From: krnet-bounces@mylist.net To: John Bouyea Subject: KRnet Digest, Vol 346, Issue 67 Date: 8/10/2004 8:59:47 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. Fuel tanks (GavinandLouise) 2. Re: Light Sport Aircraft (Dana Overall) 3. Re: Fuel tanks (Phil Matheson) 4. Re: Light Sport Aircraft (Good day) (Shortcourses Shortcourses) 5. Re: P factor (Martindale Family) 6. RE: Fuel tanks (Wood, Sidney M.) 7. Rand Gear vs Diehl Gear (larry flesner) 8. RE: Fuel tanks (Donald Reid) 9. RE: Gotta Share (Stephen Jacobs) 10. RE: Fuel tanks (Wood, Sidney M.) 11. How many hours (larry flesner) 12. RE: Mogas and alchohol (Ameet Savant) 13. RE: Fuel tanks (Stephen Jacobs) 14. Re: Light Sport Aircraft (Wesley Scott) 15. Re: Static Vent, Cabin Heat, Fresh Air Duct, Cable installation (Scott Cable) 16. Re: Rand Gear vs Diehl Gear (VIRGIL N SALISBURY) 17. Re: Light Sport Aircraft (David Mikesell) 18. RE: Mogas and alchohol (Wood, Sidney M.) 19. Re: tortional loads +early friday (Dene Collett (SA)) 20. Re: Rand Gear vs Diehl Gear (David Mullins) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 17:46:20 +1000 From: "GavinandLouise" Subject: KR> Fuel tanks To: "KR builders and pilots" Message-ID: <002b01c47eae$2064c220$0100000a@vic.bigpond.net.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Hi all, Is it necessary to micro the insides of the fuel tanks before glassing as we do on the exterior surfaces?? I'm just starting on my header tank. Thanks Gav --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.735 / Virus Database: 489 - Release Date: 06/08/2004 ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 07:46:37 -0400 From: "Dana Overall" Subject: Re: KR> Light Sport Aircraft To: krnet@mylist.net Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed >61.315 What are the priviliges and limits of my sport pilot certificate? > (a) If you hold a sport pilot certificate you may act as pilot in >command of a light-sport aircraft, except as specified in paragraph (c) >of this section > >And >1.1 General definitions > Light-sport aircraft means an aircraft, other than a helicopter or >powered-lift that, since its original certification, has continued to >meet the following: > >List not included > >The conclusion is that a light sport aircraft may have an airworthiness >certificate in another category and still be flyable by a sport pilot. >Or for a plans built plane, "I swear that's all she'll do" means your >buddy with his sport pilot certificate (and the over 87kts endorsement) >and valid drivers license can legally fly your plane (assuming the >stall speed is low enough). > >-- >wesley scott >kr2@spottedowl.biz Wesley, there are a couple "assumptions" contained therein which leave one vulnerable to recourse. I'll certainly go back and review the regs with cross reference to existing support sections. Many of the sport issues are referenced to current regs. There has been some discussions as to whether something like a Champ (don't go listing weights, speed, etc. I am only using this as an example) would be a viable option for a sport licensed pilot who meets the medical requirements. It appears to be so. Another assumption is the valid drivers license, once again a known disqualifier for a 3rd. class voids the valid drivers license issue. This is a very, very large can of worms to the "loaner" and "flyer" of the airplane but that is another issue. My case in point was, and still is, putting different wings, different engines, speed brakes, hanging things off the KR to slow it down, flat front cowlings.......the list goes on, and a promise of "that's all she'll do" will fall far short of the requirements for aircraft certification under the sport pilot regulations as adopted. As much as we would like to inexpensively build the KR, there exists a very large void between what we see as a pie in sky available avenue and the reality contained within the sport pilot aircraft certification process. The sport pilot deal, in my opinion, was initiated to bring the illegal "ultralights" under FAA control in order to assemble all the various ultralight "licensing" (I use that term loosely) associations under one umbrella. It will have some spinoffs, but won't affect most on this board, wish is would but I still have a bad taste in my mouth. Dana Overall 1999 & 2000 National KR Gathering host Richmond, KY i39 RV-7 slider, Imron black, "Black Magic" Finish kit 13B Rotary. Hangar flying my Dynon. http://rvflying.tripod.com/aero1.jpg http://rvflying.tripod.com/aero3.jpg http://rvflying.tripod.com/blackrudder.jpg do not archive ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 21:46:46 +1000 From: "Phil Matheson" Subject: Re: KR> Fuel tanks