How can i keep my kitfox from stalling & spinning in too ????

[rogerh12]

Howdy all;

I was on the NTSB web site, looking up the kitfox accidents and I noticed a shocking trend. Of the ones I looked at, almost 90% of the people killed in a kitfox where killed as a result of a stall and spin. This is shocking; I figured some, but almost all fatalities where stall and spin related. Though, I guess the bright side is that all the other accidents were survivable, as long as they didn’t auger in. So this leads me to a question:

My old Zenith 601 HDS was almost stall proof, it would just bobble the noise and descend tail low, and the ercoupe I leaned in would not stall at all, but of course both of these planes have limited up elevator travel, and no flaps, so maybe that helps.

How can I make MY kitfox 4 Stall and Spin proof? (or at least highly spin resistant). Are there some design changes? Rigging changes? Or maybe just flying it only in a particular manner (only 10% flaps max?).

[DBVZ]

It would be interesting to know how many of those were flown with the CG out of the box.

[Esser]

I have seen plenty of kitfox videos on the internet of guys using extreme climb out angles and Vx for really no reason. If you stall 150feet from the ground on climb out and drop a wing you don't have too much time to recover. And if you do try to pick up the wing with aileron instead of rudder the wing drop gets worse. I am guessing with flaperons that effect is compounded. Just my two cents.

[Dorsal]

I find the 7 stalls pretty gently but I do have an AOA indicator that gently reminds me if I am anywhere near a stall.

[sdemeyer]

I would have to say the Kitfox is no more prone to stall/spin accidents then any other aircraft. The NTSB reports are riddled with stall/spin accidents from SR22's to Powered Chutes. The way to keep that from happening is to pay attention, keep things coordinated and be wary of the "Impossible Turn" if you loose the motor on takeoff. I doubt there is any mechanical way to make the KF spin proof.

[rogerh12]

I think the kitfox protects the occupants so well that only the really high energy crashes kill the folks inside, the kind of energy developed in a spin. Other planes will kill you even in low energy crashes (like landing upside down) because of high landing speeds and no steel cage to protect the occupants, so I think that's why fatal crashes with the kitfox seem to all be stall and spin related.
Of course, in general aviation, statistically if a pilot suffers and engine outage and a death results, almost 70% of the time the death results from loss of control after the engine fails and not just because of the “loss of engine” specifically. I broke the prop of my Zenith once, and made a normal landing in a bean field, then again I did keep flying the plane all the way down.
Roger

[wadeg]

My rules:
1. Don't hang it on the prop on takeoff. Nobody at the field will live a life in awe of me climbing out steeply. The kitfox climbs incredibly just at 'best rate'.

2. Never go to my final approach speed unless I am on....wait for it...final! I want that little extra speed for the turns and it might be really handy if I hit a gust working low down or if I lost power. With the idle set right, the kitfox will slow down nicely after turning on final where it is the time to do so.

Nobody suffered as much as a cracked fingernail by carrying a little extra speed but sadly many have bought the farm doing the opposite.

Fly little bit faster and keep flying!

[akflyer]

Learn to fly the plane and you don't have to worry about it. You have to work at it to spin these planes. I have done some incredibly tight turns both cordinated and un cordinated and have yet to enter a spin. You can live in fear or live in confidence depending on how much gas you put throught the tanks!

[Esser]

If you are at all nervous about spins why not look up an instructor and do some spins? Up here in Canada spins are part of our license training and once you do a couple and recover from a couple it really takes the fear out of a spin. It also helps you identify what to look for just before you enter a spin and can stop a spin before it happens. But like it was said before. Keep your speed up and you are fine.

[akflyer]

Speed is not the answer... I can stall and spin my avid at 70 but I am pulling some g's to do it. Accelerated cross control stalls kill more cub pilots than anything else up here. If you take away enough elevator to make it stall/spin proof your just begging to stuff it in when your on short final and you hit that lil sinker. You planning on putting airbags in it too? Maybe a brs? Don't forget your to strap a parachute to yourself in the 1 in a million chance that you fold a wing inflight.

The kitfox and avid line are very easy to fly. Don't sweat the small stuff! Do a ntsb search on auto accidents and you will never leave your house!

[Dave S]

Hi Roger,

You can't make a Kitfox stall/spin proof - same is true of virtually all airplanes. Some of the "spin resistant" airplanes out there can even instill a bit of unwarranted trust in the plane - if one of them ever does manage to get into a spin - it can be as difficult or worse to get it out of the spin.

What I found in testing our series 7 is that power off coordinated stall are extremely gentle - A person can literally go to 5,000 ' in a kitfox - power off and do a dozen or so consecutive "glider stalls" (meaning stall recoveries without the use of power) and you will be surprised how gentle they are and how little altitude is lost with a power off stall recovery (which is real good to know).

