From: krnet-bounces@mylist.net To: John Bouyea Subject: KRnet Digest, Vol 346, Issue 238 Date: 12/13/2004 2:47:11 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. KR plans (Stephen and Janet Henderson) 2. Weight and Balance (JIM VANCE) 3. Lift - BS debunked Part 2 (Stephen Jacobs) 4. The mystery of lift (Dan Heath) 5. Re: Weight and Balance (Dan Heath) 6. RE: The mystery of lift (Stephen Jacobs) 7. R?f. : KR> Weight and Balance (Serge VIDAL) 8. RE: Weight and Balance (Stephen Jacobs) 9. Re: Weight and Balance (patrusso) 10. Lift - BS debunked (rhartwig11@juno.com) 11. O200 mount and nose leg (GavinandLouise) 12. RE: Lift - BS debunked Part 2 (Ron Freiberger) 13. Lift - BS debunked (larry flesner) 14. Re: so glad to be back (jeffyork40@qx.net) 15. test only (larry flesner) 16. Lift - BS debunked(resent) (larry flesner) 17. Re: Re: so glad to be back (Allen Wiesner ) 18. re: Lift - BS debunked (David Brandon Sr) 19. elevator counterbalance (John Lindner) 20. re: Lift - BS debunked (larry flesner) 21. Re: Weight and Balance (The Weber's) 22. RE: Lift - BS debunked ---NOT (Dan Heath) 23. Re: re: Lift - BS debunked (Bavo) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 05:51:29 -0500 From: "Stephen and Janet Henderson" Subject: KR> KR plans To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <000901c4e101$b3f91940$0f02a8c0@laptop> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Are the plans for the KR2S more detailed than the KR1 plans? I am planning on ordering the KR2S plans this week since my KR1 is almost complete and was just wondering. The plans for the KR1 are about as vague as it can get and leaves a lot to the imagination. Stephen Henderson Email: sph12@earthlink.net ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 05:04:56 -0600 From: "JIM VANCE" Subject: KR> Weight and Balance To: "krnet" Message-ID: <000801c4e103$95809540$0800a8c0@oemcomputer> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" I have a standard conventional geared KR-2 powered by a 1915 cc GP VW with a rear drive. I have the battery mounted on the firewall at this time. I'm ready to weigh it, and would like to have it close to the right c of g before I rent the scales. Right now, when I bring the tail up to flight attitude, I have almost no weight on the tail. Is this an indication that it is nose heavy? Should I move the battery to behind the seats before I bother with weighing? I would appreciate input from those who have gone before. Thanks. Jim Vance Vance@ClaflinWildcats.com ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 13:05:29 +0200 From: "Stephen Jacobs" Subject: KR> Lift - BS debunked Part 2 To: "'KRnet'" Message-ID: <000e01c4e103$ae6f0780$2864a8c0@stephen> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I had an interesting email (off-net) from one of the fellow netters - thank you sir. I have been around since 1949 so I am aware of most broad strains of rationale regarding wing lift (and then some). When we get down to brass tacks and sort through the 10-100, most of the various hypotheses actually support reach other, but I hate it when the simple facts (truth) become distorted and difficult to comprehend because of an over supply of words, theories and ego. There is no reason why the regular builder /pilot should not have a reasonable understanding of how these things actually work (and let the academics go debate the higher sciences to their hearts content) The demonstration that placed everything into perspective for me was really brilliant and would not be that difficult to replicate. This is a highly visual demonstration that really settles all arguments. Maybe someone teaches the subject or would like to make one for the next hangar meet. There is much to be learnt from this, we can even clearly see how the centre of lift (pressure) moves around as the angle of attack varies. One simple drawing would tell it all, but let's see how far we get with words. The demo comprised of a wing section with a chord of about 30" and a similar span - no more than a short piece of typical wing with a simple 15% section and not much else - no spars etc. There was a series of holes down the centre of the wing, all along the "rib line" from front to back, top and bottom. Each such aperture was connected, via a flexible tube, to a glass U tube that was half full with colored water. By subjecting the wing to an air flow, it was possible to visibly display the actual degree of pressure (positive or negative) that the wing surface was experiencing at any point along the chord. The glass tubes were side-by-side, so the resultant image was almost like a graph. The lift profile (water height in each tube) formed a parabola starting just behind the leading edge, progressively increasing to a peak at about the 30% aft point - then tapering of to zero at the