question KR-2 or KR-2s construction

On Sun, 03 Sep 2006 05:37:18 GMT, "BA" wrote:

I"ll be honest. for some reason a plane made out of wood scares me?
wouldn't it suffer much more damage (than a metal or composite) plane if a
hard landing was neccessary?

Depends more on construction and design than materials. Planes designed to the
same limits withstand the same loads, no matter what they're made of. A metal
or composite airplane might be *lighter* than a wood airplane, but if they're
designed to the same stresses, they'll withstand those hard landings equally as
well.

I once got too slow and landed my wood airplane hard...over 4 Gs, as measured by
my pegged G-meter. My back hurt for days...but the plane shrugged it off.

if the fuel tank leaked during flight could the wings easily catch on fire?

Only if the fuel catches on fire. :-)

A fire in *any* kind of structure is bad news. Composites will quickly soften
(manufacturers prefer builders paint the planes white because *solar* heating is
a concern). Aluminum will soften eventually, too. In-flight fires are generally
pretty rare, and they're most-often engine related. On those, the type of
construction really doesn't matter.

by the way, are the fuel efficiency numbers on the kr-2 accurate (cruise at
180 and only burn 3.8 gph)? thats like 47 mpg.
I'm not aware of any other homebuilt (with a similiar style as the KR-2)
that even claims to get 40 mpg. pulsar aircraft claims the SP 100 will
cruise at 200 mph while burning 5 gph but I have yet to find an SP 100 owner
verify that.

You'll probably have trouble finding a KR-2 owner to verify 180 MPH, too. Go
to:

http://www.kr-2.aviation-mechanics.com/data1.htm

....and you'll see most owners reporting significantly lower than that.

Don't get too hard over on fuel efficiency. Yes, it's certainly nice to burn
less gas for the speed, but in all likelihood, your other expenses will be
higher than your fuel bill for these small engines. Heck, my annual fuel bill
is about a quarter of my hangar rent.

Pick an airplane that does what you want, and that you're comfortable both
*with* and *in*. If two planes meet your mission, then feel free to pick the one
that gives the best fuel efficiency. But fuel efficiency doesn't mean a damn if
you're not happy with the way the airplane flies, how much it carries, the
hassle it takes to keep operational, or how comfortable it is to ride in.

Ron Wanttaja