From: krnet-bounces+johnbou=speakeasy.net@mylist.net To: John Bouyea Subject: KRnet Digest, Vol 347, Issue 153 Date: 4/19/2005 12:16:03 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. Fw: KR> SNF (P.Byington) 2. RE: Time ran out! (Stephen Jacobs) 3. Re: R?f. : RE: KR> Prop Bolts (Phillip Matheson) 4. Re: R?f. : RE: KR> Prop Bolts (Phillip Matheson) 5. Re: winner (F Ross) 6. RE: winner (Mark Jones) 7. RE: heavy engines (Brian Kraut) 8. Re: winner (VIRGIL N SALISBURY) 9. Re: winner (Kenneth B. Jones) 10. Michael Mims Gear legs (Oscar Zuniga) 11. Re: Stability (Ray Fuenzalida) 12. Re: Re:Michael Mims Gear legs (Stephen and Janet Henderson) 13. RE: crank correction - Problem identified ( I think) (Steve Glover) 14. RE: Stability (Mark Jones) 15. Re: Stability (Mark Langford) 16. RE: Stability (Golden, Kevin) 17. Re: Stability (JAMES C FERRIS) 18. Re: Stability (Charles Buddy & Cheryl Midkiff) 19. Re: Stability (Mark Langford) 20. Re: Oleo pneumatic shock absorbing struts (Robert Morrissey) 21. Re: SNF (Robert Morrissey) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 22:38:40 -0700 From: "P.Byington" Subject: Fw: KR> SNF To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <004b01c544a2$0e8dec60$66e7e404@Byington> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ----- Original Message ----- From: "P.Byington" To: "KRnet" Sent: Sunday, April 17, 2005 8:40 PM Subject: Fw: KR> SNF > Mark; > > The other plane is a F-16 Fighting Falcon, not sure which model, the other > is definetly a F-4 probably an E model or the G Wild Weasel. > > I worked on the F-4 Flight simulators for over six years during my > stint in > the Air Force and as a civilian at Hill AFB Utah. I helped Singer > Link build the one and only F-4 G Wild Weasel simulator , it was a > converted E model, back in 1982. > > I had the priviledge of accumulating approximately 4000 hours of > simulator time mostly in the F-4 but some in the simulators of Delta > Airlines. > > I also had the opportunity to have worked on the first F-16 simulator (while > they were building it) while at Hill AFB with the 388th. > > Thanks > Parley Byington > N54PB (Kr-2) > Henderson Nv > parley@anv.net > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mark Langford" > To: "KRnet" > Sent: Sunday, April 17, 2005 7:51 PM > Subject: KR> SNF > > > > NetHeads, > > > > Here's my favorite photo from SNF this year. > > See http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/050417202m2.jpg . Holding up > > the rear is "Glacier Girl" (the P-38 rescued from the Greenland > > ice pack in 1992), following a P-51, an F-4 (I think), and another > > jet > that > > I won't venture to guess the name of. Where else would you see this > flying > > overhead, other than OSH? > > > > Thanks to Doug Steen for another great ride in his '49 v-tail > > Bonanza, and > > Dana and Elaine for some good company. Had lunch today with William > Wynne, > > and came away a little smarter, as usual. Had brats with Brian > > Kraut and > > Dean Cooper Thursday night, and the KR crowd Friday night. It's > > come to > the > > point that I don't go for the great planes, but the chance to hang > > out > with > > good friends. Next year my KR will be out there on the flight line with > > the rest of 'em... > > > > Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama > > see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford email to > > N56ML "at" hiwaay.net > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > _______________________________________ > > 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 > > > _______________________________________ > 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: 2 Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 08:26:26 +0200 From: "Stephen Jacobs" Subject: RE: KR> Time ran out! To: "'KRnet'" Message-ID: <000701c544a8$bc1abab0$7e64a8c0@stephen> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Dreams do come true, and N 61305 will fly again, and Larry now fly's with Eagles. ++++++++++++++++++ What a wonderful thing to say. This is one of those rare emails that I cannot bring myself to delete - just read it again and again. Sure started my day with something extra - Thank you ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 16:31:08 +1000 From: "Phillip Matheson" Subject: Re: R?f. : RE: KR> Prop Bolts To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <007101c544a9$5fb73090$3931ddcb@StationW2k04> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Serge My UK visit is getting closer. Hope all is well and we can have a beer or two. Arriving London Flight EK1 at 12.15 pm Sat 12th June. Phillip Matheson Phillip Matheson matheson@dodo.com.au Australia VH PKR See our engines and kits at. http://www.vw-engines.com/ http://www.homebuilt-aviation.com/ See my KR Construction web page at http://mywebpage.netscape.com/FlyingKRPhil/VHPKR.html 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: 4 Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 17:08:11 +1000 From: "Phillip Matheson" Subject: Re: R?f. : RE: KR> Prop Bolts To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <00c701c544ae$8ccadaf0$3931ddcb@StationW2k04> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sorry not for the net Phillip Matheson matheson@dodo.com.au Australia VH PKR See our engines and kits at. http://www.vw-engines.com/ http://www.homebuilt-aviation.com/ See my KR Construction web page at http://mywebpage.netscape.com/FlyingKRPhil/VHPKR.html 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: 5 Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 00:08:02 -0700 (PDT) From: F Ross Subject: Re: KR> winner To: KRnet Message-ID: <20050419070802.60097.qmail@web32010.