What is the “highest” HP someone has put into a Kitfox?

[jiott]

I think we are doing a disservice to Nik and the rest of us by a few folks assuming he stalled in his tight turn close to the ground. That is not necessarily true. As I posted several weeks ago, I have done some tests with my SS7 standard wing to explore this exact scenario but I was at 5000' for safety. Quoting my post:

"I have tried speeds from very slow to 90 mph and then suddenly pull hard elevator in a steep, 60 to 70 degrees, turn. I could not get it to do an accelerated stall. It would always whip around very quickly and lose speed quickly while the nose would drop and put me into a fairly steep spiral dive. Nothing I could do with elevator or rudder would keep the nose even close to level. It would spiral down, NOT stalled, and could be easily flown out of the spiral at any time. Now I am no test pilot and maybe there are ways to stall it in this kind of maneuver, but I could not do it. Bottom line to me, it seems like an extremely safe aircraft that wants to naturally keep itself flying. But I got to thinking about Nik's accident, where he appeared to make a very steep abrupt turn low to the ground. In this condition your nose WILL go down even if you are NOT stalled, and there may not be enough altitude to recover."

Let's wait for more info before we jump to conclusions.

[Av8r3400]

To site a hard fact, look no further than the Trent and Nick filming day. One wing allowed the maneuver and one didn’t.

I don't know what "hard fact" you are referring to. Nothing has been stated about the cause of Nikk's incident. We do not know what maneuver was being performed by Nikk or if is was similar to something that Trent did with his plane.

Again, you are making an inference that Nikk's wing or aircraft was somehow not capable of a maneuver that Trent's aircraft had just performed. There is not enough information to make this statement, much less calling it a hard fact.

No one will argue that the STi wing will out STOL the standard wing. However, stating that the standard wing is "Scary", unsafe or incapable of amazing STOL performance is not accurate.

[Rik]

I think we are doing a disservice to Nik and the rest of us by a few folks assuming he stalled in his tight turn close to the ground. That is not necessarily true.

I’m absolutely not knocking Nick. The faa report points to a stalled spin doesn’t it?

Discussion away from Nick.. For those non pilots out there watching the YT videos and listening to certain narrators, one can get the impression that these these are the perfect planes. They stall at 35 mph, can land in 100’ and according to the videos can put put down onto any surface that’s not vertical.

They show pilots doing rolls and very steep turns down low. Then a lot of owners on here back up that pilotage with their own comments/experience of similar behavior.

I’ve got my own minimums and yes this seems exciting and roll a coaster fun but I have in the back of my mind all the time that that ground and me in this plane do not need to meet unless I say so and I act accordingly.

Back to Nick, being he’s one of the cowboys, trents friend and the fact that he seems like a real nice guy, everyone is putting gloves on and I understand that but we have to realize we are all human and **** happens. Down draft, wind shift and who knows what else but we cannot ignore the severity nor safety this stuff involves.

[Rik]

I don't know what "hard fact" you are referring to. Nothing has been stated about the cause of Nikk's incident. We do not know what maneuver was being performed by Nikk or if is was similar to something that Trent did with his plane.

Again, you are making an inference that Nikk's wing or aircraft was somehow not capable of a maneuver that Trent's aircraft had just performed. There is not enough information to make this statement, much less calling it a hard fact.

No one will argue that the STi wing will out STOL the standard wing. However, stating that the standard wing is "Scary", unsafe or incapable of amazing STOL performance is not accurate.

Your RUNNING with your own thoughts here I feel. I’m not saying the wing is unsafe at all. I’m saying for the slow, steep stuff the STI wing on trents plane is better than his old wing in Nicks plane.

Please don’t read into it what I’m not saying.

[Slyfox]

OK, I'm writing this to make sure nobody thinks I'm careless and reckless. years ago I did a huge back country flying class. I rented a Cessna 172 and the instructor had over 20000hrs. we went into the cascades and had people flying over the top of us as a command post. there were several airplanes participating. He was teaching me a bunch of great stuff. things like run along the right side of the lanes in the mountains we called it on the right side. that way as we wanted to make a left turn we could see into the area before turning into it and it would allow us to get out if needed, more room to turn. we stayed within 20 ft of the sides of the canyons with many feet below us. read that up off the ground several feet but close to the canyons. he demonstrated and I did what he called a hammerhead wing over, with a Cessna . read that Cessna, that was for when we did get in a bad situation you pull up and use aileron and rudder away from the cliff, it was amazing how quick you could turn back with hardly any reduction in airspeed and come out at the same altitude. very safe. better than plowing into the ground by far. don't think I do anything unsafe. not what I was saying. above all, get some training in the back country. don't go back there and teach yourself. I also got a bunch of ground school with this class. good , day.

[Rik]

I agree with everything your saying. We all have our personal minimums and fly accordingly.

As of yet, I’m not a bush pilot, just conveying my observations of the sport and admiration for the flying it requires. It goes against all teachings to a degree and as your the first to point out, get training.

My mission, yet undefined 100%, is not cast in stone. I need some speed to get to some place whereby if I wanted to follow your flying environment, I then need a plane that can handle the mission while I’m having said fun, then I need some speed to get back home.

150’ takeoffs and landings are not required for this mission, however, building a STOL drag plane they would be. Then again since it’s only aspirations and wishes at this point maybe having two sets of wings would accomplish this goal too.

I’m merely doing my due diligence at this point. My goal would be to get/modify/build an S7 or S7STi and use a more than adequate power plant to achieve this goal. With my resources I can do things slightly differently than or different than others have considered.

As I’ve stated, a KF might not be the plane but one has to do their research.

[DesertFox4]

Sounds like good training Steve. Mountain and back country flying takes a set of skills not taught in most flight schools.

[Av8r3400]

I'll second that, Steve. My time spent with Paul at Stick and Rudder was invaluable. I am hardly a "mountain" bush pilot, I have barely scratched that itch, but Paul's teaching has allowed me to safely experience the element and begin to learn.

I hope to do more this summer...

[DesertFox4]

Hope you can Larry. I’ve flown with Paul several times adding up to 10 or 12 hours now and learn something substantial every time.

[Slyfox]

one thing I did last night, I looked at my kitfox log books. In the front it said model 4 STOL aircraft. Yes the standard kitfox is classified as a STOL aircraft according to my log book. I personally believe that as well.