-44 42"Piper PA-32 & PA-34 47". These
measurements were to the inside of the trim, and to the inside surface of the
windows would give a couple more inches.
Dennis Steed, SLC Utah
-Original Message-
From: Pete Klapp
To: kr...@mylist.net
Sent: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 7:05 pm
Sub
I said I would post a reply from the builder of my 44 inch fuselage. I
bought. Brian sold the KR2ss fuse to build an RV.
---
Hi Phil,
I was talking to Ron Slender recently and he mentioned that you were working
on the KR. You may have noticed that I made both top and bottom longerons a
gnment till the bottom cross members,
gussets, and bottom skins were complete.
Pete Klapp, building KR-2S N729PK,
Canton, Ohio> To: kr...@mylist.net> Subject: Re: KR> Widening the fuselage,
Bending Longerons> Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 12:04:54 -0500> From:
phillabaum...@aol.com> &g
Ron Wanttaja of FlyBaby fame and an contributor to Kitplanes and Sport
Aviation has an interesting comparison of cockpit dimensions on his website
http://www.wanttaja.com/avlinks/cockpit.htm could be insightful for some
that are concerned about the cockpit size of the KR.
Rick Human
N202RH
Houst
I made my fuselage 44 inches wide also.? I slowly bent the sides with the
plywood attached. (over 2 days). They lifted off the table in the middle higher
than the wood blocks I had as a spreader. I would use some at least 2" if not
3" high next time.? I did not break anything but the sounds of c
My new fuse is 44 inches. But I did not bent the longerons, I sent Mark's
email to the Aussie that bent them, and I will send on his reply if and when
he replies. OK
Phil Matheson
SAAA Ch. 20 http://www.saaa20.org/
VH-PKR
Australia
EMAIL: phillipmathe...@bigpond.com
KR Web Page: www.phil
iliar company.
>
> As I go through the KRs described on the webb and see the engines being used .
> I wonder how many have some lead in their tails.
>
> Bill Weir.
> - Original Message -
> From: "Dan Heath"
> To:
> Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 7:13 A
Very few, if any. Now after I put the Vair on my KR2, there may be one with
lead in the tail, but we don't know that yet.
I don't see how you can extrapolate anything that you think you might know
about the KR1, to the KR2S? I don't think your conclusion is wrong, I
just don't see the correl
through the KRs described on the webb and see the engines being used
I wonder how many have some lead in their tails.
Bill Weir.
- Original Message -
From: "Dan Heath"
To:
Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 7:13 AM
Subject: KR> Widening the fuselage, Bending Longerons
If you
Dan Heath wrote:
> If you want to widen the fuse, why not just make the firewall
> proportionally
> larger, and extend the length proportionally longer?
That would alleviate about a third of the extra stress, since the firewall
is about 29" aft of the spinner backplate, and the trailing edge o
If you want to widen the fuse, why not just make the firewall proportionally
larger, and extend the length proportionally longer? You are going to have
more frontal area anyway and will need room on the firewall for a larger
engine. I would think that, that would take care of the bending issues.
but a little extra room would have been nice in my case, for all that
junk that needs to hang off the firewall like oil cooler and filter. I'd
make the firewall wider too
+++
I visited the site and noted blisters for the induction tubes - when did
they disappea
Sorry for the poor typing on the last post, I hit the send button before
checking.
So I guess to have nice lines, I need to know what the demensions of the front
of the cowl will be and then take that back to the widest part of the
fuselage, in a continuous curve. That should determine the wid
Go with a rotary and you got room and power to burn.
Doug
-Original Message-
From: krnet-boun...@mylist.net [mailto:krnet-boun...@mylist.net] On Behalf
Of Stephen Jacobs
Sent: Friday, June 25, 2004 5:40 AM
To: 'KRnet'
Subject: RE: KR> Widening the fuselage
but a little ext
I am going to widen the fuselage 6 inches at the aft spar top longeron, and
deep the proportional demintion taper to the bottom logeron at that station. My
plant is to taper the fuselage back to the standard demensions at the firewall.
the reason I want to do that is to have a more areodynamic t
Ron Smith wrote:
> My questions for the group is these: Will that be better areodynamicly
than keeping that six inche width proportionally to the firewall. I can't
see how it wouldn't be better.<
I think if you leave the firewall stock width, you'll have an aesthetically
UNpleasing discontinuity
At 12:43 PM 6/24/2004, you wrote:
>I am going to widen the fuselage 6 inches at the aft spar top longeron,
>and deep the proportional demintion taper to the bottom logeron at that
>station. My plant is to taper the fuselage back to the standard demensions
>at the firewall. the
I wish that I had
There is no way that the stock KR firewall is
>wide enough to look right with an O-200.
>>Don Reid
++
Don,
Are you calling my baby ugly?! :-) :-)
http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/flesner/relax.jpg
http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/flesner/tax
>
> There is no way that the stock KR firewall is
>>wide enough to look right with an O-200.
>>>Don Reid
>++
Don,
Are you calling my baby ugly?! :-) :-)
http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/flesner/relax.jpg
http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/flesner
At 07:23 PM 6/24/2004, you wrote:
> >
> > There is no way that the stock KR firewall is
> >>wide enough to look right with an O-200.
> >>>Don Reid
> >++
>
>Don,
>
>Are you calling my baby ugly?! :-) :-)
>
>http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/flesner/rel
20 matches
Mail list logo
