Congratualtions, Colin. Well done.
You are following a trail blazed by Charles Lindbergh, not only in the
general flight route, but in goodwill. I wish you well, as, I'm sure
that everyone on the KR list does, too.
Dan Branstrom
A note for those using slime in their tires. It is fine on tires that
use tubes, but if you really want to piss off your local tire dealer,
use it on tubeless tires. It makes a real mess on the wheel and
difficult to work on.
The reasons for using nitrogen to fill tires is that it doesn't migra
hear stories from survivors. The people who didn't
make it out, or died can't tell us how wonderful their chute was.
Dan Branstrom
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Herbert wrote, "..my bellyboard turns down to about 80 deg. and
after talking to some aerodynamicists and some practical trials I
decided to let the board without holes. The tests I made are very
simple.I took a foamsheet ( 1 meter x 1 meter x 5 mm) ,fixed 5 strings
to the edges and the ce
tracted, but at the speeds of a KR, the
drag caused by the retracted speed brake may not be significant.
Dan Branstrom
nufacturer, he found that the battery's
performance fell short of the advertised specs.
Kitplanes will be on the newsstands soon for those of you that don't
subscribe.
Dan Branstrom
ws of lithium
battery usage in airplanes. Everyone is free to do what they wish, but I
urge everyone who's thinking of using lithium batteries for their
airplane to read the article.
On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 2:11 PM, Dan Branstrom via KRnet <
krnet at list.krnet.org> wrote:
>>
ery
might encounter with their use. Those don't seem to be addressed by
manufacturers. He is promising follow up articles.
I found it interesting reading.
Dan Branstrom
cilloscopes, and all sorts of electronic
test equipment, outmoded but usable.
Enjoy.
Dan Branstrom
I wondered what "the worst carb ever" would be, too, then was amused
when it meant carbohydrates, and not carburetors.
ts. That's 420 watts. Probably, that's overkill, and you might be
able to adapt a smaller, ground-based one, but even if you find one
that's suitable that takes half the power for just you, that's still 210
watts (15 amps at 14 volts) draw on your system.
Dan Branstrom
The latest Flying magazine has a spread on different Android flight
planning programs. I know that isn't what you wanted, but I thought I'd
mention it.
Dan Branstrom.
http://youtu.be/DOeKsD8aXq0
While this may be represented as a comparison between engines, I have
several problems with it.
You do not fly at 0 airspeed, but that is the speed that this test was run.
If a prop is optimized for climb or slow flight, it will outperform one
optimized for cruise in
I've got some experience with the GO-300 on a Cessna 175, as well as
having had discussions with people familiar with 175s as owners.
The consensus is that the problem is not with that engine, but with
operating technique. If the GO-300 is operated at the rpms of an
ungeared engine, such as 27
The suggestion was: "I'd use automotive wax applied with 4 ought steel
wool for maintaining and polishing."
Would using steel wool leave tiny particles of steel to corrode? Is
there something better? Or am I being too picky?
Dan Branstrom
Oscar is right. Be careful about what you put in your brake systems.
Locally, we're lucky to have a local supplier of hydraulic fittings who
is also a pilot. He is very careful about what he sells, and is very
knowledgeable. His O rings meet aviation specs for brakes.
Many pilots go to him
may vary as to your solution.
Dan Branstrom
for amphibians.
The only exception to the gross weight limit of 1,320 lbs (in essence
600 kg). is 1,430 lbs for seaplanes.
Ground adjustable props are allowed, but not in-flight adjustable.
If you have questions, I'd advise you to contact the EAA.
Dan Branstrom
18 matches
Mail list logo