Power on stalls with full flaps and partial power (3/4), provided you stay coordinated, at least in my experience with our plane are more abrupt but entirely manageable.

For the record - I did not do any spin testing of the airplane on the basis the design was not really tested for that purpose in its development. Yes, I know - people have done spins in a kitfox; they can go ahead an do that on their nickel - I won't - that's just me.

OK - full flaps - the series 7 is set up for half flaps and full flaps. what I found in testing is that there is a pretty significant stall speed reduction with half flaps and no noticeable change in handling compared to retracted other than the nose attitude changes. I also found that going to full flaps does little to further reduce stall speed but significantly changes the yaw characteristics - so much so that I almost never use full unless on short final in calm conditions.

I think a person has some potential to scare the living crap :eek: out of themselves with a full power, full flaps stall in an uncoordinated condition in a kitfox.

You prevent stall/spin deals by becoming more knowledgeable and consequently more confident about your ability control the aircraft. This is all about aircraft control.

Your comment "Or maybe just flying it only in a particular manner" really is the answer - and, the particular manner means 1) keeping the airplane coordinated especially in turns in the pattern, 2) keeping your airspeed/wing loading within reason (which keeps the angle of attack of the wing out of a stall/spin range). You are correct in following this reasoning - it's all about how you handle the aircraft.

The big problem with stall spin accidents it is the fatal type stall spin usually occurred at such a low altitude that a recovery was impossible.

If a stall/spin occurs at 5,000 feet - there is air below you to sort the mess out. If it occurs at 500 - it's going to end up being an auger job. Bottom line - don't stall spin at low altitude. Back to correct operation and training.

A highly recommended thing is to get some spin experience in a spin approved aircraft with a PROFICIENT spin instructor. I got curious enough to do that some years ago and what I can tell you is the experience (which is done at sufficient altitude) makes it absolutely clear to a person that you simply cannot allow a stall spin to develop at low altitude once you find out how much altitude is really needed to do the recovery. The second thing the training does is really helps a person understand what makes a stall spin happen. Once you know what makes it happen you know exactly what to do to make it not happen.

The US standards do not require spin training for a PP cert - other countries do and I think it should be done here too.

You're on the right track - just go out there and work your plane and get some spin training in an approved plane if you can - it'll do wonders for a person's confidence.:)

Sincerely,

Dave S

[Av8r3400]

"I'd rather die trying to live, than live trying not to die." The motto of someone I know... ;)


Seriously, though, I have to agree with Leni, these plane really need to be abused to stall-spin. If you get a little transition training and learn to fly the airplane properly, you will have no issues.

These are very safe planes, in my opinion. That's why I fly one.

[akflyer]

I live by that every day! But I have learned that dying trying to live does not include sheer stupidity ;) I gave most or that up a few minutes ago hahahaha.

[DesertFox6]

Roger -

To plagiarize a slogan from the firearms fraternity; "Spins don't kill pilots...PILOTS kill pilots." And the reason they do, with regards to spins, is a lack of knowledge, due to a lack of exposure, which is an altogether unfortunate bi-product of a systematic training philosophy that ignores teaching spins as a natural-occurring outcome of inducing yaw on a stalled airfoil.

Esser hit it right on the head; go get some "upset/spin" training with an experienced CFI who can teach you to not only deliberately spin with confidence, but recover them on a specified heading (yeah, no kiddin'!) and you'll never get the jitters about slow-flight again. You'll be ever-so-glad you did, as our Canadian friends will readily testify!

Airplanes don't do anything without a pilot except age...

"E.T."

[jtpitkin06]

Let’s go back to your original post. You are concerned that 50% of fatalities in Kitfox are stall spin. But you don’t mention accidents per flight hour compared to other aircraft. The 50% stall spin figure is in line with other light aircraft. However, I think you will find per flight hour, the Kitfox enjoys an enviable safety record.

Your other concern is how to make the Kitfox fly like a 601. Thankfully, that can’t be done. The Kitfox has delightful flight characteristics and capabilities that the 601 just can’t match.

Consider the Kitfox short field takeoff and landing performance. You don’t get that without a high lift wing flown at high angles of attack. Flying in that part of the envelope requires responsive flight controls. We could make the Kitfox a gentle little kitten by limiting control authority, but you wouldn’t be able to do steep descents at slow speeds with any flare ability left over. So let’s not change a thing.

Lastly you seem to have a fear that the Kitfox will stall and spin without warning. That's just not true.

I’ve taught stall/spins for 42 years and have done thousands of them. I think of a spin as simply another aircraft maneuver. It’s nothing to fear. I don’t accidentally spin an airplane any more than I accidentally turn an airplane upside down. It’s something you have to do deliberately with control inputs. Unfortunately, inexperienced pilots will sometimes skid around turns at low speed and low altitude. That's a condition that can set you up for a stall spin in any aircraft.

