KR> BRS vs Bean Field
I am considering this for first flights, but can you even open a front hinged canopy while in the air? Steven BedfordKR2S-CORVAIRWoodland Park,COs1bedford at msn.com Sent from my LG Mobile > > 18 lbs,sit-on emergency chute,$250 from ebay, one training jump. Done. Peter > > ?? ___ 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> BRS vs Bean Field
Mark; I was surprised how much angle of attack changed the pressure distribution over the top of the fuselage. If you are ejecting from your plane, and have control, pull back to increase pitch and the canopy should unload. If not, stall. That should do it. Peter Still, I think the answer is "not likely thatyou'll over power the canopy", but adrenaline levels might change that.
KR> BRS vs Bean Field
Steve; Chute is not useable for the first flight. Use it only for the flights where you plan on gaining enough altitude to deploy it, where you are exploring the envelope, and the first cross-countries. I'm guessing you will find a way out in-extremus. Peter I am considering this for first flights, but can you evenopen a front hinged canopy while in the air?Steven BedfordKR2S-CORVAIRWoodlandPark,COs1bedford at msn.com
KR> BRS vs Bean Field
Steven Bedford wrote: >...but can you even open a front hinged canopy while in the air? I think I once figured out that I could get about 1 psi pressure boost from ram air at 160 mph or so, and assuming a canopy is 30" x 36" (and dismissing the fact that it's not really a flat plate, which does matter), we're talking over a thousand pounds of pressure at a 90 degree opening angle. I've heard stories of folks taking off with neither side latched and the canopy rising maybe 2"-3" at the back and stopping there, so that's where the lift and pressure from on-coming air balance out (and yes, the weight of the canopy is a minor factor). Still, I think the answer is "not likely that you'll over power the canopy", but adrenaline levels might change that. But as has been mentioned, unless you're over the mountains, forest, city (that fits a lot of places), flying the plane to the ground usually makes a lot of sense. As for how many dead-stick landings I've made, well over a thousand. Ever since the first one, I've made a habit of chopping the throttle on downwind when I'm abeam the approach end of the runway, and then glide in the rest of the way. I shoot for arriving high, then slip if I'm too high. Sometimes I have to goose the throttle, but my goal is to get it on the ground smoothly with minimal roll-out...like an emergency landing. Practice makes perfect, or at least improves thing. If people always land at 1500 rpm, they will be in for a surprise when they have to land with a stopped prop. There's a very big difference in glide length and how touchdown is handled... Mark Langford ML at N56ML.com http://www.n56ml.com
KR> BRS vs Bean Field
Watch out we've got a live one here. On Aug 1, 2015 2:18 PM, "brian.kraut--- via KRnet" wrote: > Being a glider pilot I have made several hundred dead stick landings so > I laugh at 27. > > > Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: KR> BRS vs Bean Field > From: Chris Prata via KRnet > Date: Fri, July 31, 2015 9:29 am > To: KRnet > Cc: Chris Prata > > I'm new here so why wouldnt I believe the 27 number. Mark could have > been flying a prolific number of hours and for decades. As experimental > builders/operators, the idea is to try new engineering ideas. I have > friends who have run into issues with fueling, cooling, you name it. I > think it's more important to position ones self for successful > unanticipated landings than to hopelessly believe they cant happen. > Considering the great job mark did in his Bean field visit, 26 priors > for practice doesnt seem totally unrealistic! ;) > > ___ > 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> BRS vs Bean Field
Being a glider pilot I have made several hundred dead stick landings so I laugh at 27. Original Message Subject: Re: KR> BRS vs Bean Field From: Chris Prata via KRnet List-Post: krnet@list.krnet.org Date: Fri, July 31, 2015 9:29 am To: KRnet Cc: Chris Prata I'm new here so why wouldnt I believe the 27 number. Mark could have been flying a prolific number of hours and for decades. As experimental builders/operators, the idea is to try new engineering ideas. I have friends who have run into issues with fueling, cooling, you name it. I think it's more important to position ones self for successful unanticipated landings than to hopelessly believe they cant happen. Considering the great job mark did in his Bean field visit, 26 priors for practice doesnt seem totally unrealistic! ;)
KR> BRS vs Bean Field
