Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:12 AM - Carbon fiber panel (Cody Austin)
2. 05:19 AM - Re: center stick question (Graham Brighton)
3. 11:21 AM - KIS kit suppliers - who supplied what (mark_trickel)
4. 12:23 PM - Control Force Harmony (Owen Baker)
5. 11:49 PM - Re: KIS kit suppliers - who supplied what (Scott Stearns)
6. 11:53 PM - Re: Control Force Harmony (Graham Brighton)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Carbon fiber panel |
Galin,
Sorry for the delayed response, my grandfather was sick and then pased
away. I did get the pictures, thank you. I think I will pass on the
panel for now, I am thinking I want to build a multi-faceted panel. Did
you build the panel? If you want to sell some of that cloth I'll pay
$30/roll if it is a weave I can use.
Thanks,
Cody
On Thursday, April 18, 2013, Galin Hernandez wrote:
> Cody, did you get the pictures I sent you of the carbon fiber panel?
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: center stick question |
G'Day,
Scott ... sounds like u have given this some thought too
... would luv to see any pics u have ... the bob weights sound a good
idea ..but nor sure where u have them situated .!?
Cheers
Graham
.
From: Scott Stearns
Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2013 1:17 PM
Subject: Re: KIS-List: center stick question
I modified my elevator bellcrank with 3 sets of holes so i could adjust
it if needed. I fly with about 60% of the mechanical advantage as the
stock set up and and I added 2" to the elevator chord. Drilling a
couple bolt holes in the bellcrank to reduce the mechanical advantage is
pretty simple and should make a noticable improvement.
I also added a bob weight so as the G forces build up the weight adds
forward stick force. That helped a lot to smooth out turbulence and the
airplane feels more solid during spirited maneuvering. I really
recommend the bob weight. I have pics if anyone wants to see. Very
cheap and simple.
My ailerons are still a too heavy but much better matched to the
elevator compared to factory setup.
Far and away the best flying light airplane is a bonanza. Especially
the short wing ones. The control harmony is perfect. I will never
understand why all light airplanes do not have that kind of control
harmony concidering is was nearly the first modern light airplane.
Scott
On Apr 20, 2013, at 4:54 AM, Graham Brighton <gbrighton@skymesh.com.au>
wrote:
Hi OC,
Sorry didn't mean something was specially wrong .... Is
that most lighties share that common lack of harmony of control feel
with roll and pitch .... ,
With our Ailerons which are specially wholesome ( non tapered) .. some
'leverage' ... is going to be required .. (specially with increased
speed !) ...
Where as elevators are mostly light ..!? .. In theory achieving
mechanical leverage advantage in equal measure to arrive at uniform
control input between pitch and roll is straight fwd .... but carn't
think of any ( admit am only ppl and not flown very many types ..!) ..,
that have achieved it ..?!
Playing with bell crank ratios is the logical way .. but would be
super laborious I'm sure ... With my adjustable length stick ... roll is
as light/heavy as my personal preference ( for whatever speed .. ) ....
However pitch which is normally light gets lighter with extra leverage
grrr .... Am surprised someone hasn't come up with some sort of fail
safe dampener devise to enable Elevator input feel to be adjusted to
harmonise together with Aileron input feel .... , probably there is ...
but i just haven't stumbled across it sob ..,!?? , anybody ..??,
Anyway am happy at present to retract down the stick for xcrountry
legs and map reading/iPad etc ...,
Just was that stick position came up that's all ... ,
Cheers
Graham
.
Sent from my iPad
On 20/04/2013, at 1:36 PM, "Owen Baker " <bakerocb@cox.net> wrote:
4/19/2013
Hello Graham, You wrote: =9CHaven't figured how to balance
elevator feel though ... Luv to hear if anyone has a fix for that ...
??=9D
What sort of balancing is needed for KIS TR-1 elevator feel?
Thanks,
OC
'O C' Baker says "The best investment you can make is the effort to
gather and understand information."
============
From: Graham Brighton
Sent: Friday, April 19, 2013 7:46 PM
To: kis-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: KIS-List: center stick question
G'day Galin,
Actually I attached a couple pics with my
post ..... Can resend later when I get hm if u haven't received ... just
a simple 'twist lock' telescope setup ... Haven't figured how to balance
elevator feel though ... Luv to hear if anyone has a fix for that ...
??
