PDA

View Full Version : Kitfox and beginners



maxb
04-24-2009, 06:42 AM
Hello all,

First of all, I'm very happy to have found this forum, which is exactly what I was searching for m(and pleas pardon me for my not perfect English: I'm Italian, living in Italy).

I started to fly 20 years ago with paragliders (which I still fly today), but I'm becoming day by day more intereted in flying with something better :-)

I have seen several ultralights, but -honestly- the only one I really like is the Kitfox. Here some of them can be found as second hand (unluckily I don't have enough time to build one byu myself, also if I would prefer doing so), but the question is another: of course I have to take flight lessons, but what is your opinion about having a Kitfox as a first plane? Does this make sense? I mean: it's a taildragger, so more challenging to takeoff and land, but in the past all the planes were taildraggrs (and I believe too they were more diffcult to fly), as well as other similar question.

You that know so well this plane, what is your opinion? I would not (as we say here) take a step longer than the leg, but also avoid to buy a plane which I will need to change in a (more or less) short time.

Many thanks in advance for any help!

Ciao,

Massimo (Max)

Skybolt
04-24-2009, 11:29 AM
Hello Max.
Welcome to this forum.

I don't think it wize to go buy an airplane and teach yourself to fly it.

Do you know of a flight instructor who is familier with the tailwheel.
You will need at least some time with an instructor...maybe even getting the equivalent of a private pilots licence...that would be good.

Having an instructor go up with you in a Kitfox will also be benificial.
But getting signed off by an instructor is, for me very important.

Is the Kitfox more difficult than other tailwheel aircraft. I personaly don't think so.
Look at the thread "how to fly the Kitfox" Order the book from Kitfox, it shows and describes what to expect.

Flying the Kitfox is fun and handling a tailwheel is more fun...but have fun safely.

Greetings. Eric.

mcguif0a
04-24-2009, 11:55 AM
Also remember that the Kitfox does not have to be a tail dragger. If you are nervous about the tailwheel you may be interested in the nose wheel version. They don't seem to be as common but if your patient you should be able to find one.

maxb
04-24-2009, 03:02 PM
Ciao,

Thanks for the responses!

First of all, I want to underline that's NOT my idea to fly a Kitfox (or whatever else) teaching by myself. I will get a lot of flight lessons. As much as I need, and probably even more :)

My question was just about to know if I can think to have a Kitfox as a first plane. I would like just to avoid mistakes and getting a very difficult plane as first.

From you answers, looks like that the Kitfox can be good for this if starting the whole thing from the beginning.

Agauin thanks, and welcome to further suggestions and opinions.

Ciao,

Max

Skybolt
04-24-2009, 03:21 PM
Max said;
"My question was just about to know if I can think to have a Kitfox as a first plane. I would like just to avoid mistakes and getting a very difficult plane as first."

My Classic IV is my first plane. Yes I had my training in the Cessna 152 and then the 172. Rented for a couple of years.
Got the Kitfox kit, spent no time flying and a couple of years building. When it was time to prepair for flight I found an instructor with a Piper cub and then a Citabria and finaly in the Kitfox. I personaly don,t find the Kitfox more difficult to land than these.
All three aircraft are very different from each other. The Cub was the most difficult to taxi and flair for landing because of foreward visibility.

(Of course, my interpetations of this are based on the learning factor, newness to tailwheel. Ask any Cub owner and he will say not a problem to land and taxi because he is so familier with it)

Anything can be a bit of a problem when new. Remember your first bike!

Eric

SkyPirate
04-28-2009, 02:32 PM
Ciao,

Thanks for the responses!



I might be late in replying to this ,..but here's my 2.5 cents worth ..if you learn to fly a tail dragger..you can fly any other wheeled configurationed aircraft in the same class you learned in..ie 2 place single engine ...
in my opinion it is easier to fly a tail dragger ,..
one ..because you learn to be less complacent,..you have got to fly the plane until it comes to a complete stop,
two..you learn to do short field T/O's and landings without worry of the front wheel sinking into soft ground,..so runway's are not always required for tail draggers
three ,,you just can't beat the nostalgia of a taildragger :) it's just too dang Sexy~!!

