KR> PNW Mini FlyIn #2
"If you are getting your PPL, I'd strongly advise getting time in a J3 cub or aeronca champ or citabria." "The KR is shortly coupled flight characteristics in conjunction with the fact the rudder authority is limited." I may be misunderstanding things here and probably am since the statements above are about as far from accurate as can be. The KR is short coupled it's true, especially the original design, but I've never ever ran out of rudder in even the strongest of crosswinds. As for the others, I've never flown a J3 I'm ashamed to say and my Citabria time was brief and long ago but despite the years I think I can safely say the feel and handling of a Citabria is really nothing like a KR. Re the Champ . . . now that really is dangerously off the mark. I made the mistake of doing my biennial time before last in a Champ thinking it might be fun. Instead, as Riley used to say, "What a revoltin' experience that turned out to be!" It was awful. The controls are so unresponsive (compared to the 2 KR's I've owned) that trying to perform simple maneuvers with any grace was a painful experience. All three of those designs are getting close to a hundred years old and feel nothing like a plane with the responsiveness of a KR. Old planes have their charm for some people but using one in order to develop a feel for a KR is, saying it as nicely as I can, inappropriate. Any of the Grummans would be far better choices, the best of those would be the TR-2 but any of the 2 place models (they had different names and varied slightly) would be closest. The original Yankee would be best of all since it was more touchy than the others that followed. I think any of the two-place RV's would also be good - Jeff can comment on that since I'm just presuming . . . just going on what I've heard over the years. RV owners love to extol the virtue of their control quickness. I can't think how flying any of those old war horses named above would help anyone develop an expectation or feel for a KR. Using a car analogy, it would be like using a 1948 Buick Roadmaster to help get a feel for a Formula 1 car. Sorry if I've misunderstood something. Mike KSEE Sponsored by https://www.newser.com/?utm_source=part&utm_medium=uol&utm_campaign=rss_taglines_more A Response From Trump About New Book's Claim http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/5f4eae20c7e652e20413ast03vuc1 What Looks Like a Landslide May End Up Being a 'Mirage' http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/5f4eae20e88ff2e20413ast03vuc2 Suit: McDonald's 'Intentionally' Hurt Black Franchisees http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/5f4eae21152452e20413ast03vuc3 ___ Search the KRnet Archives at https://www.mail-archive.com/krnet@list.krnet.org/. Please see LIST RULES and KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html. see http://list.krnet.org/mailman/listinfo/krnet_list.krnet.org to change options. To UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to krnet-le...@list.krnet.org
Re: KR> PNW Mini FlyIn #2
On 9/1/2020 3:24 PM, Mike Stirewalt via KRnet wrote: "If you are getting your PPL, I'd strongly advise getting time in a J3 cub or aeronca champ or citabria." ++ Getting your license in one of the above would certainly teach you to fly taildraggers but not necessarily help you to transition to the KR. Control movement and response is totally different in the KR compared to the aircraft mentioned. The KR responses instantly to control input with very little movement of the controls at anything above liftoff speed or touchdown speed. If I "walked" the rudders on landing or takeoff in the KR like is required in the J3, Champ, C140, etc., I would be taking out runway edge lights. My rudder inputs on takeoff and landing are very similar to those of a nose dragger like a C172. The early model C182 that I flew loaded with jumpers required more rudder input to taxi and take off than my KR, especially taxi as it wallowed all over the place. At 30 miles per hour on landing rollout I can take my feet off the rudder and my KR runs a straight line. I've done it before just to prove that it will. I'd advise anyone looking to fly a KR taildragger with no prior experience to get some tailwheel training to help you learn that airplanes have rudders and rudder pedals. Then transition to your KR with high speed taxi time, starting slow and building up speed as you get comfortable. CAUTION: never take the airplane to the runway for practice unless everything is ready for first flight. You might just find yourself airborne. Practice to the point you are comfortable raising the tail, running on the mains, cut power and come to a stop. You should reach this