Hi Chris Ya just gotta include all of Mark's bounces...sorry Mark :-) John Martindale 29 Jane Circuit Toormina NSW 2452 Australia ph:61 2 6658 4767 m:0403 432179 email:john_martindale at bigpond.com web site: -Original Message- From: KRnet [mailto:krnet-bounces at list.krnet.org] On Behalf Of Chris Prata via KRnet Sent: Saturday, 1 August 2015 2:29 AM To: KRnet Cc: Chris Prata Subject: Re: KR> BRS vs Bean Field I'm new here so why wouldnt I believe the 27 number. - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2015.0.6086 / Virus Database: 4401/10348 - Release Date: 07/31/15
KR> BRS vs Bean Field
I'm new here so why wouldnt I believe the 27 number. Mark could have been flying a prolific number of hours and for decades. As experimental builders/operators, the idea is to try new engineering ideas. I have friends who have run into issues with fueling, cooling, you name it. I think it's more important to position ones self for successful unanticipated landings than to hopelessly believe they cant happen. Considering the great job mark did in his Bean field visit, 26 priors for practice doesnt seem totally unrealistic! ;) > Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 11:17:32 -0500 > To: krnet at list.krnet.org > Subject: Re: KR> BRS vs Bean Field > From: krnet at list.krnet.org > CC: bjoenunley at gmail.com; laser147 at juno.com > > > > Its ok, I have exaggerated over 1000 times myself...
KR> BRS vs Bean Field
Its ok, I have exaggerated over 1000 times myself... Mike at KSEE said; "If Chris can take that seriously I guess others can too.? Sheesh.? If I had said 37 or 47 would it have worked better?? For the double digit crowd out there please know using exagerration is a common and sometimes amusing way to make a point but when you have to explain it it's not funny anymore.?? Bad judgment on my part and probably bad humor as well . . . I can read it and smile though so clearly I'm warped." ? Joe Nunley?CW2 US Army RetiredBaker JROTC Instructor?Baker Florida? Original message From: Mike Stirewalt via KRnet List-Post: krnet@list.krnet.org Date: 07/31/2015 1:01 AM (GMT-06:00) To: krnet at list.krnet.org Cc: laser147 at juno.com Subject: KR> BRS vs Bean Field Chris Prata said, > "As to Mark's 27 forced landings, well, wow. But then again he has lots (!) of hours so how many hours between forced landings? and these are *experimental* planes, made to learn with." If Chris can take that seriously I guess others can too.? Sheesh.? If I had said 37 or 47 would it have worked better?? For the double digit crowd out there please know using exagerration is a common and sometimes amusing way to make a point but when you have to explain it it's not funny anymore.?? Bad judgment on my part and probably bad humor as well . . . I can read it and smile though so clearly I'm warped.? For the record I have no idea how many forced landings Mark has had.? No more or less than anybody else who flies Experimental airplanes.? Since he advertises his misfortunes so that we may learn from his experiences, clowns like me can come along and exagerrate things for amusement.?? Sorry!! ** I learned in reading an article on the subject years ago that one of the earliest signs in detecting Alzheimer's is the inability to understand irony.?? Also lost by early Alzheimer's candidates is the capacity to not take seriously things which are obviously and outrageously untrue, simply because they are said in a serious manner.? People in the early and later stages of Alzheimers would be able to watch an episode of Laugh In and not have the slightest idea why the audience thinks what Goldie Hawn or Rowan and Martin are saying is funny.? Chris is going to hate me now.? Probably others too.? I'll put myself on restriction if you want.? Probably a good idea.? I've been bad.? ? Mike KSEE Want to place your ad here? Advertise on United Online http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/55bb0f81c2d83f815ac3st03vuc ___ 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> BRS vs Bean Field