TE. This was a vivid and visual, live view of the lift "sucking" away at the surface of the top skin. It was also possible to vary the angle of attack and observe (in real time) how the peak moved fwd (and higher) as the AofA increased. The area of the curve encompassed by the points on the parabola sort of gave a pictorial representation of the quantity of lift. Similar results were displayed in the second set of glass tubes displaying the pressure from each point under the wing - except that the parabola was inverted, flatter and approx 1/2 the area generated on the top of the wing - really. I have seen illustrations of something very similar in a book - "Flight Without Theory" - I think the author is AC Kermode (sp??). This publication has a similar illustration of the span-wise lift profile at the Clmax - very useful for someone trying to figure out some wing tips to actually see how little lift is being generated in this zone (and how useful some winglets may be) A similar, simpler model of smaller proportions could be made out of some scrap 015" Alclad, ABS plastic, heavy card, 1/32" ply, etc. With some fish tank tubing, a dish of water (with food coloring) and a leaf blower - we could have a model that would serve well to illustrate the point. Please remember - this is all about the importance of the bond between the top skin and the spar(s). One last plug at this comes from my RC experience - I am sure many netters will relate to that. It was a sport model with solid foam /balsa wings that were covered with one of the glossy heat shrink materials. This airplane flew really well, but every so often it would suddenly enter a diving turn - always to the same side. Obviously everything in the radio dept. was suspect and gradually swapped out until it was painfully obvious that I had a strange aerodynamic problem. During yet another test session (with high pucker factor) one eagle eyed observer said something about one wing puffing up just before the airplane went berserk. The penny dropped - I recovered the wings making sure that the covering was well bonded all over. Thereafter the Mongrel was a treat to fly. The lift was sucking the covering away from the wing on one side only and acting like a massive airbrake, spoiler and aileron all in one. Take care Steve J ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 06:23:28 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) From: "Dan Heath" Subject: KR> The mystery of lift To: "krnet@mylist.net" Message-ID: <41BD7BB0.00000A.02168@DANHOMECOMPUTER> Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Jerry and I have this discussion often and it always ends with me saying, well I really don't care, as long as the plane fly's". I believe that it sucks and Jerry says that it pushes. Have you ever seen a convertible going down the road with a really loose top? I wonder what makes it balloon up like that? If you cup your hand and stick it out the window of the car while traveling at high speed, does it feel like it is being lifted, or pushed from the bottom. Kind of depends on the angle of attack. What does it all mean, I don't know. I just hope that my plane flys by April or I am going to be really bummed out. See N64KR at http://KR-Builder.org - Then click on the pics There is a time for building and a time for FLYING and the time for building has expired. Daniel R. Heath - Columbia, SC See you in Mt. Vernon - 2005 - KR Gathering ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 06:29:09 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) From: "Dan Heath" Subject: Re: KR> Weight and Balance To: "krnet@mylist.net" Message-ID: <41BD7D05.00000C.02168@DANHOMECOMPUTER> Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Jim, What kind of conventional gear are you using? Do you have the wings on it? If I remember correctly, there is only about 12# on the tail. If your gear is at the wrong angle, this will also cause you to fall over on the nose. I say do the preliminary W&B before making any changes, because, otherwise, you will just be guessing. See N64KR at http://KR-Builder.org - Then click on the pics There is a time for building and a time for FLYING and the time for building has expired. Daniel R. Heath - Columbia, SC See you in Mt. Vernon - 2005 - KR Gathering You wrote: Should I move the battery to behind the seats before I bother with weighing? ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 13:57:38 +0200 From: "Stephen Jacobs" Subject: RE: KR> The mystery of lift To: "'KRnet'" Message-ID: <000001c4e10a$f763ec60$0e64a8c0@stephen> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" well I really don't care, as long as the plane fly's +++++++++++++++ I agree - that is what counts. Have a great week Steve J ------------------------------ Message: 7 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 12:59:24 +0100 From: "Serge VIDAL" Subject: R?f. : KR> Weight and Balance To: KRnet Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" If it can reassure you, mine has only 1.6 kg on the tail. Once you step on board, the picture becomes quite different. Keep your battery where it is. Serge Vidal KR2 ZS-WEC Paris, France "JIM VANCE" Envoyé par : krnet-bounces@mylist.net 2004-12-13 12:04 Veuillez répondre à KRnet Remis le : 2004-12-13 11:58 Pour : "krnet" cc : (ccc : Serge VIDAL/DNSA/SAGEM) Objet : KR> Weight and Balance I have a standard conventional geared KR-2 powered by a 1915 cc GP VW with a rear drive. I have the battery mounted on the firewall at this time. I'm ready to weigh it, and would like to have it close to the right c of g before I rent the scales. Right now, when I bring the tail up to flight attitude, I have almost no weight on the tail. Is this an indication that it is nose heavy? Should I move the battery to behind the seats before I bother with weighing? I would appreciate input from those who have gone before. Thanks. Jim Vance Vance@ClaflinWildcats.com _______________________________________ Search the KRnet Archives at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp 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: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 14:06:07 +0200 From: "Stephen Jacobs" Subject: RE: KR> Weight and Balance To: "'KRnet'" Message-ID: <000101c4e10c$28a73380$0e64a8c0@stephen> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I say do the preliminary W&B before making any changes, because, otherwise, you will just be guessing. +++++++++++++++++ You can always get some idea of the CG location by seeing where it actually balances. Don't poke any holes in the bottom wing skins, but gently resting it on two trestles will give you a good indication. Make sure there is a spar, ply rib or something where it rests. Some scrap foam will help here. Not sure I want a battery anywhere behind me - just in case there is a sudden stop. Steve J ------------------------------ Message: 9 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 07:10:48 -0500 From: "patrusso" Subject: Re: KR> Weight and Balance To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <002d01c4e10c$c8c494c0$09a772d8@3z4xt01> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" On the three KR's that I have worked on they had 5, 7 and 9 lbs on the tail wheel and the CG was still comfortably within design range. Your completed weight and balance figures will supply you with the info you seek. ----- Original Message ----- From: "JIM VANCE" To: "krnet" Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 6:04 AM Subject: KR> Weight and Balance > I have a standard conventional geared KR-2 powered by a 1915 cc GP VW > with a rear drive. I have the battery mounted on the firewall at this time. > > I'm ready to weigh it, and would like to have it close to the right c > of g before I rent the scales. Right now, when I bring the tail up to flight attitude, I have almost no weight on the tail. Is this an indication that it is nose heavy? Should I move the battery to behind the seats before I bother with weighing? > > I would appreciate input from those who have gone before. > > Thanks. > > Jim Vance > Vance@ClaflinWildcats.com _______________________________________ > Search the KRnet Archives at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp > 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: 10 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 06:56:01 -0600 From: rhartwig11@juno.com Subject: KR> Lift - BS debunked To: krnet@mylist.net Message-ID: <20041213.065601.364.1.rhartwig11@juno.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 1. That sucking sound you here from the upper surface of the wing is the plane pulling money from your wallet. 2. "Sucking up" is a force only when you are complimenting someone. Here is a link to a scientific explanation of LIFT: http://www.allstar.fiu.edu/aero/airflylvl3.htm Dick Hartwig ------------------------------ Message: 11 Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 00:06:37 +1000 From: "GavinandLouise" Subject: KR> O200 mount and nose leg To: "KR builders and pilots" Message-ID: <002001c4e1e6$20d9f860$0100000a@vic.bigpond.net.