To eliminate your fears, get some spin training. It’s fun and it will make you a better pilot. While you're at it, ask for some unusual attitude recovery training, too.


JP

[Dorsal]

Another note on safety is that the Kitfox has one of the lowest fatality per accident ratios of all amateur built planes. As was pointed out further up that may be why the stall spin numbers look high, most of the other incidents where non fatal.

[rogerh12]

Wow, got a lot of response on this one !!!!
Well I guess I am poking for something more than just "being a good pilot", What about increasing the wing tip washout? Wouldn't that help keep the plane from entering a full span stall, and also help to keep wing tip control during a spin? What about increasing the rudder effectiveness with gap seals, wouldn't that help a pilot exit a spin earlier?

[DanB]

Roger,
Please don't overlook the excellent replies you have already been given. The Kitfox is as stable a platform as you will find anywhere. The stall / spins you have interpreted into being a performance issue with the design points firmly to pilot error. The suggestion that came up more than once to get some spin training came from at least one CFI who has known his way around a Kitfox for the last 20 years. Take a little more time to read here in the forum (or other places) about these planes and you will find nothing but praise and satisfaction for the performance of the craft. Your comment about rudder authority leads me to believe you have not flown in a Kitfox yet. If this is the case, go try one on then tell us what you think. ;)

[jtpitkin06]

Roger,
I think we have given you the more than gentle nudge in the right direction. However, you brought up some interesting points about washout and spins in general. So this response is not only for you but for anyone who has not done spin training.

Modifying the airframe is not the answer. More washout in the wing will not make the plane spin proof. It may, in fact, spin easier with more washout. Spin easier? Yes… remember a spin is when one wing is stalled and the other wing is flying or partially stalled. If you have more washout in a wing it reduces the angle of attack at the tip. The partially stalled wing is likely to remain flying and promote the spin.

More washout also reduces climb, cruise performance and increases stall speed. Yes, increasing washout increases stall speed. The angle of incidence at the root is higher than the tip and the root will stall before the tip has a chance to produce maximum lift. Adding more washout further reduces the lift produced at the tip and the aircraft stalls at a higher speed.

Washout does delay the stall at the tip to improve roll control when landing… but at a cost.

Now,Spins in General

Generally, I find pilots who have never done spin training are less comfortable practicing stalls because of fear they may enter a spin and not know how to recover.

So just how do you get into an inadvertent spin at low altitude?

Remember this… Most airplanes need to be forced into a spin. Here’s how you can force a plane into a spin:

To practice this maneuver we’ll do it at a safe altitude where we can demonstrate it and have room to recover. How about 3000 AGL for starters?

Let’s say you are a pilot who skids around the traffic pattern by stepping on the rudder while peeking under the wing. We’ll go through what happens in a left turn from base to final.

You’re stepping on left rudder and holding right aileron to keep the aircraft from banking too much. Either you want to peek under the wing or you are nervous about banking at low altitude. In either case the right aileron is up, the left aileron is down and the left wing has the highest angle of attack.

The skidding increases drag and the aircraft starts to get low. To correct your path you add power and pull back on the stick.

The power and torque want to roll the airplane left so you add more aileron to the right. The left wing now has lots of aileron and a high angle of attack. The aircraft continues to sink with all the drag.

Now, dangerously low, you jam in the power and pull back on the stick. Whoo Boy!!! This is going to be fun.

The prop blast on the elevator causes the nose to pop up. The sudden increase in angle of attack causes the left wing to stall. The stalled left wing now has high drag and the aircraft yaws left. The right wing has up aileron and it continues to fly

The left wing quickly drops. The aircraft is now inverted and spinning with enthusiasm. Attempting to roll the aircraft level you put in full right aileron. The aircraft continues left as it flops to right side up and continues spinning (right side up) until you do something different.

Relax… neutralize the ailerons. Simultaneously reduce power to idle, apply right rudder to stop the rotation, apply forward stick to break the stall. Wow! You’re flying again… albeit a bit nose low, so pull out of the dive. Whew!!!

Hey that’s a hoot!!! Let’s do it again. In fact, do it in both directions with and without power, you’ll see quite different spin rates.

So what’s the answer? Coordinated flight is the best spin prevention. You simply cannot enter a spin without a yawing force and you won’t get that with coordinated flight. Have you practiced stalls in a turn? Can you maintain a 30 degree bank while doing a power off stall and recover while still turning in a 30 degree bank?

If you haven’t done spins, find an instructor and aircraft to do spins with and have a good time. I highly recommend it. The fun meter will be pegged at 100% and you will be a much better pilot at the end of the ride.

If you are building a Kitfox, be sure to include spins in your operating limitations. The Kitfox spins and recovers very nicely. The aircraft does not need to be in aerobatic category to include spins. Normal or utility are acceptable. The DAR will show you how to do the logbook entries while you are still in Stage 1.

