-----Original Message----- From: Jeff Scott via KRnet Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2014 11:24 AM To: krnet Subject: Re: KR> KRElevator weights advise
Static balancing controls is always a safe addition to the plane, but is still an addition of weight. It's probably worth noting that the plans do not call for static balancing the elevator. I have flight tested the original design elevator to 225 mph IAS with no indication that it might flutter. I have the newer designed stab and elevator on my plane now and have flight tested it to 215 mph IAS and 225 TAS, also with no indication of a desire to flutter. Both tails have been flown well in excess of the designed VNE. As far as I know, there has never been an incident of flutter in the elevator of a KR with either tail design. I should probably note that I have pushrod controls from the stick to the elevator, so there is no slack in the elevator control. I was going to add counterbalances to my elevator when I built the new tail on my KR, but just couldn't bring myself to add more weight to the plane, so didn't. I'm not going to criticize anyone for adding a counterbalance to the elevator, but realize that it's there to make you feel good as flight testing has never shown a need for it on the KR. -Jeff Scott Los Alamos, NM > > At 09:34 AM 5/21/2014, you wrote: > >What is the objective, to center the elevator with no stick input? > >Larry Bell > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > The objective of balancing any control surface is to eliminate > flutter, not to "center" a control surface. > > 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
