Duncan, I would not use the 3.5° that the plans call for unless you want to go through the air looking like a dolphin with your nose pointed down. There are a lot of things in the plans which should have been well researched before they were published. The RAF48 concept was borrowed from another design. Personally, I would set it somewhere between 1 to 2 degrees. But then that is just my 2 cents worth.
Mark Jones (N886MJ) Wales, WI USA E-mail me at [email protected] Visit my KR-2S CorvAIRCRAFT web site at http://mywebpage.netscape.com/n886mj/homepage.html ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mac McConnell-Wood" <[email protected]> To: "KRnet" <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2004 4:45 AM Subject: Re: KR> Wing incidence with RAF-48? Ho! -Duncan of Devonport-are you of that ilk,-or just common old Duncan? Ref the RAF incidence,-I would stick to the original 3.5° -It gives you a nice nose down ride and "if it aint bust,why fix it?" Regards Mac McConnell-Wood of Winters hill UK ----- Original Message ----- From: "Duncan" <[email protected]> To: "krnet" <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2004 8:18 AM Subject: KR> Wing incidence with RAF-48? > Hi, > I have been following the discussion occasioned by the AS-family or > aerofoils and the 1 degree incidence recommendation, but does this also > apply to aircraft fitted (or about to be fitted) with the RAF-48 airfoils > (ie the Diehl wing skins)? > > Regards, > > Duncan of Devonport > Auckland, New Zealand > > > > _______________________________________ > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to [email protected] > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html _______________________________________ to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to [email protected] please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html
