Or Try a Turner T-40A, Virg On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 20:51:49 -0600 larry flesner <fles...@midwest.net> writes: > > Steve and Netters, > > I'll take a few minutes and try to answer some of the questions > I never got to in this earlier post. > > >I am trying to find the correct balance (of mods) for my venture - > your > >airplane seems to be in the direction that I am headed - please put > me > >straight on a few things. > >Is the 24" stretch over the 2 or 2S? > > +++++++ My stretch is over a standard KR2. All other dimentions > are > standard. > > >I note that you have Aerodynamic balance area on the elevator and > rudder > >- did you add weight as well for static balance? Did you change > the HS > >in any other way? > > +++++ The aerodynamic tabs have weight in them. The elevator also > has a weight attached inside the fuselage. I did move the elevator > and > horizontal stabilizer forward 2 inches in relation to the plans to > give me > more clearance for the elevator control horn and better > streamlining. > All size dimentions are the same. Moving the HS and elevator > forward > did give me some additional area on the vertical stabilizer which I > > wanted with the 0-200. > > >What did you do regarding the fuse width? > > ++++++ Standard KR2. A couple more inches of width would be nice. > > > >You talk of a 4" tip instead of an 8" tip - not sure what this > means but > >it does appear to be relevant to the performance? > > > ++++++++ As I recall the plans call for adding 8 inches to the end > of the standard wing when building the tip. I limited my tip to 4 > inches. > My thinking was less wing span would hurt my climb but the 0-200 > would compensate. In cruise, less span would increase my wing > loading and give me a better ride and less span would mean 2 or 3 > mph more speed. I have no way of knowing if any of this is true in > my case as I have nothing to compare it to. > > >Can you say anything encouraging about your empty weight - I tried > to > >peek through the canopy on one of the pictures - hoping to see if > the > >panel reveals lots of heavy goodies. > >If you built another - could you (would you) make it lighter? > > > +++++++++++++ The only encouraging thing I can say about my > empty weight is that it still manages to fly. You don't pick up > 200 > extra pounds in any one spot. It's 5 pounds here, 10 pounds there, > > and before you know it you have a pig on your hands. My target > empty weight was 700 pounds and I even blew right by that. My > extra weight came from things like 30" gear legs, 600X6 wheels > and brakes, 0-200 with all accessories, 5" prop extention, second > small backup battery and large main battery, a Cessna flap motor > to run my speed brake, fiberglass seat instead of a cloth seat, > 12.5 gal fuel tank in each wing with all the plumbing and two fuel > pumps, etc., etc., etc. I think you get the point. > > >Reason for asking Larry - I figured that 230lbs over the plans > weight of > >a 2S should be enough to accommodate my changes, so I targeted > 750lb > >empty with an 0-320 and some IF capability, possibly even a > training > >wheel out front. Maybe I need to learn from you that this is not > a > >realistic target > >I plan to use the 18% AS airfoil section for a deeper (stronger) > spar so > >we can get back to +6G at 1450lb MAUW). The right time to > consider > >changes to the wing area would be now. > > +++++++ If you plan on going with an 0-320 you probably need to > look at a different airplane entirely. With that much weight and > horsepower you are looking at an extensive redesign of the > KR. I'd suggest you look at something like the "Vision". > Check it out at: http://visionaircraft.com/ > > >>From your comment you are using the RAF48 - on the pics it looks > like > >you have flat plate tail feathers? > > +++++++++++ HS, elevator, VS and rudder are plans shape. > > >Do you feel the need for a header tank with the 0-200? > > > +++++++++++++ No, I have a 12.5 gal tank in each outer wing panel. > > > >I am still worried about the under carriage configuration - I have > very > >little tail dragger time - 0:35 on a Tiger Moth 27 years ago - Ok I > have > >no tail wheel time. How much tail wheel time did you have to start > with > >- what is your advice on this? > >>Kind regards > >Steve > >Zambia - Africa > > ++++++++++++++++ I had 13 hours tailwheel time over a 30 year > period when I started to taxi test the KR and teaching myself to > fly > the tailwheel. My KR has an eight foot wide main gear track and > with the fuselage extention it is probably one of the best handling > KR taildraggers going. If you don't want to learn to fly the > tailwheel > go with the nose gear. If you aren't comfortable flying the > airplane > you build it most certainly will turn out to be a "hangar queen". > > >From my 14 years exposure to the KR and having just finished > building mine and with about 10 hours of air time now I would > offer the following observation on what I think would make the > "perfect" KR for the "average" builder. It would be a KR2S, > plans built, with an engine of approx 100 hp, modest panel > with one gyro instrument (artificial horizon), 20 to 25 gal of > fuel, Diehl tricycle gear or equivelant, no sound proofing or > upholstery, (use a noise cancelling headset) a speed brake > or equivelant, with an empty weight of approx 675 pounds. > > Several builders have hinted at doing IFR work in a KR. > With just 10 hours in the air I'd say FORGET IT. I had > trouble just re-attaching my four point seat belt that > popped open in flight. I can't even imagine trying to fly > IFR in KR. The more I fly my KR the more I enjoy it but > it is strictly a FUN machine. Expect no more than that > from your KR when it's finished. > > > I hope my rambling hasn't burst anyone's bubble but I prefer > to call it like I see it and not give anyone any unrealistic > expectations. I wouldn't trade my KR for a BMW. There is > great satisfaction in seeing, touching, and flying something > you've built from scratch. Looking around at all the detail > in your KR, seeing each piece that you designed, built, > and/or assembled, all flying in formation, with your body > strapped to the finished product, and the landscape drifting > by 5000 feet below you is something that few people get > to experience. All I can say is YEE HAA........................ > > Larry Flesner > > > > > _______________________________________ > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to krnet-le...@mylist.net > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html > >
Virgil N. Salisbury - AMSOIL www.lubedealer.com/salisbury Miami ,Fl