Have fun guys and gals.

John Pitkin
Greenville, TX

[Tom Waid]

Coordinated flight is the best spin prevention.

John Pitkin
Greenville, TX

We all need to say that again... and again... and again...

[SkyPirate]

Im with you jt!! practice practice practice, the first time I did a spin ( with a qualified instructor) the cessna white with blue trim almost needed a redo,and now the only time I get nervous is when I haven't don a stall/spin recovery in the plane I'm in at the time,
As for washout compairisons "601 versus kitfox" I don't believe the 601 has any washout incorperated in the wing, its dehydral is what makes its stall characteristics, where the kitfox has allot flatter dehydral so the wash out is incorperated, although some would argue hershey bar wings don't need washout at all

[rogerh12]

Thanks for all the advice guys.
There is a champ near here, and they do offer aerobatic training, so looks like I will be doing some stalls soon. I am still looking into stall proofing the plane, so to speak, or at least optimizing the stall recovery to allow a quick recovery with minimal loss of altitude.

Roger

[akflyer]

Thanks for all the advice guys.
There is a champ near here, and they do offer aerobatic training, so looks like I will be doing some stalls soon. I am still looking into stall proofing the plane, so to speak, or at least optimizing the stall recovery to allow a quick recovery with minimal loss of altitude.

Roger

Just wondering, how many hours total do you have and how many hours in a KF ?? I can stall the avid or kitfox and recover with less than 50' lost. You REALLY have to do something stupid to stall it and spin the dang thing. These planes were originaly designed with the idea that a guy could buy the kit, build it, then learn to fly in his own plane. Great pains were taken to make them a very safe plane to fly. Without having spent any (or very much) time in one, why the heck would you want to monkey with the design and change something you really know nothing about???

Most guys I know are trying to figure out how to get the washout OUT of the wing for better cruise and STOL than to monkey around and put MORE in it. The early models had LOTS of washout, and over time, testing has proven that you dont need all that and ALOT of it has been taken out on subsequent models.

so, I guess the take away from all this should be, get out and fly the plane and learn to fly it, instead of wasting a butt load of time and engergy trying to make it idiot proof.. We all know that when you try to make something idiot proof... they just build a better idiot!

[Slyfox]

I know we all think, just take a stall training course. Ya might be ok. I remember on my second flight up when training. The instructor told me to put full power, point straight up, I did. I went into a stall and then a spin, I was having a ball, I recovered real quick, c172. My next ground class one guy was totally picked, he said his instructor(mine) put him into a spin, scared the crum out of him, he fired him. I came back and said, ya he did that to me also, but it was fun, I did 3 more on that flight.

Now lets look at the big picture here. When you stall and spin you need more than 1000ft to recover. What does that mean. Well when are you at risk of stalling and spining, NOT at 5k feet let me tell you. So when?

On base to final and on your cross wind. So what elevation are you at for this. Well if you do a short pattern like me, both of those are usually at 300agl. Wow that's way below the 1000 recovery.

If you do the standard by the book pattern, your going to be at about 600agl on both. Oh OH , your still below the 1000ft. So doing stall recovery is NOT going to do anything for you. You want to avoid a stall.
Which I believe is what the thread started out asking.

My advice, go get some more training.
Put on VG's
Maintain 60mph. In the fox that will pretty much keep you out of trouble.
again, if you have any troubles, go up and do stalls at altitude and practice practice practice what throws YOUR airplane into a stall. If you have a courdinated airplane, you will not go into a spin. Centered ball, by the way.

Know also what the fox feels like to be with too much angle of attack. that's the angle just before it stalls, know how that feels and looks like, usually you can't see out over the nose. when you see or feel this, you better be pushing the stick forward.

these things are called flying by the seat of your pants. learn that and you won't run into trouble when the engine fails or you just plain get lazy on your approach to land or take off.

all these things are fun to explore. it just takes time and practice.

[rogerh12]

This is the point of my efforts to try to "idiot proof" my kitfox. When you land like this at the airport after a power failure, it's not due to the power failure, it's due to a stall and spin. (and I doubt the spin is due to an idiot at the stick either).

Training is important, but I guess I am really looking for a hardware fix (maybe less up elevator?) just in case I forget my training too. Roger

[akflyer]

Ahh.. hmmm.. gotta dissagree with you on this one too. Planes dont just fly along straight and level at a happy cruise then for no reason at all enter a spin. Someone has to PUT THEM INTO THE SPIN.

[Slyfox]

i was told quote, by an instructor, a very wise man. " a spin is not going to happen if you have the plane coordinated, or the ball in the center. go up to altitude and try it. if the ball is in the center it WILL drop straight. even if you have a turn and ball center, it will drop out straight no spin. The pilot is the one that dictates what that plane is going to do.