To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <001101c47ecf$b75e5800$1f97dccb@Office> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Is it necessary to micro the insides of the fuel tanks before glassing as we do on the exterior surfaces?? I'm just starting on my header tank. Gavin ----------------------------------------- Yes, and round off the corners, Then when finished do another two coats of resin as well for a good seal. (Vinyl Ester Resin) 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: 4 Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 13:55:01 +0200 From: "Shortcourses Shortcourses" Subject: Re: KR> Light Sport Aircraft (Good day) To: , "Liezl Maasdorp" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Good day Thank you for your e-mail. This is an automatic reply. Please note: All short course enquiries must be directed to Ms Liezl Maasdorp (012) 301-5955 or e-mail: lmaasdor@tsa.ac.za Thank you. Regards. ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 21:53:07 +1000 From: "Martindale Family" Subject: Re: KR> P factor To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <004a01c47ed1$515053e0$75a0fea9@athlon2400> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Hi Orma I posted some personal experiences some months ago on this topic. I fly a 110 hp Corvair and even though I have some issues at present regarding lack of power the prop torque is easily sufficient to spear one off to the right unless ready on left rudder as the tail comes up. Remember the Corvair spins opposite to the Lycs and Conts. I found that below 20 knots my rudder was insufficient. The trick is to smoothly apply power and not lift the tail too early. John The Martindale Family 29 Jane Circuit TOORMINA NSW 2452 AUSTRALIA phone: 61 2 66584767 email: johnjane@chc.net.au ----- Original Message ----- From: "Orma" To: "KRnet" Sent: Monday, August 09, 2004 10:57 PM Subject: KR> P factor > Hello Net > This is a question for KR drivers with big engines like the O-200, the Corvair's and turbo VW's. Can any one discuss the difference in the amount of P factor as a comparison to their experience with a lower powered engine? Was there enough rudder to compensate, or did you have to keep the power low waiting on rudder authority? If you can answer these questions based on your KR experiences, please make an input. > Orma L. Robbins > To the gathering or bust _______________________________________ > 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: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 08:08:19 -0400 From: "Wood, Sidney M." Subject: RE: KR> Fuel tanks To: "KRnet" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Your question indicates you have not checked out the numerous how-to books on composite construction. Experimental Aircraft Association at www.eaa.org or Aircraft Spruce at www.aircraftspruce.com or Wicks at www.wicks.com have lots of helpful books for sale. The weekend hands-on training offered by SportAir Workshops www.sportair.com can provide lots of practical help. I assume you are using urethane foam for the tank structure. Any fuel leak will dissolve polystyrene foam, as will polyester and vinyl ester resin. Standard practice is to coat the raw foam surface with a film of micro followed immediately by a wet glass or carbon fiber lay-up. The micro is lighter than straight resin and helps prevent too much of the heavier resin from the wet lay up soaking into the porous foam. The idea is to produce a light and strong structure. For best chemical resistance, recommend that you use vinyl ester resin for the fuel tank construction. Epoxy will work ok as long as you only use aviation grade 100 octane LL fuel. Automotive fuels may contain alcohol and aromatic additives that will attack the epoxy. Vinyl ester resin is not susceptible to chemical attack by automotive fuels. Sid Wood Tri-gear KR-2 N6242 Mechanicsville, MD USA Sidney.wood@titan.com Hi all, Is it necessary to micro the insides of the fuel tanks before glassing as we do on the exterior surfaces?? I'm just starting on my header tank. Thanks Gav ------------------------------ Message: 7 Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 07:34:49 -0500 From: larry flesner Subject: KR> Rand Gear vs Diehl Gear To: KRnet Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20040810073449.0082d100@pop.midwest.