Here in OZ we have the SI system for just about everything, (I think) but for aviation we have feet, knots, runway lengths can be given in feet and metres, but fuel is in litres, and plane weights in kg, so it is a bit of a mish mash. Just to keep you guys in the northern hemisphere ed-u-mic-kat-ed, like! :-)
At 11:13 AM 8/09/2003 +0100, you wrote: >My 2 cents worth as an historian: >They could not throw the imperial system overboard with the tea in Boston, >'cause we, Frenchmen, had not invented the scientific replacement yet. The >Metric system came only with OUR revolution, only a few years down the line. >Of couse, later, the Metric system was made the basis of the International >System of Measures, and is therefore, today, the ONLY system with >international recognition (even the British have discarded the Imperial Body >Parts system). >Alas, at the end of WWII, aviation in the Western world has to regress to US >standards. But the Russian world abides the IS system, ant their aircraft >fly altitudes in meters, and speeds in kilometers per hour. I got my >microlight licence in a Russian built Aviatika "Baby Mig" that was just like >that... and I had to think fast in the air to convert! > >Now, while waiting for a Federal miracle Do as I do, get yourself a nice >piece of converter software. ;-) > >Serge Vidal >KR2 ZS-WEC >Tunis, Tunisia > >-----Original Message----- >From: krnet-boun...@mylist.net [mailto:krnet-boun...@mylist.net]On >Behalf Of Fraser McGregor >Sent: Sunday, September 07, 2003 11:20 PM >To: KR builders and pilots >Subject: Re: KR>Building a KR2 > > >Thanks Colin for that advice - yes I have been looking at the web sites - >all very interesting. As I live in Australia - also known as God's Great >Garden - I might just have to pass on the gathering, but thanks for the >offer - the old C172 won't go that far. > >I just wish all you guys would give your measurements in real terms, ie >millimeters, kg, Newtons, etc, instead of these ancient english imperial >things. Pity you didn' t throw the imperial system overboard with the tea >in Boston, all those years ago! Makes my head ache, having to do the >conversions. (Please note - last para is my attempt at humour :-)) > >At 09:39 AM 7/09/2003 -0400, you wrote: > >Fraser, > >You said: > >Hi - I am new to this net, so bear with me please! I am looking for a > >suitable plane to build, and the KR2 of KR2S seems to fit the bill for me > >so far. Do the current plans available have these later refinements and > >improvements that you mentioned,? If not, is there a source of these, or > >is it simply that these refinements etc are what individuals have done to > >their planes while building them? > >To answer your question, please do not think that I am the authority here, > >as there are some long time builders that have way more knowledge of this > >aircraft than I. I guess I just tend to be alittle more vocal! HaHa. > >The KR2 is a wonderful airplane, but a new builder should not consider the > >older KR2 without including the "S" supplement. If you will "cruise" over > >to the KRnet construction site and search through the archives, you will > >find a HUGE amount of information on modifications and improvements that > >builders have made to this little plane. Also, lots of builders' sites > >have great ideas and improvements that they have made to overcome > >different building challenges that they have experienced. The KR2S plans > >are reported to be the clearest and easiest to use, as well as the > >supplement including the refinements of re-enforced firewall for larger > >powerplants, and longer fuselage. Mark Langford's site talks about > >several good refinements and hiper links you to other sources of > >additional studies and mods. The original KR2 had a neat idea for > >retracts, but over the years, virtually every builder with them has done > >away with them in favor of a less drag inducing well faired fixed gear, or > >some other version of retract (Loehle Replicas has a good system that > >swing inboard, but requires alot of work to fit onto a KR2). Also you > >cannot forget to put the gear down on fixed gear! I had a student > >recently, over 300 hour pilot take me down an instrument approach in a > >twin engine aircraft and forget the landing gear, all the way down to 400 > >AGL when I took over and lowered the gear. If he had been solo that would > >have been an expensive mistake. > >What I recommend is for you to take several afternoons and read through > >the different builder websites and finished aircraft, and learn all you > >can from the ones out there building, or flying. They know what is > >working for them, and will save you literally hundreds of hours trying to > >solve problems. Then when you have questions, and you can't find the > >answer in the archives, ask it here. Go to the Gathering this year and > >look at the KR2, and KR2S up close and compare. I am told the materials > >cost is virtually the same, and you will be much happier with the plane > >when it is complete. Any other builders' thoughts please don't hesitate > >to chime in here.... :) > > > > > >Colin Rainey KR2(td) > >crain...@cfl.rr.com > >Sanford, Florida > >FLY SAFE!!!!_______________________________________________ > >see KRnet list details at http://www.krnet.org/instructions.html > > >_______________________________________________ >see KRnet list details at http://www.krnet.org/instructions.html > > >_______________________________________________ >see KRnet list details at http://www.krnet.org/instructions.html
