KR> Any word on NVaero after airport flood?

[phillip matheson]

Steve

Sorry to hear of your water damage and interruption to your business.

All the best from down under.


Phil Matheson
SAAA Ch 37
http://www.philskr2.50megs.com/

KR> Any word on NVaero after airport flood?

[I FLY KRs]

Those pics pretty well sum up my past couple weeks.  The large hangars
midfield in the bottom of the horse shoe is where we were located.  We ended
up with about 9' of water.  I received the call about 1:30 in the afternoon.
After renting two 26' u-haul trucks and a flatbed, we worked until about
4:30 in the morning getting as much as we could.  Both trucks were packed to
the gills, KR-1 put on the flatbed, and the Clausing lathe and Bridgeport
mill made it out.  All the molds, much tooling and supplies, as well as 3
airframes remained.  We came back a couple hours later and were turned away
as water was already in our hangar.  

I was able to walk in today.  About 2 - 3 inches of muck and mud remains.
The KR-100, the new KR-2S fuselage, and a few molds, including a set of
center section skins that are ready to be pulled from the molds were
untouched by water.  The new design light sport airframe we were building is
shot so we will have to start over and probably will not make it to
Sun-N-Fun with it like we had hoped.  Most of the remaining mold were in the
water but fortunately look like they will clean up well.  There were a few
tools and parts I thought had made it into the truck that were found in
various places of the hangar.  I had a new Bosch drill/ driver that
apparently was left on one of our fabrication tables.  Somehow it escaped
unscathed and works perfect.  It seems that particular table floated and
never submerged.  Our fuselage table and glass cutting table weren't so
lucky.  We will have to build new ones.

We had been diligently working on the final plugs/ molds for the new AS-5046
airfoil, center section, and 009 tail group. I am happy to say those were
all loaded and safely stowed away in the U-hauls.  

This is the second major flood in 5 years at Corona.  The past couple years
we had the threat of flood but it never happened.  The Army Corps of
Engineers had modified Prado Dam so many of us thought the flooding issue
had been finally resolved so there was a false sense of security with most
of us I think.  Now that we are producing parts and kits for the KR, as a
company we cannot afford this type of damage or losses.  Just the move so
far has cost us about $3500 and that does not include losses from parts/
machinery, or tooling.  I figure the total hit will fall around $25k.  In
light of all this we have relocated our facility to Chino (CNO), which is
about another 10 minute drive.  Corona was about a 30 minute drive for us
from home so now we are looking at least 40 minutes depending on traffic.
There is a lot of activity at Chino and several businesses that will be
beneficial to have access to.  While I prefer Corona overall Chino is by the
far the best choice from a business standpoint. 

The hangar is a bit smaller at the new location than what we had at Corona
but we are still planning a build out with a classroom/ pilot lounge with a
full bath and kitchenette for events or builder workshops.  Once we are
built out we will have a Saturday morning breakfast club for those
interested in building their first few parts with factory support. New
builders will be able to gain some hands on experience and build confidence
to complete their projects.  If any of you are ever in the area, feel free
to stop in.  It is always best to give us a call so we know to expect you.

Regards,

Steve Glover 

KR> Foam cutting large scale

[Gary Robison]

Mark

No, not too crazy!!!

Don't you have to be on edge to
do this anyway?

Besides with your flair for the new and untried
an easier way to sculpt your airfoil is in there.

That is one reason I pick the KR. So much
you can do to your own music

My dihedral will start inside the fuselage and
I want to cut/sand it all at one time if I can get
away with it. I just do not want to ruin allot of
foam. End up patching and filling.

Having to wait until spring to start my barn/garage to build in,
and with holes wearing through my plans from leafing,
ones mind wanders. Besides, I think it will work out, plus
others could borrow the machine. It would scale easily.




