From: krnet-bounces@mylist.net on behalf of krnet-request@mylist.net Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 12:01 PM To: krnet@mylist.net Subject: KRnet Digest, Vol 279, Issue 2 Send KRnet mailing list submissions to krnet@mylist.net To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://mylist.net/listinfo/krnet or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to krnet-request@mylist.net You can reach the person managing the list at krnet-owner@mylist.net When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of KRnet digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Regs (Colin & Bev Rainey) 2. John Martindale / Blocked by Road Runner (Mark Jones) 3. Re: The center spars will NOT handle the stress, Virg (VIRGIL N SALISBURY) 4. Re: Mark Jones (larry severson) 5. ROAD RUNNER SPAMMING (Ron Freiberger) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 07:18:28 -0500 From: "Colin & Bev Rainey" To: "KRnet" Subject: KR>Regs Message-ID: <003e01c3d9cf$5a678fe0$f2452141@RaineyDay> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: list Message: 1 First Chris you pointed out to me that I mis-stated not having to = have any license to fly experimental solo, so I posted the statement = from EAA and gave you credit for pointing that out to me. =20 Secondly: call your local FSDO and talk to an airworthiness = inspector and they will tell you since the PIC of any aircraft is the = only person who can ground the aircraft, even the inspector cannot = actually ground it. In a technical way he does, because he tags it as = inspected and having airworthiness discrepancies. But it does not say it = is grounded, and the pilot could take that aircraft if he wanted to, but = the inspector is almost garunteed to violate him for flying an = unairworthy aircraft. I was Asst. Chief Pilot for a major flight school = for 2 years and walked through many ramp inspections that were performed = routinely. Every one needs to understand that different procedures and = regs govern the progressive style maintenance performed on airliners and = large fleet type aircraft, than on general aviation aircraft we fly. Third: If you read the exceptions in (k) it clearly states that the = rating limitations imposed by this section, meaning the whole 61.31 reg = section, do not apply to an aircraft operating under an experimental = airworthiness certificate. However, as Bria pointed out, and I stated = in an earlier post, if the inspector makes additional statements of = standard, like the ones of appropriate category & class rating, = endorsements etc.. as long as those are a part of that aircraft's = operating manual that is what the PIC must ahve to fly that particular = aircraft. Fourth: The inspector having the ability to add such requirements = into the operating leads me to believe that he probably would on a = standard multi-engine experimental, especially on anything turbojet = powered, etc.. even though the 61.31 section clearly provides exception = to it. For us it is simple. Get at least a Private Pilot's license and = you are golden, then just do what is common sense and be safe. Colin & Bev Rainey KR2(td) N96TA Sanford, FL crainey1@cfl.rr.com or crbrn96ta@hotmail.com http://kr-builder.org/Colin/index.htmlFrom johnjane@chc.net.au Tue Jan 13 04:34:19 2004 Received: from green.hot.net.au ([216.93.176.26] helo=Hot.net.au) by lizard.esosoft.net with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1) id 1AgNkQ-000MkA-00 for krnet@mylist.net; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 04:34:19 -0800 Received: (from root@localhost) by Hot.net.au (8.12.6/8.12.6) id i0DCO5BV050837 for krnet@mylist.net; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 23:24:05 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from johnjane@chc.net.au) Received: from johnjane (async182-pool-v.in.com.au [203.202.110.182]) by green.hot.net.au (8.12.6/8.12.6) with SMTP id i0DCO27f050765 for ; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 23:24:03 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from johnjane@chc.net.au) Message-ID: <00b601c3d9cf$f924c4e0$75a0fea9@johnjane> From: "Martindale Family" To: "KRnet" Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 23:22:52 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-scanner: scanned by Inflex 1.0.12.3 - (http://pldaniels.com/inflex/) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1b3 Subject: KR>Mark Jones X-BeenThere: krnet@mylist.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1b3 Precedence: list Reply-To: KRnet List-Id: KRnet List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Help: Hi Mark Your provider is bouncing my emails regarding the Weber as is Larry's = regarding my canopy. What am I doing wrong? why should my provider be = getting blocked? Does your provider use Road Runner as well? Sorry folks = this is getting rather annoying...can't you get the Coyote to fix it = over there :-) Cheers The Martindale Family 29 Jane Circuit TOORMINA NSW 2452 AUSTRALIA phone: 61 2 66584767 email: johnjane@chc.net.auFrom bo124rs@hotmail.com Tue Jan 13 04:36:30 2004 Received: from bay13-f42.bay13.hotmail.com ([64.4.31.42] helo=hotmail.com) by lizard.esosoft.net with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1) id 1AgNmY-000MoA-00 for krnet@mylist.net; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 04:36:30 -0800 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 04:26:15 -0800 Received: from 205.188.209.74 by by13fd.bay13.