Graham
Sent from my iPad
=========
//www.matronics.com/Navigator?KIS-List
=========
cs.com
=========
matronics.com/contribution
=========
=========
//www.matronics.com/Navigator?KIS-List
=========
cs.com
=========
matronics.com/contribution
=========
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | KIS kit suppliers - who supplied what |
There is not much about the suppliers that is not already known but I'll give it
a shot. Rich tooled up 14 airplanes at High Tech Composites so traffic in and
out of the shop was pretty heavy. It was easy to network with the other kitplane
guys and share information on suppliers for the different components. Many
of the parts used on the KIS are closely related to the Lancair, after all Lance
was a partner in High Tech Composites and Rich tooled ALL of those designs
and supplied more than 400 complete sets of composite parts and then supplied
parts as needed after Lance moved the operation overseas (where it still is).
Hardware - Rich had OEM pricing from Aircraft Spruce, and this is where the bulk
of these items came from. The California warehouse was only about 100 miles
away and you can bet the Tri-R crew made a few trips there when they built the
TR-4 Cruiser in 73 days from dinner napkin sketches to flying in 1994. During
regular production if they ran short of composite supplies or anything else they
could quickly get the things they needed to move kits out the door. Rich also
had and OEM deal with Gruden for the door gas struts, those numbers are floating
around the forum somewhere and struts are readily available. There were
other suppliers for some of the odds and ends. If Rich could find a better deal
somewhere else he would take advantage of the source, but I can't recall any
specifics. I will be checking in with Rich's early employees Chuck H. and Steve
R. (they will be in shock to learn I have the McCormick TR-1C, they both knew
Ken McCormick) and see if they can recall any information on the vendors.
Metal parts - formed and welded - OC is spot on, Ken Brock was the main supplier
of these parts, and yes, Rich had problems with the quality that came out of
Ken's shop. I stressed this in a past post and I am going to stress this again
- if you are flying the factory rudder pedals I urge you to inspect them as
part of your preflight. For those who missed post about them, a couple of builders
had brought rudder pedal sets back to us at Oshkosh, bent with cracks or
breaks at the welds. Just last spring Jason Hill experienced a broken rudder pedal
on landing and now the airplane has been totaled out. Rich and Ken did try
to work out the issues that came up but at this point there is no way of knowing
who got what parts. Most problems were with the earlier TR-1 kits but I would
not rule out any of the welded metal parts. As a pilot you depend on these
parts doing their job and only close monitoring can ensure that. Sadly Ken died
in 1999, and his shop was sold off but I do not think the new owner continued
to supply the aviation industry. OC was correct again, as time pasted during
production Rich replaced many of the welded parts with machined metal parts
from Lyle Hendrick. Lyle also provided some welded parts near the end of production
including nose landing gears. Any CNC parts Lyle supplied are still available.
He maintains the files used to make these parts and they can be replicated
easily.
Vance and parts - You may know Vance was a real rocket scientist, he worked for
Rocketdyne and he specifically worked on the Apollo Lunar Modular propulsion
systems. For a kid like me that used to get sick on splashdown days so I could
stay home and watch, talking to Vance about the space stuff...it just couldn't
get any better. They probably designed that stuff on dinner napkins too! Vance
has 6 patents in his name, most about forming rocket engine nozzles. Vance
was the consummate tinkerer, and he had a really cool shop at his house with lots
of neat things and a bunch of machine tools. Rich's name is on the front of
KIS but we all know Vance was the real moving force behind KIS (Nate Rambo,
Chuck Harrison, Steve Ruege, and Mark Kettering put a lot of work into KIS too).
Vance did provide a few other small parts for the KIS project beside the nose
gears. Exactly what parts they were I am uncertain but I need a few things
for my KIS and if Lyle doesn't have files for what I need I'll know Vance made
them. I will have to keep you posted on that information.
Landing Gear -
Main Gear - The aluminum main landing gear for the TR-1 had 4 different suppliers.
Some of them came from Aircraft Spruce, some came from other suppliers, but
the last supplier was Lyle. I do not know who the other suppliers were, probably
some local machine shop or possibly somebody that supplied one of the other
kitplane sellers Rich was associated with. I would guess any kits sold after
late 1993 were supplied by Lyle. All the TR-4 main gears came from Lyle.
