Lee Van Dyke wrote: >> I have a KR-2 with retracts and I have an Ultra Pup, and 3 other KR >> projects. I do not want the KR projects and would like to get them to >> people who want to FLY a KR. It is hard to sell a project to someone, and >> save them a lot of money, cus they read that they need to build a 2-s with >> the new airfoil. I call bull stuff on that also. <<
I now own and fly a VW powered KR-2, as well as my Corvair powered KR2S that I've put over 1100 hours on, so I feel qualified to talk to this. I'm sure it's obvious that if you are building a new airplane, it makes little sense to build a KR2 rather than a KR2S. The difference in cost is negligible, but the improvement to pitch stability is considerable. There is some room to argue that building a super-light KR like Ken's prototype is more fun to fly and has a better climb rate, but it would be at the cost of safety tradeoffs. To argue that there was no room for improvement over the original design is an indefensible position. Ditching the retracts in favor of fixed gear is an almost universally acknowledged "must-have" improvement. The extra length of the S, and building the horizontal stabilizer longer has almost no effect on the cost, but brings a large improvement in the pitch stability. The new airfoil is a classic "free lunch". A more powerful engine such as the Corvair gets you off the runway much quicker than the VW, which I would argue is safer. The list goes on and on. There is room for both opinions, and you are welcome to call "bull", but I suspect the fact that you are trying to sell KR2s has something to do with your post. There is still plenty of room for "plans built" KR-1s and -2s at the table, but there's no reason to disparage the KR2S and the improvements that have been gained in the twenty years since the "most recent" plans were published...unless you have some KR-2s you want to sell... Mark Langford ML at N56ML.com website at http://www.N56ML.com --------------------------------------------------------
