"Bush Gear"

[Allen Sutphin 705]

Went back today and read many, many older posts on the so-called bush gear including ones built by various people. It kind of cast in stone that I'll keep the original gear that came with the model 2 Fox and use a alternative type safety cable.  Since I don't plan to land on a washboard, the original gear will do just fine, and they used it up to and including the Model 4. There is a wealth of information on Avid/Foxes on this site and valuable info to be gained. Sometimes, its what not to do. Like build a lardache aircraft for one. A lot of stuff I see on some planes is just not needed for the mission of a Avid/Fox and only compounds certain issues. One I read about in the old post would be lucky to come under 30K with all the stuff he wanted to do to it. A 30K+ model 1, Oh well, to each his own.  That's why its called experimental aviation.  Keep on modifying them, I learn a lot. 

[Browning 23]

Went back today and read many, many older posts on the so-called bush gear including ones built by various people. It kind of cast in stone that I'll keep the original gear that came with the model 2 Fox and use a alternative type safety cable.  Since I don't plan to land on a washboard, the original gear will do just fine, and they used it up to and including the Model 4. There is a wealth of information on Avid/Foxes on this site and valuable info to be gained. Sometimes, its what not to do. Like build a lardache aircraft for one. A lot of stuff I see on some planes is just not needed for the mission of a Avid/Fox and only compounds certain issues. One I read about in the old post would be lucky to come under 30K with all the stuff he wanted to do to it. A 30K+ model 1, Oh well, to each his own.  That's why its called experimental aviation.  Keep on modifying them, I learn a lot. 

I'm new to the site and it's my first kitfox. I've come to the same conclusion in all my reading. I feel a good bush tire is all I need to get the most out of my bird and soften the bumps. Oh and get rid of those cables. 

[Allen Sutphin 705]

Those original smoothed ATV tires were may-pops at best. I had several flats on my original 4. A good set of tires is almost a requirement. I ended up with a set of golf cart tires on it. It was a bouncy son-of-a gun with the maypops. Now, I don't know what tire I'll use but it will close to the original size.

[akflyer 1427]

lets think about getting rid of the cables... if the bungies breaks and you don't have a cable on it what do you think is going to happen??  The safety cable is there in the event the bungie breaks.  No cable your going on your back more than likely.  Been there and done it in my brothers kitfox.  Your gonna mess up the bird.

The gear legs are well known to break at the toe of the weld where the bungies wrap around the gear.  If the safety cable is there it does you no good as that part just broke off and you going on your back.

Put the cable inside the triangle like I have posted many times and it will do its job when the gear leg fails.  Make the cable longer so on a hard landing it does not come into play.  All the cable needs to do is hold the plane up enough so the prop does not strike the ground if the bungie fails.  I would not fly the way I do without a safety cable and I have yet to smack down hard enough to bend my fuse.

As far as "bush gear" goes my stance on it is pretty well known around here and the reasoning for the ones currently out there bending up planes is well documented.

I do feel that a properly designed "bush gear" is better than the stock bungee gear and I have everything sitting at the house to build a few sets but life has gotten in the way of me actually getting them done.  I have enough folks starting to hound me and I will soon get my table cleared of other projects and get on to building a set to go beat the hell out of on my bird prior to me releasing them.  The basic gear design has been working on cubs for many many many years and you don't see a lot of bent up cubs due to the gear design.

There is a huge trend in the online world to do the plop and drop because some think it looks cool I guess.  Hence the monster shocks and the $$ TK1 set up etc.  Sorry about the small size of yer peckers boys but you don't need to drop that kind of $$ on a band aide for your piss poor piloting techniques and showing off for the camera.  I can get in just as short with better control than the plop and drop and stalling it 5+ feet above the ground.  If you want to be capable with your airplane take the money you were going to drop on the shock set up and turn that into gas burned through your tanks learning actual pilotage and becoming one with your plane.  If you have to ask what approach speeds to use when trying to come in short then you need to get away from the keyboard and get out flying.  I can't remember the last time I took my eyes off my landing target to look at the airspeed, your ass and your arm will tell you if your getting mushy or still have firm control pressures.  

Crap, I think I went on a bit of a rant on that one.  I will jump off my  for now.

 

 

[Matthewtanner 44]

Is there any actual side by side comparison of drop and flop vs flying the approach slow and 3 pointing? I’ve been trying to do my approaches with real constant angle at an airspeed that feels comfortable and slow, and chopping throttle and “not trying to land” once short of the spot i wanna hit. Just don’t know how much I’d gain by doing it different, and if the risk is worth it. Juice for the squeeze type thing.

[akflyer 1427]

Elevator controls speed, throttle controls decent rate.  Practice with both till you can 3 point within 5' of where you want to land every time and you don't need to plop and drop.  Save the plop and drop for those times you feel the need to fold your plane in half for the camera or the crowd.