- Original Message - 
From: "Mark Langford" 
To: "KRnet" 
Sent: Sunday, January 02, 2011 10:46 PM
Subject: Re: KR> Foam cutting large scale


> Don't go too crazy guys.  With some 36 grit sandpaper glued to an aluminum
> angle, you can probably sand both wings completely to shape in 2-3 hours.
> That's probably less time than we've killed dreaming up a "better" way to 
> do
> it.  I thought of a "better" way to do it with the internal fiberglass 
> skin,
> and I spent a lot of time doing itbut I'm not sure it was worth the
> extra time.  Do what's worked for others and get on with the job...

KR> Any word on NVaero after airport flood?

[Glenn Martin]

Here is more on the Corona airport.

http://160knots.com/CoronaFlood2010.htm

Say a prayer for Steve Glover.
-- 

Glenn Martin
KR2 N1333A "Guardian Angel"
Biloxi, MS, 39532
rep...@martekmississippi.com

KR> Any word on NVaero after airport flood?

[Ted Sanders]

Any word on the fate of Steve Glover and NVAero? Below is a link to photos
of his hanger, all but the roof is under water:

http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=66469=corona+flood

KR> spruce vs other woods

[Pete]

Quite a few aircraft over here are being built using Hoop Pine.

Cheers.
Pete.
Ballina.
Oz, Mate.

On 4/01/2011 09:08, David Stowers wrote:
> I was wondering if there was anyone that has used other woods for aviation 
> projects instead of spruce. Spruce is getting hard to obtain at reasonable 
> prices and there are other woods that are stronger, but a little heavier. I 
> am looking at a larger engine so I think the weight issue could be balanced 
> off.
>   
> Any help would be appreciated.
>
> David Stowers
> ___
> Search the KRnet Archives at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp
> to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to krnet-le...@mylist.net
> please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html
>
>

KR> spruce vs other woods

[Fred Johnson]

I built my entire boat section and spars from Doug fir. At the time, our
shop was ordering some very high quality lumber for our trusses. so I would
take my breaks and lunch look through every new unit that was opened. After
about three months I was able to find quite a bit and then "acclimated it"
to our conditions for 8 months before I even attempted to mill it for my
airplane. our summer humidity can be 8% or less and even though it was "DRY"
lumber it's moisture was always in the 19-20% range.



The whole boat was 28# including the vertical tail spar. No ply of course.



Spruce is a little more forgiving, doesn't splinter as easily, but doug fir,
white cedar, Alaskan yellow cedar, even hem fir (sometimes called piss fir
for obvious reasons) works well, depending on what part of the country you
live in of course.



Just research the web about it first, there is lots of info about the
airworthiness of certain lumber.







Fred Johnson

Reno, NV





David wrote:



I was wondering if there was anyone that has used other woods for aviation
projects instead of spruce. Spruce is getting hard to obtain at reasonable
prices and there are other woods that are stronger, but a little heavier. I
am looking at a larger engine so I think the weight issue could be balanced
off.

Any help would be appreciated.

David Stowers
___

KR> spruce vs other woods

[David Stowers]

I was wondering if there was anyone that has used other woods for aviation 
projects instead of spruce. Spruce is getting hard to obtain at reasonable 
prices and there are other woods that are stronger, but a little heavier. I am 
looking at a larger engine so I think the weight issue could be balanced off.
 
Any help would be appreciated.

David Stowers

KR> To Turbo or not to Turbo that is the Question

[Jose Fuentes]

Thanks everyone for responding, this have been an invaluable learnign
experence and as concept its interesting  but as much experenced people have
said and validated some of my fears it might not be my best option.

Right now I have been going with an EFI system as with my other plane and
even with some of the controls that the ECU module would handle (auto fuel
mixture adjustments based on O2 input and such) it just adds too many
variables. Maybe in the future after the plane is done I can modify it for
the turbo.

Here is my idea, I can have the intake built to handle the turbo and be
facing the right direction but for now simply have cold air in. This way if
I ever want to experement with turbo in the future I can simply change the
exhaust.

