Hello All,
Just a quick twi cents worth.
My cowl installation (picked up from Sid) is coming along slow but
sure. Modifying one to fit is probably almost as much work as making a new
one but still very satisfying and much better looking than my original
Cowl. Thanks Sid!
N186 RC was first flown back in 1993 and I purchased it in September
of 2013 the third owner of it! Some cosmetic as well is modifying to fit me
better changes are being done in my two stall garage this winter. I will be
raising the canopy an inch and a half as well as changing the trim color
and adding some extra stripes for better visibility by people on the ground
as well as in the air
On that note it seems that some of you are flying at altitudes that
some of the bigger boys fly at. I remember with my other experimental
airplane at 5500 feet I felt awfully small so I stayed at altitudes at 3500
feet or less because of my model size airplane! Even in the Cherokee Arrow
or going over Lake Michigan I usually stay to 7500 feet or less. You guys
have a lot of guts!
On the stall spin note... There are airplanes with different flying
characteristics... Larry's notwithstanding... I tend to agree with the
other rwriter's statement about please use the rudder For stall recovery. I
would hate to see someone who has an airplane with conventional flight
characteristics try to recover using aileron only in a stall as in most
cases that is an invitation for at the very least an unfortunate incident!
And at the very worst... Stall recovery has been the same with aircraft
from the very smallest to the very largest of airplanes in the conventional
sense! Very few people are qualified to test stall recoveries using
different techniques and even fewer are qualified to do this in
unconventional aircraft. Let us be conservative about what we do and
hopefully what we write and live long enough to pass on that wisdom to
others:
Doran
N 186 RC
On Jan 28, 2014 4:44 PM, <krnet-request at list.krnet.org> wrote:
Send KRnet mailing list submissions to
krnet at list.krnet.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://list.krnet.org/mailman/listinfo/krnet_list.krnet.org
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
krnet-request at list.krnet.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
krnet-owner at list.krnet.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of KRnet digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. WOT operation (laser147 at juno.com)
2. Peak efficiency (Dan Calvert)
3. WOT & prop efficiency (laser147 at juno.com)
4. Re: stalls (Virgil N.Salisbury)
5. Missing Post Found (laser147 at juno.com)
6. Re: now WOT (brian.kraut at eamanufacturing.com)
7. Re: now WOT (Jeff Scott)
8. Re: now WOT (brian.kraut at eamanufacturing.com)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
List-Post: krnet@list.krnet.org
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 10:13:48 -0800
From: <laser147 at juno.com>
To: krnet at list.krnet.org
Subject: KR> WOT operation
Message-ID: <AABKQPJS7AZTVZEA at smtpout04.vgs.untd.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
At altitudes above 7.5 I adjust my percentage of power with altitude, not
with throttle. I thought that's what everybody did. I'm normally
flying at around 55% or less with WOT at the cruise altitudes I use.
I'll now shut up on the subject. Here's an article by Mike Busch that
explains all this a lot better than anything further I might have to say.
http://www.sportaviationonline.org/sportaviation/201210#pg30
Mike
KSEE
____________________________________________________________
Do THIS before eating carbs (every time)
1 EASY tip to increase fat-burning, lower blood sugar & decrease fat storage
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/52e6a21eebe5221d48e7st04vuc
------------------------------
Message: 2
List-Post: krnet@list.krnet.org
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 10:23:04 -0800
From: Dan Calvert <dan.g.calvert at gmail.com>
To: KRnet <krnet at list.krnet.org>
Subject: KR> Peak efficiency
Message-ID:
<CA+TojNr_1L-=wkBLytaCQvcxp4DpHhNpaZbUCbsxzxwX_DkxOA at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
What kind off maximum efficiency numbers are you guys getting? At what
speed and with what engine setup?
I am in negotiations on a partially built kit with a rebuilt 1600 vw
motor. I will probably enlarge displacement on it, but want to see if a
certain combo gives better economy than others in actual real world
numbers. I have read that peak efficiency is usually near peak climb
speed, which is probably slower than most kr pilots zip around. It may be
hard to get numbers unless there is another efficiency enthusiast like
myself.
