From: krnet-bounces@mylist.net To: John Bouyea Subject: KRnet Digest, Vol 346, Issue 128 Date: 7/1/2004 4:06:53 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. RE: Rotary (Doug Rupert) 2. RE: Rotary (Ron Smith) 3. Re: RE: KR> spar skins (Mark Langford) 4. Re: RE: KR> spar skins (StRaNgEdAyS) 5. Re: RE: KR> spar skins (Mark Langford) 6. Re: RE: KR> spar skins (Mark Langford) 7. RE: RE: KR> spar skins (Brian Kraut) 8. Re: Rotary (VIRGIL N SALISBURY) 9. Re: RE: KR> spar skins (GavinandLouise) 10. RE: RE: KR> spar skins (Brian Kraut) 11. Re: RE: KR> spar skins (Mark Langford) 12. RE: spar skins (Wood, Sidney M.) 13. Re: RE: KR> spar skins (Donald Reid) 14. I want to build it (Ufanet mail) 15. Re: I want to build it (StRaNgEdAyS) 16. Re: LAST CHANCE TO BUY (BABYWOLF@aol.com) 17. Re: spar skins (Bernard Wunder) 18. RE: Rotary (Doug Rupert) 19. RE: Rotary (LONG) (Doug Rupert) 20. KR2S AND SKI (Ufanet mail) 21. Thanx, spar skins (skphil@charter.net) 22. Re: Rotary (VIRGIL N SALISBURY) 23. Re: I want to build it (VIRGIL N SALISBURY) 24. RE: Thanx, spar skins (Brian Kraut) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 00:28:54 -0400 From: "Doug Rupert" Subject: RE: KR> Rotary To: "'KRnet'" Message-ID: <016001c45f23$eceaa030$4804e440@office> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Thanks Dana. I have beefed up the fuselage in the firewall area and will be adding a few other mods to the KR (longer wings, add a couple of bays out back, increase the horizontal stabilizer area as well as the rudder) She will also have only one seat. Burial plot already taken care of. Doug ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 00:41:03 -0700 (PDT) From: Ron Smith Subject: RE: KR> Rotary To: KRnet Message-ID: <20040701074103.77833.qmail@web81702.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Burial plot already taken care of. Doug A Boy scout, I deduce. lol _______________________________________ to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 06:36:28 -0500 From: "Mark Langford" Subject: Re: RE: KR> spar skins To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <00f901c45f5f$a6468db0$5e0ca58c@net.tbe.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sorry about the cedar comment. I had a picture of mahogony in what little brain I have left, and it came out as cedar instead. They kind of look alike, from about a hundred yards or so. I don't have a manual in front of me right now, but I believe the manual says that either mahogany or birch is fine for skinning the fuselage, but when it comes to spars, birch is required. I may be wrong, but that's what I remember. I'll try to find an exact reference tonight. Somebody else is welcome to check for us... Mark Langford, Huntsville, AL N56ML at hiwaay.net see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 21:43:35 +1000 From: "StRaNgEdAyS" Subject: Re: RE: KR> spar skins To: Message-ID: <40E3F8E7.00005B.02628@motherfucker> Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" "Somebody else is welcome to check for us..." Ok I'm reading it right now, so I'll have a look.... p.19. "3/32 plywood 3 ply mahogany, birch or poplar center." Cheers. Peter Bancks strangedays@dodo.com.au http://www.homebuiltairplanes.com http://canardaviationforum.dmt.net ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 07:03:45 -0500 From: "Mark Langford" Subject: Re: RE: KR> spar skins To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <061101c45f63$75d152b0$5e0ca58c@net.tbe.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" For what it's worth, from the KRnet search engine at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp , using "birch plywood spar" got a bunch of hits, the one below included. Maybe it's where I got the idea, but I don't think anybody will argue that birch is not the stronger of the two, and hence a good idea, considering the minimal weight gain. Having said that, mahogany spar faces wouldn't keep me from flying in somebody's KR either! Apparently KRnet does a better job of dispensing good building advice to the buiders than RR does... ------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Aug 11, 1998 9:39 AM From: Robert Covington Subject: Re: KR: KR-2S Center Section Spar Details Jeanette Rand has been advising builders to use Birch for the spars for quite a while for the strength gains. The orientation is important. The grain needs to be running up and down relative to the spars length, that is, the spar is E-W and the plywood grain goes N-S.Robert Covington--------------------------------------------Mark Langford, Huntsville, ALN56ML at hiwaay.netsee KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 07:06:12 -0500 From: "Mark Langford" Subject: Re: RE: KR> spar skins To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <061501c45f63$cd89fcf0$5e0ca58c@net.tbe.