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > What are the major differences between the Rand and Diehl >conventional fixed landing gears? Which one would be better for a grass runway? >Thanks in advance. dcgoff@webtv.net Dick Goff ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ I'm not that familar with the Rand gear but seeing no other responses I'll throw out what I know. The Rand gear is a one piece gear that mounts to brackets on the forward spar inside the fuselage, all aluminum. The Diehl gear has a mounting bracket on each side, on the forward spar center section just outside the fuselage. It uses a straight 24" composite gear leg with a second bracket on the bottom end to mount the axle. I don't know that one is better than the other. I'm not sure of the Rand gear length, it may be a bit taller. The Diehl gear on the other hand is a bit wider. I've not heard of problems with either type. The Diehl instructions say to mount the brackets on the spar next to the fuselage. I moved mine out approx 2"s and with the 30" legs I have (which Dan no longer sells) it gives me a main gear track right at 8 feet wide. It handles nicely on the ground. It's your money. You decide................ Larry Flesner ------------------------------ Message: 8 Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 08:49:49 -0400 From: Donald Reid Subject: RE: KR> Fuel tanks To: KRnet Message-ID: <6.1.0.6.2.20040810083450.01d35950@pop.erols.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 08:08 AM 8/10/2004, you wrote: > For best chemical resistance, recommend that you use vinyl ester > resin > for the fuel tank construction. Epoxy will work ok as long as you only > use aviation grade 100 octane LL fuel. Automotive fuels may contain > alcohol and aromatic additives that will attack the epoxy. Vinyl ester > resin is not susceptible to chemical attack by automotive fuels. It is a common misconception that autofuel will degrade epoxy resin. This is not necessarily so. I prepared two sample coupons of Last-A-Foam and EZ-Poxy. One coupon was saved as a control. One half of the test coupon was fully submerged in autogas and the other half was not. This coupon remained in a sealed container for over four years with absolutely no degradation. There was no loss of strength, there was no sediment, and there was no discoloration of the gasoline. After the coupon was removed and dried off, it was impossible to tell the difference between it and its control coupon. The two things that must be done to ensure a chemically resistant gas tank is to have the mixture ratio correct and completely mixed. If your resin/hardener ratio is off, there will be an uncured component in the final epoxy matrix. It can dissolve in an solvent. The same is true if you do not mix the components sufficiently. Epoxy will work with autogas but your quality control is important. 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: 9 Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 14:57:23 +0200 From: "Stephen Jacobs" Subject: RE: KR> Gotta Share To: "'KRnet'" Message-ID: <000701c47ed9$980369a0$7364a8c0@home> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Good day all I stumbled onto this brilliant series of aviation stories, I am sure you will enjoy them as much as I am - only two or three pages each and I read some each evening. http://aerobourne.com/00index.htm How many hours Larry - I you don't do the wheel spats (and some trim colours) by 100 hrs, chances are you never will. Have a great week Steve J ------------------------------ Message: 10 Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 09:39:46 -0400 From: "Wood, Sidney M." Subject: RE: KR> Fuel tanks To: "KRnet" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" I did the same tests mentioned in the previous post using Safe-T-Poxy, fiberglass and urethane foam, and vinyl ester resin, fiber glass and urethane foam. Fuels used were Shell 93 octane purchased in February and the same Shell 93 octane purchased in July from the same pump, Exxon 100LL obtained at 2W6 and gasohol containing ten percent alcohol. The July vintage Shell 93 octane and the 100 LL showed no degradation on the test lay-ups after one year. The February Shell 93 octane specimen was tacky after a one-year exposure. The gasohol had dissolved the epoxy resin after one year. The urethane foam was not affected in those samples. The vinyl ester resin was not affected by any of these fuels. You may have taken my post out of context. It is not the gasoline that does the damage to the epoxy. The alcohol and aromatic additives in the automotive gasoline seem to be the source of the chemical attack. Sid Wood Tri-gear KR-2 N6242 Mechanicsville, MD USA Sidney.wood@titan.com At 08:08 AM 8/10/2004, you wrote: > For best chemical resistance, recommend that you use vinyl ester > resin > for the fuel tank construction. Epoxy will work ok as long as you only > use aviation grade 100 octane LL fuel. Automotive fuels may contain > alcohol and aromatic additives that will attack the epoxy. Vinyl ester > resin is not susceptible to chemical attack by automotive fuels. It is a common misconception that autofuel will degrade epoxy resin. This is not necessarily so. I prepared