for building and a time for flying, and the time for building has long since expired." See N64KR at http://KR-Builder.org - Then click on the pics Daniel R. Heath - Columbia, SC See you in Mt. Vernon - 2004 - KR Gathering -------Original Message------- From: KRnet Date: 06/23/04 23:26:47 To: KRnet Subject: RE: KR> High Alt >Larry, >>Let's see if I understand... If I want better climb on a hot day or at high >altitudes, what is it that I need? OH, I know, longer wings. Darn, I >think I >just flunked. OH OH, now I know, it's POWER. >Daniel R. Heath - Columbia, SC """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """"""""""""" Dan, I guess my question would be how much longer would the wing have to be to make up for a 20 to 30 percent loss of power and could the present design handle that or would you have to redesign the wing to handle the extra length. Jeanette Rand once told me that the extra wing length with the premolded skins cuts down the G rating of the wing by 1/2 G. I'm assuming she meant the wing attach fittings. As I stated in my earlier post: " Longer wings should help the climb rate and the penalty for the longer wings will be felt primarily in the cruise mode and is probably not more than a few miles per hour." If if's a hot day or high altitude and I had to chose between longer wings or more power I'll take more power every time. My "more power" fix is really just an engine that would produce the same hp at 6000 feet (or whatever) that a smaller engine would produce at sea level, i.e. a 100hp 0-200 or Corvair instead of an 80 hp VW. I'd bet anyone a steak dinner that you will find more "high hp" Cessnas then "long wing" Cessnas flying in the mountains. :-) :-) Larry Flesner _______________________________________ to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 06:00:27 -0500 From: "Mark Jones" Subject: Re: KR> lost messages? To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <000701c459da$753d22e0$6401a8c0@wi.rr.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" You are not alone Larry. I have had three go astray that never posted. 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: "larry flesner" To: "KRnet" Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2004 10:57 PM Subject: KR> lost messages? > > > Has anyone posted to the net lately only to have the post disappear > into cyber space? I've had two in as many days now. > > Larry Flesner > > > > _______________________________________ > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html ------------------------------ Message: 7 Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 05:37:20 -0500 From: "JIM VANCE" Subject: KR> Speed Brake Location To: "krnet" Message-ID: <000201c459db$324c7d40$0200a8c0@oemcomputer> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Mark, The speedbrake needs to be behind the center of gravity. The further it is from the cg, the more it will affect pitch, etc. It needs to be mounted securely, and the rear spar is the logical location, unless you like adding structural weight to accomplish this elsewhere. I have an electrically actuated speed brake also: I wanted control close to the throttle with minimum hand effort during the critical time of landing. I am using the seat actuator from a 1985 GM car for my actuator (cost $15). I'm not flying yet, but this is the way I've set up of my speedbrake. Jim Vance Vance@ClaflinWildcats.com ------------------------------ Message: 8 Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 07:08:46 -0400 From: "Doug Rupert" Subject: RE: KR> High Alt To: "'KRnet'" Message-ID: <000e01c459db$9f508260$5a04e440@office> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Larry it has always seemed to me that the WAF's would be the weak link in wing construction and for this very reason I have chosen to build mine with a one piece wing instead. I have had too damn many engineer types tell me everything is hunky dory only to end up part way through the flight test module to end up riding a glorified set of panty-hose to the ground. I have developed an odd sense of survival over the years and tend to go with my gut rather than what some designer claims can be done. The fact I'm still breathing after all these years seems to bear that out. Now before the screaming starts I know there has never been a time when it has been raining KR's due to this type of failure but as I stated at the beginning this area seems to be one of the few design weak spots. Doug Rupert ------------------------------ Message: 9 Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 06:20:57 -0500 From: "Mark Langford" Subject: Re: KR> seat belts and spar strength To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <023101c459dd$5264f8d0$5e0ca58c@net.tbe.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Larry Flesner wrote: > In my case, and most KR's, two brackets are attached near the > vertical fuselage sides. That should cut the load in the center by > one half. Yes, we neglected those entirely, assuming that fuselage structure would take care of that, like you say. We were concentrating on the bending (and breaking) out at the middle. >My question: how big of a tree can I hit? :-) :-) Assuming a longleaf pine with normal growth seasons for the southern Illinois region, growing in slightly acidic soil, I'd say 4.4367" in diameter, 6 feet up from the ground or higher... Mark Langford, Huntsville, AL N56ML at hiwaay.net see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Message: 10 Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 06:40:41 -0500 From: "Mark Langford" Subject: Re: KR> seat belts and spar strength To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <023b01c459e0$13eb2360$5e0ca58c@net.tbe.