From: doshay@ursa.arc.nasa.gov (David Doshay)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
Subject: Re: Avid, Denney ... (was: Auto Engines: Montana Coyote)
Date: 16 Oct 92 22:58:37 GMT
Article-I.D.: news.1992Oct16.225837.28246
Organization: NASA-Ames Biocomputation Center

In article <1992Oct16.175225.16191@den.mmc.com>, zwork@starfighter.den.mmc.com (Michael Corvin) writes:
|> In article <1992Oct13.185658.11578@news.arc.nasa.gov>, doshay@ursa.arc.nasa.gov (David Doshay) writes:
|> |> The latest Aviation Consumer flight tested these two and gave some history
|>
|> The Avaition Consumer article was very interesting - and quite critical of the
|> handling qualities of the Avid and the Skyfox.  Other reviews 
|> (eg in Plane&Pilot)
|> have alluded to the strong adverse yaw and marginal directional stability
|> characteristics in polite terms, but this is the first time I've seen strong
|> criticisms.
|> 
|> Do any rec.avaitors who've flown either of these planes want to offer
|> support or rebuttal to the critiques?  If they are true, it seems that these
|> designs need a bit more development, especially if they are looking towards
|> VLA certification.
|> 
|> ---------

I have flown the now very old Avid model A, with the 43 hp Cyuna. They are up
past C to Mk IV by now, so things have changed. At that time it was an airplane 
that needed "more rudder than you might be used to" in the words of Charlie
(Tuna) DeRego, now the owner of the company. At that time I was not much of a 
pilot, having only had my $20 Cessna intro flight, but I did not find the plane
hard to fly. I had had surgery on my back 6 weeks prior to the flight, and
as a result I did not have much strength in my legs, but I did not find the
rudder forces to be high. I thought them lower than a 152, but these are memories
of 5 years ago. I did not do any stability testing like in the article. (there
was something of a misunderstanding between Tuna and me, because I thought
that he was just taking me up for a ride, and he thought I was expecting to
fly it. He turned it over to me with the above quote. I hope this does not make
him seem reckless, he is, after all, a 7(3?)7 flight instructor.)

At that time I carefully looked over the kit, and thought it all good quality
except that I thought that the extensions of the ribs that the ailerons hinge
off of looked flimsy. About 6 months after the above mentioned flight I went
to the Father's Day flyin at Columbia (Tuna's home base) and watched as he
broke just that part in a "high" speed pass of the runway. He went around and 
landed ... he sure felt stupid because he hit a downdraft that put the plane
over Vne. That part was reinforced right after that time. The new ones look fine
to me. The main reason I never bought one is the size. They are getting bigger, 
but I am very thin, and my wife is very small (combined weight 235) but the two 
of us never felt all that comfortable inside with the doors closed. I also am not 
too thrilled about building rag and tube ... just a personal preference for working with wood.

Has anybody flown a newer one?

David		doshay@soma.arc.nasa.gov

The thought police insist I tell you:
my thoughts, not NASA's
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt