Advice on which Kaos to build?

[Barry Demers]

I have come to the conclusion that some flavor of Kaos is to come out my shop.  But which one? 

Couple of things.
First, I rank my myself as entry level. I will need help with trimming a model as well as correctly performing the manoeuvres.
Second, I want to build, so the Tower ARF;s while offering a fast turnaround, doesn't appeal to the builder in me.
Third, I don't know what sorts of "personalization" I can do and keep the plane legal. Can I change the shape of the tail, as an example.
Forth, I have a Super Kaos kit sitting downstairs, and I have plans for a Killer, and Ultimate Kaos. I have a call out for Utter plans, so if you have a set, hollar back!
Fifth, I will electrify the plane.
Sixth, I'd like to keep the ws less than 5'.

Overriding criteria is having what is considered the "best" performing plane of the bunch. I trust that you folks can guide me in determining that. To improve my skills I need to work with a tool that is better than I am. Hopefully that tool would suffice until I am a mature enough pilot to figure out these sorts of things for myself.

So, which is it, the Super, Killer, Utter, or Ultimate?

Thanks, Barry

[Jeff Owens]

The Super Kaos is an excellent choice. After all, Joe Bridi used it in the World Champs, so it is no slouch. I believe that the original Super Kaos had a wingspan of 58 inches, so it fits into your size limitation. We strongly discourage modifications to the outlines of the flight surfaces. The model should be recognizable without the need for a name on the side!

Cheers,

Jeff

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Senior Pattern Association" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to SPAmembers+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Stephen Pacheco]

Hi,

 

I built a Super KAOS – electrified. 

My major comments are as follows:

1.       Take care in considering how to modify the motor mount.

2.       Build it light, remove a lot of wood.

3.       I built my S. KAOS and my Current Dirty Birdi to use 2 3S batteries.  I mounted these so that I could move them around to adjust the CG and not need to add weight.  I’d be glad to share more details if you wish.

 

Enjoy

 

Steve P.

[Barry Demers]

Gotcha.  Being new I had to ask. So the f15 disguised as a cub isn't going to work out well?

[Barry Demers]

Stephen, thanks for the tips.  If you'd elaborate on the motor mount, and motor selection that be great.  A 3S battery vs a 4S.  I assume you checked both ways?

[Barry Demers]

Stephen, the DB you have...... The 60 size or 40 size?

On Sep 10, 2014 8:11 AM, "Stephen Pacheco" <spac...@pacheco-computer.com> wrote:

[Jeff Owens]

Well, it might depend on whether or not the correct shade of yellow (with black striping) was used....

Jeff

[Stephen Pacheco]

It is a 60.  I’m using an e-flight power 60.

As a mater-of-fact I’m right now replacing the old Power 60 with a new one.

 

Steve

[Stephen Pacheco]

I’ll take a couple of pictures and send you some info later this morning.

 

From: SPAme...@googlegroups.com [mailto:SPAme...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Barry Demers

Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2014 7:19 AM
To: SPAme...@googlegroups.com

[Barry Demers]

Thanks on the DB spec, and the upcoming photos

Thank you,

Barry

[Vic Koenig]

 Steven, share those motor mount pics with all, I'd like to see your version.  Vic K

[Stephen Pacheco]

Barry,

 

OK Here are some pictures and suggestions based on both the KAOS and DB builds.  These pictures are from the Dirty Birdi, but as I said the S. KAOS build is almost identical.

 

Picture 1294 shows the top with the hatch removed.  The way I made the hatch was to tack glue the top block during construction and then cut the two ends and break the take-bonds after I finished all of the shaping and sanding.  I added extra braces to the fuselage build because of the size of the hatch.   

 

Picture 1293 is a close up view.  There are two battery trays for 3S batteries.  This allows spreading out the weight both in front of and behind the CG.  On the right side of the picture you can see a hole I cut out to allow access to wires related to the ESC and the disconnect plug.  The batteries are held in with Velcro.

