I deleted these posts, after reading them. If it says LSA or ELSA, I usually delete them after a quick scan, but these looked like they were worth reading, so I did. And, after leaving the computer, I found that I was still thinking about the points that both Rich and Dennis made. They are both very valid as Rich clearly pointed out what building a KR is all about and Dennis clearly summed up how to build a KR that will comply with ELSA. Not sure, but I think the E stands for Experimental, therefore it would be an ELSA if it were ever done. Dennis stated that if you build a KR to plans, fixed gear version, and simply put on long wings, sort of like the Diehl skins, and powered it with the small engine choice, that it would probably comply. I think you are right. Remember that the critical and most difficult part of the, "to plans part, is to keep it within the design weight. So, now that this issue has been resolved, maybe the next posts will be more along the line of, "I am building my ELSA KR, does anyone have any suggestion on how I would.......?" because if all you want to do is to speculate, there is plenty of that in the archives.
Dennis, I want to challenge you on one thing. Do you really know what Ken intended? Do you really think that he wanted a "simple" plane? Retractable gear with flaps. I think that his KR might even have had a turbo, and had heard that he wanted to put on a constant speed prop. I also heard that he wanted to use his plane to get a complex rating, or something like that. But, it really does not matter what WE think Ken intended, I am sure that he would be very happy with the way it has turned out, and with the way it is finding a second life. And, I want to point out, that it is finding it's second life because of the things that Rich mentioned. If the ELSA KR ever becomes more than speculation, the KR will probably find it's third life. Thank you both for the insight and very interesting posts. Now, does anybody know how to the the barrel shims off the 92mm VW barrels? See N64KR at http://KRBuilder.org - Then click on the pics See you in Mt. Vernon - 2006 - KR Gathering There is a time for building and a time for FLYING and the time for building is OVER. Daniel R. Heath - Lexington, SC -------Original Message------- From: Dennis Mingear Thanks for bringing some constructive "insight" to the list Rich. Your points are all well made and need to be considered by anyone wishing to carry on in the tradition that Ken Rand really intended for the KR. It is supposed to be a simple, lightweight, efficient aircraft that can be built by anyone with a minimum of tools and construction skills. I'm amazed at how many KR's cruise under the eLSA speed limit and just how few "stock" KR's actually cruise at 180 mph. Nothing wrong with dreaming though, that's what makes couch flying so much fun! The KR can be made to "work" in the LSA box by simply building light, 950 pound empty weight and using an 1835 vw instead of a Corvair or 0200. Notice that this is very close to the 980 pound empty weight that KR would like to see all KR2s fly. Adding a tiny bit to the wing (KR2s vs KR2) is no different than building 2 to 4 hundred pounds overweight and using a mega engine to get it all off the ground. I applaud your efforts to make the KR an LSA compliant, fun little dayfighter. I, for one, would think that Ken would also applaud your efforts and even approve of what you are trying to do. It certainly makes more sense to go in the direction that leads to a simple lightweight, fun-to-fly aircraft, rather than the direction that most are taking nowadays, Good Luck in your persuit of Ken's dream of building and flying light, simple aircraft. Denny ... Flame Away, it won't be the first time I've riden in this Rodeo! rhartwi...@juno.com wrote: Thankfully it is still Friday!! Let's see.....I think I finally have it. It is a KR if you: stretch it 14 inches, make it 6 inches wider, make the sides vertical, build it 200+ pounds over plans gross wt., use a different airfoil, install an O235, change the horizontal airfoil, use Dr. Dean Hinges, build it with sliding or forward tilt canopy, use Fowler flaps, make the fuselage a foam/fiberglass sandwich, make folding wings. (are these changes all made by "designers?") It is not a KR if you: build it light and to the plans except for adding slightly more wing area or make it a single place to give it a stall speed of 51mph instead of the Rand Robinson published stall speed of 52mph.....one little mph, have it cruise at about 135mph.....(and there are a lot of KR's flying that do not exceed the LSA cruise speed specs.) Please don't try to stifle those who are discussing how to lower the stall speed. By the way I did not get to vote on the following-- "It has been agreed upon here that an ELSA legal KR 1 or 2 would not remotely be a KR anymore" We are not talking about an ELSA anyway--we are talking about an Amateur Built Experimental KR that is legal for a Sport Pilot to fly. The LSA's category planes are factory built or built from an approved factory kit. If you took a poll of the Netters you would probably find that relatively few have finished and flown a KR or any other homebuilt. We do look up to those of you who have. Rich Hartwig Waunakee, WI rhartwi...@juno.com