comfort level in an hour or two practice. Anything more than that is unnecessary exposure. I've heard some say they spent 10 to 15 hours taxi testing. That's way out of the box. Either the aircraft has bad handling or the pilot is not ready. Of all the different types of aircraft I've flow over the past 50 years the KR is probably the nicest handling and most fun to fly of any of them. That's MY KR, yours may fly and handle differently. Get it up in the air and find out. Larry Flesner ___ Search the KRnet Archives at https://www.mail-archive.com/krnet@list.krnet.org/. Please see LIST RULES and KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html. see http://list.krnet.org/mailman/listinfo/krnet_list.krnet.org to change options. To UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to krnet-le...@list.krnet.org
Re: KR> Training to land a KR
I wrote this earlier today, but Larry's post reminded me to send it. Mike Stirewalt wrote: . I've never flown a J3 I'm ashamed to say and my Citabria time was brief and long ago but despite the years I think I can safely say the feel and handling of a Citabria is really nothing like a KR. Re the Champ . . . now that really is dangerously off the mark The morning I was planing to fly my KR2S for the first time, my EAA "Flight Advisor" showed up with a J3 Cub. I was very skeptical, having gotten my tailwheel endorsement in a Champ and found it to be completely unresponsive to anything I asked it to do. I swear there was something repelling the "ball" from the centerit was always stuck to either the left or right side. The Cub was a lot more reasonable, and of course super forgiving in the landing department, with it's generous landing gear capability. But as Mike said, it was NOTHING like landing a KR! All thet J3 did was give me a feeling that I'd have no problem with the landing, and an hour later I dropped the KR2S in from what seemed like 8 feet, and put 5.5g's on the g-meter! Turned out my airspeed indicator was way off, and the picture over the nose is far different from anything I'd ever landed before. Never flew a Grumman, but I hear repeatedly that it's very similar. It's worth mentioning that my Flight Advisor was a UPS 747 pilot, and instructed in a series of amphibs on a nearby lake, so I'm not sure he was the best choice to advise on KRs. Best thing with KRs is some stick time in a KR, and somebody showing you how the landings are done. And on your first flight take it to 3000' AGL, do some near stalls while noting the indicated airspeed, and come over the end of the runway about 10 mph faster, 10 at the most Mark Langford m...@n56ml.com http://www.n56ml.com Huntsville, AL ___ Search the KRnet Archives at https://www.mail-archive.com/krnet@list.krnet.org/. Please see LIST RULES and KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html. see http://list.krnet.org/mailman/listinfo/krnet_list.krnet.org to change options. To UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to krnet-le...@list.krnet.org
Re: KR> PNW Mini FlyIn #2
Please let me clarify. I was assuming his plane was a taildragger. That was the picture he had attached. I'd totally agree with your assessment if his plane is a tricycle geared plane. Then its flight characteristics are like the Grummans. Point 1) what the "shortly coupled" piece does for tail dragers is to exhibit itself in landings being very twitchy Point 2)... When I made the statement of "rudder authority" that was made more around the fact regarding the ability or in-ablity to recover from a spin. Which would apply to both configurations of the KR2. For the J-3, it handles spins recovery very well. We use it to teach students to use the spin to get down fast. The Pitts and Kr's are challenged. More so the Kr's. The simple reason is that the elevators and Rudder are being blanked out. This really is addressed in most cases by the increasing of the surface area of these devices. In this case the rudder is most dominant. Just my two sense Dee Engineer, aerobatics (pitts and jets), exCFI and ex test pilot. On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 4:25 PM Mike Stirewalt via KRnet < krnet@list.krnet.org> wrote: > > "If you are getting your PPL, I'd strongly advise getting time in a J3 > cub > or aeronca champ or citabria." > > "The KR is shortly coupled flight characteristics in conjunction with > the > fact the rudder authority is limited." > > I may be misunderstanding things here and probably am since the > statements above are about as far from accurate as can be. The KR is > short coupled it's true, especially the original design, but I've never > ever ran out of rudder in even the strongest of crosswinds. > > As for the others, I've never flown