Randy,
I am not sure that it is a consensus do that to the 2S plans. It
seems that is a wording that is being carried through from a time when
the first KR2 was stretched until the 2S plans came out with the
additional bay added. Then if I am not mistaken Mark Jones is the first
one that I can think of that addled more space to the fuselage simply to
fit his natural born airframe. Randy, your about my size and you are only
going to add time, labor, and anxiety to the project. I'll be down and
give you that ride. Then you can judge for yourself.
As for the tail feathers- you could go ahead and do the airfoil
shapes. making it larger does not seem to matter to me. That may be what
you might be comfortable with. I have flown with Bill Clapp and Mr.
Langford with airfoil stabilizers and don't see any real difference from
mine with stock tail feathers. I think the difference comes with the
incidence that the stabilizer is set to.
Joe Horton, Coopersburg, PA.
joe.kr2s.buil...@juno.com
On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 22:30:12 -0500 "RANDY POWELL"
<randywpow...@verizon.net> writes:
> Having read through the archives researching the fuselage length for
> a KR2S it would seem that the consensus is to add two inches in
> front of the front spar and 14 inches behind the rear spar. Is this
> still the generally agreed way to go?. Also if lengthening the
> fuselage in this fashion is the trend to go with the new wider
> elevator and new airfoil or stick to the stock elevator width and
> use the new foil ?.
> _______________________________________
> Search the KRnet Archives at
> http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp
> to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to krnet-le...@mylist.net
> Post photos, introductions, and For Sale items to
> http://www.kr2forum.com/phpBB2/index.php
> please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html
>
>
Joe Horton, Coopersburg, PA.
joe.kr2s.buil...@juno.com