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii GO, Bill! Congratulations!!! Frank Ross --- FIXERJONES@aol.com wrote: > did i miss it? or no one has mentioned that a kr > has won an award at snf > ???? > so congrats to bill clapp!!!! yes he won the > award for best wood > homebuilt! > way to go bill, n212kr __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Plan great trips with Yahoo! Travel: Now over 17,000 guides! http://travel.yahoo.com/p-travelguide ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 06:59:29 -0500 From: "Mark Jones" Subject: RE: KR> winner To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <26D1C67793459F43BF8DA235F92B1F3549DA01@tulsaexchange.tulsaokmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Congrats Bill!!!! Sure is nice to see KR's starting to get recognition at air shows again. Mark Jones (N886MJ...10.2 flight hours) Wales, WI -----Original Message----- From: krnet-bounces@mylist.net [mailto:krnet-bounces@mylist.net]On Behalf Of FIXERJONES@aol.com did i miss it? or no one has mentioned that a kr has won an award at snf ???? so congrats to bill clapp!!!! yes he won the award for best wood homebuilt! way to go bill, n212kr _ ------------------------------ Message: 7 Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 08:17:02 -0400 From: "Brian Kraut" Subject: RE: KR> heavy engines To: "KRnet" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1250" When you impact the base of a tree with enough force to flip the plane on its back and partially rip the tree out by the roots it does separate the firewall. Your results may vary. 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: Wednesday, April 13, 2005 6:12 PM To: KRnet Subject: Re: KR> heavy engines > Has there ever been a firewall separation issue with any KR out there? Al ------------------------------ Message: 8 Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 08:33:07 -0400 From: VIRGIL N SALISBURY Subject: Re: KR> winner To: krnet@mylist.net Message-ID: <20050419.083307.3388.0.virgnvs@juno.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii It don't happen if you don't show up!!!, Virg On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 06:59:29 -0500 "Mark Jones" writes: > Congrats Bill!!!! Sure is nice to see KR's starting to get > recognition at air shows again. > > Mark Jones (N886MJ...10.2 flight hours) > Wales, WI > > -----Original Message----- > From: krnet-bounces@mylist.net [mailto:krnet-bounces@mylist.net]On > Behalf Of FIXERJONES@aol.com > > did i miss it? or no one has mentioned that a kr has won an award > at snf > ???? > so congrats to bill clapp!!!! yes he won the award for best > wood > homebuilt! > way to go bill, n212kr > _ > > _______________________________________ > 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 > > Virgil N. Salisbury - AMSOIL www.lubedealer.com/salisbury Miami ,Fl ------------------------------ Message: 9 Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 09:17:01 -0400 From: "Kenneth B. Jones" Subject: Re: KR> winner To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <004b01c544e2$12ec2250$8d7ba8c0@oemcomputer> Touche'!! ----- Original Message ----- From: "VIRGIL N SALISBURY" To: Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2005 8:33 AM Subject: Re: KR> winner > It don't happen if you don't show up!!!, Virg > > On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 06:59:29 -0500 "Mark Jones" > writes: >> Congrats Bill!!!! Sure is nice to see KR's starting to get >> recognition at air shows again. ------------------------------ Message: 10 Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 08:36:38 -0500 From: "Oscar Zuniga" Subject: KR> Michael Mims Gear legs To: krnet@mylist.net Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed >I would like to question M. Mims about his self made gear legs, >but emails have been returned. Anyone have a current address? Last address I had for him was gti20vturbo@yahoo.com but as I recall, he didn't reply to that one a year or so ago either. Oscar Zuniga San Antonio, TX mailto: taildrags@hotmail.com website at http://www.flysquirrel.net ------------------------------ Message: 11 Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 07:44:12 -0700 (PDT) From: Ray Fuenzalida Subject: Re: KR> Stability To: KRnet Message-ID: <20050419144412.60886.qmail@web31501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I need a clarification on the new airfoil. Are stability issues limited to the KR and not the slightly larger KR2S? If I have the Diehl wing skins and use those, what should I expect in the future? Slight instability? Major instability? Please throw out some guidance. Thanks. Ray Mark Jones wrote: The issue of stability has been a major topic