 

Pictures 1295 and 1296 are looking into the battery compartment areas.  You will notice that I needed to open up the bulkheads to allow the batteries to be slipped in.  The batteries that I am using are “GForce 25C 5000mAh 3S Car LiPO Pack (Hard Case) – from Value Hobby” .  Be sure that you have the dimensions for whatever batteries that you want to use.  I put Velcro on the trays and on the batteries and use Velcro straps to hold them down.  So far there has been no problem with either plane regarding the batteries.

 

Picture ESC Mount shows the esc is mounted to the bottom.  I decided to mount the ESC this way to allow for better cooling and not need to worry about airflow through the fuse too much.

 

Picture 1299 shows the cowling.  I  built an appropriately sized bulkhead positioned to get the prop in the correct place and used that instead of the one that came with the kit.  I built up the nose completely and did all of the sanding and then cut cowl off with a band saw.  I faced both sides of the cut with 1/32 ply and installed alignment pins.

 

Picture 1298 shows the hatch in place, but the cowl is not on.  As I said I am in the processing of putting in a new Power 60 motor.

 

Some other notes:

1.       I mounted the rudder and elevator servos in the tail, this turned out to be a good choice in both the S. KAOS and DB builds.

2.       Because of the way I did the batteries I can balance the plane by shifting batteries and have not needed to add any weight.

3.       For the DB I built the wing with no dihedral.  I also used the rib jig holes to ensure alignment by slipping in dowels that extended through at least 3 ribs on either side.

I hope this helps.

 

Steve P.

 

From: SPAme...@googlegroups.com [mailto:SPAme...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Barry Demers

Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2014 7:19 AM
To: SPAme...@googlegroups.com

[Barry Demers]

Thanks for the pics.  I'll keep them around for reference when the time comes. I also coincidentally bumped into your build for the Super on WattFlyer Forum, so I did have a chance to see Watt (;>/) you've done. Excellent. I did see the elevator servos in back, right?  With all the lightening you did, most apparently in rear, do you think even more up in front of the cg could happen? 

As it turns out the Super I have downstairs is for a 40 (52" wing) so the Super will have to join in with the other plans build Kaos's.  Not sure that the 40 is approved, but I already have a pair of 40 sized planes in limbo, did want to muddy the waters any further. I'll stick with the 60 size since it has a tolerable wing span.  Could you possible measure the fuse length on the DB, when easy to do?  I can't 1 piece the DB wing, but maybe a 2 piece.  Now the fuse length becomes the critical dimension.  As you may be able to tell I have a overactive twitch when I see either of 2 planes:  the DB and the Mach. 

[Stephen Pacheco]

Vic,

 

So what I did was determine where the Power 60 needed to be to get the prop in the correct place.  I then took the dimensions from the plans and cut a new bulkhead to the correct size for the new location.  I did not use the bulkhead that came with kit. 

 

I built-up the fuselage nose completely and did all shaping and sanding.  I then used a band saw and cut the nose off leaving about ¾ of an inch in front of the bulkhead to make the removable cowl.

 

I then carved out the inside of the cowl to make room for the motor.  I also made a 1/32 plywood face for both the cowl and the fuse and made matching holes for alignment pins.  You can see these holes and dowels in the picture.

 

I attached some tabs to the cowl that extend into the fuse so I can attach the cowl with a couple of screws.

 

The cowl has an air outlet at the bottom, does not show up in the picture, to let air out directly rather than push the hot air through the fuse.

 

 

I hope this answers your question.

 

Steve P.

[Stephen Pacheco]

Barry,

 

Regarding weight, I suggest taking off anything you feel comfortable with.  Electric does not generate the same level of vibration as fuel, so you can sacrifice a little strength.  

 

My DB is 56 inches from prop spinner to rudder.

 

I got my DB kit from BlueJay – I thought the kit was great.

 

Steve P.

--

[Paul J. Wright]

...and a quick sample of the Tower Kaos conversion.  The motor mount made things work well up front, able to align nosegear and still offset motor for proper thrust lines.  Forming the new cowl was a bit of a pain, and if done again, I'd fair it further back, rather than stop at the stock firewall.  Battery hatch was cut from fuselage decking between firewall and 2nd former.  ESC installed under removable battery shelf, with cooling fins exposed on underside.  Elevator servo moved aft for balance, rudder on pull-pull cables.

