He wasn't anywhere near ready for a taildragger. And why the heck did he open the throttle when he could have ridden it out? He just made the situation a hundred times worse.
It was when he added power and how quickly he did that screwed him. When you’re in an incipient ground loop, the only way to really recover is add power. It’s saved me. What happened here is he decided to bail too late for that method imo and the insta torque whipped the plane around instantly, then he panicked. As soon as he hit the ground it was a mess unfortunately. Easy for us to judge from our position, though. Stay safe out there.
@@josephn944Yes, some add power to go around or just to get more rudder effectiveness. But adding power, jabbing rudder the other way, or even differential braking are all reactive control. Prevention is far superior. If we nail/bracket the centerline between our legs with dynamic proactive rudder movement, we are ahead of the airplane and don't ground loop to begin with. We are ahead of precession when we bring the tail up on takeoff. We are ahead of P factor when we bring the mains off. We are already moving so our control is already happening when a force attempts to bring the tail around. We are better when we move.
You could tell at takeoff, he was already in trouble. The tailwheel began shimmying when he landed, and that’s where he powered up-immediately losing control and going for a ride. A shimmying tailwheel shakes the crap out of the fuselage, and if you don’t know what it’s like, it’ll scare the crap out of you. That little airplane is short coupled, and he was short on training.
I was originally asked to do the test flight on this airplane. For a reason not presented to me they decided to go with someone else. I just wish I could’ve done it, that plane would more than likely still be intact. The builder and his brother were incredibly nice people and wish this didn’t happen to them 😞
When tailwheel airplanes were called conventional because most were tailwheel and I taught in a $3.00 per hour wet Champ 7AC, we all taught Wolfgang's arrive at ground level in three point attitude all slowed up and ready to squat and dynamic proactive rudder movement to nail/bracket the centerline between our legs on short final, flair, touchdown, roll out, and taxi. When tailwheel got really expensive, owners began to expect instructors to favour saving the airplane over their learning experience. So rudder jabs (reaction to ground loop), adding power (as in this case), and even differential braking (aaah) came into vogue because the instructor could ride the controls and use those techniques. If you want to learn tailwheel, get a really old instructor (perhaps a crop duster) and purchase more hull insurance than your airplane is worth.
if you want to really learn tailwheel find a CFI who knows that ailerons are more effective at directional control on the ground and will overpower the rudders every time. also once the mains are on the pavement the plane goes the opposite direction of the aileron input. if the CFI does not know that don't waste your money.
@@chucklemasters6433 Get on that steering wheel and just keep turning back from where those ailerons adverslyi yawed you. This is the number one student error that messes with both tailwheel and nose wheel landings. Sit on the picnic table at your local i and watch the wing waggers landing. Turn for longitudinal alignment when walking the rudder pedals will hold the centerline between our legs. And if we allow no turn, no bank, the wing stays level. Rudder movement will stay ahead of the center of gravity trying to swing around. Ailerons are to set a bank angle against crosswind in the air and on the ground, not to maintain longitudinal alignment in the air or on the ground. The down aileron pulls that wing back. The gust did not just pick the airplane up please turn it into the ground. The pilot used aileron instead of rudder to bring the wing back up when too slow for aileron effectiveness and adverse yawed the airplane into the ground off the runway in the same direction as the gust dropped a wing. If he had been walking the rudder pedals dynamically and proactively, he would have already been moving. He would have been ahead, not behind, the airplane. Try falling leaf stall with your ailerons to maintain heading. Ailerons at slow enough airspeed to quit flying in ground effect where Vso is irrelevant are ineffective. If we use dynamic power to nail glide angle and pitch to decelerate coming into ground effect, that prop blast is effective on elevator and rudder but not ailerons. If you are going fast enough for ailerons to be effective, you are going way too fast to land.
You seem to be saying tail wheel air planes are unsafe, where it's other problems that make it unsafe. I fly tail wheel models and tricycle gear models, you just have to know what you are doing. I trained in a Piper Cub on grass fields when I was 16 years old and helped to rebuild 22 Cubs as well. I do land on the center line most of the time.
@@tedmossTailwheel airplanes are the best trainers because they make the pilot learn to use dynamic proactive rudder to stay ahead of the airplane. It is a bit more difficult to teach this longitudinal alignment technique to nose wheel airplane pilots. With the more flexible tailwheel, we can teach students that as long as their rudder movements are dynamic, the grossness or fineness of that movement doesn't matter. Just as babies start walking with gross dynamic proactive balance, students learn fast if allowed to move the controls grossly to see what they do. I start tailwheel students out walking the rudder pedals to the stop dynamically and proactively to stay on the yellow line in a slow taxi. Yes, so fine as to be not noticed is best. But insisting on fine control early in training makes it take a lot longer. No, I can't make nose wheel pilots learn so fast. I just make them walk rudder pedals finely to take the slack out of the cables or push pull tubes. On short final, however, they are the same, Students of either geared airplane can be taught to nail/bracket the centerline between their legs with dynamic proactive rudder movement. Tail waggers, regardless of gear, have far fewer longitudinal alignment problems than do aileron steering wheel advise yaw wing waggers.