two sample coupons of Last-A-Foam and EZ-Poxy. One coupon was saved as a control. One half of the test coupon was fully submerged in autogas and the other half was not. This coupon remained in a sealed container for over four years with absolutely no degradation. There was no loss of strength, there was no sediment, and there was no discoloration of the gasoline. After the coupon was removed and dried off, it was impossible to tell the difference between it and its control coupon. The two things that must be done to ensure a chemically resistant gas tank is to have the mixture ratio correct and completely mixed. If your resin/hardener ratio is off, there will be an uncured component in the final epoxy matrix. It can dissolve in an solvent. The same is true if you do not mix the components sufficiently. Epoxy will work with autogas but your quality control is important. 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: 11 Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 08:35:25 -0500 From: larry flesner Subject: KR> How many hours To: KRnet Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20040810083525.0082ddf0@pop.midwest.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >How many hours Larry - I you don't do the wheel spats (and some trim >colours) by 100 hrs, chances are you never will. >Steve J ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Steve, If your observation is correct, I have less than 20 hours to complete the KR! I'm somewhere past 80 hours now. I don't recall exactly but I think 82 is close. Those items WILL be completed at some point, even if I have 200 hours on the KR. After 13 years of building I'm not about to quit with the finish line in site. Larry Flesner ------------------------------ Message: 12 Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 07:01:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Ameet Savant Subject: RE: KR> Mogas and alchohol To: KRnet Message-ID: <20040810140143.58367.qmail@web60806.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sid's statement may result in someone thinking that they could use the gas without alchohol in it and not have trouble with the epoxy used to make the fuel tank. I have worked with the fire marshal's office here in town and from what I heard, the alchohol content of commercially available gas is not reliable due to storage at the fueling facility. In short, one may think they are getting alchohol free mogas but that may not be the case. Ameet Savant ameetsavant at yahoo dot com > It is not the gasoline that does the > damage to the epoxy. The alcohol and aromatic > additives in the automotive gasoline seem to be the > source of the chemical attack. > Sid Wood > Tri-gear KR-2 N6242 > Mechanicsville, MD USA > Sidney.wood@titan.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail ------------------------------ Message: 13 Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 16:52:31 +0200 From: "Stephen Jacobs" Subject: RE: KR> Fuel tanks To: "'KRnet'" Message-ID: <000001c47ee9$abd836d0$de64a8c0@home> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" One half of the test coupon was fully submerged in autogas and the other half was not. ++++++++++++++++++++++ This would clinch it for me Don, the nagging worry is a potential alcohol content in mogas - has anyone checked on that. I don't have any reputable, undated epoxy handy for a test, but it would be interesting to add some methanol to the mogas and see what happens. I am under the impression that an alcohol presence in US mogas is something new - never used to be the case (4 years ago). The quality of information on a few topics over the last few days (epoxy/ester) has been brilliant - thank you. Steve J Zambia ------------------------------ Message: 14 Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 11:26:48 -0500 From: "Wesley Scott" Subject: Re: KR> Light Sport Aircraft To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <002001c47ef6$d7866420$7ea70a04@pbrain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" My point wasn't that you could certify the plane under the new light sport aircraft category. The way I read the regulation you can't certify a plans built plane, it has to be a kit and assembled per manufacturer's instructions. And the instructions and kits will have to meet consensus standards. But if you certify it under the existing experimental amateur built category and it won't fly faster than 138mph (and stalls below 45kts), then a sport pilot should be able to fly it. I definitely agree that it was designed to regulate the "ultralights". The explanations accompanying the final rule make that pretty clear. -- wesley scott kr2@spottedowl.biz ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dana