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Barry Kruyssen wrote: > I wouldn't change from the plans. And what do the plans say? I looked for seat belts last night and didn't see it anywhere. I thought I'd seen someplace to just run a 3/16 bolt throught the spar cap, period (although that may have been in an old KRnewsletter, rather than the plans). There's a shoulder belt "addendum" put out by RR, and it's located at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/seat1.jpg and http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/seat2.jpg , and it makes no mention of spar strength, just assumes it's strong enough. All I'm pointing out is that before we go crazy designing big beefy brackets and using huge bolts is that they need to be attached to something that's not going anywhere. If you're not worried about 20g crashes (and I'll admit that I'm not expecting one either), then don't sweat it. Larry's thin brackets and small bolts are probably all you need... Mark Langford, Huntsville, AL N56ML at hiwaay.net see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Message: 11 Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 06:46:06 -0500 From: "Mark Langford" Subject: Re: KR> lost messages? To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <024701c459e0$d63bdbd0$5e0ca58c@net.tbe.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" I've had a few lost messages myself. I've asked the "powers that be" and get no response, so I guess about all we can do is keep an eye out for them and post them again. That's why I posted the same message twice last week, I waited a few hours and posted it again, and then they both showed up at the same time. I was thinking maybe is was my ISP (but it'd be the FIRST problem I've ever seen with them), but apparently it the KRnet list service itself. Oddly enough, I've never seen it happen with CorvAircraft, which uses the same service. Mark Langford, Huntsville, AL N56ML at hiwaay.net see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Message: 12 Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 08:11:56 -0500 From: larry flesner Subject: Re: KR> seat belts and spar strength To: KRnet Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20040624081156.0089c600@pop.midwest.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" If you're not worried about 20g crashes (and I'll admit >that I'm not expecting one either), then don't sweat it. Larry's thin >brackets and small bolts are probably all you need... Mark Langford, +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Unfortunately, with seat belts, we build them for what we expect NOT to happen. The info you posted for the seatback reinforcement is something I did while building although I had not seen it at the time. The difference is I put the 1/4" ply on the bottom and ran it all the way to the ply on the sides. That also gave me the extra glue area. I knew I was going to use my seatback rest to set on for entry and exit. Also, on my KR, I seem to recall having a 5/8" spruce cross piece on the floor that the rear spar is glued to. I don't remember if that is where the plans place the cross piece or not. If I ever hit an oak tree instead of the pine tree you described, I hope someone remembers to check my seat belt attach brackets. :-) Larry Flesner Larry Flesner ------------------------------ Message: 13 Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 07:05:41 -0700 From: larry severson Subject: RE: KR> High Alt To: KRnet Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.0.20040624070313.024673a8@pop-server.socal.rr.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed >Secondly, and of greater concern, the higher altitude will also affect >the level of control authority, so while you may well get off the >ground on that hot day at your high altitude strip with a moderate >load, you may find that you lack sufficient elevator authority to get >out of ground effect, and even though you may have sufficient lift from >your wing extensions, and power up the yazoo from your turbo'ed engine, >you are still going to trip over the boundary fence because you are >stuck in ground effect. Control effect from the elevator is related to indicated airspeed. While the less dense air at altitude will give one a lower airspeed than true, for a given indicated one will get the same controllability as at sea level. Larry Severson Fountain Valley, CA 92708 (714) 968-9852 larry2@socal.rr.com ------------------------------ Message: 14 Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 07:28:56 -0700 From: larry severson Subject: Re: KR> KR structural analysis To: KRnet Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.0.20040624072136.02467160@pop-server.socal.rr.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 05:47 PM 6/23/2004 -0400, you wrote: >Did you ask her why you can't get the complete analysis? Can you get >any part of the analysis? The KR is a radio control model scaled up to one carrying people. It was not "engineered" at any time. The critical factor in the design is the wing spars vs the weight and G loading. Calculation of this information is fairly trivial with formulas in many book, including at least one high school physics book by Saxon Publishing. Of course, another factor is having a strong enough front end to support the chosen engine. Bottom line, don't waste time looking for a structural analysis - it doesn't exist, at least not from Rand Robinson and Jeanette isn't trained to do one. Larry Severson Fountain Valley, CA 92708 (714) 968-9852 larry2@socal.rr.com ------------------------------ Message: 15 Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 07:34:05 -0700 From: larry severson Subject: RE: KR> High Alt To: KRnet Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.0.20040624072919.0247daa8@pop-server.socal.rr.