Someone posted on here before that Bill Clapp built his KR for about 7 or
8K including the corvair engine and I notice that in Orma's list of
performance charistics that 7 out of 18 listed have stall speeds of 51
MPH or less this is the biggest problem and many of these stall speeds
may not be at gross weight as required by the FAA. However I don't see
this as a problem if the design is modified somewhat, I have looked at
this and if the wing span and the wing area is increased about 10 to 20
percent and streach the fuselage about one and a half feet it could
easly qualify. In my last few years at NASA we tested a 21 percent
airfoil that was a spin iff fron the Supercritical airfoil that would let
the spars thickness increase and thus decrease the weight for the same
strength. The increase in wing span would increase the climb rate so a
smaller engine could be used and the increased wing area would decrease
the stall speed so that all aircraft with these modifications would
qualify. So you could build one in 6 months for less than 10K if you
diden't get carried away trying to make it perfect, you know build it
like Ken Rand would do it fast and light
Jim.
On Sat, 10
Dec 205 14:13:22 -0600 ejans...@chipsnet.com (Ed Janssen) writes:
> Doug,
>
> How fat your billfold looks is still an important factor though, for
> many KR
> enthusiasts. Most of the "other" designs are pretty pricey. For
> example
> the Zodiac XL airframe kit alone is about $16K , nearly 3 times the
> cost of
> a KR kit, I think. With a nicely built-up Corvair it'll probably be
> in the
> neighborhood of $20K. I have a friend who just recently completed a
> CH601
> XL with Rotax 912S. He has $36K+ in it right now.
>
> Ed
>
>
> Ed Janssen
> mailto:ejans...@chipsnet.com
>
>
> BUT I have to agree with Colin on the other designs. The
> Zodiac XL with a Corvair for power comes to mind.
> Doug Rupert
>
>
>
>