Chris Prata said, > "As to Mark's 27 forced landings, well, wow. But then again he has lots (!) of hours so how many hours between forced landings? and these are *experimental* planes, made to learn with." If Chris can take that seriously I guess others can too. Sheesh. If I had said 37 or 47 would it have worked better? For the double digit crowd out there please know using exagerration is a common and sometimes amusing way to make a point but when you have to explain it it's not funny anymore. Bad judgment on my part and probably bad humor as well . . . I can read it and smile though so clearly I'm warped. For the record I have no idea how many forced landings Mark has had. No more or less than anybody else who flies Experimental airplanes. Since he advertises his misfortunes so that we may learn from his experiences, clowns like me can come along and exagerrate things for amusement. Sorry!! ** I learned in reading an article on the subject years ago that one of the earliest signs in detecting Alzheimer's is the inability to understand irony. Also lost by early Alzheimer's candidates is the capacity to not take seriously things which are obviously and outrageously untrue, simply because they are said in a serious manner. People in the early and later stages of Alzheimers would be able to watch an episode of Laugh In and not have the slightest idea why the audience thinks what Goldie Hawn or Rowan and Martin are saying is funny. Chris is going to hate me now. Probably others too. I'll put myself on restriction if you want. Probably a good idea. I've been bad. Mike KSEE Want to place your ad here? Advertise on United Online http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/55bb0f81c2d83f815ac3st03vuc
KR> BRS vs Bean Field
there's still a few hold outs against safety windshield glass, smoke detectors, and seat belts. maybe you "non weenies" can start a club. > To: krnet at list.krnet.org > Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 06:28:29 -0700 > Subject: Re: KR> BRS vs Bean Field > From: krnet at list.krnet.org > CC: brian.kraut at eamanufacturing.com > > You are going to get a lot of flaming arrows for this post, but I for > one agree with most of what you said. > > One for "Not a big weenie" > >
KR> BRS vs Bean Field
thats one idea. but that doesnt save the plane or people on the ground, but it is much cheaper at least. I actually have a backpack chute but a sit on would have the added benefit of cushioning on a very hard landing (late stall etc). although is there headroom? > Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 09:48:37 -0400 > To: krnet at list.krnet.org > Subject: Re: KR> BRS vs Bean Field > From: krnet at list.krnet.org > CC: jordanruthseto at aol.com > > 18 lbs,sit-on emergency chute,$250 from ebay, one training jump. Done. Peter > >
KR> BRS vs Bean Field
18 lbs,sit-on emergency chute,$250 from ebay, one training jump. Done. Peter
KR> BRS vs Bean Field
KR> BRS vs Bean Field
You are going to get a lot of flaming arrows for this post, but I for one agree with most of what you said. One for "Not a big weenie" Original Message Subject: KR> BRS vs Bean Field From: Mike Stirewalt via KRnet List-Post: krnet@list.krnet.org Date: Wed, July 29, 2015 3:13 pm To: krnet at list.krnet.org Cc: laser147 at juno.com Chris said, > "if nothing else, the peace of mind would seem worth it." It sure wouldn't contribute to _my_ peace of mind. I would be annoyed every time I got in the plane and noted I had devoted valuable space to something fairly bulky that requires repacking and inspection periodically and costs quite a bit of money to buy and maintain. That money would, in my case, be a lot better spent on something like an autopilot or some other luxury. There's also that lurking thought in the back of my mind that the thing wouldn't work if I ever _did_ try and use it. Which I wouldn't. Pushing the button would make me feel like a big weenie.
KR> BRS vs Bean Field
KR> BRS vs Bean Field
"We'd rather die than suffer the ignominy of helplessly floating down to earth under a canopy of shame." as opposed to a row of flattened corn of shame? lol I have a friend who built a gorgeous Zenith 701. He was visiting the mid west with it where he is from when a screwdriver left inside by someone else unbeknownst to him, slid forward and jammed the controls under his seat. he fought it while spiraling so steep that he could see dirt between the corn. broke it free and pulled out just in time to level out into a crash landing in the corn. could have used a BRS right there! instead he built another 701 in record time. I know you're kidding there, but I would consider it a last resort but when used, a canopy of "modern safety equipment". As to an autopilot, I installed one in my Avid, flew it 3000mi cross country, and then sold it. Seemed to make me a worse pilot and less in touch with the plane. As to Mark's 27 forced landings, well, wow. But then again he has lots (!) of hours so how many hours between forced landings? and these are *experimental* planes, made to learn with. I'll wait until others finish adding to the BRS conversation before mentioning my planned ejection seat, halon systems, emergency decel rocket prop spinner, nascar air conditioned fire suit, and inflatable emergency flotation system (kidding!)