Nose Gear - Early TR-1 nose gears came from Ken Brock. This gear was sold with
kits probably until 1996 or 1997. So many builders had problems with the nose
gear getting bent, PIO, and all that bad stuff. For the record Rich welded his
own nose gear, its still on the airplane rusting away in that funky third world
country, and neither he or any of the few pilots he let fly the airplane never
banged it! Rich was above all else an incredible pilot. I think there was
3 version of the early nose gear before Vance and Lyle came up with the current
version with sock and springs that could take some abuse (like we all used to
do to those trusty 150s, 152s, and Cherokees). The early TR-4 steerable nose
was mostly made by Vance, this is where he pioneered the shock and spring set
up. Lyle provided a few machined parts for it but Vance did the final assembly.
More about this gear in the wheel pants paragraph. The free castoring nose
gear, the final version sold with the TR-4 kits featured the same shock and spring
set up as the early steerable TR-4 nose gear and the later TR-1 nose gear.
Again Vance did the final assembly so unfortunately the exact spring combination
is unknown. That secret went with Vance when he passed away. All the Landing
gears are still available from Lyle except for the shock and springs. We all
know the shock was from the '68 Falcon. I did a pretty extensive search while
trying to help Dennis and the Falcon shock is the only shock that has the stud
end on both ends except for one other shock that is entirley to big to fit
into the nose gear strut. The only remaining mystery is the spring sets used
on the two airplanes and Galin has just provided us with some important clues.
The set up works great for the TR-1 but may not be the most idea set up for the
TR-4, it may be a bit light for the loads it takes (my arm chair engineering
opinion).
Wheel Pants - You probably would have never guessed this one...the wheel pants
for the TR-1 came from RANS (check out their website). Rich had a good relationship
with Randy Slitter. I do not recall how this worked out, Rich may have supplied
Randy at one time but I do know Rich would get wheel pants sets from Randy
from time to time. The TR-4 needed bigger wheel pants. I believe the crew
tooled their own larger size very similar to the style used on the TR-1, I'll
have Chuck and Steve confirm this. There was a problem when they put wheel pants
on the TR-4 prototype. While flying the nose gear turned with the rudder,
and when the nose gear wheel pant turned into the wind it really affected the
yaw of the airplane in a bad way. That was the reason the nose gear wheel pant
was in the luggage bay when the airplane first appeared at Oshkosh in 1994. Vance
went to work and came up with the idea of a detente. When the TR-4 would
leave the ground the nose gear would drop into a notch and sort of disconnect
from the rudder pedals and stay pointed straight ahead and the nose gear and its
big wheel pant would not turn into the wind. Problem solved, but it proved
to be to difficult and expensive to produce this type of landing gear to be included
in the kits. And so the free castering nose gear was born.
Wheels and Brakes - No big secret here. Matco was the supplier. Many builders cursed
these wheels especially on the TR-1. Maybe rightly so, the wheel is a bit
undersized for the the job it has to do. When the TR-1 started out its gross
weight was 1300 lbs. but is was increased to 1550 lbs., and that is a huge difference.
The worse thing about the brake set up as most of you know, was the
pedal is too short and it is difficult to generate enough leverage to take advantage
of what the Matcos have to offer in stopping power. Adding length to the
brake pedal helped improve the stopping power. Many builders changed them out
for other brands. I have a TR-1 builder near me who changed to the Matco double
puck system and he loves it. He operates off a grass runway with good results.
I may consider this change for my TR-1C should I actually get up enough nerve
to roll it down a real runway. The Matco set up for the TR-4 was a much better
match but still had the same rudder/brake pedal set up Rich used on the
TR-1. The gross weight increased from 2400 lbs. to 2500 lbs. on the TR-4 but the
change did not effect the braking performance. The Matcos had such a bad reputation
with builders that a couple of new kit buyers didn't even want them included
in their kit but the Matcos will do the job. Rich used Grove wheels and
brakes on the Volato 400 project.
Engine Mounts - Most of you no these came from, Snowline Welding in Oregon. Quality
was spotty from this supplier. Many of these mounts were delivered warped.
Although not a major problem it was not the most ideal situation. If you know
anything about welding, putting together a complicated mount required time to
allow the welds to cool as the assembly progressed. If the welding was rushed
and not allowed to cool along the way when the welds do cool it shrinks and
causes the part to warp. In a recent phone conversation TR-4 builder Dennis Frisone
he told me Snowline no longer had the jigs used to make the KIS motor mounts.