R. Griswold
04-28-2009, 08:20 PM
Hi: Allbee's reply that kitfoxes are tough to fly is very revealing. That one comment may keep me from making a huge mistake. I surely don't want an aircraft that is as difficult to fly as he makes it sound. But I am very curious: How and why? How is the aircraft tough to fly? I presume we are talking about landing here, probably in a crosswind situation? Perhaps in the tail dragging configuration? With a low wing loading and pretty slow approach, just what is the issue? What is it about the airplane design that tends to make it a handfull? Could it be the rather full and slab sided tail section of the fuselage. This is critical stuff. I'm way behind almost everyone on this site in any experience. The last thing I need is to choose a plane that is not the most gentle, docile, forgiving airplane ever. Is there something out there that is universally acknowledged as so easy to fly, even a caveman could do it? Rich

SkyPirate
04-28-2009, 08:40 PM
Personally I think the kitfox is one of the easiest planes to fly ,..but it's going to depend on your own co-ordination as to how well you fly any airplane,..if you have really low flying time you really need to find someone with the type of plane you want to fly and get some stick time in that type aircraft,..a cub ?
The kitfox is not prone to ground loops as some tail draggers are,..or at least i don't think they are..I use to purposely land on one tire and roll down the runway until the plane slowly set down on both mains just to see how far I could do it before stopping,..but then I would take off and get to 3000ASL then shut the motor off too just for kicks to practice dead stick landings,..
In reality the only way your going to know is to put yourself in the seat next to an experienced tail dragger pilot and get some stick time ..only you know if you can handle the transitions from a tri cycle to a tail dragger,..but like I said earlier..if you can land a tail dragger ..you can fly anything fixed wing with any landing gear configuration ,..mono,..trike..tail wheel ..tail skid .. in my opinion the easiest to land is the tricycle gear .
If your still not sure of yourself after getting some stick time ..say 10 to 15 hours,..then you might not want a tail dragger

DesertFox4
04-28-2009, 08:59 PM
Since allbee didn't address why it was difficult for him to fly I won't speak for him. The Kitfox is not hard to fly. The taildragger version may be a little more of a challenge for some people to master but the flying characteristics of all Kitfox models are very easy to love after one flight. They all fly exceptionally well once 2 inches in the air. The biggest problems with new Kitfox pilots is over controlling the aircraft with Cessna type inputs into the stick and rudder but this is soon mastered and the joy of responsive controls quickly becomes apparent to everyone I've ever taken up in my Kitfox. That includes high time & low time pilots and people that have never been airborne before yet alone touched an aircraft's controls. Everyone I take flying in my Kitfox gets to fly the airplane. The result is always predictable. They love it. Fly a Kitfox once and you will buy/build one.
It's amazing when you research something we are interested in and have never experienced for ourselves that we will read 1,000 positive comments and then fixate on that one negative feedback. I've done it myself. That's human nature to be skeptical. Are those 1,000 people all in a conspiracy to force a bad product on the unsuspecting? I'll let you be the judge Rich but it would be a shame to right off the best flying aircraft available today because you got spooked by one post. If you don't fly one you are doing yourself a disservice. That's very easy to accomplish with the resources Kitfox Aircraft makes available to interested potential customers. One flight alleviates all pre-conceived notions that maybe built up over years of research. That should be your next step in your quest for factual information gathering. I'd offer you a flight in mine if you were closer or wanted to get to Phoenix. If you want to fly any model from 4- Super Sport it can be arranged here in Phoenix if you can't make Homedale or one of the shows John and Deb will be attending this year. Let me know if I can help.:)

Slyfox
04-29-2009, 06:44 AM
Hi: Allbee's reply that kitfoxes are tough to fly is very revealing. That one comment may keep me from making a huge mistake. I surely don't want an aircraft that is as difficult to fly as he makes it sound. Rich

Tough to fly is in reference to the cessna. You should start out in a training plane. The kitfox is high performance. The turn rate is fast. If you have a taildragger it is more responsive than most. If you have the long wing, it will get blown around more in a cross wind. Just things I observed between the c180 and the kitfox. It can be done. Just have a good CFI with you when starting out is all.

