KR> Why messages appear empty - it's probably not "plain text"

2017-02-02 Thread Mark Langford via KRnet
The number one reason why posts show up with nothing in them is because
the message was sent as HTML, rather than plain text.  The system
doesn't pass HTML because HTML requires a lot more bandwidth to
transfer, which means higher data rates (which is important for folks
with limited data plans or slow internet), and it further bloats the
archive.  The default for many email systems is HTML, but it's a pretty
simple matter to change message type to "plain text" rather than "HTML".
 Many also allow you to set message type automatically based on
destination.  I have mine set to automatically make any email sent to be sent in plain text only.  

Google is your friend here..."how to send plain text messages from

Mark Langford, Harvest, AL
ML "at"

Search the KRnet Archives at
Please see LIST RULES and KRnet info at
see to change 
To UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to

Re: KR> 4-into-1 exhaust system help?

2017-01-28 Thread Mark Langford via KRnet
I gave up trying to find an exhaust system that even vaguely resembles 
what I have on N891JF.  I'm going to have to build another one that 
replicates it, unless I want to remove the engine, completely 
reconfigure the firewall and intake system, etc.  Building a new system, 
as painful as that sounds, is easier than the alternative.

I was going to build it out of 321 stainless until I checked the prices. 
 A 321 U-bend is $94, a 304 U-bend is $40, and a mild steel U-bend is 
$10.  I need 8 U-bends (four are actually J-bends, but same price), just 
to think about getting started, we're talking $800, not to mention 
collector, tailpipe, flanges, etc, if built from 321 stainless.   The 
existing one made it to 600 hours and was mild steel.  I'll have N56ML 
back in the air before I put another 600 hours on this one!

By contrast, my Corvair system was almost reasonable built from 321, 
because it is built so simply using only three U-bends for six 
cylinders.  But it's not a complex 6-into-1 system either, just a pair 
of simple 3-into-1 pipes.

I have everything I need to start on it, and that's what I'm doing all 
weekend, and probably next weekend as well.  I built two mockup engines, 
one with the old exhaust to measure distances and angles from, and the 
other as the fixture to build the new system onto. We'll see how it goes.

One thing I learned along the way is that Great Plains has no exhaust 
systems built, but they do have fixtures, so they are "to order" with a 
30 day lead time.  The configurations are shown on their website at , none of which are similar to 
mine.  Also, gauge size is not mentioned on their website, but they are 
18g (.049"), rather than the 16g (.065")like the original exhaust 
system, so I had to get all materials elsewhere.  I did buy flanges from 
them, but am not enamored with them as the mounting holes are huge 
compared to the 8mm studs, so I'll have to carefully center the flanges 
to the ports before I start welding tubes to them.

Mark Langford

Search the KRnet Archives at
Please see LIST RULES and KRnet info at
see to change 
To UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to

Re: KR> Melting lead

2017-01-28 Thread Mark Langford via KRnet

Paul Visk wrote:

> How do you melt a 5 lbs chunk of lead on the stove?

I melted mine on a small standalone hot plate (so I could do it 
outside).  The pot was a thin one with a lid, and it did take a long 
time, but it worked.  This hot pad is a cheapo thing that's probably 50 
years old, with a simple coil of nichrome wire in a spiral shape down in 
a piece of ceramic plate.  I would think a gas stove should do the job...

Mark Langford

Search the KRnet Archives at
Please see LIST RULES and KRnet info at
see to change 
To UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to

Re: KR> stall speed

2017-01-25 Thread Mark Langford via KRnet
Before I get corrected by a bunch of people, IAS stall speed remains the 
same regardless of altitude.  Not sure what I was thinking when I wrote 
that.  Right after I sent that I thought "I wonder why I never thought 
of that before".  It occurred to me when I woke up at 1AM and something 
was nagging at methat's a basic premise of IASstall speed is 
always the same, regardless of altitude.  I've gotten so used to flying 
the iEFIS and having a true air speed indication, the two have converged 
in my little bitty mind.

I think this question is even on the Basic Airman Knowledge test (I 
probably made that up too).  My only excuse is that I started mixing GPS 
speed with IAS, and that I'm getting dumber by the day...

Mark Langford

Search the KRnet Archives at
Please see LIST RULES and KRnet info at
see to change 
To UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to

Re: KR> stall speed

2017-01-25 Thread Mark Langford via KRnet

Bob Russell wrote:

> What are realistic stall speeds with flaps?

