KR> roll bar (long) from experience
Stef wrote: I am using 4130 steel for my roll bar but my plane is a radical departure from a standard KR so I don't know how carbon fiber would work. I think that strength is only 1/2 the equation here. Abrasion resistance is just as important if your scraping down the runway upside down at 30-40 knots. I would go as many layers as you can afford. Stef, Steel will work, though it MIGHT be overkill depending on the thickness. I am planning an aluminum bar for my own plane based on my own experience. While it is unlikely you will ever be upside down on the runway, I have proven it can happen, regrettably. >From a practical perspective it is unlikely you will be sliding down the runway upside down at 30-40 knots, as the failure of the nose strut (or pitching over the nose of a tail dragger), and flipping the plane perpendicular to the relative wind will take a huge amount of speed off the plane. Here is what I believe happened to us in our mishap: Nose wheel fold: 60 MPH Edge of the runway: 40-45 MPH Begin rotation over nose strut as it dug into the ground: 35 MPH Tail impacting the ground: 10 MPH or less. In going over, we probably lost 25 MPH or more. This is based on the fact there was no dragging of the tail or fuselage visible in the dirt under the plane (no witness marks). We flipped, we stopped. The biggest reason to have the roll bar is to prevent the crushing in of the fiberglass and canopy bow when weight is put on it from the vertical. Jim did not have his seatbelt cinched down tight (I did). The result was his face and head made contact with the ground and broken canopy while we were upside down and the turtledeck compressed ~ 4-6 inches. Even a light roll bar will delay or eliminate that crush. The key was the inability of the fiberglass to withstand the weight placed on it out of plane. It only took one person to lift the whole plane off of us from the tail, so the amount of weight the roll bar would need to hold is not hundreds of pounds (in our mishap, anyway). Of course, if you impact the ground at high speed (100+ MPH) and the plane flips you are out of Schlitz no matter how big your roll bar is.
KR> KR-2 and TOPGUN jet photo
Mark, We have some great photos on the KR website, including one of a "pin-up" gal on a KR wing and flying form on a BD-5. There used to be one on the site in front of a Concorde if I remember right. How about one of a KR on the TOPGUN flightline parked next to an F-16 aggressor in Russian cammo in the background? It shows how far the reach of the KR world is today. Just thinking it would be a conversation starter on the KR webpage. IHS, Dave
KR> re:iFly 700
Paul, You are one ahead of me. I was not able to get the resolution fine enough to be able to read all the data on the screen. I could read most of it, but not all, and that is a very dangerous place to be when flying an approach for real. I have been in the goo too many times to be risking it. If you got your iFly to be fully readable, my hat is off to you. Have a blessed Sunday! IHS, Dave
KR> re:iFly 700
Todd wrote: Anybody out there have anything bad to say about these systems? Todd, The one problem I have found with the iFly is on the approach plates. If you are going to use the approach plate feature, be aware that the entire plate does not fit on the screen. You will have to slew it around to see the bottom numbers (MDA, DH and such). If you were going to fly ANY IFR my recommendation would be to have paper plates in front of you for an approach you might need to make. For VFR/IFR high this would be an excellent thing to have in the plane. One could argue flying an IFR approach in the KR is not wise, but I would disagree with that assessment unless icing were a factor. Other than that, I have a few hours fiddling around with the iFly. It is a solid product, and the company, as you said, is planning some very nice upgrades. It is viewable in bright sunlight, a very useful feature in the KR series. If someone does a lot of flying outside their local patch, this is a great way to have all the charts available for those cross country flights. My opinion. IHS, Dave "Zipper" Goodman President, EAA-818
KR> Flight suites
>Yep, Short people get no respect. (5'7" and all my height is in my upper torso). So, I don't fit the suits. All, Flight suits are not designed to really fit anyone well. The only ones that look like they fit have been tailored (Blue Angels, Thunderbirds, actors, the Village People, and the like). For the jet jocks, if it was not baggy beneath your crotch you were going to regret it when you put on the speed jeans (g-suit). If it is a bit longer at that point than you think it should be, you will look like someone who actually wore it for business in days gone by. Unless the crotch goes down to your knees. A personal observation from the retired Navy carrier guy. If you do get a flight suit and actually do want to look good in it, wear boots or at least leather shoes with it instead of sneakers. Nothing looks worse than a middle-aged guy with long hair and/or a paunch, and sneakers with white socks wearing a military style flight suit. IHS, Zipper Goodman LCDR USN(ret) 575 carrier traps
KR> RE: Panel Layouts
My input would be the Dynon systems are hard to beat. Easy to install (from personal experiences). Very easy to operate (for the stick-ape in all of us). More features than even a control freak can use up. Great price (from sources other than AS). Can be used for IFR (with a back-up). NAV sources (GSP, VOR, LOC) can be put on its HSI from external inputs. Can monitor more about your engine than even Mark Langford can digest (not a knock to Mark, just acknowledgment that Dynon has superb capability). Optional transponder that can be operated from the SkyView panel (no extra unit in the instrument panel face). MGL makes some excellent systems as well. Same basic functions, but different interface. Solid construction. The V10 radio is probably the best overall 5-watt transmitter going today, and it can be operated remotely. I have 100+ hours behind a Dynon D180 in my KR2 after 200 hours behind steam gauges. Great unit. IHS, Dave "Zipper" Goodman President, EAA-818
KR> Merry Christmas fellow KR folks
Kris wrote: "This is off the KR aircraft subject, but Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays to all of you." Kris, I do not think it at all off the subject. Angels in the biggest formation in history announced the first Christmas, flying VFR at night over shepherds in Israel. That qualifies as aviation in my book. The only formation bigger will be the one at the end of the book. Merry Christmas! IHS, Dave "Zipper" Goodman
KR> iFly 700... a great unit