Next I can add all the sensors (planned to anyways) as well as the upgraded
electronics that can work in normal as well as boasted rates. This way I can
test out all the electriconics and all of that is working before ever
considering the tubo.

I can see how well the VW 2400cc engine will perform and leave the turbo
option as an option in the future without alot of rework.

Its so nice to learn from all of the people on this forum, it's so nice to
have an open community where questions are welcomed.

I continue to look forward to all information on this and every subject.

Thanks again

3rd day into the year, but HAPPY NEW YEAR ALL

Joe

On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Jeff York  wrote:

> I, as well as Steve (as he stated)  would enjoy hearing more about the
> positives
> on turbo charging too.
>
> That said, I want to say that I did not want to come off sounding negative,
> I
> just wanted to point out my concerns about turbo charging from my
> experience's
> in high performance turbo charging. There are so many benefits to turbo
> charging
>
> an engine from performance in power and fuel economy. Yes I said fuel
> economy
> and what I meant by that was you can run a normally smaller displacement
> engine
> to gain economy while getting the benefits of additional power by force
> feeding
> air/fuel via the turbo. My problem was I never could keep my foot out of it
> to
> really see the fuel economies but they are there.
>
> Also, my experience was performance related and not of the altitude
> normalizing
> that would be associated with aircraft turbo applications. However, some of
> the
> same issues apply. I pointed out, and Steve and others pointed them out as
> well.
>
>
>
> The main concerns I would have are oil and engine temps due to the very
> high
> temps a turbo can achieve. As I recall 1600 degrees F. As Steve pointed
> out, I
> would never consider a turbo without a intercooler. An intercooler is used
> to
> cool
>
> the turbo charged air fuel after it goes through the turbo and before it
> enters
> the combustion chamber. Do not mistake the idea that an intercooler is for
> cooling the turbo charger. Its not. That will be the job of your over sized
> oil
> cooler.
>
>
>
> When the engine in a turbo charged motor is shut down, that 1600 degree
> turbo
> (which is oil cooled) will act as a furnace to cook the remaining oil in
> the
> turbo. This will effectively coke the oil. This is why normal shut down of
> a
> turbo charged motor is not recommended. Its why turbo timers are used to
> circulate that oil after engine shut down.
>
> I know the Dragonfly guys and Tri Q guys did a lot of turbo charging of the
> Subaru motors and some of the Corvair guys had been looking into it or have
> done
>
> it. But I believe weight and engine life issues may have slowed down or
> halted
> the use and development of those turbo applications. One more thing. It was
> my
> understanding when I did turbos on performance applications that you did
> not
> just slap a turbo on any engine. Don't put ten pounds of boost on a 9 to 1
> or 10
>
> to 1 compression motor and expect it to hold together very long. You will
> effectively have a
> 19 or 20 to 1 compression motor. These are diesels. That kind of
> compression
> will blow up
>  a motor. Also, make sure you have the right exhaust valves to handle a
> turbo or
> you will be burning them
>
> up. Not fun pulling off to the side of the road at 10,000 feet when you eat
> a
> valve cook a piston or blow a head gasket.
>
> It was a lot of fun doing turbo apps in automotive applications. Computer
> controlled air fuel metering, precise BOV/ Waste gate control, air/fuel
> mixture
> control and other systems
>
> allowed reliable power gains. I am not sure I have seen anything better
> than old
>
> unreliable mechanical systems available to do this on a VW motor. But what
> the
> William Winns and MJ's and ML's are doing with the systems they have
> available
> on Corvair motors would to me seem to be the better platform in which to
> start a
>
> turbo project.
>
> I love my GPAS VW and all that Steve Bennett has done. But the fastest way
> for
> me to mess up all that reliability is to slap a turbo on my 

KR> To Turbo or not to Turbo that is the Question

[Vaughan Thomas]