As Larry said, you'll want to go to altitude and stall it several times 
to get the "indicated" stall speed, because airspeed indicators are 
notoriously inaccurate at low speeds...even the fancy new electronic 
versions that I've used are off at the lower end of the spectrum. For 
example, N891JF stalls "hard" (nose over) at about 36 mph indicated, and 
that's on the MGL iEFIS.  This isn't far from what Jim Faughn reported 
in his "how to land a KR" treatise, but those are indicated.  GPS stall 
speed is closer to the low fifties, at the altitudes that I practice 
stalls at.

If you are asking what's the difference in stall speed with 
"plans-built" flaps, my guess would be about two mph, three mph at the 
most, based on my experience with the much larger flaps on N56ML.  KR2S 
N56ML stalls at 57 mph with barn door flaps, 62 mph clean at "average" 
loading conditions.  KR2 N891JF stalls slightly slower, and even the 
belly board drops stall speed 1.5-2 mph.  These are all GPS speeds, 
taken on calm days in two directions probably at 4000' or so, so it'll 
be a little less nearer to sea level...which you don't want to do.  You 
can extrapolate it though...about a 2% difference per thousand feet. 
You probably already know this though.

More stall speeds are listed at , 
although their accuracy is not assured.  Speaking of which, nobody's 
sent me information for a newly minted airplane for probably five years. 
 No new KRs are flying for five years?  Please do some testing and send 
me your numbers...

Mark Langford

Search the KRnet Archives at
Please see LIST RULES and KRnet info at
see to change 
To UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to

Re: KR> Archives

2017-01-23 Thread Mark Langford via KRnet

>> Is there a new link to the archives?

The new KRnet email archive is at  I've had problems 
accessing it from work, likely because they think it's a malware site or 
something, so there may be issues still, but we're working on it.

Mark Langford

Search the KRnet Archives at
Please see LIST RULES and KRnet info at
see to change 
To UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to

Re: KR> Archives

2017-01-23 Thread Mark Langford via KRnet
Robert Russell wrote:

> Is there a new link to the archives? I keep getting a not found message when 
> I click on the link at the KRNet Page. 

There is a new archive link now.  I'll update the website tonight.  The
Tugantek archive has been down for months, and we're unsure if it'll
ever be back up.  Tom's been notified, but hasn't managed to get it back
up yet.  John Bouyea stepped up to the plate and reformatted a LOT of
email files to get us all the way back to 2003, so there should be 14
years of KRnet email in the archive now, and we have a few left to load,
back into the late 90's.  I'll fix the links tonight.

Mark Langford, Harvest, AL
ML "at"

Search the KRnet Archives at
Please see LIST RULES and KRnet info at
see to change 
To UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to

Re: KR> Tailwheel assembly

2017-01-22 Thread Mark Langford via KRnet

Phil Matheson wrote:

> I have a glass round tailwheel spring from Steve glover where do I 
get the tailwheel assembled to fit that spring.

Does it not have a steel insert embedded in the end that is about 3/4" 
thick to bolt the plans version of the tailwheel bracket to?  That's how 
the one is on Jim Faughn's plane.  I'll get you a picture of it...

Mark Langford

Search the KRnet Archives at
Please see LIST RULES and KRnet info at
see to change 
To UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to

Re: KR> Pitch sensitivity

2017-01-12 Thread Mark Langford via KRnet

Kayak Chris wrote:

> with all this talk about pitch sensitivity, one common mention is
> using forward CG. What is up with that? My last plane really liked aft
> CG (within the envelope obviously) and flew MUCH better there. What
> happens to a KR at aft CG?

You had an odd bird if it flew better with an aft CG than a forward CG. 
Could you go into further detail about "how" it flew better with a 
forward CG than an aft CG?

See for more on the KR aft CG, which 
I'm pretty sure is common to most aircraft.  This story should scare certainly scared me!

Also see 
as a starting point.

With the CG at the absolute front of the limit, my KR2 does require a 
trim tab on the elevator or it'll dive pretty quickly.  I didn't set it 
up that way, but that's the way it is.  Almost everything I installed 
after I bought it was to move it aft, but it wasn't enough to move it 
very far.

My KR2S is usually flown right in the middle of the range, maybe 
slightly aft, but even with heavy passengers there was not a huge 
difference.  Go really aft though, and you are living very dangerously, 
as discussed at ...

Mark Langford

Search the KRnet Archives at
Please see LIST RULES and KRnet info at
see to change 
To UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to

Re: KR> Interesting Crankshaft

2017-01-02 Thread Mark Langford via KRnet

Matt Quimby wrote:

>> I finally got the prop hub off my crankshaft. Noticed something 
interesting - there’s no keyway to align the prop hub. Is anyone else 
running a setup like that? Should that be a red flag, or a reason to 
consider just starting with a new crankshaft and prop hub?