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Well I've built my O200 engine mount over the last couple of days, from plans kindly supplied by Jeff Scott, Thanks Jeff. But as we all know the plans are for a tail dragger and not a trike, therefore they don't have provisions for a nose wheel. Now I've got a nose leg similar to the Dan Diehl type and I have a piece of 1 1/4" I.D. tube that my nose leg slides neatly inside. I intend to fix it to the firewall, and also brace it to the engine mount tubes like some I've seen. The question is How long do I make this 1 1/4" I.D. tube to give enough support to the nose leg??? Does this seem to be a good way of supporting the nose leg?? Thanks Gavin ------------------------------ Message: 12 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 09:36:42 -0500 From: "Ron Freiberger" Subject: RE: KR> Lift - BS debunked Part 2 To: "'KRnet'" Message-ID: <002101c4e121$2e3e1f10$d23aca0c@Disorganized> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Stephen Jacobs said; The demonstration that placed everything into perspective for me was really brilliant and would not be that difficult to replicate. This is a highly visual demonstration that really settles all arguments. Maybe someone teaches the subject or would like to make one for the next hangar meet. Sorry Stephen, but no controversy ever really ends on the KRNET, even though your efforts really ought to suffice. Thanks, Ron Freiberger mail to rfreiberger at swfla.rr.com <- substitute an @ sign ;o) ------------------------------ Message: 13 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 10:22:30 -0600 From: larry flesner Subject: KR> Lift - BS debunked To: KRnet Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20041213102230.007fa430@pop.midwest.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" At 06:56 AM 12/13/04 -0600, you wrote: >1. That sucking sound you here from the upper surface of the wing is >the plane pulling money from your wallet. 2. "Sucking up" is a force >only when you are complimenting someone. Here is a link to a scientific >explanation of LIFT: Dick Hartwig >_______________________________________ Larry's theory of lift: That "sucking sound" you hear is your "pucker" muscles giving out a muffled YEEEEE HAAAAAA !!! On a more technical note, Bernoulli's law, as stated in "Elements of Aeronautics" (Pope-Otis, dated 1941), as it applies to airfoils is this: "In a streamline flow, the greater the speed of the air the less the pressure of the air, and the less the speed of the air the greater the pressure." I don't think this theory has changed much since then. The wing on the KR is not divided into top only or bottom only but is acting as a single unit. As it slices through the air, the air that is directed over the top of the wing must accelerate in order to reach the trail edge at the same time as the air directed below the wing because the air over the top has a greater distance to travel. As the speed of the "over-the-top" air increases, it's pressure drops. Assuming the air on the bottom side of the wing maintains it's static pressure (29.92 in/2 at sea level, 59degrees F) , we now have a difference of pressure of X in/2 between the two surfaces. So, is it sucked up on the top side or pressured up from the bottom side, you decide. I conclude it has a "pulling force" on the top and a "pushing force" on the bottom acting on a single unit, the wing. The wing, as a single unit, is forced in the direction of the low pressure. There are of course too many other variables to cover here such a wing shape, cord to span ratio, , etc. but the basics remain the same. I won't go into "angle of attack" except to say that it has a direct effect on the location where the greatest "low pressure" or "difference of pressure" is generated on the top surface of the wing. The greater the angle of attack, the further forward the center of lift (greatest low pressure) is generated. The less the angle of attack, the further to the rear the center of lift is located. This directly affects the "balance" of the airplane in the air and requires the elevator forces to change to compensate for the changing center of lift. When flying my KR, as the speed picks up in cruise, the wing develops more and more lift. With the center of lift behind the C.G., the nose wants to pitch down as the speed increases and the amount of lift increases. Believe me, this change is considerable. I once demonstrated it to a friend by taking off with the trim set at neutral, accelerating to cruise, and as I passed him in the air I released the stick. I pulled negative G's and scared the s#%*t out of myself. I had been holding considerable back pressure on the stick to compensate for the increased lift being generated behind the C.of G. If I slow to say 120mph, the amount of lift ( behind the C.G. ) decreases and the nose of the airplane tends to rise and the amount of back pressure on the stick or trim required to hold the nose up is much less. This can also lead to a problem when the C.G. is too far to the rear. As the airplane slows in flight, you continue to increase the angle of attack to maintain altitude. The center of lift continues to move forward on the wing to a point forward of the C.G. and you could possibly run out of enough elevator authority to lower the nose and continue safe flight. Conclusion: The