Overall" > > > My case in point was, and still is, putting different wings, different > engines, speed brakes, hanging things off the KR to slow it down, flat front > cowlings.......the list goes on, and a promise of "that's all she'll > do" will fall far short of the requirements for aircraft certification > under the > sport pilot regulations as adopted. As much as we would like to > inexpensively build the KR, there exists a very large void between > what we see as a pie in sky available avenue and the reality contained > within the sport pilot aircraft certification process. The sport > pilot deal, in my opinion, was initiated to bring the illegal > "ultralights" under FAA control > in order to assemble all the various ultralight "licensing" (I use > that term > loosely) associations under one umbrella. It will have some spinoffs, > but won't affect most on this board, wish is would but I still have a > bad taste > in my mouth. > ------------------------------ Message: 15 Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 10:51:42 -0700 (PDT) From: Scott Cable Subject: Re: KR> Static Vent, Cabin Heat, Fresh Air Duct, Cable installation To: KRnet Message-ID: <20040810175142.67536.qmail@web53005.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Agh, THAT explains it..... Just joking! Looks really good Dan, keep it up!!!! Dan Heath wrote: The only problem is, you have to think backwards and upside down. Scott Cable KR-2S # 735 Wright City, MO s2cable1@yahoo.com --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! ------------------------------ Message: 16 Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 13:48:02 -0400 From: VIRGIL N SALISBURY Subject: Re: KR> Rand Gear vs Diehl Gear To: krnet@mylist.net Message-ID: <20040810.140152.2984.0.virgnvs@juno.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Do not forget the Grove Gear, Virg On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 07:34:49 -0500 larry flesner writes: > > > What are the major differences between the Rand and Diehl > conventional > >fixed landing gears? Which one would be better for a grass runway? > >Thanks in advance. dcgoff@webtv.net Dick Goff > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > I'm not that familar with the Rand gear but seeing no other > responses > I'll throw out what I know. > > The Rand gear is a one piece gear that mounts to brackets on the > forward spar inside the fuselage, all aluminum. > > The Diehl gear has a mounting bracket on each side, on the forward > spar center section just outside the fuselage. It uses a straight 24" > composite gear leg with a second bracket on the bottom end to mount > the axle. > > I don't know that one is better than the other. I'm not sure > of the Rand gear length, it may be a bit taller. The Diehl > gear on the other hand is a bit wider. I've not heard of problems > with either type. The Diehl instructions say to mount the brackets on > the spar next to the fuselage. I moved mine out approx 2"s and with > the 30" legs I have (which Dan no longer > sells) it gives me a main gear track right at 8 feet wide. It handles > nicely on the ground. > > It's your money. You decide................ > > 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 > > Virgil N. Salisbury - AMSOIL www.lubedealer.com/salisbury Miami ,Fl ------------------------------ Message: 17 Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 11:37:48 -0700 From: "David Mikesell" Subject: Re: KR> Light Sport Aircraft To: "Wesley Scott" , "KRnet" Message-ID: <000d01c47f09$23cbab80$03fea8c0@davids> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" You are so right, it is a kit only that will be certified. To me I see sport pilot is a way to get everyone to a Private rating. By the time the average guy spends his money to get trained in a ultralight (which when the exemption runs out in 3 years) by a Sport Pilot instructor he will have met and paid for getting his Sport Pilot rating, then by the time he gets enough endorsements to actually travel around and do real cross country trips he will have paid for and met the requirements for his Private Pilot and seeing that he will get it because it lifts so many restrictions under that rating. David Mikesell 23597 N. Hwy 99 Acampo, CA 95220 209-609-8774 skyguynca@skyguynca.com www.skyguynca.