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed > >Let's see if I understand... If I want better climb on a hot day or at >high altitudes, what is it that I need? OH, I know, longer wings. Darn, >I think I just flunked. OH OH, now I know, it's POWER. Gee, I guess that those powered gliders are just a figment of my imagination and lying marketeers. Longer wings do increase drag, but they also increase lift, reduce stall speed, and make possible flight with a less powerful engine. As they said at school, with enough power one can make a brick fly, but if power is restricted one had better give the vehicle enough wing area to lift the brick. Larry Severson Fountain Valley, CA 92708 (714) 968-9852 larry2@socal.rr.com ------------------------------ Message: 16 Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 07:47:15 -0700 From: larry severson Subject: RE: KR> High Alt To: KRnet Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.0.20040624074604.02483560@pop-server.socal.rr.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 07:08 AM 6/24/2004 -0400, you wrote: >Larry it has always seemed to me that the WAF's would be the weak link >in wing construction and for this very reason I have chosen to build >mine with a one piece wing instead. If you extend the wings, you also significantly reduce the allowable G loading. Gliders do not pull 6 G turns! Larry Severson Fountain Valley, CA 92708 (714) 968-9852 larry2@socal.rr.com ------------------------------ Message: 17 Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 09:43:58 -0700 (PDT) From: Ron Smith Subject: KR> Widening the fuselage To: krnet@mylist.net Message-ID: <20040624164358.85409.qmail@web81701.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I am going to widen the fuselage 6 inches at the aft spar top longeron, and deep the proportional demintion taper to the bottom logeron at that station. My plant is to taper the fuselage back to the standard demensions at the firewall. the reason I want to do that is to have a more areodynamic taper. My questions for the group is these: Will that be better areodynamicly than keeping that six inche width proportionally to the firewall. I can't see how it wouldn't be better. Will the standard firewall demensions at the firewall be ok for a corvair installation or would increasing the area there be a good idea? Build to plans guys need not apply. God is in the details, Ron Smith, hacking up 5/8 spruce for the fuselage as we speak ------------------------------ Message: 18 Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 18:53:10 +0200 From: "Stephen Jacobs" Subject: KR> Barry Kruyssen - GRS ballistic chute To: "'KRnet'" Message-ID: <000001c45a0b$bba7c150$2564a8c0@home> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I have fitted a ballistic chute +++++++++++++++++ Barry - can you say more about this. Where did you house the chute? Attach points to the airplane? Weight increase etc. Do you have any pics? Thanks Steve J ------------------------------ Message: 19 Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 12:53:44 -0400 From: "Jack Cooper" Subject: Re: KR> seat belts and spar strength To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <410-220046424165344515@earthlink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Take a look at the third picture on the page link below. Gene Byrd's lap belt was attached with 1 - 3/16 bolt through the spar cap. You will notice that the left seatbelt is missing. The impact (certainly not 20 Gs) split the spar and the belt pulled out. His shoulder harness was attached by cable to the tail wheel pad. Gene walked away with minor cuts and bruises,The worst bruise was across the shoulders where the shoulder harness restrained him. My belts will be attached to both spar caps. I'm not an Engineer but it seems to me that it would be better to have a channel aluminum under the spar to spread the load the width of the spar and not allow the impact force to focus in a small point. I don't plan on doing that though. http://jackandsandycooper.com/byrdcrash.html > [Original Message] > From: Mark Langford > To: KRnet > Date: 6/24/2004 7:40:41 AM > Subject: Re: KR> seat belts and spar strength > > Barry Kruyssen wrote: > > > I wouldn't change from the plans. > > And what do the plans say? I looked for seat belts last night and didn't > see it anywhere. I thought I'd seen someplace to just run a 3/16 bolt > throught the spar cap, period (although that may have been in an old > KRnewsletter, rather than the plans). There's a shoulder belt > "addendum" put out by RR, and it's located at > http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/seat1.jpg and > http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/seat2.jpg , and it makes no mention > of spar > strength, just assumes it's strong enough. > > All I'm pointing out is that before we go crazy designing big beefy brackets > and using huge bolts is that they need to be attached to something > that's not going anywhere. If you're not worried about 20g crashes > (and I'll admit > that I'm not expecting one either), then don't sweat it. Larry's thin > brackets and small bolts are probably all you need... > > Mark Langford, Huntsville, AL > N56ML at hiwaay.net > see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford > > > _______________________________________ > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html ------------------------------ Message: 20 Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 12:22:28 -0500 From: "Mark Langford" Subject: Re: KR> Widening the fuselage To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <001901c45a0f$d39eb760$5e0ca58c@net.tbe.