The keyway is only there to force the pulley back onto the same 
orientation after removal.  This is so your timing marks don't get out 
of whack after you remove and replace the hub.  Finding an accurate TDC 
is not as easy as you might think, without direct perpendicular access 
to the piston crown.  The screwdriver down the sparkplug hole isn't real 

The taper is what transfers the force from crank to hub...

Mark Langford

Search the KRnet Archives at
Please see LIST RULES and KRnet info at
see to change 
To UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to


2014-06-03 Thread Mark Langford via KRnet
>From Jack Gress:

 KR2 FOR SALE.  $8000  OBO.  HAVE TO MOVE CAN'T TAKE IT WITH.  See  for details.
jackgkr2 at

KR> How do you test a transponder?

2014-06-03 Thread Mark Langford via KRnet
Mike Taglieri wrote:

>>I'll need a Mode C transponder in my plane, and one I wanted is for sale
used at a decent price from Aircraft Spruce.  If I wind up getting it, I
could hook it up to a battery and see that the lights go on, etc., but how
would you actually test a transponder (or any used instrument, really),
without having a flying airplane to put it in? <<

My understanding is that with the advent of ADS-B, transponders will become
somewhat obsolete in a hurry, replaced by ADS-B hardware instead.  That may
explain why it's so cheap, and may be good reason to hold either
won't need one or they will be a dime a dozen...

Mark Langford, Harvest, AL
ML at  

KR> N891JF is flying again

2014-06-02 Thread Mark Langford via KRnet
Paul Visk wrote:

> How does 891JF performance and weight and balance compare to 56ML?

CG is in the forward end of the range.  Weight is about 640 empty, 120 pounds 
less than N56ML when it was new, but there's at least 60 pounds difference in 
engine weight.  There are weight savings to be had, for example the 16.5 pound 
cowling can be reduced to 4 pounds if done in carbon fiber, and more 
streamlined as well.  This will help out the far-forward CG as well.I'll 
also implement cooling plenums like N56ML, just to determine the difference, 
but I want to get the engine broken in first.  Performance is too early to 
tell, but it'll likely be 20 mph slower due the RAF48 wing and less powerful 
engine.  I don't even have wheel pants on it yet, although I did fly again late 
today.  Six more landings and they were mostly very smooth ones.  I think the 
straight-wired tailwheel cables are a huge help...

Mark Langford
ML at
website at 

KR> N891JF is flying again

2014-06-01 Thread Mark Langford via KRnet
N891JF flew again yesterday.  It felt like a "first flight", given that I'd 
removed, upgraded, or replaced just about everything in the plane, so the 
stress level was a bit high.  It was a fairly uneventful flight though, 2.4 
hours and 9 touch-and-goes just to get the feel of it (and the new speed brake) 
again.  I do very much like the speed brake.

I'm now working through a short list of minor squawks, and number one on the 
list was the deletion of the tailwheel cable springs and slack and making them 
"straight wired" like N56ML, which I've already dealt with.  A lot of data was 
gathered, the Explorer is being recalibrated based on that data, and it's now 
full of fuel and awaiting the next flight.  I'd have flown again today but it 
was a bit windy for that, and will be for the next several days.  Tomorrow 
night will likely be the reinstallation of wheel pants. 

I think this will do nicely...

Mark Langford
ML at
website at 

KR> Rudder pedals

2014-06-01 Thread Mark Langford via KRnet
Dene Collett wrote:

> Can somebody who has their plans handy please give me the measurement of 
> the
> rudder pedals from the hinge point centre to the cable attach.

4", assuming you mean using hinges attached to the bottoms of the rudder 

Mark Langford
ML at
website at

KR> KR2S Controls mounting to spar

2014-05-31 Thread Mark Langford via KRnet
Phil Matheson wrote:

> I thought of using say 1 inch dowel, drilled in lathe to required mounting 
> bolt size, then drill the spar webbing all the  way through as you would 
> the WAF , then drill 1 inch hole in one side of spar webbing. insert the 1 
> inch dowel, epoxy in place, bolt it with cheap bolts till dry, then sand 
> the dowel down flat with webbing, repeat in the other three bolt 
> locations, then bolts are tighten trough the dowel and not squashing the 
> webbing, taking the place of the spruce blocks.
> I hope that make sense.

Sounds like a great plan to me.

You probably feel the same way, but I wouldn't use anything larger than #10 
aircraft bolts, maybe even #8's if high enough quality, but those may be 
hard to come by in that length.  I see a lot of huge bolts and thick 
aluminum holding some of these kinds of things together in some of the 
photos on the web, and it's just weight added to the bottom line.  Although 
I tried to be frugal with that kind of weight (especially), I will be much 
better on the next one!

Mark Langford
ML at
website at

KR> identify this brake cylinder?

2014-05-27 Thread Mark Langford via KRnet
Thanks for the feedback.  I can see from the port and o-ring locations that
there is likely no other means of "checking" the flow.  I installed new
Viton o-rings at rebuild, and I'm pretty sure I checked compatibility with
the aircraft fluid.   I've heard from several folks offline that these are
likely Rosenhan cylinders, and are notoriously hard to bleed effectively, so
I'll try harder.  I also talked to Jim Faughn, and he assures me that when
they're working correctly, I'll be happy with them.  So for the moment, I'll


 Mark Langford
 ML at
 website at

KR> identify this brake cylinder?

2014-05-27 Thread Mark Langford via KRnet
Can anybody identify the brake cylinder shown in the enclosed photo?  It's a 
half-inch diameter (unfortunately), and I'm not so sure it's at the top of its 
game, despite my "rebuild job", cleaning it out, blowing out the passages,  and 
putting in new o-rings.   In my first taxi test, I quickly discovered no brakes 
on the right side.  It's not developing pressure at all, and I'm pretty sure 
there's no air in the line.  I'm trying to figure out the internal workings, 
check valve wise.

I'd rather take a serious beating that have to remove this thing, especially 
with the panel in place.  Come to think of it, that's what it'll be...a serious 
beating, but that may have to happen before I can fly it.  Condition inspection 
is done, so now it's the brakes...


Mark Langford
ML at
website at 

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 130303_060_brake_cylinder.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 63872 bytes
Desc: not available

KR> progress

2014-05-25 Thread Mark Langford via KRnet
Ray almost wrote my progress report for me, except I'm a lot closer to 
flying!   I towed N891JF it out to the airport late Friday (see ),  by replacing the tailwheel 
with the receiver from my Harbor Freight trailer and towing it on the gear. 
I got a lot of waves, thumbs up, and people who followed me for miles 
without passing, despite plenty of opportunities.  I pulled off the road at 
one point to let a guy by in a hilly curved part (I was only doing 25 mph) 
and rather than pass, he pulled up next to me and asked "does it run?".  I 
could only blurt out "oh YEAH!".  I was a very happy boy when I got home 
from the airport.

I spent most of yesterday helping with the airport workday, but got the 
wings on it last night.  The panel turned out pretty nicely...see for the final shot of 
that.  The belly board speed brake is totally done.  I expect a huge 
difference.  I'll do the weight and balance today, but expect no surprises. 
Afterwards, I'll do some taxi testing to test out the brakes and that sort 
of thing, and spend some time getting more familiar with the MGL Explorer, 
as well as the general layout of the controls (which is very similar to 

 I would fly it tomorrow if the condition inspection was signed off...but 
it's not. Although I'm surrounded by A at my airport, none of them do it 
professionally, and don't have the insurance for it.  I can't blame them, 
but it now looks like I'm going to have to pay somebody to do it to get it 
over with, and after finishing up the details today, that'll be the only 
holdup.  It won't take me long to get this straightened out though, and if 
the weather's decent next weekend, I should be back in the air.  It's even 
possible that I may get it signed off tomorrow, and if so, I could be flying 
in time to capture the sunset tomorrow!

And like Ray, getting that airplane out of my basement opens up a lot of 
space.  I'm also moving all the boxes of airplane support stuff back to the 
hangar, so my workshop is getting a whole lot less cluttered in a hurry!  I 
foresee a summer of cleaning up and reorganizing my basement, and a dose of 
the same for the neglected hangar.  I feel like I'm alive again...

Mark Langford
ML at
website at

KR> 'net testing

2014-05-16 Thread Mark Langford via KRnet
In an effort to make the list more useful and less bothersome...could all
you "net list testers" think of some meaningful contribution to make while
you're testing?  Anything regarding KR flying or building.  Like maybe "I've
found that putting a 90 watt floodlight 18" away from a layup cures it in
just a couple of hours, and allows me to get a lot more done on a small part
by allowing three different work sessions in the same day", or something
like that?  Or maybe "There's been a history of the plans-built rudder pedal
system breaking prematurely, so I made mine from the next larger diameter
but thinner wall tubing and they are way stiffer but weight the same".   Or
just sit on your hands for a while until you really have a reason to send a
post and then see if your test worked?  


Mark Langford, Harvest, AL
ML at   
WARNING: This response was intended to be helpful, rather than hurtful, but
may contain information that is unsuitable for overly-sensitive persons with
low self-esteem, no sense of humor, or irrational beliefs. Any perceived
insults, innuendo, insinuations, belittlement, offended sensibilities, or
questioning of manhood, were purely unintentional. Any impression that I may
think you're dumber than dirt is in your head, not mine...

KR> one more test

2014-05-15 Thread Mark Langford via KRnet
Larry Flesner wrote:

>My real name in my e-mail program was blank.

Yep, that's the answer!  For you folks who are "shooting blanks" and your 
emails to the list come back with simply "via KRnet", you need to enter your 
name (or email address) into your email program's "name" field.  It's the 
place where it asked you upon setup for "your name" or something like that. 
Most email apps/programs are different, so google it if you can't figure out 
where it is, or call or check your ISP's web site.  I  know you can do 

Mark Langford
ML at
website at

KR> Horizontal stab

2014-05-14 Thread Mark Langford via KRnet
Brian Kraut wrote:

>I think I would be inclined to also use one layer of carbon fiber under
> the glass or at least one extra ply of glass on the leading edge for the
> first 18" of span just back to the spar since it is very common to pick
> up the tail by the leading edge of the stab for moving it around on the
> ground.

I deliberately avoided carbon fiber on the vertical and horizontal 
stabilizers because that's where my radio antenna is, and I didn't want to 
attenuate any signal.  With the wood tips and the taller spars, I can easily 
lift the tail using the stabilizer tip without concern, but I rarely have to 
do that because my tailwheel is a breakaway, and I push and pull it around 
using the inside of the prop.  It's a lot easier that way, and where N891JF 
is going shortly.   The non-breakaway tailwheel is a pain, and I do have the 
lift the tail to move it, but I pick it up by standing in front of the 
horizontal stab and putting one hand under the fuselage and the other on the 
root of the h/s to push or pull with.

Mark Langford
ML at
website at

KR> Horizontal stab

2014-05-14 Thread Mark Langford via KRnet
Adam Tippin wrote:

>> I see that you have extended your H/S by 12" total. Was the extension 
>> done with spar or foam.  And for the horns,I see that the leading edges 
>> are the same, but how much  further than the H/S do they extend.<<

My horizontal stab  was done without foam extensions, all done with new 
spars.  I ordered new wood that was thicker to give them the cross section 
needed for the new airfoil, as well as the length.  It could have easily be 
done with foam extensions (especially if the plane had been built already), 
but building it all wood yielded a simple, straight, quickly built 
 There are no "horns" on the elevator.  What you see in is pretty much the assembly of the two, 
without the tips added.  I think the photos and narrative at  should tell the story of how it was built and 
the dimensions of it, and there's a template download link that shows spar 
dimensions.  Their length is 84" total.  My tips were made out of wood, just 
because it was easier to shape accurately and quickly, as opposed to foam, 
but if I were to do it today, I'd make them foam and glass.

I guess eventually I may extend the h/s on N891JF, but maybe not.  I'd like 
to get proficient at flying a "normal" KR2 so I can converse intelligently 
on the differences in the S and the 2.

Mark Langford
ML at
website at

KR> the value of a punch list

2014-05-13 Thread Mark Langford via KRnet

One reason I have trim tabs and belly boards on my mind lately (and tonight 
it's ELT and transponder ground planes) is because I'm going to carry N891JF 
back to the airport early Sunday morning (when there's no traffic).  I hope to 
be flying it a week or two after that...long overdue!

One thing I've recently re-discovered is a "punch list", which is usually a 
last-few-items push to get your newly built house finished up for inspection 
and occupation.  I've been keeping little lists on Post-It notes, but for the 
last couple of weeks I've made a Word file with a whole page of stuff that 
needs to get done.  I typically kill off a few every night, but then add about 
half as many back to the list, as I run across other things I need to get done 
before first flight.  This is a wonderful thing because it gives me real goals 
every night, that I know I need to get done to stay on schedule.  I can also 
group like items and kill several of them at tonight:  I'm putting 
a carbon fiber patch over some almost-flush weld-nuts that I used to fasten the 
flap bracket to the middle of the flap, glassing the pitot/static tubes, laying 
up three ELT ground plane elements, and epoxying a little plywood shelf into 
the back of the fuselage to mount the transponder antenna and ground plane to.  
I'll probably mix up one ounce of Aeropoxy and use it to knock out all four of 
these little jobs.  Without the punch list, I'd probably never have given it 
enough thought to group them together efficiently like this.  The same goes for 
ordering missing hardware from AS or Wicks.  