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" And having said that, here's one from Don Reid where he advocates running the grain horizontal, rather than vertical. I'd trust just about anything Don says as gospel. ---------------------------------------------- Date: Jul 20, 1999 8:27 AM From: Donald Reid Subject: Re: Grain direction.....who cares it's plywood...my turn at a 'STUPID' Question Tim wrote: > Like Aircraft Plywood is either 90 or 45 degrees, I assume this is how > the ply's (3-7) are layered. So grain direction of the top sheet is of > interest, but I wouldn't think the orintation is as critical in > dealing with the Spar web as perhaps Aluminium ..... OK, here are some numbers. Anyone who is interested can make up their own mind. All data are for birch plywood and taken from ANC-18, Design of Wooden Aircraft Structures. (The thick pieces are included just to show the effect with more plys) thickness # plys parallel perpendicular 0.125" 3 15.17 5.544 0.160" 5 21.46 11.47 0.410" 7 131.1 80.91 All plys are equal thickness. The numbers are moment for fiber stress at the proportional limit in units of inch-pounds per inch of width. As to why the KR plans specify a vertical orientation, it is because Ken Rand and Stu Robinson got it wrong. ----------------------------------- Mark Langford, Huntsville, AL N56ML at hiwaay.net see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Message: 7 Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 08:09:00 -0400 From: "Brian Kraut" Subject: RE: RE: KR> spar skins To: "KRnet" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I checked the 2S supplement also and didn't see anything except that calls for 2.5 mm ply which is only 5 thousandths of an inch bigger than 3/32 so I didn't worry about that. The KR price list shows mahogany or birch and says to pick one. Brian Kraut Engineering Alternatives, Inc. www.engalt.com -----Original Message----- From: krnet-bounces@mylist.net [mailto:krnet-bounces@mylist.net]On Behalf Of StRaNgEdAyS Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2004 7:44 AM To: krnet@mylist.net Subject: Re: RE: KR> spar skins "Somebody else is welcome to check for us..." Ok I'm reading it right now, so I'll have a look.... p.19. "3/32 plywood 3 ply mahogany, birch or poplar center." Cheers. Peter Bancks strangedays@dodo.com.au http://www.homebuiltairplanes.com http://canardaviationforum.dmt.net _______________________________________ 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: 8 Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 08:05:25 -0400 From: VIRGIL N SALISBURY Subject: Re: KR> Rotary To: krnet@mylist.net Message-ID: <20040701.081350.1968.0.virgnvs@juno.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Longer wings will call for your own stress analysis, Virg On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 00:28:54 -0400 "Doug Rupert" writes: > Thanks Dana. I have beefed up the fuselage in the firewall area and > will be > adding a few other mods to the KR (longer wings, add a couple of > bays out > back, increase the horizontal stabilizer area as well as the rudder) > She > will also have only one seat. Burial plot already taken care of. > Doug > > > > > _______________________________________ > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html > > Virgil N. Salisbury - AMSOIL www.lubedealer.com/salisbury Miami ,Fl ------------------------------ Message: 9 Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 22:23:48 +1000 From: "GavinandLouise" Subject: Re: RE: KR> spar skins To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <00f001c45f66$43001bc0$0100000a@vic.bigpond.net.