@@tjotwo might be an airline pilot who flew a kitox maybe 20 years ago. It's a tricky airplane to fly without being current. If you only fly an airline and haven't flown in years this situation could definitely happen. Most people including myself first 10 hours of kitfox were very hard I couldn't imagine landing solo haha
43 years old with 13,000 hours? Nope. Justin destroyed that poor guy’s airplane, and proved he’s a fraud. I hope he has his flying background investigated.
@ no… the NTSB isn’t an enforcement arm. They just investigate. It’s the FAA that would look into his background, but that probably won’t happen in this case.
The NTSB certainly DOES look into the background of pilots. Especially if there's any chance the pilot was a factor in an accident. And pilot error IS a factor in a large percent of accidents. Not necessarily the only or the major factor. Human error is the cause of about 80 % of aviation accidents. Pilot error 53 %. Those figures come from the NTSB database which covers data from 2008 till recently. And in this case., the pilot signed the plane experienced no mechanical issues. Leaving only pilot error. NTSB final reports often mention pilot error if it's a factor.
The person he chose to perform this test flight had oversold his skills. He was clearly at fault for wrecking a perfectly good airplane. were there any consequences?
The take off was pretty squirrely. On landing he didn't have his speed bled off, didn't have up elevator. He regained control then for whatever reason jammed the throttle in and lost control of the plane Had he cut the throttle once it took off to the left I think he would have been just embarrassed instead of ending up with a damaged plane. Test pilot admitted to not having recent experience in tailwheel.
regained control? when did he EVER have control? he didn't even have control over it on the takeoff. what are you talking about up elevator for? are you a pilot? nothing you said made any sense. your comment was very similar to his flying!
@@chucklemasters6433 Just prior to jamming the throttle the plane had settled down he could have rolled out and called it a day. Up elevator to keep the tail on the ground. Yes I am a pilot, I flew glider tugs for 15 years, I stopped logging landings after they got over 10,000. 2000+ in tailwheel alone.
Well, they say that it’s a matter of time before a pilot ground loops a taildragger, but this guy had a hard time just controlling his take off, let alone landing. That already expensive insurance for a taildragger just went way up!
I own a Kitfox and have many hours in her. The Kitfox may look cute but they are short coupled, light weight with tons of lift. They are very easy to ground loop and have caught out even experienced tail wheel pilots. But, even so the pilot in this video is clearly incompetent and was miles behind the aircraft from the moment it moved. Frankly unless there was a monstrous cross wind I have no idea why he was letting the plane's wings roll on take off and landing. On landing when he added full power was precisely when I expected him to cut all power! Wrecked a good aircraft 😢
I had a Kitfox 5 for almost 10 years - this guy had no clue how to fly it starting with the take off - I've ridden one tire half way down the runway in a strong crosswind & never was as shaky as this guy
From the takeoff roll he was in trouble…. Tail wasn’t up to load the main gear and no aileron input where needed…. If the tail wheel was shimmying, a wheel landing would have made it manageable…. Step away from the tail dragger
This is exactly why I opted for a nose-dragger version of my experimental. I had often heard the adage "there are those who have ground-looped and those who will". I certainly don't think my feet are any better than the guys that have done this so I decided to avoid the possibility altogether. I have looked at the Aviation Safety Network for accidents involving the taildragger version of my plane and, thankfully, there has only been one fatal and the remainder have been ground loops. I'm feeling pretty smug about my decision. I have to admit that the conventional gear planes are "sexier" than mine but they are a lot less so when they are crumpled up. No thanks. I'm not sexy so neither is my plane. In reference to this pilot's total hours I suspect that they had to be in jets (he had a commercial and multi after all).
Typical result of an untrained tail wheel pilot trying to fly an airplane he has no understanding of. Mistake No 1, takeoff: He allowed the airplane to leave the runway with the tail wheel low (still on the ground). This allowed the plane to lift off at too low an airspeed and almost stalling No2: Landed tail-wheel low, resulting in wing being at a high AOA and still producing significant lift. 3. Improper use of ailerons during both takeoff and landing. Guy didn't have the faintest idea on how to fly a tail dragger. Sad to see another nice airplane wrecked through pilot incompetence. Tail draggers are easy and fun to fly once you learn how to fly them, but you must understand the aerodynamic forces involved.
Ouch! That was painful to watch! But remember (my dad told me this): Among tail-dragger pilots, there's those who have ground-looped and those who will!
I had over 650 take offs & landings in my Kitfox 5 - I would practice 10 in a row all the time - this guy would have landed if he didn't give it full throttle when the tailwheel was jumping back & forth
I have added power to a bad situation before, flying models, always with bad results, I don't do that anymore. Keeping in mind that models are way overpowered.
Old timers advice when I was learning tail wheel - "if you get in trouble landing - "power off, stick back all the way, focus on keeping it going straight"
Why are the Probable Cause statements by the NTSB always a big "No Shit"? Do they ever give one piece of useful information? By just watching this it is plain that he had a cross wind and he came in too hot and flew the plane onto the runway. The plane was still flying when the wheels touched down. When he realized he was losing it, he throttled up, but by then it was too late. All obviously due to a lack of experience. His takeoff wasn't much better!
The NTSB has to put down SOMETHING. I've read several thousand (yes, that many) and when the probable cause cannot be determined, the accident mechanism is given.
@@edcew8236 Do they ever given an actual reason in their Probable Cause statements? I watch Dan Gryder and he has probably read as many of their useless remarks as you have and he has never shown them to have a common sense reason for any accident. The Brittney Infanger, Burley Idaho accident is a great example of the "usefulness" of the NTSB and the FAA allowing the many safety infractions that caused the accident. The most obvious example is the time it takes to submit a useless canned response that helps no one. I hope the new administration eliminates both bureaucracies and starts over. It certainly couldn't get any worse!
Something l'm curious about: do most of the kitplanes have full castoring tail wheels? In this video and others from Oshkosh, if the tail wheel makes hard contact on landing it does one or more 360 degree swivels. Have seen several that on the next contact with the runway the wheel is 90 degrees to direction of travel. Tail does some strange dancing.
One thing to note here. The old style bungee gear on the earlier kitfoxes were known to be squirrly. With that in mind, I would be doing everything in my power to have the first flight not take place on pavement. To me it looks like poor stick and rudder skills but giving yourself every advantage to begin with may be the difference between an NTSB report and an exciting but uneventful landing.
tail draggers and flying wings aren't something you can get aggressive with the controls on landing at least he didn't hit anyones elses stuff give him credit for that honestly when he throttled up thought he was going straight through the hanger
Takeoff looked like it was a crosswind ... same for the landing, but he needed more tailwheel time to do crosswind landings better. Nice ground loop demo though.
Just because you have 3 wheels with a criss wind you di not have to you 3:003:00 all 3,at once. 🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️WTF was he doing powering up???
Read the report and you will find the NTSB failed to include anything related to windspeed/gusts. I find this odd and you should too. I'm not a full-scale pilot but I do fly large scale radio control models. When flying high or low wing models, wind direction is critical in both takeoff and landing. My assumption is there was a crosswind prevalent in both the takeoff and landing events. In both events the pilot in command is responsible to maintain directional control. It is obvious, if this is the case, he failed to do so.
My son and I have over 600 hours in our Kitfox 4 without incident. The good news is that they walked away from that accident. Certainly, the pilot in command had little experience in a Kitfox. Here is a video of my son's first solo in our Kitfox with proper technique and wheel landing: ua-cam.com/video/ClTFpdtW8wg/v-deo.html
Pilots LHS 13,070 hrs (33 this make and model) and RHS 75hrs (62 this make and model). You’d think they’d be accustomed to the ac and know what to do with tail wheel shimmy.
I'm sorry to see this. So much work and cost again ! Besides the pilot's inability there are a few factors that could have prevented this. See that windsock, don't fly in that wind if you're not familiar with the plane. ... but it's straight down the runway ! DON'T ! Go VERY early in the morning. Choose a perfect day ! Taxi the living daylights out of the airplane, get a feel for it ! Fast , slow and turns. Most important ... go to a dirt or grass strip ! DON'T do the hard surface / asphalt thing ! Just after touch down you can see the right main wheel bite onto the asphalt and everything went south from there.! On grass the wheel would have slid sideways and greatly prevented the wing from lifting and transferred weight onto the right main wheel.
They had no business flying any airplane let alone a short coupled tail dragger like a Kitfox. Just look at the Takeoff and you could easily see there was no chance at landing it successfully
You potentially spend years laboring and assembling this aircraft, only to watch it be destroyed on it’s first flight by someone you thought you could trust with the it. Devastating.