Next airplane, I'm STARTING with a punch list.  It's a bit of a slave driver, 
but that's not such a bad thing, and it IS a more efficient way to build.

Another thing the list does is gives me plenty of options.  If I run into a 
roadblock on one thing, there are twenty others I can scan through and find 
"something" that can be done.  Tonight's version of the punch list is at .  It'll change again tomorrow 
night, as I'll have crossed off 2-5.  Last night I got started on glassing the 
static/pitot tubes together into something more aerodynamic (see enclosed 
image).  Tonight I sanded the foam to shape better, and will be adding filler 
tonight, sanding and glassing it tomorrow night...

Mark Langford
ML at
website at 

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: pitot_static_start.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 72467 bytes
Desc: not available

KR> trim tab size

2014-05-12 Thread Mark Langford via KRnet
Joe Cruz wrote:

> I  have a question about elevator trim tab  travel. How much is enough and
how many green light bars will ever be lit up at one time?

I think you'll have all of the bars but one.  Without sitting in my plane
and looking, I'm pretty sure all elements are lit except the trim tab
position, otherwise you could look at it and still not tell exactly where
you were on the scale.

As for how big, one factor is will you have flaps or a belly board, and if
so, do you care if it's trimmed properly for landing.  And also, do you have
a header tank that will result in a "volatile CG", or do you have wing tanks
that will have a much smaller CG shift during flight typical flights.  

 I built a small tab, and never used more an a third of the whole scale at
max CG change, but it wasn't enough to counter the flaps' effect during

Give us a little better idea of the rest of your setup, and somebody with
something similar can probably answer the question better.

There's more on my trim tab at .  It
has details on deflection, among other things...

Mark Langford, Harvest, AL
Still looking for my misplaced kid gloves
ML at  

KR> Drag???? Whoa!

2014-05-11 Thread Mark Langford via KRnet
Carl Dow wrote:

>>The egos, the drama, the over reactions, the 
>>perfectionism, WOW I am sick, Mr. Langford, get over yourself. Life is 
>>short Just stop and be likeable it is enough to make me puke! <<

There was a time when I'd let this bother me, but no longer.  I know that 
what I said was purely in the interest of answering Doran's post, which 
appeared to have been made without actual KR experience.  And although I 
could have said it in a "you are so wrong" way, instead I responded to his 
concerns with a simple explanation from the standpoint of my experience to 
the contrary.  And I did it as nicely as I possibly could have.

I think it's the duty of experienced builders and pilots to cry "foul" when 
somebody comes up with something from left field that has the potential of 
leading others down the wrong path.   I have zero regrets regarding my 
reply, and will continue to stand my ground when it's in the best interest 
of builders and pilots.

One of the rules of this list is to try to take comments from others as 
constructive, rather than destructive, and with the best possible 
interpretation. I'm not sure that either you or Doran read my post with that 
rule in mind.  I'm fine with what I said yesterday, and will spend the day 
working on my plane, rather than second guessing myself...

Mark Langford
ML at
website at

KR> Drag????

2014-05-09 Thread Mark Langford via KRnet
Doran Jaffas wrote:

>  I have flown several low drag / clean aircraft without flaps and
> never had any unnerving problems with landing.

Then you may not have tried to get a KR to stick to the ground when trying 
to get into a short strip!

> My personal opinion banded on some experience is to fly the airplane
> as intended. Get comfortable with the SLOWER SPEEDS and then determine 
> what
> / if anything else one needs or wants to add.

I put 1130 hours on N56ML and did over 2800 landings, most of them at the 
absolutely bottom of the speed envelope, putting it very close to the end of 
the runway (and occasionally a little short of it) so I could stop it 
ASAP...and that's using barn-door flaps!  And yes, I usually slipped it 
fully all the way down with my huge rudder, and straightened it out maybe a 
second or two before touchdown.  I'm familiar with that, but I still used my 
flaps almost EVERY landing.  The few times I didn't use them (just to stay 
proficient), I felt like I was landing downwind!


Yes, but there are some "no-brainer" compromises!

> All aircraft have speeds that work best as they are intended. Whether
> a larger engine or a set of drag inducing flaps or belly board one MUST
> ALWAYS REALIZE THE CHANGE will affect something else.

I'm almost finished putting a 1/4" thick speed brake on the belly of N891JF, 
and the total installation, including actuator, will weigh a little more 
than three pounds. That's a trade I'll take.

