The KR2/2S is what it is.Safety comes from the builder-pilot.The design has not changed because it was somehow flawed.The beauty of the KR series is its ability to provide a good flying aircraft at an affordable cost.Be happy,keep building,keep flying,don't worry.Tommy W.
On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Craig Williams <kr2seafury at yahoo.com> wrote: > I couldn't agree more. But who is gonna do all that work. It is quite an > undertaking. > > Craig > > > > > > On Tuesday, October 8, 2013 1:14 PM, Bryce Guenther < > guentheraviator at yahoo.com> wrote: > > Small gathering was a joy and as always educational, I'm thankful and > thank everyone being friendly sharing discussing topics they and possibly > others are interested in to be knowledgeable about. > None of us have all the answers but we are all interested and talking with > everyone in the forums was fun. Generally the KR has evolved and still is > because builders have features they desire. When KR > > aircraft changed from the way Ken had it and the way the KR2S is now a > drastically different airplane. The faster and more powerful KR2S has > developed stability and necessary belly board/flap aerodynamic controls > that are safety of flight issues. We talk and listen and listen to what > others have built and what others want. The new builders want and get > projects then desire features that have out grown what they have or > invested time building only to discover they need major changes for safety > , mainly empenage tail surface enlargement, higher gross weight and they CG > range issue that needs to be edited in the plans. To suggest to the KR > community that New plans be drawn up on Auto Cad that contain popular > features beyond what the KR2S has and that what the KR community has R&D > would certainly be entertaining to new builders. The facilitating KR1,KR2, > KR2S, etc.plans with realistic advertising specifications for each to > enable builders a closer design > end product choice is a goal to keep the KR alive. Neophyte builders who > are not kit builders and like the KR designs are protected in the > builder/designer designation rather than kit builder designation. > Protection as Experimental category is valuable for ELSA pilots designating > what the performance numbers of their peculiar design is rather than what a > "KIT" is regulated by the manufacture publishes. Would multiple basic > builder plans be practical? Opinions? > > guentheraviator at yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > Search the KRnet Archives at http://tugantek.com/archmailv2-kr/search. > To UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave at list.krnet.org > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html > see http://list.krnet.org/mailman/listinfo/krnet_list.krnet.org to change > options > _______________________________________________ > Search the KRnet Archives at http://tugantek.com/archmailv2-kr/search. > To UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave at list.krnet.org > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html > see http://list.krnet.org/mailman/listinfo/krnet_list.krnet.org to change > options >