of discussion since the KR debuted. This issue is something that is becoming a thing of the past. If you install the new AS504x airfoil and use the matching tail feather templates with the new recommended incidences, you too can have a stable flying KR. The proof is in the pudding. There is a new flight photo on the cover of my web page which I took this past Saturday morning from 5,000', while in a hands off level, right bank of my airport. Here is the link: http://mywebpage.netscape.com/n886mj/homepage.html Photos like this would be hard to accomplish in a stock KR with the original airfoils. Mark Jones (N886MJ....10.2 flight hours) Wales, WI http://mywebpage.netscape.com/n886mj/homepage.html _______________________________________ 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 --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Plan great trips with Yahoo! Travel: Now over 17,000 guides! ------------------------------ Message: 12 Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 09:46:45 -0500 From: "Stephen and Janet Henderson" Subject: Re: KR> Re:Michael Mims Gear legs To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <004d01c544ee$9ceadcb0$800101df@shendersonlt> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Michael Mims sold his plane to a fellow in Louisiana but I can't remember his name. He is on KRnet from time to time and will email you if he sees your inquiry. Steve ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 9:51 PM Subject: KR> Re:Michael Mims Gear legs > Netters, > I would like to question M. Mims about his self made gear legs, but emails > have been returned. Anyone have a current address? > Thanks, > Bob Polgreen > _______________________________________ > 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: 13 Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 07:56:35 -0700 From: "Steve Glover" Subject: RE: KR> crank correction - Problem identified ( I think) To: "KRnet" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Hi Netter's, After pretty exhaustive investigation on the engine and mount, it appears we rebuilt the engine just for practice. We couldn't find anything wrong. The prop was never initially considered because it had recently been repaired, refinished, and balanced. Once installed, it was the smoothest it had ever ran. The vibration became progressively worse which is what led me to believe the bad crank. With all the engine investigation completed, that leaves the prop. We set it up for a static balance and was very surprised to see it was significantly off balance. More so than it ever was when the initial rebalance was performed after the repair. The only thing we can think of is that there was still a lot of moisture in the blade that was water damaged during the flood. Once the plane was flying again, the moisture was spun out of the prop, throwing it off balance and making the vibration become progressively worse as it dried out. The prop has been stripped down and balances almost perfectly without any finish on it. I am hoping to have it refinished and back on the plane for testing this weekend. I'll post the final results of the testing. Steve Glover KR-2 N902G AJO, Ca ------------------------------ Message: 14 Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 09:59:07 -0500 From: "Mark Jones" Subject: RE: KR> Stability To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <26D1C67793459F43BF8DA235F92B1F3549DA04@tulsaexchange.tulsaokmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" There are three of four KR's flying with the new airfoil. Troy Petteway, KR-2, who reported a remarkable stability increase over his original RAF48 wings. Bill Clapp, KR-2S, who reports an extremely stable aircraft. And mine which is a KR-2S and is as stable as I could ever expect a KR to be. Unfortunately, Dead Selby's KR-2S, which was the first 2S to fly the new airfoil, was sold to an inexperienced pilot who stalled it and crashed it. Destroying the plane and thank goodness the pilot is ok. Troy is the only one who has major experience flying both wings. It would be nice if he were on the Net to tell us about his experiences. The best thing you can do is study the information on the AS504x airfoil and make the determination as to which airfoil best suits you. Here is the link for detail AS504x information: http://www.krnet.org/as504x/ Mark Jones (N886MJ....10.2 flight hours) Wales, WI -----Original Message----- From: krnet-bounces@mylist.net [mailto:krnet-bounces@mylist.net]On Behalf Of Ray Fuenzalida Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2005 9:44 AM To: KRnet Subject: Re: KR> Stability I need a clarification on the new airfoil. Are stability issues limited to the KR and not the slightly larger KR2S? If I have the Diehl wing skins and use those, what should I expect in the future? Slight instability? Major instability? Please throw out some guidance. Thanks. Ray Mark Jones wrote: The issue of stability has been a major topic of discussion since the KR debuted. This issue is something that is becoming a thing of the past. If you install the new AS504x airfoil and use the matching tail feather templates with the new recommended incidences, you too can have a stable