Steve & Jeff are thinking positive, my cynical comment on electric 'turbos' 
failed to convey my approval of conventional exhaust turbos. My current plan 
is to installa l a normally aspirated EA81 which I have, as a possible 
forerunner to a factory turbo fuel injected EA81(comp ratio,pistons, valves 
etc should be ok, its the cooling side to take care of - space & weight 
would be marginal on a KR though?). with a new plane in the air who needs 
possible extra problems to sort out first few hours up? The other concern is 
my caution regarding anythying computer/electronic going wrong at even 
1000'.  We have a lot of hills & mountains here.But I still hanker for a 
corvair core engine to use - another plea to anyone who can help get one 
down to NewZealand - corvairs are rarer than rockin horse turds downunder!
- Original Message - 
From: "Jeff York" 
To: "KRnet" 
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 6:20 AM
Subject: Re: KR> To Turbo or not to Turbo that is the Question


I, as well as Steve (as he stated)  would enjoy hearing more about the 
positives
on turbo charging too.

That said, I want to say that I did not want to come off sounding negative, 
I
just wanted to point out my concerns about turbo charging from my 
experience's
in high performance turbo charging. There are so many benefits to turbo 
charging

an engine from performance in power and fuel economy. Yes I said fuel 
economy
and what I meant by that was you can run a normally smaller displacement 
engine
to gain economy while getting the benefits of additional power by force 
feeding
air/fuel via the turbo. My problem was I never could keep my foot out of it 
to
really see the fuel economies but they are there.

Also, my experience was performance related and not of the altitude 
normalizing
that would be associated with aircraft turbo applications. However, some of 
the
same issues apply. I pointed out, and Steve and others pointed them out as 
well.



The main concerns I would have are oil and engine temps due to the very high
temps a turbo can achieve. As I recall 1600 degrees F. As Steve pointed out, 
I
would never consider a turbo without a intercooler. An intercooler is used 
to
cool

the turbo charged air fuel after it goes through the turbo and before it 
enters
the combustion chamber. Do not mistake the idea that an intercooler is for
cooling the turbo charger. Its not. That will be the job of your over sized 
oil
cooler.



When the engine in a turbo charged motor is shut down, that 1600 degree 
turbo
(which is oil cooled) will act as a furnace to cook the remaining oil in the
turbo. This will effectively coke the oil. This is why normal shut down of a
turbo charged motor is not recommended. Its why turbo timers are used to
circulate that oil after engine shut down.

I know the Dragonfly guys and Tri Q guys did a lot of turbo charging of the
Subaru motors and some of the Corvair guys had been looking into it or have 
done

it. But I believe weight and engine life issues may have slowed down or 
halted
the use and development of those turbo applications. One more thing. It was 
my
understanding when I did turbos on performance applications that you did not
just slap a turbo on any engine. Don't put ten pounds of boost on a 9 to 1 
or 10

to 1 compression motor and expect it to hold together very long. You will
effectively have a
19 or 20 to 1 compression motor. These are diesels. That kind of compression
will blow up
 a motor. Also, make sure you have the right exhaust valves to handle a 
turbo or
you will be burning them

up. Not fun pulling off to the side of the road at 10,000 feet when you eat 
a
valve cook a piston or blow a head gasket.

It was a lot of fun doing turbo apps in automotive applications. Computer
controlled air fuel metering, precise BOV/ Waste gate control, air/fuel 
mixture
control and other systems

allowed reliable power gains. I am not sure I have seen anything better than 
old

unreliable mechanical systems available to do this on a VW motor. But what 
the
William Winns and MJ's and ML's are doing with the systems they have 
available
on Corvair motors would to me seem to be the better platform in which to 
start a

turbo project.

I love my GPAS VW and all that Steve Bennett has done. But the fastest way 
for
me to mess up all that reliability is to slap a turbo on my VW motor without
finding out if and how it can be done reliably.


OK, I have ranted enough. I too want to hear from those that have done it so 
as
to get the positive and learn how. Thats what this is all about.