KR> BRS vs Bean Field
As to Mark's 27 forced landings, Mark is a great pilot. ejection seat, halon systems, emergency decel rocket prop spinner, nascar air conditioned fire suit, and inflatable emergency flotation system (kidding!) Some interesting ideas. Joe Nunley?CW2 US Army RetiredBaker JROTC Instructor?Baker Florida? Original message From: Chris Prata via KRnet List-Post: krnet@list.krnet.org Date: 07/29/2015 9:39 PM (GMT-06:00) To: KRnet Cc: Chris Prata Subject: Re: KR> BRS vs Bean Field "We'd rather die than suffer the ignominy of helplessly floating down to earth under a canopy of shame." As to Mark's 27 forced landings, well, wow. But then again he has lots (!) of hours so how many hours between forced landings? and these are *experimental* planes, made to learn with. I'll wait until others finish adding to the BRS conversation before mentioning my planned ejection seat, halon systems, emergency decel rocket prop spinner, nascar air conditioned fire suit, and inflatable emergency?
KR> BRS vs Bean Field
The best reason in my opinion for a BRS is in response to catastrophic airframe failure such as the wings calapsing or dynamic resonance, which we don't historicly have happen with KR's. A control failure would also justify a BRS. Anytime I can fly the airplane to the ground under control I would do it. The military taught us to always have an emergency landing spot in case of an emergency. ?Increase altitude to put a usable landing site in glide distance. ?All this becaue Helicopters don't have ejection seats. Thanks for allowing me to share.? Joe Nunley?CW2 US Army RetiredBaker JROTC Instructor?Baker Florida?
KR> BRS vs Bean Field
Yeah, exactly. My thoughts are that I'd rather hit anything at 5mph than at 60. Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device Original message From: Dave Acklam via KRnet Date:07/29/2015 7:09 PM (GMT-05:00) To: KRnet Cc: Dave Acklam Subject: Re: KR> BRS vs Bean Field I have one BRS equipped plane - a Fisher ultralight At least with that install, if I ever have to 'pull it' the BRS will likely destroy the airframe in the process of getting me down safely... The flip side is that if your flying area is devoid of survivable emergency spots, it beats the hell out of crashing into a forest or skyscraper On Jul 29, 2015 3:15 PM, "Mike Stirewalt via KRnet" wrote: > Chris said, > > > "if nothing else, the peace of mind would seem worth it." > > It sure wouldn't contribute to _my_ peace of mind. I would be annoyed > every time I got in the plane and noted I had devoted valuable space to > something fairly bulky that requires repacking and inspection > periodically and costs quite a bit of money to buy and maintain. That > money would, in my case, be a lot better spent on something like an > autopilot or some other luxury. There's also that lurking thought in the > back of my mind that the thing wouldn't work if I ever _did_ try and use > it. Which I wouldn't. Pushing the button would make me feel like a big > weenie. > > I've gotta admit a BRS, if it wasn't iced up like the rest of the plane, > might have saved Ken Rand's life in the predicament he was in but how > often does that happen? I think only Ken would fly into an ice storm > with no fuel left - 'course he wasn't expecting the ice. There was no > salvaging that situation other than with a BRS so clearly, in such an > extreme situation, a BRS might have saved the day (again, if it wasn't > frozen up like a popsicle). > > The best argument against carrying a "plane chute" though is simply > looking at the record of Langford's forced landings. My math is probably > off, but a quick search of the records shows Mark has had 27 forced > landings and never gotten a scratch. He usually doesn't even mess up the > plane. With a parachute, once you push the button you're liable to land > in a lake or on top of someone's roof. In case of engine failure, if you > fly the plane down instead of turning it over to the fickle finger of > wherever the wind is blowing that day, the records show you almost always > make it to a runway or a road or a golf course. Catastrophic structural > failure is another matter, but those don't seem to happen with KR's > (seats breaking don't count). > > So, as a practical matter a plane parachute for a KR isn't a good idea. > As a "peace of mind" issue, that may work for some people but it wouldn't > work for me. I wouldn't trust the thing to actually work, plus I > wouldn't be able to bring myself to push the button (or yank the lanyard > or however those things work). KR flyers are not weenies. We'd rather > die than suffer the ignominy of helplessly floating down to earth under a > canopy of shame. But who am I to speak for all KR flyers? Let's take a > poll. > > Big WeenieNot a Big Weenie > > > > > > > > Mike > KSEE > > > > > > Old School Yearbook Pics > View Class Yearbooks Online Free. Search by School & Year. Look Now! > http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/55b950343f1f050345a67st02vuc > > ___ > 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> BRS vs Bean Field