theory of lift is accurate regardless how you interpret it. I'd suggest that those of you that have not yet completed you project, get back to the shop and do so with complete assurance that if built to plans, or somewhere close, that it will actually fly when completed! You too will then be overwhelmed with the feeling that can only be expressed with a giant YEEEEEEE HAAAAAAAA……………. Larry Flesner 112.5 hours and still grinnin' ------------------------------ Message: 14 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 12:32:46 -0500 From: Subject: KR> Re: so glad to be back To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <00b801c4e139$d480e8e0$6501a8c0@server> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Somehow either in the change of internet service providers or something, I ended up getting dropped of this forum some time ago. At least a year or so. In my attempt to sign back up , I ended up on another KR forum and got very little emails. Anyway , I went along thinking that activity in this forum had come to a near stop. I had also thought that a server for the KR net had went down and just wondered if it was never brought back up. Well a fellow kr netter corrected me in my mis understanding, thank you Mike, and I am back on. I also have to admit that children, job and other activities have prevented me from dedicating the time to my KR and avaition hobby as well. So, I guess my early New Years resolution is that I am rededicating myself to my KR. So look out. the dumb questions are about to come. Now if I can just figure out how to get my wheel pants mounted on my mains and I sure would like to build some of those fiberglass cooling baffels (snorkels) like I seen on a Sonex, let's see, I finnally got that RV-6 scoop glassed on to my lower cowling, and the cowling repainted. That looks good. What can I ask the wife for for Christams, something that I really need for the KR? Hum, that new water cooled head set up from Great Plains for the 2180 sure would be nice, 100 HP, wonder if anybody out there is doing one of those on a KR-2? Man , that Corvair stuff, now that looks cool, how the heck can I get myself up to speed on that. Love Corvairs maybe I could call it a KRvair. Just doing a lot of thinking . Wow, could I really get to Sun N Fun in my KR this year? Should have flown it down there a couple of years ago, but I can't leave anything alone and had to go tearing it apart. Well maybe I could even make the Kr fly in! Merry Christmas all you KR netter guys and gals. If you get near Lexington , KY look me up, stop for a while or spend the night. Oh, and all you Northern er's! You didn't know that the 3 wise men where firemen did ya? Look it up in the Bible it say's so. The three wise men came from ah fire to see the baby Jesus. Jeff York Lexington , KY KR-2 N839BG ------------------------------ Message: 15 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 12:17:13 -0600 From: larry flesner Subject: KR> test only To: KRnet Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20041213121713.007fb100@pop.midwest.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" For some reason I'm not getting all the KRnet post. I know because I'm not getting all the ones I'm sending. For those of you that have read this far, Merry Christmas or Happy Holiday for whatever you are celebrating. Larry Flesner ------------------------------ Message: 16 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 12:23:53 -0600 From: larry flesner Subject: KR> Lift - BS debunked(resent) To: krnet@mylist.net Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20041213122353.007ff800@pop.midwest.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" I'm resending this post as I never got the original post back to my server or it dumped it or something. If you already got it just hit delete. Larry Flesner +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >At 06:56 AM 12/13/04 -0600, you wrote: >>1. That sucking sound you here from the upper surface of the wing is >>the plane pulling money from your wallet. 2. "Sucking up" is a force >>only when you are complimenting someone. Here is a link to a >>scientific explanation of LIFT: Dick Hartwig >>_______________________________________ > > >Larry's theory of lift: That "sucking sound" you hear is your "pucker" muscles giving out a muffled YEEEEE HAAAAAA !!! > >On a more technical note, Bernoulli's law, as stated in "Elements of >Aeronautics" (Pope-Otis, dated 1941), as it applies to airfoils is this: >"In a streamline flow, the greater the speed of the air the less the pressure >of the air, and the less the speed of the air the greater the pressure." >I don't think this theory has changed much since then. > >The wing on the KR is not divided into top only or bottom only but is >acting as a single unit. As it slices