Sorry for running on but, I hope I was informative in some way as to the how
what to look out for and what not to do. I would love to get 70, 80 or more
horsepower out of my VW motor and if I could add a turbo to it and get 
reliable
life out of it, I would do it. But, in my opinion,  it might make more sense 
to
look at a Corvair that can get 100 hp or one of these 23xx VW motors.

KR> final draft panel layout and fabrication

[Craig Williams]

Well, thanks everyone for the great responses on cutting the panel.  And thanks 
Mark for posting your cad file on your webpage so I had a starting point.  Just 
did a little stretching on it as my boat is 43" wide on the outside.  Minor 
changes still need to be made and of course there is always the unexpected 
stuff. I have uploaded the "final" draft design here.  
http://www.kr2seafury.com/7.html  The aluminum part of my panel is actually 
quite small at only 10x14" so I drew that up as a separate DWG file to send out 
to be cut with a flo-jet.  All the other stuff is being mounted in the 1/4" 
birch main panel covered with black laminate which I think I can cut ok.  Still 
thinking about color for the interior.  Since the plane will be all painted up 
in military colors I am thinking sea foam green cockpit and black panel as it 
would be in the real thing.

Craig
www.kr2seafury.com

KR> To Turbo or not to Turbo that is the Question

[Jeff York]

I, as well as Steve (as he stated)  would enjoy hearing more about the 
positives 
on turbo charging too. 

That said, I want to say that I did not want to come off sounding negative, I 
just wanted to point out my concerns about turbo charging from my experience's 
in high performance turbo charging. There are so many benefits to turbo 
charging 

an engine from performance in power and fuel economy. Yes I said fuel economy 
and what I meant by that was you can run a normally smaller displacement engine 
to gain economy while getting the benefits of additional power by force feeding 
air/fuel via the turbo. My problem was I never could keep my foot out of it to 
really see the fuel economies but they are there.

Also, my experience was performance related and not of the altitude normalizing 
that would be associated with aircraft turbo applications. However, some of the 
same issues apply. I pointed out, and Steve and others pointed them out as 
well. 



The main concerns I would have are oil and engine temps due to the very high 
temps a turbo can achieve. As I recall 1600 degrees F. As Steve pointed out, I 
would never consider a turbo without a intercooler. An intercooler is used to 
cool 

the turbo charged air fuel after it goes through the turbo and before it enters 
the combustion chamber. Do not mistake the idea that an intercooler is for 
cooling the turbo charger. Its not. That will be the job of your over sized oil 
cooler. 



When the engine in a turbo charged motor is shut down, that 1600 degree turbo 
(which is oil cooled) will act as a furnace to cook the remaining oil in the 
turbo. This will effectively coke the oil. This is why normal shut down of a 
turbo charged motor is not recommended. Its why turbo timers are used to 
circulate that oil after engine shut down.

I know the Dragonfly guys and Tri Q guys did a lot of turbo charging of the 
Subaru motors and some of the Corvair guys had been looking into it or have 
done 

it. But I believe weight and engine life issues may have slowed down or halted 
the use and development of those turbo applications. One more thing. It was my 
understanding when I did turbos on performance applications that you did not 
just slap a turbo on any engine. Don't put ten pounds of boost on a 9 to 1 or 
10 

to 1 compression motor and expect it to hold together very long. You will 
effectively have a
19 or 20 to 1 compression motor. These are diesels. That kind of compression 
will blow up
 a motor. Also, make sure you have the right exhaust valves to handle a turbo 
or 
you will be burning them 

up. Not fun pulling off to the side of the road at 10,000 feet when you eat a 
valve cook a piston or blow a head gasket.

It was a lot of fun doing turbo apps in automotive applications. Computer 
controlled air fuel metering, precise BOV/ Waste gate control, air/fuel mixture 
control and other systems 

allowed reliable power gains. I am not sure I have seen anything better than 
old 

unreliable mechanical systems available to do this on a VW motor. But what the 
William Winns and MJ's and ML's are doing with the systems they have available 
on Corvair motors would to me seem to be the better platform in which to start 
a 

turbo project.