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Wesley Scott" To: "KRnet" Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2004 9:26 AM Subject: Re: KR> Light Sport Aircraft > My point wasn't that you could certify the plane under the new light > sport aircraft category. The way I read the regulation you can't > certify a plans > built plane, it has to be a kit and assembled per manufacturer's > instructions. And the instructions and kits will have to meet > consensus standards. But if you certify it under the existing > experimental amateur built category and it won't fly faster than > 138mph (and stalls below 45kts), > then a sport pilot should be able to fly it. > > I definitely agree that it was designed to regulate the "ultralights". The > explanations accompanying the final rule make that pretty clear. > > -- > wesley scott > kr2@spottedowl.biz > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dana Overall" > > > > > > My case in point was, and still is, putting different wings, > > different engines, speed brakes, hanging things off the KR to slow > > it down, flat > front > > cowlings.......the list goes on, and a promise of "that's all she'll > > do" will fall far short of the requirements for aircraft > > certification under > the > > sport pilot regulations as adopted. As much as we would like to > > inexpensively build the KR, there exists a very large void between > > what we > > see as a pie in sky available avenue and the reality contained > > within the > > sport pilot aircraft certification process. The sport pilot deal, > > in my opinion, was initiated to bring the illegal "ultralights" > > under FAA > control > > in order to assemble all the various ultralight "licensing" (I use > > that > term > > loosely) associations under one umbrella. It will have some > > spinoffs, but > > won't affect most on this board, wish is would but I still have a > > bad > taste > > in my mouth. > > > > > > > _______________________________________ > 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: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 15:26:25 -0400 From: "Wood, Sidney M." Subject: RE: KR> Mogas and alchohol To: "KRnet" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Mogas handling leaves a lot to be desired regarding exact content of the product as pumped versus that which is advertised. Avgas is certified to be alcohol-free, but it certainly is not free. How much longer Avgas will be available is also in question. I still recommend that composite fuel tanks be constructed with vinyl ester resin for best chemical endurance. The styrene fumes from the curing vinyl ester resin can be handled with plenty of ventilation plus a charcoal respirator. Sanding vinyl ester is a frustrating chore, but then there is not that much to do for a fuel tank. Sid Wood Tri-gear KR-2 N6242 Mechanicsville, MD USA Sidney.wood@titan.com Sid's statement may result in someone thinking that they could use the gas without alchohol in it and not have trouble with the epoxy used to make the fuel tank. I have worked with the fire marshal's office here in town and from what I heard, the alchohol content of commercially available gas is not reliable due to storage at the fueling facility. In short, one may think they are getting alchohol free mogas but that may not be the case. Ameet Savant ameetsavant at yahoo dot com > It is not the gasoline that does the > damage to the epoxy. The alcohol and aromatic > additives in the automotive gasoline seem to be the > source of the chemical attack. > Sid Wood > Tri-gear KR-2 N6242 > Mechanicsville, MD USA > Sidney.wood@titan.com ------------------------------ Message: 19 Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 21:12:19 +0200 From: "Dene Collett \(SA\)" Subject: Re: KR> tortional loads +early friday To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <000301c47f12$b426d840$37e5fea9@telkomsa127179> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Hi Eduardo YES PLEASE, send them to me. I already have a design of my own but no metal has been cut yet so if I come across something better I can change to it easily. Thanks Dene Collett KR2S-RT builder Port Elizabeth South Africa mailto: dene.collett@telkomsa.net P.S: checkout www.whisperaircraft.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eduardo Iglesias" To: "KRnet" Sent: Friday, August 06, 2004 3:32 AM Subject: Re: KR> tortional loads +early friday > Dear Dene > > I have come thinking of the retract gear already for time and I liked > a lot > what put Lancer in the first Lancair. It is simple, easy and I believe that > sure. > I have some picture of a RG that was made in US there are about ten to > twelve years, very similar to that of the Lancair. If you need it, I > look for them and I send it to you This uses as shock absorber some > cylindrical sections of polyurethane. Eduardo > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dene Collett (SA)" > To: "krnet" > Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2004 4:45 PM > Subject: KR> tortional loads +early friday > > > > Hi KR heads > > As some of you know, I am working on a full retract tricycle gear on > > my rendition of a KR2S. Tonight I