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 12:26:15 GMT X-Originating-IP: [205.188.209.74] X-Originating-Email: [bo124rs@hotmail.com] X-Sender: bo124rs@hotmail.com From: "Dana Overall" To: krnet@mylist.net Bcc: Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 07:26:15 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Jan 2004 12:26:15.0409 (UTC) FILETIME=[70203610:01C3D9D0] Subject: KR>DAR's and inspections X-BeenThere: krnet@mylist.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1b3 Precedence: list Reply-To: KRnet List-Id: KRnet List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Help: Dan, let's see if we can put an end to this:-). No, I am not the FAA nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. OK, that stuff out of the way. This issue is brought up about once a year on any aviation list. Through the course of years I have seen FAA guys and DAR guys jump in on the issue. Simply put, FAA regs prevail over the opinion of an examiner. If your operating limitations expressly state something other than specifically stated in the FAR's, your POH needs to be revised. In this case the FAR's are actually very clear, no endorsement is required to operated a tailwheel aircraft operating under the experimental class. If a DAR pushes for such, be prepared to tactfully point out his error through the listed FAR. He cannot insert personal opinion in the place of published regulations. His opinion is limited only to your workmanship, equipment list, placards, etc., not application of regulations based on opinion. With that said, numerous issues have come up with various inspectors. Let's look at day/night operations. If you want to use lights you've designed, and are certain meet the standards for illumination, but are concerned about them passing the mustard........simply do not install them prior your inspection. Your limitation will include a statement "aircraft restricted to day operations unless properly equipped for night operations". After he gives you your paperwork, install the lights and add the statement into the logs indicating appropriate install. One DAR said he would not sign off an experimental for IFR operation unless it had DME. I diplomatically pointed out too him, if the aircraft is equipped with an enroute, terminal and approach certified GPS, the GPS substitutes in lieu of DME up to and including approaches. He rechecked his FAR's and agreed. This is another point. It is not up to the DAR to sign your aircraft off as IFR on the initial inspection even though it happens. This is ridiculous, as an experimental IFR install cannot be signed off as IFR until the equipment has been flown and "tested" as to it's appropriateness as to intercept, establish and shoot approaches appropriate for the equipment installed. The IFR equipment install must be TSO'd equipment to legally use the system but supporting equipment such as airspeed, altimeter, and so on, do not have to be TSO'd. Same thing with tinted canopies and night operations. With that said, I will always express my opinion (since I'm not DAR) which is the KR is not an acceptable IFR platform. Don't ask for moon on your initial inspection. The only thing you want is that piece of paper that says "airworthy", the rest is up to you the builder. Now remember, major modifications must be addressed outside of log book entries. Sorry to get longwinded but I have seen these issues come up so many times. It appears to be muddy water but, in actuality, it is quite clear. Dana Overall 1999 & 2000 National KR Gathering host Richmond, KY RV-7 slider, Imron black, "Black Magic" Finish kit Buying Instruments. Hangar flying my Dynon. http://rvflying.tripod.com do not archive _________________________________________________________________ Let the new MSN Premium Internet Software make the most of your high-speed experience. http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-us&page=byoa/prem&ST=1 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 06:37:36 -0600 From: "Mark Jones" To: "KRnet" Subject: KR>John Martindale / Blocked by Road Runner Message-ID: <002901c3d9d2$067b2880$6401a8c0@wi.rr.com> References: <00b601c3d9cf$f924c4e0$75a0fea9@johnjane> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list Message: 2 Yes John, I use Road Runner. Copy and paste the blocked message you are getting and e-mail it to removal@security.rr.com and explain to them what is happening and they will resolve the problem. You must send them a copy of the blocked message in it's entirety. Mark Jones (N886MJ) Wales, WI USA E-mail me at flykr2s@wi.rr.com Visit my KR-2S CorvAIRCRAFT web site at http://mywebpage.netscape.com/n886mj/homepage.html ----- Original Message ----- From: "Martindale Family" To: "KRnet" Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 6:22 AM Subject: KR>Mark Jones Hi Mark Your provider is bouncing my emails regarding the Weber as is Larry's regarding my canopy. What am I doing wrong? why should my provider be getting blocked? Does your provider use Road Runner as well? Sorry folks this is getting rather annoying...can't you get the Coyote to fix it over there :-) Cheers The Martindale Family 29 Jane Circuit TOORMINA NSW 2452 AUSTRALIA phone: 61 2 66584767 email: johnjane@chc.net.au_______________________________________ to UNSUBSCRIBE from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/instructions.