through the air, the air that is directed >over the top of the wing must accelerate in order to reach the trail >edge at the same time as the air directed below the wing because the >air over the top has a greater distance to travel. As the speed of the "over-the-top" >air increases, it's pressure drops. Assuming the air on the bottom >side of >the wing maintains it's static pressure (29.92 in/2 at sea level, 59degrees F) , >we now have a difference of pressure of X in/2 between the two >surfaces. So, is it sucked up on the top side or pressured up from the >bottom side, you decide. I conclude it has a "pulling force" on the >top and a "pushing force" on the bottom acting on a single unit, the >wing. The wing, as a single unit, is forced in the direction of the >low pressure. There are of course >too many other variables to cover here such a wing shape, cord to span ratio, >, etc. but the basics remain the same. > >I won't go into "angle of attack" except to say that it has a direct effect on the >location where the greatest "low pressure" or "difference of pressure" >is generated on the top surface of the wing. The greater the angle of attack, >the further forward the center of lift (greatest low pressure) is generated. The >less the angle of attack, the further to the rear the center of lift is located. >This directly affects the "balance" of the airplane in the air and >requires the elevator forces to change to compensate for the changing >center of lift. > >When flying my KR, as the speed picks up in cruise, the wing develops >more and more lift. With the center of lift behind the C.G., the nose wants >to pitch down as the speed increases and the amount of lift increases. >Believe me, this change is considerable. I once demonstrated it to a >friend by taking off with the trim set at neutral, accelerating to cruise, >and as I passed him in the air I released the stick. I pulled negative >G's and scared the s#%*t out of myself. I had been holding considerable >back pressure on the stick to compensate for the increased lift being >generated behind the C.of G. If I slow to say 120mph, >the amount of lift ( behind the C.G. ) decreases and the nose of the >airplane tends to rise and the amount of back pressure on the stick >or trim required to hold the nose up is much less. > >This can >also lead to a problem when the C.G. is too far to the rear. As the >airplane slows in flight, you continue to increase the angle of attack >to maintain altitude. The center of lift continues to move forward on >the wing to a point forward of the C.G. and you could possibly run out >of enough elevator authority to lower the nose and continue safe >flight. > >Conclusion: The theory of lift is accurate regardless how you >interpret it. I'd suggest that those of you that have not yet >completed you project, get back to the shop and do so with complete >assurance that if built to plans, or somewhere close, that it will >actually fly when completed! You too will then be overwhelmed with the >feeling that can only be expressed with a giant YEEEEEEE >HAAAAAAAA……………. > >Larry Flesner 112.5 hours and still grinnin' > ------------------------------ Message: 17 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 14:33:08 -0500 From: "Allen Wiesner " Subject: Re: KR> Re: so glad to be back To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <001701c4e14a$940f80d0$c212da42@CPQ69645694259> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original >Look it up in the Bible it say's so. The three wise men came from ah >fire >to >see the baby Jesus. Under Spider's classification, that barely rates a 1 :-) Flashy ------------------------------ Message: 18 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 16:44:02 -0500 From: "David Brandon Sr" Subject: KR> re: Lift - BS debunked To: Message-ID: <001201c4e15c$dcc1dd70$6401a8c0@DBRANDON> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" all right smarty pants! What is the minimum airspeed velocity neccessary to keep an unladen swallow airborne? (hee,hee, icouldnt help myself) :.) Dave ------------------------------ Message: 19 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 17:25:20 -0500 From: "John Lindner" Subject: KR> elevator counterbalance To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <005201c4e162$a1970490$0200a8c0@solarium> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" In an effort to stop the "Lift" discussion... I'm planning to start work on my elevator soon (this will be the first part of my project because it doesn't take up much room and I can scrap it later if I don't like it.). I'm going to cover it in Carbon Fiber rather than glass, and I also want to add counter balances. My plan was to get rid of the spruce tips, and stick a piece of foam (to be covered in CF)on the end that would extend all