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Ron Smith wrote: > My questions for the group is these: Will that be better areodynamicly than keeping that six inche width proportionally to the firewall. I can't see how it wouldn't be better.< I think if you leave the firewall stock width, you'll have an aesthetically UNpleasing discontinuity at the firewall/cowling interface. It would be even worse than the second photo at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/cowling.html . You could live without the extra firewall width (the Corvair is actually narrower than a VW or an 0-200), but a little extra room would have been nice in my case, for all that junk that needs to hang off the firewall like oil cooler and filter. I'd make the firewall wider too, if I were you. Mine worked OK, but four more inches would have been nice. I made my firewall stock width so I could use the RR KR2S cowling, but then ended up making my own, so I wish I'd just made it wider to start with. Mark Langford, Huntsville, AL N56ML at hiwaay.net see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Message: 21 Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 12:52:46 -0600 From: cartera Subject: Re: KR> KR structural analysis To: KRnet Message-ID: <40DB22FE.4060601@cuug.ab.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Hello KRnetters, You want to see analysis, take a look at my web site ;). larry severson wrote: >At 05:47 PM 6/23/2004 -0400, you wrote: > > >>Did you ask her why you can't get the complete analysis? Can you get >>any part of the analysis? >> >> > >The KR is a radio control model scaled up to one carrying people. It >was >not "engineered" at any time. The critical factor in the design is the wing >spars vs the weight and G loading. Calculation of this information is >fairly trivial with formulas in many book, including at least one high >school physics book by Saxon Publishing. > >Of course, another factor is having a strong enough front end to >support >the chosen engine. > >Bottom line, don't waste time looking for a structural analysis - it >doesn't exist, at least not from Rand Robinson and Jeanette isn't trained >to do one. > > >Larry Severson >Fountain Valley, CA 92708 >(714) 968-9852 >larry2@socal.rr.com > > >_______________________________________ >to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net >please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html > > > -- Adrian VE6AFY Mailto:cartera@cuug.ab.ca http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~cartera ------------------------------ Message: 22 Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 15:20:44 -0400 From: Donald Reid Subject: Re: KR> Widening the fuselage To: KRnet Message-ID: <6.1.0.6.2.20040624151611.01c398a0@pop.erols.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 12:43 PM 6/24/2004, you wrote: >I am going to widen the fuselage 6 inches at the aft spar top longeron, >and deep the proportional demintion taper to the bottom logeron at that >station. My plant is to taper the fuselage back to the standard demensions >at the firewall. the I wish that I had increased the width more. I also wish that I had put the point of maximum width at the trailing edge of the wing instead of near the leading edge. You will get a lower interference drag that way and have more room for your shoulders. I have an O-200 and had to add two inches to the width of the firewall to get a smooth transition. There is no way that the stock KR firewall is wide enough to look right with an O-200. Don Reid - donreid "at" erols.com Bumpass, Va Visit my web sites at: AeroFoil, a 2-D Airfoil Design And Analysis Computer Program: http://www.eaa231.org/AeroFoil/index.htm 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 ------------------------------ Message: 23 Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 18:54:29 -0400 From: "Brian Kraut" Subject: RE: KR> Ailerons To: "KRnet" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Funny that you can't keep the wings level in a stall with the rudder on a stretched KR. In my stock length KR I could level the wings with the rudder. I always loved doing spins in a 152 and other planes that are certified for them, but I was fairly paranoid about them in the KR so I always kept the ailerons dead neutral in stalls and reacted right away with rudder if one wing dropped first. Brian Kraut Engineering Alternatives, Inc. www.engalt.com -----Original Message----- From: krnet-bounces@mylist.net [mailto:krnet-bounces@mylist.net]On Behalf Of larry flesner Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2004 11:22 PM To: KRnet Subject: Re: KR> Ailerons Shorter >ailerons, deeper chord, less drag, roughly the same roll moment as the >plans... Mark Langford, +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ I don't have any answers on the aileron thing but I'll throw out some things to consider. My KR is basically plans built with the exception of the 24" stretch. My KR is not a rudder airplane. What I mean is I can't lift a wing using rudder at any speed. Willie Wilson from England says his nearly plans built KR