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 10:24:08 -0500 From: VIRGIL N SALISBURY To: krnet@mylist.net Subject: Re: KR>The center spars will NOT handle the stress, Virg Message-ID: <20040113.104131.3664.3.virgnvs@juno.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list Message: 3 Those are RR findings. I am not an engineer and suggest that you talk to the KR slide rule and pencil engineer and get his input, Virg On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 17:18:28 -0500 "Ron Freiberger" writes: > Virg, could you add a bit of verbiage here? Do you mean it wouldn't > handle > the stress if loaded per KR2 standards? > At the implied lower speeds, and single place, would it be OK? > > Are you willing to share the plans info? > > > Ron Freiberger > mailto: rfreiberger@swfla.rr.com > > > > > > _______________________________________ > to UNSUBSCRIBE from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/instructions.html > > Virgil N. Salisbury - AMSOIL www.lubedealer.com/salisbury Miami ,Fl ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 08:56:44 -0800 From: larry severson To: KRnet Subject: Re: KR>Mark Jones Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.0.20040113085339.00b59568@pop-server.socal.rr.com> In-Reply-To: <00b601c3d9cf$f924c4e0$75a0fea9@johnjane> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 Precedence: list Message: 4 John: I finally have some information about the problem. Road Runner and others belong to a national spam blocking system. They automatically block all e-mail from service providers (not individual subscribers) who have been transmitting spam. Yahoo is another such provider. The solution to getting your e-mail accepted by RR is to send the complete bounce of the blocked message to spamblocker@security.rr.com asking to be unblocked. After doing this, you will no longer be blocked from any rr subscriber, but all other subscribers to your provider will still be blocked. At 11:22 PM 1/13/2004 +1100, you wrote: >Hi Mark > >Your provider is bouncing my emails regarding the Weber as is Larry's >regarding my canopy. What am I doing wrong? why should my provider be >getting blocked? Does your provider use Road Runner as well? Sorry folks >this is getting rather annoying...can't you get the Coyote to fix it over >there :-) Larry Severson Fountain Valley, CA 92708 (714) 968-9852 larry2@socal.rr.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 12:50:26 -0500 From: "Ron Freiberger" To: "KRnet" Subject: KR>ROAD RUNNER SPAMMING Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.0.20040113085339.00b59568@pop-server.socal.rr.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list Message: 5 My pal tells me he gets about 100 spams a day. I'm on Road Runner, and have had none this week. Viva RR Ron Freiberger mailto: rfreiberger@swfla.rr.com -----Original Message----- From: krnet-bounces@mylist.net [mailto:krnet-bounces@mylist.net]On Behalf Of larry severson Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 11:57 AM To: KRnet Subject: Re: KR>Mark Jones John: I finally have some information about the problem. Road Runner and others belong to a national spam blocking system. They automatically block all e-mail from service providers (not individual subscribers) who have been transmitting spam. Yahoo is another such provider. The solution to getting your e-mail accepted by RR is to send the complete bounce of the blocked message to spamblocker@security.rr.com asking to be unblocked. After doing this, you will no longer be blocked from any rr subscriber, but all other subscribers to your provider will still be blocked. At 11:22 PM 1/13/2004 +1100, you wrote: >Hi Mark > >Your provider is bouncing my emails regarding the Weber as is Larry's >regarding my canopy. What am I doing wrong? why should my provider be >getting blocked? Does your provider use Road Runner as well? Sorry >folks this is getting rather annoying...can't you get the Coyote to fix >it over there :-) Larry Severson Fountain Valley, CA 92708 (714) 968-9852 larry2@socal.rr.com _______________________________________ to UNSUBSCRIBE from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/instructions.html ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ See KRnet list details at http://www.krnet.org/instructions.html End of KRnet Digest, Vol 279, Issue 2 *************************************