I always find it interesting that the thread titles in here end up being one
thing vs another thing, like flap v belly board.
I'll grant you that building a belly board as an after thought is probably
easier than building flaps. My plane was down for 2 or 3 months while I added
flaps, fairings
I think more effective flaps will require additional elevator authority at
flare...if I remember correctly, usually flap deflection moves the center of
lift forward (or was that aft?), thereby changing pitch-moment in a nose-down
direction. Peter
Many years ago I did a lot of research on, lift, drag & aerodynamics in general
trying to figure out what good cool stuff to do to a airplane design. I've
always been interested in fast, cheap to fly efficient airplanes. I looked into
the lift thing, boy oh boy are there differing opinions on th
Both are correct, one controls the "quality" of the lift e.g. Bernoulli, and
the other is just plain lift from angle of incidence. The both work together
in an infinite amount of variations. Heck one can work without the other. The
"quality"/"stability" will be less than desirable for sure.
c
Hi guys
I have not got to that stage yet but has anybody ever thought of joining the
two flaps to each other via a glass/carbon composite layup under the belly
of the plane.
That would create both a belly board and flaps with the benefits of both.
Stiffness of the bellyboard might be an issue as th
It should be noted that the "stock" flaps in the plans didn't generate a lot of
drag or lift, but were better than nothing. A belly board generates lots of
drag, but not lift. But a belly board is really a patch for the lack of
planning for adequate flaps in the plans.
While I chose to add fl
I misspoke a bit on the Nanchang. That is a split flap the whole way
across. The Mustang 2 is more a conventional flap outboard of fusalage
and like a split flap under the fusalage.
Original Message
Subject: Re: KR> flaps v belly board
From: "brian.kraut--- via KRnet"
List-Po
That is essentially what my Mustang 2 has. The plane was designed with
stub wings similar to the KR and a very long (I think about 10') flap.
The flap extends a few feet out each side of the fusalage and is
essentially a belly board/split flap under the fusalage. It is very
effective for both ad
Also, the original flap had a very short chord because anything bigger
would drag on the ground with the short retracts. Almost everybody is
using taller gear today. I had planned on bigger flaps that hinged
right off the aft spar. They would have been much more effective than
the little 8-9" wi
Not to mention the extended weight pilots over the average size in the
70s.
Original Message
Subject: Re: KR> KR-2 Plans - Corrections?
From: Mark Langford via KRnet
List-Post: krnet@list.krnet.org
Date: Sun, September 14, 2014 5:07 pm
To: "KRnet"
Sid Wood wrote:
>Are the KR
Huh? I really can't be convinced of that. The force of the air hitting the
top of the gurney flap is a force downward on the back of the car - very
little, if any, differential pressure is causing any significant downward
force. It's like saying that the shape of an airplane wing causes a "va
You're putting a huge air dam under the plane. This is essentially the
same as a gurney flap on the back of a stock car. While the flap itself
isn't making downforce on the car, it's making the air under the wing, and
quite a distance out to either side of the flap pack up, and provide
greater di
I wrote:
"...or perhaps it changes AOA of the tail or whole airplane to lower
drag..."
That's got to be the dumbest thing I've ever written, now that I think about
it...
Mark Langford, Harvest, AL
ML at N56ML.com
www.N56ML.com
Jeff Scott wrote:
" A belly board generates lots of drag, but not lift"
I thought this also, "common knowledge", I believe, and it may not be true
"lift" that the belly board generates, but something makes drops the stall
speed about 3 mph. I proved this a few weeks ago while calibrating my stal
I think the bellyboard could technically be considered a "split flap".
That's what the flaps are called on Cessna 310, 335 and 340 and DC-3's
and I'm sure some others - thinking of the Stuka and some of the Navy
WW-II planes. They drop down from beneath the wing and fuselage.
Mike
KSEE
Well done boet - how many have you built already?
Any progress on the KR?
Will be in PE later this year - you still in the same place?
Take care
Steve Jacobs
REMEMBER, GROWING OLDER IS MANDATORY. GROWING UP IS OPTIONAL.?
-Original Message-
From: KRnet [mailto:krnet-bounces at list
bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://list.krnet.org/mailman/private/krnet_list.krnet.org/attachments/20140915/ccac5d76/attachment.obj>
Having read the ease of the Belly board construction I am wondering if the
complexity of?installing flaps is worth while ? I am at the point of finishing
the stubs and starting flaps. Knowing what you know about?belly board vs flaps
would you guys?install flaps? Is the?additional low speed lift
>Having read the ease of the Belly board construction I am wondering
>if the complexity of installing flaps is worth while ? I am at the
>point of finishing the stubs and starting flaps. Knowing what you
>know about belly board vs flaps would you guys install flaps? Is the
>additional low spee
The way I think of it is. It's an airplane. Airplanes have flaps. Especially
planes that can go 200 miles an hour. Also, ?you never have to explain why your
airplane has flaps.?
Look at the way Jeff made his. That's the way I'm doing it.?
Paul Visk
Belleville Il
618 406 4705
Sent on the new Spr
Cool video Rob. For some reason I didn't remember you were taking photos in
the Cub.
This was one of the most fun trips I've ever taken in my plane. That's mostly
credited to flying with a great bunch of guys. It was a blast.
-Jeff Scott
Los Alamos, NM
> KR Net,
>
> I managed to finally
21 matches
Mail list logo
