KR> Any word on NVaero after airport flood?
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?
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
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?
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?
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&highlight=corona+flood
KR> spruce vs other woods
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
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
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
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 VW motor > without > fin
KR> To Turbo or not to Turbo that is the Question
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. But, lets hear from the ones who know how a
KR> final draft panel layout and fabrication
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
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
"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
"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
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
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 >