Slyfox
04-29-2009, 07:11 AM
I like to put in that a certain airplane is not for everybody. I feel that not all pilots are the same. Meaning, there are some that just don't have the coordination for the high performance airplanes. I'm sorry the kitfox is one. Also the rv series airplanes are another. I own both. I remember the first time I flew an RV with me at the controls doing everything, landing, taking off. I had troubles the first 30minutes. Just needed to put the airplane in the same perspective as the kitfox, remember I said the kitfox was high performance. After doing that, the Rv was a ***** cat. I guess I tried to fly it like a cessna on landing, and got a real suprise. I remember asking the person I was flying with. Are most people suprised at the RV and change their minds on flying one, he said YES.

So go out, fly a kitfox and make your own evaluation, don't take somebody elses word. It might surprise you and you may not like it, than again, you might fall in love with it. But I will say, if you don't, you better look at a Cessna or better yet, an aircoupe.

Don't look at my responses as negative, rather an inlightenment. Not everything in this world is for everybody, find out what is for you.

Robin G
04-29-2009, 09:02 AM
I'm still in the learning phase with my model 3, only about 15 hours. My last few hundred hours were in A-36 Bonanzas and P-210s and that was 20 years ago. I wouldn't say my fox is tough to fly at all, but it is althgether different than driving a fast heavy platform through the air. A long wing, light weight, relatively slow, tail dragging model 3 is really getting back to basic flying. You must be agile and stay in control of the airplane. If you are willing to keep that focus, it is both a safe, simple and a very fun airplane to fly. If you are not, I'd suggest boating.

robin g

SkyPirate
04-29-2009, 10:38 AM
I guess I shouldn't make it sound so easy to fly a kitfox or any airplane for that matter,.. I keep forgetting that there are people that have never flown a plane . I started flying at age 7, I've owned 28 and built 14 of the 28 different planes/ultralights,and I have flown everything from ultralights to jets , I can't give you an honest hour time in flight since I never sat next to an actual Certified flight Instructor in flight until I was in my 30's .
And I scared the crap out of him when I actually landed the plane when we did the engine out excersize in less then 75 feet in a 170 and I didn't spill his coffee.
It's like running a bull dozer,..some guys can tot a blade and make a piece of ground look like it was flattened with a grader,..but then some can make it look like the mogels on a ski slope.
if you've got good hand and "butt" cordination ..meaning if you can feel it in your arse and respond to correct it through your hands to flight control inputs without flipping the "bull dozer" over , chances are you'll be a very good pilot/operator of other man made machines including airplanes.

Slyfox
04-29-2009, 10:57 AM
Remember, this thread is for first time fliers. Yes, I do agree that the kitfox is easy to fly. But not when I first started flying. The kitfox is a high performing airplane, meaning it responds very quickly. You don't want that for a beginner. That's why the Cessna is the choice for beginners. It's a trainer plane. That being said, I would NOT want to go back to a Cessna. Last year, I was out for about 3 months do to needing an engine for the kitfox. The wife wanted to pay for me to fly a Cessna, I said no way. I don't want to pay good money to fly one of those things.

R. Griswold
04-30-2009, 07:10 AM
Thanks everyone, I think I get a sense of it all, and I'm still here, and Kitfox is still high on my list. I never thought that high performance meant anything except fast. Now I see where it can mean sensitive or quick to react also, even at a slower speed. This is a super forum. All you being out there would make quite a difference in kit choices. Thanks, Rich

SkyPirate
04-30-2009, 07:49 AM
I like to put in that a certain airplane is not for everybody. I feel that not all pilots are the same.


You keep talking like this albee your going to force me to ad you to my buddy list,..<grins> don't make me do it cuz I will ha ha

Slyfox
04-30-2009, 08:35 AM
You keep talking like this albee your going to force me to ad you to my buddy list,..<grins> don't make me do it cuz I will ha ha

You can ad be to your buddy list. All I ask is you call me steve.