I will deffinately do some experimentation with my own plane but since I am
just starting to build who knows when that will be...
On Jan 26, 2014 5:32 PM, "Mark Langford" <ml at n56ml.com> wrote:
> In the "tired of making corrections for one day" category, 3050 rpms would
> be in the low 80's for percent power of my normal cruise speed.
>
> Also, looking at the Diehl wing skin installation drawing, it appears as
> though stock aft spar WAFs (wing attach fittings) are used, so yes, they
> are apparently the same shape as the regular wing, but with tips molded
in,
> so no CG range change there. Diehl wing installation instructions are at
> http://www.diehlaero.com/KR-2%20Wing%20skin%20installation.htm . The
> skins are definitely the ticket to quickly building your wings, and they
> are almost (if not entirely) immune to the skin bubbling that glass on
> urethane has because of the way they are laid up and cured (vacuum bagged,
> I'm sure). Diehl wing installation instructions are at
> http://www.diehlaero.com/KR-2%20Wing%20skin%20installation.htm . I
> believe Steve Glover is now making them at nvAero. They also sell wing
> skins for the "new airfoil", AS5046. See http://www.nvaero.com/
> products/Diehl-Wing-Skin-Kit.html ...
>
> Mark Langford
> ML at N56ML.com
> website at http://www.N56ML.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
>
------------------------------
Message: 3
List-Post: krnet@list.krnet.org
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 10:54:31 -0800
From: <laser147 at juno.com>
To: krnet at list.krnet.org
Subject: KR> WOT & prop efficiency
Message-ID: <AABKQPL7GAW45QK2 at smtpout01.vgs.untd.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
I do have something more to mention that isn't touched upon in Busch's
article. I came across a chart somewhere along the line that informed me
that with my 52" diameter prop, 3100 RPM gave me a tip speed of around
80% of mach which is, if I recall the chart info correctly, the sweet
spot for tip thrust vs drag . . . drag in this instance relating to tip
vortices and their relationship to mach. I think I came across this
chart while reading one of Paul Lipps' articles in Contact Magazine.
Also, I'm using 3100 RPM as a constant when in fact my Sterba 52 x 56 at
WOT above 7.5 gives me a range that goes from 3100 to 3200. RPM is
usually somewhere in between those two figures.
***********
I wonder why my last post didn't show up in my daily digest . . . also
wonder why Brian Kraut's postings are often blank.
Mike Stirewalt
KSEE
____________________________________________________________
Do THIS before eating carbs (every time)
1 EASY tip to increase fat-burning, lower blood sugar & decrease fat storage
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/52e6aba6deb062ba66b76st01vuc
------------------------------
Message: 4
List-Post: krnet@list.krnet.org
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 14:17:53 -0500
From: "Virgil N.Salisbury" <facilitator1 at bellsouth.net>
To: KRnet <krnet at list.krnet.org>
Subject: Re: KR> stalls
Message-ID: <52E6B0E1.2010900 at bellsouth.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Reread Stick and Rudder. You are setting up a DANGEROUS SITUATION, Virg
On 1/26/2014 10:28 PM, Larry&Sallie Flesner wrote:
> I can fly through a stall with my feet on the floor, using only
> aileron to keep wings level. I like that.
> Larry Flesner
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>> PLEASE, DO NOT DO THAT ! KEEP THE WINGS LEVEL WITH
>> THE RUDDER! You increase the Angle of attack with the down
>> aileron and set
>> yourself up for a SPIN, Virg
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Not in my KR. If I try to use rudder to pick up a wing it causes
> the nose to pitch down and it won't lift a wing. With a 3 degree wash
> out the ailerons are still flying. I can slow fly a C150 all day
> with the stall horn buzzing and maintain wings level with rudder
> only. This ain't no Cessna or Piper we're flying here. My KR does
> power off stalls very gently and straight ahead, without rudder.
