Larry Flesner wrote:
> The 2S with larger tail surfaces might handle that area
> without a problem but that is not something I'm confirming here.
Richard Mole did an analysis back in 1998, where he determined that the
KR2S had a slightly better CG range than the KR2.you get another
0.4" af
Several weeks back we discussed the plans given CG range for the KR2. I
gave the location from memory but don't recall it being confirmed.
I brought my plans home from the hangar today and looked it up. As
stated in the plans on page 114, 16.1 / Weight and Balance.
( CG range is 15-35% of
Someone mentioned using the firewall to keep the numbers
positive. That only works on a taildragger. On a tri-gear, anything
forward of the firewall is negative. Select a datum, even beyond the
nose , spinner, whatever, of the aircraft and your numbers will
always be positive, whether it's
My wife just stated you are very correct. You just might become
severely impaired.
On 4/2/2016 6:05 PM, Bob via KRnet wrote:
> I thought weight and balance was if you comment on your wife's Weight you're
> going to lose your Balance!!
> Am I wrongs?
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Apr 2, 201
I thought weight and balance was if you comment on your wife's Weight you're
going to lose your Balance!!
Am I wrongs?
Sent from my iPhone
> On Apr 2, 2016, at 1:18 PM, Mike Stirewalt via KRnet list.krnet.org> wrote:
>
> What's a weight and balance?
>
> __
> I am going to re-run the calculations using the firewall datum and
> see if they match.
+++
Keep your datum forward of the nose wheel scale and don't forget to
include the weight of the cowl, prop, and spinner. Just setting or
h
r to 3" farther away from the firewall, I should be able
to find a suitable location resulting in a fwd CG. I'll run the numbers and
publish the results.Pete
> Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2016 07:37:43 -0500
> To: krnet at list.krnet.org
> Subject: KR> C.G location,
> From: krnet at
What's a weight and balance?
Wall Street Daily
Peter Schiff: China Just Armed its Financial Missile
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/56162916e7f1531dest01vuc
Mark and Jeff are both correct in saying the spinner is not the ideal
place to choose as a datum to calculate W&B as that point could
change in the future and cause self induced errors. I was addressing
Pete's concern that using the spinner was giving him errors in his
calculations. I was s
?
?
?
>> Each time the engine moves forward
>> so does the distance of your new "arm" for calculating the new
>> moments (weight on the three scales).
>Sure, it's a sum of moments either way. But why would you want to change
not only the changed weights, but every other distance in the spreadshee
At 07:55 PM 4/1/2016, you wrote:
>Sure, it's a sum of moments either way. But why would you want to change
>not only the changed weights, but every other distance in the spreadsheet
>(or worse, your W&B sheet)? Now THAT's some bothersome math, adding
>whatever your new arm is to all those moment
Larry wrote:
> Each time the engine moves forward
> so does the distance of your new "arm" for calculating the new
> moments (weight on the three scales).
Sure, it's a sum of moments either way. But why would you want to change
not only the changed weights, but every other distance in the spre
>.
> I'm using the tip of the spinner as my ref datum so each time I
> move the engine fwd so moves the datum and I'm not sure if that is correct.
+++
I don't see a problem with that. Each t
Adam Tippin
A&P KR2S builder
> On Apr 1, 2016, at 3:39 PM, Mark Langford via KRnet
> wrote:
>
> Pete Klapp wrote:
>
>> The temporary engine mount I made allows me to move the engine about five
>> inches fwd and aft. I'm using the tip of the spinner as my ref datum so
>> each time I move the
t; From: n357cj at ptd.net
> To: pkengr at hotmail.com
> CC: ml at n56ml.com
> Subject: Re: KR> C.G location, Engine centerline
>
> Hi Pete,
> Just information for you... no advice.. Your Airframe is one of the longest
> if not thee longest constructed from the information
Pete Klapp wrote:
> The temporary engine mount I made allows me to move the engine about five
> inches fwd and aft. I'm using the tip of the spinner as my ref datum so
> each time I move the engine fwd so moves the datum and I'm not sure if
> that is correct.
The datum needs to stay in the same p
Sent from my iPhone
> On 1 Apr 2016, at 4:55 AM, Sid Wood via KRnet wrote:
>
> Pete,
> I have a KR-2 with Diehl wing skins, RR engine mount and GP 2180 VW; I put
> 2-inch spacer blocks between the fire wall and engine mount. Empty CG was
> 10.6 inches and the aircraft was very tail heavy on
?
?
>>What about changing the location of the cg range, or should I stay with RR
>>location?
>If I remember correctly, the Diehl skin instructions don't call out a
change in CG location over the KR2 plans, even though the wing planform
changes a bit (just taper and length, I think). Same with t
Pete,
I have a KR-2 with Diehl wing skins, RR engine mount and GP 2180 VW; I put
2-inch spacer blocks between the fire wall and engine mount. Empty CG was
10.6 inches and the aircraft was very tail heavy on first flight. Did not
test for stall speed in flight with the tail heavy condition; wou
Does dropping the engine centreline create any issues with prop ground
clearance?