James wrote: I've used the iFly 700 since Lowrance had problems with their updates. I love it and wouldn't consider any thing else. KR-netters, Vertical Avionics got one of iFly's demo units to show my EAA chapter. As James wrote, they are excellent units, with touch screens. Very intuitive, very easy to use. They have Sectionals, low, and high charts, approach plates, airport diagrams, frequencies, and touch screen route planning and update using rubber band. All in all, this is the chart toy everyone has ever wanted. The chart subscription gets you all the charts for the states (sectional) or the IFR subscription gets you updates on everything. The subscription options alone make this a great deal for the guy who flies outside his local area or the occasional high IFR world. The only thing I have found not to like with the iFly is the approach plates. The plate scale is slightly bigger than the display, so the whole Jeppsen chart is not visible. This is only an issue if one is trying to fly a no-kidding IFR approach. Not recommended (personal input). The $499.00 price is temporary, and will be going up sometime early next year, TBD. The rep I worked with said the new price has not been set, but he inferred it would be in the $580 range. Still, not bad for what one gets. Updates they are planning/working on include tracking the plane against the approach plates, which would be so much like cheating the old-school navigator in me finds it repulsive. We worked out a deal to get a break for our local EAA chapters, about $30 each if people wanted send in a mass order through me. iFly does not have dealerships or distributorships, so I worked out the deal for my EAA chapter as a non-business one. Orders would be sent directly from the factory to you, wherever you are. If anyone in the KR world is interested in that, let me know offline. We can add your order to the one for our chapter and possibly save a few dollars. I have the demo unit and the deal up to about mid-January. Merry Christmas! IHS, Dave "Zipper" Goodman President, EAA-818
KR> insterment wiring
Robert wrote: I have a question on hooking up my CHT sensor and my EGT sensor. The leads on the sensors are only about 12" long. Do I need to use the same type of wire Robert, The short answer is you should use the same type wire, but... Using a different type wire will introduce some degree of bias to the sensor, since they operate on bi-metal characteristics. Having said that, at some point the sensor is going to have to change from its own wire to your display's wire, making a second bi-metal connection. If you are using something like a Westach unit, you may not want to splice a different kind of wire into the sender. If you are using something like a Dynon or MGL EFIS, the effect of lengths of a different wire will be somewhat mitigated. I have a Dynon FlightDEK D-180 display. My EGT and CHT senders all have 22GA wire extensions on them and I do not see any appreciable impact on their readings. They have been tested with boiling water and against an IR thermometer to verify their accuracy. It may not be textbook, but it works fine. IHS, David Goodman Vertical Avionics, Inc. www.verticalavionics.com
KR> Ailerons
Herbert wrote: ..can anyone tells me the average counterweight of a plans built aileron balance arm for the new 16% airfoil wing? Herbert, I think mine were just over 2.5 lbs, about 2 lb 9 oz as I recall. IHS, David Goodman Vertical Avionics, Inc. www.verticalavionics.com 360 678 1602 (W)
KR> FAA perspective on the mishap in N522PC (long)
KR pilots and builders, The FAA sent me a "WARNING NOTICE" for my part in the mishap involving Jim Morehead's KR2, N522PC. Rather than regurgitate all the facts here, the short is this: - I flew the plane for 12.1 hours, including dual time with several other pilots in the 40-hour Phase I test phase. - Per FARs, no passengers may be carried in this phase of flight. - The FARs do not define what a passenger is, nor what an essential crewman is. - It was my contention, based on precedent and a strict reading of the FARs that each person I flew with was a required crew member for those flights. When I was not PIC, I acted as a safety pilot for the other pilot, within the letter and intent of the FARs. The result of the investigation was a warning letter, which stated: "It has been determined that this matter does not warrant legal enforcement action." and "Legal Effect. Neither a Warning Notice nor a Letter of Correction constitutes a finding of violation..." In other words, they did not find anything to hang me on, and believe me, after the dressing down I gave the inspector, they wanted to hang me high. I am not a lawyer, but I do know how to read English. Take my input as completely anecdotal. Only the PIC can determine if another person in the cockpit during Phase I testing is required. I recommend you not try to insist your ten year old is required. I also STRONGLY recommend you NOT CARRY ANYONE unless it is essential to the flight. The big lessons learned for me personally were a) to show others how a KR flies from the left seat is fine, but never fly in the right seat (unless the pilot is well qualified and experienced in THAT KR), b) a person needs to be current in something with performance and handling qualities more closely matched to the KR than a Cessna 150 (five hours in a Cessna DOES NOT MAKE ONE READY TO FLY A KR), and c) KNOW WHAT THE FARs ACTUALLY SAY. My response to the FAA's initial charge of violation, their letter (front side data only), and my e-mail response to it will be on my website at sites.google.com/a/wildblue.net/goodmans/Home/2010-kr2-mishap . Rather than drag this into a thread that most will not be interested in, please write to me offline for any questions or input on this incident. IHS, Dave
KR> Unusual attitude recovery
KR fliers, A couple of folks e-mailed me offline and asked me to be a bit more specific in my suggestions. Pardon my regression to military-speak in my last post. Here we go: Nose high unusual attitude recovery: Throttle - max. Push the stick to less than one "G" toward the horizon. Note that you are not trying to level the plane, you are trying to get load off the wings to prevent stall. My own observation is about half a "G" works very well. It takes load off the wings, but does not cause everything on the floor to end up on the canopy. Roll to horizon (wings level) - Once the plane's nose is level with the horizon it is time to concern yourself with getting the wings level. If you were slow or close to stall you can let the planes nose fall through the horizon a few degrees to gain some speed back quickly. In the KR, going to full throttle and unloading is going probably get you all the speed you need by the time the nose reaches the horizon. I remember this as POWER-PUSH-ROLL Nose low recovery Throttle - idle. Roll to nearest horizon - If you find yourself upside down, say 45 degrees nose down inverted, if you just pull in the plane's vertical you will have to go 135 degrees to get to the horizon. If, however, you roll the plane upright to wings level BEFORE you pull to the horizon, you will only have to pull 45 degrees (plus ten degrees or so for the roll). It will take a great deal less time and altitude to do this than to not roll first. While this may seem counter-intuitive, use your hand as an airplane and work through the maneuver. Pull to horizon - Do not exceed buffet onset to do this. The temptation (fear induced) is to pull for all it is worth to the horizon. Doing this can either overstress the plane or cause an accelerated stall (if done below maneuvering speed. It is accepted this is a remote possibility, but it has been known to happen in aircraft I have flown.). Remember, people have done loops in the KR just fine, so it can be recovered from 90 degrees nose down without trying to pull the wings off. If you are at the backside of a loop and panic or lose situational awareness and need to recover, you could well be nose low with low airspeed inverted. Do not panic, fly the recovery as described. I remember this as POWER-ROLL-PULL If you are going downhill AND speed is a problem, AND you are able, AND your plane can accept speed brakes at any airspeed, putting out the speed brakes will decrease the amount of altitude lost. In jets this was just a matter of pulling a thumb switch on the throttle aft. Honestly, this is probably not a good idea for most of us, unless you have a switch controlled speed brake. Obviously, if you are not sure the brake can sustain the airloads it is also best to keep it in. The place where this could be a live or die is when the ground is in close proximity and the five hundred or 1,000 feet this may save you will save you. I would not put the flaps out in any circumstance. For what it may be worth to someone. IHS, Dave
KR> Unusual attitude recovery
KR fliers, Something else that should be discussed after our productive discussion of stalls is how to recover the plane properly should one find oneself looking at the dirt from an unusual attitude. From reading reports of several people's recoveries from being nose down the approach that comes to mind first might not be the best. I submit the following recovery procedures: Nose high recovery: Power-full Less than one "G" to horizon (unload the aircraft, preventing stall) Roll to horizon (wings level) I remember this as POWER-PUSH-ROLL Nose low recovery" Power-idle Roll to nearest horizon Pull to horizon I remember this as POWER-ROLL-PULL If one is suddenly looking at dirt upside down the natural tendency is to pull through to the horizon. In most cases this is not the nearest horizon and will greatly increase the amount of altitude lost during the recovery. My rolling to the nearest horizon, especially in the KR with its good roll rate, recovery to level flight will be quicker. In jets we would add Boards to Power, but I do not think this is a good idea if it means you have to either look inside the cockpit or take a hand off stick or throttle to do. IHS, Dave
KR> Stalls
Martin wrote: I would think that the best way to approach this is to practice slow flight as much as possible, extending the lower speed slowly and cautiously over many flights Martin, You should be doing at least a power off approach to stall on the very first flight in the plane. If you do not do this, how else are you going to know where the approach speed actually is? How will you know if you are getting ready to stall the plane on its first landing? This was my fear about the thread about stalls on the net. The discussion has been on FULL POWER or POWER ON stalls. This is a very different beast compared to the power off stall. In a power off stall, the plane is not going to be cocked up as much, you need far less rudder and you have extra power to add coming out of the stall. In the power on stall there is no extra power available, you will likely have a huge amount of rudder in to balance the torque of the motor, and there power becomes your enemy unless the plane is in balanced flight throughout. They are very different events. Pilots like Jeff Scott are high hour pilots who have a tremendous amount of experience in the KR and other aircraft. Maneuvers that come easily to them do so because they have gained insight into doing them well, often through scary experiences, or at least enough experience to have become proficient. A person writing on the KR net may have no hours at all, or be a high time pilot, and his or her experience level will be reflected in their comments. At 300 hours in my KR-2S I see no reason to be doing power on stalls in it. It is not that I cannot do them, but I have enough experience from other at high g or inverted maneuvering to not feel the need to do this type flight in this airplane. Other pilots may want to go out and do high power stalls on every flight, and for them that is just as good an answer as my own. It all depends on what you want to do in your plane. Before you do any maneuvers or fly make sure you review and brief to yourself all the maneuvers you plan on doing. Think your flights out, plan safe, fly safe... and have fun! IHS, Dave "Zipper" Goodman www.verticalavionics.com
KR> Caution on stalls
KR fliers and soon to be fliers, I hope the discussion on stalls has been a fruitful one. Please no one out there think I am saying the plane should not be flown to approach to stall or full stall. My point is to present a word of caution on flying full power stalls. It does not take a great deal of inattention in the KR to find oneself in a place one did not expect. At full power there is no extra margin for error, and inattention here could be deadly. Not everyone's experience, comfort level, or skill will react properly to seeing a face full of dirt after rolling inverted if the plane is not kept in balanced flight. The effort to keep a KR in balanced flight approaching full power stall as Jeff points out is different for each airframe built due to the diversity of builders. Basic aerodynamics says that as AOA increases approaching a full-power stall, less and less of the rudder and tail will be in free air to counter both the helical prop wash and the torque of the engine. With the tail of the KR as small as it is in stock form this can pose a problem if the plane is not flown smoothly. I have zero doubt Jeff flies safe and even less doubt he can fly the KR to a full power stall without great risk. His tail has been increased in size over the stock plans, and his wing's trailing edges have been modified as well should help. Based on his experience he surely did the same flying before the modifications, but his skill level