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Peter Just use Hoop pine 3mm plywood it's stronger than most and is approved in Australia by the Feds!!! There is two brands suitable for our use, one is Boral and the name of the other escapes me at the moment. Which ever you use it has to be A/A quality(grade) and structural bond (marine ply) and at about $80 aud for an 8' x 4' sheet it's a whole lot cheaper than all the other aicraft grade products!!!!!!!!! Gavin Australia ----- Original Message ----- From: "StRaNgEdAyS" To: Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2004 9:43 PM Subject: Re: RE: KR> spar skins > "Somebody else is > welcome to check for us..." > Ok I'm reading it right now, so I'll have a look.... > p.19. > "3/32 plywood > 3 ply mahogany, birch or > poplar center." > > Cheers. > Peter Bancks > strangedays@dodo.com.au > http://www.homebuiltairplanes.com http://canardaviationforum.dmt.net > _______________________________________ > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.712 / Virus Database: 468 - Release Date: 27/06/2004 ------------------------------ Message: 10 Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 08:46:15 -0400 From: "Brian Kraut" Subject: RE: RE: KR> spar skins To: "KRnet" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Can we see the data on mahogany also for comparison? That sounds like a book worth having. Where can I buy a copy or is it something from the FAA that I can download somewhere? Brian Kraut Engineering Alternatives, Inc. www.engalt.com -----Original Message----- From: krnet-bounces@mylist.net [mailto:krnet-bounces@mylist.net]On Behalf Of Mark Langford Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2004 8:06 AM To: KRnet Subject: Re: RE: KR> spar skins And having said that, here's one from Don Reid where he advocates running the grain horizontal, rather than vertical. I'd trust just about anything Don says as gospel. ---------------------------------------------- Date: Jul 20, 1999 8:27 AM From: Donald Reid Subject: Re: Grain direction.....who cares it's plywood...my turn at a 'STUPID' Question Tim wrote: > Like Aircraft Plywood is either 90 or 45 degrees, I assume this is how > the ply's (3-7) are layered. So grain direction of the top sheet is of > interest, but I wouldn't think the orintation is as critical in > dealing with the Spar web as perhaps Aluminium ..... OK, here are some numbers. Anyone who is interested can make up their own mind. All data are for birch plywood and taken from ANC-18, Design of Wooden Aircraft Structures. (The thick pieces are included just to show the effect with more plys) thickness # plys parallel perpendicular 0.125" 3 15.17 5.544 0.160" 5 21.46 11.47 0.410" 7 131.1 80.91 All plys are equal thickness. The numbers are moment for fiber stress at the proportional limit in units of inch-pounds per inch of width. As to why the KR plans specify a vertical orientation, it is because Ken Rand and Stu Robinson got it wrong. ----------------------------------- 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: 11 Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 07:52:57 -0500 From: "Mark Langford" Subject: Re: RE: KR> spar skins To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <062a01c45f6a$55df34c0$5e0ca58c@net.tbe.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > thickness # plys parallel perpendicular > 0.125" 3 15.17 5.544 ... but after looking at these numbers, I think I just started an argument with myself. I had to wonder what's wrong with vertical, since that would be "parallel to the grain", and by far the strongest. The point of these faces is to keep the spar caps from separating (the verticals would take handle the buckling). given the 3x strength difference from vertical to horizontal, I'd have to vote for vertical grain, like the plans show. So I went to talk to my stress analyst buddy, a guy who does aircraft and space vehicle stress analysis every day for a living, and then goes home and designs his own aircraft just for kicks. He's knows this stuff inside and out. He says those webs are shear webs, and therefore should be at a 45 degree angle if you want the ultimate strength of the spar system. (like a truss). He says the verticals are there to break up the plywood into manageable shear panels. He votes for 45 degrees to the spar, and after that vertical, but horizontal doesn't look so good to me OR him... Mark Langford, Huntsville, AL N56ML at hiwaay.net see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Message: 12 Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 09:21:24 -0400 From: "Wood, Sidney M." Subject: RE: KR> spar skins To: "KRnet" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" No one has mentioned the 5/8" vertical spruce blocks that the plans call for when building KR spars. The spars are a variant of an I-beam. The function of the web in any I beam or box beam is to keep the two caps from coming together. No