On 8/10/2020 5:10 AM, Mark Langford via KRnet wrote:
Pretty simple stuff, but failure to to it correctly has led to crashed
planes and dead pilots. Almost been there, almost did that! See
http://www.n56ml.com/wb/index.html if you haven't already.
++
As for weight and balance, it's a simple summation of moments involving
empty aircraft weight and the variable weights of things like
pilot/passenger, fuel, and baggage, such that the the aircraft CG range
is maintained in the proven CG envelope, located around the center of
lift.There a
Rear CofG. Amen to that. It’s not a nice feeling. I also had the trim cable
fail with two on board. Had to fly and land holding forward stick the entire
time.
Puckering material.
Phil.
Sent from my iPhone
> On 10 Aug 2020, at 17:25, Gary Sack via KRnet wrote:
>
> 81JM is a joy to fly at fo
81JM is a joy to fly at forward CG and a miserable thing at aft CG. I
haven't taken up passengers in a very long while for this reason. I once
turned controls over to a CFI during a biannual and quickly took them back:
"If I can safely get this thing back on the ground, will you pass me?"
I d
This whole CG thing comes down to the following simple law of physics:
Any lifting body (wing) has a center of lift (CL) where if all areas of
lift were concentrated in to one spot, it is the CL The engineer
designs the airplane to distribute the weight of the aircraft so that if
all weight
My Kr2 was balanced nose heavy. It needs a minimum of 70kg pilot to fly. Wing
tanks on the CofG central line. Flys great. But as always with the short Kr2,
PIO (pilot induced isolations) with over correction is common. If I did not
have an experienced Kr pilot with me on my first flight, it woul
On 8/9/2020 2:53 PM, Dr. Feng Hsu wrote:
So, it could be dangerous even if the tail section is around 2 pond
heavier than CG required, correct?!
Kindly,
Dr. Hsu
+++
I don't know if anyone has tested C.G. range down
Craig Williams wrote:
>> Are we using 25-33% MAC for the CG range on the AS5046 airfoil? I
setting up a new datum and rechecking moment arms locations for an
updated POH.<<
I've got too much on my plate to check right now, and it's been a
long time since we did that, but the basic prem
Are we using 25-33% MAC for the CG range on the AS5046 airfoil? I setting up a
new datum and rechecking moment arms locations for an updated POH.
Thanks
Craig
___
Search the KRnet Archives at https://www.mail-archive.com/krnet@list.krnet.org/.
Please
I wonder how much the CG moves when climbing for example, when the fuel
sloshes/repositions to the rear of the tank? Cant be much of an issue because
I have never heard of it, just wondering... could be checked by inclining the
plane with scales I suppose...
The geometry isn't that hard to figure out. You can do the math on where
the CG will be at any given attitude. "how much" the CG can change varied
with how much fuel is in the tank.
On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 1:10 PM, Chris Prata via KRnet
wrote:
> I wonder how much the CG moves when climbing for
You are correct that the new airfoil can change the cg limits...the aft cg
limit is based on the wing...not the aircraft...so a different airfoil
might affect the c.g. range. I looked through a selection of different
aircraft and 15%-35% mac is a pretty common range.
https://sites.google.com/site
>...the kr2s should actually have a
>smaller cg range than the kr2. This is because the kr2s has a shorter mean
>aerodynamic chord. 15% to 35% mac is a smaller range on the kr2s than a
>kr2.
+++
Where is the center of lift on the new airfo
Err sorry. I meant 220#@2"=440 moment
On Jul 22, 2013 9:26 PM, "Adam Tippin" wrote:
> 30# @ 18" = 540 moment.
> 220#@ 2" = 540 moment.
> On Jul 22, 2013 6:04 PM, "Larry&Sallie Flesner"
> wrote:
>
>>
>> I am finally taking Jim Faughn's recommendation to move the 2180 VW
>>> 2-inches forward.
>
30# @ 18" = 540 moment.
220#@ 2" = 540 moment.
On Jul 22, 2013 6:04 PM, "Larry&Sallie Flesner"
wrote:
>
> I am finally taking Jim Faughn's recommendation to move the 2180 VW
>> 2-inches forward.
>> Sid Wood
>>
> ++**++**
> ++
Sid,
you might want to crunch some numbers on the engine move. To remove 30
lbs from the nose you are probably looking at an engine move of 10 or so
inches.
Riley Collins
Rutledge, TN
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 3:31 PM, Sid Wood wrote:
> My KR-2 is now in my air conditioned shop at home. Afte
If anyone is interested i have my KR2 up for sale again as the previous buyer
decided not to complete the sale. I have lowered the price to 8500.00 which is
less ?than the parts alone are worth. To see pictures i have an ad on
Barnstomers that describes the
> I am finally taking Jim Faughn's recommendation to move the 2180
> VW 2-inches forward.
>Sid Wood
++
This would be a great time to install that 0-200. :-)
Larry Flesner
think will turn out
to be a really good decision.
-Jeff Scott
Los Alamos, NM
> - Original Message -
> From: Sid Wood
> Sent: 07/22/13 01:31 PM
> To: krnet at list.krnet.org
> Subject: KR> CG Considerations
>
> My KR-2 is now in my air conditioned shop at home. Afte
My KR-2 is now in my air conditioned shop at home. After three flights for
a total of 55 minutes, I am finally taking Jim Faughn's recommendation to
move the 2180 VW 2-inches forward. I have the 2-inch aluminum blocks and an
aluminum spacer for the nose strut made by a local machine shop plus
Specifications state 8-16" aft of the inboard wing leading edge.
For N64KR, the CG range is 8" to 14" aft of the inboard wing leading edge.
This is because it is generally accepted that the aft 2" are a dangerous
place to be.
I hope that answers your question as I don't have it in relation to th
>>
>> Gary
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: KRnet [mailto:krnet-bounces at list.krnet.org] On Behalf Of jon kimmel
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 10:59 AM
>> To: KRnet
>> Subject: Re: KR> cg question...
>
r, front or rear face.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Gary
>
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: KRnet [mailto:krnet-bounces at list.krnet.org] On Behalf Of jon kimmel
> Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 10:59 AM
> To: KRnet
> Subject: Re: KR>
Where is the KR2 design gross weight most forward cg in relation to the
spar, front or rear face.
Gary
-Original Message-
From: KRnet [mailto:krnet-bounces at list.krnet.org] On Behalf Of jon kimmel
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 10:59 AM
To: KRnet
Subject: Re: KR>
35% MAC is a very common aft cg limit...from 707s to cessna 150s. To get
any more accurate you would have to know exactly the point where you don't
need any download on your elevator/stabilizer. Of course the longer and
narrower your wings are the smaller and further forward your MAC moves.
Once
Does anyone have a dimension location in relation to the rear side of the
main spar for the cg using the 5048 wing?
Thanks,
Gary
The CG range called for in the plans is " 8 to 16 inches aft of the
inboard wing lead edge. I'm not sure that my earlier stated location
was entirely correct.
Larry Flesner
eliminate
the sideloading?
James
- Original Message -
From: "smwood"
To:
Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2011 9:19 AM
Subject: KR> KR CG
Leveling does change with loading as the airplane settles on the main gear.
The
spring gear also moves the wheels outboard with increasin
Perhaps put the scales on those furniture dollies with casters to eliminate
the sideloading?
James
- Original Message -
From: "smwood"
To:
Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2011 9:19 AM
Subject: KR> KR CG
Leveling does change with loading as the airplane settles on the ma
Sid
Tried to send pictures to your email address but was blocked.
Jack Cooper
Chuckey TN.
- Original Message -
From: "smwood"
To: kr...@mylist.net
Sent: Saturday, July 9, 2011 8:19:18 AM
Subject: KR> KR CG
My previously reported KR-2 weight is in error. Af
ack Cooper
Chuckey TN.