Kinduva "Circus-Circus" color scheme...

;-)

PJ

[Stephen Pacheco]

Vic,

 

So what I did was determine where the Power 60 needed to be to get the prop in the correct place.  I then took the dimensions from the plans and cut a new bulkhead to the correct size for the new location.  I did not use the bulkhead that came with kit. 

 

I built-up the fuselage nose completely and did all shaping and sanding.  I then used a band saw and cut the nose off leaving about ¾ of an inch in front of the bulkhead to make the removable cowl.

 

I then carved out the inside of the cowl to make room for the motor.  I also made a 1/32 plywood face for both the cowl and the fuse and made matching holes for alignment pins.  You can see these holes and dowels in the picture.

 

I attached some tabs to the cowl that extend into the fuse so I can attach the cowl with a couple of screws.

 

The cowl has an air outlet at the bottom, does not show up in the picture, to let air out directly rather than push the hot air through the fuse.

 

 

I hope this answers your question.

 

Steve P.

 

From: SPAme...@googlegroups.com [mailto:SPAme...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Vic Koenig

Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2014 9:49 AM
To: spamembers

Subject: Re: [SPA] Advice on which Kaos to build?

 

 Steven, share those motor mount pics with all, I'd like to see your version.  Vic K

 

On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 9:28 AM, Stephen Pacheco <spac...@pacheco-computer.com> wrote:

I’ll take a couple of pictures and send you some info later this morning.

 

From: SPAme...@googlegroups.com [mailto:SPAme...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Barry Demers

[Barry Demers]

Since I am no longer encumbered with having to work from a kit, I am spending a bit of time considering the other Kaos, currently the Killer. My plans show a tail dragger option.  In electing this option I remove some slight amount of weight and transfer weight a bit further to the rear, both  beneficial to the electric power build. Down side, the wing is longer than the Super, more area, that is just about a deal buster by itself. I suspect that I'd float on landing and slow down on rolls, making look real clumsy with the rudder. Through Sportsman, do I have a problem with a slower rolling plane, as compared to the Super? Maybe I worry too much.  Also, its probably uncool to use a computer function to dial in flaperons using 2 aileron servos?  Electric prop brakes aren't smiled on either, are they?  So, if I put both planes on the balance beam I most likely come out still in favor of the Super.

[Vic Koenig]

  You are correct on the prop breaks, but the wing length should not matter. Rolls can be done slower that way and that gives you time to correct any small line variations. Don't let wing length be a deal buster.   Vic K

On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 1:39 PM, Barry Demers <sda...@gmail.com> wrote:

Since I am no longer encumbered with having to work from a kit, I am spending a bit of time considering the other Kaos, currently the Killer. My plans show a tail dragger option.  In electing this option I remove some slight amount of weight and transfer weight a bit further to the rear, both  beneficial to the electric power build. Down side, the wing is longer than the Super, more area, that is just about a deal buster by itself. I suspect that I'd float on landing and slow down on rolls, making look real clumsy with the rudder. Through Sportsman, do I have a problem with a slower rolling plane, as compared to the Super? Maybe I worry too much.  Also, its probably uncool to use a computer function to dial in flaperons using 2 aileron servos?  Electric prop brakes aren't smiled on either, are they?  So, if I put both planes on the balance beam I most likely come out still in favor of the Super.

--

[Tim Reed]

I started off with a Super Kaos (I wasn't the one that started the kit but I finished it).  It flies great.  Mine came out to 7 lb 4 oz with a ThunderTiger 60 engine and standard servos that weigh about 1.5 oz each.

If you were to use 1 oz servos like the JR mid size some of us are using, 1 servo for the elevators, and used contest balsa and thinned it down you'd have an excellent plane around 6.5 lbs.

Glad to have you...hope to see you at one of the contests.

