KR> 2013 gathering educational and Macroscopic "plans" suggestion
The KR2/2S is what it is.Safety comes from the builder-pilot.The design has not changed because it was somehow flawed.The beauty of the KR series is its ability to provide a good flying aircraft at an affordable cost.Be happy,keep building,keep flying,don't worry.Tommy W. On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Craig Williams wrote: > I couldn't agree more. But who is gonna do all that work. It is quite an > undertaking. > > Craig > > > > > > On Tuesday, October 8, 2013 1:14 PM, Bryce Guenther < > guentheraviator at yahoo.com> wrote: > > Small gathering was a joy and as always educational, I'm thankful and > thank everyone being friendly sharing discussing topics they and possibly > others are interested in to be knowledgeable about. > None of us have all the answers but we are all interested and talking with > everyone in the forums was fun. Generally the KR has evolved and still is > because builders have features they desire. When KR > > aircraft changed from the way Ken had it and the way the KR2S is now a > drastically different airplane. The faster and more powerful KR2S has > developed stability and necessary belly board/flap aerodynamic controls > that are safety of flight issues. We talk and listen and listen to what > others have built and what others want. The new builders want and get > projects then desire features that have out grown what they have or > invested time building only to discover they need major changes for safety > , mainly empenage tail surface enlargement, higher gross weight and they CG > range issue that needs to be edited in the plans. To suggest to the KR > community that New plans be drawn up on Auto Cad that contain popular > features beyond what the KR2S has and that what the KR community has R > would certainly be entertaining to new builders. The facilitating KR1,KR2, > KR2S, etc.plans with realistic advertising specifications for each to > enable builders a closer design > end product choice is a goal to keep the KR alive. Neophyte builders who > are not kit builders and like the KR designs are protected in the > builder/designer designation rather than kit builder designation. > Protection as Experimental category is valuable for ELSA pilots designating > what the performance numbers of their peculiar design is rather than what a > "KIT" is regulated by the manufacture publishes. Would multiple basic > builder plans be practical? Opinions? > > guentheraviator at yahoo.com > > ___ > Search the KRnet Archives at http://tugantek.com/archmailv2-kr/search. > To UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave at list.krnet.org > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html > see http://list.krnet.org/mailman/listinfo/krnet_list.krnet.org to change > options > ___ > Search the KRnet Archives at http://tugantek.com/archmailv2-kr/search. > To UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave at list.krnet.org > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html > see http://list.krnet.org/mailman/listinfo/krnet_list.krnet.org to change > options >
KR> 2013 gathering educational and Macroscopic "plans" suggestion
I couldn't agree more.? But who is gonna do all that work.? It is quite an undertaking. Craig On Tuesday, October 8, 2013 1:14 PM, Bryce Guenther wrote: Small gathering was a joy and as always educational, I'm thankful and? thank everyone being friendly sharing discussing topics they and possibly others are interested in to be knowledgeable about. None of us have all the answers but we are all interested and talking with everyone in the forums was fun. Generally the KR has evolved and still is because builders have features they desire. When KR aircraft changed from the way Ken had it and the way the KR2S is now a drastically different airplane. The faster and more powerful KR2S has developed stability and necessary belly board/flap aerodynamic controls that are safety of flight issues. We talk and listen and listen to what others have built and what others want. The new builders want and get projects then desire features that have out grown what they have or invested time building only to discover they need major changes for safety , mainly empenage tail surface enlargement, higher gross weight and they CG range issue that needs to be edited in the plans.? To suggest to the KR community that New plans be drawn up on Auto Cad that contain popular features beyond what the KR2S has and that what the KR community has R would certainly be entertaining to new builders. The facilitating KR1,KR2, KR2S, etc.plans with realistic advertising specifications for each to enable builders a closer design end product choice is a goal to keep the KR alive. Neophyte builders who are not kit builders and like the KR designs are protected in the builder/designer designation rather than kit builder designation. Protection as Experimental category is valuable for ELSA pilots designating what the performance numbers of their peculiar design is rather than what a "KIT" is regulated by the manufacture publishes. Would multiple basic builder plans be practical? Opinions? guentheraviator at yahoo.com ___ Search the KRnet Archives at http://tugantek.com/archmailv2-kr/search. To UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave at list.krnet.org please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html see http://list.krnet.org/mailman/listinfo/krnet_list.krnet.org to change options
KR> 2013 gathering educational and Macroscopic "plans" suggestion
Small gathering was a joy and as always educational, I'm thankful and? thank everyone being friendly sharing discussing topics they and possibly others are interested in to be knowledgeable about. None of us have all the answers but we are all interested and talking with everyone in the forums was fun. Generally the KR has evolved and still is because builders have features they desire. When KR aircraft changed from the way Ken had it and the way the KR2S is now a drastically different airplane. The faster and more powerful KR2S has developed stability and necessary belly board/flap aerodynamic controls that are safety of flight issues. We talk and listen and listen to what others have built and what others want. The new builders want and get projects then desire features that have out grown what they have or invested time building only to discover they need major changes for safety , mainly empenage tail surface enlargement, higher gross weight and they CG range issue that needs to be edited in the plans.? To suggest to the KR community that New plans be drawn up on Auto Cad that contain popular features beyond what the KR2S has and that what the KR community has R would certainly be entertaining to new builders. The facilitating KR1,KR2, KR2S, etc.plans with realistic advertising specifications for each to enable builders a closer design end product choice is a goal to keep the KR alive. Neophyte builders who are not kit builders and like the KR designs are protected in the builder/designer designation rather than kit builder designation. Protection as Experimental category is valuable for ELSA pilots designating what the performance numbers of their peculiar design is rather than what a "KIT" is regulated by the manufacture publishes. Would multiple basic builder plans be practical? Opinions? guentheraviator at yahoo.com