a J3 I'm ashamed to say and my > Citabria time was brief and long ago but despite the years I think I can > safely say the feel and handling of a Citabria is really nothing like a > KR. Re the Champ . . . now that really is dangerously off the mark. I > made the mistake of doing my biennial time before last in a Champ > thinking it might be fun. Instead, as Riley used to say, "What a > revoltin' experience that turned out to be!" It was awful. The controls > are so unresponsive (compared to the 2 KR's I've owned) that trying to > perform simple maneuvers with any grace was a painful experience. All > three of those designs are getting close to a hundred years old and feel > nothing like a plane with the responsiveness of a KR. Old planes have > their charm for some people but using one in order to develop a feel for > a KR is, saying it as nicely as I can, inappropriate. > > Any of the Grummans would be far better choices, the best of those would > be the TR-2 but any of the 2 place models (they had different names and > varied slightly) would be closest. The original Yankee would be best of > all since it was more touchy than the others that followed. I think any > of the two-place RV's would also be good - Jeff can comment on that since > I'm just presuming . . . just going on what I've heard over the years. > RV owners love to extol the virtue of their control quickness. > > I can't think how flying any of those old war horses named above would > help anyone develop an expectation or feel for a KR. Using a car > analogy, it would be like using a 1948 Buick Roadmaster to help get a > feel for a Formula 1 car. Sorry if I've misunderstood something. > > Mike > KSEE > > > > Sponsored by > https://www.newser.com/?utm_source=part&utm_medium=uol&utm_campaign=rss_taglines_more > > A Response From Trump About New Book's Claim > http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/5f4eae20c7e652e20413ast03vuc1 > What Looks Like a Landslide May End Up Being a 'Mirage' > http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/5f4eae20e88ff2e20413ast03vuc2 > Suit: McDonald's 'Intentionally' Hurt Black Franchisees > http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/5f4eae21152452e20413ast03vuc3 > > ___ > Search the KRnet Archives at > https://www.mail-archive.com/krnet@list.krnet.org/. > Please see LIST RULES and KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html. > see http://list.krnet.org/mailman/listinfo/krnet_list.krnet.org to change > options. > To UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to krnet-le...@list.krnet.org > ___ Search the KRnet Archives at https://www.mail-archive.com/krnet@list.krnet.org/. Please see LIST RULES and KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html. see http://list.krnet.org/mailman/listinfo/krnet_list.krnet.org to change options. To UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to krnet-le...@list.krnet.org
KR> flying / T.O. &landing a KR
On 9/1/2020 4:59 PM, Flesner via KRnet wrote: That's MY KR, yours may fly and handle differently. Get it up in the air and find out. Larry Flesner The reason I made that statement is that my KR https://www.dropbox.com/s/ymnjv4pe66sjmpr/IMG_20200403_125055185.jpg?dl=0 has an 8 foot wide main gear, fuselage 24" stretch, and tail wheel cables with zero slack (as seen in the photo). For reason that escape me, some run with the tail wheel cables slack. I prefer very little rudder movement to get the desired reaction. Some KR's are setup with toe-in or toe-out on the gear that will affect handling, mine is zero/zero. KR's are like women, once you learn their personality they can be a heap of fun. Larry Flesner ___ Search the KRnet Archives at https://www.mail-archive.com/krnet@list.krnet.org/. Please see LIST RULES and KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html. see http://list.krnet.org/mailman/listinfo/krnet_list.krnet.org to change options. To UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to krnet-le...@list.krnet.org
Re: KR> PNW Mini FlyIn #2
Moral of the story... Fly a tri-gear. Just kidding, but I couldn’t resist. :D V/R Sam Spanovich N6399U 74S, Anacortes WA ___ Search the KRnet Archives at https://www.mail-archive.com/krnet@list.krnet.org/. Please see LIST RULES and KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html. see http://list.krnet.org/mailman/listinfo/krnet_list.krnet.org to change options. To UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to krnet-le...@list.krnet.org
Re: KR> PNW Mini FlyIn #2
