>I used a spring attachment to the elevator cables and a crank from a camping >trailer window to apply pressure to either the up or down cable.
Many aircraft use this type of setup i.e.. the tri-pacer. > >Disclaimer: as with all information on the net, the builder /user uses this >information solely at their own risk and responsibility. >Parley Byington ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Parley, Your system obviously works well on your KR and this reply is not an attempt to discredit it. I would like, however, to set the record straight on the Tripacer trim system. Having owned one for 6 1/2 years and flown it for 500+ hours, I know of what I speak. The Tripacer, like most of the early Piper designs, uses a movable horizontal stabilizer for trim. It pivots on the rear H.S. spar and uses a jackscrew assembly on the front mount to move the lead edge up and down, changing the pitch of the H.S. for trim. The benifit of such a system is that whatever speed and C.G. location you have the aircraft trimmed for, you still have full elevator deflection available. The early C-182 (1956 + 1957 ? ) used the same setup and,in my estimation, Cessna took a step backwards in the design when they went with a fixed H.S. and an elevator trim tab on later models. They just aren't the same airplanes in the landing mode. The Tripacer does have spring interconnects between the ailerons and rudder to make for nearly co-ordinated flight when using either control independantly. It was Pipers attempt in the early 50's to make an airplane handle more like the family Buick station wagon. Personally, I could take it or leave. It has no real downside, even when cross-controllng on landings. As for electric trim, I have the Ray Allen servo mounted in my elevator and it works quite well. A cable (mechanical) system would be faster acting, depending on the setup, and might actually be effective if one lost the elevator control as in a cable disconnect or broken bellcrank, etc. At cruise speed, say 150 mph, my electric system is too slow and behind the airplane to maintain pitch control. I know, I've tried it several times. Getting behind the airplane, I go into increasingly stronger dive and climb modes until I scare the s*&t out of myself and take control of the KR with the stick again. I hope I never have to try it for real. It might work at a lower landing speed but I'd still bet I'd have more than a few minor repairs to make. I know I'd need a new seat. The permenant pucker wrinkles would not be repairable. :-) I'll even go out on a limb here after 114.7 hours on my KR. I'd say that maintaining control system integrity is the single most critical factor on the KR, at least the elevator and ailerons. I don't think it would be a controllable airplane if you lose either of these. It's not a Cessna where you can keep the wings level with rudder, etc. Different KR's with different wing washouts, control surface areas, fuselage lengths, will all handle differently so one statement does not apply to all. Personally, I'll take losing an engine , 10 to 1, over losing either elevator or ailerons. You hardly need rudder if the wheels are not in contact with the ground. All that said, I LOVE MY KR !!!!! It's an AWSOME flying airplane. Larry Flesner
