*/ Randy: /**/
/**/
/**/Yes, I answered you and got your first reply - then I sent another
email 3 days ago asking more and requesting pictures, but no answer to
that one. I will /**/
/**/insert that second email below. Please send as many pictures as are
available, even if that means more than one email with attached pics./**/
/*
I did a check on the registration and see that you are in or near Ft
Worth - I have a son living
in NE Dallas area, not that far from where the plane is (I guess). I do
visit him now and then, so could trailer
it but the prospect of dragging a trailer that far isn't very thrilling
to this old man ... but that beats trusting
a 20 year old prop reduction drive belt, if it is the original belt!
/*Maybe can talk him into trailering it for me.*//*
*//**/
Wonder what is making that bird so heavy? Do you think it is the Subaru
installation, or something else?
Even with that engine it seems that should not be that terribly overweight.
While I have owned and flown a homebuilt before (Starduster Too), I
have not bought any plane without logs or
the original airworthiness limitation papers, so have no idea what that
would do to trying to make it legal again once
it was fixed up and flyable. If you have any idea, please pass that
info along.
More questions:
Were the cowl, spinner and wheel pants damaged or just dinged up
over time?
Assuming you have personally flown it more than once, what is your
honest opinion of it as
regards handling and speeds? Does the weight make things hairy?
You mentioned the landing speed, but is it slow in the air as well?
Any odd behavior or worrying habits?
Too sensitive controls?
Does is have a comm radio and transponder with mode C? If so,
what make and model are they? Maybe a picture of the panel
would help.
I'm an old guy, so could you help load it on a trailer?
What width and length trailer would it take, considering wheel
wells might be in the way?
I found a couple more pictures of it online, from when it was fairly new
back in the late 90's. It certainly looked very
nice then, and appears to have been a product of quality work - which
again makes me wonder why it is heavy. It
looks very slick, so could it be lots of filler and finishing, maybe?
You may have already had conversations with
Les about that, and if so then he should have had a pretty good idea, I
would think.
One note under a picture said that it has wing tanks - or maybe it was
center section tanks - but nothing said
about a fuselage header tank being present or not. That info would be
helpful, plus the total fuel capacity.
I will wait for some current pictures, if you would not mind passing
them along.
Thanks again for the quick response and information.
George
On 5/22/2015 4:36 PM, Randy Smith via KRnet wrote:
> If anyone asked about the KR That I have for sale and did not get an answer
> let me know. We think we got my computer to send out pictures again. Only 4
> at a time. Really want to move this plane. for those that asked I live in
> Fort Worth Tx Airport is T67
>
>
> On Thursday, May 21, 2015 11:01 AM, "krnet-request at list.krnet.org"
> wrote:
>
>
> Send KRnet mailing list submissions to
> krnet at list.krnet.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://list.krnet.org/mailman/listinfo/krnet_list.krnet.org
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> krnet-request at list.krnet.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> krnet-owner at list.krnet.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of KRnet digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>1. Re: Ballast Weight Installation (Sid Wood)
>2. Weight and balance (dean choitz)
>3. Re: Weight and balance (Dave Acklam)
>4. Re: Weight and balance (CraigW)
>5. Re: Weight and balance (Flesner)
>6. Help In GA (bjoenunley)
>7. Re: Help In GA (Paul Visk)
>
>
> --
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 19:47:10 -0400
> From: "Sid Wood"
> To:
> Subject: Re: KR> Ballast Weight Installation
> Message-ID: <43C9002FCC504CAE9A54D80E8B805211 at CORP55THINK>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=original
>
> I had previously reported that I would need to add 49 pounds ballast at the
> engine area to meet my goal of moving the cg 3 inches forward on my KR-2 .
> I had reported some erroneous numbers for the weight and location of the
> elevator balance weight. The correct numbers are 4.71 pounds with an arm of
> 95 inches. The nose ballast location is still 23 inches forward of the stub
> wing leading edge. Doing the math: 4.71 x 95 / 23 = 19.45 pounds ballast.
> By removing the elevator balance weight with its mounting and bolts, I will
> not need that 19.45
