Hi there. Yes indeed, the KR1 fuselage width and the KR2 fuselage width to tailplane ratio are I believe very different.
The KR1 tailplane width from memory, 72 inches wide. KR1 fuselage width approximately 28 inches. Ratio 2.6 / 1 KR2 tailplane width from memory, 72 inches wide. KR2 fuselage width approximately 38 inches. Ratio 1.9 / 1 Also the difference in hight of the turtle deck between KR1 and KR2 is significant. [cid:f2d67d38-744d-4c1b-8208-4ccc188e4872] [cid:ca454f67-6667-46ff-ad40-d7df498a5955] The area of the aperture to create turbulence to spill over the tailplane is approximately different by a ratio of 1 to 4. The greater blanking area of fuselage to tailplane and the height and size of the turtle deck between the KR1 and KR2 are obviously very different. I totally agree that flight control with the loss of the canopy of a KR1 should not be a problem. As for flight control with a loss of the canopy of a KR2, I theorise that there is too much turbulent air to allow pitch and yaw control to be kept. CH. I believe that Ken Rand's original KR-1 flew for some time with a small windscreen (windshield) and another KR-1 (Homer Sanders) lost the entire canopy in flight, later recovered it in a field, reattached it, and continued to fly after that.
-- KRnet mailing list KRnet@list.krnet.org https://list.krnet.org/mailman/listinfo/krnet