flying KR. The proof is in the pudding. There is a new flight photo on the cover of my web page which I took this past Saturday morning from 5,000', while in a hands off level, right bank of my airport. Here is the link: http://mywebpage.netscape.com/n886mj/homepage.html Photos like this would be hard to accomplish in a stock KR with the original airfoils. Mark Jones (N886MJ....10.2 flight hours) Wales, WI http://mywebpage.netscape.com/n886mj/homepage.html _______________________________________ 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 --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Plan great trips with Yahoo! Travel: Now over 17,000 guides! _______________________________________ 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: 15 Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 10:57:49 -0500 From: "Mark Langford" Subject: Re: KR> Stability To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <00a801c544f8$89bde970$5e0ca58c@net.tbe.com> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Ray Fuenzalida wrote: >I need a clarification on the new airfoil. Are stability issues limited to >the KR and not the slightly larger KR2S? If I have the Diehl wing skins >and use those, what should I expect in the future? Slight instability? >Major instability? Please throw out some guidance. I think a large part of the stability improvement that both Bill Clapp and Mark Jones are experiencing is due to the fact that they are flying the KR2S with longer fuselage and larger horizontal (and vertical) stabilizer (per plans). I forget how long Mark's h/s is, but Bill Clapp's is a little longer than even the stock plans call for, maybe 3" per side. If Marks's is 6" longer per side like mine, that would definitely make a difference. And the fact that the horizontal stabilizer is a "real" airfoil has to make it more effective than the thing shown in the plans, somewhat equivalent to making it larger. That horizontal stab airfoil is one that I'll take credit for, since I sized it to fit my airplane, and created the drawings that are now on the net for it. The vertical stab is definitely my creation, as it's a one-of-kind 5.5% airfoil based on a known airfoil formula, designed to fit the "stock" vertical stab spars. Another part of the stability improvement may be attributed to the improvement in decalage, lining the wings up with the fuselage so the two are not "fighting" each other for priority. That's total conjecture on my part however, and may be total hogwash, but I'm groping for an explanation. Troy does report a real improvement to his airplane though, and all that changed was his main wing and it's incidence to the fuselage. His tail size is unchanged, I think, but the tail's control surfaces were actually made smaller. Hard to say which one caused his improvement. If he did lengthen his h/s, that would certainly account for some of his improvement. Larry Flesner says his 24" longer KR2 has great stability too, and so does Jeff Scott (both have stock size tails, I think) so I still think it's safe to say that the extra length between wing and horizontal stabilizer makes a big difference. And you can't discount that most of us are far more aware of aft CG than our predecessors, so we're probably keeping it forward rather than aft, which helps there. But apparently there is also some real contribution from either the airfoils or the relationship between them that make the new wing "somewhat more stable" as Troy's experience would point out. It's hard to say for sure, but one thing that is for sure is that new airfoils have significantly less drag than the RAF48, and the AS5048/45 gives a lot more room for fuel and aileron cables in the wings, not to mention stronger spar (due to the fact that it's taller), and there are other trade offs. So I can see no reason to build a new plane using the RAF48 other than you have a set of Diehl wing skins in hand already, or don't think you can spend the time to build the wings. Bill Clapp told me the other day at SNF that he built his wings in three weeks, but your mileage will almost certainly vary. I know mine did, but I also built different ailerons, controls, and flaps into mine. I really think the old line that the new wing hasn't proven itself doesn't fly anymore though. But to answer your question Ray, there is no shame in using the Diehl wing skins, and that's a great reason to stick with the RAF48, and finish your plane quicker. I think if you are building a KR2S, you will be quite happy with the stability, whether it has the new airfoil system or not... Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford email to N56ML "at" hiwaay.net ------------------------------ Message: 16 Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 13:17:17 -0400 From: "Golden, Kevin" Subject: RE: KR> Stability To: 'KRnet' Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain So........If I were to build a KR1, the airfoil would be easy enough to do, but what about the horizontal stab? Should the KR1 also have a wider horizontal surface and larger vertical surface? I personally like the fuselage to remain stock length, though I realize lengthening would help too. Kevin. -----Original Message----- From: Mark Langford [mailto:n56ml@hiwaay.net] Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2005 10:58 AM To: KRnet Subject: Re: KR> Stability Ray Fuenzalida wrote: >I need a clarification on the new airfoil. Are stability issues limited to >the KR and not the slightly larger KR2S? If I have the Diehl wing skins >and use those, what should I expect in the future? Slight instability? >Major instability? Please throw out some guidance. I think a large part of the stability improvement that both Bill Clapp and Mark Jones are experiencing is due to the fact that they are flying the KR2S with longer fuselage and larger horizontal (and vertical) stabilizer (per plans). I forget how long Mark's h/s is, but Bill Clapp's is a little longer than even the stock plans call for, maybe 3" per side. If Marks's is 6" longer per side like mine, that would definitely make a difference. And the fact that the horizontal stabilizer is a "real" airfoil has to make it more effective than the thing shown in the plans, somewhat equivalent to making it larger. That horizontal stab airfoil is one that I'll take credit for, since I sized it to fit my airplane, and created the drawings that are now on the net for it. The vertical stab is definitely my creation, as it's a one-of-kind 5.5% airfoil based on a known airfoil formula, designed to fit the "stock" vertical stab spars. Another part of the stability improvement may be attributed to the improvement in decalage, lining the wings up with the fuselage so the two are not "fighting" each other for priority. That's total conjecture on my part however, and may be total hogwash, but I'm groping for an explanation. Troy does report a real improvement to his airplane though, and all that changed was his main wing and it's incidence to the fuselage. His tail size is unchanged, I think, but the tail's control surfaces were actually made smaller. Hard to say which one caused his improvement. If he did lengthen his h/s, that would certainly account for some of his improvement. Larry Flesner says his 24" longer KR2 has great stability too, and so does Jeff Scott (both have stock size tails, I think) so I still think it's safe to say that the extra length between wing and horizontal stabilizer makes a big difference. And you can't discount that most of us are far more aware of aft CG than our predecessors, so we're probably keeping it forward rather than aft, which helps there. But apparently there is also some real contribution from either the airfoils or the relationship between them that make the new wing "somewhat more stable" as Troy's experience would point out. It's hard to say for sure, but one thing that is for sure is that new airfoils have significantly less drag than the RAF48, and the AS5048/45 gives a lot more room for fuel and aileron cables in the wings, not to mention stronger spar (due to the fact that it's taller), and there are other trade offs. So I can see no reason to build a new plane using the RAF48 other than you have a set of Diehl wing skins in hand already, or don't think you can spend the time to build the wings. Bill Clapp told me the other day at SNF that he built his wings in three weeks, but your mileage will almost certainly vary. I know mine did, but I also built different ailerons, controls, and flaps into mine. I really think the old line that the new wing hasn't proven itself doesn't fly anymore though. But to answer your question Ray, there is no shame in using the Diehl wing skins, and that's a great reason to stick with the RAF48, and finish your plane quicker. I think if you are building a KR2S, you will be quite happy with the stability, whether it has the new airfoil system or not... Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford email to N56ML "at" hiwaay.net _______________________________________ 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 *The information contained in this message may be confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is for the use of the intended addressee only. Any unauthorized use, dissemination or copying of the information in this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this message.* ------------------------------ Message: 17 Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 13:38:09 -0400 From: JAMES C FERRIS Subject: Re: KR> Stability To: krnet@mylist.net Message-ID: <20050419.133810.348.0.mijnil@juno.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Stability is a function of the tail volume (area of the tail X the moment arm), so you can increase this by strecheing the fuselage or by increasing the area of the horizontal tail. JIm On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 13:17:17 -0400 "Golden, Kevin" writes: > So........If I were to build a KR1, the airfoil would be easy enough > to do, > but what about the horizontal stab? Should the KR1 also have a > wider > horizontal surface and larger vertical surface? I personally like > the > fuselage to remain stock length, though I realize lengthening would > help > too. > > Kevin. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Langford [mailto:n56ml@hiwaay.net] > Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2005 10:58 AM > To: KRnet > Subject: Re: KR> Stability > > Ray Fuenzalida wrote: > > >I need a clarification on the new airfoil. Are stability issues > limited to > > >the KR and not the slightly larger KR2S? If I have the Diehl wing > skins > >and use those, what should I expect in the future? Slight > instability? > >Major instability? Please throw out some guidance. > > I think a large part of the stability improvement that both Bill > Clapp and > Mark Jones are experiencing is due to the fact that they are flying > the KR2S > > with longer fuselage and larger horizontal (and vertical) > stabilizer (per > plans). I forget how long Mark's h/s is, but Bill Clapp's is a > little > longer than even the stock plans call for, maybe 3" per side. If > Marks's is > > 6" longer per side like mine, that would definitely make a > difference. And > the fact that the horizontal stabilizer is a "real" airfoil has to > make it > more effective than the thing shown in the plans, somewhat > equivalent to > making it larger. That horizontal stab airfoil is one that I'll > take credit > > for, since I sized it to fit my airplane, and created the drawings > that are > now on the net for it. The vertical stab is definitely my creation, > as it's > > a one-of-kind 5.5% airfoil based on a known airfoil formula, > designed to fit > > the "stock" vertical stab spars. > > Another part of the stability improvement may be attributed to the > improvement in decalage, lining the wings up with the fuselage so > the two > are not "fighting" each other for priority. That's total conjecture > on my > part however, and may be total hogwash, but I'm groping for an > explanation. > Troy does report a real improvement to his airplane though, and all > that > changed was his main wing and it's incidence to the fuselage. His > tail size > > is unchanged, I think, but the tail's control surfaces were actually > made > smaller. Hard to say which one caused his improvement. If he did > lengthen > his h/s, that would certainly account for some of his improvement. > > Larry Flesner says his 24" longer KR2 has great stability too, and > so does > Jeff Scott (both have stock size tails, I think) so I still think > it's safe > to say that the extra length between wing and horizontal stabilizer > makes a > big difference. And you can't discount that most of us are far more > aware > of aft CG than our predecessors, so we're probably keeping it > forward rather > > than aft, which helps there. But apparently there is also some real > > contribution from either the airfoils or the relationship between > them that > make the new wing "somewhat more stable" as Troy's experience would > point > out. > > It's hard to say for sure, but one thing that is for sure is that > new > airfoils have significantly less drag than the RAF48, and the > AS5048/45 > gives a lot more room for fuel and aileron cables in the wings, not > to > mention stronger spar (due to the fact that it's taller), and there > are > other trade offs. So I can see no reason to build a new plane using > the > RAF48 other than you have a set of Diehl wing skins in hand already, > or > don't think you can spend the time to build the wings. Bill Clapp > told me > the other day at SNF that he built his wings in three weeks, but > your > mileage will almost certainly vary. I know mine did, but I also > built > different ailerons, controls, and flaps into mine. I really think > the old > line that the new wing hasn't proven itself doesn't fly anymore > though. > > But to answer your question Ray, there is no shame in using the > Diehl wing > skins, and that's a great reason to stick with the RAF48, and finish > your > plane quicker. I think if you are building a KR2S, you will be > quite happy > with the stability, whether it has the new airfoil system or not... > > Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama > see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford > email to N56ML "at" hiwaay.net > > > _______________________________________ > 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 > *The information contained in this message may be confidential > and/or subject to legal privilege, and is for the use of the > intended addressee only. Any unauthorized use, dissemination or > copying of the information in this message is strictly prohibited. > If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender > immediately and delete this message.* > > > > _______________________________________ > 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: 18 Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 09:45:33 -0700 From: "Charles Buddy & Cheryl Midkiff" Subject: Re: KR> Stability To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <006b01c544ff$34d1ef90$6401a8c0@charlesmidkiff> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=iso-8859-1; reply-type=original Mark, Have you heard of anyone who has used the Diehl wing skins, or stock home made wings, with the RAF48 airfoil and has also raised the rear spar the 3/4" yet? I'd be curious about the performance differences encountered. Bud Midkiff Lynnwood, WA email: c.midkiff@verizon.net ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Langford" To: "KRnet" Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2005 