Pilot4Life
04-30-2009, 01:54 PM
Gentlemen,
It's good to see guys linking up with like minds, desires for KF, and passions for KF. Careful that this thread doesn't end up like the "roll rate" thread. If you remember, that was a misunderstanding that was taken way too far out of context. Let's keep it from happening. We've got a great site here and I look forward to establishing the same friendship with some of you as I prep for my own build. For now I'll have to settle with living vicariously through y'all. Thanks for your time.

R. Griswold
04-30-2009, 02:41 PM
Good Afternoon: I looked up the "roll rate" thread. You guys did have a bit of a Donnybrook back then. I don't think that is what's happening here at all, just some fun. What I found interesting in that discussion was not the argument, but the fact that once again, some find the Kitfox hard to fly because the controls are (1) light and enjoyable if you are used to them, or (2) twitchy and overly sensitive if you are not there yet. And of course, that has been my concern all along. I keep hearing if I want stable controls, go with the Cessna. Problem is, the Cessna is not going to be LSA. In a feature article on the Kitfox VII in a 2008 issue of Kitplanes magazine, they failed to mention all this I'm hearing on this website. So, where's that leave me, I wonder?

Slyfox
04-30-2009, 02:58 PM
Not to confuse you any further. But the Kitfox is a perfect airplane for yes, even a beginner. You just need to be purdent on control usage. I did get use to it, so much, I would not even concider going to a cessna in my future. It is the most fun flying airplane, unless you need to get somewhere fast than the RV comes into play. The RV is also a very fun airplane. But, if I had to own just one, it would be the kitfox. Sorry RV fans. Nothing like a STOL high wing, with tail wheel to boot. Today I went to the international airport and landed on their 9000ft runway(rwy3), did it within 150ft, full stop. I think it was more like 100ft. I asked for a take off with right turn at the intersection for runway 7 with a touch and go. Yup, did that no problem. I think the intersection is shorter than 1800ft away. I landed on 7 and did another landing and stop within 150ft. I know for a fact, I'm the only one that can do this, or should say has done this at this airport. I did not brake any rules. All within regs. All cleared by the tower. Flying with the kitfox makes for lots of clean fun, forget the aerobatics, even though it has been proven that the kitfox4 can do that also, I have no thrills about going inverted.

maxb
04-30-2009, 03:17 PM
That's correct: back to the original question. As correctly pointed above by Rick, summarizing the various opinion, looks like that KF is not good for beginner like me (I fly from 20 years, but with a totally different thing: maybe this experience could be helpful in some way, but doesn't help with too sensitive commands). Please correct me if I'm wrong.

I have to get, of course, my license (here we have two main tipe of "leisure flight" license: one for non-powered, the other for "with engine"), and I will get it not flying with a KF, so the first 40 flight hours will be with a simpler plane. This could be a good start, then pass to the KF (and to taildragger too, still with lessons). In this case the KF would be anyway my first plane, but not the first to pilot. Does this make sense to you?

Again, as others here pointed out, I would thank all of you for a so enlightening vision of the various aspect of flying a KF!

It's just a pity that nobody of you live here in Italy

SkyPirate
04-30-2009, 03:23 PM
Not to confuse you any further. .

I agree with you Steve,..the kitfox is allot of fun ,..I have your landing roll beat though I landed on a 75 foot long sand bar right off the Cape (Cape Cod Mass) in front of the Kennedy Mansion,..and then a half hour later I took off from that same sand bar,..ok ,..ok,,I'll give all stats there was a 25 mph head wind ,.I did draw some attention from some little black jeeps too ..hence the 1/2 hour delay but,.. I didn't break any rules ,.. they were impressed that a plane could land that short,..and I am sure even more impressed that I took off from the same sand bar.

jrthomas
05-01-2009, 06:12 AM
According to the CFI's at a local Light Sport training center,GA pilots more often have problems with the handeling of light sport aircraft than transitioning ultralight pilots, the reason they felt ultralighters were used to the more responsive controls than most GA pilots.

R. Griswold
05-01-2009, 10:12 AM
Thanks, Everyone: Not to curtail any more conversation or flying stories, but from my standpoint, I have my question answered. I really appreciate all those who tried to present what I should expect. I can assure you that should I do a Kitfox, I'll go through whatever training and practice it would take to be proficient. Shame on me if I were so short-sighted that I planned on having such a limited skill set that only the most docile airplane was suitable for me to fly. Thanks again. See you on another thread soon. Rich :D P. S. To the guy in Italy who said it was a pity we don't live in Italy, you are right, my friend. It's a beautiful place with wonderful people. Buona sera!

n85ae
05-01-2009, 11:22 AM
For what it's worth, I flew Cessna's (152, 172, 172RG, 182, T182RG)
and Piper's (Warrior, Archer, Apache), and a Mooney M20C out of various
flying clubs until I bought my Series 5 Kit. Other than that I have some
sailplane time. Other than sailplanes, all of my flying was tri-gear.

I got my tailwheel endorsement in a Citabria, and then checked out in a
Cub, and a C140 while building. I had about 50 hours tailwheel time when I
finished building.

When I finished my Series 5, taxied it a bunch, and then tail up taxied it
a bit down the runway. To get used to the rudder. It was more sensitive
that the other planes I have flown, but not excessively so.

I have six years flying time in the Kitfox now, and I do not think it is a
difficult plane to fly at all. It is a bit squirrely on pavement on windy
days as compared to the other taildraggers I have flown, but this is
the only issue I have with the plane. I have groundlooped it once
because of this. However, I chose to fly on a gusty day, and that's not
the planes fault.

If you are a decent pilot with tailwheel training, there is no reason to
not consider a Kitfox. They are easy to fly.

Regards,
Jeff


Tough to fly is in reference to the cessna. You should start out in a training plane. The kitfox is high performance. The turn rate is fast. If you have a taildragger it is more responsive than most. If you have the long wing, it will get blown around more in a cross wind. Just things I observed between the c180 and the kitfox. It can be done. Just have a good CFI with you when starting out is all.

maxb
05-01-2009, 11:55 AM
To the guy in Italy who said it was a pity we don't live in Italy, you are right, my friend. It's a beautiful place with wonderful people. Buona sera!

Well, I see that my statement could be read wrongly (also if you were really nice in your post): I'm NOT comparing in any way Italy with US! (by the way, I started working for US industries in 1987 with DEC, then Compaq and now HP :) ).

I was just saying that is a pity that we can't meet personally due to the distance. I strongly believe that all of you are really nice guys, and it's a pity that hardly we will ever fly together (but who knows...)

If someone of you will ever be in Turin, just drop me a line!

And moreover: now I'm less worried about flying a KF (I'm trying to find someone who own one here, but as for now, none close to me). Thanks to all, and, please, don't stop with your comments and findings: more info, more knowledge!

Ciao!

http://www.maxbelloni.com

maxb
05-02-2009, 11:42 AM
I forgot to ask: anybody here (or anyway known) which started flying building a KF, ans consequentrly had it as first plane?

Ciao,

Slyfox
05-02-2009, 03:06 PM
mine is first plane. It now has 1400 hrs and on the second engine.

darinh
05-02-2009, 10:03 PM
Max,

I am on my second Kitfox. My first was a model 3 and I purchased it about a month before I got my pilot's license so yes, it was my first plane and it was a taildragger. I did the bare minimum flight hours for my license (38.5 hours including my check ride) and then got my tailwheel endorsement in 3.5 hours. I did the last 2.5 hours of that in my Model 3 with my CFI and he felt I was perfectly ready so he signed me off. I am telling you this not to say that I am an amazing pilot because I am far from it but rather to let you know that a tailwheel kitfox as a first plane is perfectly fine if you feel comfortable...I flew mine solo with only 41 hours total time in all aircraft.