is also probably above many of ours. I agree that pilots should regularly fly their aircraft outside of the straight and level regime to become comfortable with how the plane operates outside "normal" flight regimes. Jeff forgive me as I am not trying to put words in your mouth. Mark Langford again is a good example of why these things are important. He has had two engines croak on him in flight, has departed his plane from a full-power stall, and landed on a freeway. For myself, I have had one real engine out landing, lost a brake after landing in a strong crosswind (which lead to a high-speed toboggan ride off the runway), and been in a plane where a split second of improper control input caused a beautiful KR2 to crash and flip upside down. Others out there have had some equally exciting events in their aircraft, both KR and others. Go out and fly your plane! Think through what you are going to do and go do it! Just be safe, because someday when I do get to fly to The Gathering, I want to meet you all. IHS, Dave "Zipper" Goodman
KR> Stalls
Jeff wrote: Before we start beating drum about the KR being a dangerous craft to stall, you need to look a little farther. I practice both power off and power on stalls in my KR. Jeff, I agree with you about stalling the KR. The chances of the average pilot making a mistake I a full power stall and turning it into either an inverted departure or spin is great enough to caution most KR pilots to not go out and try this maneuver. Ken Rand dropped 8000 feet after on by one report, and Mark Langford dumped his plane upside down doing the same. It is not the stall that is going to be the issue, it is the incipient spin phase of flight that if going to get someone killed. In my opinion there is zero good reason for the average KR pilot to be doing a full power stall in the KR. The attendant risk of departed flight is not something the average pilot (whether right or wrong) is ready for. Even as someone who has a lot of hours in planes doing high alpha flight I have zero reason to do this type flying in my own KR. If you enjoy flying in this envelope, by all means go for it! That is part of the fun of flying, to do things the way you want to. I would not advise others to do this is all I am saying, as the KR is unforgiving of mistakes one might make in this regime. IHS, David Goodman Vertical Avionics, Inc. 663 El Prado Ave. Coupeville, WA 98239 www.verticalavionics.com 360 969 1174 (C) 360 678 1602 (W) It's more docile and controllable in a power on stall than my Tomahawk was (the Tommy always wanted to roll over and spin). I would compare the handling in that regime to a Cessna 150, only quicker. Very docile and easy to recover. I have also spun it, but did not allow the spin to fully develop. Spin entry and recovery were also very docile. The spin entry was from an accelerated power on stall and was actually captured on video from another plane for use in an art video. Unfortunately, I only saw the video once and was never able to obtain a copy. For the average KR, your mileage may differ significantly, mostly due to CG considerations. Mark's plane is a different story with a completely different plan form from most. The one thing to remember about stalls, which really shows up during a power on stall, is that your ailerons are useless until you recover. You are handling the plane with rudder and elevator. -Jeff ScottN1213W -- Original Message -- Hello Phil, I once had a conversation with an early KR pilot that personally knew Ken Rand. He said that he did a full power stall in his KR at 9000 feet. He said it took more than 8000 feet to recover. It was so bad he said he had already decided that he was going to die but tried one more time and was able to get it to come out of the spin. It is not the "KR" that is the problem but any close coupled high power to weight?airplane. It is not going to stay straight when it stalls unless the ball is perfectly centered. I have more than 17,000 hours and a lot of aerobatic experience and I would not stall the KR with full power. I am not saying not to do it because I don't know your qualifications but simply wanted you to know what to expect based on the experience of this guy. On another note as a KR guy if you are ever in the southern part of Alabama look me up and we can go do some flying. Victor Taylor Irvington Alabama __ SHOCKING: 2010 Honda Civic for $1,732.09 BREAKING NEWS: High ticket items are being auctioned for an incredible 90% off! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4cf9212bf3a754eba86st03vuc ___ 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 ___ 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> Stalls (long)
KR-netters, There have been two excellent posts recently concerning full power stalls in the KR. Mark Langford's personal experience of flipping upside down after a hard roll out of a full power stall is not unique to the KR, but the math behind the snap roll says the high-powered short KR should respond this way. While most of us will not see an intentional full power stall in the KR, a more likely scenario is an accelerated stall during a hard turn or maneuver. If you are tail chasing a Glasair or RV around the patch this could be a problem if you are not paying attention to the rumble in the fuselage as it approaches stall. The feeling/sounds are the same as the stall series we all did in Phase I and are distinct from the sound of just having "G" on the plane. For my bird, Goliath, the rumble begins about 10-12 MPH before the calculated stall point and builds in intensity to a heavy rumble as approach to stall deepens. The School of Aviation Safety in their course, Fundamentals of Fixed-wing Aerodynamics covers critical conditions affecting directional stability. Two that are of interest to us in the KR world: "When an aircraft is flying at a high AOA the flow field over the vertical tail is blocked and disturbed. This causes a lost of lift which in turn results in a lower restoring moment. A technique to counter this effect is to add ventral fins on the bottom of the aircraft." I can tell you from personal experience this is why the F-16 has the huge ventral fins. Flying over the top at 40 KIAS in full blower would be impossible without them. "At high angles of side slip an aircraft can lose its directional stability because a large enough restoring force cannot be created. This would cause the aircraft to quickly diverge and depart controlled flight. To counter-act this less than desirable occurrence a dorsal fin is sometimes added to the vertical tail. This device reduces the effective aspect ratio of the tail and increases the angle at which stall occurs." This loss of directional stability is exacerbated by the P factor of the motor and helical prop wash on the aircraft. At higher AOA as the tail becomes more and more blanked eventually the motor is going to win and the plane is going to snap roll. Mark, I am glad you did not prove this in the ultimate manner. In the KR, the trend has been to add a dorsal fin to increase lateral stability. This certainly increases stability in normal flight for most who have tried it. Reducing the aspect ratio on the top of the fuselage would not help recovery from a deep stall or spin as it would be effectively blanked by the fuselage. I have not heard of anyone doing this, but has anyone put a ventral fin on a KR? This would have the effect of increasing stability in normal flight like the dorsal extension and should provide some increased measure of spin resistance. I am considering this addition to my plane this winter as I do the tail chase thing and a good deal of formation flying. IHS, Dave "Zipper" Goodman Vertical Avionics, Inc. www.verticalavionics.com 360 678 1602 (W)