- Original Message -
From: "smwood"
To: kr...@mylist.net
Sent: Saturday, July 9, 2011 8:19:18 AM
Subject: KR> KR CG
My previously reported KR-2 weight is in error. After some help by fellow
Chapter 478 members Bernie Wunder and Tom We
My previously reported KR-2 weight is in error. After some help by fellow
Chapter 478 members Bernie Wunder and Tom Weis and assisted by Mike Weis,
the correct weight appears to be 746 or 709 pounds, depending on which
measurement and which bathroom scale you care to believe. When we loaded
t
Last year testing with 120 pounds of simulated passenger weight, and me at
195#, with half fuel my plane was just busy, but not unstable. It is a KR2
built to plans with 1 inch extension on the motor mounts of the VW standard
mount. The 1915 cc VW engine was not big enough for a decent climb rat
Recently the first flight was made in 880AB. As with most any experimental
aircraft a few problems occur. Question? Is the cg range for Dan Deihl wing
skin wings the same as for the standard KR-2 wings? N880AB's cg falls within
the limits for the standard KR-2, however my KR feels tail heavy. I
Bill:
I can not address this with respect to KR aircraft but do have knowledge of an
elevator stall problem in the early units of a certified craft that led to ADs.
The early Cessna Cardinals(177s) with the Laminair flow wing had such a
problem That crafy has a "Flying Tail" and is a high win
I believe that the CG must be the same as it is the same airfoil. I too am
concerned about the difference between the stock wing and the Diehl wings.
Before I fly mine, I intend to ask Dan what to expect.
See N64KR at http://KRBuilder.org - Then click on the pics
See you in Mt. Vernon - 2006 -
net.com.au
web: http://www.members.optusnet.com.au/johnjanet/Martindale.htm
- Original Message -
From: "D F Lively"
To: "KRnet"
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 1:53 PM
Subject: Re: KR> cg with Deihl wing skins
> Bill:
>
> I can not address this with re
; AUSTRALIA
>
> ph: 61 2 66584767
> email: johnja...@optusnet.com.au
> web: http://www.members.optusnet.com.au/johnjanet/Martindale.htm
> - Original Message -----
> From: "D F Lively"
> To: "KRnet"
> Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 1:53 PM
> Subject: Re: KR> cg wi
> Is the cg range for Dan Deihl wing skin wings the same as for the
> standard KR-2 wings? N880AB's cg falls within the limits for the
> standard KR-2, however my KR feels tail heavy. I am unable to
> establish a true stall due to the uncontrolled pitching up of the
> wings prior to stall. I
Some one mentioned DECALAGE at one time, Virg
On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 08:25:57 -0600 Larry&Sallie Flesner
writes:
>
>
> > Is the cg range for Dan Deihl wing skin wings the same as for the
>
> > standard KR-2 wings? N880AB's cg falls within the limits for the
> > standard KR-2, however m
mount.
Ken Jones, kenbjo...@cinci.rr.com
Sharonville, OH
N5834, aka The Porkopolis Flying Pig, KR-2
KHAO
155 Hours
- Original Message -
From: "countryhomeprint"
To: "KRnet"
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 9:14 PM
Subject: KR> cg with Deihl wing skins
> Recent
Date: 3/29/2006 9:16:41 PM
> Subject: KR> cg with Deihl wing skins
>
> Recently the first flight was made in 880AB. As with most any
experimental aircraft a few problems occur. Question? Is the cg range for
Dan Deihl wing skin wings the same as for the standard KR-2 wings? N880AB
Dan
Be sure to let all of know what you learn from Dan Diehl. Where are you on
the engine installation?
Jack Cooper
> [Original Message]
> From: Dan Heath
> To:
> Date: 3/29/2006 10:28:23 PM
> Subject: Re: KR> cg with Deihl wing skins
>
> I believe that the CG must
Larry&Sallie Flesner"
To: "KRnet"
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 8:25 AM
Subject: KR> cg with Deihl wing skins
>
>
>> Is the cg range for Dan Deihl wing skin wings the same as for the
>> standard KR-2 wings? N880AB's cg falls within the limits for the
&
ing)
Bill Page
boliverp...@bellsouth.net
- Original Message -
From: "Jack Cooper"
To: "KRnet"
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 11:22 AM
Subject: RE: KR> cg with Deihl wing skins
> Bill
>
> Have you had someone else review your W&B figures?? A double c
ot;KRnet"
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 11:24 AM
Subject: Re: KR> cg with Deihl wing skins
> Dan
>
> Be sure to let all of know what you learn from Dan Diehl. Where are you on
> the engine installation?