[SkyPirate]

Roger,..from what you just wrote it leads me to believe you think you can make it to the runway in a power off situation,..sometimes you can,..but above all you must first "fly" the airplane,..keep your speed in the green so you have good control of the airplane,..remember the 30 degree rule ,..what you see in front of you at 30 degree's down,..left,..right is where you have the best chance of landing with control,..even if it is laying the wings in the tree tops,..
If you ask me,..panic is the number 1 problem with low time pilots,..in a panic state of mind ,..you cant think straight,.. the way to over come it ,..is before it happens ..practice practice practice
if you dont know to keep your wings level or ball centered or to keep your speed in the green,..chances are you are going to stall and spin no matter what is done to the airplane to prevent it

[Slyfox]

I really disagree with you on this, when the fan quits, first thing is to get ahold of yourself. I've had 5 different things happen to me, first thing is get ahold of your head, I freeze my arm and hold stick for 1,2, seconds. this puts you back in charge, if speed is going down, you push forward stick, I don't give a who about altitude at this point, speed is an utmost importance. after that you land the plane.

Just because the fan quits doesn't mean you're go into a spin. your way off on that one, it's the failure to control the situation. yes I've had two engine outs, still running but 20%, one in the kitfox and the other in the rv. both were under 300ft. I landed back on the runway with plenty of runway and speed left over for a beautiful landing. So get a spin out of your head, it's not going to happen unless YOU allow it.

[SkyPirate]

sorry slyfox ,..seems we were writing at the same time ,..just goes to show you we practice ha ha

[Dorsal]

I speak for myself when I say I am an amateur builder and a pilot not an aircraft designer (and I expect that is true for many on this board). Modifying the washout, dihedral or elevator travel may give you the intended results or may make them worse. Moreover they may introduce an unintended characteristic that could be worse than the original risk. One nice thing about this plane is that it is a well known and characterized design. What you are suggesting is moving toward an experimental plane vs an amateur built plane which is fine if you know what you are doing. All that said, in addition to practice and training I use and recommend a stall warning device as an added measure of safety.

[SkyPirate]

P.S. heard this somewhere ,..don't know who said it first ,..but
"A wing is not a wing,.. unless it is flying"

unknown

[rogerh12]

" stall warning device as an added measure of safety"
Does anyone know of a good (cheap would be nice tooo) stall warning device for the Kitfox model 4 ???

I figure after I install it and make a recording of the sound. Then, I could practice shoving the stick forward everytime I hear it !!!!

Roger

[SkyPirate]

OK roger ,....maybe you should think of a different hobby,.. I'm not sure I want to be in the same airspace as your flying in

[SkyPirate]

sorry ,..I probably shouldnt have said that

[Dorsal]

Search for AOA (angle of attack) or LRI (lift reserve indicator) systems, they are good, not cheap and though some will say not necessary I like having one. Mine is an AOA which is integral to my Dynon system.

[Slyfox]

i guess you were just thinking out loud. the rest of us is just not saying anything

[rogerh12]

The old Cessna I fly in training had a simple air pressure driven alarm horn. When the angle of attack became too great a device on the leading edge caused air to flow through a tube into the cabin where a air-horn was located, or something like that. I was hoping somebody might know of a non-electronic solution to a stall warning device for the kitfox. Any suggestions?
Alao, I kinda feel like that model airplane engineer, you know the one in flight of the phoenix. He knew model design and thought he could apply it to a “real” plane and create a new plane, though nobody else believed him. My early background is soundly in models, and I wish I had a good Kitfox model airplane to monkey with as maybe I could work something out to make the plane stall more like the ercoupe or Zenith 601HDS I use to fly (both almost stall proof).

Regarding the Zenith, though the Zenith 601HDS with a taper wing has always been known to stall, and has a stall speed too high to qualify for light sport, I was able almost eliminate stalls altogether, and when it did finally stall it was below the light sport threshold of 52 MPH. How did I do this? Actually, just researching the issues and then simple re-rigging the plane and adjusting the center of gravity. It was so easy to do and so successful I disseminated my pilots manual( with the re-rigging instructions) to the 601HDS community. So now everyone with this particular plane can have a light sport qualifying version, where none had existed before. It’s become a popular mod.

So back to the kitfox and stalls, so I was thinking maybe I could do the same for the Kitfox if I just had some insight into the issues. Am I wrong? Maybe, but I have been known to be right before !!!!

Roger

[Slyfox]

what is it that you want, the kitfox stall is about 39mph and 35 in ground effect or there abouts

[Esser]

Moving a planes C of G can de a dangerous thing. In fact any rerigging of a plane can be dangerous and make the plane unstable. As for your comment about spinning when the plane's engine quits is slightly ridiculous. After you do some spins you will find out that most of the time spins are MUCH more aggresive with the engine not at an idle speed depending on the direction of the spin. The way you talk about shoving the stick forward when the stall horn goes off leads me to believe you haven't flown that much. It takes some serious oversite to unintentionally stall an airplane if you are flying normally. You should spend your hours flying and learning instead of trying to change something that you can't change. ALL airplanes stall. No matter what. If it is heavier than air and the wing isnt moving fast enough to generate sufficant lift it will stall. Some planes stall more aggressively than others but they all stall. If you want to rerig your plane not to stall, glue the kitfox wings to the goodyear blimp.

