Quite true, Doug.
One remark with regards to the "Experimental" category. The word is a
misnommer, since the category is used to register two types of planes:
proven designs, and unproven designs. If you replicate exactly, as per
plans, an existing design, then you are not, strictly speaking,
"experimenting". If you buy a kit, complete, and merely assemble it, you
re not, strictly speaking, "experimenting". (Although in all cases, your
merits will be outstanding).This is why most countries have chosen to
label this category "amateur built", rather than "experimental". In South
Africa, my warning placard inside the cockpit was not "Experimental" but
"Amateur Built". In France, it is even broader, since the category is
"restricted airworthiness certificate", and covers all antiques,
experimental, amateur built, and "orphaned aircraft" (whose manufacturer
has disappeared).
Serge Vidal
KR2 "Kilimanjaro Cloud"
Paris, France
"Doug Rupert" <drup...@sympatico.ca>
Envoyé par : krnet-boun...@mylist.net
2005-05-04 05:16
Veuillez répondre à KRnet
Remis le : 2005-05-04 05:17
Pour : "'KRnet'" <kr...@mylist.net>
cc : (ccc : Serge VIDAL/DNSA/SAGEM)
Objet : RE: KR> internet friend or foe
Good point Don. I for one appreciate any and all comments
as anyone
who hangs around here for long ends up broadening their horizons as well
as
education. Anyone that takes one comment that is not substantiated as
gospel
is well on the way to destruction. It does not matter the medium whether
internet or print as there are always those out there that will try and
profess their expertise at many things. Usually these are for personal
gain
or to get you to buy something.
Many here need to remember the classification of the
aircraft we are
building as well as the power-plants we choose to use. EXPERIMENTAL. We
work
out there on the fringe and that is the real kick in our endeavors. We
create or dreams and hold the course till we have achieved the required
end.
Many items that now grace the cockpit of certificated aircraft once got
their start in experimental aircraft.
I for one really like this new medium we call the
internet as it
allows us access to much more information than we would generally have.
The
fact that we have both the KRNet and Corvair list at our disposal allows
us
to make informed choices when constructing our own projects. Much time and
energy is saved by making mistakes that others have or trying something
that
others have proven don't work. I can't help wondering what Ken would think
if he could see or ride in some of the KR's being built today. Bill
Clapp's
or Troy Pettaway's come immediately to mind. Think of it, no we can't
duplicate Ken's empty weight but we can come close. Today we routinely
outperform the original KR's with the new airfoil or Corvair engines. I
sincerely doubt that there are many of us that would take to the air
without
at least a basic compliment of flight instruments as well as navigation
equipment. The pitch sensitivity issue that once plagued this wonderful
design is now a thing of the past and many KR's taking to the air these
days
can be flown hands off for periods of time.
We have come a long way since the original design debuted
so long
ago and now we have gotten to a point where many of our machines are KR's
in
name only due to design changes that have been instituted and proven over
the years by those that have gone before us. Even Orma's KR is not immune
and has undergone changes since it was originally built twenty years ago
so
I for one say keep those comments coming.
Doug Rupert
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.2 - Release Date: 5/2/2005
_______________________________________
Search the KRnet Archives at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp
to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to krnet-le...@mylist.net
please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html
