Good to know the aircraft works fine with the crank centreline on a plane parallel with the top longerons, but I think Martin's question was about the alignment of the engine in relation to the vertical plane along the aircraft's centreline. In other words, is the mount configured so as to position the thrust line at an angle to the aircraft's centreline (to counteract torque effects and thus reduce the amount of rudder trim required) and if so by how much?
I can see a big dependency here on the amount of torque the engine is producing, so I doubt there is a single number for all cases. And as Mark has suggested it'd be a lot of work to try different settings to get to the ideal number for a given combination. Nevertheless it'd certainly be interesting to learn what different people have done. On another note, I flipped my 'boat' right way up on the bench for the first time a few days ago. Starting to feel like I really will turn this pile of sticks into an aircraft :-) Cheers, Tony King Queensland Australia On 10 April 2012 09:41, Mark Langford <m...@n56ml.com> wrote: > Martin Pearce wrote: > >>Does anyone have thoughts / experience with the best thrust line offset to >>use for the KR2? > > I doubt anybody's done testing with various thrust lines to know what > works > best, and they are essentially all different anyway, but apparently the > plans work fine (crank centerline along the plane of the top of the > longeron) and what I used works (dropped ~2.625" below the top of the > longeron). Anywhere in there should work, and I'm guessing the range is > larger. I dropped mine to get the engine lower for better visibility over > the cowling. > > Mark Langford > ML at N56ML.com > website at http://www.N56ML.com > -------------------------------------------------------- > > > _______________________________________ > Search the KRnet Archives at http://mylist.net/private/krnet/ > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to krnet-le...@mylist.net > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html