KR> Outboard wing tanks
Steve wrote: How close to the rear of the forward spar should the back of the tank be? Steve, I have aluminum tanks in my outer wings. They run almost to the tips. Inboard they are 14 inches aft toward the rear spar and outboard they are nine inches deep. My tanks are almost right up against the forward spar, with the 1/4" space between spar and tank side being filled with expanding foam. This helps keep the tank in position and prevents chaffing of the two. Baffles for long tanks are a must. I have two in each tank. Without them you are at great risk in uncoordinated flight of your plane becoming unbalanced and difficult to control. As far as CG, my plane does not move more than one third of an inch between full tanks and empty ones. I usually do not have to make more than one or two small trim changes on a long cross country flight due to shifting CG. If you make your tanks so they go all the way to the aft spar this probably is not the case, but that is opinion. Have a joyous Thanksgiving. IHS, Dave "Zipper" Goodman Vertical Avionics, Inc. www.verticalavionics.com
KR> Header tank, coils, and battery proximity
Steven wrote: I was thinking of doing like others and placing them on the firewall shelf but wasn't sure because of the close proximity of the fuel tank. Steven, As long as raw fuel cannot get to them, the shelf if a good location. Use the location of the battery to balance out your weight and balance if needed. My battery has migrated from the shelf to right in front of the spar on the passenger side. It moves the CG aft a bit, which is good for my plane. Put the fuel cutoff switch where you can reach it without moving your hand more than a few inches. This was a lesson Jim Morehead and I learned hanging upside down from the straps in his plane after flipping in a mishap. Neither one of us could reach the fuel cutoff switch, even though it was on the bottom of the center console. In my own plane these switches are right below my thighs on the front of the main spar. I would have expected Jim's location to be perfect. It turned out not to be. Only the experience can teach on this one. IHS, Dave "Zipper" Goodman Vertical Avionics, Inc. www.verticalavionics.com
KR> 1300# gross weight question
Craig wrote: No doubt about it I am going to be right near 1300# full fuel and the wife with 30# baggage if I can get the empty weight at 764# like Marks plane. Craig, I would shoot for a plane that weighs in around 700 even. Mark's plane is a very heavy aircraft. I think when he originally weighed it there was a 2nd battery in it and a number of other things that made it heavier than the norm. That is not saying his aircraft was poorly made, but as builders we make choices that effect weight. Obviously, Mark's plane flies very well and is very, very, fast. Everything you add is going to cost something (dollars and weight). My own plane weighed 698 pounds when it was first weighed, and it has 15+ pounds of nosegear. So, in my rendition of the KR-2S I made choices that made my plane 66 pounds lighter than Mark's. If it were a tail dragger, and had less items in the instrument panel it might well have weighed in the 680 range, with a Corvair motor. That is an 84 pound difference in the weight of the airframe and gear for two planes made from the same plans. Think light, build light. IHS, Dave "Zipper" Goodman Vertical Avionics, Inc. www.verticalavionics.com
KR> Dynon Autopilot Servos
Stef wrote: I am also very interesting about the [Dynon} servos. Stef, The Dynon servos are "small" and designed to work in RV sized aircraft. The KR wing is similar in size, though I do not know anyone who has them installed in our birds. Kurt from Dynon has been after me for a year now to put servos in my bird, but I have not had time or dollars to do it yet. One of the best things about them is the integrated control from the SkyView display. They even have an integrated mode-S transponder that works from the SkyView. I have a Dynon FlightDek-180 in my own KR and I love it, but am considering the SkyView as an upgrade to get the transponder and a few other features. If you want more info, contact me offline. IHS, David Goodman Vertical Avionics, Inc. www.verticalavionics.com 360 678 1602 (W)
KR> N128JH
Jay wrote: Sorry folks, I had intended to send this out before the NTSB did but I have been busy doing NTSB reports, FAA reports and NASA report. Plus trying to get the plane home since last Friday. So here is the story: Jay, That you are safe is all that matters. Good write-up and recommendations for those who follow. One question. When you say you leveled the plane after bouncing, do you mean that you gave the plane any forward stick after bouncing or just held what you had before the second touchdown? The plane can be fixed. Glad to hear you are fine. IHS, David Goodman Vertical Avionics, Inc. www.verticalavionics.com 360 678 1602 (W)
KR> Fly By Wire
Terry wrote: The KR is so light and delightful on the controls now; it's hard to imagine making it better. Terry, I agree and disagree. It would be a lot of work, but look at how much work ML put into his plane. While we certainly all benefitted from his efforts, if the goal was to just build a plane to fly many would look at his focus as a builder as overkill. The same could be said for Dr Dean's hinges, or the new airfoil, or many other improvements over the original KR-series designs that all of us take (almost) for granted today. Thankfully there are those out there who have that passion to make that better mousetrap. Who of us is to say Jose does not come out with something truly spectacular that boosts the roll rate or slow flying characteristics, or even better, dampens the pitch responsiveness in certain situations. Ten years from now we may all be wanting Jose's FBW, just like all the other improvements we now enjoy. More power to the experimenter! IHS, Dave "Zipper" Goodman Vertical Avionics, Inc. www.verticalavionics.com