Windows - Aircraft Windshield Company supplied all windows for KIS. I think every
airplane Rich tooled up for other kitplane sellers had windows provided by
this company. They have an excellent reputation. Builders may feel the cost is
high but their product is first class. A lot of time is put into the resurfacing
of these windows after they are molded to ensure excellent optics. All KIS
windows are available on an as need bases.
Composite Suppliers - Hexel was the main supplier of this stuff but Rich also did
get things from Aircraft Spruce. Later on there were other composite vendors
that provided the High Temp materials but I can't recall who these people were.
Maybe Mark K. might know.
This is about as much as I know about Richard's vendors, if I learn anymore I will
update this post.
Mark T.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=399056#399056
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Control Force Harmony |
4/21/2013
Hello Graham, You wrote: Am surprised someone hasn't come up with some sort
of fail safe dampener devise to enable Elevator input feel to be adjusted to
harmonise together with Aileron input feel .... , probably there is ... but
i just haven't stumbled across it sob ..,!?? , anybody ..??,
There is such a device and I have one installed on my KIS TR-1. Read about
it in my KIS list 1/7/2006 posting copied here:
"1/7/2006 Hello Bill, There is more to this pitch trim by springs system
than meets the eye. The typical system uses two springs in tension with an
arm that moves the spring center connect point to adjust. This works, but as
you have discovered has some sloppyness or imprecision to it. Maybe because
the two springs are always in play. A local Glasair builder has developed a
spring trim system that is superior. Can be used for pitch, aileron, or
rudder. It consists of two springs in compression between the ends of a tube
and a rod sliding within that tube with a nylon slider block which acts as a
center stop between the two springs. The slider block is normally connected
to an electric trim positioning motor and the end of the rod is connected to
the control surface bellcrank. The result is a much more positive
repositioning capability of the trim center point and the fact that when
either control input is made or aerodynamic forces move the control surface
only one spring is in play, the one being compressed. Adjustment of the trim
center point is accomplished by operating the electric trim positioning
motor. Contact me if interested in pursuing this idea further. OC"
My motivation for installing this device was to accomplish pitch trim
without having a tab installed on my elevator, it could also be installed
for the purpose of changing pitch control forces with the trim capability
just an added benefit. By changing the length of the tube and rod, the
springs installed on each, and (for fine tuning) spacers on either the tube
or rod to increase initial spring compression force one can achieve an
almost infinite number of variable stick force required to move the elevator
in either direction.
OC
PS: One caveat -- To take true advantage of this system for pitch trim one
must have sufficient travel of the linear actuator to achieve the desired
maximum nose up and maximum nose down pitch conditions desired. The puny 1.2
inch travel of a Ray Allen servo is not likely to do the job.
======================================================================================================
Saturday, April 20, 2013 7:54 AM
Hi OC,
Sorry didn't mean something was specially wrong .... Is that
most lighties share that common lack of harmony of control feel with roll
and pitch .... ,
With our Ailerons which are specially wholesome ( non tapered) .. some
'leverage' ... is going to be required .. (specially with increased speed !)
...
Where as elevators are mostly light ..!? .. In theory achieving mechanical
leverage advantage in equal measure to arrive at uniform control input
between pitch and roll is straight fwd .... but carn't think of any ( admit
am only ppl and not flown very many types ..!) .., that have achieved it
..?!
Playing with bell crank ratios is the logical way .. but would be super
laborious I'm sure ... With my adjustable length stick ... roll is as
light/heavy as my personal preference ( for whatever speed .. ) ....
However pitch which is normally light gets lighter with extra leverage grrr
.... Am surprised someone hasn't come up with some sort of fail safe
dampener devise to enable Elevator input feel to be adjusted to harmonise
together with Aileron input feel .... , probably there is ... but i just
haven't stumbled across it sob ..,!?? , anybody ..??,
Anyway am happy at present to retract down the stick for xcrountry legs and
map reading/iPad etc ...,
Just was that stick position came up that's all ... ,
Cheers
Graham
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: KIS kit suppliers - who supplied what |
Great post, thanks. Grove will make new main gear too.
