Thanks Dan, I appreciate your comments. You're right of course, unfortunately we will never know what Ken would have done had things turned out differently.
What I meant by "simple" was that the original KR-1 and 2 were, retractable gear aside, "simple" and simply constructed aircraft. There is no doubt that as Ken began to realize the hidden potential in his little jewel that he began to look for ways to wow the aviation world and he did, including turbo's and adjustable props. But, I also think that Ken would have been right in there with the "keep it a light and simple dayfighter" group. The construction technique he pioneered seems to encourage people to experiment and extend his ideas in a variety of creative and interesting directions. Personally I don't think that 138 mph is slow, LSA or not, if you can go faster that's ok too! Speed is money, how fast do you want to go. And besides the LSA guy's just may help rediscover some ways to save weight in this unique little plane that would also help the "go fast guy's" go faster, and as Martha says, "That's a good thing!". Denny ... Dan Heath <da...@alltel.net> wrote: 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 --------------------------------- Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2ยข/min or less.