KR> Fly By Wire
Jose wrote: I had been thinking about a fly by wire design, I had posted this on my other forum I'm a member of, but too many of them are "BUILD IT to PLANS!!" type, I like to change things for the better. Jose, I applaud your motivation and enthusiasm! This sounds like a tremendous amount of work for little return, but if you are charged up about it, go forth and slay dragons. The Wright Brothers did and look what happen with their ideas. Two words of caution. First, have a back-up that is instantaneous and failsafe. Second, your FBW is guaranteed to fail at the worst possible times; if you plan for it and expect it you may be able to eliminate the risk involved. Airbus still had not perfected their FBW in the 319/320 and 330/340 series aircraft even after ten years of the planes flying passengers! One of the unfortunate realities of being trained as an aviation mishap investigator is learning a lot of behind the scenes info that the public is not allowed to know. My family never flies in these aircraft, ever. I hope you efforts are worthwhile and work! Good luck to you! IHS, David "Zipper" Goodman Vertical Avionics, Inc. www.verticalavionics.com
KR> Stabilizer and rudder modifications
Steven wrote: The horizontal stab and rudder installed and built per plans. I have been contemplating on rebuilding the horz. stab and rudder using Mark L. airfoils and Dr. Dean hinges. The elevator has 3 non-bearing hinges same as rudder. I would think that the elevator would not be "airworthy" knowing what we know now about the kr hinges. Steven, The stock hinges are perfectly airworthy, based on all the flying KR series aircraft flying with them, unless your projects has a defective in installation. My own plane has just under 300 hours on the stock hinges and they are working fine. If you want to replace them because DR. Dean's hinge idea is better (which I agree it certainly is) this is the time to do it. If this is not a hill to die on, you might want to go ahead and use the hinges that are already installed. I have no doubt my hinges will need to be replaced on the elevator eventually, probably in another 150-200 hours or so. I will cross that bridge when it is before me. IHS, David Goodman Vertical Avionics, Inc. www.verticalavionics.com 360 969 1174 (C)
KR> kr control sensitivity/ my final thoughts
Jeff wrote: Is the KR2 really a lot more sensitive than a KR2S? Having recently flown both the KR2S (mine) and test flown a basically stock KR2 (small extensions on the horizontal stab) I can say they felt the same to me. I honestly could not tell enough difference between them to say one felt any different than the other in pitch. My plane has outer wing fuel tanks and the KR2 I flew did not. As a result, the KR2 has significantly better roll rate, but I could not give you a degrees per second comparison. It was noticeable. Others mileage may vary. IHS, Dave "Zipper" Goodman President, EAA-818
KR> kr control sensitivity
Pat wrote: This seems to be a characteristic of the KR, at least as far as pitch is concerned and maybe it isn't a problem for experienced or high time pilots but for those of us considering building one of these cool little machines, would it be possible to make it control more like a trainer and then transition the controls to a sportier version later as the pilot gained experience in the craft? Pat, Your idea of changing the movement rate of the elevator sounds like a good fix, but there are problems associated with the idea. If one does that, the limits of travel will likely be reduced. That could mean the plane will run out of control authority when you need it most. As far as getting used to flying the KR, the biggest issue close to the ground is to never push the nose over, or even think of doing it until one has some hours in the plane and has a feel for how it flies. Once a pilot has made the transition the KR is pure joy to fly. The challenge is getting those first few hours under your belt safely. It would be easy to fret enough about controlling the KR to convince oneself it is an unmanageable plane. This is not the case. It is a good plane with good characteristics. The big issue is simply being aware of those characteristics and preparing beforehand when flying one the first time. If you want more info, call me. IHS, Dave "Zipper" Goodman 360 969 1174 (C)
KR> Copper State
Todd wrote: Anyone attending Copper State next weekend? Todd and KRnetters, My family and I will be there as vendors. Come by Vertical Avionics in the main tent. Looking forward to seeing some other KR folks there. Unfortunately, Goliath will not be there and we will not have our Aeromax engine there, either. I had to decide between wife and children or engine and plane. Family wins! IHS, Dave"Zipper" Goodman Vertical Avionics, Inc. www.verticalavionics.com
KR> kr2 accident (long) with the facts
KrNetters, Ted wrote: Could you elaborate on the nose gear that collapsed? Where did it fail? Whose nose gear was it? Diehl? He has two, a standard and a Corvair version (don't know the difference). Do any recommendations come out of this incident regarding the mounting of the nose gear? Jim Morehead was the builder of this plane, so he final authority on the nose gear. It appeared to me to be a standard (VW) Diehl system. As far as where it folded, you can take a look at link http://sites.google.com/a/wildblue.net/goodmans/Home/2010-kr2-mishap. There is a good photo from the side of just the nose gear located there. We hit extremely hard on the nose on the first bounce. I could not tell you how hard the second hit was compared to the first, as my eyes were completely uncaged for about one second after the first impact. What I can tell you is the gear did not shatter until after the second impact nose-first of the plane onto the runway. I know this because though my eyes were uncaged I could still see the prop shatter on the second hit. That the landing gear withstood the first impact is a testimony to the Diehl gear's solid design. Having nose-planted my own plane three years ago on a Corvair-weight gear (which bent, but did not fail) and last year taking that same strut off-roading at 35 KTS off a runway in California the Diehl gear is superb. In both my excursions outside the norm I took the strut to a muffler shop and had it bent back out ~15 degrees or so... good as new. A safety plug (again) for those new to the plane. My own first bent strut came from an inadvertent takeoff during high speed taxi. I pushed the nose over (1/16 to 1/4 inch stick forward) and came crashing down on the nose. The second came on a landing in very rough weather and one of my brake pistons failed. Not able to stop, I bled as much speed off as I could before the end of the runway. Nothing I could do about it, but the strut held again, though I dug a good sized furrow with the nose tire in the soft dirt. Sorry for the long answer. If you need more data, let me know and I can e-mail you privately. IHS, David Goodman Vertical Avionics, Inc. www.verticalavionics.com
