e Telstra 4G network
- Reply message -
From: "Mark Langford"
To: "KRnet"
Subject: KR> KR G rating
List-Post: krnet@list.krnet.org
Date: Thu, Aug 22, 2013 8:23 PM
Dan Heath wrote:
>>Would you not have to divide by the gross weight rather than the weight
ewall.
>
> Sent from my HTC One XL on the Telstra 4G network
>
> - Reply message -
> From: "Mark Langford"
> To: "KRnet"
> Subject: KR> KR G rating
> Date: Thu, Aug 22, 2013 8:23 PM
>
>
> Dan Heath wrote:
>
> >>Would
>
>
>>>Would you not have to divide by the gross weight rather than the weight of
>your KR.
+
You are right. That's what I meant, I just didn't say it that
way. Divide by the gross weight. When Mark and I made the trip to
Oshkosh we
On Aug 22, 2013, at 5:18 AM, Larry&Sallie Flesner wrote:
>
>>
>>
Would you not have to divide by the gross weight rather than the
weight of
>> your KR.
> +
>
> You are right. That's what I meant, I just didn't say it that wa
Would you not have to divide by the gross weight rather than the weight of
your KR. At a gross weight of 1200 #, mine comes in at 4.66, as would any
KR at 1200, I suspect.
I also never say anything that stated a 9G rating for the KR.
See N64KR at http://KRBuilder.org - Then click on the pics?
Se
Dan Heath wrote:
>>Would you not have to divide by the gross weight rather than the weight of
your KR. At a gross weight of 1200 #, mine comes in at 4.66, as would any
KR at 1200, I suspect.<<
I'm sure Larry meant "gross" weight. He definitely knows how this works!
Mark Langford
ML at N56ML.c
>I would like to say that the AS5048 spar size conformed the KR
>advertised 9 G rating more accurately
>than the RAF48 size.
> guentheraviator at yahoo.com
I don't recall ever seeing the KR rated at 9G. My plans say "
7 matches
Mail list logo