The point of flaps is to both provide more lift, yielding a slower landing 
speed, and drag, to help you slow it down on descent and while landing.  A 
belly board doesn't give you the lift, but the drag is vital during landing, 
especially during ground effect, not to mention improved visibility over the 
nose, which improves safety.  Almost everybody who has flaps or a belly 
board loves them.  But if you don't want to trouble yourself with that 
compromise, nobody will beat you up for it...

Mark Langford
ML at
website at

KR> FW: Bob Lee's passing

2014-05-09 Thread Mark Langford via KRnet
Many of us got to know Bob through the Gatherings.  He was always there
carrying on conversations, exchanging ideas, and helping where he could.
See below... 

From: Cheryl Lee [ shortbus1017 at ] 
Sent: Friday, May 09, 2014 8:07 AM
To: 'Mark Langford'
Subject: Bob

It is with a very saddened heart to let you know that Bob passed away last
night in his sleep.  We got news about his cancer on Tuesday and Bob got
very lucid and made his wishes known.  We came home from the cancer center
on Wednesday and had a family meeting with the kids.  He let the kids know
he loved them very much and what his wishes were.  We had family portraits
taken yesterday afternoon at 4:00pm. We had a hospice nurse scheduled to
come to the house as Bob had started having pain earlier in the day.  After
the pictures his pain increased so I made arrangements to have him go into a
hospice facility.  We took him around 6:00pm and they got him very
comfortable.  We left the facility around 9:30pm and at 1:00am this morning
I got a call that he had passed on.  The kids and I went back and was with
him for a couple of hours before the funeral home came to pick him up.  We
will be working with the funeral home on arrangements today and will let you
know.  Please let the KRNet and other website know about Bob's passing.

Thank you for your help.
God Bless You,

KR> Most heavy engine

2014-05-08 Thread Mark Langford via KRnet
Hennie van Rooyen wrote:

>>I am able to lay my hands on a good 160hp Continental engine, complete
with prop & running. What is the heaviest & most powerful engine ever put in
a KR2? I see it weighs 297 lbs compared to the 227 of the Corvair.<<

The "world's lightest KR" project sure didn't last long!   I had this same
conversation with a newbie on the list a few weeks ago.  His goal, like so
many other of us cheapskates who build KRs, was to fly in and out of a short
strip on his own property, dodging expensive hangar rent.  The problem with
the KR is that it's a very slippery plane, so landing burns up at least
twice as much runway as takeoff, if not more.  You can get out of places
that you can't even land at, which is problematic.  Being light is
means a low stall speed, but if you add an extra hundred pounds of engine,
you're stall speed will climb, and your landing glide will extend due to the
higher speeds you'll have to land at, and you'll need even more runway to
land.  If getting in and out of short strips is a concern, you need the
lightest engine you can live with (and afford), not to mention "real" flaps
and a bellyboard.  Landing is your limiting case, not takeoff, so the extra
power hurts your overall mission goal, not helps it.

Having said that, I'm a big fan of more power, but short strips demand
compromises, and engine weight is one of them.  If you have several thousand
feet of runway at your disposal, it's not so much of a concern...unless you
have to dead-stick it in a small hayfield someday...

Mark Langford, Harvest, AL
ML at  

KR> Propellers

2014-05-07 Thread Mark Langford via KRnet
Doran Jaffas wrote:
> Just curious if anyone has run a 50 inch propeller. I have a 52 by 47 and
> am thinking of trimming it down to 50 inches the add a couple of hundred
> rpm.

The first prop I flew on N56ML was only in 50.25" diameter, previously cut 
down from a 52" prop.  It was one of the best props I ever had, and that was 
on a Corvair.  I'm sure 48" or 50" props were far more common on the older 
KRs with the short retract gear.  The KR performance spreadsheet at shows at least one 50" diameter prop, so 
it's not unheard of...

Mark Langford
ML at
website at

KR> KR Newsletters

2014-05-06 Thread Mark Langford via KRnet

I ran across my KR Newsletter stash a few weeks ago, and was reminded what a 
gold-mine they are of building information, as well as history of the design 
and the people that have helped to improve them over the years. Half of all 
content is filling in the missing details and "a better way to do it" of the 
plans we've all bought and used. I have no doubt that reading all these 
newsletters will result in a better and quicker built, more efficient, and 
safer airplane. To give you an idea of how much stuff I'm talking about, and I 
have them all, and if you took the paper out of the binders the stack would be 
8" thick, single sided...roughly 2000 pages. That's a lot of info, and it's not 
just applicable to KRs, much of it is applicable to homebuilding in general. 