[This is speculation from a non-expert.] I don't know anything about the Kitfox, but could its (apparently, to my eyes) narrow wheel-track have had an impact on its (apparently, to my eyes) nervous ground-handling behaviour? The plane looks wobbly even when standing still. Also, the fuselage seems to be too short to make a stable tail-dragger. Solution? There isn't an easy one. Widening the wheel track by 18" would stop its tendency to 'teeter' left and right, but would make it even more skittish longitudinally, so, frankly, I think this plane needed a tricycle undercarriage from the drawing-board stage. A nosewheel would settle it down and make it less eager to swap ends. Having said that, the pilot (apparently, to my eyes) made some very odd decisions; the plane didn't look happy either on the ground or in the air. I can't say anything further because I have no direct experience of full-size tail-draggers. I have flown the configuration many times in the form of large radio-controlled model aircraft, but I appreciate that that's a very different thing! Disclosure: I'm an ex rally driver from the Group-B era (amateur), and also got my PPL in a Cessna 172, now lapsed due to lack of flying hours (due to lack of cash!). I have no direct hands-on flying experience beyond that, and none with full-size tail-draggers, but I think I recognise an awkward customer when I see one. I'm glad nobody was hurt here, but it's always sad to see someone's baby in trouble.
I think he hesitated on the go-round. At least in the kitfox I fly hitting full power will get the wheels off the ground in 1-2 seconds maybe I am just a light pilot?
My reading of AC 90-116 is that the owner would have to be PIC and the "test pilot" would have to qualify as a Qualified Pilot. Neither can be an Observer Pilot as the aircraft hasn't gone through the 8 hrs of initial tests.
That takeoff was so sketchy I thought the incident was right in the first seconds.
My initial thoughts exactly!
Here we go another moron making it to the Dan Gryder list of shame.
Yep
Yep, he was in trouble as soon as he started the take off roll. Made me wonder if there were some rigging problems.
He wasn't anywhere near ready for a taildragger. And why the heck did he open the throttle when he could have ridden it out? He just made the situation a hundred times worse.
Adding more energy to an already bad situation is always a bad idea.
@ Like pouring gasoline on a fire..
It was when he added power and how quickly he did that screwed him. When you’re in an incipient ground loop, the only way to really recover is add power. It’s saved me. What happened here is he decided to bail too late for that method imo and the insta torque whipped the plane around instantly, then he panicked. As soon as he hit the ground it was a mess unfortunately. Easy for us to judge from our position, though. Stay safe out there.
He didn't stay on the rudders to keep the taildragger tracking on the runway centerline. 🤕
@@josephn944Yes, some add power to go around or just to get more rudder effectiveness. But adding power, jabbing rudder the other way, or even differential braking are all reactive control. Prevention is far superior. If we nail/bracket the centerline between our legs with dynamic proactive rudder movement, we are ahead of the airplane and don't ground loop to begin with. We are ahead of precession when we bring the tail up on takeoff. We are ahead of P factor when we bring the mains off. We are already moving so our control is already happening when a force attempts to bring the tail around. We are better when we move.
You could tell at takeoff, he was already in trouble. The tailwheel began shimmying when he landed, and that’s where he powered up-immediately losing control and going for a ride. A shimmying tailwheel shakes the crap out of the fuselage, and if you don’t know what it’s like, it’ll scare the crap out of you. That little airplane is short coupled, and he was short on training.
i'd say a shimmying tailwheel was probably just one more thing that he was totally unaware of.
it was stage Left bro, you called it, if had stayed powered up he'd have cleared the buildings for that epic save,
Good grief!!
Don’t ever do this in your Husky!😂😂😂😂
From what I just watched, I’d have to say that someone was lying about their hours and experience level. How unfortunate for the builder/ aircraft.
I was originally asked to do the test flight on this airplane. For a reason not presented to me they decided to go with someone else. I just wish I could’ve done it, that plane would more than likely still be intact. The builder and his brother were incredibly nice people and wish this didn’t happen to them 😞
on the other hand we won't have to be worried about them being in the sky with us for a while
@ they seemed like competent pilots and were eager to learn the Kitfox. Just the guy they hired to do the flight was inept🤷♂️
I hired a professional test pilot to fly the first few hours of my airplane. He brought it home safe. It was cheap insurance
lucky he made it to the landing, that takeoff was almost as bad.
Yeah I was expecting him to wad it up on takeoff.
When tailwheel airplanes were called conventional because most were tailwheel and I taught in a $3.00 per hour wet Champ 7AC, we all taught Wolfgang's arrive at ground level in three point attitude all slowed up and ready to squat and dynamic proactive rudder movement to nail/bracket the centerline between our legs on short final, flair, touchdown, roll out, and taxi. When tailwheel got really expensive, owners began to expect instructors to favour saving the airplane over their learning experience. So rudder jabs (reaction to ground loop), adding power (as in this case), and even differential braking (aaah) came into vogue because the instructor could ride the controls and use those techniques. If you want to learn tailwheel, get a really old instructor (perhaps a crop duster) and purchase more hull insurance than your airplane is worth.