It's been said a million times. The plane only spins if you let it.

[Dorsal]

I have one of those in my RV. I have everything hooked up, but for some reason haven't calibrated it yet. Maybe some day, it now has 540hrs.
I know I know I'm being a bit of a Sally but it makes me feel all warm a fuzzy knowing it is there:D
(no offense meant to anyone actually named Sally)

[rogerh12]

More time in a plane is a good idea, but I am in the building stage and am trying to get all my mods accounted for before covering, so that' really why I am looking for answers and insight. Right now I have a solid design modification for using the VW engine instead of the Rotax and also boosting the gross weight of the plane to 1250 lbs, both of which I understand scares people, but are safe and feasable if done right (which is just a matter of good research and calculations). Speaking of which, can anyone comment on the effect of shifting the CG back on a kitfox 4, with respect to stall charicteristics?
Roger

[Esser]

Roger, what I don't under stand is that you are nervous abtou the idea of your plane spinning but you want to put your CofG BACK. if you ever do enter a spin with an aft CofG you can enter a flat spin that is not recoverable

[SkyPirate]

I'd like to know the name of your DAR,..since we are in the same jurisdiction,..only because if he gives you an AWC with an aft CG,..
and you have a lethal crash,..I want to be able to set the FAA straight and them not puting the blame on the kitfox aircraft.

do like I did,..if your going to alter an aircraft that much,..build your own design,..so if I make a miscalculation,..which I'm pretty sure I won't ,.but there is a chance ,..it is a new design( not configuration),..at least I won't be adding to any bad raps of an existing design.
best of luck to you

Chase

[jamesmil]

hi guys, have been watching this post since it started and would like to put in my 2 cents worth about spins. it has been my experience that an airplane that is easy to enter a spin will be easy to recover from the spin.
a plane used for competition such a decathlon, extra, sky bolt will enter a spin and stop on point with normal control inputs. airplanes in this category have a more forward c/g envelope when flown in the aerobatic catagory then when flown in the normal catagory. i would stay far far away from any aft c/g condition when doing stalls in an aircraft rated in the normal catagory for now you have become a test pilot in unknown territory.
during the flight test phase of my rv7 i decided to do a series of spins after all phases of the stall test were complete. on the first attempt at a spin i missed the stall as the rv wing gives no stall buffet and as soon as the nose drops the wing is flying again so i ended up in a spiral. on the next attempt i was ready for the stall and was more aggressive on the control inputs. my intent was to do a half turn and recover and work up from there. that spin was the most unsettling spin i had ever done in all of my acro flying. the aircraft immediately snaped on its back which i had seen before. but instead of a half turn it took 2 turns to stop the rotation and a 1000' to recover. love my rv but will not spin it again, when in the pattern i all ways keep the nose down especially when slipping it in as a spin below 1000' would be unrecoverable.
look forward to the test phase on the ss7 we'r building but doubt that i will intentionally spin it. but i will do a full series of stalls in all configurations. i think the safest thing a pilot can do is to know his airplane totally and allways have an out. sorry for being so long winded.

[CDE2FLY]

To add my 2 cents on this subject, building a safe and reliable airplane was my main objective while building 725CE. The best way to accomplish this is to build the airplane as close as possible to the factory specs and double/triple check the critical geometry for dihedral, wash out, incidence, alignment of wings and empannage to the fuse etc. I verified the rigging by triangulating measurements from a fixed datum and cross checking with a digital "Smart Level". I also complete the weight and balance twice with calibrated scales to be sure I got the same results each time. Lastly, all control deflections were set to factory specs using the Smart Level. My theory was that the collective knowledge from the many thousands of flight hours that contributed to the design evalution of the Kitfox was far far better than any creative ideas might have to improve on things.

With regards to flying to avoid stall/spins, I experimented extensively during the flight testing phase with the handling characteristics and have found that the stall is generally very gentle and very easy to recover from....however, if the airplane severly is cross controlled close to stall it will drop a wing very quickly. The first time this happened, I was quite surprised after being lulled into the belief that the airplane is so benign it just wouldn't break into a sharp wing drop type stall. That said, mine does recover quickly and will not develop into a spin rotation without intentional control inputs.