I have one BRS equipped plane - a Fisher ultralight At least with that install, if I ever have to 'pull it' the BRS will likely destroy the airframe in the process of getting me down safely... The flip side is that if your flying area is devoid of survivable emergency spots, it beats the hell out of crashing into a forest or skyscraper On Jul 29, 2015 3:15 PM, "Mike Stirewalt via KRnet" wrote: > Chris said, > > > "if nothing else, the peace of mind would seem worth it." > > It sure wouldn't contribute to _my_ peace of mind. I would be annoyed > every time I got in the plane and noted I had devoted valuable space to > something fairly bulky that requires repacking and inspection > periodically and costs quite a bit of money to buy and maintain. That > money would, in my case, be a lot better spent on something like an > autopilot or some other luxury. There's also that lurking thought in the > back of my mind that the thing wouldn't work if I ever _did_ try and use > it. Which I wouldn't. Pushing the button would make me feel like a big > weenie. > > I've gotta admit a BRS, if it wasn't iced up like the rest of the plane, > might have saved Ken Rand's life in the predicament he was in but how > often does that happen? I think only Ken would fly into an ice storm > with no fuel left - 'course he wasn't expecting the ice. There was no > salvaging that situation other than with a BRS so clearly, in such an > extreme situation, a BRS might have saved the day (again, if it wasn't > frozen up like a popsicle). > > The best argument against carrying a "plane chute" though is simply > looking at the record of Langford's forced landings. My math is probably > off, but a quick search of the records shows Mark has had 27 forced > landings and never gotten a scratch. He usually doesn't even mess up the > plane. With a parachute, once you push the button you're liable to land > in a lake or on top of someone's roof. In case of engine failure, if you > fly the plane down instead of turning it over to the fickle finger of > wherever the wind is blowing that day, the records show you almost always > make it to a runway or a road or a golf course. Catastrophic structural > failure is another matter, but those don't seem to happen with KR's > (seats breaking don't count). > > So, as a practical matter a plane parachute for a KR isn't a good idea. > As a "peace of mind" issue, that may work for some people but it wouldn't > work for me. I wouldn't trust the thing to actually work, plus I > wouldn't be able to bring myself to push the button (or yank the lanyard > or however those things work). KR flyers are not weenies. We'd rather > die than suffer the ignominy of helplessly floating down to earth under a > canopy of shame. But who am I to speak for all KR flyers? Let's take a > poll. > > Big WeenieNot a Big Weenie > > > > > > > > Mike > KSEE > > > > > > Old School Yearbook Pics > View Class Yearbooks Online Free. Search by School & Year. Look Now! > http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/55b950343f1f050345a67st02vuc > > ___ > 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> BRS vs Bean Field
Chris said, > "if nothing else, the peace of mind would seem worth it." It sure wouldn't contribute to _my_ peace of mind. I would be annoyed every time I got in the plane and noted I had devoted valuable space to something fairly bulky that requires repacking and inspection periodically and costs quite a bit of money to buy and maintain. That money would, in my case, be a lot better spent on something like an autopilot or some other luxury. There's also that lurking thought in the back of my mind that the thing wouldn't work if I ever _did_ try and use it. Which I wouldn't. Pushing the button would make me feel like a big weenie. I've gotta admit a BRS, if it wasn't iced up like the rest of the plane, might have saved Ken Rand's life in the predicament he was in but how often does that happen? I think only Ken would fly into an ice storm with no fuel left - 'course he wasn't expecting the ice. There was no salvaging that situation other than with a BRS so clearly, in such an extreme situation, a BRS might have saved the day (again, if it wasn't frozen up like a popsicle). The best argument against carrying a "plane