[Matthewtanner 44]

That’s what I do, coming from flying Blackhawks, you control the size of the houses with power. I’m just trying to log all he seat time I can now.

Edited 11 Feb 2019 by Matthewtanner

[Allen Sutphin 705]

lets think about getting rid of the cables... if the bungies breaks and you don't have a cable on it what do you think is going to happen??  The safety cable is there in the event the bungie breaks.  No cable your going on your back more than likely.  Been there and done it in my brothers kitfox.  Your gonna mess up the bird.

The gear legs are well known to break at the toe of the weld where the bungies wrap around the gear.  If the safety cable is there it does you no good as that part just broke off and you going on your back.

Put the cable inside the triangle like I have posted many times and it will do its job when the gear leg fails.  Make the cable longer so on a hard landing it does not come into play.  All the cable needs to do is hold the plane up enough so the prop does not strike the ground if the bungie fails.  I would not fly the way I do without a safety cable and I have yet to smack down hard enough to bend my fuse.

As far as "bush gear" goes my stance on it is pretty well known around here and the reasoning for the ones currently out there bending up planes is well documented.

I do feel that a properly designed "bush gear" is better than the stock bungee gear and I have everything sitting at the house to build a few sets but life has gotten in the way of me actually getting them done.  I have enough folks starting to hound me and I will soon get my table cleared of other projects and get on to building a set to go beat the hell out of on my bird prior to me releasing them.  The basic gear design has been working on cubs for many many many years and you don't see a lot of bent up cubs due to the gear design.

There is a huge trend in the online world to do the plop and drop because some think it looks cool I guess.  Hence the monster shocks and the $$ TK1 set up etc.  Sorry about the small size of yer peckers boys but you don't need to drop that kind of $$ on a band aide for your piss poor piloting techniques and showing off for the camera.  I can get in just as short with better control than the plop and drop and stalling it 5+ feet above the ground.  If you want to be capable with your airplane take the money you were going to drop on the shock set up and turn that into gas burned through your tanks learning actual pilotage and becoming one with your plane.  If you have to ask what approach speeds to use when trying to come in short then you need to get away from the keyboard and get out flying.  I can't remember the last time I took my eyes off my landing target to look at the airspeed, your ass and your arm will tell you if your getting mushy or still have firm control pressures.  

Crap, I think I went on a bit of a rant on that one.  I will jump off my  for now.

 

 

First, I am not doing away with a safety cable, just using an alternative type, yet to be determined. And yes, I do agree that one can pretty much match the plop and drop landing with a on your game standard landing. As far as the other, spend the energy learning to fly the darn plane is always the best answer. In the end, the plane will tell you what it wants, needs or is going to do if you don't correct what you are doing. I don't know who or why the rant, but I do agree with you completely. Like I said before, The cowboys don't mention how many times they tore up their plane. They are not really being good role models for the newbies learning to fly. It took me a few years to learn to read the plane.

[Bandit 286]

I agree with you Allen. Those flying cowboy dudes egos are as big as their pocket books. They aren't the normal common everyday pilots like 95% of the people on this forum are.

[Willja67 144]

I agree with you Allen. Those flying cowboy dudes egos are as big as their pocket books. They aren't the normal common everyday pilots like 95% of the people on this forum are.

Do I detect a massive amount of jealousy?

I don't know all the back stories of these guys but let's just summarize a couple of the most prominent that I do know a little about and have actually met and talked to:

Mike Patey, came from a very large relatively poor family. When he and his twin were about 15 they got a business license,  rented their neighbor's tools and started a business building redwood decks for people and continued to be entrepreneurs from there. Mike went to college to get an engineering degree but the pace was too slow for him so he studied on his own. He's built over a dozen planes. Point being he paid his dues. He earned what he has. He put the time in to become the skilled pilot he now is. 

Trent Palmer:

As a teenager started filming with a camera rig on a rc helicopter and developed it into the business he now has. Used the skills from his business to become popular on YouTube.  The guy obviously has a work ethic if he can spend 18 hrs a day for a week straight upgrading his plane. Does he have all the knowledge necessary to do everything to his plane that's been done to it? No, but neither did Mike Patey at that age. The guy is obviously a good pilot and has obviously spent time developing that skill. And he seems like a really nice guy. I met him at an airport and he let me sit in his plane to try it on for size.

 

As for the other flying cowboys I know less of their backstories but a couple of them were Alaska bush pilots and a few others own their own businesses.

I get sick of people tearing others down that paid their dues to get where they are. This is America there are opportunities if you want what they have figure out a way to go get it. If I'm not willing to work as hard as Mike Patey or Trent Palmer I don't deserve to have what they have.