Tim

[Barry Demers]

Ya, My wing length issue is transportation based.  I can split a wing, but that adds on weight, so there;s a huge trade going there. Slow rolls bother the artistic side of me, I am terrible at them.  Perhaps you'd be willing to tutor me? I do appreciate you saying "small" line variations, however. Your comments does put the Killer back in the frey. That conventional gear arrangement looks real good to me and the weight budget.

On a side note, could someone explain the landing for classes through the Sportsman? Is it a touchdown within a perimeter, a touch and go isn't in this is it?  Is the glide slope considered for points, wing wobble, porpoising? Am I missing anything else? Oh, how about touchdown itself?  With conventional gear there are 2 ways of "not crashing", with trike really only one.  Maybe its the touchdown that is why folks like the trike gear over the conventional.

Barry

--
Thank you,

Barry

[Jim Johns]

Steve,

Great looking Kaos, Steve. Can't say much for the dude, though! LOL!

Jim Johns

Sent from my iPad

[Stephen Pacheco]

Barry,

 

I built my S. KAOS as trike and it was a real pain with the nose gear.  I used a small servo up front “Y’d” to the rudder rather than try to get some type of pushrod all the way from the back to the front.

 

For my DB I have gone to a tail dragger.  Less of a build problem and I mostly fly off grass, so it is less of a problem than the trike configuration.

 

Just as a side point the DB lands very nice, not a floater, but just a great glide to the runway. The S. KAOS should do just the same.

 

Steve P.

 

From: SPAme...@googlegroups.com [mailto:SPAme...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Vic Koenig

Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2014 3:32 PM
To: spamembers

[Vic Koenig]

  Go to the website and look for Judges guile. It has a pictorial of all the manuvers and shows correct placement.  FYI, I would use a fixed main gear mounted to the fuse forward of the wing to make transport easier, especially if you make a plug in or split wing. Those metal legs coming off the bottom of the wing get in the way big time.  I'm including a shot of my nitro but my electrics are built the same way.  Vic K

[Jeff Owens]

Barry,

   Judging starts at 6 feet above the ground for the landing. While not judged, a smooth approach makes a good impression on the judges. There is no designated spot or perimeter, but there is a general statement that the landing should be centered on the judges. Allowances are often made for the placement of the judges relative to the ends of the runway (we usually use two judging lines and it can get crowded.) A smooth touchdown with no bounces is the ticket.  Many prefer taildraggers for simplicity and decreased weight, but the risk of a bounce is higher. I prefer tri-gear myself, but you see lots of both.

Jeff

[Bill Dodge]

I've been competing in SPA with an Ultimate Kaos for about 15 years.  It is light, simple, and can be trimmed to fly straight and level in all modes of flight.  In the hands of a competent pilot it is competitive.  The Killer Kaos is basically the same airplane.

Bill Dodge

--

[Barry Demers]

Thanks Bill. I recall being highly attracted to the Ultimate when DC first brought it out. To use this plane for 15 years says a lot about its competency.

[Bill Dodge]

I didn't use the same plane for 15 years =- unfortunately there were a number of unfortunate accidents!  One nice feature of the design is that it is easy to build.

Bill

[Barry Demers]

Aw, Bill,had me all excited. Btw, think back on what you remember to be the best flying of the bunch. Now, do recall how much it weighed? Reason I ask is that I want to be aggressive on weight reduction, but I don't want to go too far. There is an optimum, but I'm not sure where that is for the Kaos. Suppose I can build as light as possible and experiment by adding in weight.

[Jeff Owens]

Barry,

  A number of pilots have found that the "sweet spot" is somewhere between 6.5 and 7 lbs. for planes the size of our. Too light and they bounce in the wind. Too heavy and they lack the necessary power.

Jeff

[Barry Demers]

Thanks ,Jeff. This is encouraging. I was imagining that weight to be about a lb heavier. Come time to buy an electric motor, that lb saving will affect motor, possibly esc and battery as well.

[Stephen Pacheco]

Barry,

 

My Dirty Birdi is at 7Lbs 2Oz and I am using an E-Flight Power 60.  This seems to be fine, but so far I only have 3 flights on the plane.  I’ll update after I get a couple of more flights.