Every pilot should read and reread "Stick and Rudder."
if you want to really learn tailwheel find a CFI who knows that ailerons are more effective at directional control on the ground and will overpower the rudders every time. also once the mains are on the pavement the plane goes the opposite direction of the aileron input. if the CFI does not know that don't waste your money.
@@chucklemasters6433 Get on that steering wheel and just keep turning back from where those ailerons adverslyi yawed you. This is the number one student error that messes with both tailwheel and nose wheel landings. Sit on the picnic table at your local i and watch the wing waggers landing. Turn for longitudinal alignment when walking the rudder pedals will hold the centerline between
our legs. And if we allow no turn, no bank, the wing stays level. Rudder movement will stay ahead of the center of gravity trying to swing around. Ailerons are to set a bank angle against crosswind in the air and on the ground, not to maintain longitudinal alignment in the air or on the ground. The down aileron pulls that wing back. The gust did not just pick the airplane up please turn it into the ground. The pilot used aileron instead of rudder to bring the wing back up when too slow for aileron effectiveness and adverse yawed the airplane into the ground off the runway in the same direction as the gust dropped a wing. If he had been walking the rudder pedals dynamically and proactively, he would have already been moving. He would have been ahead, not behind, the airplane. Try falling leaf stall with your ailerons to maintain heading.
Ailerons at slow enough airspeed to quit flying in ground effect where Vso is irrelevant are ineffective. If we use dynamic power to nail glide angle and pitch to decelerate coming into ground effect, that prop blast is effective on elevator and rudder but not ailerons. If you are going fast enough for ailerons to be effective, you are going way too fast to land.
You seem to be saying tail wheel air planes are unsafe, where it's other problems that make it unsafe. I fly tail wheel models and tricycle gear models, you just have to know what you are doing. I trained in a Piper Cub on grass fields when I was 16 years old and helped to rebuild 22 Cubs as well. I do land on the center line most of the time.
@@tedmossTailwheel airplanes are the best trainers because they make the pilot learn to use dynamic proactive rudder to stay ahead of the airplane. It is a bit more difficult to teach this longitudinal alignment technique to nose wheel airplane pilots. With the more flexible tailwheel, we can teach students that as long as their rudder movements are dynamic, the grossness or fineness of that movement doesn't matter. Just as babies start walking with gross dynamic proactive balance, students learn fast if allowed to move the controls grossly to see what they do. I start tailwheel students out walking the rudder pedals to the stop dynamically and proactively to stay on the yellow line in a slow taxi. Yes, so fine as to be not noticed is best. But insisting on fine control early in training makes it take a lot longer. No, I can't make nose wheel pilots learn so fast. I just make them walk rudder pedals finely to take the slack out of the cables or push pull tubes. On short final, however, they are the same, Students of either geared airplane can be taught to nail/bracket the centerline between their legs with dynamic proactive rudder movement. Tail waggers, regardless of gear, have far fewer longitudinal alignment problems than do aileron steering wheel advise yaw wing waggers.
Question: why do people taking videos always lower the camera down just as things get critical?
Maybe for the same reason a supposed 13,000-hour test pilot flies like a 13-hour student??? Just guessing.
@@tjotwo might be an airline pilot who flew a kitox maybe 20 years ago. It's a tricky airplane to fly without being current. If you only fly an airline and haven't flown in years this situation could definitely happen. Most people including myself first 10 hours of kitfox were very hard I couldn't imagine landing solo haha
43 years old with 13,000 hours? Nope. Justin destroyed that poor guy’s airplane, and proved he’s a fraud. I hope he has his flying background investigated.
it says 33 hours in this make, maybe not much of the 13000 spent in a tail dragger
@@no-wr6bj he doesn’t have 33 hours in make… he’d have landed if that was the case.
Don't they check all this info before publishing a report?
@ no… the NTSB isn’t an enforcement arm. They just investigate. It’s the FAA that would look into his background, but that probably won’t happen in this case.
The NTSB certainly DOES look into the background of pilots. Especially if there's any chance the pilot was a factor in an accident. And pilot error IS a factor in a large percent of accidents. Not necessarily the only or the major factor. Human error is the cause of about 80 % of aviation accidents. Pilot error 53 %. Those figures come from the NTSB database which covers data from 2008 till recently. And in this case., the pilot signed the plane experienced no mechanical issues. Leaving only pilot error. NTSB final reports often mention pilot error if it's a factor.
Crazy seeing this here! I was taxing to the run up area with my instructor when this happened.
As soon as he powered up to take off it wasn't if he crashes but where.