>
> Jack Cooper
>
>
>> [Original Message]
>> From: Dan H
Is that empty? Ours came out 2" in front of the forward limit, empty, and
the most forward that I can get with full fuel and me in it, is 1" inside of
the forward limit. Did you calculate the station for your fuel and people?
See N64KR at http://KRBuilder.org - Then click on the pics
See you i
Sorry, didn't read this one first. Yours comes out very much like mine does
If I ever get to fly it, I'll let you know how it compares in flight. You
know, the KR wants to fly, nose down, and more nose down, the faster it goes
Maybe, this is some of what you are experiencing.
See N64KR at ht
world in Australia.
John
- Original Message -
From: "countryhomeprint"
To: ; "KRnet"
Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 9:51 AM
Subject: Re: KR> cg with Deihl wing skins
> Jack, I had 2 different cg calculations done by two different A & P's
> using
&
-
From: "Dan Heath"
To:
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 7:04 PM
Subject: KR> CG Calculations.
> Is that empty? Ours came out 2" in front of the forward limit, empty, and
> the most forward that I can get with full fuel and me in it, is 1" inside
> of
> the fo
y, March 30, 2006 7:45 PM
Subject: Re: KR> cg with Deihl wing skins
> Hi Bill
>
> Most odd :-)
>
> Those figures seem similiar to mine and others. You should be able to keep
> within 8 to 12 " aft of leading edge in most loadings. Although RR states
> 16" as the r
Subject: Re: KR> cg with Deihl wing skins
Larry, my cg falls about an inch from the front limit empty. With full gas
it falls about 3/4 inch from front limit. This was determined with two
calculations with two different datum points. Each fell at approximately the
same distance from the fr
Foreward C G should cause a tail LIGHT condition, Virg
On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 20:10:56 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) "Dan Heath"
writes:
> Sorry, didn't read this one first. Yours comes out very much like
> mine does
> If I ever get to fly it, I'll let you know how it compares in
> flig
CorvAIRCRAFT web site at www.flykr2s.com
- Original Message -
From: "VIRGIL N SALISBURY"
To:
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 9:48 PM
Subject: Re: KR> cg with Deihl wing skins
> Foreward C G should cause a tail LIGHT condition, Virg
>
> On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 2
4 inch of
each other. I was sitting in the plane when the pilot calculation was made.
Bill
boliverp...@bellsouth.net
- Original Message -
From: "Jim Faughn"
To: "'KRnet'"
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 9:24 PM
Subject: RE: KR> cg with Deihl wing skins
The slower the airspeed, the lighter the stick becomes in the back position.
- Original Message -
From: "VIRGIL N SALISBURY"
To:
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 9:48 PM
Subject: Re: KR> cg with Deihl wing skins
>Foreward C G should cause a tail LIGHT condition,
Mark, the calculations are in my KR. I will retrieve them and send you a
copy.
Bill
- Original Message -
From: "Mark Jones"
To: "KRnet"
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 10:05 PM
Subject: Re: KR> cg with Deihl wing skins
> Virg, I am glad you pointed that o
-Original Message-
From: krnet-boun...@mylist.net [mailto:krnet-boun...@mylist.net]On
Behalf Of countryhomeprint
Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 7:13 AM
To: KRnet
Subject: Re: KR> cg with Deihl wing skins
The slower the airspeed, the lighter the stick becomes in the back
posit
No one has brought up that if you have a tail heavy condition you will have
one heck of a handfull just trying to fly the plane straight and level. You
may not have noticed if you have been flying very sensitive aerobatic planes
for the past few years, but if you have spent most of your time in mo
Without reading through the archives, do any of you guys know what station
the retract gear sets at using the bottom of the firewall as 00. Don't
have a set of drawings. Trying to do some preliminary engine mount
measurements. Is there a retract bird with an 0-200 out there anywhere?
Bobby
I.m using 18.5" aft of the firewall and 24.7 pounds. Gear up I have at 34".