Cheers,
Tony
On 31 March 2016 at 11:13, Pete Klapp via KRnet
wrote:
> KRNetters
> I am in the process of determining the cg on my project. In comparing cg
> location, RR plans show the 8" cg range with the fwd ed
I think I kind of misread the question too...the c.g. range is based on the
wing planform. The forward limit is can be manipulated with length and
size of the horizontal but the aft limit cannot. If your spar shifted in
relation to the leading edge, you should base it on the leading edge. That
b
This site gives a good way to calculate your c.g. range based on taper and
sweep...figure 15 to 35 % mac
http://www.nasascale.org/howtos/mac-calculator.htm
https://sites.google.com/site/mykr2stretch/
https://sites.google.com/site/mykr2stretch/parts-for-sale
On Mar 30, 2016 8:14 PM, "Pete Klapp vi
Pete Klapp wrote:
>What about changing the location of the cg range, or should I stay with RR
>location?
If I remember correctly, the Diehl skin instructions don't call out a
change in CG location over the KR2 plans, even though the wing planform
changes a bit (just taper and length, I think).
g the centerline to 3 to 3.25" below
the longerons? I will still have about 9.5" ground clearance.
Pete
> To: krnet at list.krnet.org
> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2016 21:42:07 -0500
> Subject: Re: KR> C.G location, Engine centerline
> From: krnet at list.krnet.org
> CC: ML a
Not a problem as I would still have approx. 9.5" ground clearance.
> Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 11:17:21 +1000
> To: krnet at list.krnet.org
> Subject: Re: KR> C.G location, Engine centerline
> From: krnet at list.krnet.org
> CC: tking58 at gmail.com
>
> Does dropping
Pete Klapp wrote:
> I have done calculations with pilot plus 1/2 fuel and it falls at 2" into
> the RR cg range, and pilot & passenger plus 3/4 fuel and cg falls within
> 6" preferred cg range, the later coming in right at the aft edge of the
> preferred range. I'm thinking that I would like se
KRNetters
I am in the process of determining the cg on my project. In comparing cg
location, RR plans show the 8" cg range with the fwd edge of the range starting
8" aft of the leading edge of the wing. Based on the profile of the 48" rib,
the leading edge of the cg range is 2" fwd of the front
com
> To: kr...@mylist.net
> Subject: Re: KR> C.G. location / flying qualities
> Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2010 19:14:34 +1000
>
> NO only with the KR's, as most will tell you, with a header tank as
> standard, the C of G moves to far aft when all the plans COG is used and it
>
: www.WealthManagementCanada.com
-Original Message-
From: phillip matheson [mailto:phillipmathe...@bigpond.com]
Sent: April 5, 2010 4:15 AM
To: KRnet
Subject: Re: KR> C.G. location / flying qualities
NO only with the KR's, as most will tell you, with a header tank as
standard, the C of G move
NO only with the KR's, as most will tell you, with a header tank as
standard, the C of G moves to far aft when all the plans COG is used and it
is very dangerous.
Phil Matheson
SAAA Ch 20
www.phils...@50megs.com
For many design's that doesn't leave much travel & an Enforcement headache.
ie: Fuselage tank"Sir, how much gas did you take-off with"
CldLk-Tim
- Original Message -
From: "phillip matheson"
In Australia, CASA ( Air Safety Dept) do NOT allow the use of the rear 2
inches of t
Is that just with KR's or in general?
Tony King
Brisbane Australia
On 31 March 2010 15:44, phillip matheson wrote:
> In Australia, CASA ( Air Safety Dept) do NOT allow the use of the rear 2
> inches of the C of G for safety concerns.
>
> Phil Matheson
> SAAA Ch 20
> www.phils...@50megs.com
>
>
>
In Australia, CASA ( Air Safety Dept) do NOT allow the use of the rear 2
inches of the C of G for safety concerns.
Phil Matheson
SAAA Ch 20
www.phils...@50megs.com
At 07:33 AM 3/30/2010, you wrote:
>What effect if any does the engine have on flying a KR-2 with 2 people? You
>would think that a larger engine like an 0-200 would bring the CG forward more
>as opposed to an Volkswagon 1853.
>How does the wing design effect the flying characteristics with 2 peopl
I received an e-mail that suggested my last post on determining c.g.
might have been a bit confusing when I said "referencing back to the
lead edge of the wing".
What I meant was that if you make any changes that will affect the
c.g. location you can choose a new "datum", measure the length
of
Hi
It seems to me that the ONLY sensible place to measure from is the wing
leading edge.
Given that the wing chord is 48 inches and wings are pretty standard, the
centre of lift will be at a known point relative to the leading edge.
You can make the plane longer or shorter, and that may alter t
At 10:14 AM 9/1/2006, you wrote:
>It seems to me that the ONLY sensible place to measure from is the wing
>leading edge.
>Given that the wing chord is 48 inches and wings are pretty standard, the
>centre of lift will be at a known point relative to the leading edge.
Pete
+++
37 matches
Mail list logo