He never let the tail come up on takeoff.......tailwheel pilot? I don't think so.
B17 pilot.
3 point takeoffs are just fine if you know how to do them, but this was something else.
kinda like a rodeo
100ft into the roll there was trouble...
The person he chose to perform this test flight had oversold his skills. He was clearly at fault for wrecking a perfectly good airplane. were there any consequences?
How unfortunate for the owner/builder.
Painful to watch. Just his rudder work taking off looked bad enough to kill the throttle and rethink one's life choices.
Obviously NOT a tail wheel pilot......for that matter even a pilot period......disgrace.
Looked like a drunken farmer routine.
I thought that.
Who did the high speed taxi test?
That was all kinds of messed up!
The take off was pretty squirrely. On landing he didn't have his speed bled off, didn't have up elevator. He regained control then for whatever reason jammed the throttle in and lost control of the plane Had he cut the throttle once it took off to the left I think he would have been just embarrassed instead of ending up with a damaged plane. Test pilot admitted to not having recent experience in tailwheel.
regained control? when did he EVER have control? he didn't even have control over it on the takeoff. what are you talking about up elevator for? are you a pilot? nothing you said made any sense. your comment was very similar to his flying!
@@chucklemasters6433 Just prior to jamming the throttle the plane had settled down he could have rolled out and called it a day. Up elevator to keep the tail on the ground. Yes I am a pilot, I flew glider tugs for 15 years, I stopped logging landings after they got over 10,000. 2000+ in tailwheel alone.
First response to a ground loop... Full power?
In my humble opinion the pilot was a spectator to the accident and not actively flying the aircraft.
Wow! It looked like the pilot was having his first solo.
He kept in full power after a 90 degree left hand excursion of the runway..... wow, that's unreal
The tail wheel is not for landing and taking off on. That is what those big wheels up front are for.
What's with the right ailerons?
A three point landing and losing it with full throttle! Wow!
I wonder if he ever thought about getting a pilot license.
Who ever signed him off needs to be checked out! That pilot was not ready
Well, they say that it’s a matter of time before a pilot ground loops a taildragger, but this guy had a hard time just controlling his take off, let alone landing. That already expensive insurance for a taildragger just went way up!
Modern day 5 o’clock Charlie.
I landed 4R shortly after he did that. I remember seeing them shaking their heads at the plane.
I own a Kitfox and have many hours in her. The Kitfox may look cute but they are short coupled, light weight with tons of lift. They are very easy to ground loop and have caught out even experienced tail wheel pilots.
But, even so the pilot in this video is clearly incompetent and was miles behind the aircraft from the moment it moved.
Frankly unless there was a monstrous cross wind I have no idea why he was letting the plane's wings roll on take off and landing.
On landing when he added full power was precisely when I expected him to cut all power!
Wrecked a good aircraft 😢
Great explanation.....Kitfox planes are awesome 😊
I had a Kitfox 5 for almost 10 years - this guy had no clue how to fly it starting with the take off - I've ridden one tire half way down the runway in a strong crosswind & never was as shaky as this guy
the pilot reported that he just decided to let the airplane go on landing and see what it would do by itself!
I love how he tried to lift off before even getting the tail up first. Gotta get that tail up first!
From the takeoff roll he was in trouble…. Tail wasn’t up to load the main gear and no aileron input where needed…. If the tail wheel was shimmying, a wheel landing would have made it manageable…. Step away from the tail dragger
Latest ever initiation of a go-around 😮
This is exactly why I opted for a nose-dragger version of my experimental. I had often heard the adage "there are those who have ground-looped and those who will". I certainly don't think my feet are any better than the guys that have done this so I decided to avoid the possibility altogether. I have looked at the Aviation Safety Network for accidents involving the taildragger version of my plane and, thankfully, there has only been one fatal and the remainder have been ground loops. I'm feeling pretty smug about my decision. I have to admit that the conventional gear planes are "sexier" than mine but they are a lot less so when they are crumpled up. No thanks. I'm not sexy so neither is my plane. In reference to this pilot's total hours I suspect that they had to be in jets (he had a commercial and multi after all).
The takeoff was sketchy enough. No surprise the landing got so expensive. Taildraggers aren’t for the faint of heart.
Typical result of an untrained tail wheel pilot trying to fly an airplane he has no understanding of.
Mistake No 1, takeoff: He allowed the airplane to leave the runway with the tail wheel low (still on the ground). This allowed the plane to lift off at too low an airspeed and almost stalling
No2: Landed tail-wheel low, resulting in wing being at a high AOA and still producing significant lift.
3. Improper use of ailerons during both takeoff and landing.
Guy didn't have the faintest idea on how to fly a tail dragger. Sad to see another nice airplane wrecked through pilot incompetence.