>
> Larry Flesner
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
------------------------------
Message: 5
List-Post: krnet@list.krnet.org
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 12:02:17 -0800
From: <laser147 at juno.com>
To: krnet at list.krnet.org
Subject: KR> Missing Post Found
Message-ID: <AABKQPQ57ALBXE5S at smtpout04.vgs.untd.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
My post I thought was missing was actually there - I just overlooked it
in the list. Sorry. KRNET digest working fine.
Mike
KSEE
____________________________________________________________
How to Sleep Like a Rock
Obey this one natural trick to fall asleep and stay asleep all night.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/52e6bb7d876903b7d4a75st04vuc
------------------------------
Message: 6
List-Post: krnet@list.krnet.org
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 13:17:51 -0700
From: <brian.kraut at eamanufacturing.com>
To: "KRnet" <krnet at list.krnet.org>
Subject: Re: KR> now WOT
Message-ID:
<
20140127131751.31a5f8c871d0e3389177406b4aec562c.1931d2b196.wbe at
email04.secureserver.net
>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
I used to always fly wide open also on cross country. WOT at 8,000' is
about 75% power and I am always 8-13 thousand feet. Since I got the M2
with the fuel flow meter I have changed this. I have found that if I
pull back to 19" manifold pressure (fixed pitch prop) which gives me
50-60% power depending on what my altitude is that I get much better
range and economy. I only decrease my speed from 191 MPH to about 180,
but my fuel burn goes from somewhere over 8 GPH down to 6.25. This also
many times gives me one less fuel stop which makes for even more fuel
and time savings than going up and down one more time.
One thing that I have found on my plane with an MA4-PA carb is that the
last inch of throttle gives me a much higher fuel burn even with the
mixture pulled back at just LOP. The experts tell me that there is an
enrichment valve in the carb that kicks in for the last bit of throttle
to cool the engine on climbs and the extra fuel does not atomize all the
way. But aside from this there is still a big difference by decreasing
power and it is due to the much higher drag at the higher speeds.
------------------------------
Message: 7
List-Post: krnet@list.krnet.org
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 16:08:22 -0500
From: "Jeff Scott" <jscott.planes at gmx.com>
To: "KRnet" <krnet at list.krnet.org>
Subject: Re: KR> now WOT
Message-ID: <20140127210822.82070 at gmx.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Additionally, I find that at WOT the fuel distribution, especially on the
small Continentals, tends to be quite uneven as evidenced by uneven EGTs
and uneven CHTs. ?I find that even a 1/8" to 1/4" reduction in Manifold
Pressure makes a big difference in evening out the fuel distribution
between the cylinders as the throttle plate gets slightly in the way of the
air flow and causes better mixing of the fuel by disturbing the air flow.
FWIW, the MA-3 and MA-4 series carbs have a backsuction "economizer" jet
that leans the mixture at less than full throttle by using the difference
between the pressure at the venturi vs the ambient pressure.
The MA-4-5 and larger Marvel Schebler carbs use an economizer valve that is
pushed off it's seat at full throttle operations to enrich the mixture for
cooling purposes at full throttle, and conversely leans the mixture at less
than full throttle.
For those with an interest, minutia level details on the operation can be
found at <
http://www.insightavionics.com/pdf%20files/MA-4%20Carb%20Manual.pdf>
-Jeff Scott
Los Alamos, NM
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: brian.kraut at eamanufacturing.com
> Sent: 01/27/14 01:17 PM
> To: KRnet
> Subject: Re: KR> now WOT
>
> I used to always fly wide open also on cross country. WOT at 8,000' is
> about 75% power and I am always 8-13 thousand feet. Since I got the M2
> with the fuel flow meter I have changed this. I have found that if I
> pull back to 19" manifold pressure (fixed pitch prop) which gives me
> 50-60% power depending on what my altitude is that I get much better
> range and economy. I only decrease my speed from 191 MPH to about 180,
> but my fuel burn goes from somewhere over 8 GPH down to 6.25. This also
> many times gives me one less fuel stop which makes for even more fuel
> and time savings than going up and down one more time.