8:57 AM Subject: Re: KR> Stability >>Major instability? Please throw out some guidance. > > But to answer your question Ray, there is no shame in using the Diehl wing > skins, and that's a great reason to stick with the RAF48, and finish your > plane quicker. I think if you are building a KR2S, you will be quite > happy > with the stability, whether it has the new airfoil system or not... > > Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama > see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford > email to N56ML "at" hiwaay.net > > > _______________________________________ > Search the KRnet Archives at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html > ------------------------------ Message: 19 Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 13:00:48 -0500 From: "Mark Langford" Subject: Re: KR> Stability To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <00ca01c54509$b7a82740$5e0ca58c@net.tbe.com> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Bud Midkiff wrote: > Have you heard of anyone who has used the Diehl wing skins, or stock home > made wings, with the RAF48 airfoil and has also raised the rear spar the > 3/4" yet? I'd be curious about the performance differences encountered. No, I haven't. If I remember correctly, there's a bit of a difference between the two, so the RAF shouldn't get quite as much reduction in the incidence angle as as would the new airfoil. I think Dana did that (and I believe he used the RAF48 Deihl skins), but he told me over the weekend that whoever bought it had changed it considerably, and that might have been one of the changes. I'd be interested in knowing more about the whereabouts and modifications that have been made to that plane. Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford email to N56ML "at" hiwaay.net ------------------------------ Message: 20 Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 14:13:48 -0400 From: "Robert Morrissey" Subject: Re: KR> Oleo pneumatic shock absorbing struts To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <003601c5450b$88f15000$0201a8c0@phoenix> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" I plan to use a Gerdes Products Co. Inc. strut, P/N A -1490 in my KR2S. It is from a Bede 5, P/N MBD5LG72. This strut is approx 28 inches to the top mounting hole. Bob Morrissey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter Leonard" To: "'KRnet'" Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2005 9:18 AM Subject: KR> Oleo pneumatic shock absorbing struts > G'Day KRnetters > Can anyone give me some information > on who supplies or makes them oleo struts. > > I am interested in the oleo strut that is used on the nose wheel of the > Falco F8L, it is very close to the size that I require. > > If anyone can supply me with info on this type of strut or ones similar > to it would be very much appreciated. > > Peter Leonard > _______________________________________ > Search the KRnet Archives at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html ------------------------------ Message: 21 Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 15:13:26 -0400 From: "Robert Morrissey" Subject: Re: KR> SNF To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <025f01c54513$dd81e5a0$0201a8c0@phoenix> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Mark/Parley; The F-4 is one of the later E models. It has the internal 25 mm Gatling gun, the IFF system (Identify Friend Foe), the two position leading edge wing maneuvering slats, and lastly the fatigue improvement wing torque box that included both thicker materials and Taper Lok fasteners. If my memory serves me accurately the acft was good for 4,000 flight hours and "oh by the way" the wing tips during a 10 G pullout were displaced up 48 inches without any permanent deformation. Bob Morrissey ----- Original Message ----- From: "P.Byington" To: "KRnet" Sent: Sunday, April 17, 2005 11:40 PM Subject: Fw: KR> SNF > Mark; > > The other plane is a F-16 Fighting Falcon, not sure which model, the other > is definetly a F-4 probably an E model or the G Wild Weasel. > > > > Thanks > Parley Byington > N54PB (Kr-2) > Henderson Nv > parley@anv.net > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mark Langford" > To: "KRnet" > Sent: Sunday, April 17, 2005 7:51 PM > Subject: KR> SNF > > > > NetHeads, > > > > Here's my favorite photo from SNF this year. > > See http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/050417202m2.jpg . > > Holding up the rear is "Glacier Girl" (the P-38 rescued from the Greenland > > ice pack in 1992), following a P-51, an F-4 (I think), and another jet > that > >> > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > _______________________________________ > > 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 > > > _______________________________________ > 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 ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ See KRnet list details at http://www.krnet.org/instructions.html End of KRnet Digest, Vol 347, Issue 153 *************************************** ================================== ABC Amber Outlook Converter v4.20 Trial version ==================================