Tail draggers are easy and fun to fly once you learn how to fly them, but you must understand the aerodynamic forces involved.
Ouch! That was painful to watch! But remember (my dad told me this): Among tail-dragger pilots, there's those who have ground-looped and those who will!
Some people shouldn’t get into a tail dragger! Kitfox lands sooo easy
I had over 650 take offs & landings in my Kitfox 5 - I would practice 10 in a row all the time - this guy would have landed if he didn't give it full throttle when the tailwheel was jumping back & forth
Takeoff said it all. Once in trouble on the ground, never add power to a bad situation. This pilot needed tailwheel training
I have added power to a bad situation before, flying models, always with bad results, I don't do that anymore. Keeping in mind that models are way overpowered.
@tedmoss So true. I love my rc aircraft. I bought a full size cub (Legend) and begun instructing. I dont fly rc near as often as Id like these days
Old timers advice when I was learning tail wheel - "if you get in trouble landing - "power off, stick back all the way, focus on keeping it going straight"
@@gregcharest443❤ Love it!! Thankyou 😀
If that guy had 947hrs on tail draggers, my name is Mary Poppins.
Did a crosswind gust lift the port wing?
Why are the Probable Cause statements by the NTSB always a big "No Shit"? Do they ever give one piece of useful information? By just watching this it is plain that he had a cross wind and he came in too hot and flew the plane onto the runway. The plane was still flying when the wheels touched down. When he realized he was losing it, he throttled up, but by then it was too late. All obviously due to a lack of experience. His takeoff wasn't much better!
The NTSB has to put down SOMETHING. I've read several thousand (yes, that many) and when the probable cause cannot be determined, the accident mechanism is given.
@@edcew8236 Do they ever given an actual reason in their Probable Cause statements? I watch Dan Gryder and he has probably read as many of their useless remarks as you have and he has never shown them to have a common sense reason for any accident.
The Brittney Infanger, Burley Idaho accident is a great example of the "usefulness" of the NTSB and the FAA allowing the many safety infractions that caused the accident.
The most obvious example is the time it takes to submit a useless canned response that helps no one. I hope the new administration eliminates both bureaucracies and starts over. It certainly couldn't get any worse!
They claim to not assign blame, though in determining the case of the wreck, they must allude to the blame.
He was nowhere near ready for that airplane
Full throttle at the first bounce and he probably could have taken off for a go a round.
pilot made error big time by advancing throttle when he should of decreased throttle completely what a goof
Needless crash! Pilot error! 🤔
Something l'm curious about: do most of the kitplanes have full castoring tail wheels? In this video and others from Oshkosh, if the tail wheel makes hard contact on landing it does one or more 360 degree swivels. Have seen several that on the next contact with the runway the wheel is 90 degrees to direction of travel. Tail does some strange dancing.
One thing to note here. The old style bungee gear on the earlier kitfoxes were known to be squirrly. With that in mind, I would be doing everything in my power to have the first flight not take place on pavement. To me it looks like poor stick and rudder skills but giving yourself every advantage to begin with may be the difference between an NTSB report and an exciting but uneventful landing.
Relatively limp windsock, and full throttle after a left 90.
The kind of incident that gives taildraggers a bad rep!
Textbook example of why every landing in a taildragger should be 3-point full stall.
Had me yelling pull power! Cut it!! Oww prop strike.. That's gonna cost ya..
Same airport where the recent honda jet incident happened.
tail draggers and flying wings aren't something you can get aggressive with the controls on landing
at least he didn't hit anyones elses stuff give him credit for that honestly when he throttled up thought he was going straight through the hanger
Someone should have shown him how the throttle and brakes work. What disaster all round.
Whisky throttle.
Am I wrong here, but most test flights are done with only one pilot? Even if the owner/builder is a pax it still doesn’t make since.
Takeoff looked like it was a crosswind ... same for the landing, but he needed more tailwheel time to do crosswind landings better. Nice ground loop demo though.
He enjoyed the build so much he wanted to do it again 😅
As usual... camera operator messed up. 😂
That's an unfair criticism, videography is hard.
In his CYA statement the 'pilot' not flying told the other to add power...
Just because you have 3 wheels with a criss wind you di not have to you 3:00 3:00 all 3,at once. 🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️WTF was he doing powering up???
Read the report and you will find the NTSB failed to include anything related to windspeed/gusts. I find this odd and you should too. I'm not a full-scale pilot but I do fly large scale radio control models. When flying high or low wing models, wind direction is critical in both takeoff and landing. My assumption is there was a crosswind prevalent in both the takeoff and landing events. In both events the pilot in command is responsible to maintain directional control. It is obvious, if this is the case, he failed to do so.