Since I have in excess of 500 hours in each type mentioned here and was invited to comment, I will. To start with, you're drawing a comparison of two different arguments. One about learning to fly a tailwheel aircraft and the other is learning to fly an aircraft with very light controls. Those are two completely different things. #1. I don't think you can train in a better taildragger than a Champ. I've owned two of them over the years. The gear is usually worn out and sloppy, the plane is slow, the brakes hardly work, if at all, and the controls are heavy and unresponsive. You can ground loop it and it will simply turn around and roll out backwards without hurting the plane. But, as simple, unresponsive and slow as it is, once you master a Champ, you have everything in your knowledge tool kit to fly almost any taildragger you will ever encounter. #2. The Cub is a good choice as well. More responsive and lighter on the controls than a Champ, and will do a good job of teaching you what you need to know. FWIW, my 160 hp SuperCub Clone is way more ham-fisted than my Champs, but you're in the plane to learn tailwheel, not to learn how to fly a twitchy elevator. It will teach you to always trim for your speed as it will flat wear you out if you don't. #3. If you are looking for a crash course to get into a KR, get some time in a RV-6, RV-7, RV-9, or a Sonex. They feel similar to the KR although a bit lighter on the ailerons and heavier on the elevator. But they will give you much more of a feel for a light uber responsive elevator. #4. The buyer of my KR had never flown a TailWheel prior to getting in my KR. We flew roughly 8 hours together while he learned TW with me in the KR. He flew the plane fine, but was still struggling with his landings which was exacerbated by two issues. The first issue was that we were flying at the aft CG limit, so the control response was less than crisp at low speeds, and with that much weight behind the gear, wheel landings always turned into a rodeo as the tail would drop as soon as the mains touched, so the plane would always want to bounce. The second challenge was that I am not an instructor, so I was struggling to explain what I have been intuitively doing as second nature for the last 23 years. After 8 hours of Dual, he went to a flight school to get his Tailwheel endorsement. They had him do 3 intensive days of flying with three different instructors in a SuperCub. That served to slow things down a bit so he could polish on the skills we had been practicing together without having things happening quite so fast. Additionally, he came back with some training suggestions from his instructors that we used. After 2 more hours of dual working mostly on 3 point landings, late yesterday, he asked me to get out of the plane so he could fly his new plane by himself. That put the CG back where it should be, and he went out and made 3 squeaker landings. I had told him that if he could learn to land the plane with me in it with him, it would be easy when I got out! While he learned to fly a Tailwheel in the KR, getting to work in slow motion in the SuperCub with an instructor did a great deal to help him polish his skills to where he was really ready to deal with the faster, much lighter controls on the KR. He plans to spend two more days doing a lot of circuits locally to polish on his skills some more before heading off for home with his new plane. -Jeff Scott Arkansas Ozarks > Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2020 at 3:24 PM > From: "Mike Stirewalt via KRnet" > To: krnet@list.krnet.org > Cc: laser...@juno.com > Subject: KR> PNW Mini FlyIn #2 > > > "If you are getting your PPL, I'd strongly advise getting time in a J3 > cub > or aeronca champ or citabria." > > "The KR is shortly coupled flight characteristics in conjunction with > the > fact the rudder authority is limited." > > I may be misunderstanding things here and probably am since the > statements above are about as far from accurate as can be. The KR is > short coupled it's true, especially the original design, but I've never > ever ran out of rudder in even the strongest of crosswinds. > > As for the others, I've never flown a J3 I'm ashamed to say and my > Citabria time was brief and long ago but despite the years I think I can > safely say the feel and handling of a Citabria is really nothing like a > KR. Re the Champ . . . now that really is dangerously off the mark. I > made the mistake of doing my biennial time before last in a Champ > thinking it might be fun. Instead, as Riley used to say, "What a > revoltin' experience that turned out to be!" It was awful. The controls > are so unresponsive (compared to the 2 KR's I've owned) that trying to > perform simple maneuvers with any grace was a painful experience. All > three of those designs are getting close to a hundred years old and feel > nothing like a plane with the respons