chute" though is simply looking at the record of Langford's forced landings. My math is probably off, but a quick search of the records shows Mark has had 27 forced landings and never gotten a scratch. He usually doesn't even mess up the plane. With a parachute, once you push the button you're liable to land in a lake or on top of someone's roof. In case of engine failure, if you fly the plane down instead of turning it over to the fickle finger of wherever the wind is blowing that day, the records show you almost always make it to a runway or a road or a golf course. Catastrophic structural failure is another matter, but those don't seem to happen with KR's (seats breaking don't count). So, as a practical matter a plane parachute for a KR isn't a good idea. As a "peace of mind" issue, that may work for some people but it wouldn't work for me. I wouldn't trust the thing to actually work, plus I wouldn't be able to bring myself to push the button (or yank the lanyard or however those things work). KR flyers are not weenies. We'd rather die than suffer the ignominy of helplessly floating down to earth under a canopy of shame. But who am I to speak for all KR flyers? Let's take a poll. Big WeenieNot a Big Weenie Mike KSEE Old School Yearbook Pics View Class Yearbooks Online Free. Search by School & Year. Look Now! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/55b950343f1f050345a67st02vuc
KR> brs vs bean field option
There is a KR on Oz with a BRS. I haven't seen it up close, but it belonged to Barry Kruyssen. I know he had it for sale a while back. Not sure where it is now. Take a look at http://www.athertonairport.com.au/kr2/ Cheers, Tony On 29 July 2015 at 02:12, Chris Prata via KRnet wrote: > I live in the northeast (althouh may move west eventually) . we have much > less emergency landing topography than almost anywhere else > > I wonder if anyone has installed a BRS system. they have those which are > internal and flush (invisible) > > the downsides of course in a KR is the loss of cargo area, and adding > weight behind the CG. Although maybe it would be possible to address both > issues with front deck installation... (where the fuel tank used to be in > the original design) > > if nothing else, the peace of mind would seem worth it. > > > > > ___ > 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> brs vs bean field option
It's a canister style mounted on the front of the firewall! Interesting. My concern would be the heat. Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device Original message From: Tony King via KRnet List-Post: krnet@list.krnet.org Date:07/28/2015 5:28 PM (GMT-05:00) To: KRnet Cc: Tony King Subject: Re: KR> brs vs bean field option There is a KR on Oz with a BRS.? I haven't seen it up close, but it belonged to Barry Kruyssen.? I know he had it for sale a while back.? Not sure where it is now. Take a look at http://www.athertonairport.com.au/kr2/ Cheers, Tony ___ 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> brs vs bean field option
they weigh like 18lb, iirc (plus harness). I suppose it has to attach to frt and rear spars on either side of the pilot... how much total weight did you figure? .the key driver is the max gross of the > aircraft. >
KR> brs vs bean field option
I live in the northeast (althouh may move west eventually) . we have much less emergency landing topography than almost anywhere else I wonder if anyone has installed a BRS system. they have those which are internal and flush (invisible) the downsides of course in a KR is the loss of cargo area, and adding weight behind the CG. Although maybe it would be possible to address both issues with front deck installation... (where the fuel tank used to be in the original design) if nothing else, the peace of mind would seem worth it.
KR> brs vs bean field option
I didn't get that far because I hadn't figured out max gross yet and weight and price of unit go up exponentially with max gross. https://sites.google.com/site/mykr2stretch/ https://sites.google.com/site/mykr2stretch/parts-for-sale On Jul 28, 2015 11:44 AM, "Chris Prata via KRnet" wrote: > they weigh like 18lb, iirc (plus harness). I suppose it has to attach to > frt and rear spars on either side of the pilot... how much total weight did > you figure? > > .the key driver is the max gross of the > > aircraft. > > > > > ___ > 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> brs vs bean field option
I contacted the company a couple of years ago and they have already designed a harness for the kr...the key driver is the max gross of the aircraft. https://sites.google.com/site/mykr2stretch/ https://sites.google.com/site/mykr2stretch/parts-for-sale