I love my GPAS VW and all that Steve Bennett has done. But the fastest way for 
me to mess up all that reliability is to slap a turbo on my VW motor without 
finding out if and how it can be done reliably. 


OK, I have ranted enough. I too want to hear from those that have done it so as 
to get the positive and learn how. Thats what this is all about.

Sorry for running on but, I hope I was informative in some way as to the how 
what to look out for and what not to do. I would love to get 70, 80 or more 
horsepower out of my VW motor and if I could add a turbo to it and get reliable 
life out of it, I would do it. But, in my opinion,  it might make more sense to 
look at a Corvair that can get 100 hp or one of these 23xx VW motors.

But, lets hear from the ones who know how and have, instead of us (me) who know 
how not to.

By the way, I worked on some turbo spam cans that came into the aviation shop I 
used to work in. But they were very rare. I have to wonder why they were so 
rare.

Jeff York
KR-2 N839BG
Lexington/ Georgetown, Kentucky



- Original Message 
From: "Teate, Stephen" 
To: KRnet 
Sent: Mon, January 3, 2011 10:22:28 AM
Subject: RE: KR> To Turbo or not to Turbo that is the Question


"I've already heard some of the negatives from others, but does anyone have a
list of positives?"

Both Jeff Scott and Jeff York have responded to this and made excellent 
comments 
to be considered. I admit I am biased to the positive side of turbo's so I will 
add my opinion.

RE: KR> To Turbo or not to Turbo that is the Question

[Jon Finley]

"I've already heard some of the negatives from others, but does anyone have a 
list of positives?"


1. Massive power increase potential.
2. Really kewl "glow in the dark" feature (also glows in the light if desired).
3. Helps keep the engine compartment warm.
4. Allows you to add a neato "TURBO" sticker to your cowling.
5. Allows you to add all sorts of new things to your wish list (oxygen system, 
in-flight adjustable prop, electrically heated seats, etc...).

... that's all I can think of but there is probably more.
  Jon Finley 
N314JF - Q2 - Subaru EJ-22
http://www.finleyweb.net/Q2Subaru.aspx 

KR> To Turbo or not to Turbo that is the Question

[Teate, Stephen]

"I've already heard some of the negatives from others, but does anyone have a
list of positives?"

Both Jeff Scott and Jeff York have responded to this and made excellent 
comments to be considered. I admit I am biased to the positive side of turbo's 
so I will add my opinion.

As far as more piping is concerned this is entirely application specific. I 
have seen installations that used less tubing than a four-into-one exhaust 
header. 

Cooling is by far the most important issue especially for an air cooled engine. 
Installing a turbo without installing a intercooler is a mistake. And since an 
aircooled engine's turbo relies on good oil an oversized oil cooler should be 
installed. Air/fuel ratio is also critical to the life of the engine and your 
ability to control this with a carburetor is just as important and can be done.

Exhaust leaks and weight are also installation dependent. But weight will be 
increased over a NA engine installation which is acceptable when you consider 
your ability to create sea level HP at whatever the critical altitude of you 
turbo turns out to be. In general terms a 100 HP engine at sea level will be 
down to approximately 73 HP at 1 feet where your turbo installation is 
still producing 100 HP. That's 27% more power for whatever your weight increase 
happens to be. Remember that the air is less dense too so the overall drag on 
the aircraft is less at altitude also.

Wear on the motor is application and operational specific. If it is a 
normalizing application there should be no increase in wear on the motor.

Turbos come in all shapes and sizes and can fit all kinds or RPMs. 2400 engine 
RPM should not be a problem. In general small turbos are used in automobiles 
and spool quickly. Not really what you want in an airplane installation so the 
turbo you want in your airplane will probably be larger than you think.