So... I've started back on a rant that I've had for years...since those 
newsletters were created mostly by the contributors, and the information is so 
invaluable, why are they simply "unavailable" now? Surely there's a way to get 
these back out to the KR community. 

Nowhere in the newsletters does it say it's copyrighted, so I checked at the US 
Copyright Office database, and sure enough, no record of it. There is language 
in the newsletters that "any reproduction without written permission will be 
considered copyright infringement, and subject to aggressive legal action", but 
it doesn't come out and say that it IS copyrighted, and after doing some 
research on it, I'm still fuzzy on whether or not you even can copyright a 
monthly compilation "club" newsletter based on contributor input anyway. 

So I called several of the five former newsletter editors to discuss this. I 
was told that they were NOT copyrighted, and that the copyright notice was just 
there to keep people honest. After all, these editors did put a lot of their 
own efforts into these newsletters, and didn't deserve to have somebody copy 
them and freely distribute them back in the day...the Newsletter would have 
died, and therefore served nobody. But fast forward several years, and back 
issues are now unavailable from ANY source. I was assured that nobody was going 
to pursue legal action if those newsletters were copied and distributed to the 
community, even if they had been copyrighted. 

The most recent editor only published two newsletters, scanned all the old 
newsletters and sold them on CD, and then essentially "turned out the lights". 
He deserved to be paid for his efforts, and he did sell a lot of CDs, but he is 
now nowhere to be found. I haven't heard from him in years and he left no 
forwarding address, and his house is now in the hands of other owners. So I've 
removed the dead link from the website, and assume he has gleaned 
all the fruit he expected from that tree. 

I believe this opens the door to a community effort to make the KR Newsletters 
available to all members of the community FREE. Mark Lougheed scanned the first 
87 of them back in the 90's (with direct permission from the founding editor), 
but I'm pretty sure they were from copies, rather than originals, and scanner 
technology and optical character recognition (OCR) have come a long way since 
then, so there's room for improvement. Many of the photos are severely lacking 
in tonal range, as they say. 

As a long-time subscriber, I have most of the "originals", but my early ones 
are repros too, and the detail in the photos leaves a lot to be desired. I'm 
looking for originals (those mailed directly to you) from the first one up 
through newsletter number 30, really just the ones with photos. These would be 
borrowed for a short period and returned. The goal is to create a text 
searchable PDF file that will eventually be kept on and freely 
distributed to builders. For those who haven't seen them, Mark Lougheed's 1-87 
have been  at  for many years now, 
although I am unable to open it at the moment.

We owe a lot to the editors for their tireless efforts to improve this 
airplane. The least we can do is preserve and distribute this group effort from 
all those contributors for the benefit of future builders. 

One more thing...feel free to keep me out of trouble here...somebody who's more 
familiar with the copyright database is welcome to double-check my search, and 
ensure there is nothing in there regarding the KR Newsletter.  Anybody with 
good quality early issues is welcome to contact me offline. 

Thanks a lot,

Mark Langford
ML at
website at 

KR> changes to KRnet message headers

2014-05-05 Thread Mark Langford via KRnet

The "DMARC change" has led to some forced changes in the Mailman system, so
email from the list will now have your name and "via KRnet" appended to the
end.  "Your name" is whatever you filled in on your user account page when
you subscribed to KRnet.  Your email address no longer shows up in the body
of the email, but when you hit "reply to" both the sender and the list
addresses go into the TO field, so you can either delete the original poster
from it or he'll get it twice, which won't be the end of the world.  I'm
sure there are other ramifications.we'll see.   To change your name that
will be displayed, go back to May 1st and find the notification from
krnet-owner at titled " mailing list memberships
reminder", which has your password reminder in it, as well as a link to your
account page at the bottom so you can make changes to that sort of thing.
If you're one of those people who deletes mails immediately after you read
them, another alternative is to go to and enter your
username in the field, and then go down and click on the REMIND button.  It
will send you your password via email shortly.  It can't get  any easier
than that.

Last night about a hundred subscribers had their account disabled
automatically by the system, and I found an email in my box describing the
change that I made this morning.  We'll see how it goes, but don't be
surprised if your account is disabled again while we work through this.
Last night's round involved mostly yahoo, Hotmail, Comcast, frontier,
scglobalnet, bellsouth, webtv, rogers, msn, and att users.  Hopefully nobody
will have to get another email address.  This may or may not have fixed it.
Just cut me some slack for the time being.

Mark Langford, Harvest, AL

ML at