I've found the Kitfox 7 to be very easy and forgiving under all but the most intentional attempts to get into trouble. It's no different than any other airplane in that you need to use basic piloting skills to stay out of trouble but again, you would have to be way out of the realm of piloting 101 before things get ugly. Keep the speed up when you're below 1000 feet agl and keep the airplane reasonably coordinated. I generally fly the pattern at 70 mph and slow to 65 on short final which is probably faster than others fly the pattern. This ensures plenty of magin for the unexpected cross wind gust and the airplane bleeds speed very well with the power pulled back. Obviously not great short field technique but most of us fly from GA airports with more than enough runway so I don't mind using 1500 feet in the interest of safety.

[HighWing]

This discussion reminds me of a seminar I took in college. We evaluated a research project and discussed it to death then it was pointed out by the professor that the basic premis of the research was faulty. I would respectfully like to suggest that merely stating that almost 90% of the fatalities were stall and spin has no relevence in a discussion of Kitfox fatalities.

Fixing the airplane is not the answer. I copied selected sections from each of the first several ( latest first) fatal Kitfox accident reports in the NTSB data base. The only editing consists of selecting the sections to cut and paste. I might have missed one, as I simply scrolled trying to idenify any Kitfox. I stopped at the Harter Kitfox as many on us knew him and considered him a good friend. Guys - Gals. The problem is not the airplane, it is almost always us!

Lowell (Excerpts below)

attempting a return to runway maneuver following a loss of power in the takeoff initial climb

flying the experimental homebuilt airplane with a potential buyer for the airplane - 1000 ft. - climbing left turn about 1,000 feet in the air when the airplane suddenly nosed over near vertical

the airplane was about 200 feet above the trees -He observed that the left wing of the airplane was perpendicular to the ground and the ground speed of the airplane appeared to be slow

level out about 200 feet above the runway on initial takeoff climb -change in engine noise - second left turn with an angle of bank exceeding 45-degrees and the witness described the airspeed of the airplane as slow - nose of the airplane was observed to pitch up, the left wing dropped down

low over a reservoir, pull straight up, perform a "barrel roll", reverse direction - 100 to 200 feet agl - straight up and performed an aerobatic "barrel roll" maneuver. The airplane then descended straight down and impacted the edge of the ice-covered reservoir

The airplane took off from runway 14 and after clearing a tree line, it entered a right spin, and vertically impacted a golf course

A farmer located and reported the accident - The 2,200-hour commercial pilot had his last medical certificate denied on March 30, 1998 - Low clouds prevailed throughout the area during the morning of the accident. Ground scars and signatures of the damage were consistent with an in-flight loss of control

the airplane was flying low and slow, about 200 to 300 feet above ground level below a canyon ridge line - as it approached rising terrain, engine power was increased. The airplane attempted to climb above the canyon, then "winged over" and dived, nose first, into the mountainside

After recently finishing the airplane, the pilot conducted some taxi test, made some modifications to the airplane, and then flew it for the first time - pilot had trouble landing the airplane - On the pilot's forth landing attempt, the airplane bounced four times - engine noise increased, and the airplane entered a "very aggressive climb." Pitch angle then reduced to about 10 to 15 degrees, and the airplane turned left crosswind about 300 feet agl. The airplane continued to climb at a "very slow airspeed, and "entered a left bank. Bank angle increased to 60 degrees, and the airplane entered a left spin before impacting the ground - The pilot never held a pilot rating, and had approximately 200 hours of flight experience in ultralight airplanes

as it was getting ready to takeoff at the pilot/owner's private airstrip, and the engine sounded as if it was "missing or sputtering” - as the airplane departed it sounded as if it was loosing power - As it proceeded down the runway, the witness said it started moving to the left and it impacted trees at the end of the runway. The airplane descended and impacting the ground in a thicket of trees, about 200 feet off the departure end of the runway - had removed the previous propeller and installed another, and were embarking on a flight after maintenance - propeller had been set to the low pitch limit

A second pilot in another airplane of the same (experimental, amateur built) type flew in loose formation with the accident aircraft and witnessed the accident - The second pilot said that the pilot's airplane had a heavier engine than most of the type did, and had a "full panel" of instruments and radios and was equipped for instrument flight. The pilot told him that, with the heavier engine and instrumentation, he was "over gross" with himself, baggage, and fuel onboard. He was carrying camping gear and the density altitude at the accident site was approximately 8,000 feet. After takeoff, the pilot was flying below and in front of the second pilot at an altitude that placed him below the canyon walls. The second pilot radioed to him "you should climb," and the pilot radioed back that he was taking pictures. About 1 mile further, it appeared that the pilot started climbing. He was keeping even with gently upsloping terrain ahead and was in no danger at that point. The pilot then made a right turn into a narrow canyon that would take him across a ridgeline toward a scenic canyon. Flying behind him, it took the second pilot a moment to reach the entrance to the canyon and, when he did, he was immediately uncomfortable. Even from his higher altitude the second pilot was barely level with the ridgeline ahead. He radioed to the pilot that he should "do a 180 . . . there is room to your right." At this point he had sufficient space to his right to reverse course. The pilot radioed back words to the effect that he thought he could make it and would proceed ahead. The second pilot radioed that he was turning immediately and that the pilot had plenty of spacing and was clear of terrain. When he started his climbing left turn he last saw the accident airplane below and in front of him, hugging the left canyon wall. It appeared the pilot was setting up to make a right turn out of the canyon. He appeared to be in a climbing attitude. When the second pilot completed his 360-degree turn, he next saw the airplane in a 45-degree right bank as it entered a spin to the right at about 300 feet agl. The spin continued for 2 1/2 turns and the airplane impacted terrain below and a fire erupted. It appeared that the spin slowed and a partial recovery was made just before the impact.