matter what loading is put on the beam - plus or minus g's, or twisting, and any combination of these forces - the caps will tend to come closer together. Beam failure will be either crushing the cap that is under compression, breaking of the cap under tension, or crush of the web followed immediately by buckling or crush of the compression cap. Metal tends to buckle; wood tends to crush. The theory and practice is to always have the caps either in compression or tension, never in bending. The lumber is much stronger in tension or compression and poor in bending. The 3/32 plywood, used for a web, will always be subject to compression and is strongest along the length of the grain (as Don Ried cites). Plywood has an odd number of plies with outside plies in the same grain orientation. That is the strongest dimension orientation. The KR box beam construction is probably way over-built at 21 g failure. So, you could put the plywood on in any random orientation and probably still have a 6-g airplane. For the exact same weight would you prefer a 21-g wing or something less? Ken Rand and Stu Robinson got it right. Sid Wood, Tri-gear KR-2 N6242 Mechanicsville, MD USA sidney.wood@titan.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- And having said that, here's one from Don Reid where he advocates running the grain horizontal, rather than vertical. I'd trust just about anything Don says as gospel. ---------------------------------------------- Date: Jul 20, 1999 8:27 AM From: Donald Reid Subject: Re: Grain direction.....who cares it's plywood...my turn at a 'STUPID' Question Tim wrote: > Like Aircraft Plywood is either 90 or 45 degrees, I assume this is how > the ply's (3-7) are layered. So grain direction of the top sheet is of > interest, but I wouldn't think the orintation is as critical in > dealing with the Spar web as perhaps Aluminium ..... OK, here are some numbers. Anyone who is interested can make up their own mind. All data are for birch plywood and taken from ANC-18, Design of Wooden Aircraft Structures. (The thick pieces are included just to show the effect with more plys) thickness # plys parallel perpendicular 0.125" 3 15.17 5.544 0.160" 5 21.46 11.47 0.410" 7 131.1 80.91 All plys are equal thickness. The numbers are moment for fiber stress at the proportional limit in units of inch-pounds per inch of width. As to why the KR plans specify a vertical orientation, it is because Ken Rand and Stu Robinson got it wrong. ----------------------------------- Mark Langford, Huntsville, AL N56ML at hiwaay.net see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Message: 13 Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2004 11:16:46 -0400 From: Donald Reid Subject: Re: RE: KR> spar skins To: KRnet Message-ID: <6.1.0.6.2.20040701105813.01c5b380@pop.erols.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 08:52 AM 7/1/2004, you wrote: > > thickness # plys parallel perpendicular > > 0.125" 3 15.17 5.544 > >... but after looking at these numbers, I think I just started an >argument with myself. I had to wonder what's wrong with vertical, >since that would be "parallel to the grain", and by far the strongest. >The point of these faces is to keep the spar caps from separating (the >verticals would take handle the buckling). given the 3x strength >difference from vertical to horizontal, I'd have to vote for vertical >grain, like the plans show. > >So I went to talk to my stress analyst buddy, a guy who does aircraft >and space vehicle stress analysis every day for a living, and then goes >home and designs his own aircraft just for kicks. He's knows this >stuff inside and out. He says those webs are shear webs, and therefore >should be at a 45 degree angle if you want the ultimate strength of the >spar system. (like a truss). He says the verticals are there to break >up the plywood into manageable shear panels. He votes for 45 degrees >to the spar, and after that vertical, but horizontal doesn't look so >good to me OR him... There is no question that diagonal is the best. Quoting from ANC-18 ... "Although square-laid plywood has been used extensively as shear webs in the past, the present trend is to use diagonal plywood because it is the more efficient shear carrying material. It is desirable to lay all diagonal plywood ... so that the face grain is at right angles to the direction of possible shear buckles. ... (It) is much stiffer in bending in the direction of the face grain and offers greater