the way to the leading edge of the elevator . Has anyone done this? If anyone has added counterbalances of some kind, please let me know. Thanks alot guys. John Lindner jrlindner@comcast.net ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Brandon Sr" To: Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 4:44 PM Subject: KR> re: Lift - BS debunked > all right smarty pants! > What is the minimum airspeed velocity neccessary to keep an unladen swallow airborne? > > (hee,hee, icouldnt help myself) :.) > Dave > _______________________________________ > Search the KRnet Archives at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp > 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: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 16:24:46 -0600 From: larry flesner Subject: KR> re: Lift - BS debunked To: KRnet Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20041213162446.007fd4b0@pop.midwest.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >all right smarty pants! >What is the minimum airspeed velocity neccessary to keep an unladen swallow airborne? >(hee,hee, icouldnt help myself) :.) >Dave +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ With my limited exposure to the world around me you'll have to tell me exactly what an "unladen swallow" is. My closest guess would be the feeling I get each time my KR mains break free of the pavement!!! Please provide us with wing loading, aspect rato, range of tail motion, male or female, gross weight, etc., and I'm sure someone will have an opinion anyway. :-) Larry Flesner ------------------------------ Message: 21 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 16:38:04 -0600 From: "The Weber's" Subject: Re: KR> Weight and Balance To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <004b01c4e164$6a55bec0$42cab4d8@hppav> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" On Ken Rand's original KR-2 He had minus 1/2 pound when the tail was up in the flying position. So your plane should be good. ----- Original Message ----- From: "JIM VANCE" To: "krnet" Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 5:04 AM Subject: KR> Weight and Balance > I have a standard conventional geared KR-2 powered by a 1915 cc GP VW > with a rear drive. I have the battery mounted on the firewall at this time. > > I'm ready to weigh it, and would like to have it close to the right c > of g before I rent the scales. Right now, when I bring the tail up to flight attitude, I have almost no weight on the tail. Is this an indication that it is nose heavy? Should I move the battery to behind the seats before I bother with weighing? > > I would appreciate input from those who have gone before. > > Thanks. > > Jim Vance > Vance@ClaflinWildcats.com _______________________________________ > Search the KRnet Archives at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp > 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: 22 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 17:44:10 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) From: "Dan Heath" Subject: RE: KR> Lift - BS debunked ---NOT To: "krnet@mylist.net" Message-ID: <41BE1B3A.000005.02792@DANHOMECOMPUTER> Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" RE: Sorry Stephen, but no controversy ever really ends on the KRNET, even though your efforts really ought to suffice. That is right, we just go brood about it while we sing the KR Sanding song, knowing that we will be flying soon, cause then it really won't matter. See N64KR at http://KR-Builder.org - Then click on the pics There is a time for building and a time for FLYING and the time for building has expired. Daniel R. Heath - Columbia, SC See you in Mt. Vernon - 2005 - KR Gathering ------------------------------ Message: 23 Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 09:46:43 +1100 From: Bavo Subject: Re: KR> re: Lift - BS debunked To: KRnet Message-ID: <830558f904121314464c30cc0e@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Is that the African or European Swallow? On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 16:44:02 -0500, David Brandon Sr wrote: > all right smarty pants! > What is the minimum airspeed velocity neccessary to keep an unladen > swallow airborne? > > (hee,hee, icouldnt help myself) :.) > Dave > _______________________________________ > Search the KRnet Archives at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net > > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html > -- http://au.geocities.com/johnbavington ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ See KRnet list details at http://www.krnet.org/instructions.html End of KRnet Digest, Vol 346, Issue 238 *************************************** ================================== ABC Amber Outlook Converter v4.20 Trial version ==================================