went to look at some wood for the > > forward outer spars at a friend of mine who is a very respected > > person in the experimental world over here. I was discussing the > > retract system with him and he brought up a point > that > > I had not considdered at all. As my retract system requires that the > bottom > > wing skin of the stubwings be split basically from root to outboard > > end in > > order for the gear to retract into the wing. This means that the > > bottom > skin > > will no linger be continuous between the spars. > > > > My question is: What, if any, tortional loads does the skin carry > > under normal conditions due to forces applied by ailerons, etc. and > > what effect > > will the splitting of the skin in order to accomodate the gear have > > on > wing > > strength. > > > > As a bit of background, my gear will consist of a 1.5" 4130 tube > > between > the > > spars supported each end by a bearing mounted in a piece of > > aluminuim that > > bolts onto the spars by picking up the W.A.F bolts. To this tube > > will be another 1.5" tube welded at 90* to it forming the gear leg. > > At the bottom > of > > this will be a trailing link arrangement with a damper. The tube between > > the spars will be mounted almost at the outboard end of the > > stubwings and > > the gear will retract towards the fuselage just clearing it to sit > > completely inside the wing. > > > > Any thoughts from those in the know will be greatly appreciated. > > Thank you next day: > > On a less serious note, I was fortunate enough to have had the "WHISPER" > > experience today. After work I was invited to go on a "test" flight for > > about half an hour down the coast here. This plane is remarkable. I was > > amased when Russell (the designer,builder &pilot) let go of the stick > > immediately as the tail came off the groung and the plane just took off > and > > flew straight ahead in a steady climb all by itself! Takeoff roll > > was less > > than 80metres with a 13 knot headwind! Deploying the spoilers on > > final brings the glide slope from 28:1 down to 8:1, feels like the > > seat has > fallen > > out of the bottom of the plane. > > For more info see my signature line. > > Dene Collett > > KR2S-RT builder > > Port Elizabeth > > South Africa > > mailto: dene.collett@telkomsa.net > > P.S: checkout www.whisperaircraft.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 > > --- > > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] > > > > > > --- > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] > > > _______________________________________ > 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: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 17:59:26 -0400 From: David Mullins Subject: Re: KR> Rand Gear vs Diehl Gear To: KRnet Message-ID: <4119453E.50608@comcast.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Virg & Dick Rand fixed gear legs are made by Grove. Dave Mullins Nashua, New Hampshire VIRGIL N SALISBURY wrote: > Do not forget the Grove Gear, Virg > >On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 07:34:49 -0500 larry flesner >writes: > > >>> What are the major differences between the Rand and Diehl >>> >>> >>conventional >> >> >>>fixed landing gears? Which one would be better for a grass runway? >>>Thanks in advance. dcgoff@webtv.net Dick Goff >>> >>> >> >>++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> >>I'm not that familar with the Rand gear but seeing no other >>responses >>I'll throw out what I know. >> >>The Rand gear is a one piece gear that mounts to brackets on the >>forward spar inside the fuselage, all aluminum. >> >>The Diehl gear has a mounting bracket on each side, on the forward >>spar center section just outside the fuselage. It uses a straight 24" >>composite gear leg with a second bracket on the bottom end to mount >>the axle. >> >>I don't know that one is better than the other. I'm not sure >>of the Rand gear length, it may be a bit taller. The Diehl >>gear on the other hand is a bit wider. I've not heard of problems >>with either type. The Diehl instructions say to mount the brackets on >>the spar next to the fuselage. I moved mine out approx 2"s and with >>the 30" legs I have (which Dan no longer >>sells) it gives me a main gear track right at 8 feet wide. It handles >>nicely on the ground. >> >>It's your money. You decide................ >> >>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 >> >> >> >> > > >Virgil N. Salisbury - AMSOIL >www.lubedealer.com/salisbury >Miami ,Fl > >_______________________________________ >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 67 ************************************** ================================== ABC Amber Outlook Converter v4.20 Trial version ==================================