KR> laser level advice
Craig wrote: Is there one (a laser level) out there for under $150 that does everything I will need it to do? Craig, If you have the money to burn, a laser level might not be a bad item to have. It is not needed to make a straight KR though. The vertical tail on my plane was done with a plumb bob from the ceiling and a bubble level and it is less than 1/4-degree off perfectly upright. Even that level of accuracy is certainly not needed for a KR, as heat, humidity, and air loads in flight are going to distort the alignment constantly. One might use a laser to align the wheels, but I used chalk, string, and angled aluminum and my wheel alignment is quite acceptable. There will be plenty of things to spend money on down the road, for the engine, fuel system, and cockpit. My recommendation is to hold on to your hard-earned cash until then. IHS, David Goodman Vertical Avionics, Inc. www.verticalavionics.com
KR> kr2 accident (long) with the facts
u cannot find anyone else to talk to, give Bill Clapp or I a call. For the tall, big, or otherwise unable to fly in with another in the KR, do not despair. Give Bill or I a call. Many people (including myself) successfully flew a KR with no prior time. My first landing in my own KR, Goliath, looked like a missile coming down the glideslope. - Yes, the plane bounced, exactly twice. The first time was under control, the second was not. The third contact collapsed the nose gear and the propeller's disintegration drove us to the left side of the runway. - We did not "continue off the left side of the runway" after landing left of centerline as the NTSB report states. This implies we were lined up left with a vector not in line with the runway. That is incorrect. On a wide runway we landed slightly left and were driven off the left side by the disintegration of the propeller. If you have a prop strike with the prop turning full power after the nose gear collapses, you are going to be driven by that prop to the side of the runway. Expect it. - The firewall was not damaged, or even cracked like the NTSB report states. The upper plywood was bent, but not fractured, and the lower firewall did not appear to have broken away from the fuselage. Other than repairing the damage to the upper portion of the airframe, and overhauling the engine this plane should be repairable. I have seen military jets crashed worse than this that went on to fly 20 more years. - There were no passengers in this aircraft, nor were there any passengers in the aircraft on any previous flight. Per FAA order 8130.2 (series) Par 134(10) there were only essential crew in the plane. One can look at 14 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 91 and Advisory Circular 20-27 (series), Certification and Operation of Amateur-built Aircraft for more information. Interestingly, nowhere in the CFR or FAA regulations will you find a definition of what an "essential crew" is. If anyone has questions about this mishap, call me at 360 678 1602. The FAA investigation is ongoing, but I will share anything and everything safety related with anyone who calls. There are more photos and write-up of the mishap aircraft at: http://sites.google.com/a/wildblue.net/goodmans/Home/2010-kr2-mishap If you have questions about flying a KR for the first time, call me as well. I will spend however much time you need or want to help you get ready for that first flight. IHS, David Goodman Vertical Avionics, Inc. www.verticalavionics.com
KR> Re: Wing Tanks
> Gonna also do a water leak test >before I put the top on the tank When my aluminum tanks were done, the person who welded them swore he did a leak check. He lied. The tanks showed numerous holes with the water test, but even those we found were not the end of it. The solution was to use POR15 to seal the inside of the tanks. POR can be found online http://www.por15.com/. This is a metal sealer and works very well. I used it on my tanks and have 300 hours on them without a drop leaked (other than through my fuel cap, but that is another problem). One solution to leaks in metal tanks to think about. IHS, David Goodman Vertical Avionics, Inc. www.verticalavionics.com
KR> GPS Verification
Todd wrote: > Can someone walk me through how to get accurate wind > information at 7500' with only a GPS? Mark Langford wrote: But to answer your question, the guys with a Dynon would just tell you to look at the screen if you want wind direction and velocity... Mark's point about checking your winds by doing runs works. Looking at the Dynon, or MGL will not work unless the pitot/static system is properly calibrated. If the system is five or six knots off, the computer will give you erroneous winds in heading and intensity as it compares to the GPS. >From personal experience with the Dynon D-180 and two different pitot/static systems. IHS, Dave "Zipper" Goodman President, EAA-818
KR> Throttle cable update
> Am I the only one that seems to screw up so much or am I the only one that > admits it? >Joe Horton, Thomas Edison: 10,000 tries to make the light bulb before he got it right and changed the entire world. IHS, Dave "Zipper" Goodman President, EAA-818
KR> Cruise Speed/Dive Brakes
Mike wrote: "Jim Morehead's has the right idea for a drag flap. It is large, goes down to almost 90º, has a very nicely designed deployment lever, and worked beautifully. It really slowed the plane down with no fuss. I would copy Jim's design if I were building a KR with a belly drag flap." Having 12 hours in this plane myself I agree that Jim's belly board design was/is excellent. It has three notches of flaps, but the last notch was not usable under most of the circumstances I flew the plane in. When installing and using a belly board, consider your ability to fly away at any setting you may have on it. I am not sure Jim's plane had a fly-away capability with one person in it at temperatures above 90 degrees (SL, VW engine). It did have fly-away capability with two people in it at those temperatures at the second notch of flaps, about 45 degrees as I recall. Two notches dropped the speed 10 MPH and made seeing the runway over the nose very easy No fly-away means the pilot's options are limited to landing on the given pass. I am not comfortable in this realm unless the landing is assured or it is critical to be on the ground on the first pass. Going from two notches to zero caused the plane to pitch downward noticeably, not uncontrollably but enough that it could be a problem if the pilot was trying to get speed brake off the plane in close proximity to the ground and was not paying attention to the nose. The plane was not tested at full speed brake but this effect would certainly have been magnified. Use caution, think everything through, and go for it... wisely. Jim's design was very well thought out and worth looking at, especially the handle design. IHS, Dave "Zipper" Goodman President, EAA-818