resistance to buckling if laid with the face grain across the buckles." Tony Bingelis talks about this in one of his articles on spar design. I can't find it in any of the books, so it must have been in the series that he wrote in the 80's when he was building a Falco. I tried to find the article reference with a search of the Sport Aviation articles on EAAs web site but it was not running. I will try later. The shear stress is parallel to the spar caps since one is trying to get longer and the other is trying to get shorter. That is the definition of shear. The shear strength of plywood is higher when it is parallel to the face grain compared to the perpendicular. ANC-18 is out of print but I do own an original copy of it, as well as ANC-5 and ANC-19. I offer copies for a little bit over my cost. Look at the Airparts link below and do NOT request it from me over the KR network. Talk to me directly. 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: 14 Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 21:46:14 +0600 From: Ufanet mail Subject: KR> I want to build it To: krnet@mylist.net Message-ID: <644274002.20040701214614@ufanet.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hello, krnet. I desided to build KR2S. It looks great. Can anybody email me drawings? -- Best regards, Urmanov Valera mailto:uvm@ufanet.ru ------------------------------ Message: 15 Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2004 02:16:23 +1000 From: "StRaNgEdAyS" Subject: Re: KR> I want to build it To: , Message-ID: <40E438D7.00005D.02628@motherfucker> Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" "Can anybody email me drawings?" ummm, probably, but I wouldn't hold my breath. You'd be much better off purchasing a set of plans, complete with the manual I'm sure there is one or two people lurking about the place who would be happy to sell you theirs, failing that, go to http://www.fly-kr.com and you can purchase a set fairly inexpensively directly from Rand Robinson Engineering. Cheers, Peter Bancks. strangedays@dodo.com.au http://www.homebuiltairplanes.com http://canardaviationforum.dmt.com ------------------------------ Message: 16 Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2004 12:24:56 -0400 From: BABYWOLF@aol.com Subject: Re: KR> LAST CHANCE TO BUY To: krnet@mylist.net (KRnet) Message-ID: <3473406A.1C71130C.00625FCA@aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > >How much $ for your spars Garry Cowles Phone 505 984 0010 >310 Catron Santa Fe NM >_______________________________________ >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: 17 Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2004 13:01:04 -0400 From: "Bernard Wunder" Subject: Re: KR> spar skins To: KRnet Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed" I thought you were an electrical engineer :) On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 09:21:24 -0400 "Wood, Sidney M." wrote: >No one has mentioned the 5/8" vertical spruce blocks that >the plans call for when building KR spars. The spars are >a variant of an I-beam. The function of the web in any I >beam or box beam is to keep the two caps from coming >together. No matter what loading is put on the beam - >plus or minus g's, or twisting, and any combination of >these forces - the caps will tend to come closer >together. Beam failure will be either crushing the cap >that is under compression, breaking of the cap under >tension, or crush of the web followed immediately by >buckling or crush of the compression cap. Metal tends to >buckle; wood tends to crush. The theory and practice is >to always have the caps either in compression or tension, >never in bending. The lumber is much stronger in tension >or compression and poor in bending. The 3/32 plywood, >used for a web, will always be subject to compression and >is strongest along the length of the grain (as Don Ried >cites). Plywood has an odd number of plies with outside >plies in the same grain orientation. That is the >strongest dimension orientation. The KR box beam >construction is probably way over-built at 21 g failure. > So, you could put the plywood on in any random >orientation and probably still have a 6-g airplane. For >the exact same weight would you prefer a 21-g wing or >something less? Ken Rand and Stu Robinson got it right. >Sid Wood, Tri-gear KR-2 N6242 >Mechanicsville, MD USA >sidney.wood@titan.com > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >And having said that, here's one