 

Steve

 

From: SPAme...@googlegroups.com [mailto:SPAme...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Barry Demers

Sent: Friday, September 12, 2014 9:31 AM
To: SPAme...@googlegroups.com

[Barry Demers]

Ok, here we go.  Most all the plans I have are in pdf form.  My typical approach is to import the pdf to my cad as an image layer, and then trace or datum to a separate layer. This will give me outlines, rib locations, etc. Then I remove the image from view and start filling in the blanks. I am now ready to fill in the blanks, but need to ask and verify a couple of items. First, duplication of canopy could be a problem.  I can dig one out of the box and adapt?  More critical is landing gear as reinforcing is involved. I understand that I can go to  the opposite style gear at will. Tail dragger where trike was drawn, or vice versa. An excellent suggestion was to move mains to the fuselage from the wing, as that will make transportation much smarter, maybe even allow for one additional plane!
Third, two piecing the wing would improve transportation logistics.
Last, I'd like to look at making tail feathers removable.
Comments on these four points while in drawing phase would be much appreciated.

Barry

On Sep 11, 2014 9:53 PM, "Jeff Owens" <jf_o...@comcast.net> wrote:

[Bill Dodge]

Mine weighed between 6-1/2 to 7 pounds and that seemed to be a good flying weigh.  With a good 91 they had almost unlimited vertical and could fly through the Expert maneuvers with good speed.  It did not require extra ordinary work to achieve this weight.  One thing you may want to consider is that I move the wing location forward 1/2 inch from what is shown on the plans.  This helps with the balance.  Otherwise you may not achieve proper balance with out adding lead to the tail.

Bill 

[Barry Demers]

Thanks Bill.  Is it considered to be good form to be moving the flying surface locations around, though?  I personally don't have an issue, but from what I've been getting as posts this seems contrary. Moving the wing forward also lengthens the tail moment, shortens the prop moment. 

Barry

[Vic Koenig]

  There used to be a 3% rule that allowed us to move a wing for or aft. My electric Dirty Bird-E's fly best with the wing an inch farther forward. That's where I put them and that's well with in the 3 % rule. Vic Koenig

[Barry Demers]

Wow! 3% could add up considering the length of the arms. I'll need to start spinning some numbers  around.

[Mike Miller]

I thought the 3% rule was void. Any planes that were already built were grandfatherd in. But all new builds were to "closely follow the plans".  I have a Daddy Rabbit that was reverse engineered from a Dennis Hunt plane.  There is 1 1/2" added to the length between the wing and tail. This plane was built in 2009 and if I ever get to fly again this will be my plane. .Grandfathered in .

Mike Miller SPA 308

-------- Original message --------
From: Barry Demers <sd...@chipchristy.com>
Date: 09/12/2014 8:00 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: SPAme...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [SPA] Advice on which Kaos to build?

[patternpilot1]

Mike,

I was thinking the same thing. No reason to have the 3% rule.

Maybe Jeff will jump in on this.

S.

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone

[Barry Demers]

See, now that makes sense. These changes must affect the flight characteristics.

[Duane Wilson]

Trouble is there IS NO 3% rule now; we have voted to tighten up requirements, and are supposed to be building either to plans, or so close to the original planform that the deviation will not become an issue.

 

I have observed many good, active SPA members long enough to know that people are going to do what they are going to do, and there is no way to enforce a strict building code.  To crack down hard would drive people away.

 

To some pilots, it is part of the fun to try to improve performance, and it is admittedly hard to put in the time, money, and energy to build a plane exactly to plans when you know you are building-in characteristics that (again supposedly) make a plane have inferior performance to what it CAN HAVE. 

 

Bottom line--many of the more knowledgeable pilots simply don't build their plane exactly to plan.  We are going to have to face the reality of that fact, and hope that deviations will be minor.  Major "pushing of the envelope" will cause future problems.

