Hello Guys,
Below is a copy of a post I did in Feb of 2016 and again now because of the on
going confusion of terms. I have about 12 sets of numbers form folks on the
net. But as I had said in follow up messages that year I would like to have
many more flying or not. I choose the foreward face of the main spar as a data
point to make it easy to hold a tape measure to and should be no confusion as
to where the comparison comes from. There are 2 lists started one for the KR2
And one for the KR2S. not surprising from the dimensions I already have there
was almost no one that had a "to the drawings dimension" not even my to the
plans KR2s.
I will gladly finish the chart if I could get another 8 or 10 guys to send
dimensions. I just don't have enough to make a true data point reference. I
didn't rally talk to Mark L about it yet but he has the one performance page
with a lot of information on it from a survey years ago and it seems that may
be the right place to add this information.
Joe Horton, n357cj
Copied from 2/2016
Hey guys,
After thinking a little bit more I see that this can still be real confusing to
anyone reading any of this in the future. Here is what I propose....
Anyone that can (flying plane or not) take a measurement from the front side of
the main spar to the back side of the fire wall plywood and take a second
measurement from the front side of the main spar to the point that the tape
measure touches at the tail-post intersection at the rear floor position of the
fuselage. Basically a center-line of the plane profile. This will give a full
length as well as a break down foreword and aft of the main spar for multiple
planes. It is also a location that should be accessible for almost every KR
built.
I guess it would help if with the dimensions I could know if it is a KR2, KR2
modified, KR2S, KR2S modified
E-mail them to me privately at n35...@ptd.net and I will make a chart up
showing all the dimensions relative to each other and assign them to a N number
for future references. Pretty sure Mark L. would link it to KR net for us.
The end result of this exercise I would hope to have real factual
dimensions instead of the subjective add this to that or the other and it flies
great. I also am still believing that we are all pretty close together with
only a few out-layers in the statistics.
I'll do both of mine tonight
Thanks for the help.
Joe Horton
----- Original Message -----
From: "KRnet" <krnet@list.krnet.org>
To: "KRnet" <krnet@list.krnet.org>
Cc: "John Bouyea" <j...@bouyea.net>
Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2019 7:35:56 PM
Subject: Re: KR> Alright guys, it's time.....
So Flesner's airplane is about 8" longer than the KR2S design; do I have that
right?
As a data point, I'm really enjoying flying Roy Marsh's N133RM just as it was
built. It defined the "2S" dimension and has the flat "airfoil", 71 inch-wide
tail feathers.
And like Langford reported about Jim Faughn's very-standard KR2 airplane, I
believe Roy's airplane DOES fly substantially easier than the "standard" KR2 I
had previously.
Not to say the KR2 is a bad design, but the KR2S is easier to pilot.
I know the "even more stretched" fuselage has a big following.
SO can we have some other input from pilots operating the standard KR2S
fuselage dimension for the sake of comparison please?
John Bouyea
N133RM KR-2S
OR81/ Hillsboro, OR
Subject: Re: KR> Alright guys, it's time.....
My KR is stretched 24" over the standard KR2 and that's not too much,
especially with mine having the standard KR2 tail feathers.
Larry Flesner
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
Search the KRnet Archives at https://www.mail-archive.com/krnet@list.krnet.org/.
Please see LIST RULES and KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html.
see http://list.krnet.org/mailman/listinfo/krnet_list.krnet.org to change
options.
To UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to krnet-le...@list.krnet.org