 

Here is a lecture by Mike's twin brother at a local university. It's a good place to start off you want to follow their path:

 

[Allen Sutphin 705]

Actually, I made mine climbing power poles 60 hrs a week for 30+ years! Plus doing A&P work on the side. So I think I paid my dues to be able to walk down to the barn and go fly. I do enjoy watching the videos, but understand not everybody has the means or ability to do it or even the desire. I don't drink, chase women (wife won't let me) so flying is my escape.

[Allen Sutphin 705]

Gosh! What are we going to discuss now?  We can't talk about brakes, bush gears, or plop and drop landings, without offending someone. How about fuzzy little puppies?  Well, everyone I've picked up had fleas.  Meanwhile, I got the fox covered and now the hundred yards of finish tape to go on the fuselage. Except nobody's paying me 7K to cover this one. Talked to a guy down south about a model 1 for a friend of mine. Evidently legal except for expired conditional insp. Ser.# 54 with original covering, drum brakes, and mostly original w/503. Was on the coast so corrosion concerns me on the tubing. About the max price for a model 1, so I recommended a pass on this one. Stored for last 2 years. Some things just aren't adding up for it to be a viable prospect.

[Turbo 162]

Leni's idea to run the safety cables thru the seat truss so it pulls down in a corner of the seat truss when in play is brilliant!  Might just do that.  My calculations say a 3-G landing will cause a 5" average bungee stretch, without exceeding forces to which a new bungee is capable, at least per my stretch testing.  So I recommend allowing for 5" bungee stretch.  Avid recommended 3".  FWIW.

Edited 13 Feb 2019 by Turbo

[akflyer 1427]

This is what I was talking about and have posted many times.

 

 

gear leg.pdf

[saskavid 47]

If you really want to break down the full physics of light aircraft, the best landing that can be done is one that produces optimum insurance of sustaining structural integrity within the conditions the plane is being landed in. In other words the softer the better no matter how tough you think something is. The sky cowboys have done some interesting work but the question still remains how much or how many of these style of landings can the collective structure of the airframe take before some unforseen event becomes an expensive repair bill?....at best or maybe worse? The best answer becomes this is what they can do... not what you should do with them... the good landing is the one you can always walk away from, the best landing is always the one that will keep you walking back to a fully intact airplane. 

[Buckchop 479]

Service Letter #48 

i have i belive just about every service letter(51 of them) and service bulletin (53 of them) printed out (if there is more please let me know) and into a folder if anyone needs copy or info, im sure they on the internet, but i like my paperwork in hard copy, MSHA hates that. Hahahahaaaaa

Edited 16 Feb 2019 by Buckchop

[Allen Sutphin 705]

If you really want to break down the full physics of light aircraft, the best landing that can be done is one that produces optimum insurance of sustaining structural integrity within the conditions the plane is being landed in. In other words the softer the better no matter how tough you think something is. The sky cowboys have done some interesting work but the question still remains how much or how many of these style of landings can the collective structure of the airframe take before some unforseen event becomes an expensive repair bill?....at best or maybe worse? The best answer becomes this is what they can do... not what you should do with them... the good landing is the one you can always walk away from, the best landing is always the one that will keep you walking back to a fully intact airplane. 

I watched a bunch of their videos last night and after looking closely I noticed they don't land on too much rough stuff. Most of their landings are on old roads, open flat country, and generally semi smooth terrain. From what I seen from their style of landings, a standard gear would handle most of them. Giving credit where credit is due, they are good at what they do but, they trained and practiced for it. Most average pilots don't and probably shouldn't try stuff without practice or training. And yet, they still blow a landing now and then. We all do!  Got to admit, though, the bush gear looks awesome!

[Turbo 162]

Huge, soft tires must play a major role!

[flywise 169]

Huge, soft tires must play a major role!

Just had to say it....I have no shock absorption at all on my rig (avid catalina) besides my 8.00x6 'small' tires...every landing I try/have to make it a soft one, go arounds are normal for me...

Big tires and bush gear gives more margin for sure.

[flyguy12 0]

Hi All

I'm wanting to replace the bungies on my Avid Heavy Hauler.  Would you recommend using the fact9ry kitfox ones (much thicker)

[1avidflyer 1983]

Kitfox uses a much shorter bungee then Avid.  Buy some shock cord from aircraft spruce and make your own is my advice.  JImChuk

[Allen Sutphin 705]

My manual states 66" loop to loop for a Kitfox 2, does that sound about right ?

[1avidflyer 1983]

That seems right, an Avid is 92" if my memory is right and you do 7 wraps around the seat truss.   JImChuk

[Allen Sutphin 705]

Manual says 6 wraps with the 3/8" cord, but that could be 7 on the top or bottom and 6 on the other. Somebody stole half my marbles so counting is vague.

[1avidflyer 1983]

Manual says 6 wraps with the 3/8" cord, but that could be 7 on the top or bottom and 6 on the other. Somebody stole half my marbles so counting is vague.

Avid manual or Kitfox manual?  Memory tells me they are different one plane to the other.  JImChuk