>
>
> One thing that I have found on my plane with an MA4-PA carb is that the
> last inch of throttle gives me a much higher fuel burn even with the
> mixture pulled back at just LOP. The experts tell me that there is an
> enrichment valve in the carb that kicks in for the last bit of throttle
> to cool the engine on climbs and the extra fuel does not atomize all the
> way. But aside from this there is still a big difference by decreasing
> power and it is due to the much higher drag at the higher speeds.
------------------------------
Message: 8
List-Post: krnet@list.krnet.org
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 15:21:31 -0700
From: <brian.kraut at eamanufacturing.com>
To: "KRnet" <krnet at list.krnet.org>
Subject: Re: KR> now WOT
Message-ID:
<
20140127152131.31a5f8c871d0e3389177406b4aec562c.c09f726c76.wbe at
email04.secureserver.net
>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Yes, what he said. The enrichment valve and economizer are different
descriptions for the same thing. I was told by the Precision Airmotive
gurus that sometimes a turbulator in the venturi helps to stir things up
and atomize the extra fuel better. I was also told that a little bit of
carb heat sometimes helps. Since I have been running at lower power
settings at cruise I have not experimented with it.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: KR> now WOT
From: "Jeff Scott" <jscott.planes at gmx.com>
List-Post: krnet@list.krnet.org
Date: Mon, January 27, 2014 2:08 pm
To: "KRnet" <krnet at list.krnet.org>
Additionally, I find that at WOT the fuel distribution, especially on
the small Continentals, tends to be quite uneven as evidenced by uneven
EGTs and uneven CHTs. I find that even a 1/8" to 1/4" reduction in
Manifold Pressure makes a big difference in evening out the fuel
distribution between the cylinders as the throttle plate gets slightly
in the way of the air flow and causes better mixing of the fuel by
disturbing the air flow.
FWIW, the MA-3 and MA-4 series carbs have a backsuction "economizer" jet
that leans the mixture at less than full throttle by using the
difference between the pressure at the venturi vs the ambient pressure.
The MA-4-5 and larger Marvel Schebler carbs use an economizer valve that
is pushed off it's seat at full throttle operations to enrich the
mixture for cooling purposes at full throttle, and conversely leans the
mixture at less than full throttle.
For those with an interest, minutia level details on the operation can
be found at
<http://www.insightavionics.com/pdf%20files/MA-4%20Carb%20Manual.pdf>
-Jeff Scott
Los Alamos, NM
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: brian.kraut at eamanufacturing.com
> Sent: 01/27/14 01:17 PM
> To: KRnet
> Subject: Re: KR> now WOT
>
> I used to always fly wide open also on cross country. WOT at 8,000' is
> about 75% power and I am always 8-13 thousand feet. Since I got the M2
> with the fuel flow meter I have changed this. I have found that if I
> pull back to 19" manifold pressure (fixed pitch prop) which gives me
> 50-60% power depending on what my altitude is that I get much better
> range and economy. I only decrease my speed from 191 MPH to about 180,
> but my fuel burn goes from somewhere over 8 GPH down to 6.25. This also
> many times gives me one less fuel stop which makes for even more fuel
> and time savings than going up and down one more time.
>
>
> One thing that I have found on my plane with an MA4-PA carb is that the
> last inch of throttle gives me a much higher fuel burn even with the
> mixture pulled back at just LOP. The experts tell me that there is an
> enrichment valve in the carb that kicks in for the last bit of throttle
> to cool the engine on climbs and the extra fuel does not atomize all the
> way. But aside from this there is still a big difference by decreasing
> power and it is due to the much higher drag at the higher speeds.
_______________________________________________
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
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
See KRnet list details at http://www.krnet.org/instructions.html
KRnet mailing list
KRnet at list.krnet.org
http://list.krnet.org/mailman/listinfo/krnet_list.krnet.org
------------------------------
End of KRnet Digest, Vol 2, Issue 26
************************************