Brad Ankerstar
KR 2 N84BA
Lebanon, OH
With retracts, be sure to measurew the CG with the gear up, Virg
On Wed, 1 Mar 2006 18:07:34 -0500 "Brad Ankerstar"
writes:
> I.m using 18.5" aft of the firewall and 24.7 pounds. Gear up I have
> at 34".
>
> Brad Ankerstar
> KR 2 N84BA
> Lebanon, OH
>
>
> ___
My KR's empty CG with pilot aboard is at 29% wing chord. Does anyone else
fly with this amount of aft CG ?
Ryan
op off the fuel tank.
> Your results may vary.--I'm 240lbs and the last passenger was
> 135 lbs.
>
> Kenny 6399U
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Colin Rainey"
> To:
> Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2005 7:24 AM
> Subject: KR> CG
Kenny and Bobby
My initial post was in response to a question posed by a builder in reference
to whether or not the CG location and limits were different from the original
KR2 and the KR2S. I had stated that they were not if both aircraft were built
to plans. Kenny your plane being flown within
The problem with these things is that everything you do changes the
CG-including leaning forward. Somebody needs to invent a sliding
counter weight. ( just kidding)
- Original Message -
From: "Colin Rainey"
To:
Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 7:24 PM
Subject:
weight. ( just kidding)
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Colin Rainey"
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 7:24 PM
> Subject: KR> CG and the KR2S
>
>
> > Kenny and Bobby
> > My initial post was in response to a question posed b
At 06:42 PM 1/4/2006, you wrote:
>The problem with these things is that everything you do changes the
>CG-including leaning forward. Ken
+
That's true on any aircraft. I once flew the Tripacer on a clear
, smooth night for 25 minutes w
page http://web.qx.net/jeffyork40/
My KR-2 http://web.qx.net/jeffyork40/Airplane/ to see my KR-2
Email jeffyor...@qx.net
- Original Message -
From: "Larry&Sallie Flesner"
To: "KRnet"
Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2006 7:00 AM
Subject: KR> CG a
>.
>I am getting ready to install wing tip navigation/ strobe lights. They are
>the Aeroflash units. I think the total weight of the power supply units is 2
>lbs. Which is 1 lb per unit.
>Considering the above and on comparison to your KR, Where are you locating
>the 2 lbs of strobe power supplies
.
www.engalt.com
-Original Message-
From: krnet-bounces+brian.kraut=engalt@mylist.net
[mailto:krnet-bounces+brian.kraut=engalt@mylist.net]On Behalf Of
jeffyor...@qx.net
Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2006 5:19 PM
To: KRnet
Subject: Re: KR> CG and the KR2S
OK, all this CG talk has got
Kenny, Colin, Mark, Mark, Dan and group,
This is exactly the factor which made me decide to build the KR- the
availability of hard, specific data from educated and experienced folks who
have
the desire to help. This thread will be fied in my wt/bal file. If you have it
available, could you
I am not exactly sure, but I can tell you that from firewall to the axle of
the tailwheel is 136.125. You can take 4 to 6 inches off that to get back
to the rudder post. If I remember, I will measure the difference for you
tomorrow, if you need an exact number. Remember, this is a stock KR2.
Th
Dan,
Thanks, I streatched my KrS2 a bit (156" firewall to post) I am looking for
the plane with similar dimensions. This entire issue is so critical to
stability that all related info is of help.
I want to fly two with a certain degree of safety and comfort. I have used
the stock dimensions
Bob
If you are concerned about it, then I would place jack stands at all 3 places
where the gear would be, or close to it, and then get a preliminary weight and
balance, measured from the firewall. I encourage use of the firewall because it
is in my opnion the most accurate place on the plane to
I am not sure that I understand your question. Given this:
Datum is Firewall = 0 inches
Leading Edge of wing = 12.3125 inches
Forward C.G. = 20.125 inchesNote: Specifications state 8-16" aft of the
inboard wing leading edge
Rear C.G. 26.125 inchesFor N64KR, the CG range is 8" to 14" aft of the
in
Dan,
Is this set of wt/bal data valid for the old airfoil or the new one? Is it
for the KR2 or the KR2s? ( If I read the question correctly, the query was for
the cg on a KR2 which would imply the old airfoil;
correct?
