I have read much on the new airfoil from the posts... but I am still left
wondering....
what are the net effects of the new airfoil over the raf48?
I have 2 sets of wings. DD and another standard set that I've picked up...
I am seriously thinking about selling them and building out the new airfoil.
Anyone have an idea if the effor would be worth the work?
-Jeff
-Jeff Wilder
CISSP,CCE,C/EH
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GIT/CM/CS/O d- s:+ a C+++ UH++ P L++ E- w-- N+++ o-- K- w O- M--
V-- PS+ PE- Y++ PGP++ t+ 5- X-- R* tv b++ DI++ D++
G e* h--- r- y+++*
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
>From: "Bob Glidden" <[email protected]>
>Reply-To: KRnet <[email protected]>
>To: "michaela" <[email protected]>,"KRnet" <[email protected]>
>Subject: Re: KR> angle of incidence, AS504x
>Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2006 20:45:35 -0500
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Received: from lizard.esosoft.net ([38.118.200.18]) by
>bay0-mc2-f11.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Thu, 2
>Feb 2006 17:46:04 -0800
>Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lizard.esosoft.net)by
>lizard.esosoft.net with esmtp (Exim 4.43)id 1F4q1S-0006P5-6Lfor
>[email protected]; Thu, 02 Feb 2006 17:46:02 -0800
>Received: from mail.ccrtc.com ([209.132.160.7] helo=ccrtc.com)by
>lizard.esosoft.net with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1F4q18-0006Bi-TVfor
>[email protected]; Thu, 02 Feb 2006 17:45:43 -0800
>Received: from ADMINISTRATOR [64.184.79.168] by ccrtc.com(SMTPD32-8.05) id
>A5BE4B7F00B2; Thu, 02 Feb 2006 20:45:34 -0500
>X-Message-Info: JGTYoYF78jGjaLUb1lUnj1cL6UFfbrW6taqPHnPj2ic=
>References: <[email protected]>
>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180
>X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
>X-BeenThere: [email protected]
>X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4
>Precedence: list
>List-Id: KRnet <krnet.mylist.net>
>List-Unsubscribe:
><http://mylist.net/listinfo/krnet>,<mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
>List-Archive: <http://mylist.net/private/krnet>
>List-Post: <mailto:[email protected]>
>List-Help: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=help>
>List-Subscribe:
><http://mylist.net/listinfo/krnet>,<mailto:[email protected]?subject=subscribe>
>Errors-To: [email protected]
>Return-Path: [email protected]
>X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Feb 2006 01:46:06.0618 (UTC)
>FILETIME=[9957CFA0:01C62863]
>
>I think what Mark L is saying is that if your rear spar is already set for
>the 1 degree there is no real advantage to raising it to 2 degree...
>
>Bob Glidden
>Eminence,Indiana
>KR2S N181FW (building)
>Corvair 110
>[email protected]
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "michaela" <[email protected]>
>To: "KRnet" <[email protected]>
>Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2006 7:36 PM
>Subject: Re: KR> angle of incidence, AS504x
>
>
>Mark et al.:
>I'd like to follow up on your last comment with a question/clarification.
>
>I've read your thoughts on AOI etc. I believe the project (boat with main
>spars in place) I just purchased was built to original KR2 plans, so I
>assume it is using 3.5degre AOI for wings?. I intend on going with the
>AS504x. I've been thinking I will have to find a way to raise the rear
>spar
>to get close to 1-2degree AOI. Are you suggesting its probably not worth
>the
>effort if my main concern is cruise AOA at altitude of 5-10K.
>
>I'm also leaning toward lengthening the H.S. and increasing area of rudder.
>Project appears past point where lengthening the fuse seems reasonable, so
>I
>am probably stuck with it as is. But I'd like to make whatever other tweaks
>I can to improve stability. Of course, I'll play close attention to keeping
>COG in range...
>
>Anyone's thoughts welcome. Thanks.
>
>Tony
>
>
> > -------Original Message-------
> > From: Mark Langford <[email protected]>
> > Subject: Re: KR> angle of incidence, AS504x
> > Sent: 03 Feb '06 01:29
> >
> > Russ Bell wrote:
> >
> > > What is current thought on AOI for the AS504x
> > > airfoils? Looks like initial calculations were 1
> > > degree. Has that been found to be optimal?
> >
> > All that have been built to data have been 1 degree and nobody's
> > complained
> > yet. My fuselage is right at zero degrees at low altitude wide open
>with
> > one degree. The question might be "how often do we fly at low altitude
> > wide
> > open", and my answer would be almost never. For that reason, I don't
>see
> > a
> > problem with 2 degree eithers, which would give you a slightly better
> > view
> > over the cowling, if nothing else, with little if any drag penalty,
> > unless
> > you spend all of your time doing high speed passes at sea level. On the
> > other hand, if your aft spar is already glued in place, you can leave
>it
> > there and it becomes a no-brainer...
> >
> > Mark Langford, Harvest, AL
> > see homebuilt airplane at http://www.N56ML.com
> > email to N56ML "at" hiwaay.net
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________
> > Search the KRnet Archives at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp
> > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to [email protected]
> > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html
> >
>
>_______________________________________
>Search the KRnet Archives at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp
>to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to [email protected]
>please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html
>
>
>_______________________________________
>Search the KRnet Archives at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp
>to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to [email protected]
>please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html