Scott
On Apr 21, 2013, at 1:20 PM, "mark_trickel" <marktrickel@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> There is not much about the suppliers that is not already known but I'll give
it a shot. Rich tooled up 14 airplanes at High Tech Composites so traffic in
and out of the shop was pretty heavy. It was easy to network with the other kitplane
guys and share information on suppliers for the different components. Many
of the parts used on the KIS are closely related to the Lancair, after all
Lance was a partner in High Tech Composites and Rich tooled ALL of those designs
and supplied more than 400 complete sets of composite parts and then supplied
parts as needed after Lance moved the operation overseas (where it still is).
>
> Hardware - Rich had OEM pricing from Aircraft Spruce, and this is where the bulk
of these items came from. The California warehouse was only about 100 miles
away and you can bet the Tri-R crew made a few trips there when they built the
TR-4 Cruiser in 73 days from dinner napkin sketches to flying in 1994. During
regular production if they ran short of composite supplies or anything else
they could quickly get the things they needed to move kits out the door. Rich
also had and OEM deal with Gruden for the door gas struts, those numbers are
floating around the forum somewhere and struts are readily available. There were
other suppliers for some of the odds and ends. If Rich could find a better
deal somewhere else he would take advantage of the source, but I can't recall
any specifics. I will be checking in with Rich's early employees Chuck H. and
Steve R. (they will be in shock to learn I have the McCormick TR-1C, they both
knew Ken McCormick) and see if they can recall any in!
> formation on the vendors.
>
> Metal parts - formed and welded - OC is spot on, Ken Brock was the main supplier
of these parts, and yes, Rich had problems with the quality that came out
of Ken's shop. I stressed this in a past post and I am going to stress this again
- if you are flying the factory rudder pedals I urge you to inspect them as
part of your preflight. For those who missed post about them, a couple of builders
had brought rudder pedal sets back to us at Oshkosh, bent with cracks or
breaks at the welds. Just last spring Jason Hill experienced a broken rudder
pedal on landing and now the airplane has been totaled out. Rich and Ken did
try to work out the issues that came up but at this point there is no way of knowing
who got what parts. Most problems were with the earlier TR-1 kits but I
would not rule out any of the welded metal parts. As a pilot you depend on these
parts doing their job and only close monitoring can ensure that. Sadly Ken
died in 1999, and his shop was sold off but I do not !
> think the new owner continued to supply the aviation industry. OC was correct
again, as time pasted during production Rich replaced many of the welded parts
with machined metal parts from Lyle Hendrick. Lyle also provided some welded
parts near the end of production including nose landing gears. Any CNC parts
Lyle supplied are still available. He maintains the files used to make these parts
and they can be replicated easily.
>
> Vance and parts - You may know Vance was a real rocket scientist, he worked for
Rocketdyne and he specifically worked on the Apollo Lunar Modular propulsion
systems. For a kid like me that used to get sick on splashdown days so I could
stay home and watch, talking to Vance about the space stuff...it just couldn't
get any better. They probably designed that stuff on dinner napkins too! Vance
has 6 patents in his name, most about forming rocket engine nozzles. Vance
was the consummate tinkerer, and he had a really cool shop at his house with
lots of neat things and a bunch of machine tools. Rich's name is on the front
of KIS but we all know Vance was the real moving force behind KIS (Nate Rambo,
Chuck Harrison, Steve Ruege, and Mark Kettering put a lot of work into KIS too).
Vance did provide a few other small parts for the KIS project beside the
nose gears. Exactly what parts they were I am uncertain but I need a few things
for my KIS and if Lyle doesn't have files for what I!
> need I'll know Vance made them. I will have to keep you posted on that information.
>
> Landing Gear -
> Main Gear - The aluminum main landing gear for the TR-1 had 4 different suppliers.
Some of them came from Aircraft Spruce, some came from other suppliers,
but the last supplier was Lyle. I do not know who the other suppliers were, probably
some local machine shop or possibly somebody that supplied one of the other
kitplane sellers Rich was associated with. I would guess any kits sold after
late 1993 were supplied by Lyle. All the TR-4 main gears came from Lyle.
>
> Nose Gear - Early TR-1 nose gears came from Ken Brock. This gear was sold with
kits probably until 1996 or 1997. So many builders had problems with the nose
gear getting bent, PIO, and all that bad stuff. For the record Rich welded his
own nose gear, its still on the airplane rusting away in that funky third world
country, and neither he or any of the few pilots he let fly the airplane
never banged it! Rich was above all else an incredible pilot. I think there was
3 version of the early nose gear before Vance and Lyle came up with the current
version with sock and springs that could take some abuse (like we all used
to do to those trusty 150s, 152s, and Cherokees). The early TR-4 steerable nose
was mostly made by Vance, this is where he pioneered the shock and spring set
up. Lyle provided a few machined parts for it but Vance did the final assembly.