handles the same way. When my stock wing stalls, with 3 degrees washout, I still have aileron control and ONLY aileron control to keep the wings level. I don't know how far out on the wing the stall developes before the nose drops. If I were to shorten my ailerons will I still have control through the stall or will the ailerons be in the stalled portion of the wing? What if I only have two degrees of washout? Like I said, I don't have the answers, just the questions. If I knew someone that weighed maybe 160 pounds, was brave as a Viking, and good with a camera, (read Mark L.) I might consider "tufting" my wings and checking it out. Larry Flesner - 60 hours since February and still grinning !! _______________________________________ to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html ------------------------------ Message: 24 Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 19:04:55 -0400 From: "Brian Kraut" Subject: RE: KR> Speed Brake To: "KRnet" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I remember reading in a post a long time ago that mounting it from the front spar is fine, but mounting it from the rear spar has the added benefit of pitching the nose down a little to give you better visibility. Keep in mind that this is what my feeble mind remembers seeing in a post from someone and I have no idea if it is right or not. Brian Kraut Engineering Alternatives, Inc. www.engalt.com -----Original Message----- From: krnet-bounces@mylist.net [mailto:krnet-bounces@mylist.net]On Behalf Of larry flesner Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2004 11:35 PM To: KRnet Subject: RE: KR> Speed Brake > Check Rich Siefert's KR on the link below. It looks to me like its >attached at the front spar. Jack Cooper >+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ My non-engineered, gut feel, is that I want my speed brake behind the center of lift and/or the C.G. I guess for basically the same reason you put the feathers on the back end of an arrow. And Mark, if you could mount you brake just forward of the rear spar and could place the motor under the seat it will help keep you C.G. forward. My motor is behind my seat and heavier than yours and I wish it wasn't either of those. Larry Flesner _______________________________________ to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html ------------------------------ Message: 25 Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 09:07:41 +1000 From: "Phil Matheson" Subject: Re: KR> lost messages? To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <000d01c45a40$0d7cb560$a096dccb@Office> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" I have also, but I figured they feel from fibre space and drowned on the from down under Phil Matheson matheson@dodo.com.au VH-PKR ( Phil's KR) 61 3 58833588 Australia.( Down Under) See My KR2 Building Web Page at: http://mywebpage.netscape.com/flyingkrphil/VHPKR.html See our VW Engines and Home built web page at http://www.vw-engines.com/ www.homebuilt-aviation.com/ ------------------------------ Message: 26 Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 19:15:20 -0400 From: "Brian Kraut" Subject: RE: KR> seat belts and spar strength To: "KRnet" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Two automotive inertia reels mounted through the top and bottom spar caps on the sides and two brackets in the center mounted to the top and bottom spar caps will hold one 175 pound person and one 200 pound person in an impact at the base of an 8" diameter tree that rips the tree out by the roots, crushes the engine mount, and rips out the firewall and will leave them hanging by the seatbelts when the plane flips upside down. Take my word for this and don't try try it yourself. Brian Kraut Engineering Alternatives, Inc. www.engalt.com -----Original Message----- From: krnet-bounces@mylist.net [mailto:krnet-bounces@mylist.net]On Behalf Of larry flesner Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2004 11:55 PM To: KRnet Subject: Re: KR> seat belts and spar strength We assumed a 1" x >1" piece of spruce with 4000 pounds (pilot and passenger) of force out >in the middle of that 32" span, neglecting the upper cap, and the >vertical members and plywood connecting them to the "subject" lower cap >(somewhat conservative). Mark Langford, ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Mark, In my case, and most KR's, two brackets are attached near the vertical fuselage sides. That should cut the load in the center by one half. My brackets, as you stated, span both spar caps. Also I don't think the entire load is horizontal to the spar but some load would carry a vertical angle. The seat back where my sholder belts are attached has two pieces of 5/8" spruce with a piece of 3/32" ply on the top and a piece of 1/4" ply on the bottom and a spruce block between the two where the bolt goes through. My question: how big of a tree can I hit? :-) :-) Seriously, from what you stated and considering the KR design, I'd guess the simplest and lightest weight way to strengthen the spar for crash forces from the belts would be to run two steel tubes or wood structures from near center of the rear spar to the forward spar at the fuselage sides. Thoughts? Larry Flesner _______________________________________ to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ See KRnet list details at http://www.krnet.org/instructions.html End of KRnet Digest, Vol 346, Issue 116 *************************************** ================================== ABC Amber Outlook Converter v4.20 Trial version ==================================