[SkyPirate]

agree 200% with JamesMil amd CDE2FLY,..
PS some nice flying down there around wilmington James, I use to fly out of my back yard just north of Le Juene

[szicree]

There's basically two ways to unintentionally stall:

1. Gradually pull back in small increments so that you don't notice the back pressure.

2. Yank back suddenly due to some form of panic.

The first one is the typical "base to final cross control situation" and the second is the typical "ground is coming up cuz I lost power" deal. Avoid both by simply letting the plane fly. Easier said than done in a panic situation, but the truth remains.

Others have recommended spin training, but once you're in a spin near the ground, you're screwed. The key is to avoid the stall altogether by knowing where the stall occurs. Go out, get some altitude and stall that sucker in every scenario imaginable. Be prepared for spin recovery just in case, but the goal is to learn exactly where the stall is and recover immediately. With a little practice you'll know EXACTLY where the edges of the envelope are.

Trying to stall-proof a Kitfox is a giant waste of time; the time and energy would be much better spent stall-proofing the guy flying it.

[Max]

This is the point of my efforts to try to "idiot proof" my kitfox.

The husband and wife in the crash at the link above were my aunt and uncle. I know very little about flying and came here in hopes of finding answers. My Uncle Jim took me up for my first airplane ride when I was 12...and that was 42 years ago. The information I've found here has been helpful and I have found that in the forum discussion where the accident was announced, the people have been sensitive and compassionate. Please keep in mind that there may be other family members here as well.

[SkySteve]

Max,
I did not know your Uncle and Aunt. I was at the flyin and can tell you that without exception every single person there who did know them held them in very high regard. Every person who knew your aunt and uncle had only true love and respect for them. When that many people express similar feelings about two people it is obvious they were good people. You are a privileged person to be part of their extended family. It is sad that they are gone, but speaking as a person who is about their age, understand they passed while on a great adventure of their choosing. As pilots we understand and accept the risks involved in our adventures and are ok with that. You can be very proud to be part of a heritage that continues to persue adventure throughout all of life. You are part of a great family.

[DesertFox4]

Max, on behalf of TeamKitfox.com, the entire Kitfox community and myself, please know how sorry we are about the loss of Jim and Sheila. They were a great part of our flying family.
I did visit with them both at the fly in and as always enjoyed the brief chance to catch up on their lives and activities. We talked about family and hobbies and politics. Jim discussed a recent repair on his classic convertible. Sheila brought me up to date on the boys. Please pass on our sympathies to both of them. They were loved very much by their parents.
Sheila later brought me a cup of ice cream, an inside joke between the 3 of us when we get talking too seriously about politics and need to cool off.;)


Before they left the fly in Sat. evening I did get a moment to ask Jim how many hours he had on the aircraft since new and he said about 180 hours. I asked how it was running and he said " it's running fantastic." I told him it looked great with the new stripes they just put on it. He invited me to fly up and spend some time at the house with them and the boys. God how I wish that was still possible. They took off for Caldwell. The aircraft sounded normal. The next morning we awake to hear the tragic news. We all await official word about the crash.
We'll miss our friends.

[Max]

DesertFox4 and SkySteve and those at the discussions 'Forum Member' and 'Sad News',

Thank you for your condolences and kind words. It means a great deal to myself and to our families.

It is sad that they are gone, but speaking as a person who is about their age, understand they passed while on a great adventure of their choosing. As pilots we understand and accept the risks involved in our adventures and are ok with that.

SkySteve, this is an illuminating perspective. It is one I wouldn't have considered and is greatly appreciated.

DesertFox4, it's consoling to have a glimpse into their last weekend and how normal it was. Thank you for that. They also spent time in Buhl and Uncle Jim took my dad and cousin up. Mom said they were happy and excited about the flyin although Aunt Sheila was nervous about the flight. Dad was impressed with the number of gauges in the dash.

I've been impressed with the camaraderie and courtesy you all show for one another here. And whether or not altering a plane is a sound decision I commend Rogerh12 for amiably sticking to his guns to explore the possibilities in the face of much ribbing. :)

Safe flying to you all.