Netters I am going to take some liberties here, so please don't flame if I over generalize or leave a technical piece of data out. Most of what I post here is general information, subject to the constraints and specifics of a particular application anyhow.
A short time ago I posted a comment about weight and I think Larry Flesner (sorry if not you) stated that weight is not really a factor in cruise but is in climb and takeoff distance. I have to respectfully disagree. Here is why: In all planes the weight lifted determines the angle of attack that the airplane must have in order to achieve enough lift to overcome gravity. When the weight of the same plane goes up, more lift must be made to overcome this greater inertia to stay Earthbound, even in level flight. I realize that I am leaving out ALOT of other factors, but I am trying to make a simple point (if one can do that in aviation) about the effect of weight on a plane. Given proper loading so that the CG is similar at gross weight to solo weight, the same plane will have to have a greater angle of attack at climb and cruise at the higher weight. It has more weight to lift, so must make more lift. This greater angle of attack may be a little or alot, depending on if the CG moves favorably or not, etc... This is why some planes have little speed loss when loaded with two, and others have alot of loss. More angle of attack means more lift and MORE DRAG. Climb rate is a function of the surplus power or thrust available above that required for cruise to maintain level flight. So if you have an 80 hp engine and you need 40 hp to maintain level flight solo, but 45 at gross weight due to the increased weight drag caused, then you will climb with 35 hp (80 - 45 = 35) instead of 40 due to the higher weight. Higher weight will effect your approach speeds also. Brain Kraut can relate to this one very well, as can others. The heavier you are the faster you need to be, to maintain the same rate of descent and control. If you slow to solo weight/speed you are too slow, because it takes more lift to do all the same things that you did solo. So, the paradox: either you jack in more power to maintain the same speeds as solo and fly behind the power curve ( NOT GOOD; loss of engine here means crash), OR you increase your approach speed slightly, say 5 knots/7 mph as a safe guess, and get alot better control. It is the same with winds. Add half the gust factor, or (I add this) half of the crosswind component to my approach speed. Gives me great control, and allows me to deal with the wind on the ground, where the KR2 has its strong suit; it is great in ground handling. Why would you want to fight in the air when you can control on the ground?! These are principles that I teach in all planes, not just KR's. I do understand that some KR's have a rearward CG when loaded fully and this may seem to over come the problems at cruise. I do not disagree with this. Just remember, that this increase in speed comes at a price of stability (you are closer to the rear limit of the CG and control). This makes spin recovery much more difficult, higher landing speeds due to lack of elevator arm in a rear CG configuration, and can lead to a flat spin if conditions work out right (or wrong really). Be careful... Hope this helps some.... Colin Rainey Independent Loan Officer Branch 2375 Apex Mortgage Company 386.615.3388 Home Office 407.739.0834 Cell 407.557.3260 Fax brokerpi...@bellsouth.net