My new Series 7 is way more airplane than the Model 3 and is a much more stable feeling airplane while still maintaining that agile Kitfox feel...I love it. The Model 3 was a blast! Very light (had the 80hp Rotax 912UL) and performed well. However, the smaller tail and non-differential aileron control made for a lot of footwork to keep the ball centered. I didn't mind this, in fact it was a welcome challenge as the last thing I wanted was to become complacent with the rudder inputs like many Cessna drivers become over the years. Lets face it, you can fly a 172 or 182 without even touching the rudder except for ground operations and you would not notice much a difference. They are great planes but they don't teach a pilot to fly the rudder and pretty much any taildragger will require attention to the rudder especially during takeoff and landing. They are not any harder to take-off, fly or land than the tricycles, simply different. Get some instruction in a tailwheel and if you feel comfortable, by all means make your first plane a Kitfox...You will love it.

sidenius
03-22-2010, 01:59 PM
That's correct: back to the original question. As correctly pointed above by Rick, summarizing the various opinion, looks like that KF is not good for beginner like me

I am a Danish guy who just bought a KF 4 here in Italy. It was being tested by a well trained tail dragger instructor and he was flying the KF as was he born in it. Please contact Marco Neri on email address: mneri@enjoy-ulm.it (mneri@enjoy-ulm.it) or go on his home page: www.enjoy-ulm.it (http://www.enjoy-ulm.it/). I am sure he can help you. Ciao, Sidenius :)

maxb
03-22-2010, 04:32 PM
Thank you for the infos. In the meantime i got my license and, due to a very particular chance, I got a Savannah VG (but the love for taildarggers is live as before...)

Ciao!

Max

Monocock
03-23-2010, 02:29 PM
Robin G said:



I'm still in the learning phase with my model 3, only about 15 hours. My last few hundred hours were in A-36 Bonanzas and P-210s and that was 20 years ago. I wouldn't say my fox is tough to fly at all, but it is althgether different than driving a fast heavy platform through the air.
I think that sums the Kitfox up superbly.

Personally, I love mine and would sell my kids to keep it if I had to !!:D

Slyfox
03-23-2010, 03:10 PM
I wish I could sell my kids but nobody wants them, even for free. TAke them they're yours. Even if I just give them away they will save me, their hands are out all the time. I did learn years ago to never, I mean never have cash on hand. I use plastic, yup that's the answer, plastic.

kitfoxnick
03-23-2010, 06:09 PM
I took all my lessons in my model iv. I think I'm a better pilot for it. Hundreds of pilots learned in tail draggers albeit they were not high performance like the kitfox.

av8rps
04-24-2012, 08:37 PM
This is a really old thread now, but a good one to keep going for anyone considering a Kitfox. So here's my story;

I soloed in a J-3 Cub when 16, but didn't finish my Private Pilots license until I was 23. After renting Pipers and Cessna's for another 40 hours of flying time, I finally got frustrated enough and bought my 1st airplane, an Avid Flyer (the predecessor to the Kitfox for anyone that doesn't already know that). It was a completed and flying airplane (It was actually Dean Wilsons Prototype), but I bought it with no idea how to get checked out in it, as since it was only 1986 there were essentially no aircraft like this in my area. So I decided to learn the airplane on my own...

With a whole 85 hours of flying time in my logbook, all in "Spam Cans" (which are VERY different than this little tube and fabric airplane with folding wings), I put the tow bar on the tail and towed it down to a hayfield a mile from my house. I threw the tow bar in the weeds and put the wings out. After a thorough pre-flight, I hopped in it and gave the recoil a pull and the engine came to life. Never having flown an airplane at that point with a snowmobile motor, I admit I had my doubts :eek: (the Avid was built in 1982, before Rotax was even involved in aircraft engines. So it used a Cuyuna 430 cc 2 stroke typically used in a Scorpion snowmobile).

But when I poured the coals to it and experienced for the 1st time the incredible acceleration it had compared to the other planes I had flown (and in grass nearly 3 ft tall!), I knew I was going to like this little airplane. This things had LOTS of POWER! I was off in only a couple hundred feet without even trying. And the climbout was equally impressive maintaining a 45 degree angle. WOW!! This was FUN I had never experienced in any other airplane! After an hour and a half of flying around learning the airplane, I came in for my first landing. Man, that was so much fun that I did 28 more landings that afternoon! Finally the sun was starting to set, so I reluctantly put the tow bar on the tail and folded the wings and took it home.

