James Leverton wrote: > So if I'm reading this correctly, since i am building a standard kr-2, > but using the new airfoil, I need to use waf's for a kr-2s. Is that > correct? Also, if I already have kr-2 waf's, can you have the other aft > waf's bent to 3 degrees without any problems?
The 2S supplement consists of several large sheet drawings, and I don't recall seeing any separate drawings for the WAFs, so I can't tell you if you can just bend the KR2 aft WAF fittings to make them work, but my gut feeling would be that you can. I'd take it to an experienced sheet metal shop to have it done by a professional though, personally. You could probably lay out the geometry full scale on paper and see if the bolt holes will all line up to see if it'll work or not. Other differences between the KR2 and KR2S are that the firewall is larger and beefed up with extra support for heavier engines such as the 0-200 and Corvair, the spars are covered with plywood on both faces from one end to the other, the spar tapers are different, the wing planform is different (including longer wings), the horizontal and vertical stabilizers are larger (and probably associated control surfaces), the canopy is taller and less "bubbular", 14" added behind behind the main spar, 2" added in front of it, and probably some stuff that I've forgotten already. If you're going to build an S or an S wing, you'd be wise to invest the $75 for the supplement. More information on the KR2S is available at http://www.fly-kr.com/kr2s.htm . Anyone wanting more information on the new KR2S airfoil should read the stuff located at http://www.krnet.org/as504x/ . I think history has proven it to be a no-brainer if you're starting from scratch and need to build a wing anyway. Anybody that thinks the original KR2 (and KR2S, since they are the same width) doesn't need to be widened should see the photo at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/pinebluff2001/01092324.jpg . The KR2S is a huge improvement over the KR2, but it should have been made wider if you really want to carry a passenger. This one also answers the question "is it long enough". The tail volume coefficient of the original KR2 is just about off the scale when compared to other airplanes. Anybody that might be considering building a KR2 from scratch rather than a KR2S would be making a mistake, in my opinion (not talking about anybody in particular here, just throwing this out for the benefit of the newbies)... Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford email to N56ML "at" hiwaay.net --------------------------------------------------------------