In my opinion turbos are worth it but they are not without issues. These issues 
are not beyond the abilities of anyone who rebuilt their own engine and has at 
least a basic understanding of how they work. 





Stephen Teate
Composite Cooling Solutions, L.P.
4150 International Plaza, Suite 500
Fort Worth, Texas 76109
817-708-9140

**
The information in this email is confidential and may be 
legally privileged. If you are not an intended recipient, 
you should delete this message.  Access to this email by 
anyone else is unauthorized, and any disclosure, copying, 
distribution or action taken or omitted in reliance on it 
is prohibited and may be unlawful.
**

KR> Cutting round holes in aluminum

[hart...@charter.net]

A router with a trammel base and using a 1/4 inch bit will cut perfect 
holes of any size quickly in aluminum.  You can buy a trammel base or 
make an acrylic base for the router and drill a 1/8 inch pivot hole in 
the base at the proper radius.  A trim router is a perfect size to use 
and you can buy one for about $25 bucks at Harbor Fright (intentional 
mis-spelling.)  If you want to spend a few more bucks, get one with a 
plunge base.  Secure a sacrificial piece of ply or particle board under 
the aluminum panel sheet and make sure the hole for the pivot pin goes 
through the aluminum and well into the sacrificial piece.  I use a 
couple of pieces of double side tape to stick the portion that will be 
cut out to the underlying particle board.  This keeps the cutout from 
rotating wildly as the bit finishes the cut.  This will give you holes 
that are the equal of CNC holes.  Always cut a test hole in scrap to 
make sure your technique and measurements are correct.  For .125 I would 
make several slow shallow passes.  If you are cutting instrument holes 
in 1/4 inch ply--a Dremel tool with 1/8 inch router bit has enough power 
to rout them.  I use this setup for cutting sound holes in ukuleles.  Be 
careful, move slowly and use eye protection whenever using a router 
and clamp the assembly to your table to make sure nothing can move. 
. 
Rich Hartwig
Waunakee WI

KR> Re: laser cutting panel

[Kenneth R Gallaher]

I made a custom panel for a D model Bonanza once upon a time and just used a
drill press and 3-1/8, 2-1/4 hole saws then swirl polished it with round
wire brush. Turned out ok
Ken Gallaher

On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 10:32 AM, smwood  wrote:

> >After a nerve racked morning with a fly cutter I have determined that I am
> >probably not going the be able to cut the instrument holes.  Another
> option
> >is a Greenlee punch but those are quite expensive unless someone has one
> to
> >loan.  With all that said I am thinking that I want to mark up a piece of
> >.125 aluminum sheet and send it off to someone to laser cut.  Any
> >suggestion on who could do that for me?
>
> Thanks
> Craig
>
> +
> I used a fly cutter for the one 3-1/8 hole for the Dynon D10A; small hole
> saws for the three little gauges; twist drills for the switches and screws.
> My panel is the stock RR forward deck/instrument panel.  I used a .040"
> aluminum sheet backing up the fiber glass for a ground and EMI shield.  All
> round holes were cut on the drill press.  Use a 2x6 to backup the fly
> cutter
> and hole saw, and do clamp everything down firmly.  Rectangular holes were
> cut with a Dremel tool fitted with rotary zip saw bits and a router adapter
> ($8 at Lowe's).  Yes, they make bits for aluminum, something like $6 at
> Lowe's.  That was my specific out of pocket cost to cut the panel.  To cut
> a
> straight line with the Dremel, clamp an aluminum angle or straight board to
> the panel offset from the cut line for the router base.  Granted, my cuts
> are not CNC precise, but it only cost $6 for two bits plus my time.  Pays
> your money and takes your choice.
>
> Sid Wood
> Tri-gear KR-2 N6242
> Mechanicsville, MD, USA
> smw...@md.metrocast.net
>
>
>
> ___
> Search the KRnet Archives at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp
> to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to krnet-le...@mylist.net
> please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html
>