 

Duane

 

From: SPAme...@googlegroups.com [mailto:SPAme...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Vic Koenig
Sent: Friday, September 12, 2014 5:39 PM
To: spamembers
Subject: Re: [SPA] Advice on which Kaos to build?

 

  There used to be a 3% rule that allowed us to move a wing for or aft. My electric Dirty Bird-E's fly best with the wing an inch farther forward. That's where I put them and that's well with in the 3 % rule. Vic Koenig

[Bill Dodge]

SPA has struggled with this issue.  Technically, probably every SPA plane out there is illegal.  Most of the pre 75 designs were single piece, low wing.  Most of the planes now are two piece plug-in wing moved up to mid-height on the fuselage.  This modification has a strong effect on reducing roll coupling.  The problem is that there is no good mechanism within SPA to enforce this rule and little interest in doing so.  Most of the members of SPA are builders and they like to "tinker' with the design.  It probably is not an important issue as 95% of your score in a contest is pilot performance not the airplane.

I forgot that you plan to use electric so you would not need to modify the design to take care of the balance issue.  You could do that with main battery location.

Bill

[Barry Demers]

Duane, the temptation to modify is huge for me. For this SPA plane, however, I have drawn the outline direct from the pdf plans, and have located the flying surfaces as shown.  I have chosen this plane specifically based on the fact that conventional gear is shown on the plan. Based on your post I am not going to place the mains on the fuse, but keep them on the wing. I will make them plug ins so that my transportation issues are addressed. As to formers and other internal components I believe I should be able to move those around to accommodate motors, batteries, etc.

This is my first plane within the SPA and I'd like to hold to the spirit of the "law", not take advantage of semantics. Being new, though, I need to ask questions so that I can get a feel for each.

Barry

[Barry Demers]

Converting a one piece wing to e two place is important to me. Seems though that the split wing in itself is not contrary to the spirit, rather the repositioning of the wing in the side elevation is. Same holds true with the tail feathers. Making them removable should not in itself cause flight characteristics to alter. I will offer this however, getting those tail feathers to consistently line up each time is a challenge. Never mind trim.

Barry

[patternpilot1]

Duane,

Thank for clarification!  There is no reason to have to stretch a fuse or move a wing for cg. With proper planing cg is easy to make.

When I built my thunder panzer I used a 4 stroke and just placed my equipment in the tail, worked great. In the spirit of spa a planes datum lines , airfoils should not be changed. 

No as a SPA & CPA plane kit manufacture we spend a lot of time to make sure airfoils and datum lines are as the original planes.

S

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone

-------- Original message --------
From: Duane Wilson <avlwi...@charter.net>
Date:09/12/2014 11:07 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: SPAme...@googlegroups.com

[Phil S.]

No.

Phil Spelt, KCRC Emeritus, Secretary
AMA 1294 Scientific Leader Member
SPA L-18, Board Member
(865)435-1476v, (865)604-0541c

[Phil S.]

It was never official.

Phil Spelt, KCRC Emeritus, Secretary
AMA 1294 Scientific Leader Member
SPA L-18, Board Member
(865)435-1476v, (865)604-0541c

[Phil S.]

The 3% rule was never official, and is not to be used these days.

Phil Spelt, KCRC Emeritus, Secretary
AMA 1294 Scientific Leader Member
SPA L-18, Board Member
(865)435-1476v, (865)604-0541c

[Phil S.]

This is not true.  Making a 2-piece wing is legal as long as the span remains stock and the location of the wing is not changed.  Despite what "Everybody" says, Dennis Hunt did not change the wing location, either vertically or longitudinally, on either his Daddy Rabbits or the Panzer.  How do I know, I duplicated the plans that he used to make his fuselage templates from.

Phil Spelt, KCRC Emeritus, Secretary
AMA 1294 Scientific Leader Member
SPA L-18, Board Member
(865)435-1476v, (865)604-0541c

[Phil S.]

As it is legal to make a 2-piece wing, so is it legal to make a removable stab and/or rudder as long as the outlines are true to the plans.

