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.
>...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
There is one thing stated incorrectly...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.
https://sites.google.com/site/mykr2stretch/
Paul Visk wrote:
>> With Sid's landing gear being 17" aft of datum (leading edge) and the
>> problem with the tail falling down. What would be a good position for the
>> landing gear if you haven't drilled your legs yet? I know you wouldn't
>> wanna make the nose to heavy because you would
Using my weight and balance Excel spread sheet, I can do all manner of "what
if" math quick and easy. (Don't know if Mr. Pazmany had Excel, but his math
is still valid.) My datum is the leading edge of the stub wings per the
KR-2 plans. At my max gross weight I would not be able to load my
With Sid's landing gear being 17" aft of datum?(leading edge) and the problem
with the the tail falling down. What would be a good position for the landing
gear if you haven't drilled your legs yet? I know you wouldn't wanna make the
nose to ?heavy because you would have problems rotating.?
6 matches
Mail list logo