from Don Reid where he >advocates running >the grain horizontal, rather than vertical. I'd trust >just about anything >Don says as gospel. >---------------------------------------------- >Date: Jul 20, 1999 8:27 AM > >From: Donald Reid > >Subject: Re: Grain direction.....who cares it's >plywood...my turn at a >'STUPID' Question > > >Tim wrote: > >> Like Aircraft Plywood is either 90 or 45 degrees, I >>assume this is how >> the ply's (3-7) are layered. So grain direction of the >>top sheet is of >> interest, but I wouldn't think the orintation is as >>critical in dealing >> with the Spar web as perhaps Aluminium ..... > >OK, here are some numbers. Anyone who is interested can >make up their >own mind. All data are for birch plywood and taken from >ANC-18, Design >of Wooden Aircraft Structures. (The thick pieces are >included just to >show the effect with more plys) > >thickness # plys parallel perpendicular >0.125" 3 15.17 5.544 >0.160" 5 21.46 11.47 >0.410" 7 131.1 80.91 > >All plys are equal thickness. The numbers are moment for >fiber stress >at the proportional limit in units of inch-pounds per >inch of width. > >As to why the KR plans specify a vertical orientation, it >is because Ken >Rand and Stu Robinson got it wrong. >----------------------------------- >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: 18 Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 14:42:31 -0400 From: "Doug Rupert" Subject: RE: KR> Rotary To: "'KRnet'" Message-ID: <004f01c45f9b$2f5d74c0$3d04e440@office> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Among other things. Course ballistic chute as well as chute on the driver's back is an insurance policy should something go drastically awry at sufficient altitude. One glaring deficiency with the KR series aircraft has been lack of power and over sensitivity of controls and since Jeanette seems as though she is not interested in addressing these problems for whatever reasons, perhaps it is time that we take over and improve the little bird to a position it so rightfully deserves. After al, it has been said over and over here on the Net that each KR is a one off model and no two are alike. Doug Rupert A Boy scout, I deduce. lol ------------------------------ Message: 19 Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 14:42:31 -0400 From: "Doug Rupert" Subject: RE: KR> Rotary (LONG) To: "'KRnet'" Message-ID: <005001c45f9b$33c6c250$3d04e440@office> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Being done since I have been working on a new type I beam spar that does right to the tip instead of have foam extension. Rear outboard spar has been finished and even without the lightening holes it weighs very close to the existing spar (without the foam extension) Going to finish the front spar and send the pair out for testing. These were built to be completely destroyed as I want the complete analysis right up to failure, not some arbitrary number that I feel should be maximum they will be subjected to. I want to know exactly what they are capable of. As and added benefit with this arrangement, each spar can be constructed singly and assembled at the field permanently with epoxy to form a single spar thus doing away with WAF's and the dihedral can be easily cut on the cut off saw and when the wings are joined the dihedral is right on the money without a bunch of making sure the fuselage is on completely level ground as well as level itself and an added benefit of NO measuring. The resulting joint will be the strongest part of the wing instead of the weakest with a very small addition to overall weight but that will make little difference with a rotary cranking out more horsepower than most of us will ever need. Dana has valid points regarding the torque and weight issues but these can be overcome by locating the battery/s to the rear and judicious use of the throttle. Now I would not recommend this combination for all as only those experienced with high performance military aircraft are trained in the proper attention to power bands as most of their aircraft are overpowered under all but combat situations. The extra power available under takeoff conditions on short fields is handy and could in many circumstances save your life but used improperly can lead to a premature meeting of one's maker. Many obstacles have to be overcome with this type of engine arrangement and there is little doubt in my mind that the resulting design will only roughly resemble a KR and that is the