Phil Spelt, KCRC Emeritus, Secretary
AMA 1294 Scientific Leader Member
SPA L-18, Board Member
(865)435-1476v, (865)604-0541c

[Phil S.]

 Yup!

Phil Spelt, KCRC Emeritus, Secretary
AMA 1294 Scientific Leader Member
SPA L-18, Board Member
(865)435-1476v, (865)604-0541c

[Jeff Owens]

Just for the record, there is no 3% rule. On the other hand, I have never seen anyone on the flightline with a tape measure. Most of us wouldn't have the plans to check with anyway. There are more important things to worry about in life. My house is 86 degrees because the a/c died while I was competing at Asheville. Sigh.

Jeff

[John Nessler]

That's hot Jeff!

It's only in the 50's here in Ohio tonight. 

John

Sent from my iPhone

[Jeff Owens]

I wish I could open a wormhole and tunnel some of that 50 degree air down here!

Jeff

[Jeff Owens]

Had a great flight back at 8000 feet. A slight headwind, but no storms. Just enough clouds to keep it interesting. I call it "cloud dancing." Just playing with the clouds...

Jeff

On Sep 14, 2014, at 10:42 PM, John Nessler wrote:

[John Nessler]

Nice pics Jeff!

I'm glad you had a safe flight!

Send us some warm air. It's chilly up here. 

John

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 14, 2014, at 10:50 PM, Jeff Owens <jf_o...@comcast.net> wrote:

Had a great flight back at 8000 feet. A slight headwind, but no storms. Just enough clouds to keep it interesting. I call it "cloud dancing." Just playing with the clouds...

Jeff

<Asheville-14-1.jpg>

<Asheville-14-2.jpg>

[Barry Demers]

Jeff, sorry about the heat issue. Here in Traverse City, MI. we have had frost advisories 3 days running, never mind this chilly rain. Maybe somewhere half way between?

[jf_o...@comcast.net]

Thanks, Barry. A blast of cool air would be nice now. But the AC repairman is coming today to look at it, so maybe this won't last long.

Jeff

---

From: "Barry Demers" <sd...@chipchristy.com>
To: SPAme...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Monday, September 15, 2014 9:38:12 AM

Subject: Re: [SPA] Advice on which Kaos to build?

[patternpilot1]

Jeff,

A cold beer would not hurt either !

Scott

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone

-------- Original message --------
From: jf_o...@comcast.net
Date:09/15/2014 10:35 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: SPAme...@googlegroups.com
Cc:

[Barry Demers]

Ya, Jeff wish your repair man could tweak the knob on our MI winters! Thank the Lord for Florida. Yes, we head that way for a month long respite long about Feb or March.

[Phil S.]

Ouch!!!

Phil Spelt, KCRC Emeritus, Secretary
AMA 1294 Scientific Leader Member
SPA L-18, Board Member
(865)435-1476v, (865)604-0541c

[Phil S.]

Sigh!  73 and very cloudy here in Oak Ridge, TN!!  The left-over gamma particles are having a ball in this temp/humidity...alphas and betas are long gone!  lol

Phil Spelt, KCRC Emeritus, Secretary
AMA 1294 Scientific Leader Member
SPA L-18, Board Member
(865)435-1476v, (865)604-0541c

[Phil S.]

Really "cool", Jeff -- lucky uh, GUY!

Phil Spelt, KCRC Emeritus, Secretary
AMA 1294 Scientific Leader Member
SPA L-18, Board Member
(865)435-1476v, (865)604-0541c

[Phil S.]

Barry, I was gunna say, "You ever driven in FL?" but you have.  I would not choose "Thank God for Florida." as a phrase to use...

Look at the 'Gators when they had Steve Superior coaching, and the drivers, and the hanging chad...'nuff said????

Phil Spelt, KCRC Emeritus, Secretary
AMA 1294 Scientific Leader Member
SPA L-18, Board Member
(865)435-1476v, (865)604-0541c

[Barry Demers]

Phil, we been doing this jaunt for about 10 years now.  We used to tow 2 motorcycles, but Florida convinced us to sell.

--