Panic at the disco. Close the throttle instead of open it.
Too much cross wind ?
between the ears yes
Oh my 🤦🏽♂️
i have never flown a real plane and i'd expect to do about that well if i was for some reason in a taildragger, that was horrendous
My son and I have over 600 hours in our Kitfox 4 without incident. The good news is that they walked away from that accident. Certainly, the pilot in command had little experience in a Kitfox. Here is a video of my son's first solo in our Kitfox with proper technique and wheel landing:
ua-cam.com/video/ClTFpdtW8wg/v-deo.html
I'm not a pilot, but in a nutshell, how did this happen, please ?
Pilots LHS 13,070 hrs (33 this make and model) and RHS 75hrs (62 this make and model). You’d think they’d be accustomed to the ac and know what to do with tail wheel shimmy.
I'm sorry to see this. So much work and cost again ! Besides the pilot's inability there are a few factors that could have prevented this.
See that windsock, don't fly in that wind if you're not familiar with the plane. ... but it's straight down the runway ! DON'T !
Go VERY early in the morning. Choose a perfect day !
Taxi the living daylights out of the airplane, get a feel for it ! Fast , slow and turns.
Most important ... go to a dirt or grass strip ! DON'T do the hard surface / asphalt thing ! Just after touch down you can see the right main wheel bite onto the asphalt and everything went south from there.! On grass the wheel would have slid sideways and greatly prevented the wing from lifting and transferred weight onto the right main wheel.
As A EXPERIENCED PILOT TOLD ME .......LOOK. ANYONE CAN GET IT UP.......ITS THE LANDING THATS DIFFICULT.
stage Left - if had kept that throttle maxed he'd have cleared the buildings
Mr Magoo flying dat Kitfox. Can't see, can't fly....
Has he flown a plane before?
The tail wheel was all over Alabama
Who's Denny?
Wtf I’m no pilot but wtf was that! He had so many opportunities to bail!
When something exciting happens, don't forget to clearly document your feet!🚫
They had no business flying any airplane let alone a short coupled tail dragger like a Kitfox. Just look at the Takeoff and you could easily see there was no chance at landing it successfully
I’m not a pilot but it seemed like all he had to do was lighten up on the throttle?
That was pilot induced!😳
I guess he forgot where the throttle was.
You potentially spend years laboring and assembling this aircraft, only to watch it be destroyed on it’s first flight by someone you thought you could trust with the it. Devastating.
[This is speculation from a non-expert.] I don't know anything about the Kitfox, but could its (apparently, to my eyes) narrow wheel-track have had an impact on its (apparently, to my eyes) nervous ground-handling behaviour? The plane looks wobbly even when standing still.
Also, the fuselage seems to be too short to make a stable tail-dragger.
Solution? There isn't an easy one. Widening the wheel track by 18" would stop its tendency to 'teeter' left and right, but would make it even more skittish longitudinally, so, frankly, I think this plane needed a tricycle undercarriage from the drawing-board stage. A nosewheel would settle it down and make it less eager to swap ends.
Having said that, the pilot (apparently, to my eyes) made some very odd decisions; the plane didn't look happy either on the ground or in the air. I can't say anything further because I have no direct experience of full-size tail-draggers. I have flown the configuration many times in the form of large radio-controlled model aircraft, but I appreciate that that's a very different thing!
Disclosure: I'm an ex rally driver from the Group-B era (amateur), and also got my PPL in a Cessna 172, now lapsed due to lack of flying hours (due to lack of cash!). I have no direct hands-on flying experience beyond that, and none with full-size tail-draggers, but I think I recognise an awkward customer when I see one.
I'm glad nobody was hurt here, but it's always sad to see someone's baby in trouble.
1st, landing half way down a runway is incorrect. 2nd....everything else he did on the landing was incorrect...😅
Shit is sketchy that so many people live in the area near airports where “pilots” have no business “attempting” to fly
I think he hesitated on the go-round. At least in the kitfox I fly hitting full power will get the wheels off the ground in 1-2 seconds maybe I am just a light pilot?
Flat out inexperienced
Why in the world would you choose to make your first flight in a new airplane in a strong crosswind??? How stupid could you be???
"Strong crosswind"? Did you even see the windsock?
Not clear who was PIC for the flight to be legal for the second pilot program. That looks sketchy...
My reading of AC 90-116 is that the owner would have to be PIC and the "test pilot" would have to qualify as a Qualified Pilot. Neither can be an Observer Pilot as the aircraft hasn't gone through the 8 hrs of initial tests.
Along for the ride…
Sure took a long time on the takeoff roll too. Looked like he was trying to "Fly" it back on the ground.
Foot slipped off the brake...