More about this gear in the wheel pants paragraph. The free castoring nose
gear, the final version sold with the TR-4 kits feat!
> ured the same shock and spring set up as the early steerable TR-4 nose gear and
the later TR-1 nose gear. Again Vance did the final assembly so unfortunately
the exact spring combination is unknown. That secret went with Vance when he
passed away. All the Landing gears are still available from Lyle except for
the shock and springs. We all know the shock was from the '68 Falcon. I did a
pretty extensive search while trying to help Dennis and the Falcon shock is the
only shock that has the stud end on both ends except for one other shock that
is entirley to big to fit into the nose gear strut. The only remaining mystery
is the spring sets used on the two airplanes and Galin has just provided us
with some important clues. The set up works great for the TR-1 but may not be
the most idea set up for the TR-4, it may be a bit light for the loads it takes
(my arm chair engineering opinion).
>
> Wheel Pants - You probably would have never guessed this one...the wheel pants
for the TR-1 came from RANS (check out their website). Rich had a good relationship
with Randy Slitter. I do not recall how this worked out, Rich may have
supplied Randy at one time but I do know Rich would get wheel pants sets from
Randy from time to time. The TR-4 needed bigger wheel pants. I believe the crew
tooled their own larger size very similar to the style used on the TR-1, I'll
have Chuck and Steve confirm this. There was a problem when they put wheel
pants on the TR-4 prototype. While flying the nose gear turned with the rudder,
and when the nose gear wheel pant turned into the wind it really affected the
yaw of the airplane in a bad way. That was the reason the nose gear wheel pant
was in the luggage bay when the airplane first appeared at Oshkosh in 1994.
Vance went to work and came up with the idea of a detente. When the TR-4 would
leave the ground the nose gear would drop into a not!
> ch and sort of disconnect from the rudder pedals and stay pointed straight ahead
and the nose gear and its big wheel pant would not turn into the wind. Problem
solved, but it proved to be to difficult and expensive to produce this type
of landing gear to be included in the kits. And so the free castering nose
gear was born.
>
> Wheels and Brakes - No big secret here. Matco was the supplier. Many builders
cursed these wheels especially on the TR-1. Maybe rightly so, the wheel is a
bit undersized for the the job it has to do. When the TR-1 started out its gross
weight was 1300 lbs. but is was increased to 1550 lbs., and that is a huge
difference. The worse thing about the brake set up as most of you know, was the
pedal is too short and it is difficult to generate enough leverage to take advantage
of what the Matcos have to offer in stopping power. Adding length to
the brake pedal helped improve the stopping power. Many builders changed them
out for other brands. I have a TR-1 builder near me who changed to the Matco double
puck system and he loves it. He operates off a grass runway with good results.
I may consider this change for my TR-1C should I actually get up enough
nerve to roll it down a real runway. The Matco set up for the TR-4 was a much
better match but still had the same rudder/brake peda!
> l set up Rich used on the TR-1. The gross weight increased from 2400 lbs. to
2500 lbs. on the TR-4 but the change did not effect the braking performance. The
Matcos had such a bad reputation with builders that a couple of new kit buyers
didn't even want them included in their kit but the Matcos will do the job.
Rich used Grove wheels and brakes on the Volato 400 project.
>
> Engine Mounts - Most of you no these came from, Snowline Welding in Oregon. Quality
was spotty from this supplier. Many of these mounts were delivered warped.
Although not a major problem it was not the most ideal situation. If you know
anything about welding, putting together a complicated mount required time
to allow the welds to cool as the assembly progressed. If the welding was rushed
and not allowed to cool along the way when the welds do cool it shrinks and
causes the part to warp. In a recent phone conversation TR-4 builder Dennis
Frisone he told me Snowline no longer had the jigs used to make the KIS motor
mounts.
>
> Windows - Aircraft Windshield Company supplied all windows for KIS. I think every
airplane Rich tooled up for other kitplane sellers had windows provided by
this company. They have an excellent reputation. Builders may feel the cost
is high but their product is first class. A lot of time is put into the resurfacing
of these windows after they are molded to ensure excellent optics. All KIS
windows are available on an as need bases.