KR>Things happen
>Joe wrote: >Sorry this is so long but I thought it may help someone to know what can happen at >the wrong times. If safety information keeps one person alive, or helps mitigate a mishap or injury down the road, it is more important than virtually anything else put on the net. Were there any warnings or twinges of impending failure with your throttle cable? Did it go from 100% to broken without warning? Dave Goodman President EAA-818
KR> KR VW engine cowling for sale
KR-netters, I have a KR VW cowling that needs to go on a plane vice sitting in my hangar. This is an original RR cowling, still in the original RR shipping box. New they are $599. Asking $250.00 for it. If interested e-mail me privately at dgoodman(at)verticalavionics.com. If no one wants it here, it is going to e-bay in two weeks. IHS, Dave "Zipper" Goodman
KR> Photos of mishap on website
KR-netters, Photos and a write-up on the mishap with N522CP are now on my website, http://sites.google.com/a/wildblue.net/goodmans/Home/2010-kr2-mishap for anyone who is interested in how it looked. As with all mishaps, there are some good lessons to be learned from this that may keep you from having a similar mishap yourself. If anyone has questions, they are certainly welcome to call or e-mail me. IHS, Dave "Zipper" Goodman President, EAA-818
KR> Jim Morehead's (and my) mishap in N522PC, lesson learned (long)
KR builders and pilots, Here is a narrative of the salient points from Jim and my mishap last week at KRIU. If anyone has questions, they may either e-mail me or call me at 360 678 1602. The goal is that everyone out there who is getting ready to fly or will fly a KR understands how quickly things can go wrong. At the same time, DO NOT BE AFRAID OF THIS AIRCRAFT! It responds to your inputs very quickly. N522PC was a standard KR-2 with a Revmaster VW engine. The h-tail had small extensions on it for stability, and had a trim tab that worked extremely well. The instrument panel was a purely VHF-only set-up, with traditional steam gauges, and it was well thought out. The workmanship was first rate, and actually made me a bit envious. I had 12.1 hours on this airframe, and it flew great. The total time on the plane was around 25 hours. 2PC flew very well, with a stall speed around 53 MIAS, and was very easy to trim up and fly hands off. LESSONS LEARNED UP FRONT: 1. NEVER, EVER RESET THE NOSE FORWARD ON A BOUNCED LANDING. The result will be a landing on the nose, with a high probability of nose gear collapse. My first flight in N191PZ (My own KR-2S) was inadvertent on a high speed taxi test, and I did what Jim did, but not as severe. The result in my plane was a destroyed nose gear that had to be replaced. I probably only moved the stick forward 1/4, but it was enough to bring the nose through. Jim moved the stick more than that and we came through much faster as a result. The proper procedure for a bounced landing is to add full power and hold the nose attitude. If you contact the ground again, you will still be in a good nose high position. If not, you are flying again and can execute a go around. I have only seen one person salvage a bounced landing in a KR gracefully, and he was an ATP with an unbelievable amount of experience. 2. FLY THE PLANE TO STOP. I do not know if Jim got the brakes on or not, but I do know if we had more speed on when we flipped, we would probably have been killed. 3. WITH TWO PEOPLE IN THE KR, UPSIDE DOWN THERE IS NO ROOM TO MANEUVER. Our feet were stuck under the instrument panel when we came to rest. I managed to get mine free of the panel, but once I got my belt off, there was almost no room to maneuver under the plane. I might have been able to get out of the plane eventually, perhaps a ten minute effort, but if the plane had been on fire it would have been doubtful we could have gotten out before the flames reached the cockpit. 4. BRIEF EVERYTHING YOU ARE GOING TO DO BEFORE YOU FLY. Even if you are flying by yourself, go over what you will do in an emergency. We did this, and having a plan in your minds when things go bad will help you solve the problems as they present themselves. 5. BRIEF UP, STRAP IN, AND THINK THROUGH WORST CASE SCENARIOS. Jim suffered some bad lacerations to his face and forehead. When the plane stopped, I checked myself, hands move, feet move, nothing feels broken. I was hanging with my head about three or four inches from the ground. I looked over at Jim and his face was in contact with the ground /canopy. When I examined the aircraft in the hangar that afternoon, Jims lap belts were about eight inches longer than mine. While Jim is a bit thicker than I am, I did strap in very tightly using the seat straps first, then the shoulder harness. My lower back was immobile. Additionally, when I saw the plane begin to tip, I pulled my hands to my lap and tucked my head down and full forward. Maximize your survival chances by thinking out what you will do beforehand, then keep thinking as events unfold. 6. REINFORCE YOUR TURTLEDECK. The turtledeck on 2PC collapsed about four inches after the canopy shattered. If we had flipped with any more speed than we did, the outcome would have been much different. Having now been in a KR that went end-over, I will be strengthening my own turtledeck shortly. On the subject of flipping, I never expected this to be something I would experience in a KR. It happened anyway. Narrative: The day of the mishap, Jim and I flew for 1.1 hours in the morning, with him flying from the right seat most of the time. We did nine landings, and other than a tendency to line up right and accept right drift in close, Jim flew very well. He was ready to fly from the left seat based on how he had done on the right, so we talked about line-up, power, missed approaches, and bounced landings. I stopped just before we got in and said a quick prayer, Lord, thank you for the great day to go flying, give us a safe flight, and watch over us, amen. We hopped in and were airborne ten minutes later. Takeoff was unremarkable, and we headed to the downwind. The first pass was tight on the field so we went around. Jim did drop the nose on the first pass at about 400 feet and I talked to him about it as we climbed out, that he had to not let the nose drop drastically on approach or