reason I have designated my project as a KR Super modified instead of the usual designation of KR2s. Early on when I purchased the project I stated that it would be a flying test bed for the project currently on the drawing board. With that in mind I have run all design changes through Aircraft PDQ to attain some semblance of what these changes will do to flight and handling characteristics. The resulting aircraft is to be a tandem seating arrangement that does not feel like I'm crawling into a funnel. Doug ------------------------------ Message: 20 Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2004 00:51:02 +0600 From: Ufanet mail Subject: KR> KR2S AND SKI To: krnet@mylist.net Message-ID: <1783363788.20040702005102@ufanet.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Yow wrote 1 èþëÿ 2004 ã., 22:16:23: IS IT POSSIBLE TO SET UP SKI ON KR2S? -- Best regards, Urmanov Valera mailto:uvm@ufanet.ru ------------------------------ Message: 21 Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 21:22:33 +0000 From: Subject: KR> Thanx, spar skins To: Message-ID: <391tms$27tbaf@mxip05a.cluster1.charter.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Thanks for the help. Going with 3/32 birch, and running vertical. Steven Phillabaum Auburn, Alabama Rusty engine teardown ------------------------------ Message: 22 Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 18:29:02 -0400 From: VIRGIL N SALISBURY Subject: Re: KR> Rotary To: krnet@mylist.net Message-ID: <20040701.183350.3216.1.virgnvs@juno.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii NOT, Not lack of power, just those who will not KEEP IT LIGHT, and thus complain. Virg On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 14:42:31 -0400 "Doug Rupert" writes: > Among other things. Course ballistic chute as well as chute on the > driver's > back is an insurance policy should something go drastically awry at > sufficient altitude. One glaring deficiency with the KR series > aircraft has > been lack of power and over sensitivity of controls and since > Jeanette seems > as though she is not interested in addressing these problems for > whatever > reasons, perhaps it is time that we take over and improve the little > bird to > a position it so rightfully deserves. After al, it has been said > over and > over here on the Net that each KR is a one off model and no two are > alike. > Doug Rupert > > > > A Boy scout, I deduce. lol > > > > > > _______________________________________ > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html > > Virgil N. Salisbury - AMSOIL www.lubedealer.com/salisbury Miami ,Fl ------------------------------ Message: 23 Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 18:25:00 -0400 From: VIRGIL N SALISBURY Subject: Re: KR> I want to build it To: uvm@ufanet.ru,krnet@mylist.net Message-ID: <20040701.183350.3216.0.virgnvs@juno.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Buy the Plans, See RR for details, Virg On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 21:46:14 +0600 Ufanet mail writes: > Hello, krnet. > > I desided to build KR2S. It looks great. Can anybody > email me drawings? > > -- > Best regards, > Urmanov Valera mailto:uvm@ufanet.ru > > > _______________________________________ > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html > > Virgil N. Salisbury - AMSOIL www.lubedealer.com/salisbury Miami ,Fl ------------------------------ Message: 24 Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 19:06:18 -0400 From: "Brian Kraut" Subject: RE: KR> Thanx, spar skins To: "KRnet" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Have you started to build the spars yet? I have learned a lot about building them. I will be getting some pictures and starting a web site for the new 2S as soon as this roll of film is done. Brian Kraut Engineering Alternatives, Inc. www.engalt.com -----Original Message----- From: krnet-bounces@mylist.net [mailto:krnet-bounces@mylist.net]On Behalf Of skphil@charter.net Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2004 5:23 PM To: krnet@mylist.net Subject: KR> Thanx, spar skins Thanks for the help. Going with 3/32 birch, and running vertical. Steven Phillabaum Auburn, Alabama Rusty engine teardown _______________________________________ 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 128 *************************************** ================================== ABC Amber Outlook Converter v4.20 Trial version ==================================