>
> Composite Suppliers - Hexel was the main supplier of this stuff but Rich also
did get things from Aircraft Spruce. Later on there were other composite vendors
that provided the High Temp materials but I can't recall who these people
were. Maybe Mark K. might know.
>
> This is about as much as I know about Richard's vendors, if I learn anymore I
will update this post.
> Mark T.
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=399056#399056
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Control Force Harmony |
Hi OC,
Thx for ur great reply ... neat idea to work the Springs in
compression ..... think i get it ok .. but would be good to see the install
.... do have any Pics at all .. ??
Cheers
Graham
.
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Owen Baker " <bakerocb@cox.net>
Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 5:23 AM
<kis-list@matronics.com>
Subject: KIS-List: Control Force Harmony
>
> 4/21/2013
>
> Hello Graham, You wrote: Am surprised someone hasn't come up with some
> sort of fail safe dampener devise to enable Elevator input feel to be
> adjusted to harmonise together with Aileron input feel .... , probably
> there is ... but i just haven't stumbled across it sob ..,!?? , anybody
> ..??,
>
> There is such a device and I have one installed on my KIS TR-1. Read about
> it in my KIS list 1/7/2006 posting copied here:
>
> "1/7/2006 Hello Bill, There is more to this pitch trim by springs system
> than meets the eye. The typical system uses two springs in tension with an
> arm that moves the spring center connect point to adjust. This works, but
> as you have discovered has some sloppyness or imprecision to it. Maybe
> because the two springs are always in play. A local Glasair builder has
> developed a spring trim system that is superior. Can be used for pitch,
> aileron, or rudder. It consists of two springs in compression between the
> ends of a tube and a rod sliding within that tube with a nylon slider
> block which acts as a center stop between the two springs. The slider
> block is normally connected to an electric trim positioning motor and the
> end of the rod is connected to the control surface bellcrank. The result
> is a much more positive repositioning capability of the trim center point
> and the fact that when either control input is made or aerodynamic forces
> move the control surface only one spring is in play, the one being
> compressed. Adjustment of the trim center point is accomplished by
> operating the electric trim positioning motor. Contact me if interested in
> pursuing this idea further. OC"
>
> My motivation for installing this device was to accomplish pitch trim
> without having a tab installed on my elevator, it could also be installed
> for the purpose of changing pitch control forces with the trim capability
> just an added benefit. By changing the length of the tube and rod, the
> springs installed on each, and (for fine tuning) spacers on either the
> tube or rod to increase initial spring compression force one can achieve
> an almost infinite number of variable stick force required to move the
> elevator in either direction.
>
> OC
>
> PS: One caveat -- To take true advantage of this system for pitch trim one
> must have sufficient travel of the linear actuator to achieve the desired
> maximum nose up and maximum nose down pitch conditions desired. The puny
> 1.2 inch travel of a Ray Allen servo is not likely to do the job.
>
> ======================================================================================================
>
> Saturday, April 20, 2013 7:54 AM
>
> Hi OC,
> Sorry didn't mean something was specially wrong .... Is that
> most lighties share that common lack of harmony of control feel with roll
> and pitch .... ,
> With our Ailerons which are specially wholesome ( non tapered) .. some
> 'leverage' ... is going to be required .. (specially with increased speed
> !) ...
>
> Where as elevators are mostly light ..!? .. In theory achieving
> mechanical leverage advantage in equal measure to arrive at uniform
> control input between pitch and roll is straight fwd .... but carn't think
> of any ( admit am only ppl and not flown very many types ..!) .., that
> have achieved it ..?!
>
> Playing with bell crank ratios is the logical way .. but would be super
> laborious I'm sure ... With my adjustable length stick ... roll is as
> light/heavy as my personal preference ( for whatever speed .. ) ....
> However pitch which is normally light gets lighter with extra leverage
> grrr .... Am surprised someone hasn't come up with some sort of fail safe
> dampener devise to enable Elevator input feel to be adjusted to harmonise
> together with Aileron input feel .... , probably there is ... but i just
> haven't stumbled across it sob ..,!?? , anybody ..??,
>
> Anyway am happy at present to retract down the stick for xcrountry legs
> and map reading/iPad etc ...,
>
> Just was that stick position came up that's all ... ,
> Cheers
> Graham
>
>
>
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|