Bob Polgreen
That CG is for a KR2 that weighs 670 pounds and has the RAF-48 airfoil,
using the Diehl long wings and Diehl fixed gear.
See N64KR at http://KRBuilder.org - Then click on the pics
See you in Mt. Vernon - 2006 - KR Gathering
There is a time for building and a time for FLYING and the time for
Bob
I do not believe that the CG limits were changed for the KR2S from those
already designed for the KR2. They are still the same, which is why the
standard modification is to add one bay forward and one bay rear for the total
stretch. Others are going alittle longer and enlargening the tail f
>> I do not believe that the CG limits were changed for the KR2S from those
already designed for the KR2. They are still the same, which is why the
standard modification is to add one bay forward and one bay rear for the
total stretch.<<
There's only 2" added to the front of the S as opposed to th
at www.flykr2s.com
- Original Message -
From: "Mark Langford"
To: "KRnet"
Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2005 7:54 AM
Subject: Re: KR> CG and the KR2S
> >> I do not believe that the CG limits were changed for the KR2S from
those
> already designed f
s may vary.--I'm 240lbs and the last passenger was
135 lbs.
Kenny 6399U
- Original Message -
From: "Colin Rainey"
To:
Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2005 7:24 AM
Subject: KR> CG and the KR2S
> Bob
> I do not believe that the CG limits were changed
op off the fuel tank.
> Your results may vary.--I'm 240lbs and the last passenger was
> 135 lbs.
>
> Kenny 6399U
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Colin Rainey"
> To:
> Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2005 7:24 AM
> Subject: KR> CG
What are your CG locations on your personal KR2's , forward of aft ?
Ryan
I have been looking at my new plans for a couple of weeks, and thinking
about building a 'simple' KR, as light as possible.
First, is it conceivable that the CG would be forward enough with a KR2S
built light to the following specs?:
-1835 engine, hand start, no electrics, Great Plains mount
-nos
You do not have to be concerned about the balance as you can move the engine
forward if you need to.
I think that scratch built is lighter, if you are good at it. If you are not
so good at it and have to do a lot of filling and re-work, then I think that
the premolds are lighter.
See N64KR at ht
I think that premolds are lighter, Virg
On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 16:09:48 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) "Dan Heath"
writes:
> You do not have to be concerned about the balance as you can move the
> engine
> forward if you need to.
>
> I think that scratch built is lighter, if you are good at
Eric,
Alot depends upon the builder, I built my own turtledeck, and although my
fuselage was 3 inches wider than plans, my turtledeck weighed half as much as
the RR pre-molded part.
you can see how I constructed mine at:
http://www.kr-builder.org/ScottCable/index.html
My turtledeck isn't what y
Phillip and others,
Not withstanding the KR, a much desired response of an aircraft is that when it
gets lighter, the CG moves forward to offset the natural tendency of a lighter
aircraft to be less stable. Most certified aircraft have fuel tanks/cells
located in a such a way as to cause the CG
I believe that Larry Flesner has wing tanks also located just behind the
spar. This would also accomplish moving the CG forward as fuel burns.
>Colin Rainey KR2(td)
+
My fuel tanks, 12.5 gal each, are located in each outer wing panel.
They s
Dan asked me to describe my installation for interpolation by others.
It is an 1835 VW with large jugs, Dan Diehl case and accessory drive,
Zenith carb, direct drive, 52" Culver Prop, and standard engine mounts with 1
inch extensions. I measured from the firewall to the middle of the engine t
or in the plans. Did
you make these weights and measurements with the aircraft level? Mains that
far forward seam somewhat excessive??
Mike Turner
- Original Message -
From: "Colin"
To:
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2003 8:25 AM
Subject: KR>CG
Dan asked me to describe my insta
Mike,
I got all these numbers from the previous builder that he supplied. I have not
performed preliminary weigh-in myself yet. I merely took his numbers, and
converted them to the firewall as a datum plane, instead of the tip of the
spinner which he used.
Colin Rainey KR2(td)
crain...@cfl.rr.co
93 matches
Mail list logo