That summer I flew that little Avid Flyer over 200 hours. And I had so much fun learning its capabilities that the more I flew it the more I came to love this little plane. And even though I had little extra money to spend on things like flying at the time, I was flying A LOT and wasn't upsetting the household budget, or my bride. This was the perfect airplane for me at the time. And I can't even begin to describe how much it taught me about flying. And when I put it on floats shortly after, the fun level went off the charts! (see attached circa '87 pic)

After 1300+ Avid Flyer hours I decided to move on to some other airplanes (primarily a Pitts and a Lake Amphibian), which I enjoyed a lot. But after 900 hours of playing around, I realized I was missing my old Avid Flyer. So one day I did something about that by purchasing a 912 Kitfox IV project, and after a few years of work on it I flew it for the 1st time. And the minute it left the ground I was reminded just why I love flying these great little airplanes. The Kitfox flew much like my old Avid, just better. More refined is probably the best way to describe it. And I've been enjoying it ever since...

So with all that said, I think a Kitfox would make for an awesome 1st airplane. You may have to work a bit harder initially when learning the Kitfox compared to a Cessna or Piper. But after you master the Kitfox you will be a much better pilot. And while you learn the Kitfox, you'll have a lot more fun flying it than anything else I can think of.

Kitfox_70
08-05-2012, 03:41 PM
Excuse the poor etiquette of replying to an old thread but somebody needs to tell you what a great story that was.

HighWing
08-05-2012, 06:54 PM
I too would like to join the poor etiquette gang. I think I missed Paul's post when it was new. Thanks for bringing it back to the front page.
Lowell

av8rps
08-06-2012, 08:14 AM
Thanks. I'm glad you enjoyed it.

I enjoyed writing it as well... I was able to relive those fun times as I put the words down :)

tommg13780
10-19-2012, 07:41 AM
I have a model 2 and it's been flown for about 100 hours since purchase in june 2010. I really don't have a lot to compare it with other than a couple Kolbs and a kitfox model 1 that I've had previously. I take full advantage of the trailering/folding wing capabilities and find that my cost per hour of flying is very low. I just recently had an "old salt" pilot/mechanic do the condition inspection and in the process he flew dual with me and then he went solo. This fellow has been a pilot for 50 years/10,000 hours with ratings all the way up through multi-eng, aerobatic and CFII. Also A&P with IA. He had all good things to say about the Kitfox. Now I can understand why I get so many comments from people about the airplane. For me it was very cool to watch it flying. Right now the model 2 is for sale on barnstormers in order to fund the remaining expenses for a IV speedster project that needs a 912 engine. I'd rather keep the II and fly it until the IV is ready to fly but that seems to be impractical for a number of reasons.

SkySteve
10-19-2012, 08:08 AM
OK, chiming in. I have a modified model 1. Mods: model 3 wings; grove main gear; increased height of vertical by 10 inches to fit added model IV rudder; custom bubble doors which added 6 inches cabin width for hips, elbows and shoulders. There are other mods as well but these are the major ones.

I absolutely love my Kitfox. Do I wish I had a SS7? Of course I do, but that's not in the cards for me right now. I fly mostly solo, approx 100 hrs per year, but also take trips with my wife and her dog. I do have the 912A, 80hp engine. Hope this helps. Buy the Kitfox. You will be glad you did.

rogerh12
10-19-2012, 08:23 AM
hey steve;

Your model 1 mods are impressive.
What is you new operational gross weight?
What kind of performance do you get out of her?

Roger

SkySteve
10-19-2012, 08:43 AM
Roger,
My plane use to belong to Dan Denney. It was the first real factory demo plane. Dan installed the model III wings. I called Dan and he told me the gross is now 1050#'s. I have to admit it has flown several times at 1200 in calm winds and does great. I can cruise at 100 mph and have done so many times but it just feels better at 90-95 mph. I usually cruise at about 5300 rpm per my TinyTac. Climbs out at 1,000-1,200 fpm.